The Center For Education Reform

More Big Media edubloggers

edspresso — Mon, 08 May 2006 20:33:29 +0000

Look out, fellow edubombthrowers. First the Miami Herald decides to send a hired gun into the edusphere, then the L.A. Times and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution get in on the game with their new offerings, School Me and Get Schooled, respectively. And Bob Sipchen, the poor ink-stained wretch at the LAT tasked with writing his masters' new blog, even links to his Big Media competitors! Just what is the world coming to?! It's almost as if Big Media is catching on to this whole blog thing (unoriginal names notwithstanding)...

Wonk gets cranky against union

edspresso — Tue, 09 May 2006 17:39:33 +0000

EdWonk has some rather unkind thoughts about the decision of the California Teachers Association to back Phil Angelides for governor in November:

It would have been nice if the leadership of the CTA had bothered to poll us rank-and-file dues payers about our gubernatorial preferences before giving the union's endorsement or spending our dues money on what may very well be a quixotic attempt to overthrow Schwarzenegger. (Who is not one of our favorite politicos right now, as he has done nothing to curb the runaway growth of California's already huge multi-layered EduCracy.)

In this era of electronic voting and survey-taking, there's no reasonable reason why this can't be done. And as the CTA loudly proclaims itself as a democratic organization, (while picking my pocket through the withholding of dues from each and every monthly paycheck) it really ought to be done.

But CTA has never felt the need to actually ask the rank-and-file their opinions about anything before, so why expect anything different now? I've grown to count on this sort of high-handed, old-fashioned type of authoritarian "we'll do the thinking for you so you don't have to," union governance from the likes of CTA's never-elected-by-the-rank-and-file-President Barbara Kerr.

Elsewhere in the post, EdWonk said he that even if he's had his fun and wants to leave the union, he still gets docked union dues of some kind? Can somebody explain?

Buzz Aldren gets a crater named after him

ed_admin — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:52:41 +0000

Colonel Buzz Aldrin, Sc.D (born January 20, 1930 as Edwin Eugene Aldrin, Jr.) is an American pilot and astronaut who became the second human to set foot on the Moon (after Neil Armstrong) during the Apollo 11 mission. A small crater on the Moon near the Apollo 11 landing site is named in his honor. He also has a TV star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame on Hollywood and Vine. He voiced himself in "Deep Space Homer", an episode of The Simpsons in which he flies into space with Homer Simpson and fictional astronaut Race Banyon.

hallelujah! yeeehaaa

edspresso — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:17:36 +0000

No, it's not related to education reform, but it makes us so relieved we're posting it anyway.

U.S. journalist Jill Carroll has been released after almost three months in captivity in Iraq.
"I am just happy to be free. I just want to be with my family quickly,'' 28-year-old Carroll, wearing a headscarf and gown, said in an interview carried today by international broadcasters. "I was treated well. It's important people know that. I was not harmed, they never said they would hit me.''

Great news.

Ryan - Are you blogging right now?

ed_admin — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:29:09 +0000

hey ryan -- how'd your presentation go? good i hope.

RYAN RESPONDS: I think it went okay. Got some questions, some rather pointed. Overall, I guess I'm none the worse for wear, if that makes sense.

test2353

edspresso — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:51:59 +0000

This here's a test post. I'm typing it to see if the appearance improves any with a little more text.

This part is indentedd

and now it's not.

About Florida Watch

edspresso — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:58:45 +0000

As anybody watching the school choice movement will know, we're highly invested in the Florida voucher program. And after taking it on the chin for years from various segments of Florida media, we've decided we're not going to take it anymore. In this section, we plan to highlight important edureform developments in the Sunshine State and respond to instances of bias and error in Florida media. Needless to say, we expect this section of the site to be, well, rather busy.

test double columns on EdReforum

edspresso — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 13:20:59 +0000

Rusty Shackleford linked to an Argentine Indymedia "report" (I use the term loosely in connection with Indymedia) that fidelito is dead. For the benefit of my fellow gringos, here's a little cleaner translation.

Longtime Cuban dictator Fidel Castro died today at his residence in El Laguito.

According to unofficial sources, the Cuban dictator had been in critical condition for the last few days after suffering a sudden heart attack.

Fidel Castro took power January 1, 1959 through a coup, deposing dictator Fulgencio Batista and sinse then has kept himself in power.

Official government sources, including brother Raul Castro and top officials in the regime have not yet notified the Cuban people, awaiting international reaction.

En la tarde hoy murió en su residencia de el Laguito el longevo dictador cubano Fidel Castro.

Según fuentes no oficiales el dictador cubano Castro desde hace alguno días se encontraba en delicado estado de salud después de haber sufrido un repentino infarto.

Fidel Castro tomo el poder el 1 de enero de 1959, con un golpe de estado, deponiendo al dictador Fulgencio Batista y desde entonces se ha mantenido en poder.

Fuentes oficiales del gobierno, su hermano Raúl Castro y altos dirigentes del régimen aun no han querido dar la noticia al pueblo cubano, en espera de un reacción internacional.

Val Prieto thinks it's bunk.

(Technorati ping: fidel castro.)

ALMOST FORGOT: Hat tip to Michelle Malkin's guest blogger...Allah!

charter school news

edspresso — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:36:50 +0000

One school is finished...

After years of enrollment drops and financial struggles, the North Lauderdale Academy High School will shut its doors in May, the City Commission decided at an emergency meeting Monday.
The charter high school has 480 students this year, down from more than 800 three years ago; those who aren't graduating will have to find desks elsewhere to finish their education.
Monday's decision brings an end to a school that was no stranger to second chances; after North Lauderdale received two consecutive F grades in 2003 and 2004, the state wanted to shut it down.
But the school got an extension from the state after Broward Schools Superintendent Frank Till asked that it be allowed to stay open. The school was overhauled, and last year received a C grade.

...while another gets a financial boost.

Green Dot Public Schools, one of the city's leading charter school operations, will receive a $6-million gift today from the Wasserman Foundation.
The money, which more than doubles Green Dot's reserves, comes at a critical time for the organization. This fall, Green Dot plans to expand dramatically, opening several South Los Angeles campuses as part of a plan to reform Jefferson High School — one of the city's lowest-performing public schools.
"Green Dot has an opportunity to take one of the worst schools in Los Angeles and turn it, hopefully, into several high-performing, smaller schools," said Casey Wasserman, 31, who owns the Avengers arena football team and heads his family's foundation.

Oprah on education

edspresso — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:04:25 +0000

Part two of Oprah on education is later today. Some thoughts on yesterday's episode are forthcoming. Also, a blog roundup is probably in order. FYI: today's episode centers on a Sacramento charter school.

elementary science classes go high-tech

edspresso — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:31:31 +0000

As the world moves inexorably closer to the Singularity (hat tip to the Professor), elementary science classes are starting to look a little different.

The backpacks of Deer Creek students will be a little lighter next year.
Monday night, school board members approved using laboratory kits for a curriculum focused more on interactive learning.
"It is a lab-based program," curriculum director Jan Seely said. "In the elementary, you will not see a science textbook come home next year."
Other grade levels also will turn toward a more lab-focused approach, she said.
Seely said students will start out working on lab projects rather than reading a text first. That way, the information has real meaning since students learn while doing the activity, she said.
Students will still have access to textbooks but will not have a textbook of their own, Seely said. The classroom will have books to check out, and all students will be able to access texts online, she said. (emphasis added)

I have mixed feelings about this, which will join additional thoughts in a follow-up post.

Oregon superintendent flap

edspresso — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:01:48 +0000

We're still scratching our heads over the opposition by some folks in Oregon to a newly hired school superintendent.

Around 50 Central Linn High School students left their classrooms today to protest the district's choice for new superintendent. High School Principal Michael Bremont said that he had made it clear to the students that they would be punished for leaving class. However, at 10:30 a.m. the students took chairs and signs out to Highway 228 and cheered at passing motorists.

Their signs said things like, "Honk If You Support Us," and "Save The Teachers." The protesters felt that the the school board's decision to hire the controversial superintendent will cause the break-up of their teaching faculty.

"All but two teachers are leaving if he comes and we don't want that," one student said.

"We have the highest test scores in the state and we don't want that changing because some guy thinks he can control us," another student said.

Bremont said that he has received one resignation already in response to the new superintendent and expects several more shortly, although he asked the staff to hold off resigning until things calmed down.

And what, precisely, did the new superintendent, Kermit Jones, do to bring all this about? You have to drill down in the article, but here it is:

Among the accusations by teachers and parents at Thursday’s board meeting were that Jones made racist and sexist comments while visiting the Central Linn schools.

Board members countered that they had read several hundred pages of background on Jones, in addition to visiting his district, meeting with his staff, students, the community and the local union representative and had found no indication of racism or sexism.

The accusations were based on a comment Jones made that he had difficulties in his current position in Oklahoma, being a white administrator for a district that is 80 percent African-American.

The sexist allegations stem from something that, according to teacher and union representative Sharon Franklin, Jones said when he met a group of female elementary teachers: “A room full of women. That’s what I like to see.”

Some board members said the comment to the women was merely an ice-breaker and the comment about being a white administrator in a predominantly poor, African-American district was factual rather than derogatory.

“Mr. Jones’ building in Oklahoma is one that you have to go through nine security points to get in. He’s raised that district’s performance, taken them as far as he can and now he’s ready to move on,” board member Pat McConnel said. “He likes Oregon and he wants to be out here.”

When the Democrat-Herald contacted the teachers’ union in Oklahoma, a representative expressed confidence in Jones and affirmed that Jones’ district is a difficult one.

Turning Cory Booker into Beelzebub

edspresso — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:32:38 +0000

Note to the anti-Booker coalition: while you're at it, why don't you just add horns and a tail? (Hat tip to True Schools.)

Charter schools and school choice: why the parallel universes?

edspresso — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:23:43 +0000

I have long held that parents should have access to educational options for their children. While we may disagree on the vehicle to get there, so do charter school proponents. But as somebody relatively new to the movement, I can't understand for the life of me why the two movements have formed their own little cliques.

Kansas City educrats lose it over vouchers

edspresso — Mon, 01 May 2006 21:38:18 +0000

Randy Shain over at True Schools fisks a Kansas City Star op-ed on the voucher fight in the Missouri legislature. While it's well worth reading, he also points out elsewhere that school choice opponents are definitely trading against the trend.

Where did he learn to spoke?

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 19:31:23 +0000

Good for a laugh.

Edublog duel

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 15:06:45 +0000

Eduwonk called our first debate a "cage match". But folks, that was a walk in the park next to this ongoing exchange involving Edspresso contributor Ken De Rosa. Plenty of good stuff in comments, too.

Pick me! Pick me! (or: reduced to begging for a good school)

edspresso — Fri, 12 May 2006 20:55:52 +0000

This is profoundly disturbing:

Nervous parents packed a South Los Angeles church Thursday hoping that they would win the lottery.

The jackpot: a spot for their child at one of Green Dot Public Schools' new charter campuses.

Several hundred parents and students came out to Victory Baptist Church and waited through the evening to see if they would get into one of the five charter campuses that will open in the fall in South Los Angeles.

Green Dot Public Schools founder Steve Barr praised those who came out.

"You are all revolutionaries," he said. "The whole city is watching tonight."

The lottery is the latest salvo in Barr's campaign to establish a series of charters surrounding the troubled Jefferson High School campus — one of the lowest performing schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The lottery is the culmination of months of efforts by Barr and his staff to raise awareness among neighborhood parents about the new schools and to persuade them to apply.

Before we go any further, please understand that this is in no way a criticism of Green Dot. On the contrary, we applaud Steve Barr and his focus on extending educational opportunities to kids in the urban jungle of Los Angeles.

What we find so disturbing is this: why should anybody be made to hope--almost beg--for rescue from a dysfunctional school?

We are willing to accept unequal outcomes in education. Some schools will perform better than others, some students will be educated better than others. But the present situation in L.A. is this: if you don't have access to a charter school, can't pay for a private school or move to an area with a better school, you are, quite literally, trapped.

Further thoughts along these lines will be addressed in an upcoming post. But there's something profoundly disturbing about putting parents in this situation.

Examining curriculum

edspresso — Tue, 16 May 2006 17:41:46 +0000

Ken De Rosa over at D-Ed Reckoning has a lengthy post examining why disadvantaged children are impacted most by curriculum structure. Check it out.

Textbook politics

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 14:49:57 +0000

Interesting MSNBC story on the politically charged process of textbook selection. While part of the story relies on a Fordham Institute study published back in 2004, this part is rather interesting:

The culprit is the system by which many states choose what books their students will read. Because the market is a small one, textbook publishers must cater to the whims of elected school board leaders in the biggest states that buy the most books: Texas and California, which control a third of the national market, the Association of American Publishers estimates.

Few elementary and high school textbook publishers “can afford to spend millions of dollars developing a textbook series and not have it adopted in these high-volume states,” the Fordham Institute said.

So the operating philosophy is one of “superficial compliance with the rules, not a focus on results,” (said Frank Wang, a former textbook publisher who left the field to teach mathematics at the University of Oklahoma).

Texas and California. Is it possible to find two states with more divergent ideological stances? We leave it up to the thoughtful reader to drill deeper in the column to see just where those states' respective stances lead in the textbook battles.

Mayor Booker, time for your close-up

edspresso — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:42:40 +0000

Townhall is keeping an eye on Newark.

admin — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Headlines for July 19, 2011

admin — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

States Test Education Law
Wall Street Journal, July 19, 2011
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has been at odds with state schools chief Tony Evers over budget cuts, vouchers and teachers' collective-bargaining rights. But they have found common ground in their aggravation with No Child Left Behind.

Fixing No Child Left Behind
Baltimore Sun, MD, July 18, 2011
The law's original goal of holding underperforming schools accountable has become a ticking time bomb that threatens to punish school districts across the country

Teacher Cheating, Student Testing and The Great Education Tradeoff
Washington Post, DC, July 18, 2011
The right reaction to the cheating scandals in Atlanta, Washington and elsewhere isn't to declare testing a failure. It is to string up, metaphorically, the worst offenders as a lesson to anyone else who wants to give it a try. It is to spend the money on software and investigations to create a very credible threat that if you do this you'll get caught.

School Choice Gains Support
World Magazine, July 18, 2011
New budget provisions in Ohio, signed into law by Republican Gov. John Kasich, advance this year's national trend for school choice. Thirteen states have shown support for school choice this year by passing major education reforms. Twenty-eight states have similar legislation pending.

FROM THE STATES

ARIZONA

Private K-12 School Settles With State Over Charter Partnership
Arizona Republic, AZ, July 19, 2011
A private Christian school in Glendale violated the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act when it teamed up with a public charter school to teach its classes while also accepting tuition payments from parents unaware of the arrangement, according to a settlement reached by the Arizona Attorney General's Office.

CALIFORNIA

Victory for Students
Contra Costa Times, CA, July 18, 2011
LAST YEAR, the Legislature passed the parent-empowerment law, which gave parents the means to achieve major change in underperforming schools. It is also known as the parent trigger.

Study: LA Charter Schools See High Teacher Churn
San Jose Mercury News, CA, July 19, 2011
Teachers at Los Angeles Unified charter schools are up to three times as likely to quit their jobs as their counterparts in traditional district schools, according to a University of California, Berkeley study released Tuesday.

FLORIDA

Education Chief: Give Miami-Dade, Duval More Time to Fix Failing Schools
Sunshine News, FL, July 19, 2011
Six chronically failing public schools will have yet another year to get their act together under a waiver recommended by state Education Commissioner John Winn.

Big Changes Await Educators
Highlands Today, FL, July 19, 2011
Educators will be facing a number of significant initiatives in the upcoming school year, from changes on how they are evaluated, to required retirement contributions - and for new hires - an end to tenure.

GEORGIA

Few Step Down in APS Cheating Scandal
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, GA, July 18, 2011
Only two employees stepped down Monday as Atlanta Public Schools opened a three-day grace period to allow all employees implicated in an ongoing test cheating scandal to quit in lieu of being fired.

Court Decision Not Fatal To Charters
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, GA, July 18, 2011
The state Supreme Court's recent decision declaring the state's Charter Commission Act unconstitutional has generated intense reaction among charter school advocates, including calls to amend the state's constitution. Before embarking on the serious and extended process of altering the historical constitutional framework governing public education, advocates and legislators should pause to consider a few points.

INDIANA

A Better Choice?
Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, IN, July 19, 2011
Private and parochial schools participating in the new state-funded voucher program will inevitably see increased scrutiny of their ISTEP+ scores next year. But parents who plan to seek vouchers might want to take a look at this year's passing-rate results, where they will likely find their neighborhood public school posted greater improvement than the prospective voucher school.

ISTEP Scores Compared: Duneland Finishes Generally Ahead Of Charter School, Behind Church Schools
Chesterton Tribune, IN, July 18, 2011
Last week's release of the ISTEP-plus test scores for students in grades 3 through 8 showed that the Duneland Schools finished somewhat better than the new Discovery Charter School. Parochial schools located in Porter County had overall higher scores.

MASSACHUSETTS

City Wants To Relocate Two High Schools
Boston Globe, MA, July 19, 2011
Less than a month after Boston closed the former Hyde Park High School, the city is seeking to reopen the building in fall 2012 as the new home of Boston Latin Academy, under an ambitious proposal being announced today to increase capacity at several popular schools

MINNESOTA

New Charter School Continues Interesting Experiment
Post Bulletin, MN, July 18, 2011
An interesting educational experiment in Rochester enters its second phase this fall when STEM Academy, a new charter school, opens its doors.

Teacher Helps Make A Difference
Register -Guard, MN, July 19, 2011
But Duggan, 24, has been part of another upgrade far away: a school in Minnesota that's opening some eyes because of how it is turning kids who used to be "lapped" by peers into kids now striding down the homestretch with pride.

Charter School Advocates Want Exemption From Payment Delay
Minnesota Public Radio, July 18, 2011
Minnesota charter school advocates said the tentative budget agreement between the governor and Republican lawmakers will hit charters harder than traditional schools.

NEVADA

Somerset Academy of Las Vegas to Open Two New Campuses in Valley
Las Vegas Review-Journal, NV, July 19, 2011
Parents will have a few more choices when they decide where to enroll their kids in school next month. Two new charter schools are scheduled to open in North Las Vegas and Whitney with a capacity of more than 1,000 students.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

N.H. Tenure Change Makes Some Happy, Some Not
Eagle Tribune, NH, July 19, 2011
While school administrators praise a new law that extends the number of years a teacher must work to earn tenure, teachers unions oppose the measure.

NEW JERSEY

Most New Charter Schools Not Ready to Open in September
NJ Spotlight, July 19, 2011
When the Christie administration announced in January that it had approved 23 new charter schools, that number was celebrated as being the largest class of charters yet. Equally impressive, according to the administration, there would be close to 100 of the alternative schools operating this fall.

Three Charter Schools In Atlantic County, Approved To Open This Year, Won't Be Ready To Open Until Fall 2012
Press of Atlantic City, NJ, July 19, 2011
None of the three new charter schools approved in Atlantic County will open in September, a list released Monday by the state Department of Education shows. A new charter elementary school in Millville will open then, however.

NORTH CAROLINA

Charter Day Schools Vs. Five County School Boards
WECT, NC, July 18, 2011
The Charter Day Schools of Brunswick and Columbus County are heading to court against the five counties they serve. A 2009 court decision has prompted several North Carolina Charter Schools to re-examine their books.

OHIO

New Gifted Academy Filling Up
Cincinnati Enquirer, OH, July 18, 2011
A new Cincinnati Gifted Academy - the first of its kind to be launched by the Cincinnati Public School district - is quickly filling up.

Sandusky Considering Elementary Charter School
Sandusky Register, OH, July 18, 2011
Sandusky City Schools may sponsor a charter school for gifted elementary school students for the 2012-2013 school year.

PENNSYLVANIA

Put To The Test: It's Prudent To Probe Possible Cheating By Schools
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, PA, July 19, 2011
It's not clear whether cheating was involved in test results that were flagged in a 2009 statewide analysis, but it's obvious that regular reviews are an important safeguard that can help protect the integrity of the mandatory Pennsylvania System of School Assessment program.

TENNESSEE

Promise Academy Charter School Fights For Survival
Commercial Appeal, TN, July 19, 2011
Promise Academy in North Memphis is the touchstone of faith for a handful of Episcopalians who pooled their expertise and goodwill to see if they could make lasting change in public education.

WISCONSIN

23 Schools Show Interest In Voucher Plan
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, WI, July 18, 2011
More than 20 private schools around Milwaukee and Racine eligible for the expanded Milwaukee voucher program or new Racine voucher program are considering racing the clock to participate as soon as this fall.

VIRTUAL EDUCATION

S. Korea Leads Way For Paperless Classroom
Washington Times, DC, July 18, 2011
By 2015, the nation's schools will abandon traditional textbooks in favor of digital learning. Over the next four years, the nation's government will spend more than $2 billion to provide every student with a tablet and, in the process, become the first country in the world to go paperless in its schools. No, not the United States. It is South Korea that is leading the way in classroom technology.

Pro-school choice = anti-education?

edspresso — Thu, 25 May 2006 18:58:14 +0000

That, apparently, is the opinion of the Columbia (S.C.) State.

Rep. Bill Cotty is against vouchers, tax credits or anything else that takes South Carolina’s resources and focus off of our central challenge — educating the kids who aren’t getting educated, who aren’t employable, who make our state less attractive to investors.

Oh yeah--school choice has really been harmful.

But he’s no defender of the status quo. Schools need support, he says, but they also need innovation: The state should have created charter schools in Allendale County; the Education Oversight Committee should have been pushing 4-year-old kindergarten long before a judge demanded it.

You're in favor of innovation, but against vouchers. Wouldn't it be fair to say there's a bit of cognitive dissonance in here somewhere?

Mr. Cotty is now a member of the EOC, and he’s pushing that body to become a “source of innovative ideas.” But he’s also getting pushback of his own, from anti-government groups upset by his opposition to spending tax money on private schools and the fact that he declared his “no new taxes” pledge only bound him until his next election, when he took it back and was easily re-elected.
Those groups like Republican Sherri Few, who offers less government as the solution to South Carolina’s ills. Ms. Few says government is doing all it should “and then some” and says setting an arbitrary cap on spending is “the least we can do.”

That's right, dear taxpayer--give till it hurts!

Asked what the state shouldn’t be doing, she makes a bee-line to education, identifies herself as a proponent of “choice” and says “the free market system” would cut costs. She says “scholarships” would rescue the “Corridor of Shame” kids; but when asked who would open private schools in stagnant rural communities, she says: “That’s an excellent question, and I haven’t really thought that through.”

At least three usages of sneer quotes in a single paragraph. Been borrowing the Palm Beach Post playbook, have we? In all fairness, Few really should have her ducks in a row before espousing any sort of policy change. But this paper's kneejerk call for more government and higher taxes is even more absurd.

Bill Cotty has thought things through, and not just in terms of schools. He values local government autonomy and favors real tax reform.
Voters need to make it clear to the groups that have targeted pro-education Republicans that they’re not interested in abandoning the public schools.

Read that carefully. As defined by this paper, if you favor school choice, you also oppose local government autonomy, real tax reform, and abandoning the public schools. The insult is duly noted.

The Writing/Reading Connection (Bob Rose)

fguest — Fri, 26 May 2006 17:36:52 +0000

African-American and hispanic children can do just as well in school as white children. The proof is in the following unpublished paper describing our experiment with kindergartners and first-graders: Bob Rose Jasper, GA tele 770-737-2503 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Here is an reedited copy of the article I submitted to the Harvard Educational Review. THE WRITING/READING CONNECTION Submitted March 15, 2004 Abstract The possible relationship between practice printing alphabet letters and learning to read in the earliest grades has not been adequately explored. The present article describes preliminary evidence that this relationship may be important, and that reading difficulties may relate directly to inadequate printing practice in kindergarten and first-grade Historically, many authorities on the subject of literacy instruction have stressed the importance of adequate practice in printing alphabet letters. The first century Roman scholar Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (ca A.D. 35-98?) has been quoted as writing, "the art of writing well and quickly is not unimportant for our purpose, though it is generally disregarded by persons of quality. Writing is of the utmost importance in the study which we have under consideration and by its means alone can true and deeply rooted proficiency be obtained." He also wrote, ",,,a sluggish pen delays our thoughts". The full text of the Quintilianus essy, "The Ideal Education", book one, is accessible at the website: http://www.molloy.edu/academic/philosophy/sophia/quintilian/education.htm, The Sophia Project, Sophia Study Editions -- Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory, Translated by H.E. Butler (1920) "The Ideal Education, Book One, Chapter 1/sophia/quintilian/education.htm In 1912, Maria Montessori wrote, in effect, that teaching young children to print letters is easy, that it is easy to teach children to read after they have practiced printing alphabet letters, but that it is difficult to teach children to read if they have not practiced writing them. 1 Marilyn Jager Adams noted that prior to the onset of the twentieth century the "spelling drill" was the principal means of inducing literacy for several millennia. 2 More recently, several published authors have called attention to the dearth of research on the possible link between printing practice and the acquisition of literacy in young children, but objective studies of the relationship are still lacking.3, 4 This author has made the assumption that emphasis on practicing printing alphabet letters increases the fluency with which children can print them. It was therefore decided to examine the relationship between fluency at printing the alphabet in preliterate children, and their subsequent success in learning to read well. This method suffers the disadvantage of requiring children to be able to recite the alphabet in order to print the different letters both legibly and at a rate sufficient to demonstrate that they have practiced enough to have become "printing fluent." However, it was considered superior to other methods of assessing fluency in printing alphabet letters in young children. Such children have limited attention spans. It was therefore decided to measure the number of alphabet letters children write during a timed twenty-second interval, and multiply that number by three in order to obtain a "letters-per-minute," or "LPM," value for each child. During the early months of 2002, five first-grade teachers were enlisted from teacher-related internet listservs, to do a cooperative study of the relationship between fluency in writing the alphabet, and concomitant reading skill. The printing rate of each child was listed by teachers submitting classroom data, and each was matched by the subjective teacher assessment of the child's relative reading skill. The assessments were A, B, C, D and E, to designate "excellent", "above average", "average", "below average" and "possible reading problem", respectively. A total of 94 children in five first-grade classrooms were studied. When the letter grades were converted to numbers (4, 3, 2, 1, 0), "average relative reading ability" could be determined for subgroups of students, defined as printing at different rates. Among the sixteen children who printed faster than 40 LPM, the average reading score was 3.6. Among the 33 children who printed from 30 to 39 LPM, the average was 2.9. For the 26 children writing at 20-29 LPM, it was 2.3. For the 21 children who wrote more slowly than 20 LPM, it was 1.6. During this current school year, a number of kindergarten teachers have submitted series of similar studies on their classrooms to the k1writing listserv, accessible at www.yahoogroups.com. By the end of February, 2004, a total of five teachers had submitted serial data on a total of 106 kindergarten students, including data for the month of February. The relative reading skills of the kindergartners were ranked according to a three-level system: "reading better than grade level", "doing well at grade level" and "lagging behind expectations". In the opinions of their teachers, six children were already reading at second-grade level or above. Statistical analysis of the correlation again yielded similar results. Among the eighteen children who printed the alphabet faster than 40 LPM, 72% were "above grade level," and only one was "lagging." Among the eighteen children who wrote more slowly than 20 LPM, none was above grade level in reading skill, and half of them were "lagging" in this regard. A tabulation of these findings is revealing. It is informative to look down the column of LPM figures for these 106 children, and observe the correlations. These data are presented in Table One. The correlation between reading skill and fluency at printing alphabet letters in kindergarten and first-grade is readily apparent. This correlation was known to each of the experienced [kindergarten] teachers participating in this study even before the study was done. The experiment, then, was designed to answer the question as to whether this correlation is one of causation, or merely coincident with some other unidentified factor. The kindergarten teachers involved have each been able to achieve a level of printing fluency that is considerably above what is generally achieved by American kindergarten students. The printing rates of their kindergarten children are comparable to the rates of the first-grade students in the original study, whose teachers had NOT been previously monitoring printing rate. If the cause of the correlation were in the opposite direction, and it is having learned to read which drives printing fluency, then one would expect the correlation to weaken in classrooms where printing fluency has been intentionally contrived. However, we here see the correlation has persisted intact. This year, each of the kindergarten teachers has been making a dedicated effort to induce objectively measurable printing fluency in the students as the school year progresses. Each of the five kindergarten teachers has emphatically proclaimed that this practice is found to be immensely helpful in turning young children into readers. A number of the classrooms have high percentages of poverty and minority children, and none of the children could read at the beginning of the kindergarten school year. It was found that printing fluency, which we arbitrarily defined as 40 LPM or faster, is achieved at different times by different children, and that such fluency is an excellent indicator of when children will learn to read, as well as indicating which children have become successful at reading at any particular point in time. It was also observed that printing fluency gradually improves in almost all cases with continued practice writing the alphabet letters. Failure to cooperate during the time allocated by teachers for dedicated printing practice seems to be the main limiting factor in the development of printing skill. None-the-less, our data suggest that fluency in writing the letters of the alphabet is a reasonable goal for all normal children by the end of first-grade. But it appears that printing fluency does not at all correlate with reading ability much beyond the first-grade level. One teacher submitted data on 54 fourth-graders, demonstrating no difference at all in the median alphabet-printing rates between children who had been formally identified as reading below grade level, and the other students.5 It is also apparent that printing skill is by no means a necessary prerequisite for literacy. Many children learn to read before they are fluent at printing alphabet letters. On the other hand, virtually all children who lag in reading skill in K-1 are dysfluent printers. That this lack of skill is remediable through continued dedicated practice, extended over time, appears to be of fundamental importance. If the attainment of fluent ability to print alphabet letters in the earliest grades generally assures early success in reading, this fact challenges some current theoretical conceptions regarding the nature of reading disabilities. Our evidence suggests both that printing fluency confers the ability to name random letters more rapidly than 40 per minute6, and that the ability to phonetically write words fluently, possible only after the attainment of fluency in printing letters, confers phonemic awareness. Adams wrote, "It has been shown that the act of writing newly learned words results in a significant strengthening of their perceptual integrity in recognition. This is surely a factor underlying the documented advantages of programs that emphasize writing and spelling activities."7 Montessori also considered practice writing alphabet letters to be crucial, and wrote, "We shall soon see that the child, on hearing the word, or on thinking of a word he already knows, will see, in his mind's eye, all the letters, necessary to compose the word, arrange themselves. He will reproduce this vision with a facility most surprising to us."8 While such rhetorical explanations of the value of writing practice have been seen as nebulous in the past, converging advances in the fields of pattern recognition by artificial intelligence and of the cerebral physiology involved in visual pattern recognition and categorization may render them more plausible. It is emphasized that these studies are limited and preliminary, but their results underscore the pressing need to either confirm or disaffirm their apparent implications. The author wishes to acknowledge the participation of the classroom teachers who did and submitted these comparison studies on their students. They are Libby Rhoden, Pasadena, Texas; Sue Fisher, Kailua Kona, Hawaii; Ann Vasconcellos, Homewood, Illinois; Helen Wilder, Middlesboro, Kentucky; Nancy Creech, Eastpointe, Michigan; Ruby Clayton, Indianapolis, Indiana; Alice A. Pickel, Phoenix, Arizona; Lori Jackson, Mission, South Dakota; Lalia Kerr, Nova Scotia; Jennifer Runkle, Ohio. TABLE ONE Kindergarten Students Printing Level in Letters Per Minute (LPM) LPM rate: > 40 LPM 30-39 LPM 20-29 LPM < 20 LPM 78** 39** 33** 27** 24* 18* 72** 39** 33** 27** 24* 18* 66** 39** 33** 27** 24* 18* 60** 39** 33* 27** 24o 18* 60* 39** 33* 27** 24o 18* 57** 39** 33* 27** 24* 18* 54** 39* 33* 27* 21* 18 o 54** 39 o 33 o 27* 21* 15* 51** 36** 30** 27* 21* 15* 51** 36** 30** 27* 21* 15 o 48** 36** 30** 27* 21* 15 o 48** 36** 30** 27o 21* 15 o 48** 36** 30** 27o 21* 12* 48* 36* 30* 24** 21* 12 o 48* 36* 30* 24* 21* 12 o 42** 36* 30* 24* 21 o 6 o 42* 36 o 30* 24* 21 o 3 o 42 o 30* 3 o 30* In the opinion of respective classroom teachers: KEY: o lagging in reading skill * on level ** above level in reading References: 1. Montessori, Maria. The Montessori Method, Dover Publications, 2002, pp.266-7 2. Adams, Marilyn Jager. Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning About Print, MIT Press, 1990, p.388 3. Sofia Vernon and Emilia Ferreiro. "Writing Development: A Neglected Variable in the Consideration of Phonological Awareness." Harvard Educational Review 69:4 (1999): pp.395-415. 4. Groff, Patrick. "Teaching Phonics: Letter-to-phoneme, Phoneme-to-letter, or Both?" Reading and Writing Quarterly 17 (fall, 2001): pp.291-306. 5. Data provided by Marianne Morin, Watkins Glen, New York. 6. Data on kindergarten classroom correlation between letter-naming and printing fluency provided by Sue Fisher, Hawaii. 7. Adams, Op. cit., pp.230-231

Champion speller crowned

edspresso — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 14:40:17 +0000

Congrats to Katharine Close, winner of the 2006 National Spelling Bee. This snippet caught my eye:

"The spelling bee is a visual playing out of our nation's overriding capitalistic ideology," Boyd of USC said. "It's based on competition and hard work, and its rewards are available to anyone who spends time studying and learning the words."

Gee, that almost sounds like it could be instructive for kids! Whatever you do, don't tell Eric Zorn!

(And props to Joanne Jacobs, who tapped Katharine to win: "I chose on the basis of alliteration.")

Prop 82 campaign gets some star power

edspresso — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 19:39:51 +0000

Opponents of the universal preschool initiative in California are up against a new threat: President Matt Santos. (And you thought we were getting silly with blog pictures...)

Choice and NCLB

edspresso — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:55:08 +0000

Dianne Piche, guestblogging over at Eduwonk, writes here and here about school choice. It's that second link, though, that has gotten our attention:

Seems like there are more and more "strange bedfellows," unconventional alliances and unprecedented splits on Big Issues: NCLB, choice, charters, assessment, teacher assignment and compensation, transparency, and even boys and girls (as in boys are the new girls). So much so that advocates like me are finding ourselves in heated debate on a number of issues with lifelong friends and historic allies. On both the traditional "left" and "right" conventional ways of thinking and organizing are going out the window. Even the center is divided: between the inertia-driven defenders of the established order and the new "radical centrists" who are bound neither by precedent nor ideology. The muddle goes beyond the scandalous reports of the NEA taking up company with the ultra-conservative Republican Study Group, or their re-packaging the Newt Gingrich "Contract with America" and arguing the Right's case, a decade later, against "unfunded mandates." Or the Heritage Foundation taking the opposite position on the same question. There are conservatives talking national standards, race-consciousness, school finance equity. And the whispering among some fed-up liberals about how vouchers ought to be granted under some limited circumstances is so widespread it's almost an audible mantra. Where's this all going? Don't know, but it's going fast. Buckle up for a wild ride!

Actually, some folks may be taking our advice. (Additional thoughts from Alexander Russo.)

Vouchers coming to Arizona?

edspresso — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 15:04:14 +0000

Here in our parched backyard (for the love of all that is holy--rain! please! but I digress), Arizona has taken a backseat to Florida and Ohio on the subject of school choice. Which isn't entirely fair. We've had tax credits of various stripes for some time, and of course charters are enormously popular here. But if this comes to fruition, the Grand Canyon State could be the next front in the school choice battles:

The biggest winners in the $10 billion budget deal approved Saturday by lawmakers could end up being the state's private and parochial schools.
For the first time ever, the state will allow parents of at least some children to send their youngsters to any school of their choice and have state taxpayers pick up the costs.
On paper, the amount of money involved is small: $2.5 million for vouchers for disabled children and an identical amount for former foster children who have been adopted. That is out of a nearly $3.8 billion in education spending.
But it sets an important precedent that it's OK to use tax dollars for private and parochial school tuition, a precedent that Sydney Hay, lobbyist for Arizonans for School Choice, said she believes could pave the way for similar vouchers for all parents.
"That is an important first step," she said.
That presumes, however, the law ever takes effect. John Wright, president of the Arizona Education Association, said a legal challenge is virtually certain. He said the state constitution bans state funds for religious instruction.
But Rep. Rick Murphy, R-Glendale, who crafted one of the measures, countered the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld similar voucher programs in other states.

Will this get past Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano? Hard to say; she has a habit of vetoing these sorts of things. But if it does, here's where things will sit:

Fledgling voucher program: check.
Union cabal frothing at the mouth with a lawsuit: check.
Lawyer waiting in the wings, brass knuckles at the ready: check.
Snarky, biased MSM: check.

Boy, sure feels like Florida to me. And this time, I'll have ringside seats!

Trash-talking the boy crisis

edspresso — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:35:10 +0000

A new report says the boy crisis is all hype:

A study to be released today looking at long-term trends in test scores and academic success argues that widespread reports of U.S. boys being in crisis are greatly overstated and that young males in school are in many ways doing better than ever.

Using data compiled from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a federally funded accounting of student achievement since 1971, the Washington-based think tank Education Sector found that, over the past three decades, boys' test scores are mostly up, more boys are going to college and more are getting bachelor's degrees.

Lou Dobbs on education

edspresso — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:33:41 +0000

Lou Dobbs takes a break from blasting NAFTA to train his sights on education. His suggested solution to the K-12 crisis:

Certainly none of us has all the answers to fixing our failing schools. But here are a few thoughts, just to add to what I hope becomes a national effort to assure the quality education of the next generation:
It is time to restore absolute discipline to our public schools and classrooms to eliminate every extraneous program in kindergarten through eighth grade that does not focus on reading, literature, writing, American history and civics, mathematics and natural sciences.
We should begin to redress the compensation of all public school teachers to ensure that we have the very best and brightest educating our next generation. For me, that means paying teachers far more and demanding far more of them.
The role of the federal government should be to provide, no matter what the cost, a scholarship program that provides a family stipend to economically disadvantaged students who demonstrate exceptional intellect and talent.
All graduating seniors in the top 10 percent of their class should be assured federally funded national scholarships to pursue university educations in mathematics, science and English. And stipend programs should be instituted, conditional on an educational commitment to teach in our public schools after their college graduation.

Boy, I sure see a lot of increased spending in there. But what really caught my eye is his second bullet point, which is basically a call for a pay raise accompanied by...merit pay!!! (insert hysterical shrieks here)

Okay, all joking aside--I have a serious question for teachers out there. Would you accept merit pay if it were accompanied by a substantial pay raise? If so, how big would the pay raise have to be, and what would be some of the measurements included in the merit pay plan? Drop a comment in the threads, or fire off an e-mail: rboots at allianceREMOVETHISforschoolchoice period org.

Columnist: Dems should co-opt school choice

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 01:49:14 +0000

As the 2006 campaigns go into full swing, a Florida columnist casts a jaded eye on how Democrats are doing with the issue of education in the Sunshine State, particularly standardized testing.

The growing disconnect between official reports and actual achievement provides ample fodder for Democrats, who have been searching for ways to seize the education initiative from Bush & Co.
House Minority Leader Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, who has been walking point on this mission, makes sense when he charges that the system seems set up to focus on minimal competence. He notes that closing the racial achievement gap is a nice goal, but that this sets the bar awfully low.
If Gelber's critique is correct, the A+ Plan is more like a Gentleman's C scam that ultimately ends in mediocrity. The federal No Child Left Behind program seems to confirm this; it downgraded Florida's schools this year at the same time the state was handing out a record batch of As.
Unfortunately, Gelber doesn't have the right answers either. Here are his top two "things to work on for 2007":
• "Eliminate the need for 10th-graders to pass the FCAT to graduate."
• "Eliminate retention of third-graders who aren't up to (grade level) in reading."
Is he kidding? If Bush and the Republicans are guilty of ginning up grades, dulling the tools of measurement and standards would send Florida back to the educational Stone Age.
Such an agenda fuels suspicions that the Democratic Party remains an unreconstructed pawn of the Florida Teachers Association and others who simply want to get rid of FCAT. In this old-school thinking, more tax dollars equal better education. Period.

So what to do? The columnist suggests the unthinkable: Democrats should embrace school choice!

Clint Bolick, president of the Phoenix-based Alliance for School Choice, reports that Arizona's Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano recently signed a school voucher bill for disabled children (similar to Bush's program).
In Iowa, Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack signed legislation creating a new corporate scholarship tax program (also patterned after Bush's initiative).
In Wisconsin, Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle signed a bill expanding the Milwaukee voucher program by 50 percent.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell plans to expand his state's corporate scholarships for the second straight year.
Last year, even that icon of liberalism, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., supported inclusion of private schools in a federal rescue effort for more than 300,000 children displaced by Hurricane Katrina.
If Florida's numbers game is failing students, as Mr. Gelber alleges, he and his party have an opportunity to seize higher ground. If Republicans have fumbled on accountability, Democrats should pick up the ball and beat GOP "reformers" at their own game — which includes school-choice programs that empower parents.
Whether Florida wants to acknowledge its failing schools, the federal No Child Left Behind act will not turn a blind eye. Sanctions will come. "The day of reckoning is fast approaching," Bolick noted in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed piece.
Can this state's Democrats offer something besides criticism?

Guys, we've got a nice big tent here. Come on in!

Homosexual debate at NEA convention

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 01:58:09 +0000

Looks like they get all kinds at the NEA convention, currently underway in Orlando.

A booth representing ex-gay teachers at the National Education Association's convention in Orlando drew protests Friday from gay organizations that called it part of a plan to infiltrate the schools with anti-gay teachings.
"They have a right to be there, but it's part of a larger strategy of getting into schools and misinform people," said Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, a Miami Beach-based group that opposes ex-gay ministries.
At the Ex-Gay Educators Caucus booth, the groups' founder said the caucus was created in response to the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Caucus, which also had a booth at the convention.
"We're here because they're here," said Jeralee Smith, a California special-education teacher whose two-year-old caucus has about 30 members.
Smith says the caucus wants to combat the idea that a person is genetically predisposed toward homosexuality. When the issue comes up in the classroom, she said, children should be exposed to the view that being gay is a choice.

Look. Regardless of what you happen to believe regarding homosexuality, it should be kind of obvious that a teachers' union convention really isn't the place for this sort of debate. But the NEA left this door wide open, first by trying to take over the debate by looking to stake out positions on matters that have absolutely nothing to do with education (like, er, same-sex marriage).

Besides, shouldn't discussion of homosexuality with children be left up to their parents?

Blacks arguing for resegregated schools?

edspresso — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 14:04:27 +0000

It's happening in Illinois:

One way to fix the achievement gap between black and white children in Springfield schools might be to reintroduce a little bit of segregation to the classroom, say three prominent area educators.
The three men — Jim Forstall, Gordon Smith, and Allan Woodson — are proposing that District 186 offer special instruction just for black boys, who typically perform the worst on state standardized tests.
Last week, they went over their plan for a “school within a school” with district superintendent Diane Rutledge. According to Carol Votsmier, communications director for the district, the idea is still under consideration, though several legal challenges must be addressed.

Now there's a candidate for understatement of the year. Here is the teachers' reasoning:

...the men are betting that, once the data are analyzed, fifth-grade African-American boys, who would feed the program, will perform disproportionately poorly on the most recent Illinois Standardized Achievement Test than their white counterparts, further justifying the need for a new approach.
“The facts are indisputable, and so it’s a choice: You can sit there and do nothing and see the decline continue or step up and do something,” says Woodson, a lifelong Springfield resident and former alderman and mayoral candidate.
How diligently district officials work to get this project, or some form of it, off the ground, the men agree, will prove how committed the district is to closing the achievement gap, which the district’s own strategic plan identifies as a priority.
“These are relatively simple things to do if you really consider yourself to be a leader,” Forstall says. “We’re looking for some leadership from educators on this matter and not from attorneys or from businesspeople.”
At best, the proposal might appear to some as a sophisticated form of tracking; at worst, critics may argue, it’s a slippery slope toward the resegregation of Springfield schools.

Here's one way to sidestep the rather obvious legal entanglements presented by this proposal. According to the article, the program is "modeled loosely" after KIPP. So why not just do a charter or some other sort of choice program? If that's not politically or operationally feasible, why not give parents the option to participate? Add some sort of parental choice component and the segregation argument pretty much falls apart. Furthermore, such a component would tend to imply a higher rate of parental support, meaning the program would be that much more likely to succeed.

Hats off to these men for taking an awfully gutsy move. Woodson's point is rather powerful: doing something is far outweighed by the risk of doing nothing.

Are Charter Schools Helping Latino Students? (David Hernandez and Donna Connally)

mtigani — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:00:56 +0000

If Mayor Villaraigosa is successful in appealing the recent Superior Court decision that ruled AB 1381 unconstitutional, and he takes over the LAUSD, what does he plan to do? His supporters seem to think with Villaraigosa at the helm, it will magically get better – as if Latino students in the cluster of schools with the highest dropout rates will say “Let’s stay in school now.” One only needs to examine his financial backers to glean some understanding of what he intends to do. Frank Baxter, an investment banker who has been an active supporter and financial backer of charter schools, gave $50,000 to Mayor Villaraigosa’s political action committee Excellence in LA Schools. Businessman Jerrold Perenchio contributed $500,000, in addition to several other community and business leaders at $100,000 each. According to a July 2006 article in LA Weekly, most of AB 1381 financial supporters are charter school advocates as well. So, assuming that the Mayor is successful in appealing AB 1381 and -- with his new found authority -- intends to open up a slew of independent charter schools, just how successful will he be in reducing the dropout rate and increasing the test scores in schools that service the Latino community? According to a recent report distributed by Caprice Young, Director of California Charter Schools Association, (based on data collected from the California Department of Education) the Median Growth Scores in 2006 for Latinos in charter schools is 10 points higher than the scores in traditional public schools. Whites show a median growth score of 42 points higher and for African American students in charter schools the median scores are 96 points higher. When you compare these scores, African American student’s score 14% higher in charter schools, whites score 5% higher and Latino students score less that 2% higher. Whereas it appears that charter schools are working for African American and white students, the performance increase among Latino students seems negligible. Thus, we are still left with the gnawing question: “Exactly how does the mayor plan to reform Los Angeles schools if he is or isn’t in control?” Maybe he should admit defeat and leave the education of our children up to the elected school board and superintendent and turn his attention to his many other duties. He can start by explaining to this female writer and Los Angeles resident why aggravated assaults against women and children are no longer being included in local and citywide crime statistics.

Where did I leave my glasses?

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Perhaps I misread the headline. It was early. “Teachers unions embracing reform” Nope. It was still the same even after rubbing my eyes. At first I was excited about this breaking news development. Then I started reading … Reform is a challenge teachers unions embrace. Yes, that’s right. The record clearly demonstrates the commitment of teachers unions to improving public education. I guess that depends on what your definition of public education is. I would imagine it difficult for a union to work on reforming a system in dire straits in part due to your own actions, focused as you are by nature and necessity on benefitting individuals, not an industry. Good luck! NYSUT proudly represents teachers in more than a dozen charter schools, including five here in Buffalo. Charter schools can provide opportunities for innovation and experimentation. We also believe charters must be accountable for the tax money they receive and transparent in how they spend it, and urge caution so that a proliferation of charters does not undermine full support for traditional public schools. NYSUT might be proud to represent dues paying teachers in charter schools, but do you support the work (even existence) of the schools themselves? I couldn’t bear to think of precious NYSUT resources going down the drain in constant worry over charter school accountability, so here’s a hint: charters are already accountable for the money they receive to educate children. Even more, they are accountable for results, unlike traditional public schools. Don’t tell anyone, though; your mandate for full support for conventional schools (by which, I assume, you mean full financial support from politicians, not necessarily full support by parents and students) might be weakened by widespread knowledge that charters are driven by the one singular goal of helping students achieve academic success. Under the leadership of Randi Weingarten, the American Federation of Teachers has launched a $1 million innovation fund to implement sustainable reform efforts developed by union members. Pardon me if I sound naïve, but can reform truly come from within an organization who’s purpose is to further the interests of it’s members? Why not reach out beyond the group and ask a parent (or even a student) what they think about teachers union priorities. Then ask them if they think you will be able to turn the ship around. By the way, it’s already sinking…

Questions for Leo

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Leo Casey, Vice President of the United Federation of Teachers, New York's arm of the AFT, probably didn't have too difficult of a time cramming for his Monday testimony before the City Council. He probably even went to bed early and slept in. Why? Well, would you break a sweat if your staff had prepared and dispensed a set of friendly questions for the Council to ask you? Why stop there, you ask? Why not magnanimously hand Councilmembers questions with with which they could pepper officials from the Dept. of Education on the issue of charter school growth in the city as well? Now your thinking like a union official. (Stop. You're scaring me.) There's no way the Council would use those questions, you exclaim! We all know that being a Councilman takes a lot of hard work. We know they are on top of any issue that comes before them, especially a hearing on a hot topic like charter schools! What happened to your union thinking? (You disappoint me. You were so indoctrinated a few paragraphs ago.) Of course some of them did! (Ahem. Melinda Katz. Cough. Robert Jackson.) Regardless of the tactics used to manage the hearing, the truth is the UFT is currently treading in some strange waters when it comes to charters. January brought news that teachers at two KIPP schools were prepared to join up, but then several apparently changed their minds, and the process is in limbo. Now, Elizabeth Green shares a story of dissatisfaction out of Queens' Renaissance Charter School where staff are puzzled over the inaction of their union to advocate for charter school funding out of Albany. She rightly points out that the process of recruiting teachers at charters "has put the union in the tricky position of on the one hand lobbying for limits on charter schools, while, on the other hand, representing some charter school staff." How long can the union bite the hand that feeds it and expect to get away with it?

Where there's smoke...

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Both the blogosphere and the mainstream media have been all over the loss of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program. Not a day went by after Congress and the Administration dashed the hopes (and futures) of District students desperate to escape failing schools that someone didn't stand-up and express outrage. But is tough talk enough? Where have the people affected most by this thoughtless decision been? Why aren't there daily stories about parents and education and advocay leaders pestering members of Congress? Where are the rallies? Where are the sit-ins? Where is the public outrage? A successful program - proven to help students achieve; proven to bring hope to families; proven to educate students in our Nation's Capital for half the price of the local public school system - is placed on the chopping block and only editorials, op-eds and talking heads programs are there to defend it? Hopefully the old adage of "where there's smoke, there's fire" will hold true in coming weeks. There seems to finally be movement on the ground in DC. Get those parents out in front of the people stealing their children's futures. Get those residents who know there is a better way to raise their voices. A polite conversation with a Congressman or Councilman won't save school DC school choice.

Upside down and backwards

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What's wrong with this picture?: The most successful public middle school in the city of Baltimore is forced to turn its back on the very elements fueling its achievement in order to placate demands made by the teachers union, demands that a majority of teachers at the school do not even agree are necessary. Welcome to Bawlmer, hon! On the same day that Sec. Arne Duncan helped applaud a rise in Maryland's test results for elementary and middle schools, the Baltimore Sun reports that KIPP Ujima Village Academy - where students score among the top 10 middle schools in the entire state - will have to cut back on extended days and other programs that help students achieve. The union is imposing an 33 percent pay raise for teachers due to their extended hours, hours that most of them realized were an integral part of the KIPP school culture as well as an important tool for student learning when they signed on. The additional financial hit cannot be sustained by the school for long. The weird part: The teachers aren't calling for it. "It is a school for choice for teachers as well as students. I didn't feel I was tricked. It was worth it for me to teach at a school that is working so well," said teacher Brad Nornhold. Maryland's charter school law scored a "D" on CER's recent ranking of the country's laws, the 10th weakest of the bunch. One of the reason's for its consistently low score is the inclusion of a union stranglehold over teachers and negotiations. Kids achieving, teachers fulfilled by their work, a successful school culture. How does the teachers union see a problem with that picture?

Tell us how you really feel

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This video of former NEA General Counsel Bob Chanin pretty much speaks for itself, but here are a few questions to keep in mind: - Is this the kind of partner the Education Department should have by its side when working on new, innovative ideas to raise up public education? - Is this the type of organization parents would like to have guiding the careers and priorities of the number one most influential individual in their child's life outside of the family? - The basic premise here is "We have the money, so we have the power". First, doesn't that remove entirely the balance of interests away from kids before they even enter school? And secondly, what if teachers really had a choice to join a union or not? Would the power still be in union hands if every teacher made an individual choice? (A tip of the hat to the Heritage Foundation's Foundry blog.)

This is a related post.

admin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 02:56:09 +0000

This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What's Happening section.

This is another related post.

admin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:29:57 +0000

This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section. This post appears on the Issues pages, right under the What’s Happening section.

Teacher Attitudes A'Changin'

admin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:00:01 +0000

Teachers' ideas for improving schools are sounding more and more like the current reform agenda. Performance pay, seniority, firing incompetent teachers. These and other views are becoming more popular, according to a survey conducted by the National Center for Education Information. They've conducted five national surveys of teachers, beginning in 1986. This year's poll, Profile of Teachers in the U.S. 2011, finds positive movement on key issues. Teachers: "strongly" support firing incompetent teachers regardless of seniority; favor performance pay (up from 42% in 2005 to 59% in 2011); agree on market-drive pay for high-demand subjects (rising from 15% in 1996 to 40% today); want to eliminate tenure (edging up from 27% in 2005 to 33% today). But, hold on. The survey found even greater support in these reform issues from teachers alternatively prepared (not through the traditional ed-degree route). 70% of these teachers say yes to performance pay, and 52% say get rid of tenure. Half support recruiting teachers from other careers and half say recruit teachers from the top third of all students. All teachers want more participation at the building and district level, and both groups say autonomy in determining what and how they teach would strengthen the profession. No wonder the status quo shrinks from alternative certification and wants to stick to the degree-seniority path to higher pay.

What gives?

admin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:01:22 +0000

Besides jobs and stimuli for the economy, the President promised in his speech last week a big gift for the establishment -- $35B to teachers to allegedly help avert further layoffs, without evidence that such layoffs are looming or would have any impact on kids and without any strings attached to ensure quality comes first over quantity. Obama said that “these are the men and women charged with preparing our children for a world where the competition has never been tougher.” Clearly, then, we need teachers who are at the top of their game to do this job, not just blanket hiring of people who can stand in front of the classroom. Another problem, as has been noted here and trumpeted over the air waves everywhere, is that the nation’s schools actually have a higher percentage of teachers and staff than enrollment numbers suggest is necessary. Census data for the 2008-2009 school year show that during that time, just over 48,000,000 students were enrolled in K-12 public education, which is a decline of 157,114 students from the previous year. But, they were taught by 3,231,487 teachers (full-time equivalent); an increase of just over 81,000 teachers from the previous year. So, like we asked: What gives? Most likely a shoring up of Obama’s political base (i.e. teacher unions) as we near that presidential election cycle. If we have to spend more money, instead of giving billions to hire teachers schools may not need, why not give schools the flexibility to target funds where real need exists.

This is an Edspresso post.

admin — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:08:20 +0000

"Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?"

Administration's New Message to Charter Schools: Quality Not Quantity

erickaf — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 22:19:59 +0000

“We’re happy that good schools were approved, but I question a review process that couldn’t find more than 4 out of 60 applicants,” said Jeanne Allen, director of the Center for Education Reform, a pro-charter group in Washington, D.C. that assisted some applicants. Read the full story here.

National Charter School Leader to Hoosier Parents: Keep Pressure On

erickaf — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:30:22 +0000

Chavous says parental pressure, and reforms that offer them choices, must be at the heart of the reform movement. He warned charter-school leaders to beware of what he labels "drive-by reformers," who endorse small steps toward change while stressing a need to preserve the whole system. Read more.

Charters Perform Well on NAEP

erickaf — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It’s been well documented that the 2011 NAEP scores for students have left much to be desired. Students only improved their scores by one point since 2009 and the achievement gap hasn’t budged. However, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools compared charter school scores with traditional public school scores and the results were promising. In nearly every subject and category, charter school students made much larger improvements than conventional public school students. You can read the full analysis here.

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

http://www.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/StateOfCharterSchools_CER_Dec2011-Web-1.pdf

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2011/12/21/study-11-area-charter-schools-closed.html

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

"Parent Trigger's Second Try" LA Weekly, CA January 12, 2012 And to think — this week, this nowhere school in San Bernardino County could make history as the first in the nation to be seized by disgusted working-class parents under California's much-debated Parent Trigger law. http://www.laweekly.com/2012-01-12/news/parent-trigger-adelanto-california/

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

New York City Charter School Finds That a Grade of ‘C’ Means Closing (CER in the news) New York Times, NY January 12, 2012 For the first time, New York City is closing a charter school for the offense of simply being mediocre. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/education/new-york-city-plans-to-close-a-charter-school-for-mediocrity.html?_r=1&ref=education

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Bill would give Indiana parents ability to convert schools to charters Louisville Courier Journal, IN January 12, 2012 Parents could vote to convert traditional schools to charters under a bill an Indiana House committee passed Wednesday. http://www.courier-journal.com/article/2012301110106

CREDO studies

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Fact-Checking Charter School Achievement

Why some are saying only 1 in 5 charter schools perform, and why it's wrong: In July 2009, CREDO (Center for Research on Education Outcomes) published a national report on charter school achievement. The Center for Education Reform and Dr. Caroline Hoxby, among others critiqued the report’s results and methodology. That report is flawed in several ways:

It was not a national study but a study of only15 states. Forty-one states plus DC have charter school laws.
It deployed a method of comparing students in charters to "virtual twins" in traditional public schools. These children are composites of what the researchers believe the student in a traditional public school would look like, not what they DO look like. While there are virtual charter schools, there is no such thing as "virtual" student achievement.
The study did not account for any variation in grade levels of schools. Some charters run from K-3, starting a new grade each year; others start at 3 and go to 8 and so on. The number of years a student was in a charter is completely ignored.
The researchers ignored the gold standards of research that requires apples to apples comparisons. That means that the achievement of a student that is already in a charter but would have gone to the precise neighborhood school of the student to whom he is compared in the traditional public school.
The researchers ignored variations in state test rigor, reporting and data, and made comparisons of students regardless of state boundaries.
The study accounted for poverty using federal free and reduced lunch program data, which the federal research bureau that collects that data has admitted is deeply flawed, as most charters do not participate fully in the free and reduced lunch program for a variety of well- documented reasons. That does not mean they do not feed students; it means they prefer not to comply with US Department of Agriculture paperwork and regulations that are costly and often negate the funds they'd receive.

For more information on charter school achievement and why the report is flawed, please see our report Fact Checking School Achievement. Rejection of CREDO’s Methodology A widely touted study found deficiencies in student achievement in charters in several states by employing a method of comparing charter school students to virtual twins in traditional public schools (TPS). Despite our skepticism, the report was widely embraced, with little appreciation for the scientific flaws in the research. Dr. Caroline Hoxby has long conducted apples to apples scientific comparisons of charter school achievement. She points out that attempts to use other methods of evaluations, such as that recently used by CREDO to issue negative conclusions about charter students in several states, actually make fair comparisons almost impossible. There are a couple of methods that should not be used because, instead of making the selection bias better, they make it dramatically worse. These methods are: (1) pure value-added and (2) matching based on students' prior history in the traditional public schools ("TPS-history-matching"). Both methods have been used by a variety of researchers." To do the TPS-history-matching (as in the recent CREDO study), a researcher finds students who are currently in charter school but who were previously enrolled in traditional public schools long enough to establish a program participation history (free lunch participation, special education, English Learner services). Then, the researcher matches the charter school student to one or more students in his or her previous traditional public school. The match is based on whether the students have the same race and ethnicity, the same program participation, and similar prior test scores. The researcher compares each student to his or her matched counterparts. Also, a researcher can use the switchers' histories to find matches for the charter school classmates of switchers, even if these classmates are not themselves switchers. The point is that the entire matching process is based on those students, and only those students, who apply to charter schools in late grades. These switchers are non- representative students and are precisely the students for whom switcher bias is most serious. (The CREDO study also has a serious statistical problem that causes its estimates of charter schools' effects to be negatively biased. An explanation of this problem can be found in a memo posted on the website for CER Summary Hoxby New York Charters 2009.

March 20, 2009

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

School Funding Doesn't Add Up
Washington Times, D.C., March 20, 2009
Though $53.6 billion in "stabilization" funds has dramatically softened the blow, several states and public school districts still need to cut teacher payrolls to make ends meet.

Testing Mayoral Control of Schools
Wall Street Journal, March 20, 2009
In regard to your editorial "Mayoral Control Makes the Grade" (March 6): The United Federation of Teachers (UFT) supports preserving the school governance law giving New York City's mayor control of the schools with modifications that improve and strengthen, not weaken the structure.

Education Secretary Duncan to Visit New Orleans
Times Picayune, LA, March 19, 2009
Education Secretary Arne Duncan will visit New Orleans on Friday to get a first-hand look at reforms the Obama administration is pushing nationally, reforms that remain a work in progress locally.

Catholic Schools May Get New Life as Charters
Miami Herald, FL, March 20, 2009
The Archdiocese of Miami is working with Academica, South Florida's largest charter school management company, to convert six Catholic schools it plans to close in June into nonreligious charter schools by the fall.

For Schools, the Buck Stops in Legislature
Miami Herald, FL, March 20, 2009
For too long the Florida Legislature has been reducing its general-revenue contribution to the state's public-education budget and making up the difference by raising a school-board tax called the Local Required Effort.

Merit Pay For Teachers Is A Good Idea, If Done Right
Orlando Sentinel, FL, March 20, 2009
Merit pay for teachers has long been a controversial issue, particularly in Florida, where previous efforts have not succeeded. But merit pay is a hot topic again because President Obama recently added the concept to his plan to reform public education.

Talk Must Turn To Helping Catholic Schools to Survive
Cleveland Plain Dealer, OH, March 20, 2009
The Diocese of Cleveland is the largest school system in Ohio. Public high school graduation rates in Cleveland have hovered in the 30th percentile. Diocesan graduation rates exceed 98 percent.

Environmental Charter School Renewed: State Asks For Changes At Grayslake School
Chicago Tribune, IL, March 20, 2009
Illinois education leaders agreed Thursday to renew the state's only charter school devoted to environmental education, allowing Prairie Crossing Charter School to keep its doors open for another five years.

Capping Charter School Success
Leland Tribune, NC, March 19, 2009
Research on charter schools generally shows these innovative public schools boost achievement. Critics aren't convinced. Charter students might excel, they counter, but such success is preprogrammed before school even starts.

'Innovation Schools' Succeed Doing Things Their Own Way
9NEWS, CO, March 19, 2009
It's rare when those responsible for enforcing the rules suddenly say it's O.K. to break them, but for the first time in Colorado history, public schools are being granted a special status as "innovation schools" to do things their own way.

There Is a Hunger for These Schools
Boston Globe, MA, March 20, 2009
THIS MONTH I had the honor, and the anguish, of drawing names from a stuffed box of applicants for 75 coveted freshman spots at the MATCH Charter Public High School in Boston.

Bay State Model Is Not One To Extol
Boston Globe, MA, March 20, 2009
In Massachusetts, charter schools are created without the consent of communities or without meaningful consideration of their concerns. A new charter in Gloucester was approved recently over strenuous objection of parents and local officials.

Limit School Districts' Risk in Charter Funding
South Coast Today, MA, March 20, 2009
Governor Patrick deserves credit for putting charter school reform on the table. Up to now, it has been a public policy third rail, in part because of the intensive public relations campaign and lobbying of the charter school community.

Charters Called Good For Competition
Gary Post Tribune, IN, March 20, 2009
Bennett has been an outspoken supporter on the need for competition in education. He visited KIPP LEAD, which is a college preparatory charter school that serves 210 students in grades 5 through 7. KIPP plans to expand to eighth grade this fall.

Charter School Principals Mobilize Parents To Lobby For Mayor Bloomberg School Control
New York Daily News, NY, March 20, 2009
Are parents of charter school children across the city being organized into shock troops for Mayor Bloomberg's continued control of the public school system?

Lessons of Charter Schools
Albany Times Union, NY, March 20, 2009
This fall, the number of charter schools in New York City alone is expected to increase from 78 to 104. While New York has by far the largest share, charter schools are expanding throughout the state.

Chattanooga: Charter Schools Could Hurt County Schools Revenue, Budget
Chattanooga Times Free Press, TN, March 19, 2009
Ivy Academy and Chattanooga Girls Leadership Academy still are public schools, but their students will take with them their share of property and sales taxes as well as Basic Education Program money from the state, said Hamilton County Schools Chief Financial Officer Tommy Kranz.

Texas' Charter-School Owners Are Replicating Their Success
Fort Worth Star Telegram, TX, March 19, 2009
"We have 1,400 applications for 350 openings," said Teyfik Eski, superintendent of the 3-year-old academy, one of 19 affiliated schools across the state operated by the nonprofit Cosmos Foundation of Houston.

Rhee Joins Influential New Board
Washington Post, D.C., March 20, 2009
D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee has joined the newly formed advisory board of the Broad Center for the Management of School Systems, a non-profit that trains new urban school leaders.

What's good for the goose...

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools has presented a public code of accountability, a set of standards they say all member schools hold themselves to generally but hope are adopted completely. This is a nice notion, but one that seems to have been pushed upon PCCS by outspoken opponents in the Keystone State, not to mention a media witch hunt focused on Philadelphia area schools that failed to balance “reporting” of financial mismanagement at some schools with charter success stories such as Boys’ Latin or Independence Charter School (winner of the Goldman Sachs Foundation’s Prize for Excellence). Charter schools are individually held accountable for their success or failure, the level of this accountability determined by the charter school law in each state. In Pennsylvania’s case, CER has measured their law as falling 12th out of 41 throughout the country. Why now has Pennsylvania applied pressure to charters to follow a uniform code? Each school is unique. Lumping them all into one group and asking them to monitor each other in some sort of Neighborhood Watch-like scenario runs counter to the spirit of these schools. Independence and freedom to innovate are trade-offs for accountability, a contract entered into upon initial approval of each school. Will Pennsylvania now pressure conventional public schools - schools allowed to fail students academically and mismanage funds continually without fear of closure - to police themselves and hold each other accountable for achievement and standards? After all, what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander.

50 is the new 30

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The L.A. Times' Steve Lopez ventures forth into the complex and convoluted world of the UTLA union contract for teachers in his search for the reasoning behind their "last hired, first fired" stance on teacher job cuts in the city. 5,500 teachers in the Los Angeles Unified schools have been handed layoff notices and Lopez is confused as to the logic of basing the fragility of a teacher's career on their seniority and not their demonstrated skill in the classroom.

The teachers union has every right to scream about funding cuts and potential layoffs (even if we won't have real numbers for several weeks at least). But what union President A.J. Duffy won't admit, as he raises a stink, is that when good teachers are on the chopping block and burned-out teachers are protected, it's because of his union's contract.

Lopez echos the concerns of many parents when he writes:

At my daughter's school, I'd much rather have the very capable principal decide on staffing rather than have decisions forced on her by Duffy and a bloated union contract. At 347 pages of boilerplate and trivial specificity, the UTLA (contract) manages to dehumanize teachers and crush innovation, treating them like components of an outdated machine rather than like intelligent, independent, adaptable professionals.

Journalist Richard Whitmire underlined the key disconnect between the employee retention in the teaching profession and that of other professionals in CER's recent monograph Mandate for Change:

...teachers should be hired, promoted, or fired based on their effectiveness in educating children. That simple formula, however—judging employees by the outcome of their efforts—although commonplace in the rest of society, remains elusive in the teaching profession.

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Monday, June 1, 2009

46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards
Washington Post, D.C., June 1, 2009
Forty-six states and the District of Columbia today will announce an effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each year from kindergarten through high school graduation, an unprecedented step toward a uniform definition of success in American schools.

School Choice Is the New Civil Rights Struggle
Wall Street Journal, May 30, 2009
Today this black Democrat says the new civil-rights struggle is about the quality of instruction in public schools, and that to receive a decent education African-Americans need school choice.

Supreme Court to Address Meeting the Needs of Special-Education Students
New York Times, NY, May 31, 2009
In a case with potential financial repercussions for school districts and families alike, the United States Supreme Court will soon decide when public schools must reimburse parents of special-education students for private-school tuition.

Charter Schools Provide Good Model On Teacher Pay
Washington Post, D.C., June 1, 2009
It is hard for me to find a school leader with a track record for raising student achievement who does not admire almost everything Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee is doing with the D.C. schools.

Fewer Apply For Local Private School Vouchers
Springfield News Sun, OH, May 30, 2009
The drop in new applicants likely reflects improved performance in some school buildings that allowed those buildings to move off the eligibility list, according to state and city schools officials.

Charter Schools Market Themselves To Community
Shreveport Times, LA, June 1, 2009
With less than three months before the beginning of the next school year, the clock is ticking for the two new charter schools — Linwood Public Charter School and Linear Leadership Academy — to enroll students.

Higher LEAP Scores Add Fuel To Debate Over Charter Schools
Times Picayune, LA, May 30, 2009
Two weeks ago, a busload of New Orleans community leaders trekked to Baton Rouge to petition the state board of education, venting frustration over the lack of a local voice in the dramatic changes to the city's school landscape.

Charter Schools Are Public Schools; Confusion Skews Public View
The Ledger, FL, June 1, 2009
I was dismayed when I picked up the paper May 20 and read the Polk Pulse question for May 19 with responses from 1,153 readers. The misleading May 19 question read: "Should charter schools get the same funding as public schools?" The question implies that public schools and charter schools are two different things.

Charter Salaries Attract Attention
Denver Post, CO, June 1, 2009
The success of many charter schools in Colorado has been very promising. So why give enemies of charter schools any ammunition that could imperil their reforms?

Education Secretary Duncan Should Come To Washington State
Seattle Times, WA, June 1, 2009
EDUCATION Secretary Arne Duncan's "Listening and Learning" national tour of public schools ought to include Washington state if federal officials are serious about understanding education reform's local impact.

Charters Get Money To Build On
New York Post, NY, June 1, 2009
Despite a prohibition on using state funds to build charter schools, the city has quietly expanded available funding for charter school construction to as much as $3.8 billion.

Desire to 'Raise The Bar' Fuels Push For Second Charter School
Staten Island Advance, NY, May 31, 2009
At least that's what a group of North Shore parents are envisioning as they compile their application. The group said they are hoping to develop the second charter school on Staten Island that would make up for a lack of quality public schools where there isn't enough parent involvement.

Textbook for Failure
Washington Post, D.C., May 30, 2009
WHETHER NEW York Mayor Michael Bloomberg will retain control of the city's public schools will soon be decided by state lawmakers in Albany.

Money and the Schools
Wall Street Journal, June 1, 2009
Under the new law, state funds will be sent automatically to wherever the needy kids are, even if they attend suburban schools. The real reform would be to let parents decide which schools deserve their kids and allow the funding to follow. But at least we've had one more object lesson that more money doesn't mean better schools.

Raise The Cap On Charters
Milford Daily New, MA, May 30, 2009
The latest study of public education in Massachusetts cites progress over the last 15 years and a stubborn gap between the state's highest- and lowest-performing schools. It makes a handful of sensible recommendations, including one for which there is growing momentum: Raising the cap on new charter schools.

Open Minds, Not More Money, Key To Schools’ Success
The Patriot Ledger, MA, May 30, 2009
A new study on the state of education in Massachusetts since the Education Reform Act of 1993 shows that, while there has been progress, a growing population of poor students has outstripped attempts to ensure everyone receives the education they need to succeed.

100% Graduating: Charter School Grants Diplomas To Entire Senior Class
Memphis Commercial Appeal, TN, May 30, 2009
As each of the 89 seniors from the state's first charter school rehearsed accepting a diploma from their principal, ear-splitting cheers from their classmates filled the auditorium.

Spitting In The Eye Of Mainstream Education
Los Angeles Times, CA, May 31, 2009
Reporting from Oakland -- Not many schools in California recruit teachers with language like this: "We are looking for hard working people who believe in free market capitalism. . . . Multicultural specialists, ultra liberal zealots and college-tainted oppression liberators need not apply."

Ohio Charter Schools Part Of Budget Talks
13abc, OH, May 31, 2009
The fate of many of Ohio's charter schools rests in the hands of state lawmakers who will soon begin negotiating a compromise on the two-year state budget.

Stimulus Funds For Schools Stall in Legislature
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, PA, June 1, 2009
While road and bridge projects using federal economic stimulus money already are under way, local school districts have not yet received a dime of stimulus money expected to total more than $2.6 billion in Pennsylvania.

Tennessee Schools Could Lose $100 Million
The Tennessean, TN, May 30, 2009
Tennessee could lose more than $100 million in stimulus money because of a failed legislative effort to allow more students to attend charter schools.

Curbs on Louisiana School Boards' Clout Losing Steam in Legislature
Times Picayune, LA, May 31, 2009
Legislation aimed at curbing local school boards' clout hasn't fared well so far this legislative session, testament, perhaps, to the boards' collective influence in Baton Rouge if not to the strength of their argument that they are being unfairly scapegoated for Louisiana's public education problems.

Charter Schools Debate Looms
Central Maine Morning Sentinel, ME, June 1, 2009
Biddeford legislator is at work on a charter schools compromise as lawmakers prepare for debate on a bill that would allow the independently run schools in Maine.

Gov. Signs School Voucher Bill
KTAR, AZ, May 29, 2009
Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill that allows parents of disabled and foster children to continue to choose schools that best serve the needs of their children.

A Changing Student Body
Washington Post, D.C., June 1, 2009
Public school enrollment across the country is hitting a record this year with just less than 50 million students, and classrooms are becoming more diverse, largely because of growth in the Latino population, according to a new federal report.

Flying High

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Three students from Friendship Southeast Elementary Academy, one of D.C.'s Friendship Public Charter Schools, were on hand for a phone call from President Barack Obama to the astronauts of the International Space Station last week. FSEA 5th grader John Johnson took the opportunity to challenge the Commander-in-Chief to a game of basketball. Look for the telltale maroon blazers behind the President:

Dear Sec. Duncan,

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dear Sec. Duncan,

I imagine you’ve never had quite so many leading political, financial and media players attempting to second guess your thoughts and interpret your words. Throughout the blogosphere, talk of your comments regarding the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program is rampant. I thought an open letter might help put all the issues circulating behind the scenes into perspective.

Some people think they’ve finally got you – meaning that you really are a choice supporter. Others see your words as dancing between the rain drops, so to speak, and that while you appreciate the plight of children in the private schools here that have scholarships and think they ought to continue throughout the next year, that you’re not going to weigh in on the voucher thing.

Perhaps you’re like many leaders with whom I’ve spoken lately who say things like “Well, I’ve never been a fan of vouchers.” How about safe schools, I say. Are you a fan of those? How about good schools? You see, Mr. Secretary, vouchers (or scholarships or choice) are simply tools to the end game – which is getting kids a decent education. But I digress.

I’m still stuck on whether or not – as your reform minded Democrat friends think – you and President Obama are actually closet choice supporters who just can’t veer off course now and risk upsetting any number of interest groups. They (your Dem friends) also used to say that about Clinton. In fact, I still have a copy of the letter then Governor Clinton wrote to then Milwaukee State Representative Polly Williams applauding her efforts as an African-American leader to bring vouchers to her community – the first ever instance. But as President, Clinton vetoed twice a program that was eerily similar to the one that has the blogosphere posting up a storm. I was in the gallery the day the Senate voted to pass the first bill in 1996, along with more than 200 of the District’s poorest children, who came to show their support. But peering down on the Senators that day didn’t have an impact, until years later, when some of the very same Senators (Lieberman among them) would partner with the city’s Mayor, City Council education leader and others to create and foster this now historical program.

I have to tell you what the program has meant not only for children in the city, but my family personally. “Your family, Jeanne? You have what you need for your children. How have you benefited personally?”

Well, let me tell you, Mr. Secretary, about the extraordinary comment my daughter made to me this past Fall during the first week of her freshman year in high school. She attends a wonderful girls school in Washington DC known as Georgetown Visitation. Though it’s a huge struggle, we choose not to use the mostly above average public schools in our county. Most people, as you know, can’t do that.

There is little diversity in our community, sadly, and so I was thrilled when my daughter came home her first week and was excited to tell me about one of her new friends.

It turns out that this friend and four other students are able to go to Visi (as we call it), because of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program that Congress wants to kill. Let me restate that a different way – Visi is truly one of the best schools in the area, if not on a par with the best in the nation. Their programs, their care of the girls, their moral fortitude, prepare women to be strong, forceful and highly educated leaders in this world. Schools like Visi can open up new worlds to students, particularly those not normally exposed to worldly people, matters, etc. In short, girls like the 5 who attend Visi with Opportunity Scholarships – which, by the way, cover but a fraction of the cost to attend Visi (and Sidwell, etc.) – will be forever changed by this experience, as will all of the girls who attend.

D.C.’s program, Mr. Duncan, can’t be dismissed for petty policy reasons when the very people it benefits are those we most need to help grow.

We attended a school fundraiser the other night. The headmaster called for our attention before the frenzied live auction began and reminded us all that we need to raise money for the kinds of scholarships that allow for more than just those five girls to enrich our lives at Visi. Like most elite private schools, and contrary to the cries of the establishment, we are civic minded and believe that diversity of race and income is critical to our school. And thus we reach out, taxing ourselves to write more checks so that more can have that opportunity.

Frankly, that’s why this debate shouldn’t be about what you or Senator Durbin think. It should be about what we want for our nation. As the huge budget looms and we’re told daily by your boss that we should help care for more Americans - and thus tax increases are necessary -, let me just ask why such help doesn’t automatically extend to every parent who wants better for their children but can’t afford the move, or the private school, or don’t have enough charter school options to accommodate their concern for their children? Why must $100 billion for education stimulus funds only really flow to a system we all recognize is broken?

I’m not content to say this won’t change in my lifetime, but maybe if it doesn’t my daughter and her new friend – and scores like them – will recognize the folly of our actions and fix it for their kids. But wouldn’t you rather see that while we all still can see?

I bet if you could, you’d say yes. Tell us how to help get you there.

Morning Shots for April 20, 2009

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Columbine Massacre Changed School Security
CNN, April 20, 2009
Now, 10 years after those highly publicized shootings in which two young men killed 13 people and themselves, school security has taken another dramatic turn. Some of the noticeable security measures remain, but experts say the country is exploring a new way to protect kids from in-school violence: administrators now want to foster school communities that essentially can protect themselves with or without the high-tech gear.

Americans Love Their . . . Little Schools
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, PA, April 19, 2009
In these tough economic times, the argument goes, bigger districts would reduce administrative costs while enhancing educational opportunities. Citizens would get more classroom bang for their property-tax buck. Only the citizens don't see it that way. Especially in rural areas, voters have flooded statehouses with letters and petitions against consolidation proposals.

Tossing Out the Bad Apples
National Review Online, April 17, 2009
President Obama is only pointing out the elephant in the room — we all know that there are some bad teachers out there. Like breaking an addiction, removing ineffective teachers first requires acknowledging that there is a problem, namely, that the current tenure system protects too many teachers who don't belong in the classroom.

Only for the Privileged Few?
Washington Post, D.C., April 20, 2009
A NEW SURVEY shows that 38 percent of members of Congress have sent their children to private school. About 20 percent themselves attended private school, nearly twice the rate of the general public.

Improvement on Tests More Telling Than Pass Rates
Washington Post, D.C., April 20, 2009
I have been hearing for some time about this practice of devoting special attention to what are called the "on-the-bubble" kids. They are close to scoring proficient on the annual test, which affects the school's rating under the No Child Left Behind law. Some schools give them extra teacher time, leaving less help for lower-performing students, such as Shawn, who have no chance of increasing the passing rate. I sometimes shrugged this off as just one more sign of poorly led schools.

D.C. Schools Gearing Up for Standardized Tests
Washington Post, D.C., April 18, 2009
In the District, the test -- DC-CAS, short for the District of Columbia Comprehensive Assessment System -- is particularly important because it is one of two tests this year that will provide much-anticipated snapshots of Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee's progress in her efforts to overhaul the historically underachieving public school system.

Education Plan Lacks Needed Flexibility
Columbus Dispatch, OH, April 19, 2009
In a statement released last week, Strickland reaffirmed his support for his new "evidence-based" school funding model. Trouble is the plan, Transforming Ohio's Public Education System, would make Ohio's schools more expensive but not more effective.

Propel's Success Costs Local School Districts, Which Pay Most of Bill
Pittsburgh Post Gazette, PA, April 19, 2009
In fall 2003, the first Propel charter school opened with just 173 elementary students in the basement of the former Homestead Hospital building. Six years later, the Propel organization has grown to the size of a small school district with five schools, an enrollment of 1,500, a staff of 200, an annual budget of $19 million and an administrative office on the South Side.

Would-be Charter Schools Face Moment Of Truth
News & Observer, NC, April 20, 2009
In a world where North Carolina charter school slots are limited, you get an opportunity to operate your own only if an existing school fails.With the closing of three schools, including two in the Triangle, 18 groups are vying for the final three openings under the state's 100-school cap.

Nothing Wrong With State's Schools
Athens Banner-Herald, GA, April 20, 2009
Most folks don't know it, but Georgia schools are on an impressive run. Believe it or not, Georgia is now ranked No. 1 in the nation in educational technology, according to Education Week. The report highlighted Georgia's "Virtual School," which allows computer learning of more than 120 online courses.

Merit Pay For Teachers Studied
The Advocate, LA, April 20, 2009
Merit pay for public school teachers is under review again, this time because Louisiana is one of six states picked to tackle the controversial issue.

New Charter School in West Miami-Dade Moves Closer to Reality
Miami Herald, FL, April 19, 2009
A plan to build a large K-12 school at Bird Road and Southwest 149th Avenue is one step closer to final approval.The executive council of the county's Development Impact Committee voted Wednesday to recommend that commissioners green-light a new charter school with space for 1,000 students.

St. Louis Public School Board Lifts Deed Restrictions on Charter Schools
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, MO, April 18, 2009
City charter schools will soon — at least in theory — be able to buy shuttered St. Louis Public School buildings. The district announced Friday it would lift the deed restriction that barred charter groups from buying the sites.

Tug of War Over Costs to Educate the Autistic
New York Times, NY, April 18, 2009
The eight children, ages 5 to 11, who attend the Brooklyn Autism Center Academy need intensive individual instruction to cope with a neurological disorder that can make achieving academic progress slow and grueling.

State Must Help Charters Grow
Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, NY, April 20, 2009
No one should be immune from the spending cuts needed to right New York's listing governmental ship. But that doesn't mean swinging wildly at everything with a budget line. Some public initiatives are central to the kind of reform that is good for the state's future.

More School Choices Better For Everyone
Utica Observer Dispatch, NY, April 19, 2009
Despite protests of some public school leaders, there is room in the local educational firmament for charter schools.

Tennessee Needs More Good Charter Schools
The Tennessean, TN, April 19, 2009
We have each served as U.S. education secretary, under the first President Bush from 1991 to 1993 and now under President Barack Obama, and have seen the potential that charter schools can have in getting results for American students.

Our New Education Chief's Call to Action
Indianapolis Star, IN, April 19, 2009
In short order, Bennett has collided with superintendents over his demand that they honestly meet the requirement that students spend 180 days a year in school. He has irritated the teachers union by not running every reform idea he has past them.

Focus on Schools' Success, Not Type
Crain's Detroit Business, MI, April 19, 2009
So what are the rest of us to conclude in the pursuit of good public policy? We would suggest this: Are individual schools, regardless of format, good enough? Are their students being well-educated enough to successfully pursue post-secondary education, with the largest number of them achieving bachelor's degrees and a reasonable number of those going on to graduate school?

$3.1-Billion Economic Stimulus Windfall Offers A Chance To Reform California Schools, Top Education Official Says
Los Angeles Times, CA, April 18, 2009
As California received billions of dollars Friday to stave off widespread teacher layoffs, the state's highest elected education official pledged to reform schools, aligning academic standards with other states, rewarding teachers who work in the most challenging classrooms and improving student assessments.

Teacher Unions: Good for Teachers, Bad for Students?
Santa Cruz Sentinel, CA, April 20, 2009
Never mind that the furloughs would save many teacher jobs and preserve class size reduction for first and second graders, the teachers union is digging in its heels while the district wrestles with how best to sustain student achievement improvement progress.

Only Painful Options in No-Harm Budget
Miami Herald, FL, April 20, 2009
The budget proposal, cached in CS/HB 5005 and similar bills, is worse than the Legislature's usual bait-and-switch tactics. This one gives South Florida schools a lose-lose option: Transfer tax-millage money from capital funds to the general fund in order to cover shortfalls in education spending. Or, leave the funds there and find other ways to make up for the shortages. Either option carries dire consequences for South Florida.

Time to Build On Charter Schools' Successes
Salisbury Post, NC, April 20, 2009
While there are many important budget challenges facing this session of the North Carolina General Assembly, there are many other important issues which the legislators should address. Revisions in the charter school legislation passed by the 1996 General Assembly need to be made as a result of the success of the charter school movement in our state.

School Choice Gets Push
The State, S.C., April 20, 2009
Small private schools that charge tuition of $2,000 to $3,000 a year could be setting the stage for one of the most aggressive "school choice" pushes yet in South Carolina. After three failed school choice bills in the past four years, the schools — increasingly racially diverse, organized and outspoken — are backing the latest tax credit plan for parents who send their children to private schools.

Gauntlet Thrown Down For Better Schools
Detroit Free Press, MI, April 20, 2009
Nearly three dozen chronically failing schools in Michigan, including almost half of Detroit's public high schools, would be taken over by the state if they cannot make dramatic improvement under a plan set to be unveiled Tuesday.

Charter Schools Proposal Resurfaces
Bangor Daily News, ME, April 20, 2009
A proposal to allow the establishment of charter schools in Maine has resurfaced and is expected to be taken up by a legislative panel later this month. LD 1438, "An Act to Permit Charter Schools in Maine" sponsored by Sen. Dennis Damon, D-Trenton, is similar to the measure that failed to pass muster when debated in 2006.

Once Again, House Says No To School Vouchers
Austin American-Statesman, TX, April 17, 2009
The House of Representatives once again enacted a prohibition on using state money for private school vouchers late Friday night in a 122 to 23 vote for an amendment introduced by Rep. Joe Heflin, D-Crosbyton.

School Reform Turns Politics Upside Down
The News Tribune, WA, April 19, 2009
In times of stress, people sometimes do things out of character. On Thursday that concept manifested itself in a reversal of roles by the state’s political parties. The setting was Senate debate on House Bill 2261, which begins a process to reform the state’s public schools. On one side were Democrats pushing for changes that were passionately opposed by the leadership of the state teachers union but just-as-passionately supported by district administrators, business groups and parent organizations.

Charter and Alternative Schools Get Boost From Alaska Legislature
Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, AK, April 19, 2009
Charter schools should be more fairly funded through a bill the Legislature passed on Saturday. Advocates said the bill supports school choice by eliminating per-student funding penalties on charter schools.

Quality Counts

Ed M. Onitor — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

"Imagine running a factory where you've got these workers - some of them just making crap - and the management is told, "Hey. You can only come down here once a year, but you need to let us know 'cause we might actually fool you and try and do a good job in that one brief moment." Discussing the lessons learned by his foundation over the past few years in a TED Talk this week, Bill Gates declared that "having great teachers is the main thing" necessary to making education better. He called for rewarding and retaining good teachers, and dispelled the myth that the best teachers are the most senior ones saying, "Once somebody has taught for 3 years, their teaching quality does not change thereafter." "All of us here, I'll bet, had some great teachers. We all had a wonderful education. That's part of the reason we're here today, part of the reason we're successful." Teacher quality is also the focus of journalist Richard Whitmire's essay contribution to Mandate for Change - an effort led by The Center for Education Reform that outlines what our leaders must do to improve our nation's schools. In the monograph, Whitmire laments the fact that "Effective teachers make a difference and the current system does next to nothing to reward effective teaching." Got Mandate?

Have fun storming the castle

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Tuesday was a big day for charter schools in the Ocean State. Families waited with bated breath to see if their names were among those chosen by lottery to attend one of Rhode Island's 11 charters. With an applicant to opening ratio of 6 to 1 (several schools had 10 times as many applications as available slots) , many were disappointed. At the same time educational futures were being forecast, teachers union representatives were storming the castle to voice opposition to a proposed plan that would allow charters more freedom in how they utilized their financial resources. At the heart of the union attack lies a fear that charters will be granted flexibility in that they "would not be bound by prevailing wage, tenure and retirement-system clauses that govern other public schools." Apparently having recently brushed up on his thesaurus reading, the union's chief lobbyist James Parisi exclaimed, “It’s wrong, it’s unfair, it’s unconscionable, it’s absolutely unnecessary and it wasn’t the deal that was struck when the original charter law was put into place." Um, yeah. It wasn't.

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

For Obama, split looms over education reform Christian Science Monitor, MA December 18, 2008 With the selection of Arne Duncan as the next secretary of Education, President-elect Obama has chosen a diplomatic reformer. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1218/p02s01-usgn.html Our view on education: Low-cost ways to fix schools/ Opposing view: Too much 'reform' Op-Ed USA Today December 18, 2008 In tough economic times, focus on affordable reforms. Accountability movement turns schools into test-prep factories. http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/12/our-view-on-edu.html http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/12/opposing-view-2.html States Eye Solutions as Budget Ax Hits Schools Education Week, MD December 17, 2008 Funding for public schools continues to come under the ax in states hit hard by the financial crisis, forcing lawmakers and education officials to look for alternative sources of revenue to make up for some of the funds lost. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/12/17/16ap_states.html School Choice Group Recruits 10,000 New Supporters in Just Five Weeks MarketWatch December 17, 2008 More than 10,000 people signed up to join a coalition supporting school vouchers and scholarship tax credit programs over the past five weeks, the Alliance for School Choice announced today. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/School-Choice-Group-Recruits-10000/story.aspx?guid=%7B1AD98E67-FFC0-4BFB-B19C-0ED8AD17B814%7D TARGET STATES Charter schools Obama praised ripped at board meeting Chicago Sun-Times, IL December 18, 2008 A parade of teachers, parents and students complained Wednesday about the new breed of Chicago schools President-elect Barack Obama touted the day before when he tapped Chicago's school chief to be his U.S. secretary of education. http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/1337780,CST-NWS-skul18.article Troubled school won't reopen Cincinnati Enquirer, OH December 17, 2008 Deland McCullough, the school's director, said an ongoing lawsuit by the Ohio Attorney General's Office and negative publicity have hurt the school. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20081217/NEWS0102/812170346/1058 Missouri: Schools Takeover Upheld New York Times, NY December 18, 2008 The Missouri Supreme Court has affirmed the state takeover of the St. Louis school system, which has struggled for years with poor finances and student test scores. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/education/18brfs-SCHOOLSTAKEO_BRF.html?scp=8&sq=education&st=nyt Georgia charter schools earn national recognition Gainesville Times, GA December 17, 2008 The National Association of Charter School Authorizers presented its first national Improving Policy award to Georgia. Georgia was the only state in the nation chosen for the award. http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/article/12559/ Georgia’s largest school system opts out of state rules Atlanta Journal Constitution, GA December 17, 2008 The Gwinnett County school board Wednesday unanimously approved a plan to gain greater local control over the education of students, including freeing itself from state mandates on class size and teacher pay. http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/2008/12/17/gwinnett_school_plan.html Voucher 'savings' no deal for state Sarasota Herald-Tribune, FL December 18, 2008 With money in short supply this year, I wonder how many Florida lawmakers will get the wrong idea from a report that says a recently created school voucher program is saving the state millions. http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20081218/COLUMNIST/812180346/-1/NEWSSITEMAP OTHER STORIES A decade later, charter schools are proving critics wrong Opinion New York Daily News, NY December 18, 2008 On this anniversary, we can definitively say that this educational "experiment" - derided by many in the status quo from the very start - has long since graduated from the laboratory and delivered impressive achievement results for children across New York. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/12/18/2008-12-18_a_decade_later_charter_schools_are_provi.html Charter schools won't escape state ax Albany Times Union, NY December 18, 2008 Now that Gov. David Paterson has delivered the grim news about his plan to cut state education funding, charter school advocates say they face the same difficult choices next school year as public districts. http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=751644 A Doomed Crusade for More Diverse Schools New York Times, NYDecember 18, 2008 The truth is that, now as then, the real losers in education’s rigged game are those in the less demographically desirable districts, forever cut off from the social and intellectual capital that’s the birthright of the kids born on second and third base. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/nyregion/18towns.html?_r=1&scp=7&sq=education&st=nyt Charter school study misleading, inaccurate Opinion Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, December 18, 2008 While I applaud The Journal Gazette for its editorial, “The Charter Effect” (Dec. 2), I urge readers to be cautious in taking some of the report’s findings at face value. http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081218/EDIT05/812180380

It's what you do

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It looks like RNC Chariman Michael Steele beat us to the punch and hit one out of the park for DC kids on last night's Harball when he pointed out the disconnect between President Obama's incredible speech to the NAACP and his near sweeping under the rug of the successful DC Opportunity Scholarship Program. "You can go to the NAACP and say a lot, but it's what you do (that matters)," countered Steele when Matthews praised the hardball words of Obama in New York. Chris Matthews was down right civil on the issue, said it was an area he and Steele agreed upon, that "Opportunity Scholarships should be maintained", and pointed out it was the education Sonia Sotomayor received at Cardinal Spellman High School, a Catholic school in the Bronx, that was a key factor in her success. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#32014153 Take a look for yourself (discussion of DCOSP begins at the 6:45 mark):

February 24, 2009

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Charters Seen as Lab for Report's Ideas on Teachers
Education Week, MD, February 23, 2009
Charter schools—unfettered by some of the bureaucratic constraints of traditional public schools—are theoretically in a good position to use just the sorts of tactics the report’s authors thought were needed for hiring and maintaining a high-quality teaching staff.

Quality Seen as Job One for Charters
Education Week, MD, February 23, 2009
A quarter-century after A Nation at Risk warned of a "rising tide of mediocrity," efforts are afoot to strengthen the growing charter sector.

Phila. Schools: A New Vision
Philadelphia Inquirer, PA, February 24, 2009
Philadelphia public schools for years have been a poster child for bold experiments, but too many children are still failing.

Teachers at Charter School Vote to Unionize
Philadelphia Inquirer, PA, February 24, 2009
Teachers at the Wakisha Charter School have voted to be represented by a union.

Cleveland Teachers Union Says District Offers Little Help To 10 Troubled Schools
Cleveland Plain Dealer, OH, February 24, 2009
Cleveland schools chief Eugene Sanders called out bad teachers and failing schools in a rousing speech early this month. Now it's the teachers union's turn to throw down.

CPS Criticized For $11K Billboard Ad Campaign
MSNBC, February 24, 2009
Cincinnati Public Schools is trying to lure people -- and students -- in with billboards placed across town, but some taxpayers said it's a big waste of their money

JCPS Could Top 100,000 Students
Louisville Courier-Journal, KY, February 24, 2009
Berman said he believes the main reason for the increase is parental satisfaction. "We offer a lot of different choices and our schools are very attractive," he said. "I also think it is because we have a well-integrated system that has balance and a strong curriculum."

Pastorek Says La. Ahead of Curve on e-learning
Alexandria Town Talk, LA, February 24, 2009
Louisiana ranks fifth in the nation in adopting e-learning technology, but more needs to be done to get students closer to the 21st century classroom.

Public Funds Not For Church Schools
St. Augustine Record, FL, February 24, 2009
Charter schools have been heralded as the answer to education. Nothing could be further from the truth. Charter schools are really public-funded private schools.

New Schools Chief Stumbles in First Month
Seattle Times, WA, February 21, 2009
Most players in statewide education give him a passing grade on his first month despite the number of times his staff had to apologize for him.

Appeals Court Rejects Boulder Valley Charter Challenge
Daily Camera, CO, February 23, 2009
The lawsuit began four years ago when Boulder Valley and two other districts challenged the constitutionality of the Colorado Charter School Institute, which was established by the Legislature in 2004 to approve and manage charter schools independent of school districts.

The Value of Teaching 21st-Century Skills
Boston Globe, MA, February 24, 2009
The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education's Task Force on 21st Century Skills released a set of recommendations in November of ways these skills can be integrated into the K-12 curriculum in Massachusetts.

Enrollment an Issue For Private Schools? Not Here, Not Yet
Green Bay Press Gazette, WI, February 24, 2009
From preschool through college, officials at many tuition-based schools say their enrollments have remained steady despite the fact that many families are pinching pennies.

New Charter School Creeps Toward Capacity
Idaho Press-Tribune, ID, February 24, 2009
More than 700 students already have applied, and grades seven and eight are the only classes with room for more.

Mayor Tom Leppert Exploring Takeover Of Dallas School District
Dallas Morning News, TX, February 23, 2009
Mayor Tom Leppert, often seen as the city's education mayor, recently has explored taking over the problem-plagued Dallas school district.

Union Launches "BE NICE" Campaign Against KIPP Founders
Gotham Schools, NY, February 23, 2009
In its campaign to unionize a KIPP charter school in Brooklyn, the national American Federation of Teachers union has a new target: other teachers in the wide KIPP network. The AFT today reached out to KIPP teachers from San Jose to D.C. to Boston, asking them to join an e-mail campaign to urge the charter network’s co-founders to recognize the union.

House Bill May Create Problems For Schools
Times-Herald, GA, February 23, 2009
The latest education legislation that has passed the Georgia House would allow for any public school student to attend any school in his local school district as long as there's space available and his parents take care of the transportation.

Bill Would Stop Schools From Paying Union Leaders
Salt Lake Tribune, UT, February 23, 2009
In this time of budget cuts, Utah school districts should not spend money on local teacher union leaders, says one lawmaker. Rep. Christopher Herrod, R-Provo, is running a bill, HB381, that would prohibit school districts from paying local union association presidents' salaries.

The 3 R's? A Fourth Is Crucial, Too: Recess
New York Times, NY, February 24, 2009
New research suggests that play and down time may be as important to a child's academic experience as reading, science and math, and that regular recess, fitness or nature time can influence behavior, concentration and even grades.

Entering The (education) Arena

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The President surely kicked up a storm of debate over his education priorities with last night's speech: He's all about the charters. He talks about charters, but will he ever actually support them? Was the whole speech about charters? 9 words that rocked the ed world: and, we, will, expand, our, commitment, to, charter, schools. Craving an antidote to the never ending charter chatter? CER's Jeanne Allen contributed her thoughts on two of the evening's other education related matters to Politico's The Arena in the wake of both Obama and Gov. Bobby Jindal's remarks. Check them out HERE.

Testing 1,2,3

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Let's test this theory out:

November 3, 2008

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Along for the ride (New York Times), Lining up for school choice (News Journal), Fixing South Carolina schools (Independent-Mail) and much more in today's Morning Shots.

The easy way out

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The New York Times this morning, highlights the sad tale of a Vermont principal who "was removed because the Burlington School District wanted to qualify for up to $3 million in federal stimulus money". Reporter TK digs deep to show how bad this scenario is for the kids, the school and the community. It vilifies Washington, DC, greedy Vermont's state leaders, a diverse - but ultimately - unlucky school culture and evil standardized tests for the loss of a great school leader.

Daily Headlines for July 19, 2011

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

FROM THE STATES

ARIZONA

CALIFORNIA

FLORIDA

GEORGIA

INDIANA

MASSACHUSETTS

MINNESOTA

NEVADA

NEW HAMPSHIRE

NEW JERSEY

NORTH CAROLINA

OHIO

PENNSYLVANIA

TENNESSEE

WISCONSIN

VIRTUAL EDUCATION

Daily Headlines for August 5, 2011

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Headlines for August 23, 201

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Headlines for November 6, 2009

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

Duncan's Education Innovations
Charleston Post Courier, SC, November 6, 2009
President Obama's Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, is doing what a good educator does. He is using his knowledge to help students learn. Mr. Duncan got valuable hands-on experience -- and insight -- as CEO of public schools in Chicago, where he made dramatic changes that produced dramatic improvements.

Obama Races to Fix Education
Harvard Crimson, MA, November 6, 2009
Entrenched interests often protect themselves at the expense of innovation. Barack Obama can't reconcile that tradeoff. The president spent Wednesday in Wisconsin explaining his revolutionary $4.35 billion Race to the Top initiative, which will give states an immediate monetary incentive to reform dilapidated public schools.

FROM THE STATES

Colorado

Colorado Pulls Out Stops in Bid for 'Race to Top' Aid
Education Week, MD, November 5, 2009
If the competition for a slice of $4 billion in federal Race to the Top Fund money were a school class, Colorado would be one of the kids sitting up front, furiously taking notes, and leaping up to answer every one of the teacher's questions.

Florida

Florida Officials Fail to Provide Quality Education, Suit Claims
New York Times, NY, November 6, 2009
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Thursday accusing state officials in Florida of failing to ensure that students in Palm Beach County receive a high quality education, as evidenced by their poor graduation rates.

Georgia

Virtual Schools Chart New Course
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, GA, November 6, 2009
Representatives of five would-be virtual charter schools will file into the administrative towers of the Georgia Department of Education today to pitch their brand of public education, which lets students study at home computers in their pajamas

Illinois

Charter School Group Sees Roadblock
Peoria Journal Star, IL, November 5, 2009
An effort by a group of prominent business and education officials to get Peoria's first modern-day charter school off the ground may be in jeopardy.

Indiana

Another Wave's Coming
Indianapolis Star, IN, November 6, 2009
Compton showed the film last week in Indianapolis. He asked state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett for commentary. Bennett offered three goals for Indiana: competition among schools; accountability through test scores; and freedom for schools to experiment.

Louisiana

School Officials Await Final Race To The Top Guidelines To Make Decision
Monroe News Star, LA, November 6, 2009
School officials at a Race to the Top information session Thursday said they will wait until the final federal regulations come out before deciding whether to apply for funds aimed at improving low-performing schools.

Massachusetts

Charter on State Panel's Plate Again
Gloucester Daily Times, MA, November 6, 2009
The state board that, with little public debate, approved the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School last winter appears at City Hall tomorrow to face the local leaders who have called that process a political "charade."

Nevada

"No' On Education
Las Vegas Sun, NV, November 6, 2009
Ever since authoring a state constitutional amendment requiring the Nevada Legislature to fund public education first before settling other budget issues, Gov. Jim Gibbons has fancied himself as a champion of kindergarten through 12th grade schools. His record as governor, though, shows that he is no friend of education.

North Carolina

Gorman: 'Profound' Changes Are Ahead for Teachers
Charlotte Observer, NC, November 5, 2009
Superintendent Peter Gorman today unveiled an ambitious four-year plan that would scrap the tradition of paying better-educated teachers higher salaries and replace it with a pay-for-performance system tied to students' academic growth.

Rhode Island

Community Input Sought on Improving R.I. Schools
Providence Journal, RI, November 6, 2009
Education officials are inviting Rhode Islanders to share their ideas about how to improve schools over the next month at a series of community forums in five different communities.

Wisconsin

Education Bill Ends Ban On Using Test Data For Scoring Teachers
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, WI, November 5, 2009
Student test data can be used to evaluate teachers' performances but not to discipline or dismiss them, under a bill passed Thursday by the Senate as part of a package of education-related initiatives.

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Bags packed.

Daily Headlines for April 20, 2010

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

$3.5 Billion in Turnaround Aid Flowing to States
Education Week, MD, April 19, 2010
The largest-ever federal investment in fixing low-achieving schools is now flowing to states, raising the pressure on district leaders to make tough-and quick-decisions about firing principals, replacing teachers, or shutting down schools entirely.

Big Week for the NEA
National Review Online, April 20, 2010
Last week had two red-letter days for the National Education Association, as Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan opted, at crucial moments, to forsake reform and preen for easy applause from the cheap seats.

Church Schools Without Church
Opelousas Daily World, LA, April 20, 2010
It has to do with charter schools, and what happens when the Roman Catholic Church decides to enter that particular sphere of education. The church will have to walk carefully along a fine line to make such participation work. We might all be better off if church officials pull it off.

FROM THE STATES

California

Lodi Unified May Change Stance on Charters
Stockton Record, CA, April 20, 2010
The Lodi Unified School District has reversed course on its once-tough stance against launching new charter schools under the school district umbrella, and staff is recommending a partnership with a group that targets struggling high school students.

Colorado

Teachers' Union Comes Under Fire
Denver Daily News, CO, April 20, 2010
The Colorado Education Association says it simply cannot support round two of the competition because Senate Bill 191 has been directly linked to success in the competition. Colorado is competing for $175 million in education grant money.

Hawaii

Hawaii Stifling Charter Schools
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, HI, April 20, 2010
The Obama administration has urged states to remove their caps limiting the number of charter schools that operate at arm's length from conventional public schools systems, but Hawaii is reluctant to do so. The resistance is damaging, as most charter schools have found innovative ways to avoid the furlough days that have hammered the state's traditional system.

Illinois

Chicago School Vouchers Plan Moves Forward in Legislature
Catalyst Chicago, IL, April 19, 2010
A controversial school voucher plan sponsored by state Sen. James Meeks (D-Chicago) is showing signs of life in the Illinois House, despite the fact that its impact on Chicago schools is largely unknown and a recent study suggests flat results for a similar program in Milwaukee.

Michigan

Gov., Lawmakers Should Move This Week To Give Bobb Clear Authority Over All Aspects of Detroit Schools
The Detroit News, MI, April 20, 2010
Gov. Jennifer Granholm should push the Legislature to pass a bill this week giving Robert Bobb control of all areas of the Detroit Public Schools, including academics. If the school board succeeds in using the courts to mute Bobb's powers, the school district is in real danger of becoming irrelevant.

Minnesota

Pawlenty Proposes Education Bill
Pioneer Press, MN, April 20, 2010
Wrapping both recent and long-held education reform ideas into one package, Gov. Tim Pawlenty on Monday proposed a bill that he hopes positions Minnesota for a second shot at millions of dollars as part of President Barack Obama's Race to the Top initiative.

Missouri

Model St. Louis School Meets Its First Real Test
St. Louis Post Dispatch, MO, April 20, 2010
Success on the MAP, as it is called, leads to school parties and regional acclaim. Failure, or even stagnation, can spell state intervention, principal firings, staff removals and shame. Yet no school in the region faces more pressure this year, or shoulders a heavier burden of high expectations, than KIPP Inspire.

New York

The Unions' Plan To Kill Good Schools
New York Post, NY, April 20, 2010
The state teachers union, New York State United Teachers, is working this week with a key ally, state Sen. Bill Perkins, to smear charter schools as badly as possible.

Ohio

Meet the Demand
Columbus Dispatch, OH, April 20, 2010
As applications for private-school vouchers outnumber available vouchers for the first time this year, Ohio lawmakers should make sure the Educational Choice Scholarship Program is sized to fit the state's need.

West Virginia

Charter Schools Top School Board's List
Charleston Daily Mail, WV, April 20, 2010
The state Board of Education on Monday unanimously approved a wish list of legislation it hopes will bolster the state's second-round application for federal Race to the Top dollars.

The care and feeding of charter schools

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Forget H1N1, there's a much more serious ailment lurking out there amongst the country's school systems. It targets charter schools specifically, but its effects resonate through the halls of all public schools. A disease so subtle that even Arne Duncan hasn't been able to properly warn us of its true impact on the achievement of America's students. And all but a very few states are susceptible. Ground zero for possible infection can be found in each State Capitol, where weak legislation allows self-interest, bureaucracy and ignorance to block the growth of high quality school options for families and their students. But there is hope. A new study shows that when given a proper diet of freedom and autonomy, offered a choice of caregivers and monitored with reasonable accountability, America's charter schools can remain BLOB-free and continue their singular focus on student achievement in spite of special interests and diagnosticians focused too narrowly on the comfort levels of adults. Charter Laws Across the States, CER's 11th annual analysis of what's working and what's not in the country's 40 charter school laws, takes the temperature and reveals the pulse of charter legislation today. How did your state fare in this year's checkup?

Daily Headlines for April 29, 2010

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Is Teacher Tenure Still Necessary?
National Public Radio, April 29, 2010
Tenure is under attack. The century-old system of protecting experienced teachers from arbitrary dismissal - long viewed as sacred - has triggered hot political debates in several states.

Getting to the Point of Learning
Washington Times, DC, April 29, 2010
One important new argument sets two prominent conservatives against each other, and it's a fascinating faceoff. The antagonists are old friends and allies in the war over how best to teach our children.

FROM THE STATES

California

Performance Over Seniority
Glendale News Press, CA, April 28, 2010
A set of education reform proposals from local lawmakers passed out of a key state Senate committee last week, including one from Sen. Bub Huff (R-Diamond Bar) that would allow school districts to lay off teachers based on performance, rather than seniority.

Colorado

Colorado's Crawl to Mediocrity
Denver Post, CO, April 29, 2010
It's no surprise the Colorado Education Association (CEA) is fighting the latest legislative attempt to reform tenure. Unions, by their nature, are foes of accountability and productivity. Their aversion to competition among their rank and file drives them to protect their least competent members from their most competent.

Georgia

Charter Status Would Reshape Local Schools
Dahlonega Nugget, GA, April 28, 2010
A new charter is in the works for the Lumpkin County School System; one that could change the business of learning for local teachers and students for years to come.

Illinois

Voucher Support in Illinois Shatters Preconceptions
PR Newswire, April 28, 2010
Demonstrating the power of grassroots action to drive solutions to persistent school failure in the city of Chicago, the Illinois State House of Representatives is nearing a vote on a program that could provide up to 22,000 students in the city's lowest-performing public schools with vouchers to attend private schools, and thus would join the four other states that offer specialized voucher programs for students who are most disadvantaged, offering them hope and opportunity for a better life.

Kentucky

Education Leader Tries To Rally Support for Charter Schools
Lexington Herald Leader, KY, April 29, 2010
Kentucky Education Commissioner Terry Holliday says he's trying to ease opposition to charter-schools legislation with education leaders around the state in case the issue is considered during a special legislative session in May.

Louisiana

House Panel Approves Overhaul of Teacher Evaluations, with Gov. Bobby Jindal's Backing
The Times-Picayune, LA, April 28, 2010
The House Education Committee panel gave its approval to a plan that would factor student test scores into public school teacher evaluations. The amended House Bill 1033 by Rep. Frank Hoffman, R-West Monroe, now moves to the House floor.

Maryland

Montgomery County Takes Baby Steps Toward Charter Schools
Washington Post, DC, April 29, 2010
Although charter schools have become firmly established in the District's education world, stepping over to Montgomery County means entering a charter desert. No such schools operate there, but this year, two groups aim to change that.

Missouri

St. Louis Public Schools Deserves A Fresh Look With An Open Mind
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, MO, April 28, 2010
St. Louis Public Schools suddenly has become a serious place, and reasons are growing for parents, policy makers and community leaders to give the district a fresh look with an open mind - not out of obligation, but on the merits.

New York

Look for the Union Libel: State Teachers Union Smears Charter Schools
New York Daily News, NY, April 29, 2010
The state teachers union is mounting a fresh assault on charter schools with a compendium of innuendo and the most amazing and hypocritical argument:

Rhode Island

Anxiety Ahead Of Charter School Lottery
Providence Eyewitness News, RI, April 28, 2010
Hundreds of Rhode Island families were experiencing high anxiety Wednesday, as they awaited the results of a random lottery, to determine which kindergartners will attend the Democracy Prep Blackstone Valley charter school next year.

Hundreds of RI Teachers Rally to Protest Policies of Commissioner Gist
Providence Journal, RI, April 29, 2010
Fueled by teacher firings in Central Falls and slashed paychecks in East Providence, frustrations among many of the state's 14,500 teachers with Education Commissioner Deborah A. Gist boiled over Wednesday evening.

Racing to the Bottom

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

South Carolina's restrictive charter school legislation is once again projecting failure on a school even before it has an opportunity to prove its worth. The Hope Charter Academy this week saw its charter unanimously rejected by a hostile school board that feels its own evaluation criteria trumps that of the state level approval process. Hope Academy was vetted earlier this month to be a sound educational investment for the children of the Palmetto State and had already counted more than 250 enrollment requests from parents. However, after four hours of grilling by the Richland school board, the proposal was found to be lacking, primarily due to lack of a facilities plan (isn't that putting the cart before the horse?). This (sadly) is a perfect example of why we argue that caps are not the only impediment to the growth of charter schools around the country as argued by the Obama Administration. They're just the most obvious one. It's also why we call for strong multiple authorizers in each state's law so a school's application has a fair shake when going up against a self-interested school board, and why charters need to receive funding from the same streams as their traditional counterparts (another real problem in SC). Are we really racing to the top when potentially great schools like Hope Academy aren't even allowed see the light of day?

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Clips for August 10, 2009

Daily News — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

Arne Duncan, Educational Kingmaker
Politico, August 10, 2009
But not everyone has bought into the Obama-style reforms, which are expected to include a greater emphasis on merit pay for teachers and data systems to track progress. Both have been long resisted by the powerful teacher unions - big backers of Democratic candidates.

A Long Trek Before a Race to the Top
Huffington Post, NY, August 9, 2009
Duncan's announcement of Race the Top criteria didn't come out of the blue -- it's the result of the smart investment of several billion dollars by a coalition of foundations supporting the work of hundreds of education policy entrepreneurs.

2 Views To Boost Schools: Investment Or Competition
Arizona Republic, AZ, August 9, 2009
The current public school debate can be roughly divided into two camps. On one side: those who say investing in America's public school system will improve student achievement. On the other side: those who have lost faith in the public school system and believe investing in competition and privately-operated schools is the best way to improve student achievement.

FROM THE STATES

California

Calling All Teachers! Let's Start A School
Los Angeles Daily News, CA, August 9, 2009
Throughout the ruckus last month surrounding LAUSD board member Yolie Flores Aguilar's resolution to solicit competitive proposals for the operation of new schools, it was clear that already existing players in the new schools adventure all think they know best about schools and teaching, and learning. Well, as a teacher, let me tell them who knows best. Teachers. Not the teachers' union, not the charter management organizations...

Don't Let Politics Block Blooming LAUSD Reform
Daily Breeze, CA, August 8, 2009
Here are two things that virtually everyone involved in education in Los Angeles agrees upon: First, that the current educational system is failing. Second, that reform is crucial. Unfortunately, that's where the agreement ends. When it comes to how to reverse Los Angeles Unified School District's years-long decline in school enrollment, graduation rates and reputation, there's little consensus.

District of Columbia

Schools Need Teachers Like Me. I Just Can't Stay.
Washington Post, DC, August 9, 2009
Four years later, the question I encounter is equally thorny: Why leave teaching? It's not just a question about how I'll pay my rent. Reformers have big plans to transform failing urban schools, and their work hinges on finding a way to keep strong teachers in the classroom. By throwing in the towel, I have become one more teacher abandoning her students. So why am I leaving?

Michigan

De-fund Detroit Public Schools
Detroit Free Press, MI, August 9, 2009
Detroit is crumbling, with public schools leading the way toward total dissolution. After decades of mismanagement and malfeasance, after countless scandals and promised reforms, after losing about half of its student population since 2001, the end seems finally, perhaps mercifully, here. The Detroit public school system is on the edge of bankruptcy.

New York

Obama, Teach New York A Lesson: How The Feds Should Answer The State's Request For School Funds
New York Daily News, NY, August 10, 2009
The reality is that the Empire State's self-absorbed, feel-good approach to education policy is on a collision course with President Obama's plans to promote pragmatic change in our nation's schools by rewarding only the most progressive states through a $4.3 billion federal "Race to the Top" reform contest.

Charters: The Best Special-Ed Choice
New York Post, NY, August 8, 2009
IF New Yorkers needed another reason to lift the artificial cap on charter schools, they got it with this June's US Supreme Court decision that mandated public reimbursement for private-school special-education services -- services that charter schools can provide at a fraction of the cost.

North Carolina

An Alternative For Training Our Teachers
Greensboro News Record, NC, August 9, 2009
Imagine an experiment in which "Victoria," a recent college graduate with a degree in English, takes over a 10th-grade class, the racial composition of which is 80 percent minority. A few miles down the street, in another 10th-grade classroom, is "Sherry," a teacher with three years of experience and a degree in education. Less than half of Sherry's students are minorities.

Ohio

Charters Reach Farther Out
Columbus Dispatch, OH, August 10, 2009
What once was a trickle of suburban students to charter schools is now a steady stream, with suburban and rural districts statewide losing students at nearly twice the rate of urban ones.

Charter School Advocates Wary After Budget Battle
Middletown Journal, OH, August 8, 2009
Charter schools are breathing a collective sigh of relief that plans to cut funding were stopped. When first proposed, the two-year state budget included funding cuts to charter schools anywhere from 5 percent to 70 percent, depending on the type of school, said Bill Sims, president and chief executive of the Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

Oregon

Oregon's a Slow Starter In Race To Better Schools
The Oregonian, OR, August 8, 2009
A state with 71 failing schools and a stubborn achievement gap remains all too reluctant to embrace change and innovation.

Pennsylvania

More Charter Schools Mean More Choices in the Lehigh Valley
Allentown Morning Call, PA, August 10, 2009
The alternative to public schools continues to increase in popularity across the state and in the Lehigh Valley. This year, nearly 2,400 students in the Lehigh Valley will attend charter schools, up from about 100 students in 2001. Soon, that figure will grow.

South Carolina

Reform-minded, Too
Myrtle Beach Sun News, SC, August 9, 2009
Republicans do not hold a monopoly on new ideas. These Democratic gubernatorial hopefuls are also pitching reform.

Tennessee

Schools Escaped Takeover, But Dean's Not Backing Off
The Tennessean, TN, August 10, 2009
Mayor Karl Dean didn't get an opening to run Metro Schools this year, but you wouldn't know it by looking at his calendar.

Utah

All Charter Schools May Face Accreditation
Salt Lake Tribune, UT, August 7, 2009
All charter schools soon likely will have to be accredited by the same group that now checks up on Utah high schools. Utah State Board of Education members gave preliminary approval to the rule Friday, which would require charter schools serving students of all ages to become accredited.

Virginia

A Parent's Right To Choose
The New Dominion Magazine, August 9, 2009
"We're for anything that moves the ball forward. And we don't feel that adult interests should get in the way of what's best for children. Obviously that's gotten us at loggerheads with the teachers' unions, but we feel that there needs to be a realignment of the Democratic Party's positioning on education issues so that it's more kid-centered," said Kevin Chavous, a Democrat and former member of the Washington, D.C., City Council who now heads up the group Democrats for Education Reform.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

McDonnell Talks Jobs In Response To Presidential Address
Washington Examiner, DC, August 9, 2009
Virginia's former attorney general closed his address by praising the president's effort for education reform through expanding charter schools and performance pay for teachers and principals.

Redefining "success"

Ed M. Onitor — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

SAT scores for the class of 2009 have been released and the College Board has defined this year as a success merely because more of them took the test (therefore garnering more revenue through testing fees). They hype the rising diversity of test takers, the rising number of test takers and the minimal rise in some scores over the course of the past 6 years. What this boils down to, really, is that a larger and more diverse group of students than ever before is showcasing the inadequacy of our education system: a minority are making gains while a majority benefit from a constant redefinition of average. Scores also show that an achievement gap persists in our schools, with white and Asian students making gains over time as African American and Hispanic scores fall. If, as the College Board says, the SAT is one of the best indicators of college readiness, this should be a wake-up call to parents around the country that perhaps their kids aren’t getting what they need to find success down the road.

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This morning, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) gave notice to their colleagues and to the Obama Administration that the future of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program would receive the courtesy of a full Senate debate and vote when they add a bi-partisan amendment to existing legislation moving through the chamber. Lieberman lamented the fact that the Obama Administration is spending billions more than ever before to fix American education, while disregarding the (proven) success of a small program that has "not only changed lives, but saved lives." "If the President is focused on what works," he continued, "he should be a strong supporter of the Opportunity Scholarship Program." Sen. Collins reminded everyone that "If we fail to act today, 86% of students now participating will return to schools we know are failing." When pressed by a lone protester, Sen. Lieberman highlighted the true colors of his colleagues who would sit back and see OSP fade into the history books. "The reason this program is not moving through Congress is not because of principaled opposition, it's to protect the status quo... Regardless of position, (OSP) deserves a full debate and vote in the Senate." OSP parent Latash Bennett drove home the importance of the program (and what its loss would mean to kids of the District), saying, "Don't take away out children's future beacause of politics. Don't let their dreams vanish. Don't sweep them under the rug. Give them a chance. Let them succeed." Indeed. (Save Opportunity)

March 20, 2009

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What's good for the goose...

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

50 is the new 30

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The teachers union has every right to scream about funding cuts and potential layoffs (even if we won't have real numbers for several weeks at least). But what union President A.J. Duffy won't admit, as he raises a stink, is that when good teachers are on the chopping block and burned-out teachers are protected, it's because of his union's contract.

Lopez echos the concerns of many parents when he writes:

At my daughter's school, I'd much rather have the very capable principal decide on staffing rather than have decisions forced on her by Duffy and a bloated union contract. At 347 pages of boilerplate and trivial specificity, the UTLA (contract) manages to dehumanize teachers and crush innovation, treating them like components of an outdated machine rather than like intelligent, independent, adaptable professionals.

Journalist Richard Whitmire underlined the key disconnect between the employee retention in the teaching profession and that of other professionals in CER's recent monograph Mandate for Change:

...teachers should be hired, promoted, or fired based on their effectiveness in educating children. That simple formula, however—judging employees by the outcome of their efforts—although commonplace in the rest of society, remains elusive in the teaching profession.

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Monday, June 1, 2009

Textbook for Failure
Washington Post, D.C., May 30, 2009
WHETHER NEW York Mayor Michael Bloomberg will retain control of the city's public schools will soon be decided by state lawmakers in Albany.

Flying High

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Quality Counts

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Have fun storming the castle

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Morning Shots for April 20, 2009

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It's what you do

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

February 24, 2009

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Entering The (education) Arena

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Testing 1,2,3

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Let's test this theory out:

Dear Sec. Duncan,

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dear Sec. Duncan,

There is little diversity in our community, sadly, and so I was thrilled when my daughter came home her first week and was excited to tell me about one of her new friends.

D.C.’s program, Mr. Duncan, can’t be dismissed for petty policy reasons when the very people it benefits are those we most need to help grow.

I bet if you could, you’d say yes. Tell us how to help get you there.

November 3, 2008

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Along for the ride (New York Times), Lining up for school choice (News Journal), Fixing South Carolina schools (Independent-Mail) and much more in today's Morning Shots.

The easy way out

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

http://choicemedia.tv/2012/05/07/school-choice-in-connecticut/

Where there's smoke...

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

How quickly we forget

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Remember when 'Race to the Top' was going to be the savior of America's charter school movement, sweeping out of Washington and across the country to usher in a new era of growth? Come on. It wasn't that long ago. What legislator could look all of that money in the eye and say "No thanks", the educhatters all asked. And yet, here we are, about to witness the unveiling of round one finalists and not one of them will be a state that has passed a new charter school law. In fact, there are more states without charter laws today than there were when the strongest pro-charter rhetoric was flowing out of Pennsylvania and Maryland Avenues. The closest anyone has come so far is Alabama. Everything seemed to be in place. They had (and continue to have) strong support from their Governor and Washington. There was a huge media blitz. They had 'Race to the Top' arguments. But in the end, the bill never left Committee. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Though a right-to-work state, the AEA wields influence in the State House. Increased money for the state budget pales in comparison to union endorsement and fundraising. (How else can you explain the charter battleground New York became for a week last month as the ink was drying on their R2TT application?) Now all the R2TT charter cheerleaders are becoming ESEA charter cheerleaders, hoping that more funding will equal more support. But it will not be federal dollars or speeches that strengthen charters. It will be the persistent drumbeat generated by parents and reformers in the states that will bring about more change than any carrot DC could offer. Comprehensive fixes are needed in more than half of the country's charter laws. And the fight to make them happen will not be waged inside the Beltway.

Daily Headlines for July 19, 2011

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

FROM THE STATES

ARIZONA

CALIFORNIA

FLORIDA

GEORGIA

INDIANA

MASSACHUSETTS

MINNESOTA

NEVADA

NEW HAMPSHIRE

NEW JERSEY

NORTH CAROLINA

OHIO

PENNSYLVANIA

TENNESSEE

WISCONSIN

VIRTUAL EDUCATION

Daily Headlines for August 5, 2011

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Why me?

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

So, last week after the Wall Street Journal pushed the issue of Congressional support for continuation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship into the national spotlight (again), CER pushed even more, emailing thousands around the country with a request to call Senator Dick Durbin in a rousing show of support. If his phone lines exploded, we thought, perhaps he'd get the message loud and clear. They did. And he did. Many emailed to let us know that they couldn't get through due to overwhelming call volume (but promised to keep trying). Others reported back on positive conversations with the Senator's staff who had conveyed his support. We had some interesting push back as well, and get this: some of it was from state legislators or their staff who wondered why Durbin should hear from them, or care at all. I guess they don't see the big picture here that DC Opportunity Scholarships are saving the lives of kids throughout the District who would otherwise be lost to a failed system. If the success of DC OSP is allowed to continue in our Nation's Capital, it will only be that much more likely to become an option for other areas of the country that have grown complacent, comfortable with the status quo. Parents and their students need a way out of a mode of thinking that allows the U.S. to slip further and further away from regaining the gold standard. That's why. Interestingly, the most abrasive reaction to our little email request came from a state legislator in Colorado, the epicenter of education reform efforts for the pot of gold at the end of the Race to the Top rainbow (if you believe the hype). And guess what? He's the Chair of the House Education Committee (you can Google him if you like). Run all you want, but a team captain like that won't win any races. Reauthorization of DC OSP is not an issue local to DC. Whatever the outcome, the debate will reflect the true priorities of Congress and the Administration. Will they side with entrenched union interests or will they fulfill a pledge to "do what works" for kids? It's not too late to call. (Save Opportunity)

Daily Headlines for August 23, 201

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Headlines for November 6, 2009

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

FROM THE STATES

Colorado

Florida

Georgia

Illinois

Indiana

Louisiana

Massachusetts

Nevada

North Carolina

Rhode Island

Wisconsin

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Bags packed.

NEA: The man behind the curtain

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Just as in The Wizard of Oz, everybody's looking for something. Dorothy needed a way home. The tin man needed a heart. Charlie Crist needs votes. Though he took almost a week to reveal his decision to veto Florida's revolutionary teacher tenure bill, Gov. Charlie Crist's mind was likely made up long ago on the issue. If he had signed the bill (as he previously indicated), Florida would have implemented on a grand scale a system only hinted at in legislation working its way through other states now. As passed by the legislature, teachers would have been evaluated and paid based on classroom results, not on how long they've been teaching or how many degrees they've been able to obtain. In other words, teachers would have been treated as professionals, and Florida would have been able to effectively identify and remove teachers who might otherwise have continued to interrupt student learning for years. SB6 would have broken new ground even in the Sunshine State, a consistent leader in education reform efforts. As many have pointed out, it may have even pushed their already ambitious ‘Race to the Top' application to a new level. But Crist is facing a fierce party primary and posting numbers that are beyond a long shot. A courtship by the NEA's Florida team and other BLOB leaders may have been too much too pass up. "I know in my heart it's the right thing to do," said Crist, wielding his veto pen. For Florida's students, or his political future? Dorothy may have needed to find a way home in The Wizard of Oz, but Crist needs to find a way to secure any vote he can and the teachers union must look to him like a great and powerful wizard indeed. The reward at the end of Charlie Crist's journey along the political yellow brick road? The allegiance of a trusty voting block, even if it means turning his back on kids (and his political party). If he only had a brain.

Daily Headlines for April 20, 2010

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

FROM THE STATES

California

Colorado

Hawaii

Illinois

Michigan

Minnesota

Missouri

New York

Ohio

West Virginia

Upside down and backwards

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The care and feeding of charter schools

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Headlines for April 29, 2010

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

FROM THE STATES

California

Colorado

Georgia

Illinois

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maryland

Missouri

New York

Rhode Island

Tell us how you really feel

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Racing to the Bottom

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Daily Clips for August 10, 2009

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NATIONAL

FROM THE STATES

California

District of Columbia

Michigan

New York

North Carolina

Ohio

Oregon

Pennsylvania

South Carolina

Reform-minded, Too
Myrtle Beach Sun News, SC, August 9, 2009
Republicans do not hold a monopoly on new ideas. These Democratic gubernatorial hopefuls are also pitching reform.

Tennessee

Utah

Virginia

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Redefining "success"

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Tell us how you really feel

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Surprise! NY Times gets it wrong on digital learning

admin — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What’s wrong with the NY Times article, “Profits and Questions at Online Charter Schools”? Let me count the ways:

Alex Molnar -- used as an expert. Has been a known ideological opponent of reform since I was in college. Literally. Crazy man. Has no academic standing.
Gary Miron -- a little better and sometimes a fairly good researcher, but who’s devoted a lifetime to studying for-profit companies, always with a slant as to how they hurt charter schools. Not much credibility here, either.
Jack Wagner -- PA State Auditor, who wants to be governor some day with the support of the teachers union. Has been saying for years that having charter schools funded from same pool as other public schools is unfair. Strike 3
Lawyer for school districts used as a source
By page 5 (online), we still haven’t heard from someone with a different point of view. Now the NEA is being used as a source for policy and data.
CREDO -- Yep, that study. Too bad there’s no corollary provided.
Reagan. Had to bring him up. PR guy for local Ohio choice group used to work in that Administration. Clearly this is all the former president’s fault!

And this reporter won a Pulitzer Prize? Obviously, it’s not just the education system that’s been dumbed down! For the facts on online learning, check out the Center for Education Reform's Digital Learning Toolkit.

Where did I leave my glasses?

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Questions for Leo

Ed M. Onitor — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Where there's smoke...

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

How quickly we forget

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Surprise! NY Times gets it wrong on digital learning

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What’s wrong with the NY Times article, “Profits and Questions at Online Charter Schools”? Let me count the ways:

Alex Molnar -- used as an expert. Has been a known ideological opponent of reform since I was in college. Literally. Crazy man. Has no academic standing.
Gary Miron -- a little better and sometimes a fairly good researcher, but who’s devoted a lifetime to studying for-profit companies, always with a slant as to how they hurt charter schools. Not much credibility here, either.
Jack Wagner -- PA State Auditor, who wants to be governor some day with the support of the teachers union. Has been saying for years that having charter schools funded from same pool as other public schools is unfair. Strike 3
Lawyer for school districts used as a source
By page 5 (online), we still haven’t heard from someone with a different point of view. Now the NEA is being used as a source for policy and data.
CREDO -- Yep, that study. Too bad there’s no corollary provided.
Reagan. Had to bring him up. PR guy for local Ohio choice group used to work in that Administration. Clearly this is all the former president’s fault!

Why me?

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NEA: The man behind the curtain

edspresso — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Upside down and backwards

Ed M. Onitor — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Where did I leave my glasses?

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Questions for Leo

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Surprise! NY Times gets it wrong on digital learning

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What’s wrong with the NY Times article, “Profits and Questions at Online Charter Schools”? Let me count the ways:

Alex Molnar -- used as an expert. Has been a known ideological opponent of reform since I was in college. Literally. Crazy man. Has no academic standing.
Gary Miron -- a little better and sometimes a fairly good researcher, but who’s devoted a lifetime to studying for-profit companies, always with a slant as to how they hurt charter schools. Not much credibility here, either.
Jack Wagner -- PA State Auditor, who wants to be governor some day with the support of the teachers union. Has been saying for years that having charter schools funded from same pool as other public schools is unfair. Strike 3
Lawyer for school districts used as a source
By page 5 (online), we still haven’t heard from someone with a different point of view. Now the NEA is being used as a source for policy and data.
CREDO -- Yep, that study. Too bad there’s no corollary provided.
Reagan. Had to bring him up. PR guy for local Ohio choice group used to work in that Administration. Clearly this is all the former president’s fault!

Why me?

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

How quickly we forget

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

NEA: The man behind the curtain

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

'Parent trigger' bill allowing teachers, families to petition for school conversion headed to Senate vote

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

by Dave Murray Mlive.com June 5, 2012 Families with children in failing schools would be “empowered” to convert their traditional public school into a charter school or adopt a turnaround plan as part of a bill headed for debate on the state Senate floor on Wednesday. Supporters said the bill, called the “parent trigger,” would offer families more choices and keep pressure on school districts to improve the most-struggling school buildings. But school district leaders said the laws eliminating the charter school cap and creating the achievement authority for schools in the bottom 5 percent make this bill unnecessary. Under the version of SB 620 that cleared the Senate Education Committee in the fall, schools would be offered to charter school authorizers if at least 60 percent of parents agree to the move, or if 60 percent of teachers want the change and 51 percent of parents agree. Amendments since then would add three turnaround options that are included in federal school improvement grants. Those include adopting new teaching strategies, removing the principal and at least half the teachers and shutting down the building. Schools would have to be in the lowest-performing 5 percent of state schools to be eligible under the bill, sponsored by state Sen. David Robertson, R-Grand Blanc Twp. Similar bills are under consideration in more than 20 states, according to national school choice advocates. Educators argued there already are remedies in place for struggling schools. Robert LeFevre, director of education policy for the Macomb Intermediate School District, said the cap on charter schools approved by state universities had not yet been approved when the parent trigger bill was written. Now, he said, charter schools can pop up in neighborhoods where operators believe there is demand without having to go through the trigger process. Also, he said, the state has since created the Education Achievement Authority, which is starting with buildings in the Detroit Public Schools but is planned to expand to schools deemed in the lowest-performing 5 percent across the state. But Senate Education Committee chairman Phil Pavlov, R-St. Clair Township, said the bills are intended to provide options to involved parents who might be frustrated by the pace of improvement in under-performing schools. “This is a tool to give parents leverage when school boards and districts are not responding the needs of the neighborhood schools,” he said. “It’s one more thing that we need to do to make sure parents have options.” Pavlov said there is still discussion among the Republican caucus about the bill, though he expects there will be enough votes to bring it to the floor on Wednesday. After the bill cleared the Education Committee, opponents said the trigger would break teacher contracts and opens the door to charter advocates organizing in neighborhoods, nudging parents toward demanding the change. “The parent trigger bill operates under a false premise that you can flip a switch and schools will improve overnight just because they'd be a charter school,” Doug Pratt, public affairs director for the Michigan Education Association, said in October. But Jeanne Allen, president of the Washington, D.C- based Center for Education Reform, , called the trigger “the ultimate example of parental empowerment.” California was the first with a law on the books, and Texas parents can intervene after two or more years of an “unacceptable” performance rating. Ohio's pilot program applies to only the bottom 5 percent of Columbus schools, and Connecticut allows failing schools three years to change course before going into effect. Allen said California school boards and unions have fought the changes in the courts, including challenging the signatures on petitions. “It's tough for parents to wrestle control from the school boards, unions and educational establishment,” she said, “This is a different approach to change. It puts the parents back in the drivers’ seat.”

Test

Jason — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 01:33:56 +0000

testing

Understanding Charter Achievement Research: The CREDO Report

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

A Stanford University report from the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) gained major attention in June 2009 when the New York Times ran its findings that public charter schools do no better or worse than traditional public schools. Unfortunately, these findings continue to be taken as fact today despite the study's shortcomings. Below are some brief talking points on why the CREDO report is flawed. You can find more detailed information in "Fact-Checking Charter School Achievement." Uncorrelated Variables CREDO's analysis does not account for the great variances in charter laws from state to state or how those laws may differ from paper to practice.

While the report suggests correlations exist between student achievement and charter law components, they admit to not fully understanding the impact of specific laws.

The report suggests a negative correlation between student achievement and multiple authorizers. In fact, such charter authorizers vary greatly in law and practice, as CER's 2012 study and scorecard demonstrate. There is clear evidence that charter students succeed in states witha number of meaningful, independent and highly accountable authorizers who compete for chartering. See our Multiple Authorizers Primer for more information on charter authorizers.

The study was based on student population and not the overal strength of their charter system. Therefore CREDO missed most opportunities to see really strong charters in action.

Virtual Methodology While there are virtual schools, there is no such thing as "virtual" student achievement.

The CREDO report acknowledges the creation of new research tools to assess the unknowable. Instead of comparing real students who attend charter schools to real students who attend conventional public schools, CREDO merged demographic data to create "virtual twins." Randomization, the gold standard of research, is not used.

By virtually replicating the demographic profile of a charter school student -- ethnicity, age, socio-economic status -- and averaging that same profile in a conventional public school students, researchers ignore something every parent and teacher knows is an impossible comparison since no two students are alike. The study essentially treats group averages as if they were students themselves. (Respected researcher Caroline Hoxby explains this point in greater detail in Fact-Checking Charter School Achievement)

The virtual twins were not created with state test data. Instead, the study uses National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores, which are meant to provide snapshots of state performance and should not be used to gauge individual school performance. Meaningful comparisons cannot be made since relevant achievement data aren't used.

mtigani — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

USA’s top teachers union losing members The nation’s largest teachers union, the National Education Association (NEA), has lost more than 100,000 members since 2010. According to union projections, the NEA could lose a total of 308,000 members by 2014. This loss would result in a 16% drop in membership, and an NEA budget loss of an estimated $65 million. The union contributes changing teacher demographics, attempts by states to restrict public employee collective bargaining rights, and an increase in online learning for the drop in membership. Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute said that with fewer members and fewer dollars, “there’s absolutely a point where they’re going to matter less than they do today.”

Thomas Sowell vs. unions

edspresso — Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:16:16 +0000

Ready, aim, fire:

Workers themselves increasingly recognize the reality that there is no free lunch through unionization and are increasingly voting to be non-union. But the word has yet to reach many among the intelligentsia, who still think of labor unions as institutions that benefit the working class.

You can always benefit particular segments of any society at the expense of some other segment but unions do not benefit even the working class as a whole -- just those who are current union members -- at the expense of other workers, current and future.

(snip)

Teachers' unions fight desperately and ruthlessly against vouchers, because they must maintain a monopoly of school children under the compulsory attendance laws. Their members stand to lose jobs if forced to compete with private schools.

Monopoly is the key to unionized teachers' job security -- at the expense of children's education as well as the taxpayers' money.

In all fairness, Sowell is concentrating on unions generally and not on teachers' unions specifically. But go read the whole thing anyway. (Hat tip to Hispanic Pundit.)

public schools: parents, please go away

edspresso — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:26:58 +0000

This story just comes out and says it: parents just need to quit poking their noses where they don't belong!

They are needy, overanxious and sometimes plain pesky -- and schools at every level are trying to find ways to deal with them.
No, not students. Parents -- specifically parents of today's "millennial generation" who, many educators are discovering, can't let their kids go.
They text message their children in middle school, use the cellphone like an umbilical cord to Harvard Yard and have no compunction about marching into kindergarten class and screaming at a teacher about a grade.
To handle the modern breed of micromanaging parent, educators are devising programs to help them separate from their kids -- and they are taking a harder line on especially intrusive parents.
At seminars, such as one in Phoenix last year titled "Managing Millennial Parents," they swap strategies on how to handle the "hovercrafts" or "helicopter parents," so dubbed because of a propensity to swoop in at the slightest crisis.
Educators worry not only about how their school climates are affected by intrusive parents trying to set their own agendas but also about the ability of young people to become independent.

Spunky Homeschooler is, shall we say, less than impressed:

Educator and author Rosalind Wiseman calls parents who try to set the agenda for schools "queen bee moms" and "kingpin dads." What's ironic about Ms. Wiseman is that she is the co-founder of the Empower Program, a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating teenagers about violence. So it's alright for a complete stranger to fret over my children but I'm supposed to back off or be labeled a "Queen Bee". Sorry Ms. Wiseman you've got it all backwards. It is you and your social engineers who need to quit attempting to parent our nation's children and resenting the involvement of those whom God has entrusted to their care. It is the parents of this nation who need to collectively say to our nation's schools and the "experts" who want to raise them for us - BACK OFF! They are NOT your children!

I hope parents will finally see that our nation's government schools are a conduit for social engineering meant to replace the parent with the state as the primary influence in children's lives. For those who have eyes to see and ears to hear let them understand before it's too late.

MORE: Mwheh.

Sorry folks. You can't have it both ways. You need to decide which excuse you're going to use and stick with it. This will just confuse everyone. How will NEA, CTA, CDE, ACSA, CCSESA, CSBA and others know who to blame? They'll never be able to keep the excuses straight without help.

Now, for a few caveats. Drill deeper in the WaPo article, and you'll find this isn't merely a public school phenomenon:

A number of private schools have added language in their enrollment contracts and handbooks warning that a student can be asked to leave as a result of a parent's behavior. Some have tossed out children because their parents became too difficult to work with. (emphasis added)

Now that's an interesting, albeit heavy-handed, way of dealing with the problem. Rather than the government school trying to mold the behavior of parent and student, the school simply says, "Our way or the highway." In other words, society copes with social problems rather than government trying to fix them. Hmmm...

a voice from the inside

edspresso — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:28:46 +0000

Whatever you do, never call teachers' union watchdog Mike Antonucci intolerant. While he's out on vacation, he's invited a couple of guest bloggers to take the helm of Intercepts, and this week, it's...a member of the NEA!

The transfer of authority from appointed staff to elected leadership within the NEA and its affiliates, whether it has arisen organically or as a result of the increasing connections between NEA and other more traditionally structured unions, has taken place within the context of an organization that is passionately committed to its culture of term limits. Regardless of whether or not one supports term limits, the approach clearly limits the quality, range, and extent of actual work that these leaders can experience. The clear advantage of the traditional NEA staff-driven system in this climate of term limits was that there was always a "grown-up" in the room when elected leaders were considering the strategic options facing the organization. And it is equally clear that that advantage is being sorely missed at all levels by the Association at the present time.

Go read. And also check out today's post about this individual's job within the NEA. See, like we said--tolerant.

another voice from within the union

edspresso — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:22:50 +0000

Today's guest blogger over at Mike Antonucci's Intercepts, a present AFT member in West Virginia, is a must-read:

In WV we join unions by "choice," not by law. We do not have collective bargaining for school employees. So why join a union at all? Protection. As a teacher, it only takes three words to ruin your career: "They touched me." You don't have to be guilty. You can be completely exonerated. But you are marked for life. Legal bills can go into six figures in a flash. A union will provide legal aid and insurance.

Without collective bargaining, we have to lobby the legislature and the governor to effect changes in our salary and working conditions. This gets us into the sordid world of politics.

I am a staunchly conservative person, both fiscally and socially. So I have had to sit and stew on many occasions when my union decided to "enter the realm." When I joined the AFT in 1988 the union stayed out of all non-school issues. Their attitude at the time was that members were intelligent enough to make their own decisions concerning personal beliefs and that there was enough room in the AFT for teachers of every political persuasion. The NEA was seen at the time as being the political body that was constantly meddling into matters that didn't directly pertain to teaching.

But oh, how times have changed. Even at the state level.

His candor is incredible. Go read.

Historic Victory for School Choice and Children

joanp — Sat, 22 Jun 2002 20:52:29 +0000

Download or print your PDF copy of Historic Victory for School Choice and Children

2011 State By State National Assessment of Educational Progress - Math Results (old version)

admin — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:08:07 +0000

2011 State by State National Assessment of Educational Progress - Reading Results (old version)

admin — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:11:05 +0000

US Students Continue to Stall on SATs

admin — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:36:33 +0000

Choice for me, but not for thee

edspresso — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 16:46:07 +0000

As anybody even remotely interested in national politics is aware, ethics investigations are all the rage these days in Washington. The latest casualty: House Democrat John Conyers, who has been accused by some former staffers of violating various ethics rules, including being required to baby-sit and chauffer his kids, one of which went to the Cranbrook School, a private school in the Detroit area. According to this, tuition at Cranbrook will run nearly $18,000 for grades 1-5, $19,280 for middle school, and $21,730 for high school. All this reflects rather badly on Conyers' stance on school choice.

At a “Stand Up for Public Schools” rally a few years back, Conyers decried educational choice as a “scheme” which “will only harm our public schools” and pointed instead to the sort of “real” school reforms drawn from the educational unions’ playbook – teacher training, reduced class size, and school construction. “It is vital,” he said then, “for parents, educators, and community leaders to join together to strengthen Detroit’s public schools.”

While some bloggers have noted the hypocrisy, we aren't terribly surprised--after all, look what public teachers do!

Hey lady, your mask just slipped

edspresso — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:48:36 +0000

Some anti-choice types just can't keep all that hostility bottled up:

In December, a Home School Legal Defense Association member family in Fayette County, West Virginia, received a letter from the county's attendance director. The two-page letter demanded that families complete and return a form declaring whether they intended to use the WESTEST or another standardized achievement test for their end-of-the-year assessment.

Furthermore, the letter demanded that a certified teacher complete and send the school district an invasive, four-page form for families choosing the portfolio evaluation option.

HSLDA called the county's attendance director. She repeatedly stated that she thought that homeschoolers needed to have more supervision by the school district. At one point, she said, "You've heard of third world countries? Well, that is what is happening to West Virginia because of homeschooling." (emphasis added)

Can you feel the love? (Hat tip to Kimberly Swigert, who we're glad to see is back and blogging up a storm after spending some time at the hospital.)

barrel. fish. gun.

edspresso — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:02:35 +0000

As you wish, Concord (N.H.) Monitor.

Legislative proposals for school vouchers have come up again and should be shot down again. Vouchers rob public schools of badly needed money and, if the money is given to a religious institution, are unconstitutional. That hasn't kept voucher proponents from trying.

Unconstitutional, eh? Rather than name names (i.e. Florida), the editorial staff declines to elaborate on which voucher programs have been struck down. Apparently they haven't looked in Milwaukee, Cleveland, or Washington D.C. Or perhaps they prefer not to.

House and Senate voucher bills take different paths. The House route calls for giving $3,342, or 80 percent of a student's allotment from the state's education trust fund, to the parents of a child who chooses to attend a charter school, private school or public school in another district.

Since the child's home school district would keep 20 percent of the money, the bill's proponents argue that local schools will gain, not lose. But it doesn't work that way. The fixed costs to run the school won't change because a few students leave. The district will simply have to make do with less state aid, and the average cost of educating students in the district will rise.

The fixed costs per child will rise. But the money available to spend per pupil will also rise. Apparently the editorial staff seems to think the fixed costs per student will outpace the increase per student. Again, see Milwaukee and Cleveland. They've had vouchers for some time now, and amazingly, neither city's public school system has suddenly turned to rubble.

The Senate bill calls for giving vouchers to public school parents whose children opt out of the system, but it calls them scholarships.

And shame on that bill for its misleading language!!!

The money for the vouchers would not come from the education trust fund but from other state sources, augmented, in theory, by contributions from companies that donate in exchange for a tax credit. But the tax credits are money the state won't get - money other taxpayers will have to make up.

Oh, please. We've been here before. Goldwater weighed in on the Arizona program some time ago:

Although the state loses money when taxpayers use the credit, localities and the state save money when students who would have otherwise been educated at public expense switch to private school. The state lost $26.3 million in revenue through use of the credit in 2002. Yet the savings incurred by transferring students offset much of that loss, leaving the total revenue loss between $7.5 and $13.4 million.

As donations increase, it is likely that a greater portion of scholarships will be used by students newly transferring into private school from public school. Therefore, it is probable that future savings will fully offset the revenue loss, eventually saving taxpayers money.

Besides, if this is correct, the great state of New Hampshire's single biggest expenditure is education. But to hear this paper tell it, this program could very well bankrupt schools across the state.

The Republican Party has made it its mission to get taxpayers to subsidize private and sectarian schools. It's in the GOP's 2005-06 state platform, which backs vouchers and says: "The so-called 'Blaine Amendment' should be repealed so as to end discrimination against religious schools."

The amendment, which was added to the constitutions of 37 states in the 1870s to prevent public money from going to parochial schools, may not have arisen from the noblest of sentiments. But it mirrors an earlier provision in the state constitution that says that "no person shall ever be compelled to pay towards the support of the schools of any sect or denomination."

The amendment does not discriminate. It separates church from state. Sectarian schools are free to educate students.

You can almost hear the Monitor kind of muttering that "noblest of sentiments" line before launching into another breathless denunciation of the ~~voucher~~ scholarship program. Here's what the Monitor would rather you didn't know about the so-called Blaine amendment.

Present in the constitutions of 37 states, the Blaine Amendments are the biggest legal barrier to school choice programs. States adopted these amendments during a wave of anti-Catholic prejudice in the late 1800's. At the time, public schools were not secular as they are now, but taught Protestant religious doctrine. Large numbers of immigrants from non-Protestant countries such as Ireland and Italy objected to the one-sided subsidy that prevented them from sending their children to schools they had already paid for in good conscience.

State leaders rushed to adopt the restrictive Blaine Amendments to head off the possibility of programs that would subsidize Catholic education. Today, they prohibit any public voucher or scholarship program that includes religious schools, regardless of whether the programs are neutral and inclusive in nature, and regardless of the desire of any parent to choose a religious school.

Upshot: the Blaine amendments were not based on any high-minded notions of separation of church and state, but bald-faced anti-Catholic bigotry. When Blaine couldn't get it through Congress, he made sure to get it on the state constitutions. (A Constrained Vision has more on the rather conflicted history of the Blaine Amendment.) And since the Monitor can't be bothered to run a quick Google search, here's more (page 4) on how the Supreme Court has ruled recently with respect to state Blaine amendments:

Not only are members of the U.S. Supreme Court showing increasing recognition that the state Blaine Amendments have a discriminatory pedigree, but the Court has decided a number of cases where it has refused to countenance states’ efforts to justify infringements on free speech/free exerciserights based on expansive interpretations of their Blaine Amendments. For example, in Widmar v. Vincent,7 the Court refused to let Missouri justify its denial of religious groups equal access to campus facilities at the University of Missouri on the basis of the Blaine Amendment and compelled support clauses in its state constitution. Similarly, in Rosenberger v. Rectors & Visitors of the University of Virginia,8 the Court refused to let Virginia justify its denial of student fee subsidies to a religious student publication on the basis of Virginia’s Blaine Amendment and compelled support language. Missouri and Virginia happen to be two states that, like Washington, have consistently interpreted their religion clauses expansively to restrict parental choice.

Bottom line: that Blaine amendment ain't necessarily bulletproof.

The House bill purports to get around the constitution by saying that the vouchers may not provide more than an "incidental benefit"to a particular religion. But giving public money to a religious school, even if all of it truly is used for secular purposes, would free up money that could be used for religious purposes. It's a shell game.

Voucher proponents say the scheme is legal because checks are made out to parents but delivered to the school of their choice. Parents would sign the checks over to the schools. That's money laundering and sh ouldn't survive court scrutiny.

There's just one problem: it already has survived court scrutiny. Let's turn again to that last link. This time, page 5.

Much like their theory under the federal Establishment Clause, the opponents of parental choice programs argue that providing student assistance to families opting for a religious school for their children’s education is the equivalent of providing aid directly to the religious schools themselves. Although the Blaine Amendments were obviously designed to address direct aid to the schools themselves, which was, after all, what Catholics were requesting at the time the Blaine Amendment was created, the opponents of choice wish to extend the language to encompass money that incidentally reaches religious school coffers because parents have selected to spend their scholarships there.

The U.S. Supreme Court definitively rejected this theory under the Establishment Clause in Zelman, holding that where the scholarship program is religiously neutral, i.e., neither favoring nor disfavoring the choice of religious schools, and where the parents made a free and independent choice of a religious alternative for their children’s education, the aid is not to be treated the same as direct aid to the religious schools. Parental choice opponents hope that the state supreme courts will nonetheless adopt a broader construction of their states’ Blaine Amendments that will be more restrictive of parental choice than the federal Establishment Clause. The Institute for Justice’s counterargument is the same as under the Establishment Clause: scholarship/voucher programs aid families—not schools—and not one dime reaches a religious school but for the free and independent choice of a parent.

It feels like the Monitor wrote this in a historical vacuum, as though fifteen years worth of court cases haven't been argued over these issues. Oh well. Moving right along...

The House scheme also raises the question of whether a check made out to a parent should be counted as income by the IRS. After all, if there are more students than there are vouchers, the lucky winners of the $3,342 checks are chosen by lottery, and lottery winnings, under the law, are taxable.

Is this some sort of joke? From the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, the definition of the word "lottery":

1 a : a drawing of lots in which prizes are distributed to the winners among persons buying a chance b : a drawing of lots used to decide something
2 : an event or affair whose outcome is or seems to be determined by chance

So let's spell this out for the good folks at the Monitor who can't seem to understand what is meant by "lottery"--see, they mean definition 1b, not 1a. Is that clear now?

The best kind of school choice reax

edspresso — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:44:21 +0000

Now here's a prime example of the sort of thing that's supposed to happen with school choice. First, some background is in order. Massachusetts passed public school choice legislation back in 1991. Upshot on the program: school districts can opt out of the program, parents can elect to take their children to a different school, and the state will even reimburse low income parents for transportation costs.

Well, according to one mayor, the whole thing has been a "disaster":

Mayor James M. Ruberto has classified the volume of students leaving the city's school district due to school choice as a disaster. The Pittsfield public schools have experienced a 21 percent increase in the number of students who have left to attend school in other districts this year, according to Business Manager Sally Douglas.

Douglas said 41 more students had left city schools for other districts as of Oct. 1, the date when the School Department is required to provide the state Department of Education with its official enrollment figures. The total number of those students has risen from 200 to 241 pupils.

Last year, the number of students who left Pittsfield for other districts increased by 27 pupils, from 173 to 200.

241 students may not sound like much, but the article says the district's per-pupil expenditure is $6,000. Multiply by 241 = $1.4 million. So yeah, it hits 'em where it hurts.

Now, the school board could whine about needing more funding. Or it could demand an exemption to the law (or even a repeal). Instead, look at the response.

"It's about time we identify these kids and talk to their parents what it is about our school system that causes students to leave," Ruberto said. "We have to understand what's going on. It's stripping us of money we can use for our own students."

In other words, in the face of declining revenues, the administrators are responding to the desires of the parents! Which, of course, was the whole point all along. Contrast that with the sad story of Dorian Cain for an example on the other end of the spectrum.

Navarrette vs. teachers

edspresso — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:42:14 +0000

Ruben Navarrette goes after his teacher critics with both barrels:

I used to think that left-wing Latino activists, Minutemen vigilantes and politicians in both parties had the thinnest skins on the planet. But now that I've been scolded for criticizing the critics of the No Child Left Behind education law, I'd have to say that public schoolteachers win the prize.

In what became a common theme, one teacher asked: “How many education courses have you taken? Have you ever been involved in education? I cannot respect your writing because it is so simplistic, so uninformed. Why don't you stick to writing about topics you understand?” Another educator wrote: “What are your qualifications to assume you have an opinion on this matter? Because if you have none, your piece is a waste of newspaper space.”

As a matter of fact, I was a substitute teacher for four years in my old school district, where I taught at every grade level from kindergarten through high school. I also taught at the college level. I took education courses both at Harvard and later at UCLA, where I enrolled in a doctoral program in education before dropping out to write a book about my own educational experience.

None of that will placate some teachers. All they care about is that you agree with them. And I don't.

Teachers are so accustomed to being around like-minded people – in education courses, in their credentialing program, in the schoolhouse – that many have become hostile to hearing another view. They will talk your ear off about the shortcomings of students – particularly Hispanics and African-Americans – but they're in no mood to confront their shortcomings as educators. Judging from their complaints, many of them hate their jobs, disrespect their students and resent their supervisors. And yet, they won't leave.

Go read the whole thing.

unions show their true colors (again)

edspresso — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 20:18:12 +0000

Imagine, if you will, the following scenario. You live in Pasadena, California. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which has been running the ongoing exploration of Mars, is right in your backyard. Your high school junior has a chance to have regular visits from a real, live, currently employed NASA engineer for more instruction in physics and calculus.

And your friendly neighborhood NEA union local moves to shut the program down.

This sort of collaboration might sound non-controversial, but it's not. Teachers' union leaders are resisting a plan by President Bush to build an “adjunct teacher corps” of 30,000 experienced scientists and mathematicians, like those at Aberdeen, to assist in the nation's schools. The union leaders say raising teacher pay and improving working conditions, not bring in outside experts, is the way to enhance math and science teaching. (emphasis added)
Those objections miss the larger point. The USA faces a challenge to its technology leadership that can't be ignored. Although this country was built on innovation, it now risks passing that mantle to international competitors, according to several recent credible reports.
Business and government leaders say retaining a creative edge requires doubling the number of math and technology majors by the year 2015. Meeting that goal requires reaching students early with instruction that is both competent and inspirational.
As it is now, fewer than a third of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students score at the proficient level in math. And U.S. students score below the international average on tests of math and science knowledge.
Inadequate instruction is at least part of the reason for those scores. An estimated 38% of math teachers in grades 7-12 lack either a major or minor in math.

Just sit and absorb this situation a minute. The government is trying to bring in the brightest minds we have to offer to teach in U.S. schools, people whose business is science, math and technology--and the unions are so bloody busy gritching for more money that they see such a move as a threat rather than an opportunity.

Moral: the spirit of Albert Shanker is alive and well.

doom n' gloom from within the NEA

edspresso — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:40:59 +0000

You gotta hand it to Mike Antonucci--he sure knows how to pick his guest bloggers. This anonymous writer has nothing nice to say about the NEAAFTAFLCIO merger.

NEA leaders refuse to organize mass actions of teachers, parents, students, and others over issues that clearly tie them all together: class size, books and libraries, free supplies, a just and fair tax system, etc. Indeed, the necessity of the strike weapon even as a vital bargaining chip simply drifted out of NEA leaders' minds, to the point that there are very few people in NEA, or anywhere in the labor movement, who actually know how to conduct a strike.

It is clear to me that since the rank and file members of NEA rejected the merger with AFT-AFL-CIO, the NEA bosses have worked hard behind closed doors to achieve what they could not win in the open. I feel very strongly that the democracy that once characterized NEA is vanishing fast.

So, unless a rank and file uprising moves to overturn this maneuver, I can easily see NEA slipping fast into the same irrelevance that characterizes the AFL-CIO, following the United Auto Workers, once the most powerful union in the U.S., now having lost a million members, and doing nothing at all as those members still employed kiss away their wages, health benefits and pensions, while the UAW bosses plan their retirements. Today, the only people the AFL-CIO bosses can beat up are their own members.

The AFL-CIO cannot offer solidarity in labor struggles. It never has. Now, with about 1/3 of its membership gone, it cannot offer numbers. It cannot offer political action aid. It cannot even stop its own members from voting for George Bush.

Clearly, education workers and others are going to have to find new forms of organizations, outside the NEA-AFT-AFL-CIO, that can unite those in the community, teachers, parents, and students, in a common struggle for justice.So, this is my small tear shed for what could have been with NEA, and with that pause, I plunge ahead to see what might be in a new organization, with one toe in, and nine toes out, of the fraudulently termed "organized labor movement."

Read the whole thing.

end run around reform?

edspresso — Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:22:11 +0000

That's the ominous opinion from the L.A. Daily News (hat tip: Charter Blog). Upshot: an LAUSD school looking to go charter is running into a number of procedural obstacles from the district. But the devil is in the details:

Instead of making Parkman a charter, LAUSD and UTLA (United Teachers of Los Angeles--ed.) brass propose making it a "waiver" school. Although short on specifics, the idea is to keep Parkman under the control of the LAUSD - and with a UTLA-represented staff - but extend it some of the autonomy enjoyed by charter schools.
Union and district officials make no secret that what they do at Parkman might provide the model for how to extinguish the charter movement and block Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plans for taking over the LAUSD. And that ought to make anyone concerned about the future of public education in Los Angeles nervous.
If what the union and district are proposing is to undermine public enthusiasm for charters by coming up with something even better, well then, by all means, let's see what they have to offer. That's the sort of innovation charters are supposed to foster.
But given that both organizations have spent decades fighting reform, it seems they may have something more nefarious up their sleeves, namely, thwarting charters through a combination of bureaucratic obstruction and smoke-and-mirrors PR.

We're shocked, shocked.

go on--take up the challenge

edspresso — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:36:45 +0000

One of our colleagues, Matthew Ladner, has thrown down the gauntlet:

The first person in the nation who can send me two random assignment school-choice studies showing significant declines in either academic performance or parental satisfaction will win a steak dinner. I'll even throw in drinks and dessert — the whole nine yards. You have one month to send the studies to Mladner@goldwaterinstitute.org. Feel free to forward this to your anti-school-choice friends and invite them to play. The more the merrier.
If opponents of school choice can offer no proof to back their assertions, they deserve neither my steak nor anyone's confidence, leaving everyone to wonder: where's the beef?

What do you have to lose?

they have met the enemy...

edspresso — Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:38:34 +0000

George F. Will:

What Florida's teachers unions consider a menace, and what Florida's Supreme Court considers an affront to the state's Constitution, weighs 105 pounds, smiles shyly, speaks softly and wants to be a nurse. Octavia Lopez, 17, an 11th-grader at Miami's Archbishop Curley-Notre Dame High School in the heart of this polyglot city, was enabled to come to this school because of the smallest of three school-choice programs enacted under Gov. Jeb Bush.
The Opportunity Scholarship Program currently serves just 733 children statewide, 62 of whom are at this school of 416 students. The program provides vouchers, redeemable at private as well as public schools, to students at schools the state says are failing. Archbishop Curley, which in 1960 - just its seventh year - became the first Florida secondary school to be racially integrated, has grades nine through 12 and sends more than 98 percent of its graduates to college.
But Florida's Supreme Court fulfilled the desires of the teachers unions, and disrupted the lives of the 733 children and their parents, by declaring, in a 5-2 ruling, that the voucher program is incompatible with the state Constitution. Specifically, the court held that the Opportunity Scholarship Program violates the stipulation, which voters put into the Constitution in 1998, that the state shall provide a "uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools that allows students to obtain a high quality education."
(snip)
All of Archbishop Curley's 43 Opportunity Scholarship children who are not graduating in June are going to stay in the school. The voucher is worth about $1,800 less than the school's $6,400 tuition, and about $3,400 less than the $8,000 cost of educating a pupil. But Brother Patrick Sean Moffett, the head of the school, says "we're going to keep them all, somehow."
It is stirring to see the quiet tenacity of persons whose lives are disrupted by other people's political struggles. When Octavia and her mother - and David Hill, 14, a ninth-grader, and his parents, and several other parents and relatives of students - recently gathered at the school to discuss the end of the choice program, there was no rancor.
The children and parents at the table were black. None were Republicans. The NAACP, as usual, is in lockstep with the Democratic Party, which is in lockstep with the teachers unions. But the people at that table spoke only words of gratitude for the school - its small classes and respectfulness. All displayed the dignified patience that ordinary people often display when they are buffeted by the opaque storms of politics.

Enjoy.

just what the world needs--more Eduwonks

edspresso — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:42:02 +0000

Our warmest congratulations to the inimitable Andrew Rotherham of Eduwonk for his newborn bundles of joy (yes, plural).

Monthly Letter to Friends of The Center for Education Reform No. 1

erickaf — Wed, 03 Nov 1993 21:49:28 +0000

Monthly Letter to Friends of The Center for Education Reform No. 1 NOVEMBER 3, 1993 Dear Friend: The purpose of this letter, which will be a regular feature of the Center, is to share with a small group of people our insights into current reform efforts, hot-spots of activity, and other important facts. I have often found myself wanting to pick up the phone and contact you about this or that development; rather than contribute to an already busy schedule, we thought this would be a good method for communication. Please feel free to share what is written here with others you deem appropriate. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The Battle Out West The final score on Proposition 174: For — 30.1%; Against — 69.7%. While many of us have recently suspected the outcome, it is critical that we take stock and fully evaluate what these results means and how they will influence our future actions. The questions to ask: if school choice, in its many and varied forms, lacks credibility as a reform measure, why did the NEA and its state counterpart organizations feel the need to spend over 15 million dollars to defeat this initiative? And, given that barrage of negative campaigning, why did this initiative still win the support of almost 1.5 million Californians? Post-mortems are important, and I look forward to talking with many of you about what it is we can be doing jointly to continue our quest. The Center will have on hand shortly a detailed analysis that highlights the thinking of the initiative's organizers and leaders around the country; if you are interested in receiving this, please let us know. Perhaps the most important aspect of this campaign that we should walk away with is that the public does not clearly understand what school choice is and how it can improve education. Thus it is critical that we continue to educate at the most local level possible, as school choice victories have their origins in bottom-up growth and recognition. Potential in Michigan The proposals currently in front of the people of Michigan provide an opportunity to further the discussion on choice, and the education of the people both in Michigan and nationwide. While the legislature there is on a fast-track, and Governor Engler's plan is expected to be considered by the end of this month, there will be additional months of debate as they prepare to put the question of sources of school financing in front of the voters. Charter schools garner the support of a diverse and wide array of people; however, in Michigan, the MEA and its allies there have already launched a battle against this modest reform concept. Local groups such as TEACH Michigan headed by Dr. Paul DeWeese and the Mackinac Center have long been doing an excellent job of putting the word out and will continue to do so. For our part, The Center is bringing our S.W.A.T. team of experts and community organizers on the road and will hold a large-scale Town Meeting right outside of Detroit later this month. We are planning to attract nearly 2,000 parents and school and community representatives, and will treat them to a brief video tape of network television programs on choice, discussion of school reform from some of our best and brightest, and entertain an hour of questions from the audience. We hope to have this televised locally via cable, and are working on C-SPAN coverage as well. If you'd like more information as we firm up details this week, please let us know. There is a lot of potential for a watered-down version of the Governor's proposal. It is our hope that with such educational forums, we may be able to build greater support for more vital education reforms. Choice Candidate Wins New Jersey Gubernatorial Republican Party candidate Christie Whitman defeated Governor James Florio for New Jersey's top spot. Governor-elect Whitman has been a supporter of school choice reform and thus may be helpful to school reform activists in the state. It is important to note that she assured Jersey City Mayor Bret Schundler of her support for his efforts. We've been hearing from a lot of folks in Virginia who are interested in moving forward with reform in their state. With George Allen, a long-time supporter of educational choice, soon taking up residence in the Governor's Mansion, the possibilities for legislation in Virginia are looking up. Hot Spots Alabama: A well-organized group of conservative activists and business leaders are fighting the Governor's OBE (Outcome Based Education) bill with a solid standards bill of their own. Alabama Education Association President and gubernatorial candidate Paul Hubbert is, startlingly, on their side. Texas: Last session, citizens there saw a narrow defeat of a low-income choice demonstration project. The Texas Public Policy Foundation is gearing up for a massive education effort and the Texas Justice Foundation (Allan Parker) is filing suit on behalf of low-income parents seeking choice as a remedy to failed schools. Pennsylvania: The Keystone state should be on everyone's radar screen as they enter the critical stages of their legislative battle for choice. The REACH Alliance continues to grow at all levels. One unique concept, the brainchild of co-chairman Paul Henkels, is the distribution of billboards in front of each of the state's parochial schools, announcing that "St. Agnes is saving the taxpayer $1,350,000 (the number of students times the state per pupil cost in that area) this year." The signs are powerful reminders that these schools are providing a service in more ways than one. This media is available for a relatively low cost of about $30.00 per billboard. More on progress in the states next month. Finally, At the Center We have a number of brief Action Papers on issues of choice, private voucher plans, legal actions on choice, accountability, and other models of existing, successful school reforms. Our Action kits are more in depth and include clips, summary papers, and publications from groups around the country. We are also prepared to do briefing papers on special subjects. Please let us know if we can be helpful in anyway, and by all means, let us know of your ideas. Until next time, Jeanne Allen President

Senate committee vote: report from the trenches

edspresso — Wed, 05 Apr 2006 20:24:20 +0000

Yesterday the Florida Senate Education Committee voted on the proposed amendment to the state constitution permitting school vouchers. There are a number of press reports regarding the vote, many of which we plan to comment on soon. However, we received a fascinating first-hand account from John Kirtley, who was on hand for the hearing. We pass his remarks along in their entirety, without comment.

Today was another intense day for the school choice movement in Florida. I thought I would give you an eyewitness account of what happened, because you will never read about it in the Florida press.

Last Thursday, the bill to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November barely escaped the Senate Judiciary Committee. We did not expect it to move to the Senate Education Committee for at least a week or two, which would give us time to continue our grassroots efforts. Our C4 has been executing a patch through phone program and a letter writing effort targeting weak Senators. We started the session with 25 firm committed votes in the Senate (24 are needed). Some of you may be aware that a attempted coup later occurred in the Senate Republican caucus over future leadership. Four of the Senators who had given us their commitment later withdrew their support, with some denying they ever made the promise.

Last Friday we were stunned to learn that the bill had been calendared for today in the Senate Education Committee. This may have been done by the committee Chairperson, Sen. Evelyn Lynn, who was one who had recanted her support. Perhaps she felt if she brought it up quick it would die. It was certainly a risk on Friday.

Over the weekend we were able to arrange for 15 Haitian American parents and children to come to the capitol today from Senator Bullard's district in Miami. They started driving at 1am this morning. Bullard is an African American Democrat who All Children Matter backed in a big way in 2004, when she was targeted by her party for defeat. They have been putting tremendous pressure on her to vote against this bill, with the Senate Democrat Leader "guaranteeing" a locked down caucus. We brought the parents to Bullard's office and to the committee meeting. We also brought a McKay parent from Senator Lynn's district to speak.

The hearing to me perfectly captured the politics of school choice. Frederica Wilson, an African American Democrat from Miami, demanded of the sponsor his reasons for the amendment. "I don't hear any parents in my district asking for this-they want more money for the public schools. Who wants this?" Applause broke out in the room. As I was in front with the parents, I turned around to see a sea of white faces in suits applauding-union and public school people. They cheered again when the teacher union lawyer told the committee there was no need for the bill.

The parent representing the Haitian group spoke next. As he is blind, his son led him to the podium. In heavily accented English, he spoke plainly but powerfully about how the scholarship programs had saved his children. He urged the Senators to give the people the right to decide if they should continue. The McKay parent from Lynn's district spoke of her two special needs children and how they needed the scholarship to continue their success.

The room surely expected the Democrats to be in lockstep, and noboby knew what Lynn and Senator King would do. Senator Bullard asked the group from her district to stand up. She said, " I'm for the public schools. I'm for them having more money. But how can I sit here and tell these people, these success stories, that their scholarships should be taken away? I can't do it. I'm voting for the bill".

There were literally gasps behind me from the union and public school people. The vote went 6-1. Governor Bush was watching the vote from his office and asked to see the group from Miami in his office, at which time he thanked them personally for their efforts.

We have a very long way to go. The internal Senate politics still pose a huge hurdle. However we continue to see the power of parents to speak to the truth. When they did so today the other side had no answer.

I want to thank Michael Benjamin, Denise Lasher and Cindy Forster on our team for the incredible work on such short notice. Wish us luck. Remember this account when you read the articles in the paper tomorrow.

the meaning of words

edspresso — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 20:12:29 +0000

New York State United Teachers (the state arm of the AFT) has launched a "massive campaign" (their words) to fight Gov. Pataki's education tax credit proposal. And judging from their online campaign, they aren't kidding. Like many such unions, a significant portion of their website devoted to the struggle against the nefarious cabal looking to demolish public education.

With respect to the NYSUT's campaign against the tax credit, it was this article that gave us pause. First, let's go through their list of planned actions:

more than 31,000 letters opposing backdoor vouchers faxed to the offices of individual lawmakers in just 10 days;
thousands of phone calls to lawmakers across the state;
a special Voucher Threat Resource Center on the union's Web site, www.nysut.org. Parents and other public school supporters are using the Web site to marshal opposition to the voucher scheme;
a two-week, statewide television ad campaign warning New Yorkers of the damage that education tax credits would do to public education;
billboards on the highway rimming the state Capitol;
full-page advertisements and opinion pieces in key newspapers; and
a rally by 2,500 United Federation of Teachers members and New York City parents;

"And NYSUT will do more if we have to," promised executive vice president Alan B. Lubin.

All this for a $500 tax credit? Talk about a study in excess. But notice something from the first bullet: "backdoor vouchers." Not tax credits--vouchers. In fact, throughout this press release, the term "tax credit" (which is what this proposal actually is) is only used three times. Comparatively, the term "voucher," or some variation thereof, is used nine times. And note the first usage of "tax credit", in this sentence from the fifth paragraph:

Lubin added that NYSUT members are outraged that the disingenuously named "education tax credits" — which are really backdoor vouchers — would cost hundreds of millions of tax dollars annually "without a penny of accountability."

The sneer quotes. The hostile language. The conspiratorial tone (they're practically accusing Pataki of lying). Good heavens, these people are seething. Next paragraph:

"Private schools are just that — private," Lubin said. "Private and religious schools don't publish test scores, hold public meetings or put their budgets up for a vote. Public schools in New York are the most scrutinized and most accountable schools in the nation.

Actually, in terms of their openness to outsiders, both "public" and "private" schools should trade names. Public schools are notoriously difficult to examine internally, as John Stossel (insert devilish laughter) noted in his report. Kind of the opposite of private schools, which generally are quite happy to give people a look around.

It's wrong to pour $400 million into private or church schools without demanding the same level of accountability."

Oh, come on. Let's have a look at that $400 million in context:

New York State now ranks number three in the nation in education spending, with a statewide per-pupil average of $14,000 a year; only New Jersey and Washington, D.C., shell out more per student. And New York City kids aren’t shortchanged: while per-pupil education spending in the city once slightly lagged the state average, the gap has narrowed to almost nothing. Earlier this spring, New York city councilwoman Eva Moskowitz, who chairs the council’s Education Committee, released a report showing that the Gotham schools’ operating budget has ballooned 50 percent over the last five years, to $13.5 billion. That figure, Moskowitz noted, doesn’t even take into account pension and benefit costs, representing another $2 billion annually, nor the billions the city spends on the schools’ capital budget and interest payments on school construction loans. All told, the real New York City education budget is zooming toward the $20 billion mark—over one-third of the total city budget. That works out to a jaw-dropping $18,000 per pupil.

According to this, the state spent a total of $39 billion for the 2002-2003 year. Assuming spending has remained flat, the education tax credit would siphon off a whopping 1 percent of the budget. Shame on those lousy private schools trying to mooch off the system!

An editorial in favor of NCLB?

edspresso — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:19:34 +0000

Now here's something you don't see every day:

Much of the pushback against No Child Left Behind comes from teachers and school administrators. Some object to the accountability it has imposed. Before it, there was little accountability in public education - astoundingly little, given the billions of dollars involved and the importance of the enterprise to our collective future.

And No Child Left Behind is, undeniably, imperfect in design and execution. The biggest flaw is the mishmash measure that is the centerpiece of its accountability scheme, the one that gauges whether students, schools and school districts are making Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP.

But many of the criticisms levied against No Child Left Behind are unfair and untrue. It is not massive federal intrusion. States devise their own standards, craft their own curriculum, set their own goals, write their own tests and concoct their own definitions of progress.

Not something you read every day...

We're sorry--what was the question?

edspresso — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:12:29 +0000

Robert Enlow of the Friedman Foundation said this about polls some time ago:

One word makes a difference to public opinion and allows negative connotations to seep into documents meant to inform the public. That's exactly what happened in the (annual Phi Delta Kappa / Gallup Poll of Public Attitudes Toward the Public Schools). As expected, it showed that the general public does not support school vouchers — 42 percent supported the idea.

Why was it expected?

For years, the word selection in the poll's school-voucher question has been disputed. There have been rumblings that some of the connotation works to artificially lower support for school choice.

These rumblings prompted the Milton and Rose D. Friedman to carry out a study of its own to explore the potential of bias in the PDK poll. Conducted by leading research firm WirthlinWorldwide, the study, using a sound research methodology of a split-sample format, asked half of the participants the PDK question, while the other half was asked a more neutral school-voucher question.

Only a few words were changed.

For example, the PDK question asks, "do you favor or oppose allowing students and parents to choose a private school to attend at public expense?" The Friedman Foundation question read, "do you favor or oppose allowing students and parents to choose any school, public or private, to attend using public funds?"

Did the results raise questions of potential bias? We'll let you draw your own conclusion.

The Friedman Foundation question netted support from 63 percent of Americans. The PDK question resulted in support from 41 percent. By changing only a few words, but keeping the meaning the same, support rose over 20 percent. (emphasis added)

If you think the PDK question is, well, questionable, then look at this St. Petersburg Times poll. The question:

"Some people say that state funds should only go to public schools. Others say the state of Florida should pay for private schooling if the public school a child attends is failing. In this situation, would you be for or against giving state funds to private schools?"

We don't particularly have an issue with the first two sentences of that paragraph. But just who does the Times think it's fooling with that third line? Not surprisingly, 61 percent said they were against.

Actually, this gives us an idea. So according to this, Gov. Jeb Bush is looking to spend 49 percent of next year's budget on education. (Do not look any closer at that page, though--at least, not yet. We are, after all, trying to treat this like the Times treated that poll.) So! How about if the Alliance commissions the following poll question:

"Teachers' unions have said Governor Jeb Bush needs to increase education spending. Since he has proposed spending nearly half of next year's budget on education, do you believe that level of spending is good enough?"

Or how about this one?

"Governor Jeb Bush has proposed spending 49 percent of next year's budget on education. Do you believe his spending proposal will benefit Florida schools?"

No, wait--we love this one:

"The state of Florida is planning to spend nearly half its annual budget on education. Do you believe that level of spending is too high?"

Now, look. We're honest enough to realize that those poll questions are hopelessly slanted. Why? Let's now go back to Bush's budget numbers and actually, you know, tell the whole story by looking at the graph: that 49 percent number is of the general revenue fund, which doesn't include lottery revenue, tobacco lawsuit money, and state trust or federal trust funds. Add those in, and education gets a total of 34 percent of all funding. Still the highest category, but it isn't nearly half the total.

In short, no responsible pollster would use those sample questions and expect to get an accurate response. Which is why we find this poll by the Tampa Tribune a bit revealing in light of the Times poll.

Voters agree with the governor by a plurality, however, on another of his educational goals - reinstating the statewide private school tuition voucher program, which was struck down by the state Supreme Court.

The numbers (they're buried in the next to last paragraph): 48 percent in favor/41 percent against. We can't find the questions, but we're willing to bet they're a little more fair than those of the Times poll. Bottom line: you would be better off trusting an online poll than dreck like the St. Petersburg Times.

UPDATE: So saith Eduwonk.

The problem is the sentiment captured in the final line: "giving state funds to private schools." Sure, that's part of the issue with vouchers but it's not a clean way to ask the question because it loads it. I haven't seen the entire poll so I don't know if they asked the question in multiple ways but I'd bet that if you asked it with an emphasis on parents being able to chose schools, even private schools with public money, you'd get a different result.

Parents KIPP, shame on you!

edspresso — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:58:40 +0000

We just can't let this pass without comment. Friends of Dave linked to this rather disturbing missive on KIPP by one Mr. AB:

It’s hard for me to say this. As a Teach For America teacher, I feel espirit-de-corps-bound to laud you as a great example of what’s right with “The Movement.” But as a public school teacher, I feel an even greater onus to label you the worst thing for public education since Plessy vs. Ferguson. KIPP, you are re-segregating our schools, a sliver at a time. Sorting out families, students and teachers not by race but by predilection for success, always taking from among the best and always leaving the dregs.

At first I thought that your self-selective academies were tolerable because they held up models that real public schools could emulate. Now I realize that your academies are unreplicable so long as you exist. The things that make you successful, such as supportive families, curricular options, extended days, a superior staff of young, life-less teachers ---gosh, did we really need a whole new line of schools to prove those are they keys to achievement--- are currently out of reach for us but they are not impossibly distant. However, KIPP, your academies are only pushing them farther and farther away.

We can change the union contracts. We can acquire curricula that meet the needs of our students. We too can create a culture of achievement among students and staff. But we cannot do this when you siphon off our most invested families, most participative students, and most dedicated teachers.

What disturbs us about these remarks isn't that KIPP is accused of stealing away the best students (they don't, as pointed out in the comment thread). Where we have issues with these thoughts are kind of expressed in the next to last paragraph:

Thanks to you, more children, those fortunate enough to have parents who will attend your meetings and lucky enough to be selected in your lottery, now have that opportunity. (emphasis added)

So who is the blogger in question really upset with? The parents. In spite of what this blogger alleges, it's not as though KIPP targeted these kids and abducted them under cloak of darkness; they are only at a KIPP school because that's where the parents want them to be. But the blogger isn't so foolish as to blame a parent for rationally selecting a better option. So instead let's blame...the overachieving school! Curse you, KIPP!

One other thought from the fifth paragraph:

Certainly, you take only a handful. But a handful is all we need.

Riiiiight. How long have you had a complete hammerlock on the whole enchilada? We can discuss funding and curriculum issues, but when it comes to enrollment, lower income families have been compelled to send their kids to your school because they didn't have the means to go elsewhere. Suddenly, KIPP appears on the scene and has become the bane of your existence.

The more we look at this, the more astounded we are: an innovative, high-achieving school program is berated for...being an innovative, high-achieving school program.

UPDATE--Eduwonk weighs in.

To Mr. AB's point -- which is well worth reading because it illustrates an important debate -- the idea that we restrict the choices that parents have in the alleged service of the greater good just doesn't fly in a society like ours. One inescapable theme of the last 40 years of school reform is that if unsatisfied parents can walk, one way or another, they will. What's different now is that low-income families can increasingly walk through ideas like vouchers. That ought to discomfort public school supporters more than it apparently does. Essentially, saying that a good public option like KIPP is skimming the "best" families so we shouldn't have it, is saying to these families that they should forgo something that might be in the best interest of their kids because of a potential abstract good for all kids. That's not exactly how you build brand loyalty and it's not what we ask more affluent people to do and not what they do. To beat a dead horse some more, the way to build support for the public schools is not to give parents fewer choices in the public system but to give them more.

As Eduwonk has said elsewhere, he's no fan of vouchers, so as a result it's possible his remarks will carry a bit more weight with some in the anti-choice crowd. In fact, based on the thoughts of Mr. AB, let's stretch the criticism of choice in general a bit further. Many parents with the means to do so have been fleeing inner cities, which are some of the major centers of public school decay. What will you tell them? That they must not leave, no matter how much better suburban schools may be?

Or better yet, let's talk about public school teachers, who are more likely to put their kids in private schools. They're pretty doggone invested in public schools. If families should be required to forgo KIPP in lieu of their public school, irrespective of the quality of that public school, shouldn't public schoolteachers be compelled to do likewise?

Stossel vs. the unions, part XIV (or: they blinked)

edspresso — Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:46:25 +0000

In the ongoing PR slapfest between John Stossel and the AFT, he took the union up on their challenge to spend a week teaching in the Big Apple. NYC Educator was characteristically furious:

First of all, by allowing him to take responsibility for real kids, it's implicit that teachers need no qualifications or preparation.

Anyone can do this job. It's a lark.

Right there she's demeaning our profession.

Furthermore, if Randi (Weingarten, UFT president) thinks Stossel is doing this for any other motive than to prepare yet another hatchet job, she's laboring under a terrific misconception. Stossel's got free reign on ABC to spout whatever nonsense strikes his fancy.

Expect to read his column in the NY Sun describing the week as a walk in the park, vilifying teachers, criticizing public schools as inadequate, and renewing his call for vouchers. Expect well-edited film footage calculated to prove the points he's already decided upon.

I've seen Randi Weingarten speak, and always thought she was very smart. But she's dealing with someone with a clear and pronounced agenda, tremendous access to mass media, and she ought to know better.

As it turns out, NYC Educator didn't have to be quite so worried: the deal fell through. Long story short: talks, negotiations, and the union hand-picking a school for Stossel to teach at went on for weeks, until...

Finally, four days before what was supposed to be my first day of class, they canceled. Officially, "they" were the public school administrators who said it might be "disruptive" and that it might "set a precedent" that would open their doors to other reporters.
Too bad. Letting cameras into schools would be a good thing. Taxpayers might finally get to see how more than $200,000 per classroom of their money was being spent.
I wonder why the union even made the challenge. I suspect the UFT didn't expect me to say yes. When I turned out not to be easily intimidated, the teachers' union and the government school monopoly folded. Perhaps there's a lesson there.
But I wasn't trying to call a bluff. I wanted to accept an invitation. I'd like 20/20's cameras to see me struggle to be a good teacher.
I wonder what else our cameras might see.

Look. We can understand (but don't necessarily agree with) the sentiments expressed by the blogger above, that trying to take Stossel on publicly would do more harm than good. But Randi Weingarten should have had all her ducks in a row before flipping Stossel that offer. Given the way this all just sort of fell apart, it's kind of obvious she was either bluffing or shooting from the hip.

About guest contributors

edspresso — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:51:22 +0000

One of our big goals here at Edspresso is to provide a platform for lots of different voices in the education reform debate. Here you'll find remarks and thoughts from a wide range of folks interested in the education debate--politicians, analysts, and bloggers.

Romney weighs in

edspresso — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:42:42 +0000

With various presidential hopefuls angling for advantage, Mitt Romney weighs in on education:

How to close the education gaps? The teacher's unions have their answers: simply spend more money and hire more teachers for smaller classroom size. But the data show that those are not the answers at all. Massachusetts tests our kids regularly; when studentproficiencyis matched with classroom size and per-pupil spending, there is absolutely no relationship. In fact, the district with the highest per-pupil spending in our state -- almost $19,000 per student -- is in the bottom 10 percent of our state in student proficiency.

We found our education prescription by interviewing parents, teachers and principals, studying actual data, mining lessons from successful districts and charter schools, and digesting the recommendations from commissions and experts.

Go read his checklist. QandO is enthused.

School reform and looking at China

edspresso — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 21:08:08 +0000

A very articulate column in the Eugene Register-Guard urges school reformers to look before they leap:

My research turned up some interesting perspectives from adults who've graduated from China's school system. A Web site on home-schooling in China included an article featuring a woman who is home-schooling her children because she remembers being very lonely as a child. She seldom spent time with her parents, who worked long hours, and almost all of her own time was spent at school or studying.
Another woman was sent away as a young child to attend a better school, not an uncommon practice in China. She saw her parents once a year. Perhaps not surprisingly, she doesn't want a child of her own.
All the glowing reports of amazingly well-educated kids fail to mention the downside of China's education system. Contrary to (Stephen) Barnes' perception (in a prior Register-Guard column), education funding in China is below the international average, according to numerous reports. Although the government is attempting to remedy the problem, rural children do not fare nearly as well as children in the cities. The government currently spends only 23 percent of the education budget on rural schools, even though two-thirds of the Chinese live in the countryside.
The majority of rural children do not attend school beyond junior high. Children must pass a test to enter senior high school, and rural children generally don't score as well as their urban counterparts. Parents are required to pay tuition and higher school fees at the senior high level; if they can't afford them, they're out of luck, unless they can land one of a limited number of scholarships.
Students who manage to graduate from senior high face additional hurdles. There aren't enough available spots in Chinese universities to accommodate all the students who want to attend. Often universities set a quota on the number of students they admit from various parts of the country, with preference given to city dwellers. At the same time, jobs are scarce.

There's lots more. Go read.

School research, impartiality and Jack Jennings

edspresso — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:14:41 +0000

Back when this writer was slogging through journalism school, the debate over objectivity (particularly in connection with the blogosphere) was just getting heated up. Now that the fistfight has bled into other endeavors, an examination of that debate may be instructive.

Before I go any further, a story is in order.

While taking a newswriting class as part of my studies, a reporter from the Arizona Republic was invited for a guest lecture. In the course of his remarks, he said an amazing thing (especially for a mainstream media reporter): the search for objectivity is an exercise in futility. He summed up his attitude like this: "If three different people in three different locations see the same car crash, they're all going to say something different or unique about the event. Objectivity is impossible. You'll never reach it. So why shoot for it?"

At this point, my hand shot into the air. "If journalists can't be counted on to simply tell what happened with a given event or issue, then what's the point of news?"

His answer was actually rather instructive. "Instead of aiming for objectivity, how about fairness? If you try to be fair and equal with reporting a story," he said, "a modicum of objectivity will come through."

That exchange took place back in the summer of 2003. While some may seize upon these remarks as proof of media bias, his statements on fairness actually resonated with me, particularly as the debate really began to heat up over objectivity with respect to the blogosphere.

Anybody with even passing familiarity with the blogosphere knows something of this debate. Detractors say that blogs—with their built-in, loud-and-proud bias—may be fine for opinion and commentary, but can’t be relied upon for reporting of facts. The basic defense to that criticism:

Mainstream media claims of objectivity are a sham. TV networks have been biased in their news coverage for decades (and newspapers for centuries). So why demand a higher standard for blogs?
Expecting objectivity out of reporters is a bit unreasonable. Every human has certain strongly-held opinions and beliefs. Is it necessarily healthy for reporters—much less their readers or viewers—if we demand they start acting as automatons?
Knowing which way a writer tilts in his or her opinions can be beneficial for the reader. If the writer is known to be center-left, the reader can compensate accordingly and draw their own conclusions from the writer’s remarks.

Of course, that’s a summary of a rather complicated debate, so arguments on both sides are omitted. But that’s largely where the discussion has found itself—a debate that still rages and will probably never be settled. And much like a grassfire jumps into new territory, suddenly the eduresearch community finds itself in need of a bucket brigade. Greg Forster of the Friedman Foundation goes after Jack Jennings of the Center on Education Policy:

In an article headlined "Donkey in Disguise," posted on the Web site of the quarterly policy journal Education Next, http://www.educationnext.org/ , Forster accuses Jennings of labeling the center's studies on state education policy as nonpartisan and independent while choosing research methods that always point to a Democratic Party solution: more federal money and fewer rules by the Bush administration.
"There's no hope for improving education policy if we don't keep the facts and evidence distinct from the public-school system's party (and often partisan) line," Forster concluded.

And Jennings fires back:

Let me lay out my record as well as that of the center's. I am a Democrat and have made no pretense that I am not. I worked for the Democrats on Capitol Hill for many years. But I always have thought that education is too important an issue to be partisan. Therefore, when I crafted legislation in the three decades I was on the Hill, I always tried to be bipartisan. Almost every meeting that I convened was for both Democrats and Republicans, and the results were that nearly every law I helped to write was passed by large bipartisan majorities.
When I established the Center on Education Policy, I carried that same policy of nonpartisanship into this work. The first chair of our board of directors, Chris Cross, had been a former Republican staff director on Capitol Hill and was also a political appointee in [George H.W. Bush's] administration. In the last several years, as we have tracked [No Child Left Behind], we have been contacted by Republican and Democratic members of Congress who have wanted our advice on whether they understood correctly the effects of NCLB, and we have happily helped all of them. A week and a half ago, three days after we released our fourth annual NCLB report, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate and House education committees asked us to brief the aides of all members of Congress on our report. Members of Congress do not sponsor such events if they believe you have a partisan agenda.

What I find notable in Jennings’s response is what is missing: an answer to Forster’s charge of cloaking opinion and public school system statements as empirical research. From page 2 of Forster’s article:

The trouble with the (CEP) studies is that they do not gather data about the issues they purport to examine. The authors have read large volumes of legal, regulatory, and administrative documents related to NCLB. This puts them in a good position to know, in detail, exactly what policies are being set. However, the CEP claims to be studying not what the policies are, but how they are implemented and how they are affecting education. To examine implementation the CEP relies exclusively on surveys of state education officials and interviews with public school staff. In other words, CEP researchers report as facts what the public school system says about how things are going in the public school system.
The CEP does not hide its methods. The studies quite openly attribute their findings to surveys and interviews. Phrases like “officials told us that…” and “according to the teachers we interviewed…” appear here and there. Nonetheless, both the studies themselves and Jennings’s public comments about them present the findings as scientifically confirmed facts, not merely as the claims made by public school officials and staff. They rely on the accuracy of these claims as a basis for policy recommendations.
Survey and interview data need not be dismissed across the board as unscientific. A survey using scientific methods—such as random sample generation and, where appropriate, credible assurances of anonymity for interviewees—can produce legitimate empirical data on many subjects. But the CEP is investigating the merits of an accountability system by asking the opinion of the institution that is being held accountable.

To my mind, the linchpin of this entire argument is summed up in the WaPo article:

Chester E. Finn Jr., a former Reagan administration education official who runs the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and is on the Education Next editorial board, said Forster is right to say Jennings's "politics and opinions color all that he does, says and publishes." But, Finn added: "This is no crime. Indeed, it's the norm in Washington.
"What's criminal is for the media to clothe him in a mantle of objectivity or neutrality," he said. Finn cited an Education Week report that called the Center on Education Policy "a Washington-based research organization" but said the Friedman Foundation was a "group that supports greater choice in education." If the newspaper were even-handed, he said, it would have described CEP as a "group that favors increased federal education spending." Education Week reporter Michelle Davis said she used words from the groups' Web sites to describe them and mentioned Jennings's Democratic Party background in the article.
Gerald W. Bracey, a Fairfax County-based educational psychologist and research columnist who opposes what he calls the Friedman Foundation's campaign for "the elimination of publicly run schools," said Jennings "has indeed managed to get media to see him as impartial, in contrast, say, to me or Greg [Forster]."
But Jennings's statements "usually sound reasonable to me," Bracey said, while Forster and Education Next seem partisans for vouchers and other Republican Party positions. (emphasis added)

In a way, this illustrates where the blogosphere debate over objectivity has wandered. Blogs will be opinionated. There’s no getting around it. But are their statements valid, their reasoning sound, their conclusions acceptable? That is how blogs are measured: on the merits of their reasoning, not some facile claim of objectivity.

Comparing this line of thought to education research, it is absurd to expect Jack Jennings, who spent three decades as a Democratic education policy wonk on Capitol Hill, to suddenly morph into a nonpartisan specimen. Of course he has strongly-held opinions and has specific ideas about how to improve education, and like Chester Finn, I wouldn’t begrudge him or anybody else the right to advance an agenda. But it is equally as absurd to say that Jack Jennings should be able to seize some moral high ground of objectivity and thereby claim his research is somehow more authentic or legitimate. His findings should be examined on their merits, not Jennings’s questionable posture as an independent third party.

Philadelphia: a bloodbath of teacher firings?

edspresso — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:22:55 +0000

We were going to comment on this, but True Schools beat us to it.

California private preschools split over Proposition 82

edspresso — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:24:26 +0000

Apparently not all private preschools are enamored with Proposition 82:

Some Montessori schools fear Proposition 82, dubbed the Preschool for All Act, would lead to state standards that could compromise their teaching methods and mixed-age classrooms. Faith-based preschools say they would be at a competitive disadvantage because the measure wouldn't fund schools that offer religious instruction. Others worry a requirement that teachers earn a bachelor's degree would drive them out of business.
``I am going to vote no, and I am very much in favor of universal preschool,'' said Bonnie Mathisen, director of Discovery Children's House, a Montessori school in Palo Alto. ``I just feel that Prop. 82 is not the right way to go about it. When you get down to the nitty-gritty, a lot of preschools will be left out.''
Others are taking sides: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former California Senate President Pro Tem John Burton came out against Proposition 82 this week -- Schwarzenegger because of how it's funded and Burton because he believes it wouldn't do enough to help the poorest Californians. Democratic gubernatorial candidates Phil Angelides and Steve Westly endorsed it.
Many early childhood educators also favor the measure, which was spearheaded by Hollywood director Rob Reiner.

Wait...wasn't Rob Reiner the one who stepped down from an education commission over alleged improprieties related to Proposition 82? That's what we thought--only the article, well, failed to mention it. How odd! Maybe it would have been included if the paper in question was the Palm Beach Post and the story was, you know, connected to vouchers or something...

teaching math

edspresso — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:11:53 +0000

We were going to comment on this interesting article on math teaching, but D-Ed Reckoning and (especially) Right on the Left Coast say far more than we ever thought possible. And they say it better!

Education News for Tuesday, April 18

edspresso — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:09:19 +0000

Mayor to push for control of LAUSD (LA Daily News) -Taking his campaign for education reform to a citywide audience, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is expected to use tonight's State of the City address to ask the public to back his efforts to take control of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

About debates

edspresso — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 04:00:03 +0000

In June 2005, Legal Affairs approached Alliance for School Choice president Clint Bolick about participating in an online debate on school choice. We found the resulting week-long exchange so interesting that we decided to offer a similar feature here on Edspresso. In this section, you'll find one-on-one debates on a wide range of issues related to education reform.

The first debate will involve analysts from two major think tanks, Neal McCluskey from the Cato Institute and Michael J. Petrilli from the Fordham Foundation, on national standards in education.

Education News for Wednesday, April 19

Daily News — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:55:42 +0000

Proposals For Two Florida Scholarship Programs Move Forward in Senate - Two separate plans to save a school voucher program ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court passed through Senate committees Tuesday. (more)

High School Graduation Gap More Than Racial - A new study leaves you pondering whether boys are slackers or whether girls have simply picked up the education ball and run with it, yelling "Goodbye fools!" to the boys. (more)

Milwaukee near bottom for graduation rates - Milwaukee public high schools have one of the worst graduation rates in the country among large school districts, according to a new report that takes the unusual step of trying to make comparisons across large school districts as well as states. (more)

CA preschool measure still winning in poll - California voters support Proposition 82, dubbed the Preschool for All Act, by a 13-point margin, according to a Field Poll released Wednesday. (more)

Villaraigosa promises to fix LA's problems while calling for a revolution in education - Promising to confront the city's problems and make each tax dollar count, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa proposed on Tuesday a six-year experiment in school reform... (more)

Check back later today for more news.

UPDATE:

AP Story on Florida voucher moving through Senate - An unconstitutional plan that let students from failing public schools transfer to private schools at public expense would be re-established as part of another voucher program under a bill that cleared a Senate committee Tuesday. (more)

South Carolina school choice bill dies - A new plan to give private school vouchers to parents of students in failing schools has died in a House subcommittee. (more)

Florida's failing schools face hard choices - Failing schools, including two in Polk County, may face some tough choices this summer if their students' FCAT scores haven't improved this year. (more)

Two great teachers teach me - Does Washington Post's Jay Mathews have any business writing about schools? (more)

New York Times: Boys are no match for girls in completing high school - Nationwide, about 72 percent of the girls in the high school class of 2003 — but only 65 percent of the boys — earned diplomas, a gender gap that is far more pronounced among minorities... (more)

Arizona groups file suit to overturn use of AIMS testing - Two legal advocacy groups filed a lawsuit Tuesday that seeks to overturn the statewide AIMS test as a high school graduation requirement, claiming inadequate funding for schools leads to students who are unprepared for the test. (more)

'No Child' Law Raises Segregation Fear - Connecticut hasn't always given its poor and minority students an education as good as it's given its rich and white students. (more)

LA Mayor's School Takeover Would Bypass Local Voters - Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced Tuesday that he would ask the Legislature to give him overwhelming authority to run the city's embattled public schools. (more)

Congress reacts to NCLB excluding minority test scores - Schools should stop excluding large numbers of minority students' test scores when they report progress under the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Don't retreat on tough school courses - Principals, teachers shouldn't cave to pressure to water down academics. (more)

Pay more to Iowa teachers of math, science - Eventual legislation should include payment of significant bonuses for secondary math and science teachers for a set period. (more)

Oregon has widest disparity of funding for rural schools - Rural school districts in Oregon have the widest funding gap in the nation, and students in rural districts that receive the most tax money outperform those in rural districts that receive less, a new national study shows. (more)

Researches review think tank researchers - A group of education researchers recently launched a project to review edu cation reports released by private think tanks to judge the quality of their research, the accuracy of their conclusions and expose any ideological bias. (more)

And we're live in three......two......

fguest — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:30:00 +0000

Well, this is it--after weeks of plotting and planning, this show is finally on the road!

So how did this blog come about, anyway? The Alliance team wanted to find another vehicle to reach the public with information about education reform that was both provocative and resourceful. After some debate, the organization decided to launch a blog. I was lucky enough to get the job of running it.

My background? My bio is here. But I'm no novice to the blogosphere; I edited my own blog from 2003-2004, and as any blogger will appreciate, am thrilled that Edspresso is now my main gig. I hit the ground running on this new venture in mid-February. After lengthy discussions, design and testing, Edspresso has arrived.

You may be wondering why a brand-new blog already has posts going back into last month. As part of the testing stage, I did quite a bit of blogging behind the scenes to give the folks here at the Alliance some idea of what to expect, and to help the blog find its voice. After some discussion, we decided to make all that public, so you'll have some stuff to read the first day (not to mention this from Gov. Bush, of course).

As we've clearly indicated, this blog is hosted by the Alliance. However, one thing needs to be made clear: while Edspresso will certainly reflect our stance in favor of parental choice in education, we're not going to use this site merely as a platform to demand vouchers for all. Instead, we plan on discussing anything dealing with education reform. NCLB, merit pay, high-stakes testing, funding, achievement gap, universal preschool--if it's about K-12 education and improving our nation's schools, we consider it fair game.

Furthermore, this is a bit more than a blog--think of it somewhere between a group blog and an online magazine. A major part of my job involves bringing in diversity of thought--the Alliance wants to attract lots of different voices. To that end, please take note of the tabs at the top:

Today's News: links to raw news from across the nation. Check it frequently--it is updated throughout the day - and often commented on in "Our View."
Daily View: the daily blog where we give our take on edunews. (This will largely be my corner, but others at the Alliance and outside the organization will chime in regularly.)
Featured Commentary: thoughts and remarks from outside contributors from a variety of spectrums - many of whom you know as experts in the field. This is a weekly offering, appearing Tuesdays. And we welcome views from everyone.
Debates: one-on-one exchanges by analysts and experts on education issues - most of these will last throughout the week, so tune in each day for pings back and forth. We hope this will be one of the livelier areas on the site.

As noted, we welcome outside contributions. To submit an article for Featured Commentary or a blog post for the Daily View, please e-mail me at rboots at allianceforREMOVETHISschoolchoice dot org. (Obligatory disclaimer: the views expressed by third-party contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the Alliance for School Choice.)

So that's how Edspresso came to be. Now let's brew up some rich bloggy goodness.

Technorati claim tag

edspresso — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:24:30 +0000

Don't mind us--we're just trying to claim Edspresso on Technorati through this Technorati Profile tag.

So who's gonna vet the vetters?

edspresso — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:51:20 +0000

In the spirit of Media Matters going after conservative media bias both real and perceived, a group of academics is targeting conservative/libertarian think tanks:

A group of education researchers recently launched a project to review education reports released by private think tanks to judge the quality of their research, the accuracy of their conclusions and expose any ideological bias. But some targets of the project contend that its motives and objectivity are suspect.

The project is a joint effort of the Education Policy Studies Laboratory at Arizona State University and the University of Colorado's Education and Public Interest Center. It will critique studies of topical education issues, which are often published without undergoing independent peer reviews.

"Calling these reports to account brings more discipline to what's become kind of a 'wild west' of scholarly writing," said University of Illinois education professor Christopher Lubienski, one of the participants in what is being called the Think Tank Review Project. It plans to provide policymakers and the news media with "expert reviews" of major education studies within two weeks of a report's release.

And where does this outfit get its funding?

The Think Tank Review Project is itself funded by a think tank, which raises questions about its own political bias, some education advocates said. The project's funding comes from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, an East Lansing, Mich.-based group founded by the Michigan Education Association, an affiliate of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union.

Critics say it's no coincidence that the first three reviews conducted by the project, which were released in March online at http://thinktankreview.org, criticized reports released by well-known conservative think tanks on issues opposed by teachers' unions.

And according to the Goldwater Institute (who will likely be targeted but doesn't appear concerned), that may not be the only union funding this project is receiving:

Under new Department of Labor regulations, the NEA and other employee unions must file reports documenting how they spend member dues. We recently dug through the NEA’s 455-page filing. In addition to spending nearly $25 million on “political activities and lobbying,” the NEA awarded $250,000 to ASU’s “Office for Sponsored Research.”

What kind of research is the NEA sponsoring? We placed calls to the Office of Sponsored Research and the Education Policy Studies Laboratory, and the College of Education to ask whether it had received NEA funding for targeted research. The Office of Sponsored Research had no record of any NEA grants. And after four days, the EPSL still hasn’t responded.

Look. As we've stated earlier, who cares if an individual or group wants to advance a particular agenda or question a set of conclusions? But you really should be transparent about what you're doing. And more to the point, you shouldn't attempt to hide behind some façade of neutrality when it can be pretty fairly concluded that you're just as invested in the outcome (maybe even moreso) as those who you seek to criticize.

Jeb's Rules for School Reform (Gov. Jeb Bush)

mtigani — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:00:00 +0000

When I took office in 1999, I made it my highest priority to provide a quality education to all of Florida’s children. For the past seven years, I have had the honor of working with thousands of educators, policymakers, parents and students to make that happen by bringing true reform to Florida’s public education system. Five rules have guided our success.

Rule number one applies long before the ballots are counted on Election Day. Simply, when you run for office, you need to say what you're going to do and then do what you said you would. Candidates who aren't willing to take political risks won't take the policy risks required to drive real change. By taking a stand during our campaign, my running mate and I gave voters a chance to examine and debate our plan to transform Florida schools. As a result, our election came with a mandate to implement a comprehensive education reform based on high standards and expectations, clear measurement and accountability, and rewards and consequences for results. Since 1999, we have eliminated social promotion, increased the exit exam requirements for high school graduation, raised standards for school performance, and made reading instruction a primary focus in the early grades and, more recently, in our middle schools.

The second rule of reform is that if you don't measure, you don't care. You must be willing to measure the outcomes of reforms, and equally important, you must be willing to share the results – the ones you're proud of, as well as the ones that show more work is needed – with the rest of the world.

We know our reforms are working because we measure progress. Today, Florida’s graduation rate is up from 60 percent to 72 percent, our drop-out rate is down by half, and our students are making greater learning gains than their national counterparts. The biggest gains are being made by our minority students, bringing us one step closer to closing the achievement gap in Florida.

Third, big reforms require long-term commitment. We've been testing 4th grade reading since the 1998-99 school year. At that time, only 51 percent of our 4th graders could read at grade level. Two years later, the number had risen to just 53 percent. After six years, 71 percent of all Florida 4th graders have the ability to pick up a book and read it independently. It's the cumulative effect of incremental improvement that creates significant progress.

Another rule – the fourth – is to communicate what you're doing, especially to parents. Education reform can only be sustained when families know it is working. Florida gives parents a comprehensive report card tracking their child's performance, along with the school's performance compared to state and national standards, with explanations of each. The fifth rule is that success is never final and reform is never finished. You are either in ascendance or decline, so if you aren't moving forward you are losing ground as well as opportunities for students. Right now, we are working to implement the largest reform package since the sweeping changes made in 1999. These reforms include differentiated pay and performance-based pay to encourage educators to teach in economically challenged schools and reward teachers for improving student performance. We are also proposing a state financial investment that complements local efforts to attract and retain talented teachers.

Our proposed reforms will bring rigor to middle schools and relevance to high school. To build on the intensive instruction of elementary school and better prepare for high school, students in grades six through eight will be required to take three years each of math, science, language arts and social studies.

We are also revamping high school to better prepare students for postsecondary education and the workforce. In addition to completing core classes, students will be able to major or minor in a subject area such as math, science, fine arts, or career and vocational skills, depending on their goals and interests. The opportunity keeps them interested in their education and better prepares them for their future.

It took a full generation of school decline to bring us today's problems, and it will take at least half that long to fix them. In the process, Florida gives parents the power to move their children from a chronically failing school to another school of their choice. We also empower students with disabilities to find the most supportive educational environment, whether public or private.

Our choice programs include corporate tax credit scholarships for use at private schools so low-income parents have the same options that wealthier families have always had when it comes to educating their children. Equal opportunity starts with equal access to all available education options.

Researchers from the Manhattan Institute, Harvard and Cornell have independently studied Florida's private school choice programs. All three studies concluded that the threat of vouchers actually creates the greatest improvement in struggling schools. Given the choice between losing students and raising the quality of education, schools rise to the challenge and make tremendous gains.

The Florida Supreme Court recently struck down one of Florida's three choice programs on the grounds that it created competition for public schools – the very competition that has helped drive improvement in Florida's schools. The ruling not only threatens the future of the 733 students in the Opportunity Scholarship program, but in varying degrees could also impact the 29,641 other low-income, minority and disabled students who currently use tuition vouchers.

School choice benefits all students whether they take advantage of the opportunity or not. Our ongoing reform efforts will include changing state law, or the Florida Constitution, to protect school choice programs from activist court rulings.

Jeb Bush is governor of Florida.

Education News for Thursday, April 20

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:23:41 +0000

A bar raised for all - In the first of a series, the Christian Science Monitor examines a Maryland school's efforts to close student achievement gaps. (more)

L.A. Schools Plan Splits Capitol - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger backs Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's takeover proposal, which faces a battle from teachers unions, some legislators and other cities in district. (more)

Parents confident, teachers dubious about expectations - An AP-AOL Learning Services Poll found that Virginia teachers are far more pessimistic than parents about getting every student to succeed in reading and math as boldly promised by the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Doubts on New York City teacher incentives - Educators across the country said yesterday New York City is right on track with new housing incentives for hard-to-find teachers - but doubted that longtime veteran instructors would be swayed by the offer. (more)

Federal loophole excludes minority test scores under NCLB - Arkansas' schools are not counting the scores of one in 14 students when they report the progress of racial groups, a study by The Associated Press has found. (more)

Check back later today for more news.

UPDATE:

Report questions severity of nation's dropout crisis - Dueling reports offered sharply conflicting claims this week on the number of high school students, especially minorities, who drop out of school and fail to earn a diploma. (more)

AP-AOL poll finds parents confident about NCLB - Almost eight in 10 parents are confident their local school will get all students up to state standards in reading and math by 2013-14 (more)

GOP split could doom Missouri tax credit proposal - The measure - which calls for about $40 million in state tax credits for student scholarships - may hit the state House floor within the next few days. (more)

Wisconsin NCLB performance data available to public - Even though Wisconsin public schools don't face No Child Left Behind sanctions for the performance of subgroups smaller than 40 students, much of the data on the performance of those subgroups still can be viewed by the public. (more)

Denver Post editorial: All students should be counted - In Colorado, 32,416 students' scores were not reported in separate ethnic categories in 2003-04. (more)

Thousands of Illinois students' scores not included - Nearly 1,600 students in Rock Island County schools had test results not counted toward their school's minority subgroups under a provision in the state law that critics are calling a loophole to "game" the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

New Hampshire vouchers a recipe for chaos? - Giving tax credits to businesses that help pay for private school vouchers would be “a recipe for chaos,” the state’s top tax official said.. (more)

Nevada Democrats propose merit pay for teachers - State Democrats called for merit pay for teachers, full-day kindergarten classes in all schools and a state lottery to fund classroom supplies as part of a package of school reforms they'll take to voters in the 2006 campaign. (more)

New Jersey state assemblyman blasts state funding - State Assemblyman Joseph R. Malone III has alleged that if the state doesn't do something about school fnding, only "the filthy rich and the obscenely poor" will be able to live in New Jersey. (more)

New York offers housing subsidy to attract teachers - New York City will offer housing subsidies of up to $14,600 to entice new math, science and special education teachers to work in the city's most challenging schools.... (more)

The 65 percent revolutionary - Patrick Byrne is the 43-year-old man behind the education spending plan storming the nation... (more)

Arizona governor says AIMS test hurdle still in place - Gov. Janet Napolitano said high school students shouldn't read too much into a class-action lawsuit that tries to block use of the AIMS test as a graduation requirement. (more)

Indiana teachers' union lawsuit

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:59:00 +0000

The NEA-affiliated Indiana State Teachers Association will be filing a lawsuit today against the state to demand higher funding:

The Indiana State Teachers Association will file on April 20 a lawsuit against the State of Indiana for failing to fund the standards and accountability mandates required for Indiana’s public schools. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that Indiana’s school funding formula does not provide the resources necessary for all Hoosier school children to have a fair chance to learn.

Filed in Marion County on behalf of students and their families from different school corporations across the state, the class action lawsuit represents all Indiana students who are being denied essential learning opportunities, including students living in poverty, minority students, students just beginning to learn English and students with disabilities.

“This action is about Indiana’s future,” said Judy Briganti, ISTA President. “It’s clear that the current funding formula denies many of our students a fair chance to learn. The action we’re taking is about giving all students the opportunities they need to be successful.”

With current funding, Indiana denies students preschool opportunities, supplemental reading instruction, English-language learning instruction and remediation and summer school opportunities.

Just for added effect, go check out the full press release. The union has assembled an impressive point-by-point list of alleged grievances.

Now hold on to your hat as we examine just how much those pennypinchers in Indianapolis skimp on schools:

Currently, the state spends about $4 billion annually —about one-third of its general fund budget — on elementary and secondary schools, an amount that includes the administration of the Department of Education.
But when federal funds and local property-tax revenues were added, schools spent about $10.2 billion in calendar year 2004, said Dave Reynolds, deputy director of the State Budget Agency.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Hoosier schools spent nearly the national average per student — about $8,280, compared to about $8,287 nationally — in fiscal year 2004. That ranked the state 22nd.
But (union deputy executive director Dan) Clark said it's not enough.
When the Indiana Department of Education begins categorizing schools this summer based on their standardized test scores, graduation rates and attendance, he said the public will see that many students are not achieving at adequate levels.
"There will be this outcry that public schools are failing again," Clark said. "What's particularly troublesome for us is that some will use those alleged failures as a reason to support public school vouchers. That, quite frankly, is the end of the line for us."

So, to review: one-third of Indiana state funds are being spent on education. Combined with federal and local funds, more than $10 billion dollars were spent on K-12, placing the state right in line with national averages. And yet, the union wants more.

Listen. Let's set aside the swipes at school choice, along with the list of areas where you say the state is failing. (For the benefit of the union, we'll also disregard the Kansas City episode for the time being.) Instead, let's step back and ask a sane, common-sense question: how on earth can anybody, from an individual to an organization, be asked to spend more than one-third of their income on anything? Irrespective of the good or service--health care, law enforcement, transportation--at what point is it fair for the individual writing the check to decide that, even though the good or service in question is a worthy (even critical) endeavor, at some point enough is enough?

UPDATE: Hoosiers indeed: of the top ten high school basketball gymnasiums in the nation, nine--count 'em--nine are in Indiana. (Hat tip: Indiana Education Review.)

Wonk fistfight en route

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 14:44:14 +0000

Some education analyst types are about to square off over dropout rates:

Widely accepted reports in recent years that two-thirds of all students and only half of minorities graduate from high school have sparked a major push by the nation's governors and President Bush to overhaul America's high schools. The National Governors Association last summer issued a report sharply criticizing states for failing to accurately track dropout rates, and all 50 governors have since signed an agreement to adopt improved, uniform calculations for graduation rates.

But a new report released by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) April 20 claims that high school graduation rates are much higher than commonly reported, with 75 percent of minority students and 82 percent of all students earning diplomas on time. The report, Rethinking High School Graduation Rates and Trends, claimed that high school completion rates have improved significantly for all students and that the black-white graduation gap has been cut in half over the past 40 years. EPI is a nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C., that focuses on policies affecting low-and middle-income people.
EPI’s report conflicts with the most recent findings released by the Manhattan Institute on April 18 that put the national graduation rate at 70 percent, with 78 percent of white students, 55 percent of African American students and 53 percent of Hispanic students earning high school diplomas in 2003, the most recent year of available data. It concluded that the nation's graduation rates have not changed significantly over the past 20 years. It also reported that 72 percent of females graduate compared to 65 percent of males.
The Manhattan Institute, a New York-based nonprofit group that advocates free-market economics and education reform, calculated graduation rates by comparing the number of ninth graders in a school to the number of diplomas issued four years later. The EPI report was based on official government data on high school completion compiled in several surveys by the Census Bureau and other federal agencies.
Jay Greene, a scholar for the Manhattan Institute who developed its method of calculating graduation rates, said that the conflicting EPI report is based on official government data that has been proven inaccurate by independent estimates such as his.
"What (EPI) is suggesting is that we ought to believe the results of surveys based on a random sample of the population, rather than the actual count of the population," which is the opposite of what social scientists do, Greene said.

The story also said Greene and EPI president Lawrence Mishel will debate this next Thursday, April 27 at the National Press Club in D.C. Would that we could make it. (We can't find the event anywhere on their calendar, though.)

(Technorati tags: graduation rates.)

Shaming success in D.C.

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:13:16 +0000

First they came for KIPP. Now they're coming for SEED.

New Hampshire vouchers = chaos?

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:41:37 +0000

That's the word from one top New Hampshire bureaucrat:

Giving tax credits to businesses that help pay for private school vouchers would be “a recipe for chaos,” the state’s top tax official said yesterday.
“This can’t be administered,” Department of Revenue Administration Commissioner Phil Blatsos told the House Ways and Means Committee yesterday.
The bill, which passed in the Senate and got preliminary approval from the House, would allow businesses to reduce their state business taxes by the same sum they contribute to a special foundation that would provide the vouchers.

Aside from the fact that similar programs are administered in six states, why, precisely, can't such a program work in New Hampshire?

The state would cap the tax credits at $500,000, which raised the question of what happens to a business that donated to the foundation, then learned the tax credits were used up. Blatsos said the idea of first-come, first-serve wouldn’t work.

There are countless tax credit programs across the nation that are capped at a given amount. And this guy says a $500k program wouldn't work because...well, we don't know why. On that note, cut to the anti-school-choice Republican!

Others raised concerns about constitutionality, with Manchester Rep. Steve Vaillancourt calling the tax credits “a shell game,” to drain state revenue for religious schools.

But he's been here before--specifically, when he helped defeat a voucher bill back in March.

"It's so blatantly unconstitutional that it should be done away with and put out of its misery once and for all," said Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, a Manchester Republican, who waved a copy of the state Constitution. He said the plan to direct the tuition money through parents would amount to "money laundering."

And by the way: if we're reading this correctly, New Hampshire's Department of Education received $137 million in state general fund revenue in 2005 (that's part of $1 billion total for last year). Assuming the $500,000 program is maxed out, it would take up a whopping .36% of the total budget. Oh yeah, New Hampshire would lose its shirt on the deal.

New edublog

edspresso — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:00:00 +0000

Just discovered D-Ed Reckoning. Try this on for size—it’s possibly one of the most devastating critiques of teacher performance and education reporting we’ve read in a while.

Education News for Friday, April 21

Daily News — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:51:29 +0000

Weakened New Orleans voucher program moved forward - A House committee overrode the wishes of Gov. Kathleen Blanco on Thursday and approved a plan to set up a voucher program for students attending New Orleans' worst public schools. (more)

Children before special interests - In the Philadelphia Daily News, Matt Ladner writes about Oprah's show on the dropout crisis in our nation. (more)

LA mayor puts spotlight on charter school - State of the City address offered lavish praise for alternative campus that could be a model in proposed L.A. Unified takeover. (more)

Time to set things right in LAUSD - Op-ed in LA Daily News: Every parent in Los Angeles has a right to ask, "What's going on with our schools?" The Los Angeles Unified School District has a 22 percent dropout rate - some studies show it is as high as 50 percent. (more)

Trapped (Clint Bolick and Star Parker)

fguest — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:15:00 +0000

On March 23, our two organizations took a major step to test the vitality of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and expand educational opportunities for children in large urban districts across the nation. We filed legal actions in California against the Los Angeles and Compton Unified School Districts for their failure to make school choice available for children in failing schools.

The cornerstone of NCLB is that every child is entitled to attend a quality public school and those in failing schools should not be forced to remain in inadequate schools while improvements are being made. Rather, the law makes clear that it is the right of every child to attend an effective school today.

But in school districts across the nation, that promise remains unfulfilled; and to date, the sanctions to noncompliance – a cut-off of federal education funds – have gone unused.

Along with the legal actions, CURE and the Alliance for School Choice asked U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings to take action against the school districts and to impose sanctions for noncompliance. These actions, the first of their kind, will in large measure determine whether NCLB will accomplish its mission of providing high-quality educational opportunities to all schoolchildren or is merely another empty promise.

Secretary Spellings said during an April 5 speech at a school choice forum in Jamaica, New York that said she had directed Henry L. Johnson, the department’s assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education, to look into the matter, but she hinted that she would take a hard line against recalcitrant districts.

“There are a number of steps we can take to enforce these provisions, including withholding federal funds,” she said.

The Bush Administration has proposed a partial remedy in the form of the Opportunity Scholarships for Kids, which it has proposed as part of the 2006 budget. The proposal is a $100 million demonstration project that would allow communities to compete for grants to provide scholarships for private schools or additional supplemental services to schools that have been failing for six or more years. This bill is a good first step in recognizing that public schools alone cannot solve the crisis of inner-city education. We must look to all possible educational life preservers, and worry less about where children are educated and more about whether they are educated.

Nationally, a tremendous mismatch exists between the number of children eligible to transfer from failing to better-performing public schools under NCLB and the number of seats available in better-performing public schools. In 2002, the New York Times reported that in Baltimore, for instance, 30,000 children were attending failing schools, but there were only 194 slots available for transfer to better-performing public schools within the district; and in Chicago, 145,000 children were eligible for only 1,170 spaces.

For the 2003-04 school year, the California Department of Education reported that 250,000 students in the LA system were eligible to transfer to a better-performing school. Yet, there have only been 527 transfers. The notion that only two of every thousand families with kids in failing schools want to get them into better schools is absurd. In Compton, zero students have received transfers despite appalling educational conditions.

Los Angeles has by far the nation’s highest number of students in failing schools who are eligible to transfer. Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa has called for mayoral takeover of the school district, declaring that to serve the students it is necessary to “take on the powerful and entrenched interests” and “shake up the system.” Compton, meanwhile, was already under state control, which did not significantly improve educational conditions.

Regardless of one’s perspective on the specifics of the No Child Left Behind Act, clearly it reflected a good-faith, bipartisan attempt to bring our nation closer to achieving its moral obligations, by holding schools accountable and by providing options for children trapped in failing schools. The two are interconnected: without meaningful parental choice for children in failing schools, there can be no true accountability.

For more than 50 years since Brown v. Board of Education, our nation has struggled to make good on the sacred promise of equal educational opportunities. For many that promise has become a reality; but for millions of others, particularly low-income and disproportionately minority children, that promise remains a cruel illusion.

Clint Bolick is president of the Alliance For School Choice (www.AllianceForSchoolChoice.org). Star Parker is president of CURE, Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education (www.urbancure.org).

Edublogger fatigue?

edspresso — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:46:30 +0000

First Kimberly Swygert goes on a semi-emeritus status from Number 2 Pencil (fortunately, she'll still be over at Education Wonks from time to time). Then EdWahoo goes on hiatus until May. Hmmm...suddenly I'm feeling just exhausted...I could really use a break...

Children before special interests (Matthew Ladner)

fguest — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:07:10 +0000

Oprah Winfrey recently used two days of her program to highlight the crisis in American public schools, focusing attention on our appalling dropout problem. The visuals were quite stunning.

In one segment, a group of inner-city Chicago students traded places with a group of suburban students to compare facilities and curriculums. In another, a valedictorian from a rural high school told of needing remedial classes in college. Perhaps most striking of all, CNN's Andersen Cooper toured a high school near the White House that was in a shameful state of disrepair. Pieces of the ceiling had fallen on the ground, holes in the roof let rain pour into the school, restrooms were inoperable and unlit.

Oprah deserves a good deal of credit for putting a spotlight on these problems. Public schools face a dropout problem of stunning scale. Estimates from the Manhattan Institute put the nation's dropout rate near 30 percent, with rates much higher among low-income and minority students. Many who do graduate do so without mastering high-school level material, as evidenced not only by the need for remediation among college students, but also in the stunningly poor literacy skills of the public.

National reading tests show that 38 percent of our fourth-graders score "below basic" in reading, meaning that they have failed to gain the basic literacy skills necessary to function academically. These students will drift into middle school, and literally be unable to make heads or tails of their textbooks.

They don't ever see themselves going to college, and see little point in attending high school, and begin to drop out of school in large numbers in late middle school. Our students and taxpayers deserve and need much better.

While the Winfrey programs emphasized the disparities between facilities in urban and suburban schools, a more disturbing gap lies in the area of teacher quality. There is a limited supply of highly skilled teachers, and the public school system does not recognize their performance with higher compensation.

Teacher pay is typically determined largely by a pay scale that rigidly rewards length of service and credentialism, but not effectiveness. Lacking control over pay, these teachers gravitate toward better working conditions like the suburban school complexes featured on the program.

Research shows that a child sitting through three ineffective teachers in a row learns 50 percent less in their subject matter, but the students who need the more effective teachers the most are also the least likely to get one.

How did we get here? It's not from a lack of resources. The school Andersen Cooper visited, for example, is a part of a district that spends more than $16,000 a pupil per year.

That's more than enough to pay the tuition for two students to attend the University of Texas at Austin, perhaps to study zoology, engineering or do science experiments with a particle accelerator. Yet the principal of the school displayed unmet maintenance orders going back to 2002.

But U.S. schools can get much better once we put the interests of students and parents before those of the special interests.

The vast majority of people who founded the United States were subsistence farmers and had an average life expectancy of 35 years. They could scarcely have imagined the modern United States, with vast wealth and technological wonders, in which the average life-span is 77 years (and rising) and in which the biggest nutrition concern, even among the poor, is obesity.

The founding generation had little, but their belief in liberty and the pursuit of happiness has transformed the world.

The keys to transforming our schools are functionally simple, but politically difficult: Increase transparency for schools, increase parental choice in both schools and teachers and transform teaching into a true profession that rewards excellence and does not tolerate failure.

Our education system has become tragically divorced from the engine of progress that drives the rest of our economy at the behest of a narrow set of self-interested parties who guard a failed status quo.

But Americans, for all of our differences, universally share a commitment to equality of opportunity, and will not continue to tolerate a school system that looks as though it was designed to serve only the privileged.

Matthew Ladner is a director of state projects at the Alliance for School Choice in Phoenix. This column was published in the Philadelphia Daily News on Friday, April 21.

Following the money, Hawaiian-style

edspresso — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:29:19 +0000

A Hawaii education reporter has cast a jaded eye on the Hawaii State Teachers' Association:

HSTA reports on its 2003-04 Form 990 that $3.1 million of $4.8 million in dues collected from 12,513 members was paid out in HSTA personnel salaries, benefits and payroll costs. Executive Director Joan Husted now tops out the pay chart at $157,050 per year, including benefits and allowances. President Roger Takabayashi fares even better. His $160,409 compensation package is $28,000 more per year than earned by his predecessor. While teachers struggled mightily to achieve a less than 3 percent raise per year during the 2005 round of collective bargaining, their union leaders got raises of 15 percent to 20 percent.
The National Education Association claims on its Department of Labor LM-2 form that it gives the HSTA $102,000 in grants for an executive director. At the same time, $105,176 is deducted from teacher dues for an "Executive Director Option." The NEA also funnels back $410,000 in UniServe director grants. However, if all 12,513 members are paying $140 per year each in NEA dues, that would amount to $1.7 million in dues going out of state for purposes other than collective bargaining for Hawaii’s teachers.
Dues also went to the HSTA’s 527 fund, with IRS reporting of $94,221 in receipts and $5,500 in current expenditures, including $2,000 to a PAC supporting Hawaii’s House Democrats, $1,000 to the Democratic Party of Hawaii and $500 to the Hawaii State Republican Party. The HSTA’s 2004 end of year political action fund report declares $49,628 in contributions from the general fund and $30,636 in expenditures to 33 politicians -- all Democrats.
Even payroll costs to run the HSTA Political Action Committee fund are up to $89,000 for an organization that takes in approximately $180,000 per year. Other costs incurred are for automobile, room and board and expense allowance. The candidates are lucky that there’s any money left over for them after all the administrative costs.

And union leaders are somehow surprised--nay, indignant--that fewer and fewer people are joining up?

K12 still atoning for Bill Bennett's sins

edspresso — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:53:44 +0000

We're several months removed from Bill Bennett's AM radio snafu, but that's still not enough distance for some folks. (In case you were living under a rock at the time, go here for more on the unfortunate episode.) What was apparently lost in the mayhem of the moment is that Bennett certainly paid a price with one of his projects: he ended up resigning from K12, the educompany he helped start in 1999. But even though K12 has completely parted ways with Bennett, that's not enough for some folks:

K12 Inc., the science-curriculum company whose founder, former education secretary William J. Bennett, drew fire last fall for suggesting that aborting black babies would reduce crime, is on the verge of losing its $3 million contract with the School District of Philadelphia.
Following yesterday's School Reform Commission meeting, SRC members and sources told the Daily News that the K12 contract would not be renewed. Under the contract, the school district must tell the McLean, Va., company what it intends to do by May 1 - one month before the contract is set to expire.
Two of the five members of the reform commission - Martin Bednarek and Sandra Dungee Glenn - said they will not support renewing the arrangement, which requires the company to supply science-curriculum materials to each district elementary school.
A high-ranking school district source confirmed that SRC Chairman James Nevels "is strongly inclined not to renew the K12 contract."

After the near-riot last November when the district agreed to retain the contract (see the article), it's not altogether surprising. The company's line:

Ron Packard, K12's chairman and co-founder, said he was surprised and saddened by some members' statements because principals and teachers rave about the company's curriculum.
He said Bennett was forced out shortly after making the remarks, so K12 should not be punished.
"Whatever happens, the real losers are the schools and the kids," Packard said. "It would be a sad day when a company that has delivered as we have delivered has its contract not renewed."

Let's leave it to others to debate Bennett's remarks. The thing is, it's not about him anymore. He's no longer with K12--what else can the company do, perform some sort of exorcism? Bottom line: it would be one thing had K12 failed to deliver on the contract. The people in Philly are more concerned with making a statement than making a difference for their kids.

Education News for Monday, April 24

Daily News — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:57:43 +0000

Indianapolis public schools rank worst for graduating males - The Star Editorial Board last year brought attention to the academic achievement gap for black males and for males overall. (more)

Maryland students learning on their own terms - Md. School With No Curriculum Challenges Conventions of Modern Education. (more)

Milwaukee voucher schools put to the test - The requirement in a new state law that all private schools taking part in Milwaukee's precedent-setting voucher program be accredited could prove pivotal in determining whether the program will achieve more of its original hopes or be left under a permanent cloud kicked up by a cluster of weak schools. (more)

Pataki Offers Deal to Avert Budget Fight - Gov. Pataki is trying to avert legislative overrides of his 207 budget vetoes, is offering a final compromise that would restore some property tax breaks and child tax credits... (more)

A Cry in the Streets of Brooklyn Is Answered by a Prep School - In looping printed letters, which looked like the handwriting of a young girl, Thomas wrote a one-page cry for help: "I cannot read or write. I need all you people's help. Please do not turn your back on me." (more)

Come back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Cory Booker for mayor - New York Times: We believe that Newark's new leader should be Cory Booker, who is running for mayor for the second time. (more)

Milwaukee parents, former staff say voucher school lacks direction - With leaders in the voucher movement promising to take a hard line on troubled schools when it comes to a new accreditation requirement, the leaders of some schools face a choice: Shape up or get out. (more)

Pataki's last stand - People have been calling Governor Pataki a lame duck for months now, but for a duck, lame or otherwise, our governor is showing an impressive amount of backbone. (more)

LA school takeover views mixed - Throughout Los Angeles, the hallmarks of public education are often high dropout rates and pitiful test scores. (more)

Maryland school with no cirriculum challenges conventions of modern education - Justin Reed took no tests in his three years at the private school, received no grades and had no course requirements. (more)

DC public school seeks linkup with new charter - Over the past five years, D.C. public schools have lost 10,000 students, mostly to charter schools. (more)

Secretary Spellings: NCLB should reach out to minorities - Education Secretary Margaret Spellings has said that her agency must do more to make sure that huge numbers of minority students are not excluded under the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Beyond Newark's school yard - On May 9, Newark will elect a new mayor. For the first time in two decades, it will not be Sharpe James. (more)

NYT: Booker for mayor

edspresso — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:00:36 +0000

Newark mayoral candidate Cory Booker (disclosure: he's an Alliance for School Choice board member) has captured the attention of the Gray Lady.

On May 9, when Newark's voters go to the polls, the curtain will drop on the memorable and controversial reign of Sharpe James. For the first time since 1986, Mr. James is not on the ballot in Newark's mayoral election.
We believe that Newark's new leader should be Cory Booker, who is running for mayor for the second time.

Of course, the editorial staff couldn't help but take a swipe at vouchers:

Not all of Mr. Booker's ideas are equally compelling. For example, he refuses to rule out vouchers as part of his remedy for Newark's schools. He now notes with care that he supports vouchers financed with private, not public, dollars. But the next mayor should be devoting his energy to fixing the public schools, and not be sidetracked by schemes that would at best rescue a small fraction of the needy students.

Eh. Who cares? Cory probably shouldn't. As it looks now, his opponent, deputy mayor Ron Rice, will need all the help he can get: according to this, just two weeks before the May 9 election, Cory has a $6 million head start and a 43-point lead in the polls.

Picking their poison: national competition or high school graduation?

edspresso — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:36:17 +0000

Now this is a decision we're glad we don't have to make:

Plantation High School valedictorian Mackenzie Howell had a choice: pomp and circumstance or launch and liftoff?
She chose liftoff.
While her classmates are attending graduation ceremonies, Howell, 17, will compete in the Team America National Rocketry Challenge in Virginia. Howell leads one of the school's rocketry teams, groups of three to 15 students who spend the school year designing, building and launching rockets that bear a payload of a single raw egg.
When the school got word that six of its rocketry teams qualified for nationals in the rocketry challenge, called TARC, nearly 20 seniors faced a hard decision: go to graduation or compete in nationals?

So what is Howell going to do?

Howell, who was on the first rocketry team her sophomore year, says she was undecided until she considered the presence Plantation High's teams will have at this year's nationals, and the long hours she and her teammates have spent on their rockets, working through lunch and showing up at 7 a.m. on Saturdays for test launches.
''I need to be there,'' she said. ``It's where my life is.''
So she will videotape her valedictory speech, which will be broadcast at the ceremony.

Now that's dedication. Read the whole thing (including the comments, which are interestingly one-sided).

Education News for Tuesday, April 25

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:24:10 +0000

Unions' Advice is Failing Teachers - Teachers' unions have joined forces with investment firms to steer educators into savings plans that often have high expenses and poor returns. (more)

State Senate Democrats sue to uncover qualifications of state test scorers - Two Democratic senators filed a lawsuit Monday against the Florida Department of Education, saying the agency and its contractor violated state public records laws by refusing to release the names of the scorers of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. (more)

Budget crisis looms in Albany - Gov. George Pataki's efforts to enact an educational tax credit are at the heart of budget vetoes the state legislature is expected to override today, as relations between the two branches of government fall to historic lows and the state veers toward a constitutional crisis. (more)

The new new math - Georgia sixth-graders took a new state-mandated math test last week that favored concept over computation. (more)

Check back later today for more education news.

UPDATE:

Florida senator breaks rank on charter school bill - Boca Raton Sen. Ron Klein broke with other Democrats Monday on a bill that would create an independent state board with the power to approve charter schools. (more)

Senate Dems sue to uncover qualifications of FCAT scorers - Two Democratic senators filed a lawsuit Monday against the Florida Department of Education, saying the agency and its contractor violated state public records laws by refusing to release the names of the scorers of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. (more)

North Carolina forum looks at equity and choice - "To hear a school-board member say that integration is irrelevant does not do justice to ... years of struggle..." (more)

The tools to turn schools around - While the state has made great progress in the 13 years since education reform was enacted, more than 60,000 children across Massachusetts still languish in schools... (more)

Houston debuts pilot virtual schooling project - The Southwest School is the first of five programs in Texas to launch under a pilot approved by state lawmakers in 2003. The Houston, Coleman, Fort Davis and Iraan-Sheffield school districts also are developing "electronic course pilots" that are expected to begin soon. (more)

Pataki's "cruel and unusual" flick of the pen - Gov. George Pataki slashed nearly $3 billion from the Legislature's state budget, including a child tax credit for working families and tuition assistance for low-income college students. (more)

Omaha school reform on NPR - Click to listen to NPR's Ed Gordon examine how Omaha's school controversy is resonating nationally. He speaks to Jeff Howard, founder and president of the Efficacy Institute based just outside Boston.

Indiana test may cause schools to fail - Indiana schools will be judged for the first time this year by the test scores of children who are severely disabled or barely speak English, under a piece of federal law that administrators worry will sink their reputations. (more)

New Orleans schools will be unique in nation - Paving the way for a public education system unlike any other in the nation, state officials who took over most district campuses last fall say New Orleans parents will be able to chose from about 50 schools reopening this August with capacity for 34,000 students. (more)

West Virginia pre-K programs growing - By 2012, all county school systems must offer 4-year-old preschool or pre-kindergarten classes to all children to comply with state law. (more)

School choice expanding in three states - In the May issue of School Reform News, three states either created new school choice programs or expanded existing ones in late March--a trend suggesting the movement is gaining wider support among legislators. (more)

UPDATE:

Campus murder, lawwuit spur calls for school choice in Texas - School Reform News: School choice is seldom discussed in literal life-or-death terms. (more)

Kansas education chief advocates vouchers - School Reform News: One: He came to the job from outside the field of professional education.Two: He is an advocate of vouchers and other forms of choice for students whose needs are not being met in the public school system. (more)

Report: Spending increases don't improve student achievement - School Reform News: ALEC's Report Card on American Education: A State-by-State Analysis found no evident correlation between improved student achievement and increasing education spending or lowering student-teacher ratios. (more)

New Hampshire Senate passes scholarship program - School Reform News: Later this year, if the New Hampshire House agrees with a measure passed by the state Senate on January 18, students in low-income families in the Granite State could receive scholarships to attend the schools of their choice. (more)

Universal vouchers approved in Maine - School Reform News: The people of Swans Island, Maine, a town without a secondary school, voted to pay for their children's education with local tax funds at either public or private secondary schools... (more)

Barriers to innovation in government-run schools - School Reform News: After a century of failed public school innovations, pressure is increasing for education reforms to be "research-based." (more)

USA Today: Richer areas attract better teachers - Public school teachers in the nation's wealthiest communities continue to be more qualified than those in the poorest despite a federal law designed to provide all children equal educational opportunity. (more)

Ed Week: Do they really help troubled schools? (subscription required) Of the most popular organizations and companies that are hired to run troubled public schools, only one has accumulated a solid body of evidence to show that it does improve student achievement... (more)

DC schools' accounting "high risk" - The U.S. Department of Education has declared the D.C. school system at "high risk" for mismanaging federal funds, a rarely used designation... (more)

Ed Week: Low grades thwart college for some Chicagoans - (subscription required) While most of Chicago’s high school seniors hope to attend college, the school system has a long way to go to make that vision a reality.. (more)

Ed Week: Federal suit contends Dallas school segregates Latinos - (subscription required) The complaint maintains that one of the three children, a 5th grader, doesn’t have limited proficiency in English but is still assigned to an English-as-a-second-language class... (more)

Cleveland's new accountability effort - Spending continues on the district's roughly $1 billion effort, and the need to rejuvenate oversight is as urgent as ever. (more)

The real reason teachers' unions oppose charter schools

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:22:00 +0000

After hearing complaints from the Ohio Education Association that charter schools siphon off funding (a common criticism of school choice generally), the inimitable Mike Antonucci delivers the numbers on state spending in this week's Communiqué (scroll down to #2):

EIA's school district spending and enrollment tables, updated with the latest U.S. Census data, show clearly what happened in public school spending in Ohio during the three years referred to by Allen in his letter to the Times. And the effect was opposite that claimed by OEA.
Most of Ohio's charter schools are located in six of the state's seven largest school districts. Only the sixth-ranked South-Western City School District lacks a significant group of charters, and is the only one of the top seven that experienced enrollment growth in the years between 2000-01 and 2003-04.
Here are the enrollment and per-pupil spending statistics for the other six:
State average – enrollment down 2.04%, per-pupil spending up 19.53%, spending on employees up 19.83%
Cleveland - enrollment down 7.97%, per-pupil spending up 19.29%, spending on employees up 24.80%
Columbus - enrollment down 2.19%, per-pupil spending up 18.47%, spending on employees up 22.11%
Cincinnati - enrollment down 13.29%, per-pupil spending up 39.08%, spending on employees up 37.89%
Toledo - enrollment down 8.62%, per-pupil spending up 29.37%, spending on employees up 32.34%
Akron - enrollment down 8.42%, per-pupil spending up 25.08%, spending on employees up 26.40%
Dayton - enrollment down 21.39%, per-pupil spending up 21.86%, spending on employees up 32.40%
Does this mean the state and local governments are actually plowing more money into districts with declining enrollment? Not necessarily, but it seems the district workforce does not decline commensurate with enrollment. Same payroll or higher, with fewer students, equals higher per-pupil spending for regular public schools.

That sounds about right. The thing is, in the real world, when an organization experiences less demand for a product or service, said organization has to adjust accordingly. Translation: cut costs through layoffs. That sounds heartless, but as Randy Shain pointed out last week, it all depends on whether educating children or employing teachers is the goal of education.

Furthermore, such a mindset completely lacks a macroeconomic viewpoint, which can reasonably be articulated as:

Charter school enrollment increases.
Public school enrollment decreases.
Due to decreased demand, public school teachers are laid off.
Due to increased demand, charter school hires more teachers.
Net teacher unemployment levels remain steady.

So who loses in this arrangement? Mike Antonucci nails it:

If it's a win-win situation for all involved, why are the unions so opposed to charter schools? Simple. This lovely arrangement can't last forever. Eventually enrollment declines have to lead to layoffs, attrition and other staff reductions. As unionized employees retire or are laid off, and the students they used to teach increasingly enroll in non-union charter schools, the union eventually ends up in a membership death spiral.
Each teacher working in a charter is some $440 in annual dues not being received by OEA. With more than 85,000 Ohio students enrolled in charters, it's really starting to cost OEA some money.

Suddenly those union complaints about charter schools really start to come into focus.

We get love from the Miami Herald

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:28:40 +0000

There's a new edublog in town by Miami Herald reporter Matt Pinzer. In his first post, he drops a sweet link on us. Welcome to the edusphere, Matt!

Public school waste

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:56:47 +0000

EducationNews is all over a story coming out of Katy, a western suburb of Houston:

A technology vendor that has been paid over $13 million by the Katy Independent School District filed three years of State Franchise Tax Reports Tuesday of this week in an effort to restore its corporate privileges that were originally forfeited February 25, 2003, an official of Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts confirmed Thursday.
However, documents released Thursday by the Comptroller's office appear to contradict the Texas school district's earlier published version of the scope of Xpediant LLC's tax problems with the State of Texas.

Massive rundown here. Question: if this involved the Florida or Milwaukee school choice programs, would you ever hear the end of this story? We didn't think so either.

Public school teacher comes out of the closet...

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:37:18 +0000

...the school choice closet, that is.

As much as I might dislike saying it, IF I was given the opportunity to use school vouchers to enroll my boys in a private or parochial school that truly offered a better educational opportunity to my boys, then I would do it. Yes, it might cost me some additional money and time, but what is the cost of NOT ensuring your children receive the best educational foundation ?

I also wonder what the parents of children in the rest of the state of Wisconsin wonder about their state government excluding their children from the school voucher opportunity ? Does this have something to do with Milwaukee's high minority population and Wisconsin elected officials pandering to them ? Politics aside, I hope this works for many Milwaukee families as a step toward their children having a better opportunity to receive a better education.

Now to the comment thread, where Darren from Right on the Left Coast says:

Don't feel guilty. I've read that teachers are more likely than the general population to send their own kids to private schools.

Oh, but she's not the only one who feels guilty: the next comment is from "elementaryhistoryteacher" (side note: she blogs here):

Ok...I'll admit it. My daughter is attending a private school for the first time this year. There are several reasons for this. One being I attended private school and didn't feel she was receiving everything she needed because of major discipline problems in the her school including the one you posted about on the 13th. So I guess I go in the yes category that if my state provided vouchers I'd be the first in line, but I say that without sufficient knowledge to have an educated postion on them. What effect would they have on public/privcate schools? How would the funding of schools change because tax dollars would be used for vouchers? I simply don't know enough.

In spite of Darren's admonition, both these public schoolteachers quite clearly feel ashamed for sending (or wanting to send) their kids to private school. But let's set aside the higher likelihood Darren cites (something mentioned in our featured commentary and documented elsewhere). Who cares what they do for a living? Yes, we understand they feel a sense of obligation to put their children in a public school since, well, that's where they work. But if they feel that a private school is the best option for their children, why should they be prevented from sending their children there?

In short, we think this comment hits the nail on the head:

Public schools are a part of this country's foundation, as far as I'm concerned. I just don't know if private schools are always "better" than public. At times, yes, but in my district, where wealth is commonplace, the problems at the private schools at times are more serious than at Unnamed Junior High School.

Private school teachers often don't have to be certified, and they aren't held accountable to the same ridiculous items that we, as a public school are.

Having said all that, I think there's room for both. It shouldn't be an either/or situation. (emphasis added)

While we might quibble over the history of public schooling in this country, that last paragraph is precisely where we sit. What we seek is emphatically not an either/or situation. In spite of what critics may say, school choice is not about demolishing public schools and starting over. In fact, if you are fortunate enough to have a stellar public school in your neighborhood, your school will not only survive but thrive in a choice environment.

Education News for Monday, May 1

Daily News — Mon, 01 May 2006 09:15:20 +0000

Should class size be a top priority? No - Says Andrew Rotherham in the NY Daily News. Reducing class size without addressing teacher quality more broadly is akin to continually adding pitchers to your bullpen without worrying about whether any of them can even throw a fastball. (more)

State takes over Phoenix school district - For the first time, the troubled Roosevelt district of south Phoenix was facing the hammer of the state. In an unprecedented move, the Arizona Department of Education had ranked 10 of Roosevelt's 21 schools "underperforming." (more)

Money, race, at root of Phoenix schools problems - Over the years, however, its role as provider has led to overspending and patronage, accompanied by sloppy bookkeeping and poor projections of available cash, state and district officials say. Conflicts arose often between Blacks, once a majority in the area, and Latinos, whose numbers are growing.(more)

Orlando Sentinel: Do what's right - Mr. Bush can't see it, but vouchers stand to tarnish his legacy as an education reformer. (more)

Florida voucher ads target black senators - Expecting a critical vote on private-school vouchers as early as today, a Tampa millionaire is spearheading a political advertising campaign aimed at persuading key black state senators to change their stance. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Vote looms on Florida vouchers - The fate of a seven-year-old private-school voucher program could be decided this morning in the Florida Senate. (more)

Secretary Spellings speaks in Louisiana about charter schools - One of the major shifts coming from the hurricanes of Katrina and Rita has been the advent of the charter school system adopted in the New Orleans area. (more)

Vermont education reform advocate steps down - Libby Sternberg said she had taken a job as marketing director for a music organization in the Rutland area... (more)

NY Times: Be careful what you wish for - Call Corey Booker idealistic, pragmatic or some combination of the two. Just don't call him naïve. (more)

An ivy leage replay in Newark - The 36-year-old Yale-trained lawyer is campaigning again for mayor of that city, on legs far from the running trim of his Stanford football days, but quick enough for the street wards of Newark. (more)

Maine: School choice debate belongs in the Legislature - It appears proponents of school choice in Maine have been taking their arguments to the wrong branch of government. (more)

Vouchers, religion debated (from Saturday) - A school voucher debate in the Senate Friday focused largely on whether tax dollars should pay for religious schools. (more)

Mums the v-word (from Saturday) - Lakeland Ledger takes its shot at Florida vouchers. (more)

Smith: use money for vouchers and stocks and bonds for teachers raises - Democratic gubernatorial candidate Rod Smith wants to fulfill his promise to bring Florida teacher salaries to within the top half of the nation's (more)

Both turmoil and define Utah GOP meets - It was a Dickensian tale of two county conventions Saturday, as an anti-incum- bent fervor swept Utah County Republicans.. (more)

Alan Bonsteel: Many will fail because schools fail them - In June, an estimated 8 percent of California high school seniors will fail to earn a diploma because they flunked the exit exam. (more)

Spellings addresses testing, NCLB issues - Education Week (subscription required)- Ms. Spellings’ April 27 trip to Philadelphia for the first of what will be at least four U.S. Department of Education-sponsored forums on the landmark federal education law also signaled how far the Bush administration believes the 4-year-old law has come (more)

Models of middle school success - Educators came to Baltimore last week from Massachusetts, New York, Washington and Virginia to study the success of the Crossroads School. (more)

Hispanic students to peers: stay in school, vote - The same kids who led school wa lkouts in March and launched an immigrant rights movement in Dallas are telling friends to stay in class today. (more)

What makes a high school great? - A one-size-fits-all approach no longer works for everyone, the new thinking goes; a more individualized experience is better. (more)

Private letdown for public schools - two more research studies rain on the assumption by some that public education can be saved by wresting it from government bureaucrats and handing it over to private, independent operators. (more)

USA Today: Educators give FEMA a big "F" - Eight months after Hurricane Katrina flattened the Gulf Coast region and displaced about 372,000 students, school officials say restrictions on how they can spend federal relief money are slowing down their efforts to rebuild and reopen schools. (more)

Blasting away at Jonathan Kozol

edspresso — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:52:33 +0000

One of our new favorite blogs is D-Ed Reckoning, who has Jonathan Kozol firmly in his sights. Go here and here for detailed, pointed criticism.

Education News for Wednesday, April 26

Daily News — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 08:58:54 +0000

Florida voucher amendment gets green light from House - A proposed state constitutional amendment that would prohibit courts from relying on a legal doctrine used to overturn a school voucher program passed Tuesday in the Florida House. (more)

Florida: Reject stealth voucher bill - The word voucher is banned, because Gov. Bush and Republican leaders in the Legislature hope that voters won't notice what's in those bills. (more)

Albany seeks to give peace a least a day - The chances for a three-way compromise are slim, lawmakers say. Mr. Silver, a Democrat, appears to be firmly opposed to a number of key items that Mr. Pataki demands be included in a final budget deal. (more)

Column: Pro-choice education in Champaign schools - Once again, we are presented with stark evidence of a school board that does not listen to the desires of parents and insists that, despite being public servants, the public works for them. (more)

Come back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Iowa budget talks still on, outlook gloomy - House Republican leaders say they have an agreement with all legislative leaders over education policy changes that they contend will make schools more rigorous. (more)

Oklahoma editorial: No child left unfunded - The theory behind the Administration’s “No Child Left Behind” education program was a good one. The execution, though, has left something to be desired. (more)

Teachers testy about proving abilities - 7,000 North Carolina teachers face a June 30 deadline to meet a federal requirement for being deemed "highly qualified." (more)

Judge rules Arizona's new English language learner law doesn' t meet orders - U.S. District Judge Raner Collins ruled that the law doesn't fulfill his earlier orders because it doesn't adequately fund English Language Learning programs... (more)

South Carolina group advocates leaving public schools - The organization does not support taxpayer funded vouchers or tuition tax credits to help parents pay for private school. Instead, churches and philanthropists should help pay for private school tuition for families that cannot afford it.... (more)

Leave no teacher behind either - The president of a Philadelphia teachers union has a message for Secretary Spellings. (more)

Dan Lips: Show me the choices - Soon Missouri lawmakers will consider legislation that would encourage scholarships that students struggling in public schools could use to attend alternative schools of their parents’ choice. (more)

L..A. union story required reading

edspresso — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:16:00 +0000

Can't believe we failed to mention this from yesterday.

Some of the nation's largest teachers unions have joined forces with investment companies to steer their members into retirement plans with high expenses that eat away at returns.

In what might seem an unlikely partnership, the unions endorse investment providers, even specific products, and the companies reciprocate with financial support. They sponsor union conferences, advertise in union publications or make direct payments to union treasuries.

The investment firms more than recoup their money through sales of annuities and other high-fee products to teachers for their 403(b) plans — personal retirement accounts similar to 401(k)s.

New York State United Teachers, for instance, receives $3 million a year from ING Group for encouraging its 525,000 members to invest in an annuity sold by the Dutch insurance giant.

The National Education Assn., the largest teachers union in the country with 2.7 million members, collected nearly $50 million in royalties in 2004 on the sale of annuities, life insurance and other financial products it endorses.

Teachers unions across the country — including those in Las Vegas and San Diego and statewide teacher associations in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Oregon — have struck their own endorsement deals.

Unions in Dallas, Miami, Phoenix, Seattle and Atlanta, among others, refer members to products approved by the NEA and typically receive a share of endorsement revenue in return.

Many teachers say they presume an endorsement means their union has used its clout to get the best price, as unions do on products from eyeglasses to automobiles. But when it comes to retirement accounts, union backing is often a sign that the product will cost more, not less.

Read the whole damning thing. If unions can't even be trusted to look out for the interests of their dues-paying membership, just who do they care about?

Reading between the lines: a response to the Palm Beach Post

edspresso — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:22:00 +0000

While much of MSM's coverage of school choice is spotty at best, the Palm Beach Post is in a league of its own when its comes to one-sided--sometimes even venomous--reporting and commentary on the issue. Today's editorial is a case in point. This is the first in a regular series of responses to erroneous, distorted reporting and commentary in Florida media in general and the Palm Beach Post in particular.

And here we go:

Gov. Bush started the "Just Read, Florida!" program. But the Legislature is considering voucher bills that show why it isn't enough to "just read." Floridians have to think about what they read.

Those who "just read" this year's voucher bills and amendments could conclude that they aren't voucher bills at all. The word voucher is banned, because Gov. Bush and Republican leaders in the Legislature hope that voters won't notice what's in those bills. Polls have shown that most Floridians oppose vouchers.

As we've pointed out earlier (along with Eduwonk), it depends on how the question is worded. Thanks in no small part to the work of newspapers like the PBP, the dreaded "v" word has become hopelessly loaded. But when the poll question is posed such that people are told what the term actually means--giving children a publicly-funded scholarship to attend a higher-performing public or private school--the poll numbers tend to shift in the other direction.

The House (in HJR 1573) and Senate (in SJR 2234) are considering an amendment that, if voters approve it in November, would overturn the Florida Supreme Court's January ruling that the Florida Constitution does not allow the direct use of tax money to provide vouchers for use at private schools. Rather than tell the plain truth - that this amendment, after an interim step by the state, would give a voucher to any student who wanted one - voucher backers have crafted language designed to appeal to all.

Aside from the editorial's attempt to channel Hillary Clinton from back in February, the other portion of the PBP's argument--that vouchers would suck the treasury dry--completely ignores nearly two decades of experience in Milwaukee, Cleveland and Washington, D.C. What they're complaining about hasn't happened. Because it's up to the legislature, not the courts, to determine policy. What happened in Florida is a prime example of what happens when judges try to make policy from the bench. Moving right along:

"Every child deserves an equal opportunity to obtain a high quality education, regardless of his or her family's income, religion, or race," the proposed amendment declares. Therefore, "The Legislature may enact and publicly fund pre-kindergarten through college education programs, without regard to the religious nature of any participant or non-public provider." These are the same voucher supporters who are so committed to "a high quality education" that they exempted most voucher programs from any meaningful academic oversight.

We would like to take this opportunity to introduce the Palm Beach Post to HB 7041 and S10. These are sister bills going through the Florida House and Senate intended to introduce eligibility and accountability requirements to the McKay Scholarship Program.

Oddly enough, you can check the status of this and similar legislation at the website for the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education. And you'll never believe this (no, really--we don't expect you to believe it), but said organization supports the legislation. Let's repeat that: the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education, one of the premier school choice organizations in the Sunshine State, supports increased accountability requirements for school choice programs. Not only do they support this legislation, but they and independent accrediting agencies in the state have supported similar bills that have been introduced during the last two or three legislative sessions--bills that lawmakers on both sides have kicked around, used as pawns, fought over and generally left for dead as the congressional session drew to a close.

See, one of the most tiring misconceptions about school choice programs is that schools operate entirely free of any sort of oversight. So it's time for another real-world, common-sense assertion: if a parent sees that his/her child is not learning, said parent will take his/her kid and tuition and move elsewhere. It is in a school's best interests to demonstrate to a parent that it is doing what it is being paid to do. Therefore, no school in its right mind will operate without meaningful testing. Believe it or not (again, we expect you probably won't), most private schools already administer standardized tests. In short, we suggest that the constant demands for increased accountability are another way of saying parents are too stupid to see if a school is working. But to fill in the gaps, the legislation currently pending in the Florida legislature would require all schools participating in the McKay program to administer a norm-referenced test recognized by the Department of Education.

Now, we certainly aren't going to go so far as to say that all choice schools and activists support this legislation. Some don't. But many do. Because they see the realities of the situation in Florida, and are willing to meet up halfway to show that, no, tax dollars aren't being wasted in this program. So to assert that choice schools are trying to dodge accountability requirements--in essence, to accuse them of trying to game the system--is disingenuous to say the least.

The Senate also is considering a bill (SB 2234) that would let students in the unconstitutional voucher program - the first, one of three the state operates - continue to receive vouchers. How? Rather than take the money directly from the treasury, corporations could donate up to $5 million for private "scholarships" - then get a dollar-for-dollar tax break. That method already pays for some vouchers in Florida, but the Supreme Court hasn't considered their constitutionality. Based on the court's rejection of the original voucher plan, however, the so-called "corporate tax vouchers" also are unconstitutional.

Now we're playing judge, jury and executioner? Hey, fine by us; it's your paper. (By the way, nice sneer quotes on "scholarship".) We won't deny that the Supreme Court ruling definitely places the McKay program and tax credit program in jeopardy. But why stop at K-12? The state of Florida offers a wide array of university financial aid. If the Supreme Court's decision is going to be applied based on a church-and-state question, then the Florida Student Assistance Grant Program and the Florida Bright Futures Scholarship Program, which allow funds to be used at private religious schools, had better be shut down.

And while we're on the subject of the Suprem e Court decision, let's talk about uniformity. If you were to stop and think for a minute, the majority opinion wasn't nearly as favorable as you would believe. As Frederick Hess and Andrew Rotherham pointed out:

While the majority in the court decision seems not to have thought of it, any effort to honestly or faithfully apply their decision spells a death sentence for a number of popular reforms in Florida and sets an unfortunate precedent for elsewhere. Public charter schooling? Certainly not uniform in provision or operations. Specialty schools and tutoring programs? Neither uniformly available nor operationally standard. Programs for gifted students? Hardly uniform. Efforts by some districts to promote collaborative management, reward outstanding teachers, or adopt new curricular models? None of this is uniform either.

Nor should these or other ideas be uniform. Standardization was a reasonable goal sixty years ago, when fewer than half of Americans graduated high school and attention to sameness may have been the only sensible way to pursue equitable educational provision. We have seen how that experiment turned out, however. It worked okay for many students, especially those in comfortable communities, but standardized schools proved to be profoundly unsuccessful at educating those with nonstandard needs.
(snip)
In searching for every conceivable wrench to throw at the Florida voucher program, the Florida decision brings to mind Roe v. Wade. Just as many supporters of a woman's right to choose now realize how the shaky legal reasoning of Roe and the ensuing politics have hurt rather than helped their cause, so those who oppose vouchers but believe in choice and customization may find themselves grasping a Pyrrhic victory in Florida. Let the NAACP and the National School Boards Association beware.

So is this where we're going to go, Palm Beach Post? If we're going to demand an equal or "uniform" education for all, then we're going to have equality in mediocrity. Moving on:

Rather than tell the plain truth - that this bill is a dodge to continue an illegal voucher program - the measure claims that its goal is to "enable children in this state to achieve a greater level of excellence in their education." These tactics are more of the same from a governor and Legislature who have refused to pay for "a greater level of excellence" in education.

"Refused to pay". This is probably one of our favorite assertions of all, because it's such fun to shoot down! This is the governor's budget proposal for 2006-2007. We chose this particular snapshot of the budget because a) it shows education spending as a percentage of the total budget, and b) if the governor really is the cheapskate the PBP is making him out to be, then it's almost certainly lowballed from where the final budget will end up.

Well, what does Bush propose to spend? A total of $21 billion. That's 34 percent of the total budget, and nearly half (49 percent) of the general fund. Either way, it's the single largest item in the budget--it's more than Health and Human Services, and it positively dwarfs Public Safety and Transportation and Economic Development.

So here's yet another real-world question for the Palm Beach Post: the state is already spending one-third of all its available resources and nearly one-half of state funds on K-12. Just how much more money do you want to spend? And just where do you propose we pull it from? Health and Human Services? Maybe transportation? Oh, wait--you want to raise taxes!

And lest we be accused of taking too much of a macro view on this, let's go to the Friedman Foundation, which has done the heavy lifting on per-student spending in the Sunshine State: combined with funding through capital costs and debt service, Florida spent a total of more than $22 billion on education, or $8,735 per student, in 2003-04. That would be right in line with national averages. And yet it's not enough?

You know, suddenly those shrill cries of "accountability for voucher schools!" are looking rather deflated in the face of this level of spending. Literally tens of billions of dollars spent, year after year, and still nothing to show for it? Who's unaccountable now?

That's why Florida is near the bottom in every credible ranking of per-pupil school spending. Just read, Florida. Just read between the lines.

Read between the lines, indeed.

UPDATE--John Kirtley e-mailed the following correction:

It is Senate Bill 256 that is the accountability bill. McKay kids will not be required to take nationally recognized norm referenced tests--only tax credit kids. Worth mentioning is that the test scores will have to be reported to a third party research entity and a public report issued on longitudinal gains every year.

¡Mejor no hay! Hispanic kids and robotics competition

edspresso — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:47:26 +0000

Want proof that we really are fans of public schools? Blogosphere denizens may remember this story about a group of Latino immigrant kids from Phoenix's Carl Hayden High School that creamed a bunch of schools (including MIT and Cambridge) in an underwater robotics competition. The school has continued to sponsor a team, and the Arizona Republic has the latest:

For these teens, there's much more at stake in learning about engineering and building robots than just winning. The 2004 win transformed their school and changed the course of their lives.

The team has grown from a dozen kids to 50, attracting students from across campus and in different areas of study. It operates like a little corporation promoting a stand-out athletic team, with some students creating brochures, videotaping practice runs or raising money, while others program, design and build robots. Even the cheerleaders come to matches.

"We used to be known as an underperforming school," said Annalisa Regalado, 17. "Now we're known as the robot school."

And now every senior on the robotics team at Carl Hayden in the past three years - about 25, so far - has gone into the military or college, most on full scholarships. All six of this year's seniors are going to college on full scholarships.

Understand, Hayden High School is in west Phoenix--the barrio, in the biggest sense of the word. A bunch of inner-city immigrant kids manage to outrun and outsmart the best engineering schools around, doing more with less than any other school in the nation. Sort of like Rocket Boys crossed with Stand and Deliver for the new millennium.

Teachers blogging anonymously

edspresso — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:48:50 +0000

First of all, this blogger has some empathy for those who choose to blog anonymously due to work constraints. I did so for a year while in a different line of work. We've all heard the usual reasons: it could put my job in jeopardy, I don't want to harm my current employer, I fear retribution, et cetera.

However, that empathy starts to hit some limits when anonymous bloggers start lobbing hand grenades at their current employers or dishing dirt on co-workers. I'm not necessarily saying they shouldn't let their hair down in the blogosphere--sometimes certain workplace shenanigans deserve a bit of sunlight, and having a place to vent can be therapeutic--but said blogger knows or should be aware that he/she is taking an awfully big risk by doing so. (Note: during the time I blogged anonymously, I never wrote about work at all.)

As you might have surmised, all this is inspired by the suspension/firing of a Chicago teacher who blogged anonymously and very critically about his high school. (The original blog has since been taken off of Blogspot, but go here for a sample post. Warning: graphic in places.) The thing is, he's hardly alone--there are plenty of other teachers blogging anonymously.

So I'm curious. I'd like to hear from other anonymous teacherbloggers out there. (Note the qualification: I'm specifically looking to hear from teachers who are blogging incognito.) Here are my questions:

Why do you blog?
How concerned are you that your identity will be revealed? Are there any measures you've taken to help protect your anonymity?
How much do you blog about school? If you do blog about events at school, can you explain why?
What has your best blogging moment been? Your worst?

In the effort to protect identities, feel free to post answers to these questions on your own blog; link back to the post, and we should get a trackback. If you prefer, you can forward me responses to editorREMOVETHIS at edspresso dot com and I'll post them. (Yes, of course your identity will stay completely confidential.)

Education News for Thursday, April 27

edspresso — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:10:01 +0000

House rejects plan to set up school voucher program - By one vote, the Louisiana House of Representatives rejected a plan to set up a voucher program for students attending New Orleans' worst public schools. (more)

Legislature Overrides Most Budget Vetoes, but Pataki Says He Will Block Some Items - The Legislature overrode almost all of Gov. George Pataki's 207 budget vetoes yesterday, including one for a $330 per child tax credit that Pataki had wanted to direct to education. (more)

Dropouts Build New Foundations at D.C. Charter School - An in-depth look at a Washington, D.C. charter school that works with kids given up for lost by public schools. (more)

A smaller, better L.A. Unified - A former California Assembly speaker says that L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plan to take over the Los Angeles Unified School District doesn't address its biggest problem: runaway bureaucracy. (more)

School choice is made easier - The Aiken County, South Carolina school board recently approved a plan to re-engineer the district's school choice program, which will make transferring easier beginning in the 2007-08 school year. (more)

Teachers stage `blue flu' protest - To protest several aspects of state education policy, a few dozen Palm Beach County teachers joined their counterparts across South Florida by catching the symbolic "blue flu" and attending work dressed in blue yesterday. (more)

Court: State still can't fund religious schools - For the second time in a decade, Maine's highest court upheld a state law banning state funding of religious schools. (more)

Record school budget settled - Florida lawmakers have agreed on a record education budget that will increase K-12 spending by nearly $1.8 billion. (more)

Chicago principals flunk more than 1,000 teachers - For the second year in a row, Chicago Public Schools principals dumped more than 1,000 non-tenured teachers, citing poor classroom management as the top reason. (more)

Check back later today for more education news.

UPDATE:

LA Board of Education president visits Capital over takeover plan - Los Angeles Board of Education President Marlene Canter quietly traveled to Sacramento on Wednesday to discuss with state lawmakers the ongoing battle for control of the city school district. (more)

PBP editorial: Can FCAT graders make the grade? - Gov. Bush, in the latest flap and in other FCAT decisions, has tried to ensure that there is no complete record of results on which he can be judged. It's kind of shameful, to be honest with you. (more)

Democrat senator prevents "lock down" against Florida vouchers - State Sen. Al Lawson said he supports the concept of tuition vouchers - to help poor children get out of failing schools -and that he has doubts about the high cost of reducing class sizes in public schools. (more)

Palm Beach Post take on Lawson refusing to block vouchers - Sen. Al Lawson stunned his Democratic colleagues at a pre-session caucus meeting this morning when he refused to agree to vote as a bloc against the proposed constitutional amendment that would protect school vouchers and another that would water down class-size limits approved by voters in 2002. (more)

Educating from the bench - In the Wall Street Journal, Jay Greene writes about judges ordering legislators to spend more on schools and taxpayers seeing less in return. (more)

Administration Slow to Hold School Districts Accountable Under NCLB - Heritage Foundation's David B. Muhlhausen writes about the Alliance and CURE's actions in California. (more)

Arizona Republic editorial: Kids can't outwait endless legal tangle - No. U.S. District Judge Raner Collins used a few more words than that. But he couldn't have been clearer in ruling Wednesday on the Legislature's plan to fund English-language instruction. (more)

Black parents in Maine see obstacles - Closing achievement gap requires changing school system, they say. (more)

Chartering a course in New York - Columnist Stanley Crouch: We should all know by now that the public school system needs to be overhauled, and the changes will not come about as quickly as necessary. There will be battl es with the unions, which hold failed practices in place... (more)

Californian's increasingly worried about public schools - A Public Policy Institute of California survey found that California residents hold a more negative view of the state's vast K-12 public education system than at any time since 1998, when the PPIC conducted its first poll on the subject. (more)

LA mayor wants law stripping state of board powers - Education Week (subsciption required) Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa last week called for California lawmakers to put his office in charge of running the day-to-day operations of the nation’s second-largest school district. (more)

NY Times:Hurricane evacuees struggle on tests - Math scores for fifth-grade students displaced to Texas after last year's hurricanes are lagging significantly, mirroring similar low scores in reading. (more)

The Washington Times: FEMA handling of Gulf schools criticized - Putting the Federal Emergency Management Agency in charge of rebuilding and reopening schools on the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina was a critical mistake, congressional Democrats on the House Education and the Workforce Committee said ... (more)

Indy star editorial: Start earlier to stop falling behind - Of every 100 students in Indiana who enter their freshman year of high school, less than 75 will receive a diploma four years later. Only about 40 will enter college. And only 21 will earn a college degree within six years. (more)

Call for submissions and debate participants

edspresso — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:45:22 +0000

As you can tell, we here at Edspresso want to hear lots of different voices. We've set up a Featured Commentary section for precisely that purpose. And if you haven't checked out the Debate section lately, you should see Neal and Mike go at it--the carnage has been pretty intense, and we've got another day to go!

But we want more--lots more. To that end, here's what's going on:

We'd like to see increased activity in our comment threads. So we took the plunge and removed mandatory Typekey registration. Posting is still delayed, but we figure that's enough security to screen comments for Viagra and online pr0n.
In case you can't tell, the site layout and architecture are still being tweaked. Expect occasional changes to the sidebar.
Next week's debate is between edusphere luminary Joanne Jacobs and Susanna Cooper of Preschool California to discuss--what else?--universal preschool! If it's half as interesting as the ongoing ~~fistfight~~ amiable discussion between Neal and Mike, we expect a good ol' time.
There's more good stuff to come from our guest contributors. And, of course, there's no shortage of writing talent across the edusphere, so our ongoing searches are yielding excellent results.

But we're always interested in more content. And we want to line up more debates--while we've got several in the planning stage, no debates are scheduled past next week.

So what do you want to write about? Are you interested in participating in a debate? Or is there something you would like to hear more about? Drop us a line at editorREMOVETHIS at edspresso dot com, and we'll talk.

The battle begins to shape up

edspresso — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:57:01 +0000

Shhh...hear that? Them's war drums in the distance:

Los Angeles Board of Education President Marlene Canter quietly traveled to Sacramento on Wednesday to discuss with state lawmakers the ongoing battle for control of the city school district.

The trip comes days before the introduction of widely anticipated legislation that, if passed, would strip the seven-member school board of much of its power and give Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa sweeping powers over the Los Angeles Unified School District.
The expected bill is the centerpiece of Villaraigosa's campaign to take control of the district. Board members have struggled to effectively counter the mayor's relentless attacks and tout district successes.

Boy, this feels like Lord of the Rings all over again! (Except this time you can take a bathroom break without worrying too much that you'll miss something.)

The two big issues in California

edspresso — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:16:04 +0000

A while back I read an interview of an economist who identified two issues of greatest economic importance:

Two things, I think, things that people are missing and that, if we keep ignoring them, are so dangerous that they could kill our economy: immigration and education.

That was waaaaay back in 1997. And today?

Californians are increasingly frustrated and dissatisfied with their public school system, and so skeptical about government's ability to spend money wisely that they oppose any general tax increase to improve education, according to a statewide poll scheduled for release today..

Nearly two in three Californians believe the quality of education is a major problem for the state, and only one issue — immigration — is seen as a higher priority for state government, according to the poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California. More than nine in 10 people surveyed said education was shaping up as an important issue in the upcoming race for governor.

We're not terribly surprised the man on the street agrees (albeit probably for different reasons in the case of immigration). But will even this significant public sentiment translate to some action in Sacramento? On one hand, optimism is a bit hard to come by. Lest we forget, Arnold Schwarzenegger was here just a fortnight ago. Remember those ballot proposals from last November--one of them a proposal to stiffen requirements for teacher tenure? The message from the NEA: don't you lay a finger on us, understand?

That defeat, coupled with overall poor public opinion of Schwarzenegger when he's up for reelection, might leave us with the impression that he's too busy fighting for political survival to pick another fight with the union. But with the Governator publicly supporting Villaraigosa's takeover proposal, it seems Schwarzenegger is ready for a second round.

And, of course, we have a dog in this race: aside from the possible LAUSD takeover, we (meaning the Alliance of School Choice) and CURE filed legal action against the LA and Compton school districts. (Go here and here for discussion on the filing.)

Bottom line: after years of merely throwing money at the education crisis, could legal prodding and Villaraigosa's proposed shakeup force Sacramento to try something different for a change? Here's hoping, anyway.

Education News for Friday, April 28

Daily News — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:14:01 +0000

Florida voucher controls within reach - This year, lawmakers appear to be closer than ever to enacting legislation that would tighten rules on how state money is handled by the schools and parents. The House passed its version of the bill on March 29. The Senate is scheduled to debate its version next week. (more)

Lawson's vote switch roils Black caucus - Sen. Al Lawson disappointed Democratic colleagues at a caucus meeting Thursday morning when he refused to agree to vote as part of their bloc against a bill that would amend the constitution to protect school vouchers. (more)

Bargains begin in Florida over class size - Old-fashioned pork-barrel politics could shape the outcome of today's Senate showdown over a Republican plan to weaken the voter-approved class size limits in Florida schools. (more)

Kentucy coalition calls for more accountabiity, school choice - There will not be meaningful change in Kentucky’s schools until parents are fully empowered to decide which school is best for their children and the funding follows those decisions. (more)

Kansas Senate to study NCLB - Kansas senators considered taking a step back Thursday from the federal No Child Left Behind Act but, in the end, decided against it.After an hourlong public hearing, they agreed to recommend further study of the idea. (more)

Philadelphia will seek share of $100 incentive to improve teaching - In a visit to Philadelphia yesterday, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings touted a $100 million federal fund to reward teachers and principals who raise student achievement in high-need schools, and city schools chief Paul Vallas was eager to apply for a share. (more)

Tutoring didn't pay off in Minneapolis - The dominant provider of required after-school tutoring in Minneapolis didn't produce any better reading gains last year than those for students who skipped tutoring. (more)

Ohio schools have more money despite charter school drain - School districts have long blamed charter schools for their money problems. Although they are losing thousands of students — and the more than $5,000 in state money that follows each one –– to charters, some districts actually have more money now than they did before charter schools opened (more)

4 out of 5 Mass. candidates for governor send their kids to private schools - Nothing wrong with that -- millions of parents would move their kids out of public schools tomorrow if they thought they could afford something better. (more)

Return later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NY judge stymies mother's attempt to have state fund child's tuition - A judge has shot down a Queens mother's attempt to get the state to pay for her children to attend private school... (more)

Justice denied again - Justice Leland DeGrasse gets a "C" for effort for his latest ruling in the Dianne Payne case since he has at least typed out a short ruling dismissing her plea for school vouchers for her children... (more)

Vote on South Carolina tax credits missed deadline, but may return - Tax credits for private and public schools and a higher levy on cigarettes missed a key legislative deadline for passage Thursday. But they are likely to be back, forcing House members at least to cast high-profile votes next week. (more)

Seems like Oprah can't take a hint - While at The Meyerhoff to raise money for a private school, Oprah Winfrey blasted Baltimore public schools and said she had considered - but decided against - contributing some of her millions to the system. (more)

LA mayor endorses universal preschool measure - His call for city voters to support Proposition 82 is the latest in a flurry of announcements both for and against the initiative that reveal a surprising lack of traditional partisanship. (more)

Texas Houses passes fair school finance reform - Following Gov. Rick Perry's leadership, he House has passed a comprehensive reform of the school finance system that provides a 33 percent reduction in property taxes, a net tax decrease of $6 billion over the next three years... (more)

Chicago union: Most teachers fired got high marks - One day before nearly 1,100 nontenured Chicago Public Schools teachers formally get the ax, the city's teachers union released the results of a study Thursday... (more)

Baltimore Sun editorial: Help more disabled students - The decision by Baltimore school officials to stop fighting a federal court order requiring the state to take more responsibility for special education in the city is a triumph of good sense over pride. (more)

Des Moines: Don't forget about teacher training - Training for teachers should be a high priority as legislators and the governor wrap up negotiations on education funding. (more)

North Carolina test scores up, but more live in poverty - Children in North Carolina have made some strides in academic competence and smoking prevention, while conditions have worsened for youngsters who don't have medical insurance, live in poverty and drink alcohol, a child advocacy group reports. (more)

April 24-28: Michael J. Petrilli vs. Neal McCluskey on National Standards

edspresso — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:04:00 +0000

As No Child Left Behind is currently constituted, each state establishes its own standards by which schools are measured. But should some sort of nationwide standards be established?

Michael J. Petrilli is Vice President for National Programs and Policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, and co-author, with Frederick M. Hess, of No Child Left Behind: A Primer (available here). Neal McCluskey is a policy analyst with Cato's Center for Educational Freedom.

MONDAY, APRIL 24

Petrilli (9:08 a.m. Pacific):

Argument #1: A More Rational Federal Role in Education

Surely education reformers can agree that the current federal role in education is a mess. In recent decades Washington has become an overbearing, micromanaging nanny, attempting to coerce equity and excellence from the K-12 system through regulation and bribery.

The No Child Left Behind Act was supposed to improve the situation, to signal a New Deal between the federal government and the states. The states would embrace tough accountability for their schools and districts and the schools would yield markedly higher achievement; the feds would back away from heavy-handed regulation and slash the red tape. The combination would give schools what they needed to be successful: strong incentives to boost student achievement, combined with the freedom of action to innovate and get the job done. Parents, too, would be empowered through additional information and school choices.

Unfortunately, neither states nor feds have kept their part of the grand bargain, leaving our schools under-motivated and over-regulated and parents frustrated and bewildered.

Take a look at the states. Last week brought more news that they are playing games with the No Child Left Behind Act, this time to let schools off the hook even if their minority students are performing abysmally. (An Associated Press analysis found that an astounding 2 million students—most of them minorities—are being left behind by the law’s accountability system because of these state decisions.) Last month we learned that the number of schools “in need of improvement” is remaining stable, even as states are supposedly ratcheting up their standards, mostly because of technical changes that states are making to their “Adequate Yearly Progress” definitions. States are also finding myriad ways to lower their standards and make their tests easier. This educational gerrymandering is putting the entire standards-and-accountability movement at risk—which is a real shame since the few states that have adopted this strategy wholeheartedly are seeing great results.

Washington’s record is equally unimpressive. Despite the rhetoric about NCLB providing “flexibility in return for accountability,” by the time President Bush’s law cleared Congress there was precious little flexibility left. Most of the rules and regulations that accrued over the past 40 years stayed in place; NCLB’s new “flex” programs have gone largely unused because they offer scant relief. To make matters worse, Uncle Sam added a huge new mandate that schools hire only teachers with certain paper credentials. At the same time, Washington has no say over what really matters: the content of the academic standards, the rigor of the tests, or the ultimate consequences for school failure. So the feds and the states play a classic compliance-oriented cat-and-mouse game around a blizzard of bureaucratic rules, and no one pays attention to whether students are learning at high levels.

Parents, meanwhile, face a paradox. They have access to loads of new data but, because the yardstick keeps changing and comparability ends at the state line, they actually have little information about how their child’s school is really doing.

It’s time to try a radically different approach, a role reversal in which the feds play a much smaller role in the day-to-day affairs of local schools—but are much more specific about achievement expectations. Washington would measure the progress of schools with common standards and tests, and pretty much otherwise get out of the way.

Certainly some reformers recoil at the idea of national standards and tests. (Of course, some libertarian-types don’t like standards and tests at any level.) But they should ask themselves: how else are we going to rein in the federal government and give schools the freedom they need to succeed? Ironically, the one way to extricate Washington from the minutiae of K-12 education might be to give it this power.

McCluskey (3:55 p.m. Pacific):

Rebuttal #1: Federal Policy Is Never the Answer

Based on Mike’s opening salvo, it seems we agree on a lot. He is absolutely right, for instance, that “the current federal role in education is a mess,” and hits the nail squarely on the head when he points out that the No Child Left Behind Act, which “was supposed to improve the situation,” has turned out to be nothing but an expensive package of perverse incentives. Indeed, Mike and the Fordham Foundation have taken the lead in both identifying the law’s perverse incentives and shining a bright light on states’ standards-dropping “race to the bottom.”

Unfortunately, wretched results like NCLB’s are inevitable when the federal government makes policy. Why? Because political logic drives federal policymaking, and that logic is almost always based on what’s best for politicians and special interest groups, not children or the nation. Groups with vested interests in the public school monopoly, like the teachers unions and the National School Boards Association, with their D.C.-based headquarters, lobbying staffs, and abundant cash, will always have outsized influence over federal policy, while lobby-less parents will be left in the lurch.

In light of political logic, NCLB’s seemingly irrational outcomes actually make perfect sense. The law’s standards and accountability mechanisms have evasion built right in to them, for instance, because neither special interests nor the politicians they control benefit if schools are really forced to do better. NCLB’s school choice and supplemental service provisions are largely meaningless for the same reasons. And then there’s the money: Despite abundant evidence that ballooning federal spending hasn’t produced anything like ballooning academic achievement, when negotiating NCLB President Bush promised to crank out a lot more federal bucks. He had to build enough support for the bill’s passage. The result: Between 2001 and 2006 spending on programs falling under NCLB has grown 34 percent, from $17.4 billion to $23.3 billion, yet all we’ve got to show for it is this lousy race to the bottom.

Sadly, we were warned long ago about the corrupting influence of political logic and power, but about forty years ago we stopped listening. The Founding Fathers constantly cautioned against giving the national government too much power, both because it posed a threat to liberty and because a national government simply could not handle most matters as well as the states or people. That is why the Constitution gives the federal government no authority whatsoever over education. Unfortunately, too many politicians and self-serving special interests have decided to ignore the Constitution, and political logic now reigns supreme. Imposing federal standards would only compound the problem.

Fortunately, despite our transgressions, American education can be saved, and the key is related to Mike’s assertion that “some libertarian-types don’t like standards and tests at any level.” As a libertarian myself, I can honestly say that he is wrong: Many of us love standards, so long as they aren’t forged in politics and imposed by government. The standards we like are consumer-driven, the kind we benefit from every day. For instance, I can go to a McDonald’s anywhere in America and almost always get the burger I expect and demand. Why? Because Ronald McDonald knows that if his standards drop – or Wendy’s get better – I can leave. The same holds true for almost every product or service we buy, from automobiles to magazine subscriptions.

It is this kind of accountability – accountability built on individual freedom and market incentives – that libertarians like, and that holds the key to fixing American education. It is only when parents are allowed to exercise full school choice, and government stops trying to impose things like national standards and tests, that we will see real accountability and progress in American education.

TUESDAY, APRIL 25

Petrilli (9:04 a.m. Pacific):

Argument #2: Equity

Neal is right that we agree on a lot. We would both like the federal government to get out of the business of micromanaging our schools, and we both support expanded parental choice in education. But worry not, readers who seek a real debate. Neal’s dead wrong when he claims that federal policy is the domain most subject to education group politics.

Let’s take a look at this statement of his: “Unfortunately, wretched results like NCLB’s are inevitable when the federal government makes policy. Why? Because political logic drives federal policymaking, and that logic is almost always based on what’s best for politicians and special interest groups, not children or the nation. Groups with vested interests in the public school monopoly, like the teachers unions and the National School Boards Association, with their D.C.-based headquarters, lobbying staffs, and abundant cash, will always have outsized influence over federal policy, while lobby-less parents will be left in the lurch.”

Set aside for the moment that all of these “powerful” groups vigorously opposed NCLB, and yet it passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities. Go back and replace “federal government” with “school board” in the statements above and you’ll find an even greater truth: it’s at the local level, not in Washington, where the education blob is strongest. It’s at the local level where low voter turnout allows teachers unions to elect their own hand-picked candidates. It’s at the local level where the education monopoly keeps parents in the dark and tells them to accept the crumbs they are given. And, most critically, it’s at the local level where standards have been set for decades—in a way that’s been disastrous for poor and minority children.

This brings us back to the larger standards-and-accountability debate. Neal claims that he is not opposed to standards, but the McStandards of which he writes are not really standards, they are consumer preferences. If Neal wants to eat Big Macs for lunch everyday, it doesn’t bother me a bit. But if Neal’s children get a McNugget kind of education, one that doesn’t prepare them for productive life in our democracy and economy, it bothers me a lot. After all, education is not just a private good, it’s a public good, and we all benefit if all of the nation’s children are well-educated. And we know from voucher and charter school programs that some parents will choose to send their children to schools that are academically abysmal; choice is necessary but not sufficient.

We also know what happens when standards are set at the local level. They are uneven. Affluent communities tend to aim high, treating Advanced Placement exams as de facto standards. Schools in low-income areas tended to aim lower, shooting for minimum competency and basic skills. The result? Today, the average African-American 12th grader graduates with the reading and math skills of the average white 8th grader. This is awful news for all of us.

Thankfully, we know that setting rigorous statewide standards and holding schools accountable for them is a strategy that works. Massachusetts students, for example, have made tremendous gains on the National Assessment of Educational Progress over the past decade, pushing the state to the top in most categories. The Bay State’s poor and minority students have made especially impressive strides. The state’s small charter schools program can’t claim much of the credit; it was the development of clear standards, rigorous assessments, and real accountability for schools and students that made the difference.

Yet Massachusetts is the exception, not the rule; most states are moving in the opposite direction, lowering their standards and playing games with accountability. So we are left with a conundrum. If we leave standard-setting to parents, we will have customer satisfaction but no guarantees of high student achievement. If we leave it up to local communities, we will exacerbate our system’s inequities. If we leave it up to the states, the “race to the bottom” will continue. We are left with one good option: set the standards at the national level, so that all schools and students are held to the same, high standards, such as those that have driven reform in Massachusetts. In fact, I could imagine a certain New England governor taking his state’s excellent standards with him to Washington if he were elected president. That’s the kind of “bottom-up” reform of which our founders could be proud.

McCluskey (5:19 p.m. Pacific):

Rebuttal #2: If I Were a Monopolist, Where Would I Go? The Federal Government!

I think Mike and I would agree that public education is a monopoly that primarily serves the people it employs, a group Mike calls the “blob.” Now, what does a monopolist do? He tries to control as many customers as he can. That’s a problem for Mike: The history of American education shows that public schooling has been driven by a relentless effort to expand the public school monopoly, ultimately to the federal level.

This was not the case at first. Until about 1830, education was pretty much market-driven and educational attainment grew steadily, despite the fact that America was still primarily a wild, unsettled land. What changed? Immigrants arrived, industrialization started, and people with political power resolved to “assimilate” the new and the poor.

As time went on the monopolists expanded their power and schools became assimilation factories designed to mold students into obedient industrial workers and good “Americans.” By the end of the nineteenth century, the progressive educators whom Mike and others blame for so many of our current woes took control of the increasingly monolithic system and forced their ideas on captive parents and children.

During most of this time, the Constitution was not yet treated as a dead letter, and expansion stalled at the state level. But that’s not what the monopolists wanted. Since the mid-1800s the NEA, which for decades included teachers, principals, and superintendents, desired a federal Department of Education and a greater federal presence in America’s schools. By the latter half of the twentieth century, with the Great Society, creation of the U.S. Department of Education, and forays into national standards and accountability, they got it.

Despite the monopolists’ progress at the federal level, it’s true that much of their power is concentrated locally and with states. But that is only because education is not yet totally federalized, not because the Blob prefers state and local control. In addition, while it is true that many of the monopolists opposed NCLB, they still love federal control. It’s just that they wanted to be in charge of the new law and get more money in the deal.

Sadly, national standards supporters want to do the monopolists a favor by giving the federal government complete authority over what the schools teach. Of course, they don’t want the Blob to make the new national curriculum, so Mike and company must expect to control the standards. But that is an unreasonable expectation. Except in rare instances, the Blob has almost always eventually gotten what it wanted, and would almost certainly take over national standards.

Of course, what right do Mike and others have to impose national standards on parents and children, anyway?

Mike predicates their “right” on the “public good.” But history teaches us something about that as well. Assimilationists used the same justification to force children into industrial-prep schools, and progressives used it to wrest control of education from “lay” people, leading to our current education disaster.

Why have the keepers of the “public good” been such failures? Perhaps due to their tendency to view top-down control as good – as long as they are on top. Mike wears such blinders in his argument that national standards will work based on the fact that Massachusetts, which has “rigorous” standards, is performing better on NAEP than states with lesser standards.

Should we really model policy around the least hideously performing state in a completely broken system because it is doing better than anyone else? That makes no sense.

What does make sense is to look at systems outside of public schooling that work and see what makes them tick. Thankfully, we have abundant examples to examine. Consider the computer industry, where the cheapest machines, affordable to almost anyone, vastly outperform even the greatest computers of a decade or two ago. Or look at consumer electronics like iPods and DVD players, which advance technologically at remarkable rates. Imagine if education improved so quickly.

What drives these industries’ success? Free market accountability imposed by millions of consumers making individual decisions, not “experts” who presume to know what’s best for everyone.

Expert control has been an utter failure, and free choice a resounding success, which leaves Mike with just one weak argument: The market can’t “guarantee…high student achievement.” On an individual level, it’s true: With choice some people will make bad decisions. For the vast majority, however, results will be excellent, while with “expert” control the only things we’ve been “guaranteed” are pitiful academic results and the imposition of bad choices on everyone.

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26

Petrilli (11:12 a.m. Pacific)

Argument #3: Content Matters

Now we’re having some fun. I know Neal is getting serious when he throws around the iPod example. (And speaking of iPods, have you checked out the latest and greatest podcast, The Education Gadfly Show?) I also enjoyed the history lesson, though it conveniently left out an important chapter whereby local school systems across the south were systematically segregating children and denying equal opportunity until the federal government took action. Of course, that piece doesn’t fit nicely into the libertarian story line.

Obviously McCluskey wants to turn this into a debate on choice/competition, since that’s the only solution the one-hit-wonder Cato Institution believes is necessary for our educational woes. But alas, we both agree that choice is an important ingredient; I merely believe that it’s not enough. After all, take a look at education’s private sector. It’s hard to argue that private schools are progressing at “remarkable rates” like the high-tech field. While their lack of regulation allows them to do some smart things—such as hire teachers who lack certification but possess a command of their subjects—on the whole they are just as mediocre and fad-ridden as the public schools.

If parents want to shell out their own bucks for a lackluster private education, I say, it’s a free country, go right ahead. But once public dollars are involved—my tax dollars—then I want some say in the deal. I’m not asking for much—just some assurance that children are learning what they need to be prepared to contribute to society. Everything else I leave up to the school and its customers. That’s the grand bargain that charter schools are given—at least in states with decent charter laws—and it explains why the most dynamic sector in American education is not public or private—it’s charter. (KIPP did not appear within the public school system, but it didn’t arrive via a voucher program either.)

A fundamental question is whether it matters what children learn. Some in the school choice movement appear to be agnostic about the content of education. If certain parents merely want their children to “learn to learn” and swing from the rafters all day, so be it. If others want core knowledge for their kids, great.

That approach is a mistake. It’s bad for individuals and it’s bad for society. Let’s take individuals first. As E.D. Hirsch, Jr. has so masterfully shown over the years, people who successfully climb the American ladder of meritocracy have a store of knowledge that gives them power. For upper-middle class children much of that “cultural literacy” comes from experiences out of school, like family travels and academic camps.

Poor children are at a great disadvantage, both because they lack many of the out-of-school experiences that build this vocabulary and literacy, and because their schools refuse to systematically provide it to them. Addressing this deficit should be job number-one for our educational system.

Yet most state standards are not up to the task. The Fordham Institute has been reviewing K-12 standards for almost a decade. (See our latest reviews here, here, and here.) In any given subject, only a handful of states earn an A, and the majority get D’s and F’s. The reason is simple enough: the education system (and the faculty at the nation’s education schools) derides knowledge as “mere facts.” The professional organizations developed model standards—later adopted by many states—that are largely devoid of content. Only in states like California, Massachusetts, South Carolina, and Indiana, where policymakers or civic leaders took a strong interest in the quality of the standards and went to battle with the blob, do schools and teachers have access to clear explanations about what students should actually learn.

Neal is right to worry that these same professional organizations will seize control of any national standards and turn them into mush. So here’s a proposal: First, set the standards and develop the tests, building on the excellent ones from the states mentioned above. Make them available for public inspection. Then offer the states a deal: if you opt into this national measurement and reporting system, all the pesky federal rules (such as “highly qualified teachers”) go away. Or you can keep your own standards and tests—and the full panoply of federal regulations.

We suspect that many state officials would jump at the opportunity to switch. After all, it provides them with political cover to do the right thing. Before long you’d have de facto national standards—without any states being forced to submit. And if the feds renege and go back to their micromanaging ways, states are free to pull out.

So Neal: deal, or no deal?

McCluskey (3:34 p.m. Pacific)

Rebuttal #3: Reality Check

Sorry Mike, no deal. Your “build federal standards and freedom will come” plan is just too dreamy for me.

Thanks, though, for restating my argument that the Blob almost always controls government education. I thought this passage from your entry today illustrated my point nicely:

“The Fordham Institute has been reviewing K-12 standards for almost a decade…In any given subject, only a handful of states earn an A, and the majority get D’s and F’s. The reason is simple enough: the education system…derides knowledge as ‘mere facts.’ The professional organizations developed model standards—later adopted by many states—that are largely devoid of content.”

So the Blob really does dictate policy! Which begs the question of the debate: Why would you want to impose national standards? The Blob will almost certainly take them over, only this time everyone in America will be stuck with the consequences.

Here’s your defense mechanism:

“First, set the standards and develop the tests….Then offer the states a deal: if you opt into this national measurement and reporting system, all the pesky federal rules…go away. Or you can keep your own standards and tests—and the full panoply of federal regulations.”

Where in this plan is there any assurance that the pedagogical bad guys will not take power? If the Democrats retake Congress and Hillary is the next President, for example, mightn’t they just please their Blob friends and rewrite the standards to be as weak as possible? Such an outcome is hardly unprecedented: There’s NCLB’s race to the bottom, the track record of federal policy, and, of course, the entire history of public education!

One more thing: Even if you release states from federal regulations – a highly dubious proposition considering the government’s insatiable appetite for them – what will you do about runaway spending? Heck, with the feds controlling standards legislators could even justify programs like the pure-blubber Exchanges with Historic Whaling and Trading Partners. “They teach the standards,” we’d be told.

If Mike’s plan is the best protection against national standards expanding the public school monopoly, then it just reaffirms my support for choice. Of course, I can look at the economy around me for that reaffirmation. Or I can gaze at American higher education, which has problems, but thanks to market competition is the best university system in the world. Or I can even look to slums in India and Africa, where researchers have found that free market schools are providing much better education than “free” government schools.

Ahh, but American private schools are not so great, sayeth Mike. I agree, but when 90 percent of the education industry is controlled by a government monopoly, what should we expect? It’s the same reason we don’t see innovation in U.S. K-12 education like we do in real market-based industries. Of course, maybe Mike wouldn’t even want innovation: It might result in some “weird” schools that don’t comply with his standards. But, then, people thought the Wright Brothers and Einstein were a little unstandard.

Mike is right about two things. The first is that before the federal government stepped in, many states discriminated against African Americans. However, in contrast to national standards, when the feds intervened to end state-imposed segregation, they did so in accordance with the Constitution. It also took them forever to do it, with the Supreme Court enforcing segregation in 1896 with Plessy v. Ferguson, and not correcting its mistake until Brown in the mid-1950s!

And let’s not forget what happened when the feds decided to go beyond their Constitutional authority and institute forced busing: Lots of Americans, black and white, were outraged, more suffering and division ensued, and, ultimately, African Americans across the country demanded school choice! It was a wise demand: Research by Derek Neal, Jay Greene, and others, has confirmed the dramatically superior outcomes for poor and minority students in such places as Catholic schools and private schools in Milwaukee’s choice program.

Finally, Mike is right that his taxes should not go to schools with standards of which he disapproves. But why shouldn’t the same apply to taxpayers when it comes to Mike’s standards? Thankfully, we have a solution: Universal tax credits for both personal use and donations to scholarship-granting organizations of the taxpayers’ choosing. At last, there would be real choice in education without forcing anyone to pay for my standards, the Blob’s standards, or even Mike’s standards!

Which brings me back to the central point of this debate: If history teaches us anything, it’s that choice works and Big Brother is a failure. So why would we ever want to give Big Bro more power?

Check back tomorrow for continued debate.

THURSDAY, APRIL 27

Petrilli (8:53 a.m. Pacific):

Argument #4: National Greatness

Neal, I’m really disappointed that you didn’t take the deal. That’s like turning your back on the million-dollar briefcase.

You ask, “Where in this plan is there any assurance that the pedagogical bad guys will not take power?”

Right in front of your eyes! As I wrote, you build the standards first, before the states commit to using them. If the bad guys win the day, you push the abort button. Furthermore, if the standards later change, the states are always free to cancel the contract. The same principle applies if the feds renege and go back on a regulatory binge. This escape clause would buy us some insurance, plus put healthy pressure on the standards-setters to do the job right.

Still, it’s true that there’s no fool-proof way to ensure that the standards come out right. The lesson from the state standards movement is that people matter. Most states have done a horrible job setting standards—by which I mean they haven’t really set standards, they just wrote platitudes about the importance of learning—but there are shining examples where the opposite is true. California’s standards are rigorous, clear, and, one might even say, beautiful. The same can be said about those in Massachusetts, South Carolina, and Indiana. Take a look at that list. There are red states and blue states. What made the difference? Committed reformers jumped into the fight and didn’t stop until they won. If it can happen in Sacramento, it can happen in Washington.

Are there risks in setting national standards? Of course. But what great mission isn’t without risk? Yesterday I argued that rigorous standards and the development of “cultural literacy” is essential for individuals, especially poor children. Today I want to discuss its importance for our society.

Once upon a time, a certain breed of conservatives (led by Bill Kristol and David Brooks) promoted “national greatness.” This was an alternative to the “leave us alone” ideologies of libertarian conservatives, and summoned the memory of Theodore Roosevelt to the cause of great national projects at home and abroad. (Perhaps “national greatness” as a movement still lives; a new McCain campaign is likely to reignite it.) Developing a common civic and cultural language could certainly be considered such a great national project—and would be possible through common K-12 standards. This is especially essential as the nation wrestles with the challenge of assimilating millions of new immigrants into our economy and society. In an age of thousands of cable channels and millions of blogs, wouldn’t it help the cause of E Pluribus Unum to have all of our children learning some common history, literature, and science?

Neal’s alternative is radical individualism. He says, tax credits for everyone! The promised land, as he sees it, looks something like today’s higher education system, where Pell Grants and student financial aid are strapped to the backs of students and not just limited to public, secular institutions. Hooray, I say, to those elements of choice and competition. But let’s not ignore the downside. Back in the day, colleges and universities used to accept, as their mission, the task of building core knowledge and common understanding among their students. Those days are over. As one would expect in a market system, colleges and universities are diversifying their offerings and giving their customers what they want—which is mainly pragmatic training for lucrative careers (not to mention gold-plated fitness centers and trendy pedagogical experiences). (hyperlink fixed; our apologies.--ed.)

So yes, Neal, remake the K-12 system in the image of higher ed, and you might spur greater innovation, efficiency, and dynamism. But without standards for what students are expected to learn, you will see a different race to the bottom—a race that leaves our society and democracy even more fractured and disconnected than it is now.

But choice versus standards is a false dichotomy. We can have both. In fact, we need both if our system is to serve its customers and its public—and if our nation is to be as great as our founders intended.

McCluskey (3:35 p.m. Pacific):

Rebuttal #4: Great Like US, or Great Like USSR?

I’m going to spend a second on Mike’s “safeguards” for national standards, but quickly move on to something much more important.

Mike’s first line of defense is to write the standards before states have to accept them. That’s sensible, but doesn’t address the major threat: What happens when the Blob takes power after the states have accepted the standards? Mike’s answer is that the states can “cancel the contract.” But yesterday he said that if states don’t take the standards, they get “the full panoply of federal regulations.” Some choice. Plus, the thing that really locks states into federal control is federal money, money taken from taxpayers. If the feds renege on the deal, does anyone think they will give taxpayers their money back? Of course not, so Mike’s protections are meaningless: States will take federal standards because they can’t tell taxpayers they are refusing to take back their hard-earned dollars.

As scary as Mike’s game of “heads Blob wins, tails children lose” is, it’s not the primary argument against national standards. No, the entire notion of imposing a single, federal standard on all Americans is fundamentally opposed to what has made America great. Liberty – not forced “assimilation” or a “common,” government-created, “civic and cultural language” – is the key to America’s greatness.

In the history I furnished a couple of days ago, I reviewed how public education dedicated to “Americanization” inflicted conflict and misery on American society, and produced the education disaster we have now. Perhaps, though, I didn’t give sufficiently explicit examples. Unfortunately, neither time nor space allows me to do so here, but thankfully they are well summarized elsewhere. Read Tyack’s The One Best System, or Jorgenson’s The State and the Non-Public School, or Ravitch’s Left Back: A Century of Battles Over School Reform, to understand our sad history of coercive public education. Or just check out the daily news to see the conflict public education forces: There are constant battles over Intelligent Design, homosexuality and religious expression, the International Baccalaureate program, school library books, and so on.

Do we really want to push this sort of social warfare to the federal level, where no one can escape even by moving to a new state? And should we really buy into Mike’s utopian notion that federal standards will put the unum in E Pluribus Unum?

Of course, government-imposed “national greatness” has been tried before. Prussia became a great military power thanks to its bureaucracy and regimentation, not to mention a public school system greatly admired by common school enthusiasts. The Soviet Union transformed itself from backward Russia into a superpower. But, alas, in neither place did “national greatness” translate into happiness or prosperity, only oppression and suffering.

Contrast this with the “radical individualism” on which the Founders built the United States. Rather than relying on centralized power, the American tradition as enshrined in the Constitution understands that groups do not think, feel, dream, or learn – individuals do – and thus leaves individuals free to pursue what they see as their own best interest. The system is a proven success: It drives our nation’s dynamic economy. It has made ours a free country, where we can pursue our dreams and express ourselves without government retribution – except in public schools. It has made the nation attractive to millions of immigrants, who have come seeking success, a goal that has far too often been denied them by government-imposed preparation to be factory drones or agricultural workers.

Importantly, this individualism does not translate into isolation or Balkanization. Far from it. To be successful, we all must live and work with countless other people, and to do that we must have standards. But for standards to be useful, they must be accepted voluntarily; forcing them on others only creates division and conflict. Of course, voluntary standards are at work all around us, in churches, at clubs, in workplaces, in neighborhoods, in private schools, and in the now-globalized world of commerce.

Mike concludes his entry today saying that “choice versus standards is a false dichotomy. We can have both.” He’s right, but there is only way to do it. When people have choice they create standards while keeping their freedom. When their only choice is a single standard, however, there is no choice at all, and nothing good comes of that.

FRIDAY, APRIL 28

Petrilli (9:27 a.m. Pacific)

Argument #5: Choice Won’t Work Without Standards

I should start today by admitting I was wrong. On Wednesday I accused the libertarian Cato Institute of being a “one-hit-wonder” that promotes a single solution for our education troubles (school choice). But Neal’s entry yesterday reminded me that libertarians also support…liberty!

Fret not, even we “national greatness” types like Lady Liberty, too, and as I’ll explain below, one of the best reasons to support standards (national or otherwise) is because they will facilitate the educational freedom Neal so desires.

First, let’s recap the week’s debate. From my perspective, our goal with K-12 education should be ensuring that all 18-year-olds have the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in our economy and democracy. If they want to pursue higher education, they should not be limited by their primary and secondary schooling. We should not be satisfied as a nation until all students are achieving at much higher levels—and our pernicious achievement gaps have narrowed significantly. Building the “cultural literacy” of poor and minority students is especially important if we are to live up to the country’s ideal of equal opportunity.

Neal, on the other hand, aims for customer satisfaction. He expresses faith that while, on the individual level, “some people will make bad decisions,” he thinks that “for the vast majority…results will be excellent.” But what results? Measured how? He doesn’t say.

I’ve also argued that national standards will be good for our society—in fact, might even support the cause of “national greatness.” In a wonderfully diverse country, a common grounding in history, literature, the sciences and the arts would give our young people (and over time, our whole citizenry) a common cultural language. (Importantly, it would also bolster our economy and make the U.S. more competitive. Math is the same in Boise as Buffalo as Bombay, after all.)

Neal derides this approach as Prussian or even Soviet, and claims that liberty (and, he implies, liberty alone) is the only standard our republic was built upon. (One can only surmise that Neal is not a big Alexander Hamilton fan.)

I’ve also argued that standards-and-accountability, when done right, gets great results. Massachusetts is the best example de jour. Yet standards-and-accountability is not being done right in most states. Unfortunately (and ironically) the No Child Left Behind Act is making the situation worse by creating a “race to the bottom” rather than pushing states to raise standards and hold their schools accountable. The solution, I argued, is a grand bargain: the feds would be charged with setting common standards and measuring how schools perform against them through a common national test. Otherwise it would get out of the K-12 business and leave the rest to the states and individual schools.

Neal wouldn’t take the deal and retreated to his familiar position: There should be no federal role in education (talk about utopian!) and we should rely entirely on parental choice and the invisible hand of the marketplace.

Yet through all the debate we both agreed on several points. We both believe that the federal government is involved in many matters best left to the states or to schools. We both believe that the education monopoly needs to be broken and that parents need to be empowered with real choices.

That brings me to my final argument for the week: educational choice cannot work without standards—just as standards cannot work without choice.

Credit goes to my boss, Checker Finn, for first explaining this maxim. As he says, standards-based reform and choice-based reform are each the solution to the other’s fatal flaws. Standards-based reform is good at identifying failing schools, but it isn’t good at all at fixing them or creating alternatives to them. That’s where choice—and “new schools” mechanisms like charter schools—come in. Choice-based reform, on the other hand, is good at providing options to parents and boosting the supply of new schools, but it isn’t good at all at giving parents the information they need to choose wisely. That’s where standards and tests—and the public information they spawn—come in.

Neal says that “voluntary standards” will do the trick. Yet that’s what we have now. If you’re a parent in the Washington, DC area and want to choose the best elementary school for your daughter, you have a lot of choices and not a lot of information. Sure, if you’re looking at public schools, you can find test score data, though it’s based on different standards in the District of Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland. How to make sense of it? You might ask parents or consult books to get impressions, but the prestige of the school is probably based more on the social class of the students who attend the institution than the learning that happens there. (There’s your “voluntary standards,” Neal.) If you want to consider a private school, you have even less information, since these institutions don’t participate in state testing and rarely make any test-scores available to their customers. Of course, if you’re poor, you have fewer choices (obviously) and less information, since much of these data are only tapped through certain social networks.

As explained earlier, Neal has a theory that choice and competition will lead to excellence. He might be right—but only if consumers have good, reliable, comparable information about the quality of schools and their outcomes in terms of student learning.

I, of course, would go further. I want more choices for parents but not unlimited choices. I would require taxpayer-funded schools to meet some basic standards, or else lose their license to accept pub lic funds. This is hard to enforce, as we know from charter school authorizers who have attempted to close schools that are failing academically but still popular with parents and students. But it’s essential if we care about preparing all students academically, and not just making consumers happy.

But even if we accept Neal’s one-size-fits-all solution (the one size being choice), the only way parents will get this information that is so essential is if we have a common measurement of school quality. And that means a national standard.

So Neal, reject my calls for a new federal role in education. Ignore my pleas for “national greatness” or “cultural literacy.” But for the sake of your own dreams of educational freedom, isn’t it time to admit that national standards are an essential part of the picture?

Thanks for the great debate.

—MJP

McCluskey (4:03 p.m. Pacific):

Rebuttal #5: Choice Must Be the Standard

Mike and I both want the best education system possible. Our difference is that while I know only freedom and choice will deliver that system, he thinks government must create it. When will he learn the lessons of history?

As I’ve established, the story of American public education is one of ever-increasing centralization. Indeed, it is centralization that has kept the sort of content Mike and others want out of the schools. Diane Ravitch, for example, reports that in the early Twentieth Century the “progressive reformers created centralized school bureaucracies and civil service systems in urban districts….” E.D. Hirsch complains that progressives created an impenetrable “thoughtworld” that kept traditionalist ideas out of the schools. Mike himself has admitted that most states have woeful standards because “The professional organizations developed model standards—later adopted by many states—that are largely devoid of content.” He has also freely admitted that Massachusetts, which he highlights for its “good” standards, “is the exception, not the rule.”

Of course it’s the exception! The standards Mike advocates are rarely enacted because they are not the standards the entrenched interests – that is, the Blob – want, and like it or not, the Blob exerts huge political influence. After all, the Blob’s livelihood is based on getting as much money and as little “accountability” out of public education as possible, and lobbies for that full time. Parents, in contrast, have millions of other things to deal with than political warfare, and simply cannot compete with the Blob.

This Blob power, in addition to keeping standards the Blob dislikes out, is used to kill such standards after they’ve been enacted. Look at NCLB: After promising great standards and accountability, the constant pressure put on NCLB by vested interests has produced a “race to the bottom” and crumbling enforcement. As Checker Finn has written: “Prodded by Washington to do things differently, [Blobbers are] balking….They're demanding waivers, exemptions, and ‘flexibility’ so they don't have to change, at least not much. And to a lamentable degree the U.S. Department of Education is yielding.”

So how many more lessons do we need that giving more power to government is just providing more rope to hang ourselves?

Quite simply, if we want to achieve greatness we must let liberty work. Indeed, in stark contrast to Mike’s suggestion that the nation would somehow be rudderless without government standards, it is only choice, free of government coercion, that will establish high standards.

We know that liberty leads to the creation of standards. Do computers constantly get faster and more powerful because the government mandates it? Of course not: they get better because if manufacturers don’t improve their products they’ll never keep up with the constantly increasing standards of supply and demand. Or look outside of business: Churches have completely voluntary standards of belief and behavior, and even common “literacy” and “culture.” And then there are professional sports: The government did not set a minimum vertical leap for the NBA, or 40-yard dash time for the NFL. Players, owners, and fans did. And how about this: No government set English as the unofficial language for commerce world-wide. The reality of globalized business did.

Voluntary standards are everywhere because people need them to make their lives better. Indeed, as Ravitch has chronicled, often the only thing that has maintained standards in public education has been the freedom people have taken. For example in the 1930s and 40s, she writes, it was mainly “the strong allegiance of parents and teachers to the academic curriculum [that] slowed the implementation of radical changes even after superintendents announced them. Teachers knew that they had to go along, join study groups, and give outward signs of compliance to their supervisors. But they could always close the classroom door and teach the subject they knew best.” Unfortunately, educational black markets couldn’t save all standards. “What they could not do, however, was to revive subjects that were dropped from the curriculum altogether.”

Confronted with massive evidence that choice works, Mike is left to argue that if choice is so wonderful, why aren’t private schools doing better? The answer, as I’ve noted before, is that 90 percent of the education industry is controlled by a monopoly, and there’s never going to be much innovation as long as that’s the case. It’s also why there’s not a lot of information out there to help parents select schools: Why would anyone furnish such information if no one can use it?

Despite the monopoly’s effect, I seriously question Mike’s assertion that private schools “rarely make any test-scores available to their customers.” Mike provided no evidence of this, and we know that private school test scores often are readily available. Consider, for instance, Peterson’s guides to private schools. Or look abroad: Japan’s tutoring industry is a true market, and a huge industry ranks and explains the merits of tutoring schools. And here’s the kicker: Even if Mike were right, if consumers of private education can’t find information for a school that they think is crucial, they can choose not to go there – or send their money there – if the school refuses to furnish it. No such option exists with public schools.

So in the end, why are government-imposed national standards an idea we should consign to the ash-heap of history? Because history makes one thing clear: Liberty is the key to greatness, and government is its mortal enemy.

Thanks to Edspresso and Mike for the enjoyable debate! And now, to rest…

"Educating from the bench"

edspresso — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:31:57 +0000

Even in the wake of recent history in Kansas City, some judges remain persuaded that even politicians can't spend enough on schools:

Spending on public schools nationwide has skyrocketed to $536 billion as of the 2004 school year, or more than $10,000 per pupil. That's more than double per pupil what we spent three decades ago, adjusted for inflation--and more than we currently spend on national defense ($494 billion as of 2005). But the argument behind lawsuits in 45 states is that we don't spend nearly enough on schools. Spending is so low, these litigants claim, that it is in violation of state constitutional provisions requiring an "adequate" education. And in almost half the states, the courts have agreed.
Arkansas is one such state, and its "adequacy" problem neatly illustrates the way courts have driven spending up and evidence out. In 2001 the state Supreme Court declared the amount of money spent at that time--more than $7,000 per pupil--in violation of the state constitutional requirement to provide a "general, suitable and efficient" system of public education. Like courts in other states, Arkansas's court ordered that outside consultants be hired to determine how much extra funding would be required for an adequate education.

The ensuing circus is so sad it’s almost funny. Read the whole thing, as they say.

Channeling the Palm Beach Post

edspresso — Mon, 01 May 2006 13:31:25 +0000

You know, if we were Lakeland Ledger subscribers, we would demand a refund right about now. The paper's Saturday editorial reads suspiciously like the Palm Beach Post hatchet job from last Wednesday.

Hey, fisking this sort of stuff is what a blogger lives for.

What's the education reform that dare not speak its name in Tallahassee? Hint: It's the V-word fix. Yes, vouchers are all the rage with Gov. Jeb Bush and the Republican-run Legislature. According to them, in order to "fix" education, Florida must divert money from public schools to private schools.

Those sneer quotes really do speak volumes. "Fix" education. There are a couple of ways that could be interpreted: vouchers are a bogus fix, or the whole notion of fixing education some misguided quest, that education is fine and needs no attention. Just what are you saying, Lakeland Ledger? Do you really mean to suggest that schools don't need improvement?

It is, literally, an article of faith, because Bush refuses to hold private schools to the same accountability measures as public schools.

Sigh. Like the Palm Beach Post, the Lakeland Ledger apparently can't be bothered to pay even cursory attention to the Florida legislature, where HB 7041 and S 256 are being considered. In fact, since this is pretty much just a retread of the PBP's Wednesday editorial, we'll save time and just copy and paste from our response to the PBP last week:

These are sister bills going through the Florida House and Senate intended to introduce eligibility and accountability requirements to the McKay Scholarship Program.
Oddly enough, you can check the status of this and similar legislation at the website for the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education. And you'll never believe this (no, really--we don't expect you to believe it), but said organization supports the legislation. Let's repeat that: the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education, one of the premier school choice organizations in the Sunshine State, supports increased accountability requirements for school choice programs. Not only do they support this legislation, but they and independent accrediting agencies in the state have supported similar bills that have been introduced during the last two or three legislative sessions--bills that lawmakers on both sides have kicked around, used as pawns, fought over and generally left for dead as the congressional session drew to a close.
See, one of the most tiring misconceptions about school choice programs is that schools operate entirely free of any sort of oversight. So it's time for another real-world, common-sense assertion: if a parent sees that his/her child is not learning, said parent will take his/her kid and tuition and move elsewhere. It is in a school's best interests to demonstrate to a parent that it is doing what it is being paid to do. Therefore, no school in its right mind will operate without meaningful testing. Believe it or not (again, we expect you probably won't), most private schools already administer standardized tests. In short, we suggest that the constant demands for increased accountability are another way of saying parents are too stupid to see if a school is working. But to fill in the gaps, the legislation currently pending in the Florida legislature would require all schools participating in the McKay program to administer a norm-referenced test recognized by the Department of Education.
Now, we certainly aren't going to go so far as to say that all choice schools and activists support this legislation. Some don't. But many do. Because they see the realities of the situation in Florida, and are willing to meet up halfway to show that, no, tax dollars aren't being wasted in this program. So to assert that choice schools are trying to dodge accountability requirements--in essence, to accuse them of trying to game the system--is disingenuous to say the least.

Also: under the legislation currently being debated, test scores would be reported to a third party, and scores would be made public record every year. Continuing with the Lakeland Ledger's editorial:

But the Florida Supreme Court has ruled one of Florida's voucher programs unconstitutional. That cannot stand, so Republicans want to send a proposed constitutional amendment to voters this November that would overturn the court's anti-voucher ruling.

But this proposed voucher fix doesn't actually contain the Vword in its text. Rather, it says "The Legislature may enact and publicly fund prekindergarten through college education programs without regard to the religious nature of any participant or nonpublic provider."

So why soft-peddle the V-word? Because public opinion polls indicate that Floridians oppose vouchers. Apparently the idea is to fool the voters into approving vouchers by the clever ruse of not actually using the V-word.

Oh, please. Once again, as we said in response to pretty much the same statement in the PBP editorial, the dreaded V-word has become so hopelessly loaded in part thanks to the work of editorials like this one. But when voters are told what the term actually means--giving children a publicly-funded scholarship to attend a higher-performing public or private school--the poll numbers tend to see a significant change.

But if backers of the education reform that dare not speak its name cannot even use the V-word, they are being honest with neither themselves nor the voters. Shame on legislators if they sanction this constitutional ruse, and shame on voters if they approve it.

And shame on you for practically cribbing the PBP's entire editorial. If you want to go after school choice with a sledgehammer, then fine. But the least you could do is, you know, offer some original thought and content.

What the St. Petersburg Times didn't mention (John Kirtley)

edspresso — Mon, 01 May 2006 18:09:45 +0000

Yesterday’s St. Petersburg Times article illustrates why we elected not to do a press release to the Florida papers on our radio ad campaign.

As mentioned in the article, my organization is running radio ads in Florida aimed at convincing certain black state senators to vote for a proposed constitutional amendment to protect the Florida school choice program. Here are just a few things the article failed to mention:

I mentioned repeatedly that we had over 250 low-income parents contribute to the ads. To me that is the most powerful aspect to all this—parents who are directly affected by this program explaining what it means to them. Is it any surprise the reporter omitted the number of parents involved in this?
And just who are the people in the ads, and where are they from? They’re parents and ministers from the senators’ own districts. But you wouldn’t know this from reading the article. We didn’t bring in some hired gun activists from elsewhere to manufacture these ads—these are just people looking to keep their kids in good schools.
There was also no mention at all of the threat to pre-K and college scholarships, which the reporter and I discussed at length. If state-funded scholarships are unconstitutional based on a question of separation of church and state—which is what the Florida Supreme Court ruled earlier this year—then the Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program, the Bright Futures Scholarship Program, FRAG, and a number of other state-funded education programs which allow scholarships to be used at faith-based schools are likewise unconstitutional. (Presently the ACLU is waiting in the wings with a lawsuit against the VPK program depending on what happens with the proposed amendment.)
The radio ads weren’t our idea. When we explained to parents in Jacksonville and Orlando what was happening in the Senate, they became so outraged over their senators’ lack of support for school choice, they suggested running the ads to apply some pressure.

I wish I could say I’m surprised at the final version of the article. But we’ve grown used to this sort of thing out of Florida media.

John Kirtley is vice-chairman of the board of the Alliance for School Choice and leads the Florida Education Freedom Foundation.

Education News for Tuesday, May 2

Daily News — Tue, 02 May 2006 09:10:08 +0000

School vouchers killed by one vote; senate majority leader asked to resign - In a stinging loss for Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy, a proposed Florida constitutional amendment to protect his school voucher program fails in the Senate by a single vote. (more)

Teachers union criticized for pushing retirement plan - A New York education reform group is pressing the state attorney general to investigate the state's largest teachers union, which gets $3 million a year from an investment company for recommending its members enroll in retirement plans with high fees that often eat into returns. (more)

NSEA Went Too Far With Reference To "Apartheid" - Opinion: A new state law to divide the Omaha, Nebraska school district into three smaller districts may be controversial, but that doesn't justify inflammatory rhetoric on the part of the Nebraska State Education Association. (more)

D.C. kids are fighting to succeed - Opinion: A math teacher shares his perspective as his Washington, D.C. high school works to avoid NCLB sanctions. (more)

Council to discuss limits on private-school clusters - The Scottsdale, Arizona city council today will debate a zoning law designed to limit the clustering of church, charter and private schools in the city's wealthy northern neighborhoods.

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Choice issue opens rift in Missouri - Education Week (subscription required) - The debate over a school choice bill in the Missouri legislature has opened a bitter rift among some of the state’s top black elected officials. (more)

Bush suffers vouchers defeat - Four Republican senators delivered a crushing political defeat to Gov. Jeb Bush Monday by refusing to ask voters to rescind a recent court decision that struck down some private-school vouchers. (more)

Party-switching votes doom vouchers - In a razor-thin vote that cost the majority leader his job, the Senate dealt a second major blow to Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy Monday - refusing to revive his tuition-voucher plan for students in failing public schools. (more)

Senate GOP revive vouchers - In a startling parliamentary move that infuriated Democrats, Senate Republican leaders revived Gov. Jeb Bush's school-voucher constitutional amendment late today. (more)

Florida amendment defeat: media roundup

edspresso — Tue, 02 May 2006 13:05:18 +0000

With the defeat of the Florida voucher amendment yesterday by a single vote, Florida media is hopping today. Keep visiting this space for updates.

If you read enough Florida media articles about school choice, you start to see a pattern. From the Tallahassee Democrat:

In a razor-thin vote that cost the majority leader his job, the Senate dealt a second major blow to Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy Monday - refusing to revive his tuition-voucher plan for students in failing public schools.

The Miami Herald:

In a stinging loss for Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy, the state Senate narrowly defeated a plan to ask voters to protect and expand his voucher program that sends public money to private schools.

The Orlando Sentinel:

In a stunning second blow to Gov. Jeb Bush, the Florida Senate on Monday night rejected a ballot proposal aimed at reviving the governor's private-school voucher program for students at failing public schools.

Whose voucher program? The governor's. There are, of course, all sorts of connotative meanings: it's his pet project, he's foisting it on an unsuspecting public, it's his "scheme" (a favorite buzzword of anti-school-choice unionistas everywhere). But such language conveniently sets aside images like these, from a school choice rally in Tallahassee in February:

There were also some interesting comments from Al Lawson, the sole Democrat to vote for the amendment. From this report in the Tallahassee Democrat, which featured Lawson chewing out his fellow Dems in a caucus this morning:

Lawson said many of Florida's worst schools are in heavily black areas, including inner-city schools and poor rural communities. He said wealthy and middle-class students can afford better schools, or their communities get more attention from school boards, but that vouchers would have helped mainly poor and black students.
"A lot of these schools in minority communities have been failing for years and years. They're poorly equipped and y'all have them in y'all's districts; you know, they don't have the same level of teachers at those schools," Lawson said at a morning Democratic caucus. "The equipment in those schools is dilapidated. Some of those schools are falling down because the system has not put money into those schools - and you all know it."

Meanwhile, the amendment defeat has cost Alex Villalobos his job as majority leader. Two separate stories on that in the St. Petersburg Times and the Tallahassee Democrat.

UPDATE--Mark Pudlow, spokesman for the NEA-affiliated Florida Education Association, is being just a bit disingenuous:

The prospect of the FEA challenging other voucher programs, "is just a scare tactic," Pudlow said. But he acknowledged the union was still analyzing the impact of at least one voucher program, Florida's corporate tax-credit program used by children in poor families.

Just who do you think you're kidding? We can expect to see you and the ACLU in court in, what, June?

Radley Balko keeps movin' on up

edspresso — Tue, 02 May 2006 18:30:01 +0000

Radley Balko, who blogs at The Agitator and is a self-described policy wonk with Cato, is one of several writers on Cato's new group blog. (Come to think of it, what took Cato so long to get into the blogosphere, anyway?)

Education News for Wednesday, May 3

Daily News — Wed, 03 May 2006 09:09:31 +0000

Florida House passes class size amendment despite defeat in Senate - A proposed Florida state constitutional amendment that would weaken Florida's class size reduction requirements narrowly passed in the House even though the Senate rejected a similar measure last week. (more)

Experts say shortage of male teachers hurt students - The school year is winding down, but this is the time teachers are hired for next school year. And there is a shortage of male teachers, especially at the elementary level. (more)

Senate reverses, keeps hopes for vouchers alive - In a startling move less than 24 hours after handing Gov. Jeb Bush an embarrassing defeat, the Florida Senate voted late Tuesday to revisit asking voters to allow private school vouchers. (more)

Professor to call for greater focus on math, science - A Kansas University chemistry professor will speak today on Capitol Hill, weighing in on the national debate about how to keep America competitive in science and technology. (more)

Scottsdale, Arizona council tables school-zoning code vote - City Council members Tuesday postponed voting on a new zoning code limiting the location of private and charter schools, saying they wanted to hear more from the public. (more)

Bill could enable online education - South Carolina students might not have to go to school to get a public education in the future. They could go to cyberschool instead. (more)

Senate moves to keep vouchers - The state Senate advanced legislation to fix the constitutional weaknesses of Florida's first voucher program. The plan--to allow voucher students to instead receive money from a corporate tax credit program--comes up for a vote today. (more)

Give kids more chance to hope - Opinion: a U.S. congressman from New York explains why he introduced federal federal tuition-tax credit for K-12 parochial and private school education. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Vouchers not the answer - AFTER THE HOUSE rejected last year’s plan to subsidize private school tuition, supporters came back this year with a bill they claimed addressed a central objection: that they were pushing a giveaway to wealthy parents that would do nothing to help poor children. (more)

Tax plan doesn’t even pretend to help poor kids - AFTER THE HOUSE rejected last year’s plan to subsidize private school tuition, supporters came back this year with a bill they claimed addressed a central objection: that they were pushing a giveaway to wealthy parents that would do nothing to help poor children. (more)

From majority leader to GOP outcast - Only a couple of months ago Alex Villalobos was on the cusp of making history as a future president of the state Senate, the first Cuban American who would hold the post. (more)

TODAY AT THE STATE HOUSE – School Choice - A group of black advocates for school choice challenged the General Assembly to adopt legislation that would give parents from low-income households financial incentives if they choose to send their children to private schools. (more)

Choice Issue Opens Rift in Missouri - The proposal--a bill that would provide tax credits for donations to scholarship funds that help children pay tuition at private schools--is similar to programs that are growing in popularity in other states. While such plans have also evoked criticism elsewhere, the debate in Missouri has reached what may be new heights of acrimony. (more)

Spitzer to NYSUT: thanks, but no thanks

edspresso — Mon, 08 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

After revelations of alleged NYSUT kickbacks from investment companies and subsequent calls for investigation, New York Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Eliot Spitzer is distancing himself from the teachers' union:

State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer canceled his speech to the state's largest teachers' union that endorsed his campaign for governor because he is investigating its leadership, according to a published report.
Spitzer wouldn't accept the endorsement of New York State United Teachers union in Rochester on Friday, although the union issued a press release Friday endorsing Spitzer's Democratic run for governor.
NYSUT representatives could not be reached for comment Sunday.
Spitzer is investigating the union's practice of accepting cash from an investment company that is then allowed to try to sell retirement plans to union members. The New York Post on Saturday was the first to report Spitzer's refusal to speak to the union.
A Spitzer spokesman didn't respond to a request for comment.

Given the unions' clout, especially in New York, could this play a role in that state's gubernatorial elections this November?

Pitching New Ideas in Education (Rhonda Meyer)

edspresso — Mon, 08 May 2006 18:41:00 +0000

Our nation's vexing education problems could use a little dose of real-world wisdom. Some of the insights painfully learned in the world of baseball could work wonders.

Not too long ago, I read Michael Lewis’ best-seller Moneyball. It is a compelling story of Billy Beane’s unique approach to building a baseball team through comprehensive data analysis. Beane has consistently built a winning low-budget program by using players’ statistics to determine their most likely path to success in the game. This scientific approach, known as sabermetrics, has produced teams that are maximally efficient. The most bang for the buck, in other words.

Yet even with visible results (Beane’s major league team, the Oakland A’s, has won at least 88 games in the past 5 seasons), the establishment of baseball has had tremendous difficulty in responding to those results in any meaningful way. The traditional scouting system continues to place emphasis on a player’s “look” while downplaying the importance of several areas of statistical performance. In reality, as we all know past performance is a better indicator of future performance than aesthetics.

Simply put, the numbers don’t lie. The same reasoning holds true in education. Past performance of our education system reveals significant racial achievement gaps, for example, which are not likely to be corrected without systemic and sustainable reform efforts. Unless there is substantial change, we have no reason to expect anything different from what we have already seen.

In education reform, we demonstrate the success of an issue such as school choice with powerful and meaningful quantitative research, including graduation rate studies by Jay Greene and research by economist Caroline Hoxby. Greene’s statistics point to the strong academic success of choice schools. In discussions about school choice, many people mistakenly assume that there will be winners and losers. Hoxby has, among other things, demonstrated the power of competition in improving achievement in all public schools. In other words, with school choice, every student wins in the long run because all schools have incentive to improve in order to attract students. The numbers don’t lie.

School choice is an attempt to move the institution of education toward maximal efficiency by forcing it to respond to the choices made by parents for their children’s education. Parental choices are market forces. Of course, parental choice alone will not result in maximal efficiency unless choices can be based on meaningful information. The quality of teachers in a school makes a difference; as does the quality of the curriculum, the involvement of the parents and students as well as the support of the administrators and larger community. Until all that information is made available to parents regarding all schools, they will have to do the best they can with the information at hand. Billy Beane created a winning baseball team because he had all of the important data he needed. Just think what low-income parents in failing school districts could do if they had that kind of access to meaningful school information.

Change is never easy, and quite often it isn’t pretty. In Lewis’ words, “[i]f you look long enough for an argument against reason you will find it.” (p.298) Opponents of school choice point to the closing of under-performing charter schools. Those of us who favor school choice are saddened by the news coverage garnered by these rare schools, but we wouldn’t change the fact that we can close schools that don’t perform. That should be a realistic option for any school that doesn’t meet standards. Changing the education system is a long, slow process, but it is one so important that we dare not stop. As more parents become familiar with the concept of school choice it will become an approach increasingly difficult for the education establishment to ignore, just as baseball is having a hard time ignoring a new approach.

Major League Baseball is finally responding to the inherent value of Billy Beane’s sabermetrics system. Just think back to October 2004, when Theo Epstein used sabermetrics to bring the Boston Red Sox their first championship in 86 years, and you’ll get a sense for how innovative K-12 education reform can be.

Rhonda Meyer is director of research for the Alliance for School Choice.

Education News for Tuesday, May 9

Daily News — Tue, 09 May 2006 09:11:10 +0000

Bush sees defeats in his final session - With the failure to revive school vouchers and to curb a class size initiative, Gov. Jeb Bush learned a lesson that many governors learned before him: It's hard to control the Legislature even when it's run by your own party. (more)

Spitzer Studying ING's Tie to Teachers' Union - Attorney General Eliot Spitzer confirmed Monday that his office had for several months been investigating ties between a powerful New York teachers' union and the ING Group, an inquiry that was prompted by an article in Forbes magazine. (more)

Half of Teachers Quit in 5 Years - According to a new study from the National Education Association, half of new U.S. teachers are likely to quit within the first five years because of poor working conditions and low salaries. (more)

Judge Moves to Block High School Exit Exam - An Oakland judge issued a surprise, tentative ruling Monday evening indicating he was likely to grant an injunction against California's controversial high school exit exam, which students must pass to graduate. (more)

Closing the achievement gap - Evansville's public school chief told a group of black clergy Monday that addressing academic achievement gaps along racial and economic lines is like eating an elephant--one bite at a time. (more)

No Child may leave teachers behind - More than a dozen Madison County, Alabama teachers who have not yet been labeled "highly qualified" by the federal government could find themselves out of a job come August. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Study finds national board teachers no better than other educators - Ed Week (subscription required) Students of teachers who hold certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards achieve, on average, no greater academic progress than students of teachers without the special status, a long-awaited study using North Carolina data concludes. (more)

Unless middle grades fixed, advocates warn, high school reforms will fail - Ed Week (subscription required) Middle school advocates have launched a campaign aimed at persuading policymakers to help improve education for 10- to 15-year-olds—or, they say, watch efforts to prepare more students for college and work falter. (more)

Governor’s Voucher Effort Loses Steam in Florida - Ed Week (subscription required) - Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is in a political dogfight with Democrats and members of his own party over proposals to help preserve Opportunity Scholarships and other voucher programs in the Sunshine State. (more)

Depleted New Orleans Teachers’ Union Vows to Rebuild - Ed Week (subscription required) The local affiliate is being kept afloat with help from its state organization and the American Federation of Teachers. (more)

Ed Week commentary: The elephant in the reform room - (subscription required) - The 2006 Child Well-Being Index, released in March by the Foundation for Child Development in cooperation with Duke University and the Brookings Institution, suggests a general lack of progress for K-12 students, evidenced by flat scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, persistent achievement gaps...(more)

First online high school planned in Seattle in the fall - A Portland-based company called Insight Schools Monday announced plans to operate Insight School of Washington in partnership with Quillayute Valley School District, a small district on the Olympic Peninsula. (more)

USA Today: Science teaching gets weak diversity grade - A survey of 100 top technology executives gives the nation's public schools a C-minus for efforts to encourage girls and minorities to pursue science and technology careers. (more)

Phoenix: A district in chaos - A recent want ad from the Roosevelt Elementary School District in south Phoenix speaks volumes. The ad carries an almost desperate message: "Immediate vacancies." (more)

Iowa: Report's right, prepare all students better - High school students need to be prepared at similar levels in math and reading whether they're headed to college or workforce training, according to a new report from ACT, which administers the college-entrance exam most often taken by Iowa students. (more)

A response—and invitation—to the Palm Beach Post

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 14:01:34 +0000

The Palm Beach Post, in its usual style, breaks out the hatchet for reporting the amendment vote. But this (yes, it’s a news report, not op-ed commentary) is just too much.

In each of the past two legislative sessions, the Senate has approved legislation that would impose some oversight and "accountability" measures to the programs, but both times has been stopped by Bush's office and his allies in the House, who have wanted looser standards.
Yet another voucher "accountability" bill is on the agenda this session. It has passed the House and could be heard as early as today on the floor of the Senate.

“Accountability” in sneer quotes? So the proposed legislation is faking it? Can’t you restrain this sort of obnoxiousness for the editorial page?

This is such a watered-down, drive-by explanation of the legislation in question that it ends up being terribly misleading. Furthermore, it’s not only a “second verse, same as the first” repeat of worn-out arguments, it reveals that a disappointing level of ignorance on the part of the PBP with respect to how the FCAT is designed. Let’s first elaborate on the accountability legislation presently before the Florida legislation. Once again, we will refer to our response to the Palm Beach Post last week:

We would like to take this opportunity to introduce the Palm Beach Post to HB 7041 and ~~S10~~ (correction—that would be SB 256-ed.). These are sister bills going through the Florida House and Senate intended to introduce eligibility and accountability requirements to the McKay Scholarship Program.

Oddly enough, you can check the status of this and similar legislation at the website for the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education. And you'll never believe this (no, really--we don't expect you to believe it), but said organization supports the legislation. Let's repeat that: the Florida Alliance for Choices in Education, one of the premier school choice organizations in the Sunshine State, supports increased accountability requirements for school choice programs. Not only do they support this legislation, but they and independent accrediting agencies in the state have supported similar bills that have been introduced during the last two or three legislative sessions--bills that lawmakers on both sides have kicked around, used as pawns, fought over and generally left for dead as the congressional session drew to a close.

And lest the PBP accuse us of glossing over the legislation, here’s a quick rundown on what the legislation requires: each school taking voucher students will be required to administer a norm-referenced test recognized by the Department of Education. The scores will be delivered to each parent and a third-party agency which will then report the scores to the state for the purposes of long-term tracking of voucher schools performance. More from last week’s post:

See, one of the most tiring misconceptions about school choice programs is that schools operate entirely free of any sort of oversight. So it's time for another real-world, common-sense assertion: if a parent sees that his/her child is not learning, said parent will take his/her kid and tuition and move elsewhere. It is in a school's best interests to demonstrate to a parent that it is doing what it is being paid to do. Therefore, no school in its right mind will operate without meaningful testing. Believe it or not (again, we expect you probably won't), most private schools already administer standardized tests. In short, we suggest that the constant demands for increased accountability are another way of saying parents are too stupid to see if a school is working.

With that, let’s turn to one of the biggest complaints the PBP and like-minded Florida papers (which is to say, pretty much every other newspaper in the state) have with the ~~charter~~ voucher school program (sorry--our mistake): they aren’t required to take the FCAT. But unlike the PBP, let’s actually take a minute to examine the FCAT’s design. As stated on the Florida DOE website:

The FCAT, administered to students in Grades 3-11, contains two basic components: criterion-referenced tests (CRT), measuring selected benchmarks in Mathematics, Reading, Science, and Writing from the Sunshine State Standards (SSS); and norm-referenced tests (NRT) in Reading and Mathematics, measuring individual student performance against national norms.

So, to restate: the FCAT has a criterion-referenced test and a norm-referenced test. The basic difference between the two (go here for more specifics) is in how the test scores are interpreted:

The CRT is used to evaluate students against state standards. For example, a CRT for math might judge whether a student has learned what the state wants him/her to understand about algebra.
The NRT is used to determine how test-takers do relative to one another. A sample of students takes the test, and all other test takers are judged against that sample. (Remember “percentile” scores on those tests you took in school? Those were norm-referenced tests.) Please note that the norm-referenced portion of the FCAT measures “individual student performance against national norms”. (This will be critically important in a minute.)

Well, let’s go back and again examine the legislation currently pending in the Florida legislature. According to page 33 of HB 7041—that’s the bill introduced in the House (go here)—any school accepting a voucher student will be required to annually administer “one of the nationally norm-referenced tests identified by the Department of Education.” In other words, all voucher schools would have to start using nationally norm-referenced tests—the same kind used in the FCAT.

School choice critics demanding that voucher schools administer the FCAT do so presumably out of a desire for “accountability”—they want to make sure the kids are doing at least as well as their public schools peers. Well, news flash for the Palm Beach Post: this legislation is your dream come true. Because not only have most voucher schools been doing this for several years now, this legislation would require those few schools not already testing to start doing so. Since most voucher students have been taking nationally norm-referenced tests for some time, comparison of their performance to their public-school peers has been a reality for some time. The accountability legislation currently being considered would simply codify what has already been taking place and require those few voucher students not presently taking such tests to begin doing so.

In short, the “accountability” sneer quotes noted above were put there out of lazy ignorance or dishonesty. The PBP reporters either didn’t know what is in the legislation and didn’t care to learn, or they were perfectly aware of what was in the legislation and declined to mention it, even in passing. (Personally, we think the reporters in question couldn’t be troubled to actually find out a bit more about the legislation. But maybe you, the thoughtful Edspresso reader, believe differently.)

So why do we argue that voucher schools should be free of the FCAT? Because of the other side of the coin: the criterion-referenced tests. The CRTs are a reflection of the state standards. Requiring a school to take on the state’s standards means, ultimately, that that school will be required to take on the state’s curriculum. And if private schools are compelled to do that, they will cease to be an effective solution for kids in underperforming schools. The reason that private schools are able to routinely outperform their public counterparts is that they can do things their own way—they can sidestep the bureaucracy to innovate and assemble curricula that best fits their goals. These schools are private entities; if compelled to take up the state’s curriculum, they will lose their independence. As long as they can demonstrate through norm-referenced tests that they are measuring up to other schools locally and nationally, choice schools are and should remain at liberty to pursue curricula that they prefer.

In short, forcing the FCAT upon schools that are already measuring their students’ growth is both unreasonable and unnecessary. But as we pointed out last week and above, the major activist groups in Florida have been pushing for this legislation, and similar bills introduced in past sessions, in order to respond to accountability complaints. But apparently, said legislation still doesn’t satisfy the likes of the Palm Beach Post.

But you know what? Rather than dismiss the Palm Beach Post completely, let’s instead engage the paper head-on. Here’s our open question for the editorial staff of the Palm Beach Post. For a moment, let’s bend reality and pretend the Florida Supreme Court didn’t throw out the voucher program last January and instead allowed the program to stand. Had that happened, what changes (aside from requiring the FCAT) would you want to make to the program for it to be an acceptable education alternative to Florida children?

We’re entirely serious about this. All you’ve done since the thing was passed into law is kick it around. But here’s your chance to play armchair education policymaker. We are highly interested to hear what you would change to make the voucher program an acceptable education alternative to the children of Florida. Feel free to submit your thoughts in the comment thread below, through your own editorial page, or feel free to e-mail your response to editorREMOVETHIS at edspresso dot com. As editor of this website, I give you my personal and public pledge that, if you choose to post your response in the comment thread below or send your response directly to me, I will not alter your remarks in any fashion.

Will the Palm Beach Post take up the challenge? We’ll see.

The 2006 Joanne Jacobs Book Tour rolls on

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 15:20:00 +0000

We got the following from Joanne Jacobs on her new book:

I’ll speak and sign books on Thursday, May 11 at 5:30 pm at William E. Doar Jr. (WEDJ) Public Charter School for the Performing Arts, 705 Edgewood St. NE, Washington, DC (near the Rhode Island and Brookland-CUA metro stops). In addition, the school’s musical troupe will perform and I’ll ask guests to donate a children’s book to the school library.
Founded in 2004, WEDJ School enrolls students from all over the city. Students take classes in music, dance and theater and perform in at least one public exhibition or performance each year. A longer school day and Saturday classes ensure enough time for academics and arts. Currently an elementary, the school is adding middle and high school classes in the fall.
On Wednesday, May 17 at 5:30 pm, I’ll speak at Russell Byers Charter School, 1911 Arch St., in downtown Philadelphia.
Founded in 2001, the school educates children in kindergarten (a two-year program starting at age four) through sixth grade using the Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound program. The school was created to honor the memory of Russell Byers, a Daily News columnist killed in a mugging.
Both the Washington and Philadelphia charter schools primarily serve black students. “Our School” follows the principal, teachers and students at Downtown College Prep, a San Jose charter high school that’s 90 percent Hispanic. Most students come from Spanish-speaking immigrant families; most earned D’s and F’s in middle school and enter ninth grade with fifth-grade reading and math skills. They were left behind academically but promoted anyhow. Operating with a work-your-butt-off philosophy, Downtown College Prep now outscores the average California high school on the state’s Academic Performance Index and sends all graduates to four-year colleges.

If you aren't able to see her in person, don't forget to check out her ongoing Edspresso debate with Susanna Cooper of Preschool California on universal preschool!

Diploma shenanigans in the Bronx

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 18:46:01 +0000

One Bronx high school has degenerated into being little more than a degree mill:

Ramses Santelises was supposed to graduate from John F. Kennedy High in the Bronx in June 2005, but, he said, he goofed off his senior year. He failed senior English in the second semester and two gym classes. "I got senioritis," he said.
He was planning to make up the courses at summer school, but said that he got sick and was hospitalized, and that by the time he reported to summer school, he had missed too many days. They told him to sign up for night school in the fall. "I was upset," he said. "I was hoping to start college."
In late August he went to Kennedy to register for the night program, discussed the three courses he needed and, he said, got a big surprise. "They said, 'No questions asked, we're going to let you graduate,' " he recalled. "I never had to take the two gym classes and English class I should have taken."
And he wasn't alone, he said. "I know for a fact there were kids there they let graduate to get it over with," he said. At Kennedy's September 2005 graduation, Ramses was one of 105 students awarded diplomas, 31 more than graduated the September before.
For the last year, the city has been investigating whether long-troubled Kennedy High, which has been perilously close to landing on the state's failing school list, used several illegal methods to improve its academic standing. In February, this column raised questions about the principal's decision to change scores to passing from failing on 16 students' English Regents exams required for graduation. City officials were so concerned about grading practices at Kennedy that they issued a memorandum in March to all high school principals, announcing a new citywide policy aimed at closing loopholes in graduation requirements.

JFK High School? Shudder.

A true race to the bottom

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 18:52:14 +0000

Dave reads this week's EIA Communique and adds some interesting thoughts on school funding.

Unions for against charter schools?

edspresso — Wed, 03 May 2006 20:15:00 +0000

Katie of A Constrained Vision points out that Ohio's teacher unions are smacking at charter schools with one hand and reaching out with the other:

All three major unions — the Ohio Education Association, Ohio Federation of Teachers and Ohio Association of Professional School Employees — have said they are interested in gaining charter-school teachers as members.
The news is squarely at odds with the legal and philosophical war between the unions and the roughly 300 charter schools in Ohio. The unions are behind a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of charter schools, charging that charters aren’t held to the same academic standards as public schools and that they operate too much like private schools.
Charter schools are public schools that can operate separate of traditional school districts and are often free of state rules. Currently, none is unionized. There are few, if any, public districts without a union.
"At first blush, I think people would say (the interest in organizing charters is) hypocritical. We’re challenging the existence of charter schools on one hand, and yet remaining open to organizing," said Mark Hatch, spokesman for the Professional School Employees group.

Boy, we would hate to be in Hatch's shoes right now. Just how does one spin this sort of thing? Especially when the OFT's ~~parent~~ sister union*, the United Federation of Teachers, opened a charter school in Brooklyn?

In all fairness, there are a few charter schools in Michigan that are unionized. But Katie is probably right when she says:

Why would charter school teachers want to pay dues to an organization that is attacking their schools? How does it "protect" teachers to have their schools declared unconstitutional? I'll go out on a limb and predict that the unions will not find many takers.

*We mistakenly said the UFT, the New York City union, is the OFT's parent organization. Fixed now.

Education News for Thursday, May 4

Daily News — Thu, 04 May 2006 14:52:00 +0000

~~School Voucher Initiative Fails Again - For the second time this week, a plan to put school vouchers on the ballot has failed in Florida. (more)~~ CORRECTION: We apologize for including this erroneous news story. After posting this news around 5:30 a.m. Pacific, we called the office of Senate President Tom Lee at around 8:30 Pacific, which said a vote has not yet taken place. The record above has been changed accordingly. We also put in a call to the news organization in question to request a correction. We apologize for the incorrect information.

Accusations and delay tactics cap day at state Senate - A Fort Lauderdale Democrat accused ''emissaries'' of Gov. Jeb Bush of ''bullying'' her into supporting a failed plan to steer more public money to private schools. The accusation capped a tense day in the Senate. (more)

Ticked-off Democrats halt state business - The Florida Senate hit a brief pocket of gridlock Wednesday, with Democrats forcing a slowdown of business in response to a fight over Gov. Jeb Bush’s school vouchers program. (more)

Initiative aims to boost geographic knowledge - A five-year, multimedia campaign by National Geographic aims to motivate parents and educators to expand geographic offerings in school, at home and in their communities. (more)

Latest Numbers Show School Achievement Gap Closing - Data from the 2005 school year shows the achievement gap between minority students and whites in New York City is shrinking overall, but it's still significant in certain grades. (more)

Transfer option under NCLB could arrive late - An expected delay in grading final math tests this year means some schools in the state won't know if they met federal No Child Left Behind standards until October. The federal regulation requires school systems to allow parents to pull children from the Title 1 schools if they don't meet standards on end-of-grade tests for two years straight. (more)

Going Charter Gets Easier - South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford enacted new legislation on Wednesday, establishing a statewide public charter school district. (more)

Tuition tax credit bill shot down - The South Carolina House rejected a controversial tuition tax credit bill in a sometimes heated debate Wednesday, defeating such a plan for the second year in a row. (more)

Nice report cards - Editorial: The Los Angeles Unified School District just closed out a spectacular week. (more)

Science friction - At six out of the 11 New York middle schools that have the word "science" in their official name, the majority of eighth-graders failed last year's state science exam, new data reveal. (more)

Partnership that boosted math, science celebrated - Superintendents, college leaders and teachers in the San Antonio area swapped stories and lessons from 10 years of cross-district collaboration for science and math teaching Tuesday as they celebrated two National Science Foundation grants coming to an end this year. (more)

Education gap fix takes more than a law, researcher says - According to one researcher, expecting even the best schools and teachers to bear the brunt of closing the achievement gap is "absurd and dangerous." (more)

Restrictive law hinders charter school progress - Opinion: We believe Memphis deserves commendation for its efforts to expand quality educational options for students and families. Unfortunately, Tennessee's highly restrictive charter school law does not create the conditions that would enable more students to benefit. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

U.S. representative: Congress unlikely to hike funds for schools - U.S. representative Judy Biggert (R-Il.) voiced dismay that federal school funding decreased this fiscal year for the first time since President George W. Bush took office. She attributed that to the Iraq war and hurricane disasters Rita and Katrina. (more)

Teachers unions vs. teachers - Opinion: It's old news that teachers unions put their members' desires - short hours in the classroom, zero accountability for test scores - above the needs of children. What gets more clear every day, however, is that union leadership puts its own interests above those of rank-and-file members.(more)

Who is prepared for kindergarten? - According to a survey released today, kindergarten teachers and parents say most children in Silicon Valley start kindergarten with a good grasp of the basic skills teachers say they need--but the survey discovered major differences in the skills young students bring to the classroom. (more)

Soda Ban Means Change at Schools - Yesterday, the beverage industry announced that it will voluntarily remove high-calorie sodas from all schools, under an agreement with anti-obesity groups led by former president Bill Clinton. (more)

Florida Budget Includes Teacher Raises - A one-year, $147.5 million teacher merit pay plan designed to reward performance has been included in the Florida state budget to replace a never-implemented program that drew fire from lawmakers, teachers and school boards. (more)

LATEST UPDATE:

Senate proposes voucher compromise - Today the Florida Senate passed a compromise plan to preserve Gov. Jeb Bush’s statewide school voucher program Thursday. (more)

A silver lining in the Florida voucher wars

edspresso — Thu, 04 May 2006 15:37:39 +0000

''Students using vouchers will now be welcomed back into Florida public schools," said Ron Meyer, lead lawyer for the unions/school districts when the Florida voucher program was struck down in January.

Well, not quite:

The Florida Senate passed a compromise plan to preserve Gov. Jeb Bush’s statewide school voucher program Thursday.

The legislation passed by the Senate today would create a separate trust fund to preserve the Opportunity Scholarship program in order to comply with the state Supreme Court’s January ruling that its tuition vouchers unconstitutionally diverted tax dollars from the public school system.

Opportunity Scholarships go to 733 students statewide, providing tuition money to get out of their failing public schools.

The House must still pass the remedy proposed by the Senate.

Amidst the fireworks in Florida over the amendment, this is welcome news indeed.

Getting past the privatization argument

edspresso — Thu, 04 May 2006 15:38:25 +0000

Earlier this week the Atlanta Journal-Constitution launched this broadside against private educompanies:

Studies on America's schools appear with the regularity of weather reports, but the forecast is rarely for sunny days to come, only gray skies and storm clouds.

Now, two more research studies rain on the assumption by some that public education can be saved by wresting it from government bureaucrats and handing it over to private, independent operators.

In one study, a federally funded review of the seven biggest education-management firms, operating 350 public schools, found that bringing in private companies to run schools is not a panacea.

After reviewing data from those 350 schools, the American Institutes for Research found that only one of the seven private groups had solid evidence of improved learning. That firm, the for-profit Edison Schools, only rated a "moderate" grade for its effect on achievement. (In Georgia, Edison operates Atlanta's Charles R. Drew Charter School.)

Those findings come on the heels of another study that found Philadelphia math students in privatized middle schools don't fare any better than their peers in publicly managed schools. The state of Pennsylvania took over the troubled Philadelphia schools in late 2001, creating a School Reform Commission that delegated management of 46 schools to independent contractors, including 26 middle schools. Researchers from Johns Hopkins University have tracked the impact of that effort.

"So far, this experiment has not paid off by producing consistently better math achievement gains in the privatized schools," concluded Douglas J. Mac Iver and Martha Abele Mac Iver.

Before certain anti-school-choice types gear up to declare victory, consider the remarks of Todd Kern, Alexander Russo's ~~victim~~ subject for this week's Hot Seat interview:

What did you learn from your stint in the private sector that you didn't know before -- and that most folks in education probably still don't know?

TK: For three years I helped manage a small investment bank/consulting firm in the emerging education industry. Some of the things I learned: the “industry” includes a hell of a lot more than schools (ranging from early childhood to corporate training – or “K to gray,” as they say); profit motive is not necessarily a bad thing (and not just in the Gordon Gekko good greed way); and finally, and perhaps most important, this genie definitely will not go back in the bottle.

How is the profit motive “not a bad thing”? These are helpless children, for god’s sake.

TK: Sure, some folks might be out to make a quick (or not-so-quick) buck, but there are also many others who care about kids and view the for-profit industry as a wedge strategy to improve a public system that clearly isn’t working as well as it needs to.

So are you still pro-private sector?

TK: I’m not for privatizing the system – education is our most precious public good – but I welcome anything that spurs innovation. And the problem is so big that I think the private sector will have to be part of the solution.

With all that as a backdrop, allow us to make a couple of observations to the anti-school-choice folks. First off, as Kern pointed out, private involvement in education is here to stay. Exhibit A:

Back in 1990, when Milwaukee adopted the nation's first modern school choice program, few people thought the movement would be as successful as it is.
There are now 17 school choice programs in 11 states plus the District of Columbia. Over 100,000 students attend private school using vouchers and tax-funded scholarships--and over 400,000 families can receive personal tax credits to offset private-school tuition for their children.
And the momentum is getting stronger, not weaker. Last year, 33 state legislatures introduced about 60 school choice bills. Two new voucher programs were created in Ohio and Utah, and existing school choice programs were expanded in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.
That continues a 10-year trend toward more, not less, school choice.

In short: school choice opponents need to read the tea leaves.

Furthermore, what the AJC article was describing had less to do with school choice and more to do with outsourcing. We in the school choice movement are really only after one thing: allowing parents to put their kid in whatever school they deem appropriate, be it public or private. Farming out the work of a public school to a private provider, which is what happened in Philly and is what was done with many of the schools in the study cited, isn't the same thing.

Which brings us to the more fundamental point of what we want to change. We're not arguing "that public education can be saved by wresting it from government bureaucrats and handing it over to private, independent operators". What we are saying is that educational decisions should be wrested from the grip of government bureaucrats and turned over to the parents.

We say Kern hit the nail squarely on the head with respect to the ultimate direction of school choice. Simply put, it's not a zero-sum game. In spite of accusations to the contrary, parental choice in education does not translate to dynamiting the public school system currently in existence and making private companies the only providers in existence; it means giving parents as wide an array of educational options as possible.

Let's say you're upper-middle class, earning well into six figures. You can live pretty much wherever you want, so you've moved to the suburbs where there are some high-quality public schools nearby recognized for their excellence. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Not only should your child be entitled to continue attending that school, but that school would only continue to thrive under true school choice.

What is most interesting is the choice schools that seem to achieve the most success are nonprofits. Two of the more storied examples from the Milwaukee program, Notre Dame Middle School and Messmer High School are Catholic schools (insert ACLU shrieking and lawsuits), so they're hardly in it for the almighty dollar.

To sum up: we see the privatization argument as more than a bit silly. Just as the Internet will coexist with Big Media rather than replace it, choice schools will never replace public schools. All we want--in fact, all we've ever wanted--is for children, especially the disadvantaged, to have as many options, public and private, as necessary to give kids the best education possible. Is that really too much to ask?

New Jersey cries uncle

edspresso — Thu, 04 May 2006 16:01:00 +0000

New Jersey is saying enough is enough on education spending:

New Jersey's 31 neediest school districts want too much money, and the state can no longer afford their increasingly high demands, the state attorney general told New Jersey's Supreme Court yesterday.

"We have gotten to a point where the supplemental funding requests of some districts are truly shocking," Zulima Farber said during an application to freeze funding for the so-called Abbott districts for one year.

Camden, she said, asked for $78 million in new supplemental aid - an increase of more than 100 percent. Vineland wants an increase of $34 million, or 66 percent, and Passaic $31 million more, or 55 percent.

Buried deeper in the story is this:

Average per-pupil spending in New Jersey districts is $11,056. Abbott districts average $14,287, led by Asbury Park's $18,893.

Under Abbott v. Burke, a series of state Supreme Court decisions that began in the 1980s, the state must pay to educate students in the 31 special-needs districts at the same level that taxpayers in the state's wealthy suburban districts do.

Astute readers will recognize that New Jersey average per-pupil spending is nearly the highest in the nation.

All this follows a round of school budget defeats last month:

The message came loud and clear in the soundest trouncing of school budgets in years: New Jersey voters' wallets have been hit too hard, and they struck back in the only way available to them.
Just 53 percent of school budgets statewide passed Tuesday, a steep drop from last year's 71 percent and the lowest approval rate since 1994.
South Jersey budgets fared even worse, with just 40 percent passing.
New Jersey's property taxes are already the highest in the nation, and the idea of a heavier burden appeared to be too much for some.

What the Wall Street Journal said

edspresso — Thu, 04 May 2006 20:57:11 +0000

If there were lingering doubts that teachers unions are the worms in the apple of the American education system, take a look at the monumental setback for school reform in Florida this week.

May 1-5: Susanna Cooper vs. Joanne Jacobs on Universal Preschool

edspresso — Fri, 05 May 2006 12:55:00 +0000

On June 6, Californians will head to the polls to vote on Proposition 82, the Preschool for All initiative. If approved, it would provide three hours of voluntary daily preschool for every 4-year-old in the state. Is this a good move for California?

Susanna Cooper is the director of communications for Preschool California, one of the organizations pushing for approval of Proposition 82. Former syndicated columnist Joanne Jacobs is a freelance writer, blogger and author of the new book Our School: The Inspiring Story of Two Teachers, One Big Idea and the School That Beat the Odds.

MONDAY, MAY 1

Cooper (11:42 a.m.):

It may be too much to hope for, but at long last it feels like the debate around Proposition 82 – the Preschool for All Act on the California ballot June 6 – is moving away from the distracting controversy surrounding Rob Reiner and back to the substance of a potentially historic change in education policy. Should all children have an equal chance to get ready for success in kindergarten? Or should we continue to limp along with a grossly uneven playing field, in which middle-class and low-income and families are priced out of private preschool and frozen out of the scarce public programs that do exist.

My organization helped develop the policy in the initiative, and we are proud that it has the interests of children as its focus. Unfortunately, the interests of children don’t sell newspapers. Controversy does. And Prop. 82’s anti-tax, anti-government opposition would much rather focus on Rob Reiner than on making an argument against the importance of preschool. Who wants to be against kids?

The media has been nothing if not complicit, only too happy to focus on politics, distortions and hints of scandal. Case in point: A recent Orange County Register editorial cited a claim that Prop. 82 would help just 4% more children attend preschool. But that claim – put forth by initiative opponents like the Reason Foundation and too often regurgitated in print -- assumes that the childcare situations that many children are in now are the equivalent of quality preschool.

That couldn’t be farther from the truth. According to the Economic Policy Institute, just 25% of California’s public and private preschool teachers and administrators have bachelor’s degrees – a key measure of quality that would be assured by Prop. 82. After carefully examining data from the Census, the Bureau of Labor, UC Berkeley’s Center for the Study of the Childcare Workforce and other sources, Preschool California estimates that just 1 in 5 children now has access to quality preschool.

Editorials and news coverage too often center on the ever-predictable horserace – a recent Field poll showing that 52% of voters support Prop. 82, down somewhat from an earlier poll. The Register interpreted the slippage as a sign that voters are “catching on” to problems with the initiative.

My take is quite different: Despite two solid months of nearly constant attack by opponents, mischaracterizations of the research, distraction tactics and not enough hard-nosed analysis by the media, Prop. 82 still commands a 13-point advantage among likely voters. It boasts a coalition – from local chambers of commerce (Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland) to labor (SEIU and AFL-CIO) to teachers (California Teachers Association, the California Kindergarten Association and the California Federation of Teachers) to doctors and nurses (American Academy of Pediatrics – California and the California Nurses Association) – that represents a true coming together of diverse individuals and organizations to support what all California children deserve: A strong start in school and in life.

Jacobs (1:18 p.m.):

I disagree with Susanna Cooper’s framing of the issue. She says the question is: Should all children have an equal chance to get ready for success in kindergarten?

I think the question is quite different: What’s the best way to prepare children for success in kindergarten? The answer to expand the number of high-quality preschools designed for the kids who really need help, children growing up with poor, poorly educated and non-English-speaking parents. These children can benefit significantly if their preschool teachers focus on developing language skills.

Proposition 82 makes half-day preschool for four-year-olds an entitlement for all families, regardless of financial need and regardless of their children’s needs.

This form of universal preschool is more than middle-class kids need: Educated parents can prepare their children for kindergarten without professional assistance. The very slight preschool benefit for middle-class kids fades out by third grade.

Proposition 82’s universal preschool is much less than disadvantaged children need: The most effective programs for needy children start at earlier ages, run for a full day and include home visits to teach skills to parents.

“Quality” has nothing to do with the percentage of preschool teachers with bachelor’s degrees, according to Bruce Fuller, a Berkeley professor of education and public policy, who I’ve always considered a true-blue liberal. In the April 4 Los Angeles Times, Fuller writes:

“Children's growth curves do rise when their teacher holds a two-year degree in child development and so is better able to organize stimulating activities and offer steady emotional support. No additional gains are detected when the preschool teacher has a four-year degree, although labor costs skyrocket, a finding newly replicated by UCLA and University of North Carolina researchers.”

Why should taxpayers pay $2.4 billion a year for college graduates who aren’t more effective than teachers with two-year degrees? For that matter, parents of kids who are too young for the Prop. 82 subsidy are likely to pay a lot more for preschool -- or discover their neighborhood preschool has folded because it can’t qualify for the state subsidy and can’t make a go of it without four-year-olds.

Susanna asks: Should we continue to limp along with a grossly uneven playing field, in which middle-class and low-income and families are priced out of private preschool and frozen out of the scarce public programs that do exist.

Well, middle-class families aren’t priced out of preschool. If they need day care, they choose the best progam they can afford based on their child’s needs. At-home moms who don’t want to pay for preschool often form play groups, so their children can socialize without cost.

Low-income working parents may find it hard to afford a decent preschool yet earn too much to qualify for government progams. Offering developmental preschool to more low-income and moderate-income families would be a good idea -- and it would cost much less than making half-day preschool a middle-class entitlement.

TUESDAY, MAY 2

Cooper (10:45 a.m.):

Joanne’s argument would hold more water if, in fact, middle class kids in California were doing just fine. The notion that only poor children struggle in school is a little old-fashioned. Half of our fourth graders failed to meet basic reading standards on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) last year, ranking California in the bottom along with Mississippi and Washington D.C. The strugglers are not just poor kids.

Ed Zigler, founding director of the federal Head Start preschool program for poor children and emeritus professor at Yale, made a powerful case for universal programs in an April 23rd Sacramento Bee article . I’m reluctant to reduce his eloquent rationale to a laundry list, but in the interest of brevity, here are just a few of his arguments with some judicious edits.

As many as 40 percent of children enter primary school without the basic building blocks they need to succeed, and not all of them live in low-income families. According to the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers, 9 percent of children in families with incomes in the top 20 percent income bracket are held back in school, compared with 18 percent in the lowest.
Today, half of California's 4-year-olds live in homes headed by two working parents or a single working parent. Where are the children while mom and dad are working? Few are in the kinds of quality programs Prop. 82 would provide.
Establishing arbitrary eligibility limits is inherently unfair. Is there really any difference between a child living in a household a few dollars above the 75th percentile of the state median income - the current income ceiling for state-subsidized preschool programs - and one living in a household a few dollars below?
The notion of targeting preschool to children with particular characteristics is offensive and counterproductive. Why is it wrong to separate children by race but OK to separate them by socioeconomic status? When public policy limits admission to only children who are poor or who are English learners or whose mothers have little education, the end result is to discourage a socioeconomic mix.
A targeted program may not be cost-effective. When programs are available based on characteristics of the children or their families, an entire administrative superstructure must be created to sort the eligible children from the ineligible, sometimes repeatedly, because family circumstances often change. A targeted program may even discourage participation by the children expected to benefit most because of the negative stigma attached to such a program or confusion over rules. Means-testing is itself expensive and inefficient, and the dollars saved by not making preschool available free to more advantaged families are simply not worth the trouble.

Zigler, who knows a little something about the pitfalls of targeted programs, concludes: “Poor children will get free preschool when all children get it. That is the only way.”

Joanne’s assertion that middle-class families are doing just fine in the present preschool “system” doesn’t square with reality. Middle class children don’t have good access to quality programs. A recent report by the law enforcement group Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California placed the average cost of part-time preschool in CA at over $4,000, well over full-time tuition to the state university system. High quality programs cost far more – double university tuition in some communities.

From the report: “The high cost of preschool helps explain why most children from both low-income and middle-income families are unlikely to be enrolled in any program at all, and why very few are likely to be enrolled in a quality preschool. Middle-income families, earning between $30,000 and $60,000 in 2000, are particularly hard hit. Higher-income families are 43% more likely to enroll their children in preschool than middle-income families. Children from these middle-income families are almost as unlikely as low-income children to be enrolled in preschool. A family of four earning $50,000 has no money left for preschool after taking care of its most basic needs, such as housing, food and health care.”

The argument over whether this system should be universal strongly echoes the argument a century ago about public kindergarten. Nobody asserts any more that universally available kindergarten “is more than middle-class kids need.” Imagine if we had built a K-12 system just for poor kids, and let the middle class families fend for themselves by paying out of pocket. Harsh as the truth may be, programs build for poor children tend to be poor programs. We need a preschool system in whose success a broad swath of society is invested.

And I would love to see journalists be more discriminating in their choice of academic counsel in the preschool debate. Bruce Fuller’s assertions about preschool’s effects are out of step with mainstream research on this subject. He has been using research on a large sample of mostly childcare programs and using it to draw conclusions about what Prop. 82 would accomplish, even though he and just about everyone in his field knows that the two are in no way equal. Research on truly quality programs – those taught by well-trained teachers – shows that the benefits are real and lasting, from improved reading ability, to less need for grade retention and special education, to higher graduation rates, and the profound social and economic benefits that follow all of those education gains.

Fuller is getting lots of attention, and working overtime to get it, but he is making strange, unsupported claims that leave him increasingly marginalized in the academic community. Just recently, on a telephone briefing call for journalists in which Fuller presented an analysis of Prop. 82 and sold it as a “Stanford-U.C. Berkeley” document, the dean of the Stanford School of Education crashed the briefing to announce that she had not seen the analysis and to distance Stanford from Fuller’s work. The San Francisco Chronicle covered the spat.

I’ll get to the issue of bachelor’s degrees – which deserves more thoughtful treatment – in a future post.

Jacobs (3:40 p.m.):

Yes, some middle-class kids do poorly in school, but there’s no evidence that preschool attendance provides a lasting benefit for middle-class students. In fact, the evidence that preschool improves school achievement relies on intensive, full-day programs, including home visits, for low-income children.

The Rutgers’ stats merely show that a small percentage of children from affluent families have learning problems -- not that they have problems that would have been solved if they’d attended preschool. It’s likely that most of them did attend preschool -- probably a high-cost preschool with well-educated teachers. Preschool is not a silver bullet for all learning difficulties.

Yes, most four-year-olds have working parents. They need full-day child care, which Prop. 82 won’t provide. By raising preschool costs, the inevitable result of requiring a bachelor’s degree for teachers, Prop. 82 will make it harder for parents to afford preschool for children under the age of four.

In addition, I question whether Prop. 82 regulations define “quality.” I think parents may prefer care by a grandmother or neighbor to care in a group setting. It’s a matter of personal preference. I worked part-time when my daughter was young. I wanted a responsible, warm person to care for my daughter when she was a baby and toddler. I planned to handle the education side myself. My daughter learned to handle group activities in day care when she was three. If she'd waited to master circle time skills till she was five, I'm sure no permanent educational handicap would have resulted. Just because children enjoy preschool doesn't mean it's essential -- except for kids who aren't getting the stimulation, language development and pre-reading skills they need at home.

I agree that the current eligibility system for state-funded preschool is too low and that it’s crazy to cut off eligibility without a slidi ng scale. That’s easily fixed.

Targeting state-funded preschool to children who are poor or have special needs is “offensive and counterproductive?” Why? We target lots of state programs to people in need. Means-testing is not expensive. All public schools qualify students for free and subsidized meals. The same mechanism could be used for preschools.

With the $2.4 billion it would cost to boost preschool attendance from 66 percent to 70 percent of four-year-olds, we could pay for full-day preschool for poor kids and for moderate-income kids and have money left over to improve K-3 education, which is the real make-or-break time for students.

I don’t think it’s true that “Poor children will get free preschool when all children get it. That is the only way.” After all, California already provides free preschool to some poor children, though not enough. In any case, this is a political argument that assumes middle-class people are too greedy to help anyone but themselves.

I know that Prop. 82 claims to “tax the rich” not the average citizen, but it’s state tax money that would otherwise be available for other purposes. Democrats have proposed other worthy programs to be funded by a surtax on the rich. Is preschool for the middle class more important than health care for the poor?

All young people need an education. But there’s no evidence they need a state-regulated education starting at the age of four. Preschool is not the same as kindergarten. And kindergarten remains optional because we’re not sure every five-year-old is ready for school.

Let me add that many, many researchers -- not just Bruce Fuller -- have looked at the effects of preschool. There’s been concern for years that the benefits fade even for poor children, especially if the programs don’t involve parents. This is a quality issue that Prop. 82 ignores. I resent the implication that Fuller, a Berkeley professor and a member of PACE (Policy Analysis for California Education), which includes Berkeley, Stanford and UC-Davis professors, is out of the mainstream or “strange.” Let’s argue substance. I haven’t made any Meathead jokes.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 3

Cooper (9:23 a.m.):

Joanne, I’m grateful you have resisted the Meathead jokes. One of our challenges in this campaign has been to remind voters that this is about far more than one man – that it is in fact about kids – and than there are many, many thoughtful Californians who support Proposition 82. As part of that effort, Preschool California has launched an email campaign featuring weekly messages from leaders like Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, California Kindergarten Association President Armando Argandona, and today’s guest messenger, California Police Chiefs Association President Steve Krull, who speaks for 120 chiefs, sheriffs and DAs in support of the initiative. See all their messages, including photos of these folks when they were still playing with play dough, here (you can also sign up to receive the rest of the emails, featuring elected leaders, heads of large organizations, and a few celebrities other than the guy who used to play Meathead, between now and election day).

Your last post mentioned the choices you made for your own child, and I want to pick up that theme of choice. Prop. 82 has been criticized by some private providers who fear it will put them out of business by asking them to meet new quality standards, foremost an early learning credential for preschool teachers who work in the publicly funded system. But one of the many strengths of Prop. 82, in fact, is that it builds on the existing diverse patchwork of programs – including school-based, private, non-profit, family child care homes and faith-based providers. Responsibility for administering the system rests not with local school districts, but with county superintendents of education, who are instructed to include all providers who meet important quality standards – not an unreasonable expectation in exchange for public funding. This county-based governance model is designed to avoid a top-down, cookie-cutter approach from the state Department of Education, and to expand real choices for families (too many of whom have no choices now, other than to get in line.)

Many, many providers welcome this approach. Key provider associations, including the CA Head Start Association and the California Association for the Education of Young Children, were at the drafting table and made sure the initiative language was inclusive. Both associations endorse Prop. 82. An entire organization of 40,000 private providers Early Childhood Educators for Preschool for All, has sprung up with the sole purpose of supporting the initiative, and, once it passes, having a strong voice at the table during the drafting of regulations that will guide implementation of the new law. They see opportunity for children and families but also professional opportunity for preschool teachers and administrators, whose wages and training has declined alarmingly in California over the past two decades (see the Economic Policy Institute’s 2005 study, Losing Ground). Preschool teachers make on average half the wages of kindergarten teachers; do we really think their work is less important?

There’s fear out there among some providers who worry about their future. Several things to remember: Many parents will continue to use private programs that do not choose to participate in the system, just as parents choose private K-12 schools now. (My son is 4: His private preschool program in downtown Sacramento always has a waiting list and is very highly regarded in the community. Whether or not the preschool owner decides to participate in the public program, I don’t think she will go wanting for applicants to her full-day program, and her program also accommodates children 2 and 3 years old.) The Early Learning Credential requirement doesn’t kick in until 2014 – providing lots of time for current and aspiring teachers to get additional training. And unlike many other proposals that increase standards but don’t provide the means to meet them, Prop. 82 includes significant funds to help teachers go back to school, and money for colleges to develop the coursework to train them.

If Prop. 82 doesn’t pass on June 6, you will very likely see movement in the Legislature to begin expanding access to preschool. That will mark lawmakers recognition that preschool has risen quickly as a priority issue for Californians – all in all, a good thing. But I would be surprised if any expansion approved by the Legislature included the mixed-delivery model that is the hallmark of the initiative. It would more likely to be a purely school district-based program. That would succeed in increasing access, but not necessarily diversity or choice for parents using the system. And that would be an opportunity lost.

Jacobs (1:34 p.m.):

As Susanna writes, many child-care providers would like $2.4 billion in state funding every year. Preschool teachers must love the promise of doubling preschool teachers’ wages so they’ll earn as much as kindergarten teachers.

Furthermore, Prop. 82 won’t fund child care or preschool for children under the age of four or full-day care, so private preschools will be motivated to run split programs with lower-paid, less-educated teachers for younger children and college-educated teachers for four-year-olds. I suppose afternoon care for preschoolers could be provided by lesser-paid teachers as well.

However, I have no faith this can be done without tons of regulation -- he who pays the piper always picks the tune -- red tape and much higher expenses.

Montessori schools wouldn’t be able to mix children who are two, three and four years old without finding college graduates and paying public-teacher salaries.

In schools trying to run a split system, lower-paid teachers would demand more money. Why should caring for four-year-olds be worth twice as much as working with three-year-olds? Do we love two-year-olds less than three-year-olds? There would be pressure to expand state funding to younger children.

Preschools that refuse to take Prop. 82 money will lose 90 percent of their four-year-olds, if the K-12 model prevails. (About 10 percent of K-12 students attend private schools.) Many preschools won’t be able to afford this. It’s not a business with a high profit margin.

Preschools that do take Prop. 82 funds will charge more for higher-paid staff, driving up prices for parents with a child under four; parents who need full-day care for four-year-olds will pay twice as much for the half day that’s not state funded.

In addition, Prop. 82 will boost significantly the demand for college graduates with a teaching credential, making the predicted teacher shortage even worse. Yes, it will drive up salaries even more, but that will drive up costs even more.

There also are costs for administering a system that funds four-year-olds -- but only if their preschools meet certain requirements. Someone has to monitor preschools to see if they’re meeting the rules and telling the truth about their enrollment, etc.

Perhaps current teachers, most of whom don’t have four-year degrees, will be able to meet the Prop. 82 requirements, but I think most will not qualify. For years, school districts have tried to get teachers’ aides, nearly all of whom are bilingual, through four-year college programs. It’s very tough for women who are working six to eight hours a day and usually raising children to take and pass college classes at a rate that will get them a degree before they’re ready to retire. If an aide knows that eight or 10 years of evening classes will pay off in a college degree . . . Well, it’s an awfully long haul. Despite all the help districts provide, only a few aides stick with these programs and earn a degree. It will be just as difficult for current preschool teachers to finish college while working -- and very few can afford to quit work to go to college full-time.

Susanna thinks the alternative to Prop. 82 is an expanded state-run preschool system. If this were targeted to low-income children, with a sliding scale for moderate-income children, it wouldn’t compete with private preschools, who have few subsidized slots.

Rand researchers write: “Targeted programs providing free preschool only for low-income children would cost less (than universal preschool) and can be expected to generate higher returns per child.”

I’m speaking (on May 17 at 5:30 pm) at Russell Byers Charter School in Philadelphia, which serves many disadvantaged black children. The school starts with “4K” -- a year of kindergarten for four-year-olds that prepares them for an academic kindergarten program for five-year-olds. This has proven very successful in preparing students for success as they move through the elementary grades. I’m sure 4K isn’t the right approach for all students, but this school designed its program to meet the needs of the children it had come to know. Private donors were willing to provide the money and to keep funding it when the school had evidence of effectiveness.

If Prop. 82 doesn’t boost elementary school achievement for all or most or any students, if the benefits fade after a few years or the costs get out of control, California won’t be able to redirect the money to other priorities.

Remember Arnold Schwarzenegger’s initiative to fund after-school programs? Research has shown no academic gains for kids in after-school programs. It’s quite clear the money could be spent more effectively for other education purposes -- the eight-hour school day has proven very effective for poor kids -- but the money is tied up.

Funding is limited. We can tax smokers and tax the rich. A fat tax probably is the next big thing. But we’ll never have enough money to do every nice thing that might be done. And, at some point, the rich are going to move to Nevada, smokers will buy tax-free cigarettes from Indian reservations, etc. (I have a personal interest: My fiancé moved to Illinois, his home state, to escape California taxes -- paying taxes on capital gains for stock donated to charity was the last straw -- and wants me to move there too.)

I think we as voters and taxpayers have to make choices about where to set priorities and how to spend scarce resources. Paying for every child’s preschool takes billions of dollars that could be spent far more effectively.

THURSDAY, MAY 4

Cooper (9:05 a.m.):

Heavens, Joanne, at least allow the Rand economists to finish their paragraph.

In a recent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, in which researchers Karoly and Bigelow attempt to correct recent Times distortions of their findings, the two also write:

“On the other hand, paying for preschool for all eliminates the bureaucracy for determining which children are eligible each year (some children would be classified at-risk one year and not the next). It would avoid stigmatizing children in targeted programs. And it would make sure preschool is available to all children who can benefit.”

A little more about “all children who can benefit.” William Gormley, who directs Georgetown University’s Center for Research on Children in the U.S., has followed children in Oklahoma’s universal preschool system and found that children from all ethnic groups and across all incomes benefit from quality preschool programs taught by well-trained teachers.

Also from the RAND op-ed: “Children from working-class families and middle-class children face many of the same problems as children in poverty. Half of all children who repeat a grade in school, and half of all high school dropouts, come from families in the middle 60% of the income ladder. Any benefits of preschool realized by children from these families push the return from investing in preschool even higher — from $2.62 to $4 depending on the assumptions of preschool benefits.”

I am sorry to cut it short for today.

I leave you with a challenge. It strikes me that it is awfully easy to sit back and spin doomsday scenarios about government proposals, finding every imaginable pitfall and unintended consequence. Actually, I know how easy it is. I was an editorial writer at the Sacramento Bee for over a decade, and this is pretty much what pundits and commentators do. It is far harder to actually come up with a program that has a chance of working in our admittedly imperfect system.

Joanne, what would it cost to take, say, all the schools in the bottom half of the API in California and do something along the lines of the nice 4-K program you describe at the charter school in Philadelphia. (Recognizing that you wouldn’t want all programs would look exactly like this, but let’s just take the example you like.) This would be a big undertaking, reaching millions of children. Which California corporations would be willing to step forward to finance this effort to benefit poor and working-class children? What sort of quality standards and accountability systems would be put in place to assure those corporations they were accomplishing something on behalf of those children?

Jacobs (4:24 p.m.):

Universal preschool proponents have been citing the Rand report, which is based on an intensive program for disadvantaged children, as support for the idea that half-day preschool for all kids will boost achievement and save taxpayer money in the long run. But Rand acknowledges this is not a clear or easy decision. That paragraph ends: “Whether these benefits are worth the cost is for voters to decide.”

Voters should consider the alternatives. The $2.4 billion for a preschool entitlement for all four-year-olds could fund full-day preschool for high-need children, with money left over. Instead of spending $4,300 per child for all four-year-olds -- with most of the money going to middle-class families -- California easily could fund an extra year of kindergarten at low-performing schools, again with money left over for other needs.

If the surtax passes, generating $2.4 billion a year, private donors wouldn't be needed. But let’s say there’s no extra tax money to expand early learning options for needy kids. Donors probably would model the program after the successful Chicago program for low-income children that Rand studied, including parent training and home visits, and hire researchers to evaluat long-term results. That’s what philanthropists do these days. They look for evidence of effectiveness before they give and check to see for effectiveness after they give so they can decide whether to continue funding. You don’t see philanthropists funding free preschool for middle-class children.

Means testing is a lot simpler than you think. All public schools do it for the school lunch program. Some parents underreport income; nobody calls in when their income rises. If a few ineligible kids get benefits, that's no big deal. Even a loose means-testing program saves a lot of money at $4,300 a year.

States with universal preschool are not education leaders.

You write: “William Gormley, who directs Georgetown University’s Center for Research on Children in the U.S., has followed children in Oklahoma’s universal preschool system and found that children from all ethnic groups and across all incomes benefit from quality preschool programs taught by well-trained teachers.”

If they benefit significantly, why are Oklahoma’s reading scores so low?

Oklahoma has offered free preschool to all children since 1995; Georgia’s program started in 1998. Yet the National Assessment of Educational Progress’ analysis of the change in fourth-grade reading scores from 1992 to 2005 found both states were in the bottom 10. Oklahoma’s reading scores have fallen. A Georgia study finds no difference in scores between children who enrolled in the state’s preschool and similar children who did not.

I suspect any benefits have faded away by fourth grade because the children who needed the most help didn't get enough to make a lasting difference.

I did a column some years ago on the Abcedarian Project in North Carolina, which provided free child care and preschool starting in infancy to children of very poor single mothers. The care was full time and provided by well-trained staff, though not with bachelor's degrees. It focused on developing language skills. Abcedarian graduates did significantly better than the control group all through school and into early adulthood; They were more likely to graduate, be employed, stay out of jail and off welfare, etc. Most didn't do well in life, but they did so much better than others from very poor families that the long-term cost savings were significant, even though Abcedarian is costly. I talked to the professor who'd launched the project. He emphasized that programs like Head Start come too late and do too little to make a lasting difference. It takes a lot to change the life prospects of poor kids. Half a loaf is worthless, he said.

"Quality" preschool for needy kids looks very different and costs a lot more than "quality" preschool for children with educated parents. I don't think we can afford to pay for both. I'd gladly give my charitable dollars to give poor kids a chance to catch up. In fact, that's where most of my donations go now. I really don't want to give my tax dollars to subsidize middle-class parents.

FRIDAY, MAY 5

Cooper (8:50 a.m.):

Thank you, Edspresso, and thank you, Joanne, for the opportunity to talk about an issue of such great importance for California children, their families, and society. I’ll leave you with four reasons Prop. 82 deserves support June 6.

Prop. 82 will help children enter school ready to learn. Preschool takes advantage of a time in children’s lives when their brains are growing incredibly rapidly, when we can lay a strong foundation for important learning and social skills that will help them succeed in K-12. Kids who go to quality preschool are more likely to read by 3rd grade and graduate high school. Yet only 20% of California children now enroll in quality preschool.
Prop. 82 is an investment in smart school reform. In a recent survey, 95% of CA kindergarten teachers said children who attend preschool are batter prepared to start school. By sending our children to quality preschools, with well-trained teachers and more parental involvement, Prop. 82 will strengthen our schools an improve education for all our kids.
Prop. 82 is strictly accountable to taxpayers and parents. The initiative provides for annual, independent audits, and criminal penalties for misuse of funds. According to California’s independent Legislative Analyst’s Office, all revenues will be used for the preschool program. Parents are empowered to choose the best preschool for their children. Three out of four public preschools in CA have children waiting in line to get in. too many parents now struggle to find a quality preschool they can afford for their children.
Prop. 82 reduces crime and improves our economy. Respected research shows that children who participated in a quality preschool program were four time less likely ever to be arrested. That’s way the California Police Chiefs Association and the California State Sheriff’s Association endorse the initiative. Economists at RAND found that the benefits of a universally available preschool program in California would greatly outweigh the costs. California will see returns of $2.62 for every $1 invested, due to reduced crime and dropout rates and increased tax revenues.

Thanks again for the opportunity to debate.

Jacobs (4:19 p.m.):

Prop. 82 proponents are making pie-in-the-sky promises they won’t be able to keep.

Currently, 66 percent of California’s four-year-olds attend pre-school. Prop. 82, at an estimated cost of $2.4 billion a year, would raise that to 70 percent, according to the Legislative Analyst’s estimate. Is that going to turn students into achievers and cut the crime rate? Don’t hold your breath.

Susanna says on ly 20 percent of four-year-olds attend a “quality” preschool? That’s only true if quality is defined as college graduates as preschool teachers. But research shows preschool teachers with a two-year degree are just as effective as teachers with a four-year degree. So the 20 percent figure is meaningless. Prop. 82 will raise costs dramatically without raising quality.

Other states have tried for the pie without success. Oklahoma started universal preschool in 1995: Elementary reading scores have declined, while other states are improving. Georgia started in 1998: Preschool grads do no better in school than children who didn’t attend preschool.

The only programs that have proven to be effective are designed much differently than Prop. 82’s three-hours-a-day preschool. These full-time, language development programs with strong parental outreach compenents are far too expensive to offer to every four-year-old, but would be affordable if targeted to disadvantaged children, who need learning and social skills.

RAND studied a Chicago program that targeted poor children’s learning needs and included tutoring through third grade. Parent participation was a key component. Arthur J. Reynolds, the lead researcher, said, "We are confident that participation in the Child-Parent Center Program from ages 3 to 9 years was the source of the group differences at age 20 years." That’s a quality program -- that bears no resemblance to the kind of preschool experience funded by Prop. 82.

Prop. 82 proposes a watered-down program targeted to middle-class parents’ desire for free child care. It’s like taking a medicine for the sick, cutting the dose in half and giving it to everyone, whether they’re sick or not.

Universal preschool will cost California $2.4 billion a year without making a significant and lasting difference for children. Ideas that might be much more effective won’t get funding because the state will be taxed out. When Californians realize it’s not working as promised, they’ll be stuck with it.

The habit of passing an initiative to fund pet programs is one the state should try to break. We did it with the cigarette surtax to fund programs for kids in their first five years. That produced a pot of money to pay for ads claiming every child needs preschool.

I think Prop. 82 will pass on June 6. I’ll hope for pie in the sky but I’m predicting pie in the face.

And what goes with pie? Edspresso! Thanks for the chance to be an Edspresso debater.

At the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, it's all education all the time

edspresso — Fri, 05 May 2006 17:27:00 +0000

Ed reform junkies will find all sorts of eye candy over at the Atlanta-Journal Constitution today. First, a response to an editorial we addressed yesterday. Charles Knapp (we're not sure, but we think he's the former president of the University of Georgia) says this in response to the criticism of private companies involved in K-12 education:

The fact is that when it comes to creating great schools, there is no single magic ingredient.

Drew Charter School in East Lake has been assisted since its inception in 2000 by an effective private firm, Edison Schools. The success that Drew has experienced, however, is really more directly related to the fact that it enjoys the support of an entire community.

As an educator for 36 years, I've learned that how well you address the challenges students face outside school can affect how well they perform inside the classroom.

There's also a shoving match between the editorial staff...

Atlanta residents have been generous to their public schools, paying their taxes at a rate that has made their teacher pay scale and their per-pupil costs among the highest in the state.

In asking for a tax increase of about 2.3 mills, Atlanta's superintendent and school board are hoping that well of generosity hasn't been tapped out.

If it hasn't, it should be.

Atlanta is seeking a tax increase at the same time that school enrollment is dropping and city property values are skyrocketing. Five years ago, Atlanta had 57,000 students; now it has 50,000. A housing and retail boom is invigorating marginal neighborhoods, luring young people tired of long commutes. In the 2000 census, the city recorded the first increase in its white population in 40 years.

The school system argues that despite the booming tax digest and falling enrollment, its costs are soaring because of state funding cuts, its pension costs and rising fuel and utility bills. Without a tax hike, APS says it will face a $37 million shortfall. This year's proposed Atlanta schools budget is $582.8 million.

The system's plea would be more compelling if it was willing to share in the pain it wants to inflict on city taxpayers. Yet despite its supposedly desperate straits, the system is proposing a 4 percent across-the-board raise for all employees.

Without those raises, the school board says, some teachers will leave. Well, maybe some teachers ought to leave. Target raises to the good teachers who should be retained, and hope the ineffective ones get the message and leave.

...and the state Board of Education:

Atlanta Public Schools is focused on providing our students with the quality education they need and deserve to be successful in life. For the first time since 1997, this commitment to Atlanta's children will mean a tax increase.

Despite absorbing $47 million in state "austerity" cuts since fiscal year 2003 and a shift in funding from the state to local level, APS has been a good steward of taxpayer dollars and has provided a return on the city's investment in public education.

Meanwhile, continuing a theme of public school supporters' guilt that we picked up on last week, one woman details her internal tug-of-war:

My daughter is my world. It's hard to accept, but Elizabeth is turning me — a person who is pro public education — into a potential voucher supporter. If vouchers were available, I would keep Elizabeth in her private school quicker than you could snap a pole bean.

The reason I like vouchers is the same reason I hate vouchers. Unlike public schools, private schools can choose the students. If a child becomes a "problem," the parents are told, "You know, we don't think Johnny is really suited for our environment." What if public schools are left without bright students because the bright students are getting an education elsewhere?

To me, a school with great test scores means that the kids in that school feel it's cool to be smart. We don't have enough of those in the Atlanta public school system.

Go read.

Education News for Friday, May 5

Daily News — Fri, 05 May 2006 18:40:00 +0000

Legislature OKs oversight of vouchers - Both chambers of the Florida legislature passed voucher accountability bills Thursday — unanimously in the Senate and 95-21 in the House. (more)

Vouchers saved, but Bush won't get amendment - Florida Senate leaders acknowledged Thursday they don't have the votes to revive a constitutional amendment to expand the governor's prized school voucher program, but at the same time lawmakers quietly rescued 733 students in a voucher program that was struck down by the state's high court. (more)

Vocational classes make a comeback - At the Burbank (California) Unified School District's two high schools, vocational programs have been making a comeback for the past few years. (more)

As Test-Taking Grows, Test-Makers Grow Rarer - No Child Left Behind is pushing demand for psychometricians, or testing experts. (more)

Charter school aims high with plan to teach students to fly - A new charter school will let students take classes toward certifications in the airline industry. (more)

Teachers Union Criticized For Pushing Retirement Plan - A group seeking to reform education in New York wants Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to investigate New York State United Teachers, the state's largest teachers' union, which reportedly gets $3 million a year from an investment company for recommending its members enroll in retirement plans with high fees that often eat into returns. (more)

Magnet, charter school interest up - At a time when standards in education are changing and the option of school choice is becoming more prevalent, state officials say there is an increase in the number of Connecticut students who want to enroll in magnet and charter schools. (more)

Vouchers test school choice - More than 7,000 students in Greater Cincinnati are eligible for tuition vouchers to attend private schools next school year, but just 135 have applied. (more)

Mayor should get nod to OK charter schools - Opinion: Amid the recent calls for bold reform and significant change at the Los Angeles Unified School District, there is one point on which policymakers should quickly agree: Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa ought to have the ability to approve charter schools, providing parents and students with expanded educational opportunities within the public school system. (more)

11% of seniors still need to pass exit exam - About 11 percent of this year's senior class has not yet passed the high school exit exam and won't be able to graduate on time, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell reported Thursday. (more)

Tutors waiting by the phone - Editorial: U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings recently said she would launch an investigation into states' efforts to notify parents of tutoring options. Good for her. (more)

Training is key in mending program - Heavy doses of training are among pages of strategies that will be implemented to narrow the achievement gap between special education and regular education pupils in Richmond County, according to a report submitted to the Georgia Department of Education. (more)

Public Dissatisfied Over Key NCLB Provisions, Report Says - (Subscription required) The public is largely disenchanted with the way the federal No Child Law Behind Act measures student learning and teacher quality, and it would like greater input into the law’s implementation, a report scheduled for release this week by the Public Education Network finds. (more)

There's a dropout crisis in Dallas public schools - Opinion: Just about everyone knows that Dallas schools are performing poorly, but sometimes it is useful to remind ourselves exactly how severe the problem really is. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

I have private preference but public purse - My 5-year-old daughter, Elizabeth Virginia, now attends a private school that teaches foreign language and arts and offers after-school music and dance classes. But tuition is forcing me to look at Atlanta Public Schools next year for kindergarten. (more)

Voucher revival try snarls Senate -The fight over Gov. Jeb Bush's prized school vouchers pulled in the future of Riviera Beach's redevelopment and forced Senate Democrats to take escorted bathroom trips Wednesday, as the Senate muddled through another fractious day in the session's final week. (more)

Bush denies voucher pressure -Gov. Jeb Bush said Thursday he is doing everything he can to find the Senate votes he needs to put a constitutional amendment before voters that would expand and protect school vouchers, one of his top priorities, but he denied pressuring Sen. Mandy Dawson on the issue. (more)

Bush's prized project passes -High school students across the state will get a chance to select majors and minors, just like college students do, under a sweeping education measure passed Thursday by the Florida Legislature. (more)

Gov. Bush still pursues school vouchers - Gov. Jeb Bush said Thursday that he is not giving up on a proposed state constitutional amendment to let the Legislature restore a stricken voucher program and create others to send students to religious and other private schools. (more)

Governor denies strong-arming on vouchers - Gov. Jeb Bush said Thursday that he is still lobbying senators who opposed his bid to put his school voucher plan before voters, but he denied using strong-arm tactics. (more)

Senate plan could salvage private school vouchers - The one private-school voucher program struck down by a court could be salvaged by a plan passed Thursday in the Florida Senate. (more)

Senate yay, House nay on vouchers - Lawmakers in the House and Senate yesterday cast themselves on opposite sides of the debate over whether the state should help parents pay private school tuition for their children. (more)

Voucher legislation lingers as session draws to close - Legislation designed to restore Gov. Jeb Bush's prized but unconstitutional school voucher program hung in the balance as Florida's regular 2006 legislative session drew toward a close Friday. (more)

Palm Beach Post, one-trick pony

edspresso — Fri, 05 May 2006 20:16:00 +0000

The editorial board of the PB&J goes after the Florida Senate and round two of the amendment fight. And, of course, the gang can't quite stop itself from hitting the tired old accountability argument.

But most of the blame falls on Gov. Bush, who has betrayed his own voucher programs by refusing to make them accountable. When the Florida Supreme Court this year struck down the first voucher program, the justices noted that Gov. Bush had given private schools taking so-called "opportunity scholarships" special treatment he denied to public schools. The gap is even larger for "corporate voucher" schools, whose students, for example, don't have to take the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test.

Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. Didn't fit. Took it back. In fact, we swung by for a visit as early as yesterday! And that was after our trip last week!

On one hand, I'm tempted to merely copy and paste my arguments in those posts (hey, two can play at that game). But I like to show that I earn my keep, so while you are encouraged to read those prior posts for a more in-depth explanation, here's a quick restatement:

The legislation currently pending before the Florida legislature--which isn't unlike the legislation that has been introduced during the last two or three sessions--both accomplishes exactly what you want it to do (that is, it requires choice schools to administer tests to compare students' progress to their peers in public and private schools nationwide) and will likely fall victim to the same partisan infighting that killed its forerunners in previous legislative sessions.
Most--not just many, but most--choice schools already administer these sorts of tests, because it is in their best interests to do so.
The major school choice organizations in Florida, along with state private school accrediting organizations, support the legislation, and have been trying to get it passed.
Constant cries for "more accountability!" are, ultimately, accusations that parents are too stupid to see if a school is effectively educating their children.

Onward:

Teaching and financial standards also have been much lower in voucher schools - a deficiency that has resulted in scandals at several schools.

And what happens with those schools? They get shut down. Sure, it's painful and tragic. But those schools deserve to get the axe. And unlike the public school system, it's actually possible to pull the plug on schools that aren't measuring up or are leeching money. We covered Florida spending in one of the posts above (just like the PB&J keeps dredging up the same old complaints), and found that aside from the fact that the Sunshine State spends more on K-12 than on any other budget area (to the tune of $21 billion a year), Florida schools truly are starving to death and are in desperate need of cash.

Last year, Republicans tied down the Legislature for two weeks by wrongly trying to "save" Terri Schiavo.

What a cheap shot. Do we have to go back there?

Sen. Lee's action has forced delay during the critical last week of the session.Even if vouchers do get on the ballot, it is unlikely that voters will approve such substandard programs.

The situation in Florida has been a bit difficult for researchers, particularly in the wake of the Supreme Court decision. The program that was shut down, the Opportunity Scholarship Program, has only been in existence for around five years and has just over 700 children. Even though the program is just now at the point where results begin to surface (it usually takes around four years to see an impact), the full population of children in the program isn't enough for any sort of meaningful, comparative research. And to top it off, long-term comparisons of test scores, finally available due to passage of legislation yesterday, are about three years late due to any number of political slapfights.

So the jury is still out with respect to statistics on the benefit of school choice to Florida voucher recipients. But significant research concludes that school choice has been a boost to kids not in the program:

Florida’s low-performing schools are improving in direct proportion to the challenge they face from voucher competition. These improvements are real, not the result of test gaming, demographic shifts, or the statistical phenomenon of “regression to the mean.”
Schools already facing competition from vouchers showed the greatest improvements of all five categories of low-performing schools, improving by 9.3 scale score points on the FCAT math test, 10.1 points on the FCAT reading test, and 5.1 percentile points on the Stanford-9 math test relative to Florida public schools that were not in any low-performing category.
Schools threatened with the prospect of vouchers showed the second greatest improvements, making relative gains of 6.7 scale points on the FCAT math test, 8.2 points on the FCAT reading test, and 3.0 percentile points on the Stanford-9 math test.
Low-performing schools that have never received any grade other than a D, or that have received at least one D since FCAT grading began, produced small and indistinguishable gains, respectively, relative to Florida public schools that were not low-performing. While these schools were similar to schools facing voucher competition, they failed to make similar gains in the absence of competitive incentives.
Some researchers theorize that failing schools improve because of the stigma of a failing grade rather than the threat of voucher competition. The results of this study contradict this thesis. Schools that received one F in 1998-99 but none since are no longer exposed to the potential of voucher competition. These schools actually lost ground relative to non-low-performing Florida public schools, supporting the conclusion that once the threat of vouchers goes away, so does the incentive for failing schools to improve.

(Also, see this.)

In short, the PBP has got to find a different adjective to describe Florida school choice. While all three school choice programs have been thrown under the bus from a legal standpoint, and therefore might (and we do stress might) have an argument that these programs are legally substandard, no serious researcher has concluded that school choice results in poorer choices for children; in fact, the worst they're able to say is that school choice doesn't hurt.

In addition, many Floridians object to using public money for the private religious schools that take most voucher students. Republicans kept the word "voucher" out of their proposed amendment because they know that vouchers are unpopular.

Presumably they're referring to polling data. Once again, the PBP makes my job that much easier. Quoting from an earlier post:

As we've pointed out earlier (along with Eduwonk ), it depends on how the question is worded. Thanks in no small part to the work of newspapers like the PBP, the dreaded "v" word has become hopelessly loaded. But when the poll question is posed such that people are told what the term actually means--giving children a publicly-funded scholarship to attend a higher-performing public or private school--the poll numbers tend to shift in the other direction.

Moving right along:

Gov. Bush said senators who didn't back his voucher amendment "turned their backs" on students who would be stuck in failing schools. Wrong. Students at schools that get two F's from the state can transfer to a higher-graded public school.

The PBP is referring to the transfer option available under NCLB. That transfer option assumes there are better quality public schools available for those students to attend. There's just one problem--there aren't any. So for those students who have no other public school options--and that's the reality for many of those students--just what are they supposed to do? Besides get kicked out of the only good schools they've ever known?

Rather than fulfill commitments to the 2.5 million public school students - for example, by paying for the class-size amendment that he again tried and failed to kill - ...

As luck would have it, Andrew "Eduwonk" Rotherham recently did some heavy lifting on the subject of class size:

Common sense and research both tell us that if all else is equal, smaller classes are good for students. Unfortunately, in urban education, all else is rarely equal, and a host of problems hinder efforts to attract top teachers. So reducing class size without addressing teacher quality more broadly is akin to continually adding pitchers to your bullpen without worrying about whether any of them can even throw a fastball.

Back to the editorial:

...Gov. Bush wants to use legislative sleight-of-hand on behalf of about 750 students to preserve the voucher program that the state Supreme Court declared unconstitutional.

Well, it's nice to see where newspapers really sit when it comes to the underdog.

The good thing is that even if Gov. Bush and Sen. Lee can strong-arm enough senators into putting the voucher amendment before the voters, they can't strong-arm enough voters into passing it.

Then what are you worried about? Seriously, now--if you really believe the poll numbers, why not put it to a vote? We won't deny that Bush and (especially) Lee are making huge political gambles. Nor will we deny that Villalobos has paid a political price in all this (although the truth is that the amendment saga is just one component of the larger fistfight occurring right now among the Senate GOP). But if you really believe that public opinion is on your side, what do you have to lose by going to the polls with this?

Why We Don't Have A Silicon Valley of Education (Michael Strong)

fguest — Mon, 08 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Despite a relatively unregulated private school sector in the U.S., opportunities for innovation in education are constrained by the dominance of the government school educational standard. The matrix of curriculum, textbooks, standardized testing, and teacher training and certification form a standard, analogous to a computer operating system standard, which is essentially designed to the specifications dictated by government-run schools. Just as a dominant operating system is preferred by most consumers because of the ease of transferring data within a known system and the greater availability of software for the dominant system, so too consumers will prefer an educational approach with a known interface to existing educational institutions. Entrepreneurial educators will find it more economical to start new schools that are consistent with the dominant system in order to take advantage of available curricula, textbooks, tests, and teacher training, experience, and certification. Because entrepreneurs who establish a new operating system have an opportunity to create their own businesses, Microsoft will constantly face challenges to its standard (the transition from DOS to Windows was due to the challenge presented by Apple; Java and the web represent a different challenge). By contrast, the government school educational standard possesses a larger market dominance than does Microsoft; depending on how it is defined, one could argue that more than 96% of students are educated at schools that adhere to the dominant standard. Moreover, unlike Microsoft's dominance, the government school standard is enforced by law in dozens of ways, including property tax support for government school funding, state-sanctioned teacher credentialing systems, federal financial aid for those enrolled in state-certification programs, and obstacles to for-profit management of education. Bright engineers can identify a niche for a new operating system (e.g. hand-held devices) and obtain venture capital funding. Although for-profit educational ventures exist, such as the Edison Project, they are necessarily entrepreneurial only within the boundaries of the government school standard. The opportunity cost of allowing the existing state-enforced standard to continue only appears large to those who envision the possibility that very different systems of education might be significantly better. Unlike existing debates on voucher programs, which marshal test score evidence, the argument against the standard is an argument against the fact of the standard regardless of test outcomes, at least in the short run. A visionary Soviet mathematician in 1935 could not possibly have made an empirical argument for free markets as the foundation of a flourishing computer industry 65 years hence; yet the extraordinary wealth produced by the computer industry today is due to the fact that tens of thousands of visionary mathematicians, engineers, and amateurs, mostly in the United States, were allowed, encouraged, and ultimately supported to play around with ideas and equipment in the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s in a manner that was often speculative, impractical, and experimental in the early stages of each new wave of technological innovation. Educational innovation, as with technological innovation, will not produce the spectacular gains resulting from decades of freedom unless tens of thousands of educators have the freedom and potential for financial support to tinker with incremental steps, some of which may seem impractical and experimental for decades. The extraordinary benefits ultimately resulting from a free market in education have nothing to do with better test scores in the next five years. The real benefits will be realized by releasing what Hayek calls "the creative powers of a free civilization"over the course of the ensuing decades to allow radical innovation to occur in education. Pedagogical innovations that inculcate specific habits and attitudes have the potential to improve education for all students and yet are virtually impossible to create while the public sector dominates education. Such innovations require teaching staffs with expertise in cultivating habits and attitudes (e.g. self-discipline, the ability to learn how to learn, entrepreneurial alertness). In the ten years’ experience I’ve had creating innovative schools (private and charter, using Montessori, Socratic, and entrepreneurial principles), which included hiring dozens of teachers from among hundreds of applicants, credentialed and uncredentialed, I have found it difficult to hire teachers who exhibit adequate consistency in their ability to inculcate sophisticated habits. Until it becomes cost effective for innovative school systems to invest in dedicated teacher training programs tailored to the unique methods and goals of the new schools, with ongoing research and development and quality improvements, the benefits of this type of innovation will remain haphazard. The opportunity cost in terms of lost human capital of not allowing innovative schools to flourish may be larger than the opportunity cost that would have resulted had the computer not been developed. With respect to education, we are the Soviet Union in 1935. In order to create the Silicon Valley of education 65 years hence, we need to free education markets now. Michael Strong is the CEO of Flow, Inc., the founder of several innovative high-performance schools, and the author of The Habit of Thought: From Socratic Seminars to Socratic Practice.

Education News for Monday, May 8

Daily News — Mon, 08 May 2006 09:18:09 +0000

School reform in danger - This was supposed to be a landmark year for the No Child Left Behind Act, which requires the states to close the achievement gap between white and minority students in exchange for federal education dollars. (more)

FL voucher programs in vulnerable position - Florida got into the voucher business seven years ago to offer an escape to children in failing public schools. With the conclusion of the recent legislative session, that mission has all but been abandoned. (more)

Bush hasn't won all battles - With the failure to revive school vouchers and curb a class-size initiative, Gov. Jeb Bush has learned a lesson that many governors have learned before him: It's hard to control the Legislature even when it's run by your own party. (more)

Wise investment - Florida lawmakers made a smart investment in the state's future by approving near-record spending for schools and by passing the last round of Gov. Jeb Bush's school reforms. Those reforms will bring rewarding new challenges to middle- and high-school (more)

Return later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Voucher, class size overshadowed other education issues - Thousands of children and adults rallied with Gov. Jeb Bush at the Florida Capitol to support vouchers that let students attend religious and other private schools at taxpayer expense. (more)

Session a fell for post-Jeb Florida - Jeb Bush, after nearly eight years in office, is too popular and too ambitious to be written off yet as a lame duck. But lawmakers have started treating him like one. (more)

Lawmakers predict more vouchers suits - As Gov. Jeb Bush failed to pass two of his key education goals during his last legislative session, other Republican leaders were already considering the future of school vouchers and how to reduce the financial impact of the class-size amendment on the state budget. (more)

A new army fights charter school war - NY Daily News: Two dozen Assembly Democrats will fight the good fight for education reform this week, pushing their colleagues to authorize dozens more charter schools across the city and the state. (more)

Florida votes to require high school majors - The measure now goes to Governor Jeb Bush, who pushed the requirement as part of a sweeping education overhaul approved by the House 90-24. (more)

Madison schools closing racial achievement gap - Madison's public schools appear to be succeeding with efforts to attack a problem common to urban districts nationwide — the performance gap between students of different races, according to two education researchers. (more)

School reform leaves Clemente simmering - Two years after Chicago officials began shutting low-performing high schools and moving students to nearby campuses as part of Renaissance 2010 reforms, the crime rate at five of the nine schools that received the bulk of students has shot up. (more)

New Orleans charter school students thriving - New Orleans public schools were either chartered or taken over by the state in the wake of Katrina ...inclusion efforts commonly met with resistance in a district where mainstream students were already struggling. (more)

Why We Don't Have A Silicon Valley of Education (Michael Strong)

mtigani — Mon, 08 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Secretary Spellings responds to Alliance action against LA/Compton

edspresso — Tue, 09 May 2006 14:03:55 +0000

We just got wind of a letter Ed Sec Spellings sent to California regarding our recent legal filing in L.A. Our response is here.

UPDATE: Download the letter here. Main stuff:

Public school choice and SES are critical to students' academic success, and yet there are indications that participation in public school choice and SES may be unacceptably low in a number of districts in your State. As an example, on March 23, 2006, attorneys for the Coalition on Urban Renewal (CURE) and Alliance for School Choice (Alliance) filed complaints against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and the Compton Unified School District (CUSD) alleging significant shortcomings in their implementation of the public school choice requirements. The complaints include such allegations as the following: transfer notices sent to parents in both districts are neither "uniform nor understandable," and, in the case of one district, the letter makes no reference to public school choice; based on the very low number of students transferring, parents may not be properly informed of their child's "school transfer rights"; and transfer notices in the two districts create "obstacles, artibrary deadlines, and in other ways discourage school choice."

We understand that California's complaint procedures assign initial responsibility to the local educational agencies to investigate and resolve such complaints within 60 days. We understand that these complaints are currently being resolved by the local educational agencies (LEAs) in accordance with the State procedures, and the two districts will prepare their decisions on or about May 22, 2006.

While we are trying not to disturb the State and local processes at work, and it is usually best to allow matters such as these to be resolved at the local and State level, we are mindful of our own compliance responsibilities and remedies, with regard to these specific matters, as well as the overall status of public school choice and SES implementation in California. Thus, we request that your State educational agency submit to me an update by the end of May on how LAUSD and CUSD resolved the complaints, and by mid-June, an update as to whether the complainants have appealed the districts' decisions to the State educational agency.

According to the letter, the DOE is also examining other districts in California for similar issues.

UPDATE: That old file wasn't displaying properly. Fixed now.

Education News for Wednesday, May 10

Daily News — Wed, 10 May 2006 09:10:10 +0000

AP: Rising number of schools face penalties - Falling short of requirements under President Bush's education law, about 1,750 U.S. schools have been ordered into radical "restructuring," subject to mass firings, closure, state takeover or other moves aimed at wiping their slates clean. (more)

New federal rule shifts more tax buck for disabled to private schools - Florida students who get state tax money to go to private schools because they have disabilities now will be entitled to about $21 million more, taken from programs that would have helped disabled students in public schools. (more)

NY: Klein give powerful No Child Left Behind defense - City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein gave an impassioned defense of the federal No Child Left Behind law yesterday, saying schools need more testing and accountability - not less - to bolster performance and close the achievement gap. (more)

Come back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NYT: Reining in charter schools - The charter school movement began with the tantalizing promise that independently operated schools would outperform their traditional counterparts — if they could only be exempted from state regulations while receiving public money. (more)

Newark - first new mayor in 2 decades - Cory Booker, a 37-year-old former Rhodes scholar, became Newark's first new mayor in two decades by a landslide Tuesday, ushering in a new era for the struggling city. (more)

An earlier start - Ed Week commentary (subscription required) - Prekindergarten is becoming part of elementary school in the growing number of districts that treat the pre-K-3 years as a distinct learning period. (more)

USA Today: SAT scores drop, some see red flag - Some colleges are reporting double-digit drops in the average SAT scores of applicants this year, even as other credentials, such as class rank and college-prep coursework, remained similar to or grew stronger than last year's. (more)

Nearly half of U.S. children under 5 are minorities - Nearly half of the nation's children under 5 are racial or ethnic minorities, and the percentage is increasing mainly because the Hispanic population is growing so rapidly, according to a census report released today. (more)

Schwarzenegger plans to pay debt, help schools - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to retire a large chunk of the state's debt and boost education funding with more than $5 billion in unexpected revenue from surging tax receipts, according to documents obtained by The Times. (more)

Texas group backs equity for poor schools - Top school groups Tuesday expressed support for a provision to boost funding for poorer school districts that has stalled a Senate vote on a bill to cut property taxes and raise teacher salaries. (more)

Is closing 8 Detroit schools enough? - Observers inside and outside Detroit's school district are asking whether the proposed closures of eight buildings will do enough to help the financially struggling district stay afloat. (more)

AZ: AIMS change may be too late - Weeks before graduation, state lawmakers want to make it easier for students to earn a high school diploma, though it appears unlikely that the measure would benefit this year's seniors. (more)

Tracking the elusive dropout - In the latest volleys in the seemingly interminable battle over how best to calculate graduation rates, Jay Greene of the fairly conservative Manhattan Institute argues that many current methods exaggerate the figures. (more)

USA Today opinion: Accountability is key - Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour writes about public money to be given to a private organization — with no state accountability for its operations. (more)

Missouri votes to create virtual school - Missouri lawmakers approved the creation of a new public school Tuesday that would link students to teachers and textbooks by the computer instead of a traditional classroom. (more)

May 8-12: Tim Mooney vs. Chris Correa on the 65% Solution

fguest — Fri, 12 May 2006 21:15:00 +0000

A number of states are presently considering the so-called "65 percent solution": legislation requiring that 65% of every school district's operational budget be spent in the classroom. According to George Will, a proponent of the idea, only four states--Utah, Tennessee, New York, Maine--spend at least 65% of their budgets in classrooms. Supporters say they only want to make sure that money is being spent efficiently. Critics say the plan disregards other services needed by students, including counselors, librarians, and transportation.

Tim Mooney is a Republican political consultant and one of the organizers behind First Class Education. Chris Correa is a blogger and doctoral student in education and psychology at the University of Michigan.

MONDAY, MAY 8:

Mooney, 8:31 a.m.:

While America’s taxpayers are spending more money for K-12 public education…a lot more money…the percentage reaching our classrooms, teachers and students has fallen for the last four years. Only 61.3% as a national average now reaches America’s classrooms. Twenty states are below 60% reaching their classrooms.

For too long the education funding debate has been “how much money for education.” We want the question to be reversed – “how much education for our money.” If we could make classrooms, teachers and students the first priority by setting a goal of 65% getting to the classroom, we could place $14 billion more into America’s classrooms without a tax increase -- enough for a computer for every student or 300,000 additional teachers, or doubling classroom supplies.

With the future of our children at stake, the tales of waste in education spending are more than frustrating. In Florida alone the Miami-Dade district has 240 administrators making $100,000+ a year, (not one a teacher). Broward’s district has a fleet of over 100 cars. Lee district administrators spent $563,000 on out-of-town travel in the last 10 months. And the Collier district superintendent demanded a mid-contract renegotiation of his compensation to more than $400,000 a year while classroom budgets were being cut and taxes raised. And not one of these districts places 65% in its classrooms.

Will putting more education money in the classroom make a difference? The five states with the highest standardized test scores place the highest average in the classroom (64.12%) and the five states with the lowest test scores place the lowest percentage in the classroom (59.46%).

Better yet, ask any teacher you know these three questions:

Do you spend money out of your pocket for basic classroom supplies?

Can you cite areas of waste outside the classroom?

Would you, your classroom and your students be better off cutting the waste and placing the money into the classroom?

Making classrooms, teachers and students the first priority in education funding is no fad. Seeking value for taxpayer’s money is no distraction. Ensuring that 65% of education funding reaches our classrooms is just common sense.

Correa, 3:54 p.m.:

Tim Mooney asks if the sixty-five percent solution will make a difference in U.S. education. The answer is "no."

First, there is no good evidence that spending 65% of all expenditures in the classroom will have any effect on student achievement. Second, a clumsy definition of "in the classroom" expenditures ensures that the proposal will not address real "waste in education spending." Mooney's organization, First Class Education, is promoting an arbitrary system of micromanagement that will not lead to any substantive improvements in U.S. education.

Tim Mooney states that "five states with the highest standardized test scores" average about 64% in the classroom, but the most recent NAEP reading scores suggest the highest-achieving states spend anywhere from 58% to 69% in the classroom. Additionally, some below-average states spend 64% or more in the classroom.

There isn't one simple or correct way to spend money.

The diversity of effective school budgets becomes even more clear when you look at within-state differences in spending and student achievement. In Texas, Governor Perry signed an executive order requiring that all districts spend 65% or more on classroom spending. When I looked at district spending in Texas, however, I found that there was no relationship between in the classroom spending and student achievement as measured by the state's student assessment. Instead, I found that some districts only spent 40%-50% on "in the classroom" expenditures and managed to get all of their students to meet or exceed state requirements in reading and mathematics. Other districts experienced more mediocre results among their students while committing up to 75% of their budget on "in the classroom" expenditur! es.

I'm not the only one looking into the relationship between spending practices and student achievement. Standard & Poor's more comprehensive analysis leads to the same conclusion:

"Analysis of data in nine states that are currently considering instituting a 65 Percent Solution shows no significant positive correlation between the percentage of funds that districts spend on instruction and the percentage of students who score proficient or higher on state reading and math tests."

In sum, the empirical evidence finds no relationship between spending 65% in classroom spending and improved student achievement. One possible reason for this is that First Class Education's definition of classroom spending is ill-defined and largely irrelevant to student learning.

This is the second major problem with First Class Education's proposal; their definition of "in the classroom" spending is outdated and nonsensical. As you might expect, classroom spending does include teacher salaries and classroom supplies. Beyond that, it's difficult to make sense of the definition. Sports teams' uniforms are included as "in the classroom" spending but library books are excluded. Field trips are included as "in the classroom" spending but transporting students to school is excluded. Football coaches are included as "in the classroom" spending but support staff such as speech pathologists and guidance counselors are excluded.

You get the idea. What counts as "in the classroom" spending is arbitrary and ill-defined. The sixty-five percent requirement would likely lead to bickering about definitions and creative shuffling of roles. None of that would really benefit students in meaningful ways.

With the future of our children at stake, faddish solutions to complex educational problems are more than frustrating. I'll leave you with two important questions:

Why is 65% an appropriate level of spending when there is no evidence that it benefits students' learning? If we are going to heavily regulate local school districts, why not require 50%, 60%, or 70% on classroom spending?
Why should football uniforms count as "in the classroom" spending if library materials such as books and computers do not?

Check back tomorrow for continued debate.

UPDATE: Due to circumstances beyond our control, today's installment of the debate has been delayed. Please check this space tomorrow for continued discussion.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 10/THURSDAY, MAY 11:

Mooney, 4:45 p.m. Wednesday:

Chris's criticisms are similar to those from the National Education Association and other status quo education organizations that are resistant to chance, non-responsive to their own teacher members and uncaring to the plight of the taxpayer.

First, "more money in the classroom won't make a difference." Strangely we hear this most from those advocating for more money being spent on K-12 education overall. They continue to say schools are underfunded, but K-12 education funding for the last four years has increased at a rate of four times that of inflation. We're throwing money at K-12 with the hope of it making a difference, but the percentage of money actually reaching the classrooms continues to fall each year to now just 61.3% as a national average. The number of states with less than even 60% reaching their classrooms has increased from 14 to 20 in the last four years.

So, if our opponents say money directed into the classroom won't improve test scores -- stop asking for the additional money! Ah, but there's the rub. They want more, and more, and more money...they just don't want any accountability on how that money is spent. The 65% goal sets a statewide standard of accountability the voters are beginning to demand. Sure, we'll fund education spending growth, but let's have some value for the money being spent.

The 65% Solution will mean thousands more per classroom by cutting overhead costs and forcing better management of funds. Ask any teacher, they'll tell you more money in their classroom for updated textbooks, hiring an assistant to work with lagging students or bringing back arts and music programs will make a difference. We just want that money to come from better management and greater efficiencies first, rather than the taxpayer. That’s exactly what the private sector does -- efficiencies first, price increases second.

Next, "there isn't one correct way of spending money." We agree, which is why the 65% number is a goal, not an immovable wall. Districts currently below 65% are asked to improve at 2% a year till the 65% goal is met. Local school boards get to decide what to spend the additional classroom dollars on -- pay their teachers more, ensure they have proper supplies, or bring in classroom computers -- whatever the local school board decides. Additionally, if there's a reason a district can't or shouldn't reach 65% in the classroom, it can ask for a waiver from the highest statewide elected education official, the state superintendent (if elected) or the governor. We expect every school district to place as high a percentage in the classroom as possible, with 65% being shown to be achievable by higher performing states, or at least tell the voters why that's not possible.

Lastly is the "definition" concern. The National Center for Education Statistics has been collecting data based on the same classroom instruction definition for literally decades and not once has the education bureaucracy ever complained. But, now that they're going to be held accountable for their wasteful spending habits, they're screaming bloody murder.

Inside the classroom is pretty much everything that touches the kid in a learning environment. Here's what the Oklahoma initiative says by example:

“Classroom Instructional Expenditures” means expenditures directly related to classroom instruction, including, but not limited to, instructional staff and instructional materials. “Instructional” shall include activities dealing directly with interaction between students and teachers or other classroom and instructional personnel, special education instruction, tutors, books, classroom computers, general instruction supplies, instructional aides, libraries and librarians, class activities such as field trips, athletics, arts, music and multidisciplinary learning, and extra curricular activities including, but not limited to, drama, sports and band

Outside includes administration, food services, maintenance, transportation and the like. This is not to say these things aren’t important. It is to say for the sake of teachers, students and taxpayers these things should be delivered as efficiently as possible. Opponents will scream, “Johnny won’t have a bus. Jane won’t have a nurse. Joe won’t have a counselor. And there will be no heat in the schools.” But ask yourself, do schools in Maine have heat? Do Minnesota schools have buses? Do Utah schools have nurses? And do New York schools have counselors? (NY overall puts 68 cents on the dollar in the classroom because efficient, upstate, high-performing schools do so well they bring the total statewide average up for their wasteful brethren from NYC).

These states all have these basic services and they all average at 65% or above using the described definition above.

If these states and about a quarter of all school districts across America can get 65% into their classrooms, why shouldn’t every school district at least try…or at least tell their taxpayers why they can’t.

Correa, 9:19 a.m. Thursday:

I never said "more money in the classroom won't make a difference." I said the sixty-five percent solution won't make a difference. The definition of classroom spending is not well thought-out and there's no evidence that spending 65% of all expenditures on what you call "in the classroom" spending will make a difference in student achievement. I'm all for efficient and intelligent management of resources in schools, but I need more than nice-sounding slogans to convince me that states should micromanage district budgets and create new bureaucracy to monitor school spending.

The concern about definitions is a rather important problem because what counts as "in the classroom" spending is at the heart of the proposal. Your claim that the 65% includes "everything that touches the kid in a learning environment" appears disingenuous to me. First, that's a far cry from what the original NCES definition (simply labeled 'Instruction') claims to be. Your own website claims librarians and other instructional support do not count as "in the classroom" expenditures. This is the definition used by most state initiatives that your group has funded.

So why should soccer coaches be included as "in the classroom" spending while reading specialists are not?

I have nothing against coaches, of course. I'm just trying to figure out why they are more important to students' lives than reading specialists, speech therapists, counselors, librarians, and other support staff that are dismissed as "out of classroom" expenditures.

The Oklahoma initiative is interesting because they are broadening the definition of what counts as "in the classroom" and basically including two other categories of expenditures in the NCES finances database. If Oklahoma really ends up including all instructional support services such as librarians, reading specialists, and so on, the state will be close to spending 67% of school expenditures "in the classroom". If that's the case, I wonder why the 65% policy is needed at all. Does the average Oklahoma school need less money spent "in the classroom"?

Finally, I think it's worth reflecting on the potential costs of this so-called solution. After all, the 65% mandate might be harmless at worst even if it's true that the definition of "in the classroom" spending is profoundly flawed and there's absolutely no evidence that student achievement improves when schools pass the 65% threshold.

I don't think that's the case, however. There could be significant negative consequences to a 65% mandate.

First, the one-size-fits-all approach could stifle real innovations in schooling and shift policy-makers' focus away from important outcomes such as student achievement. In many ways, the 65% solution is old-fashioned ineffective education reform because it simply focuses on what goes in to schooling (money) and ignores the outcomes of schooling (learning). Contemporary education policies such as No Child Left Behind allow schools a good deal of freedom as long as they continue to demonstrate that their students are learning. As I outlined in my previous contribution, there are a number of very effective schools that spend as little as 40%-50% on what First Class Education calls "in the classroom" spending. There's no reason to re-structure these schools' finances just because other districts have engaged in wasteful spending. The 65% goal also doesn't necessarily work well for school districts experimenting with new structures and programs, including innovative distance-learning programs, that will help their students much more than shifting dollars around to meet some arbitrary 65% goal. In Checker Finn's analysis the proposal, he noted that "to shackle a state’s or school system’s education budget to such a formula may serve to freeze the status quo."

The 65% solution also represents a real distraction for policy-makers. First Class Education produced a now-infamous memo (acquired by the Austin American-Statesman) that suggests the 65% goal gives Republicans" a viable answer to in the classroom improvement of education" for the upcoming election years. I don't think anything could be further from the truth. While more and more voters are dismissing the idea as "nothing more than a political ploy," many legislators in support of this bill are fooling themselves into thinking they are improving education without addressing the challenging, complex, and important educational issues of our times.

The 65% solution is more than ineffective. It’s a step backwards.

THURSDAY, MAY 11

Mooney, 1:39 p.m.

As Ronald Reagan famously once said in a debate, "There you go again!"

The education bureaucracy's "This is impossible and we're already doing it" argument. Let's take 'em one at a time.

There's no "micro-managing" of school budgets with the 65% Solution. Voters will say, preferably via the initiative process, that we want to ensure classrooms, teachers and kids are the first priority in education funding by setting a goal of 65%. What the additional classroom spending will be spent on and how the local money will be moved from the largess outside the classroom will be determined by the local school board. And as was stated before twice, if a district can't get to 65%, there a waiver provision. Just tell the State Superintendent or Governor and the parents and taxpayers why 65% isn't possible for your district when so many others can.

School districts are often terribly inefficient and their budgets mind-numbingly complicated. That's why so few parents and taxpayers seek out further information on how the money is actually being spend. The 65% sets a "strike zone" for spending and begins a conversation between the taxpayers and those spending the taxpayers money, making the latter justify their actions to the former.

Back once again to the definition. The definition is the NCES definition plus libraries and librarians. Oklahoma's numbers are about 59 cents according to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, not 67%.

And far from freezing the status quo, this reform is being fought by the NEA and their state minions in a defense of the status quo. They know if the voters start demanding value for their money, their monopolistic system will be in danger of even further calls for change.

As far as a distraction...seeking value for every taxpayer dollar is no distraction. Hey, it's our money, it's our students, it's our schools. It's about time we demanded some explanation on how this money is being spent.

Horror stories abound of waste. And examples of saving being realized also exist. Here's a few.

Spending:

Miami-Dade SD, FL – 240 Administrators making in excess of $100,000 a year!
Deer Valley SD, AZ – 101 school buses…and 167 cars!
Minneapolis, MN – Three Superintendents take $450,000+ severance package in addition to state retirement…for quitting mid-contract!
Burlington, Vermont – Superintendent telecommutes January – March from Florida!
GM Auto Fleet Sales #1 customer in America – School Districts!

Savings:

Hillsboro SD, OR – Saves $2 million by competitive bid for maintenance service!
Clark County, NV – Saves $9 million on electric bills thru incentive of 10% of savings going to principles for whatever their school needs.
Reason/Deloitte report shows $9 billion in savings possible for small districts through cooperative purchasing with neighboring school districts.

Ask any teacher,

Do you spend money out of your own pocket for basic classroom supplies?
Can you name three areas of waste outside the classroom…can you name three more?
Would your classroom work better if the waste you’ve identified was cut and the money saved moved to your classroom?”

As Ben Franklin said, “A Penny saved is a penny earned.”

In America's K-12 public education, five pennies saved equals $14 billion earned!

That's enough for a new computer for every student in America, or 300,000 additional teachers at a starting salary of $40,000 a year, or doubling of classroom supplies. Not with more taxes, but with some common-sense savings the private sector would demand of any company.

No wonder Governors from Bill Richardson of New Mexico to Sonny Perdue of Georgia support getting 65% into their classrooms. They're joined by Governors Perry, Blunt, Bush, Owens and Pawlenty. They're joined by nearly 80% of the voters.

Seeking value for the taxpayer dollar may be passe' in Washington and in many school districts, but the voters, parents and taxpayers are beginning to demand more for their dollar and more for their vote.

Will this solve every problem in education, certainly not. Just as medical savings accounts won't solve the health care crisis or capital gains tax cuts solve systemic inner city poverty. But each is a step in the right direction.

Or we can sit still, either waiting for the perfect politically unobtainable reform, or simply saying the educrats blocking reform win.

I would rather win one for the taxpayers and teachers, parents and students by making the classroom, teachers and students the first priority in education funding, rather than the bureaucracy.

In politics...and yes every piece of legislation and every ballot proposition is political in nature, always has been always will be...winning begets winning. And those in favor of education reforms need to continue to have progress in reforms of all kinds, lest the bureaucratic status quo beast grow ever stronger and ever more resistant to change.

Correa, 5:14 p.m.:

There I went again, and yet I still haven't heard why soccer coaches should count as "in the classroom" expenditures when reading specialists do not.

I'll assume there's no good answer to that question, so let's move on.

Contrary to your clai ms, I do think it's possible to get most districts to commit 65% of their budgets to "in the classroom" spending. Small districts with fixed costs may need a tax increase to reach that goal and other districts will undoubtedly take advantage of definitional loopholes and creative accounting practices, but I do think it's possible.

If it's possible to get all districts to spend 65% "in the classroom", is it a worthy goal for U.S. school systems?

I think the answer to that question depends on how you view schools. I see schools as places of learning and I don't see how this proposal will help students learn.

There's a reason that no researcher can find a correlation between student achievement and spending 65% on "in the classroom" expenses. What you call "common-sense savings" doesn't seem to make any sense at all considering what we know about effective learning environments. There are a lot of components to schools besides football uniforms, teacher salaries, and field trips that distinguish effective schools from the rest. Consider that more and more research is documenting the effect of teachers' knowledge on student learning. It seems that rigorous professional development of teachers could be critical to providing high quality instruction to all students, but the sixty-five percent solution dismisses professional development as a wasteful "support service."

Tim, you also keep mentioning how the savings could lead to more computers in the classroom. I wonder how useful those new computers will be if districts are pressured to skimp on wasteful "out of classroom" costs such as networking infrastructure, technical support staff, and media specialists?

Schools should never feel pressure to cut corners in any of these areas just so that they can move towards some admittedly arbitrary goal.

What we both probably agree on is that taxpayers have the right and responsibility to hold schools accountable. But what should schools be held accountable for? I don't think all schools need to be held accountable for spending money in some particular way. Taxpayers' investment in schools should produce capable students, not cookie-cutter budgets. Let local school boards and voters decide if a superintendent in Vermont can be effective when he travels. There's no reason to create a new layer of bureaucracy to process waivers, dilute local control, and make sure a school budget in Oklahoma looks like one in Minnesota.

Instead, I believe schools need the freedom to innovate more and be held accountable for the outcomes that matter. Are students learning to read in elementary schools? Do all students, regardless of race or their family wealth, enter high school with the skills they need to succeed? Are high school students graduating with what they they need to k! now for their next role in the workplace or college?

These are the outcomes schools need to be held accountable for. The sixty-five percent solution is a step away from this very important goal.

Check back for the final installment of this debate.

FRIDAY, MAY 12

Mooney, 2:41 p.m.

Chris, classroom instruction according to the NCES includes coaches because they're involved in teaching kids a skill. Student athletes are almost always better students because of their involvement in sports. With more youth in America having weight problems and the health related conditions, we need to get physical education back into our curriculum, as well as arts and music.

Maybe if a school district had fewer cars for their administrators to drive around, not to mention just fewer administrators, we could put these items back into a student's daily routine.

As far as reading coaches are concerned, if they're coaching the students, they're included in the classroom.

And once again Chris, there is ZERO new bureaucracy added with the 65% Solution. School districts are already doing this accounting and reporting these numbers to each state superintendent. All we're doing is making these numbers meaningful by allowing the voters to say that our education priorities are the classroom, teachers and students.

You say the teacher makes the biggest difference in outcomes. We agree. That's why we want teachers paid more and not to have to take money out of their limited pockets for basic classroom supplies. We want those additional classroom dollars to come not from higher taxes, but through greater efficiencies. (Please don't tell me you think we've reached maximum efficiency in America's school systems.)

That's why the National Taxpayer Union and Americans for Tax Reform both strongly endorse the 65% Solution.

And yes, I want every school administrator to feel tremendous pressure to justify how they spend money. (Starting with their car allowances -- the average car allowance for a Superintendent in America is $750 a month, enough to have the local BMW dealership to keep a Superintendent's phone number on speed dial!)

Would you ever contribute to a charity that spent less than 65% of its budget on its core activity? Would you own the stock of a business that spent more than 35% of its budget on its general overhead? Without market pressures, bureaucracies always grown fat and resistant to change. Best way to deal with this is to bring market competition to education, but until that happens, we need to simply shame the bureaucracy into thinking of its students first and itself second.

Bottom line is we want one question asked and answered in as public way as possible:

"Before we spend this dollar outside the classroom, could it be better spent inside the classroom?"

With America's classrooms receiving only 61.3% of education operational budgets as a national average, with that percentage having declined four years in a row while education budgets have increased at record pace, with 20 states not even getting 60% in their classrooms, this question is either not being asked often enough or answered correctly enough.

Change in education is coming. The 65% Solution is but one part of the change we need. The biggest part of educational change is to remember why schools exist in the first place -- to teach students in a classroom environment.

That's why we need to return the focus to classroom instruction, and ensure at least 65% of our budgets get to the classroom, the teachers and the students. That's exactly what the teachers and taxpayers, parents and students want.

Correa, 5:15 p.m.:

Reading specialists also teach students a skill - a rather important one - but NCES categorizes all instructional specialists as "instrucional staff support services" rather than "instruction". In other words, reading specialists and a number of other important people working with students are not included in the 61.3% national average that you repeatedly cite. You either have to significantly broaden the definition of what counts as "in the classroom spending" (in which case the arbitrary 65% goal may already met in most U.S. school districts) or you have to justify to voters why soccer coaches and field trips are more important than reading specialists, librarians, and speech pathologists.

This is just one of many problems of a "solution" that looks well-meaning but is flawed and far too simplistic to improve schooling in any meaningful way. In closing, I would like to review the significant shortcomings associated with the three main goals of the intiative.

1. Operational Efficiency

Does the sixty-five percent solution really "return the focus to classroom instruction"?

If it did, it would reward districts for allocating funds for instructional specialists, support for technology in the classroom, and professional development. The reality is that the initiative discourages districts from "wasting" money in these areas because First Class Education's definition of "in the classroom" is out of touch with reality and excludes many resources that really matter to teachers, parents, and students.

Tim Mooney has cited some compelling anecdotes of administrative waste, but administrators account for only about 7% of all school expenditures across the nation. That's even true in the Miami-Dade district he likes to talk about, where "in the classroom" funding is already above 60%. It's unlikely that the 65% solution will significantly cut down on administrative waste in Miami-Dade or anywhere else because most "out of classroom" costs have nothing to do with administration. The majority of the "out of classroom" funding goes to practical needs such as maintenance of buildings and transporting students to school. It also goes to professionals who work closely with students, including librarians, speech therapists, media specialists, counselors, nurses, and instructional specialists.

The absurd definitions and arbitrary targets in this intiative all but ensure that real wasteful spending won't be curbed while thousands of well-run school districts are pressured to fit into some one-size-fits-all pattern of spending. This simply doesn't make sense given the diversity of school districts in this country; local school boards and voters are the ones who need to monitor school spending.

2. Student Achievement

In the beginning of this debate, Tim Mooney claimed that "putting more education money in the classroom can make a difference" and he supported this idea by citing the average achievement scores of top five and bottom five states.

There is no good evidence that correlates a school districts' "in the classroom" spending with student achievement.
This seems counter-intuitive, but it's important to remember that "in the classroom" spending doesn't really mean "in the classroom" spending. It's possible for schools to produce high-achieving students when they heavily invest in important educational resources that happen to fall outside of First Class Education's unusual definition. Some very successful school districts in Texas only spend about 50% on what First Class Education calls "in the classroom" expenditures. These districts should not be forced to overhaul their system just because some schools in Utah happen to find success by spending 65% or so on "in the classroom" expenditures.

3. Political Gains

The First Class Education memo cites a number of political benefits for Republicans who endorse this idea. Most important is the possibility that Republicans will gain voter support for vouchers after they endorse this initiative and gain "greater credibility on public education issues." It probably doesn't surprise you that I believe politicians will lose credibility on educational issues when they endorse this initiative and fail to address more significant problems in the schools. Education policy analysts - both right- and left-leaning, all agree that the sixty five percent solution is simplistic and unlikely to lead to real improvement i! n U.S. schools. As more people recognize the initiative for what it is, legislators will learn to keep a safe distance from it. Republican senators in Florida failed to pass the sixty-five percent solution a few weeks ago, and I doubt they will be the last group of legislators to have second thoughts about endorsing this initiative.

If you've read this far into the debate, you have also probably noticed a few gratuitous snipes directed towards teacher unions. It shouldn't surprise you that one of the perceived benefits of the initiative is that it will cause tension within teacher unions when it "naturally pits administrators and teachers at odds with one another." That's an interesting idea, but it isn't going to happen. Teacher unions are strongly against this so-called solution and it's unlikely that there will be any internal dissent over this.

In sum, the sixty-five percent solution falls short of the major goals Tim Mooney has outlined. It is unlikely to improve operational efficiency or student achievement, and even the political benefits seem doubtful at this point.

Finally, I would like to thank Tim Mooney for participating in this exchange and I would like to thank the good folks at Edspresso for inviting me to this debate. I know I learned a good deal during this experience and I hope the readers have as well. As this well-funded movement reaches more states over the next year or two, I hope legislators, taxpayers, and educators will take a closer look at what this initiative is really all about.

The sky is falling!!!

edspresso — Tue, 09 May 2006 21:02:00 +0000

Boy oh boy.

On Wednesday, April 26 th , the United Federation of Teachers, the public school teachers union in New York City, struck a revolutionary blow to take back their profession. Its 1400 chapter leaders and delegates voted unanimously, with no dissent, in favor of the following motion, authored by me (Ron Isaac--ed.):
WHEREAS: The UFT, together with its brother and sister public employee unions, is under relentless, brutal, and coordinated attack by individuals and agencies of City government as well as certain of their allies in the media, corporate community, and elsewhere; and

Which is, of course, why Rupert is getting all chummy with Hillary.

WHEREAS: These attacks are fueled by the current national climate of hostility to organized labor, as aggressively advanced through propaganda and policies of the federal government and otherwise; and

Well, by golly, somebody in the Bush Administration is falling down on the job. Why on earth haven't they dispatched a platoon to put down those uppity unionistas striking in Vermont? And Lord Rove doesn't get on the ball, Pennsylvania could be next!

WHEREAS: As a result of this massively funded and sustained campaign to undermine among the public and especially our members, grasp of and support for our purposes and mission, certain damage or potential damage has been suffered; and

"Massively funded"...we'll get to that in a minute.

WHEREAS: Such damage tends to demoralize and divide us against ourselves, drain us of our capacity to fulfill our noble agenda as unionists and arguably weaken our bargaining position, thus playing into the hands of our common enemy; be it

"Bargaining position". Bargaining for what, precisely? A commenter over at Joanne Jacobs's engaged in a moment of candor some months ago:

I'm a teacher and member of NEA and UTLA (United Teachers Los Angeles). Unions, whether teachers or auto workers, et al. are about two essential things: wages and working conditions. Period. I'm not naive enough to believe that NEA/UTLA really cares about improving pedagogy or properly spending TAXPAYER money. The teacher who wrote the article ranted on about how unfair and sterotypical he thought Stossel's portrayal of public education is, but never refuted the facts presented, namely that SPENDING MORE MONEY ON PUBLIC EDUCATION DOES NOT LEAD TO IMPROVEMENTS. The U.S taxpayer has wasted BILLIONS of dollars on idiotic programs such as Title I, Bilingual Education, more bureaucratic administrators, and supplies that are either vandalized or go unused. I see it every day at my school in Los Angeles. Students with fewer supplies and larger classes in other countries often outperform American public school students. Catholic schools educate their students for less than half of what taxpayers spend on the average public school student in California. It's the values, stupid. Parents who parent properly, teachers who teach proficiently, and students who make the effort are what it takes to be successful, not the taxpayers. 'Nuff said.

And what article does this particular comment refer to? Oh wait, here it is--it's this one, written by none other than Ron Isaac!

Oh, one other thing...common "enemy"? So there's just one? I thought the gubmit, media, corporate community, and others were in on this.

Back to Isaac's glorious call to arms:

RESOLVED: That the UFT engage in a vigorous, many-fronted, high-priority program of chapter-building to jump-start a pro-unionist awareness among newer members, re-educate our veterans, and spark among the whole Organization, school-based and beyond, vitality in activism, conciliation, and a new militancy.

Um, guys? You're already widely viewed as adversaries. Adopting a "many-fronted" program of "new militancy" probably won't do much to change that perception.

This resolution is a unifying declaration that allows for the embrace of all members of the UFT, a union of professionals, without anyone's sacrifice of principle. It acknowledges their role and contributions to the unionist family, and the many-pronged attack against them by corporate, government, and media forces.

"Without anyone's sacrifice of principles"...giggle snort.

It also recognizes the filthy rich funding of their reactionary enemies' campaign to confuse the public, split and neutralize the union, and undermine and destroy the entire labor movement.

"Filthy rich funding"? Let's take a look at the UFT's cash reserves. This comes courtesy of the Employment Standards Administration of the Department of Labor:

So from 2000 to 2004, the UFT:

Added 15,000 new members, an increase of nearly 11 percent
Increased its total receipts by nearly $76 million, or 79%
Increased its total assets by nearly $89 million, or 194%

Even assuming ~~Imperial Stormtroopers~~ ~~the military-industrial complex~~ some nebulous, shadowy cabal of corporate/government/media interests has banded together to crush the ~~small band of Rebel forces~~ teachers' union, it's not as though the UFT doesn't have a rather significant stockpile of weaponry at its disposal.

My resolution is also a call to action. It is a call to raise awareness and inject fresh activism into all members of the teachers union, who encompasses all public school teachers, paraprofessionals, social workers, psychologists, and others. It inspires veterans as well as those entering the profession during the current anti-union climate.

If the work of your parent organization is any indication, it would seem your state parent organization, New York State United Teachers, has been extremely vocal and active in recent months. So what's the problem in the Big Apple? Maybe folks like NYC Educator, a loud-and-proud UFT member, could fill in the blanks.

The triumphant resolution...

"Triumphant"? So it's over before it even started? No fair!

...is also an appeal to drive the great New York City teachers union, and ultimately others also, as a single organism, into the goal of unapologetic militancy in the wake and face of insults, threats, and actual deeds committed against them.

"Single organism"? "Unapologetic militancy" ove r "actual deeds"? Okay, listen. You're an English teacher, right? Don't you mention something to your students about the importance of substance over style--that overheated rhetoric can distract from the message? Oh...you don't? Well, we didn't think so.

By passing this resolution by acclamation, the teachers union has served notice and opened the eyes of the tycoons of Tweed, the seat of Department of Education management, named after the 19 th -century corrupt New York politician “Boss Tweed.”

"The tycoons of Tweed"--another turn of phrase brought to you by...none other than Ron Isaac!

From corner to corner, up and down the aisles, and from every direction of the compass in the packed auditorium, the affirmative votes of the delegates and chapter leaders cried out in unison for the common victory of all who seek quality and dignity in American public education.

Insert melodramatic John Williams orchestral score here.

And this fellow teaches in NYC public schools. Hey, Big Apple--your tax dollars at work!

Los Angeles edunews highlights

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 14:29:18 +0000

The L.A. Times says LAUSD could face an audit:

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and leaders of several neighboring cities will call today for a state audit of student achievement in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Villaraigosa and mayors from other cities served by the school system want a joint committee of the Assembly and state Senate to investigate why the district's dropout rate is so high and its test scores so low, according to a letter outlining their request.

The move for a state audit comes as Villaraigosa seeks legislation that would effectively put him in charge of the nation's second-largest school district and turn its elected board into a quasi-advisory body.

"We are deeply concerned about the failure of LAUSD's schools to meet the basic educational needs of our children," the mayors wrote in their letter to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. "Why are these kids not learning and achieving at the levels they should be?"

The superintendent's predictable reaction:

In a letter to Villaraigosa Tuesday, Supt. Roy Romer urged the mayor "to not waste the taxpayers' money to orchestrate this event."

Romer said in an interview that the district was preparing for a comprehensive performance audit called for in an agreement with the teachers union.

"It is frustrating, because if you really want to help us educate students better, you would not pile another audit on us," Romer said.

"I'd rather spend our money on students."

On that last line, cue hysterical laughter. Meanwhile, back in Sacramento:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to retire a large chunk of the state's debt and boost education funding with more than $5 billion in unexpected revenue from surging tax receipts, according to documents obtained by The Times.

The governor will offer details on the windfall, and the plan for spending it, in a revised budget proposal on Friday. The billions he will propose returning to schools promise to help him end a bruising political battle that has dogged his administration.

The revised plan builds upon the $125.6-billion spending blueprint Schwarzenegger presented to the Legislature in January. The earlier budget was criticized by fiscal conservatives for continuing to commit more spending than the state was projected to bring in and by Democrats for not doing enough to restore some of the programs that had been eroded through three years of budget cuts.

Since then, the strong stock market and business gains that were more robust than anticipated led to record April collections for the state. The $5 billion in extra cash goes a long way in the state budget, allowing the governor to increase debt repayment, meet the demands of school groups and still have some extra left over for his own pet programs.

According to this NPR report from December, California isn't the only state finding itself with more money than planned.

Cory Booker: victory!

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 15:17:23 +0000

First he was an Alliance for School Choice board member. Now, he's the next mayor of Newark:

Cory Booker, a 37-year-old former Rhodes scholar, became Newark's first new mayor in two decades by a landslide Tuesday, ushering in a new era for the struggling city.

Booker swamped his nearest challenger, state Sen. Ronald L. Rice, taking 72 percent of the vote compared with 24 percent for the lawmaker in the nonpartisan election.

Booker, a Democrat, called his victory a mandate. He takes office July 1.

Like us, The Chalkboard and True Schools are pleased. Congratulations, Cory!

Teacher certification pointless?

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 18:24:00 +0000

We didn't have a chance to get to this yesterday, but it tends to reflect rather badly on the idea that one must have the blessing of the edustablishment via certification to be considered a good teacher. (Mike Antonucci vents a bit about it here.)

And to think that we might still be waiting for even these cursory results were it not for gentle nudging from Eduwonk. Viva la edusphere!

Following the money

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 20:56:00 +0000

Compliments of this week's Carnival of Education comes this from Larry Sankey at A Revolution of One, who takes a good look at the black liberal Democrat behind Omaha's controversial school redistricting plan.

We'll admit neglecting the Omaha plan; recent events in Florida and L.A. have occupied the balance of our time. One small passage in this post, however, caught our eye:

My European friends ask me all the time why America doesn't do what they do in Europe. The first time I was asked was 20 years ago by a friend from the Netherlands. Just recently I was asked by a German friend. Why not allocate money for all the schools from the state's general tax base, and not by district according to real estate taxes, as is the current practice? Then every school gets the same amount of money per student no matter whether the students are black, white, brown, or any other minority. Whether their parents are rich or poor. That ways no child is truly left behind.

That, in short, is how American public education is funded. It's directly connected to real estate values. If you want at least a decent (not great, but decent) public school for your kid, all you have to do is have the wherewithal to buy a decent house. Of course, that is going to vary from one place to the next--we don't want to know what it would take to buy a decent house in Hispanic Pundit's neck of the woods--but if you can acquire, say, a $300,000 house, you can be more (but not entirely) confident the school your child will attend will be at least adequate.

Which is, as the Larry's European acquaintances pointed out, a major issue with education equities in this country--especially with the poor, who can't afford to move to areas where real estate values are high enough to produce the kind of tax revenues that fund those schools.

And tying education funding to the real estate market raises even greater inequities. As even casual observers are probably aware, real estate values across the nation have ascended to stratospheric heights in recent years. While this might help erase some of the inequities among school districts in the short term (higher real estate values = bigger tax base), in the long term it will likely produce even greater disparities, especially if suburban real estate prices outpace urban values.

This is at least one reason that liberals, at least in theory, should be some of the strongest supporters of vouchers. What could be more level than simply tying annual per-pupil spending to the kid as opposed to generating that amount out of the value of the kid's home?

NYC schools chancellor: pro-NCLB?!

edspresso — Wed, 10 May 2006 20:59:00 +0000

Maybe it's just us, but we expect Joel Klein to get taken out behind the NEA woodshed any minute now:

City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein gave an impassioned defense of the federal No Child Left Behind law yesterday, saying schools need more testing and accountability - not less - to bolster performance and close the achievement gap.

And Klein stressed that the city's own promotion policies and school measures go well beyond what the NCLB requires.

The NCLB - approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush in 2001 - requires standardized testing in schools and a breakdown in scores of students by race, ethnicity and disability.

"It is incredibly valuable because it recognizes that the achievement gap - the gap that separates our African-American and Latino students from their white and Asian peers - is the chief problem in American schooling," Klein said during a speech before the Aspen Institute's Commission on NCLB in West Hartford, Conn.

Klein testified right after Connecticut officials, who filed suit against the U.S. Education Department, claiming the federal law is too intrusive and requires too many tests. Klein disagreed.

"When they passed NCLB, our national leaders finally took responsibility for the fact that white and Asian students are performing four years ahead of African-American and Latino students in high school. Four years. And this law finally put muscle behind the attempt to close that gap," Klein said.

Our boss is publicly skeptical ("agnostic", more specifically) on NCLB. But it's almost astonishing to find a school administrator a) admitting some good has arisen out of accountability and b) welcoming consequences for poor performance.

(Of course, some might ask whether this is best resolved on the federal level...)

Education News for Thursday, May 11

Daily News — Thu, 11 May 2006 09:18:39 +0000

GOP Joins Inquiry About Uncounted Kids - In an expanding call for answers, Republicans have joined Democrats in asking the Education Department why the test scores of many minority students are not being counted as promised under the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Florida wants feds to compile national teacher pay figures - State education officials want the federal government to compile comparative teacher pay numbers across the nation, but a teachers union spokesman dismissed the idea as public relations spin to make Florida's salaries look better than they are. (more)

FCAT writing scores show improvement - Intense classes, practice tests and teacher preparation propel gains in the Tallahassee area. (more)

State Education board considers plan to revamp school rankings - The California Board of Education on Wednesday unanimously approved a change that will require schools to improve the performance of blacks, English learners and other minorities in order to reach state achievement goals. (more)

School tries incentives - Tutoring, teacher specialists, prizes, even a day at an amusement park— one Utah junior high school hopes these and other measures will be enough lift the school from No Child Left Behind's sanctions that open the door for a state school takeover. (more)

Villaraigosa's Request for a State Audit of L.A. Unified Prompts a Rebuke From Romer - Los Angeles schools chief Roy Romer fired off a stern rebuttal to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's call for a state audit Wednesday, saying that he and the Board of Education welcome the review but reject the mayor's continued attacks on the school district. (more)

UPDATE:

Iowa poised to enact new tuition tax credit - Ed Week (subscription required) - Iowa lawmakers approved a measure May 2 that would establish a tax credit for individuals who make donations to groups that provide scholarships to help low-income students pay tuition at private religious or secular schools. (more)

Senate backs more hurricane relief for schools - Ed Week (subscription required)-States and school districts that opened their doors to students displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are anxiously watching the fate of $650 million in a potential second round of federal aid to cover the costs of educating such students. (more)

Expectations raised for Calif. minority students - The state Board of Education on Wednesday unanimously approved a change that will require schools to improve the performance of blacks, English learners and other minorities in order to reach state achievement goals. (more)

Let Florida voters decide on vouchers - Students in schools that have failed them should not be trapped in those schools merely because their parents cannot afford a better educational choice. Families with more financial resources make these choices regularly, but students with limited resources cannot. (more)

Tuition tax credit group told to open up books - South Carolinians for Responsible Government, a pro-tuition tax credit group, has until today to disclose where it gets and spends its money, an official with the State Ethics Commission said. (more)

Wisconsin pulls money to voucher programs - A long-simmering dispute between the state Department of Public Instruction and one of the schools that has been in Milwaukee's voucher program the longest came to a boil Tuesday with the DPI cutting off the school's money and leaders of a half-dozen voucher schools accusing the department of targeting black schools. (more)

Charters harder to get them before - Ed Week (Subscription required) - Charter school authorizers are getting “choosier” about which applications for schools they will accept and are basing decisions not to renew charters more on student-achievement issues than previously recognized, an analysis by a pro-charter organization finds. (more)

Hearing from the other side of the Florida voucher debate

edspresso — Thu, 11 May 2006 13:39:33 +0000

Roberto Martinez, former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida and member of the state Department of Education:

Students in schools that have failed them should not be trapped in those schools merely because their parents cannot afford a better educational choice. Families with more financial resources make these choices regularly, but students with limited resources cannot. Why shouldn't low-income students be given that same choice through school vouchers? The case for school choice is that morally clear.
Regrettably, last week the Florida Senate voted to deny Floridians the opportunity to decide for themselves whether to amend the state's Constitution to protect school choice. The amendment is necessary to override a decision by the Florida Supreme Court, which invalidated Florida's landmark effort to enhance parental choice over their children's education.
Apart from its moral imperative, school choice, through vouchers and their threat, has been shown to improve the quality of public education in our state. Under Florida's principal voucher program (the Opportunity Scholarships Program, OPS, created by Gov. Jeb Bush's A+ Accountability Plan), students at schools that fail two out of any four years can receive a voucher to attend any school -- public or private. Research at Harvard University and elsewhere has concluded that Florida's voucher program has had a positive impact on student performance in public schools. The gains have been greatest among African-American students.
This school year, 740 students participated in the OSP: 64 percent are African Americans, 30 percent are Hispanics and most come from low-income families.
Unfortunately, the Florida Supreme Court decision eliminated the OSP. This is the first time that the state's Supreme Court has eliminated an educational program solely because private schools participate in them. That ruling threatens adversely to affect thousands of school children enrolled in other scholarship programs in which private schools also participate.

Remember that the Florida ruling was based on uniformity, not on the sectarian status of the schools. As a result, rest assured that ACLUNEAAFT lawsuits against all other forms of school choice in Florida are well on their way.

Paternalism in letter to the editor

edspresso — Thu, 11 May 2006 13:56:27 +0000

Saw this in today's letters to the editor at the St. Petersburg Times:

I am not a fan of vouchers to fund private education. If school choice has taught us nothing else, it is that it's hard for even the most informed parents to make school decisions. What about those who are less informed?

The various voucher programs in the state predominantly serve lower-income families. So this reader is effectively saying poor people are too ignorant to make proper education decisions for their kids. We find that more than a bit insulting.

Perhaps I am cynical, but when I hear of a child who has gone from being a "D" student to an "A" student upon entering a private school, I wonder if it is the child who has improved, or the grade.

Generally speaking, it takes around four years for a student to see solid, measurable improvement upon entering a voucher school. So yes, perhaps you are cynical.

Since lawmakers are determined to keep pushing school vouchers, then I suggest they make it the law that all students in Florida, whether they are private, public or home-schooled, must take the FCAT. The results should have to be published as they are for public schools. If the FCAT is our benchmark, this would ensure that all students are meeting the required standard.

As we said recently with respect to testing, the sort of comparisons that you want to see have been taking place for years now through testing in choice schools. Furthermore, the accountability legislation just passed--which school choice advocates have been fighting for over the last two to three years--now makes such testing mandatory.

Note to the Palm Beach Post, et al: your misinformation campaign is clearly working.

New arguments against school choice from the Palm Beach Post

edspresso — Thu, 11 May 2006 14:39:05 +0000

A jazz trumpeter once said that it is possible, but not necessarily advisable, to play an entire improvised solo using just one note. In that spirit, we recognize the poor tone, atrocious tuning, weak range, and generally inferior sound of this screed by Palm Beach Post columnist Jac Wilder VerSteeg.

From a May 2 Palm Beach Post article: "As many as 1,200 Palm Beach County high school seniors may not graduate this month because they have not passed the reading or math portions of the 10th-grade Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test."

That's a whole high school full of kids, folks. Some of them won't get diplomas even though they've passed all the courses required to graduate.

That's an insane policy. On what basis does the state decide that the FCAT is a better measure of achievement than four years of classes and grades? How does it help any kid to take away his or her diploma?

Because those four years of classes may have been watered-down tripe, making the grades for said classes unreliable measurements of a student's knowledge. (Side note, we're actually quite interested in holding a debate on the subject of high-stakes testing. Want to participate? Know somebody who would? E-mail address: rboots at allianceREMOVETHISforschoolchoice dot org.)

There's an easy fix. Just give Florida's public school students the same kind of breaks the state gives to voucher students who attend private schools.

Boy, you were just itching to take this article into yet another round of beatings on the voucher program, eh? Kind of like that silly old Rodney Dangerfield joke about going to a boxing match and a hockey game breaking out...

The Legislature this year belatedly passed "accountability" measures for private schools that take vouchers. Scandals - many of them reported first in The Post - finally moved legislators to act.

Upon reaching this point in his article, VerSteeg reaches for a form titled "PALM BEACH POST REQUIREMENTS FOR WRITING ON SCHOOL CHOICE":

"Accountability" in sneer quotes...check.
Voucher schools = money laundering...check.
Disregard history on accountability legislation and school choice advocates...checkity check. (Major school choice advocates in the state have been pushing for accountability legislation for three years.)

Back to the article:

Compared with what public schools are forced to go through, though, voucher schools get accountability lite. There are some financial safeguards and background checks on employees. The academic accountability, in particular, is minimal. Private school voucher students still don't have to take the FCAT. But they do have to take a standardized test of some sort.

"Minimal" accountability. "Some sort" of standardized test. VerSteeg, you have our deepest, most sincere gratitude--not only have you made this fisking easier to write, you have also illustrated that you don't know what you're talking about! Back, once again, to our response from last week:

...let’s actually take a minute to examine the FCAT’s design. As stated on the Florida DOE website:

The FCAT, administered to students in Grades 3-11, contains two basic components: criterion-referenced tests (CRT), measuring selected benchmarks in Mathematics, Reading, Science, and Writing from the Sunshine State Standards (SSS); and norm-referenced tests (NRT) in Reading and Mathematics, measuring individual student performance against national norms.

So, to restate: the FCAT has a criterion-referenced test and a norm-referenced test. The basic difference between the two (go here for more specifics) is in how the test scores are interpreted:

The CRT is used to evaluate students against state standards. For example, a CRT for math might judge whether a student has learned what the state wants him/her to understand about algebra.
The NRT is used to determine how test-takers do relative to one another. A sample of students takes the test, and all other test takers are judged against that sample. (Remember “percentile” scores on those tests you took in school? Those were norm-referenced tests.) Please note that the norm-referenced portion of the FCAT measures “individual student performance against national norms”. (This will be critically important in a minute.)

In short, if VerSteeg insists upon going after the new legislation, the least he could do is learn a bit about it. But there's more nonsense within the same paragraph:

Parents get to know the score, and so does "an independent research organization."

Again with the sneer quotes. Does your editor hand out brownie points for this sort of thing? Since VerSteeg glossed over it, it's worth pointing out that the organization in question is selected by the Florida Department of Education for the purposes of long-term measurement of choice schools against their public counterparts.

The law goes out of its way to make clear, however, that the data can't be used to let the public know how individual private voucher schools are doing. That's a far cry from the FCAT-based grades that public schools face.

And there's a very good reason for that. The choice schools in question are accepting students who are performing very poorly academically. It takes around four years for choice students to start seeing measurable improvements in most students. Therefore, examining individual voucher schools won't necessarily be a valid indicator of that school's success or quality, because new students whose test scores are generally much lower will artifically skew the school's grades.

The limited accountability for voucher schools doesn't erase the underlying double standard that Gov. Bush set up for voucher schools and public schools. When it comes to academics, if the voucher school parent is happy, the state is happy. But for public schools, the parents' perception doesn't count. If the kid isn't doing well on the FCAT, the kid isn't doing well.

This is pretty much the linchpin of the demands for increased accountability: parents are assumed to be too stupid to see if a school is working. As we recognized earlier today, your paternalism campaign is doing the trick. Look, we have no problem discussing the impact and justification for testing. But the least you could do is acknowledge that voucher schools are not unsupervised loose cannons.

One solution would be to require private schools to give voucher students the FCAT, to inform the public how those schools are doing and to require voucher students to pass the FCAT in order to graduate.
But since it makes no sense to use the FCAT for that purpose in public schools, there's no reason - except a perverse kind of fairness - to inflict the same on voucher students.

VerSteeg, thanks again for the whole broken record thing--I have a lot of stuff on my plate today, so being able to copy and paste from earlier posts really makes things easier on me. Once again, from last week's fisking:

Back to VerSteeg's article:

Another solution would be to give up on the FCAT. But that's going too far. The test itself isn't bad.

We agree--it isn't a bad test. Which is why most voucher schools have been using the half of it that allows for state- and nationwide comparisons. And why all choice schools are now required to do so.

It can be a useful diagnostic tool.

For diagnosing what, precisely? Underperforming schools, maybe?

The problem is that the state has placed more weight on the FCAT than it validly can bear.

Here VerSteeg seems to be hinting at the overtesting argument. Indirectly, NYC chancellor Joel Klein addressed this just a few days ago:

Klein also flunked his anti-testing critics, who claim NCLB and the Bloomberg administration's policy curbing social promotion have turned schools into testing mills.

He said NCLB - like most laws - is not perfect. But he described as "fundamental" the law's focus on holding educators responsible for teaching all students.

"I've never met a law that couldn't improve. But to criticize the heart of No Child Left Behin d is to refuse to take responsibility for the achievement gap - the most serious civil-rights, social and economic crisis facing America today," Klein said.

He added that schools should be testing students "routinely," as long as the exams are based on solid standards.

"The anti-testing advocates would have you believe that people like me want our students to run through daily drills on how to properly fill in bubbles with No. 2 pencils. That couldn't be further from the truth," the chancellor said.

"Our teachers should teach students the skills and ideas they must master in order to pass their tests. That's teaching to the test," he said.

VerSteeg's proposed solution:

Tenth-graders should continue to take the reading, math and writing FCAT. The state should continue to set what it considers to be a passing grade. As happens now, students who don't pass should have the opportunity to retake the test in their junior and senior years.

And if those students still can't pass by graduation time? Give them a diploma anyway. Then report their FCAT scores on transcripts requested by colleges and employers.

In other words, diplomas are largely meaningless. VerSteeg's proposed solution pretty much guts the accountability purposes the FCAT was intended to address.

That's not exactly equivalent to the break voucher students get, but it's close.

The only "break" voucher students get is the shot at going to a decent school--a break you would take away from them.

If colleges or employers think that a sub-par FCAT score is more important than four years of high school classes, they can refuse to admit or hire the student.

Again, the whole idea with the FCAT was to make diplomas actually mean something academically. Now you're going to force schools and employers to go through extra legwork to see if a high school graduate actually learned something?

The important thing is that students who did everything they were supposed to do - except pass one part of a high-stakes test - would not be sent out into the world without a high school diploma.

...a diploma that some would say was awarded from a publicly-owned degree mill.

Under the system set up under Gov. Bush, the FCAT determines whether a student's entire high school education is valid. But who's to say that isn't backward? Maybe, for some students, the FCAT just doesn't measure what they know.

As we said above, the whole subject of high-stakes testing is worthy of debate. But you're too busy taking swipes at voucher schools to actually talk about why such an approach is wrong.

In voucher schools, parents get to decide what the newly required standardized test means.

You're absolutely right. And if parents see that their kids are testing poorly at a choice school, what can they do? They can take their kid elsewhere. Why, this point dovetails nicely into...

Confer some of that flexibility on public school students. Report the FCAT, but don't sacrifice students to it.

While we may disagree on the uses of the FCAT, we're amazed to see VerSteeg make our central point for us: kids trapped in broken schools should have the ability to get out. So what is his beef with voucher schools, especially with the new accountability legislation in place? If he could just get away from the NEA talking points for five minutes, we might actually find some common ground.

In fact, let's see your bet and raise it. Try this on for size:

We do precisely what VerSteeg proposes: diplomas are no longer tied to the FCAT, scores are reported only to employers and educators that request them for individual students, and average norm-referenced scores are made public for both public and voucher schools. The field, by VerSteeg's own reasoning, is therefore level.
Parents may then made educational decisions based on those scores--if they decide those scores are insufficient for their child, they are free to go to any school they choose, be it a public or choice school.

What do you say, VerSteeg? The comment thread is open.

Math or Technology: Take Your Pick (Sarah Natividad)

fguest — Fri, 12 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Recently Utah schools have been given an F for technology use in the classroom (or lack thereof). This is one area I hope Utah continues to fail in. Technology has been touted as a fabulous tool for teaching math and other subjects, but it’s not. Technology teaches technology; you still have to learn math separately if you want to know math too.

The misconception that technology can be part of learning math stems from the fact that there are calculators that can produce the same numerical result as mathematical calculations. Sadly, calculator use does not produce the same cognitive result as actually learning math. Just because a student can produce the answer to 23+56 on a spreadsheet does not mean he has mastered double-digit addition, any more than the ability to microwave a TV dinner constitutes knowledge of cookery. Too many curricula nowadays conflate the ability to get answers with the knowledge of how the mathematics works. And too many teachers fall back on technology use as a crutch, to help them “teach” students who for whatever reason are having trouble grasping mathematical concepts. I’d be rich if I had a dollar for every student who’s been in his college professor’s office, trembling with fear of failure at remedial algebra, for no better reason than that he can’t add fractions to save his life and is now being asked to add rational expressions using the same method as fractions. Only, the rational expressions won’t go into his calculator, see.

If all we want is the ability to get answers fast, then by all means let’s train our kids to be calculator or spreadsheet jockeys. Let’s give prizes to the one who can push the buttons the fastest or has the lowest error rate. But if we really do want our kids to go on to learn algebra and calculus and other nifty stuff, we had damn well better put some actual math into their heads, because the skills developed by the actual learning of arithmetic (the old-fashioned way) are the ones algebra builds on. Trying to build knowledge of algebra on the false foundation of technology-assisted arithmetic is like trying to build a five-story building on mobile home jack stands. Oh, jack stands work well enough-- if all you want to hold up is a mobile home. You can live quite comfortably in a mobile home, but it will never be the impressive edifice we should be aspiring to construct.

We need to decide exactly what it is we are trying to build here, so that we can put the appropriate foundation underneath it. Are we trying to get our kids through as many hoops called “algebra” and “geometry” as we can, or are we actually trying to teach algebra and geometry? Are we aiming to produce calculator jockeys, or are we aiming to produce people with the ability to think logically? If the former is all that matters, then give up trying to make high school students pass a test of actual algebra, because they’re never going to be able to do it. And if it’s the latter we want, we ought to be able to weather the opinions of those who give us F’s for lack of dependence on technology. We can laugh at them all the way to the bank when it’s time for actual performance to be measured.

Sarah Natividad lives with her husband and four children in Utah, where she teaches math at the post-secondary level and runs a small business. She can be found blogging at Organic Baby Farm.

Connectivity issues

edspresso — Fri, 12 May 2006 15:41:25 +0000

Due to ISP issues that are beyond our control, I am unable to access my normal e-mail. In the meantime, please use our backup e-mail at edspressoblog at yahoo dot com.

UPDATE: Things are fixed now. My regular e-mail, rboots at allianceforschoolchoice dot org, is once again operational.

Governator vs. the unions

edspresso — Fri, 12 May 2006 16:05:18 +0000

According to the L.A. Times, Arnold Schwarzenegger is trying to dig himself out of a hole with the teachers unions:

When Schwarzenegger backtracked last year on a commitment to pay off education money that had been diverted to other state programs, he made a political enemy of the well-funded education lobby. Union leaders cast him as a double-talking politician who could not be trusted to protect California's schoolchildren.

Now that argument becomes harder to make: Schwarzenegger is pledging to repay over seven years more than $5 billion that education groups say they are due — beginning with a $2-billion cash infusion this summer.

"There's no question in my mind that there's a political effort underway to neutralize as much opposition as possible," said Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez (D-Los Angeles). "I don't think the administration lives in fantasyland. They know they're going to have strong opposition in November. But this is a way to soften the blow. And if they can soften the blow enough, they think they're looking at the governor's reelection."

Other union allies say that there is no political truce with the governor and that they remain committed to Schwarzenegger's defeat. The California Teachers Assn., one of Schwarzenegger's main adversaries, has endorsed Democratic state Treasurer Phil Angelides for governor. There is no sign that will change.

As Schwarzenegger can attest, once one incurs the wrath of the unions, one must endure sore repentance to make things right again.

Education News for Friday, May 12

Daily News — Fri, 12 May 2006 19:03:00 +0000

Teachers union defends taking $3 million from investment firm - New York's largest teachers' union on Monday defended its practice of accepting $3 million from an investment company to sell a retirement plan of questionable value that State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has been investigating for months. (more)

Baldacci signs bill to boost teachers' pay to $30,000 - Maine Gov. John Baldacci has signed into law a bill to eventually increase Maine teachers' minimum salaries to $30,000 a year. (more)

Spellings hopeful funds to educate evacuees on the way - Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said Thursday the federal government was working to get funds to local schools that are educating hurricane evacuee students, but officials said it's still less than they expected or need. (more)

Minority students closing achievement gap - The achievement gap between minority third graders and their Caucasian classmates just got much skinnier in the DeSoto County (Florida) School District. (more)

Dems settle in FCAT lawsuit - Democratic leaders in the Florida Senate claimed victory Thursday in their court fight to learn the qualifications of low-wage workers who grade the high-stakes Florida Comprehensive Assessment Tests. (more)

Bill Seeks to Block Access to MySpace in Schools - Concerned about reports of pedophiles trolling wildly popular "social networking" websites for teenage victims, one Republican congressman has introduced a bill to prohibit anyone under 18 from accessing them on school or library computers. (more)

Assessments Show Work Needs To Be Done To Close Achievement Gap - In the Worcester County, Maryland public school system, African-American students have typically fallen on the lower end of the totem pole in academic proficiency, and although recent data shows that improvements are being made, it is undeniable the achievement gap still exists in local classrooms. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

States Enjoy Steady Rise in Revenue - (Education Week--subscription required) According to a recent report, fiscal 2006 revenue estimates are exceeding original targets in 44 states. But while schools will share in the spoils in many states, some lawmakers are instead spending unexpected revenue elsewhere or are saving it for a rainy day. (more)

Detroit to close 7 schools, not 8 - Amid jeers and shouts, the city's public school board voted Thursday night to close seven schools in the fall to save costs in the financially struggling district -- one less than originally planned. (more)

Parents Leave a Message: Let Students Have Their Cellphones - In the first 12 days of surprise scanning for weapons and other contraband in the public schools, NYPD confiscated seven knives, two box cutters, a razor, some marijuana — and 800 cellphones. (more)

San Diego may make it tougher to enter high school; two F's would send students to alternative facility - By making it harder to get into high school, the San Diego school district is hoping more students would be around to exit with a diploma. (more)

State: Schools can set kindergarten fees - Indiana's top education official has told local schools it is up to them whether to charge parents for full-day kindergarten, even though a memo from her department last week called the fees unconstitutional. (more)

The NAACP's fight against private school vouchers - Opinion: Why would an organization that calls itself the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, whose motto is "Making Democracy Work Since 1909," oppose individual choice and freedom and dedicate itself to promoting public policy that guarantees the perpetuation of black poverty? (more)

UPDATE:

New budget rules draw educators' ire - School leaders say '65-percent solution' ties their hands--while doing little to boost achievement. (more)

Continued hatchetwork at the Palm Beach Post

edspresso — Fri, 12 May 2006 19:38:48 +0000

The contempt held against school choice by the Palm Beach Post shows no signs of letting up.

To clarify: the McKay Scholarship Program gives vouchers to disabled children for use at any school that will accept them. Now, to the article. First off, the headline:

New federal rule shifts more tax bucks for disabled to private schools.

Notice the distinction: the money goes to private schools rather than disabled kids. Something frequently forgotten in the school choice debate is that vouchers can be used at either public or private schools. If public schools simply did what they're paid to do, then this debate would be over before it began.

Florida students who get state tax money to go to private schools because they have disabilities now will be entitled to about $21 million more, taken from programs that would have helped disabled students in public schools.
Changes to federal law will require Florida school districts to pay for services such as speech therapy, physical therapy and occupational therapy for these students, even though they have chosen to attend private schools instead of public schools by using vouchers called McKay scholarships.

Once again, a not-so-subtle distinction: students getting McKay vouchers have disabilities, meanwhile they're disabled students in the public schools. What, does accepting vouchers somehow make the McKay kids less disabled? Furthermore, the public schools don't need the money if they are teaching fewer disabled students!!! To borrow a question from the big boss: Which is more important, where a child is educated, or whether a child is educated?

The change will benefit about 16,800 private school students statewide, and it will slash school district budgets for students with disabilities in their own schools. It will cost Palm Beach County alone $1.25 million, money the district otherwise would use on items such as special computers that help students who can't speak or special education teachers who work alongside regular classroom teachers.

Broward will have to divert $2.3 million. In St. Lucie County, it will cost about $165,000; in Martin County, about $50,000.

"All of us went 'Gulp,' " said Russell Feldman, special education director in Palm Beach County.
The change essentially will wipe out any increase in federal money for disabled students Feldman expected for next school year. Feldman said he would have used that money for teacher aides, crisis intervention teachers and substitute teachers who govern classes while special education teachers are in training.

Florida will spend some $21 billion on K-12 this year (probably more, depending on how the budget finally shaped up). You're losing $1.25 million--and you're having to teach fewer students. Somebody call the waaaaambulance.

That money would have been spent on students enrolled at public schools with severe disabilities. But most students who use McKay scholarships have mild disabilities because most private schools can't accommodate students with serious impairments.

Not true. As Jay Greene pointed out in 2003, kids using McKay vouchers pretty much reflect the special education kids in public schools:

McKay students reflect the general population of disabled students in Florida. Although the state does not keep exact statewide numbers on matrix levels, the Florida Department of Education estimates that 60% of students are in Matrix Level 1 (the mildest category), 25% are in Matrix Level 2, 10% are in Matrix Level 3, and 5-6% are in Matrix Levels 4 and 5 (see Florida DOE 2002). No doubt many schools do “pick and choose,” but that’s a two-way street; some schools can’t accommodate severe disabilities and take only mild cases, but other schools specialize in students with severe disabilities. In any case, it appears from our survey that students with more severe disabilities are not underrepresented in the McKay program.

And further on in the study, he addresses the issue of finding an appropriate school:

These results indicate that most participating families did not have significant difficulty in finding an acceptable school. It is true that former participants reported a higher rate of difficulty than current participants, but recall that former participants make up only 10.2% of all families that participated in 2001-02 and 2002-03. If we weight the current and former participant categories to represent their respective shares of the total participant population, we find that 29.8% of all participants from those two school years had difficulty finding an acceptable school. This means that seven out of ten participants found it “not too difficult” or “not at all difficult” to find an acceptable school. However, some parents did have difficulty finding an acceptable school, and this seems to be the main reason parents leave the program. When former participants were asked the main reason they left the program, the most common response, making up 16.3% of former participants, was that they had not found a private school with adequate services.

It is also important to look at the overall McKay participant population when considering the difficulty that students with major disabilities had in finding an appropriate school. When our survey samples are weighted to represent their shares of the total participant population, among all McKay participants in 2001-02 and 2002-03 we find that 29.3% of students with mild disabilities and 30.5% of students with major disabilities had difficulty finding an acceptable school. There is no statistically significant difference between these figures, indicating that in the overall participant population students with more severe disabilities were no more likely that students with mild disabilities to have difficulty in finding an acceptable school.

Now, are these results ideal? Of course not. In a perfect world, these kids would have no problem finding the kind of help they need. Maybe these results aren't even optimal. But the bottom line is this: these kids are better off than they were in public schools--a point which, oddly enough, appears missing from this article.

If these students stayed in public school, it is unlikely they would have earned a share of the federal money.

Students using McKay vouchers get anywhere from $4,805 to $20,703 in Florida tax money a year, depending on whether they have mild learning disabilities or more severe disorders, such as autism. This school year, the amount of state tax money that followed these students to private schools was about $80 million. If these students were at public school, that money would cover any special services they require because of their handicaps.

Really? Then why didn't they simply stay at the public school? Maybe because their parents didn't feel their children were getting the help they needed? Oddly enough, this is another issue that goes unaddressed in the article, so let's go to a different section of Jay Greene's study:

92.7% of current McKay participants are satisfied or very satisfied with their McKay schools; only 32.7% were similarly satisfied with their public schools;
Those participants also saw class size drop dramatically, from an average of 25.1 students per class in public schools to 12.8 students per class in McKay schools;
Participating students were victimized far less by other students because of their disabilities in McKay schools. In public schools, 46.8% were bothered often and 24.7% were physically assaulted, while in McKay schools 5.3% were bothered often and 6.0% were assaulted;
McKay schools also outperformed public schools on our measurement of accountability for services provided. Only 30.2% of current participants say they received all services required under federal law from their public school, while 86.0% report their McKay school has provided all the services they promised to provide;
Behavior problems have also dropped in McKay schools. 40.3% of current participants said their special education children exhibited behavior problems in the public school, but only 18.8% report such behavior in McKay schools;
Former McKay participants provide similar responses. 62.3% were satisfied with their McKay school, while only 45.2% were satisfied with their old public school. Their class sizes also dropped from an average of 21.8 students to 12.7 students. Former participants also reported that their McKay schools performed better than their public schools on almost every other measure;
This superior performance by McKay schools was largely provided for the same or only slightly more money per pupil than is spent in public schools. Even though the McKay program allows participants to choose schools that charge tuition above the amount of the voucher, 71.7% of current participants and 75.8% of former participants report paying either nothing at all or less than $1,000 per year above the voucher;
Perhaps the strongest evidence regarding the McKay program’s performance is that over 90% of parents who have left the program believe it should continue to be available to those who wish to use it.

Back to the article:

As long as they've attended public school at least one year and show that they have some kind of disability, they can get state tax money to go to any private school until they graduate from high school or turn 22.

Real leeches on society, eh?

In some cases, such as students with broken bones or lisps, they may outgrow the disability but keep getting private school tuition money. In others, they are classified as having a psychological problem called "school phobia" that can entitle them to a voucher.

Oh, come on. Can't you at least give us an example of when something like this has taken place?

What's more, school districts now will have to go to students' schools to provide the therapy or tutoring and they can't use public school employees. In Palm Beach County, hiring a teacher for tutoring might cost $22 an hour. But the district will have to hire a contractor and that might cost as much as $50 an hour, Feldman said.

It might cost more. But what is frequently forgotten is that contractors a) generally don't get benefits and b) aren't charged union dues (cue NEA weeping). If you were to add in those costs to a teacher's salary, the cost of a teacher versus those of a contractor would almost disappear.

In Palm Beach County, private school kids will be entitled to speech therapy, occupational and physical therapy and academic tutoring. But the district won't pay for special equipment, one-on-one aides and sign language interpreters.

Palm Beach County School Board members Debra Robinson and Sandra Richmond oppose the new rule. Richmond's son, who has Down syndrome, went to public schools.

Robinson nearly always votes against sending tax money to private schools on principle, she said. Not because she doesn't want students with disabilities to get what they need, but because of the philosophy behind McKay scholarships and the lack of any accountability for private schools that get public money.

"I think any parent should do whatever they think they need to do to get their kids a good education," Robinson said. "But this belief says that the private schools are inherently better."

Not necessarily. The belief says that parents should have the right to select a school they feel is best for their child. For crying out loud, Florida spends more on K-12 than any other budget item--more than transportation, public safety, or health and human services. If I'm a customer and I feel I'm getting ripped off, at some point shouldn't I get a shot at a refund?

UPDATE: A good comment via e-mail...this program doesn't mean public schools are losing money--only that they aren't getting more of it. Well, look for a reason to complain, and eventually you'll find it...

Lifesaving competition

edspresso — Fri, 12 May 2006 21:08:58 +0000

In her first Edspresso article, Nancy Salvato quoted former teacher Ruth Holmes Cameron:

You know competition is not for children. It's not for human beings. It's not for public education.

We are the first to agree that education is absolutely critical for the survival of this nation; that children who do not receive sufficient education are woefully equipped to be contributing members of society; that lack of a good education can doom an individual to a life of poverty and misery. But there is something even more critical to an individual's well-being than education. So let's talk about food.

If we are to take the first two sentences of Cameron's quote seriously, we must then seek to compare them to anything related to the health and condition of human beings. However, education is merely extremely important, while food is critical. So if the state, and only the state, is to be trusted with educating a child, the state should certainly also be responsible for feeding that child.

But unfortunately, history (particularly in the 20th century) is littered with disastrous examples of state-monopolized efforts to feed the people. Just a few:

1921-1923: Under Soviet rule, 1.5 million to 2 million people, most of them Ukrainians, died of starvation and accompanying epidemics.
1932-1933: Stalin decided Ukrainians hadn't had enough yet, leading to another seven million dead.
1959-1961: Mao Zedong's "Great Leap Forward" claimed the lives of as many as 40 million in Communist China.
While estimates vary widely (600,000 to 3.5 million), most people agree that the 1990s were lethal for North Korea.

In particular, these remarks kind of sum up the nature of state-sponsored famine:

In recent years, North Korean leaders have announced a series of economic reforms, but (Marcus Noland, senior fellow at the Institute for International Economics in Washington, D.C.) said he doesn't believe they will go far enough to pull the country out of the crisis. The situation, he said, is deeply rooted in the structure of the nation's agricultural and economic system and will not be easy to resolve.

Noland said he believes North Korea has to abandon its national goal of agricultural self-sufficiency and adopt a course of industrializing to produce goods for export. Money from those exported goods could then be used to import the food North Korea needs.

North Korea's northerly latitude and high population compared with its amount of arable land mean it isn't the most ideal place to grow a lot of food. When combined with its comparatively literate and skilled population available to work in industrial settings, the way seems clear, Noland said.

The nation's leadership stands in the way, however. With power concentrated in the hands of Kim Jong Il, the army, and a small number of people around Kim Jong Il, Noland said he didn't see the nation changing course anytime soon.
Further, with China, South Korea, and Japan worried about the nation's stability, Noland believes North Korea will receive enough food and other aid to forestall a serious challenge to the nation's leadership.

In other words, the key to North Korea's survival lies in the market. But as long as North Korea keeps doing what it's doing (i.e. a state-run monopoly), it will keep getting what it's getting.

Summary: at best, state-monopolized agricultural and economic systems work badly. When people aren't starving to death, they are merely poor. As Bulgaria's former president put it, communism tends to produce "equality in poverty".

Now let's go back to Cameron's statement:

You know competition is not for children. It's not for human beings. It's not for public education.

With all that communist tragedy as a backdrop, we would suggest that the third sentence of that quote really shouldn't be attached to the first two. While competition's compatibility with public education might be worthy of debate, its compatibility with humanity really isn't debatable at all. As Glenn Reynolds pointed out in his new book, much of the 20th century was spent demonstrating that trying to shut down market forces in lieu of state-run enterprises was not only much less efficient but much more lethal.

This certainly isn't to suggest that those opposing school choice are communists or wannabe dictators. We have no question that they only want to produce the best possible system of education, or at least guarantee a minimal level of education, for as many children as possible. So do we. Which is why we trust parents more than the state, given government's track record of producing mediocrity for all.

Having considered all this, let's now go here:

Nervous parents packed a South Los Angeles church Thursday hoping that they would win the lottery.
The jackpot: a spot for their child at one of Green Dot Public Schools' new charter campuses.
Several hundred parents and students came out to Victory Baptist Church and waited through the evening to see if they would get into one of the five charter campuses that will open in the fall in South Los Angeles.
Green Dot Public Schools founder Steve Barr praised those who came out.
"You are all revolutionaries," he said. "The whole city is watching tonight."

Our hats are off to the folks at Green Dot for working to extend educational opportunities to the inner city. But here's what we find almost heartbreaking about the situation: why should anybody be made to hope--almost beg--for rescue from a dysfunctional school? Yet this is the product of the government monopoly in education. Much as such ironclad control of economics led to equality in poverty, our state-run education system has led to equality in mediocrity.

Suppose that, instead of begging for a good education for their children, these parents were begging for bread for their children. Can you imagine the headlines? There would be unbelievable shame, a national outcry, demands for investigations. It would be unthinkable. In fact, it is unthinkable--because American market forces have unleashed an agricultural system that is more than capable of feeding both itself and a number of Third World countries. After all, we associate poverty abroad with starvation, but when we think of poverty in the United States, we think of obesity.

Lots of people are railing against "privatization" of education (where the devil is in the details*), or are clamoring to "save public education" (as if public education was somehow innocent in all this). But nobody is calling for government to take over U.S. farms in order to feed the masses, for obvious reasons: the market can handle it, and far better than the government ever could. The markets figured out how to feed our children. So why shouldn't they be able to work out how to educate them as well?

*One last thought about "privatization". We're not necessarily interesting in farming out the running of schools to private companies. And this might be the dream of libertarians everywhere, but we certainly aren't interested in merely cutting taxes to almost nothing, shutting down public school districts and leaving the markets to dictate the rest. When it comes to education, all we want is for parents to have as many options as possible to select the best educational opportunity possible for their children. In other words, we're interested in what works. And frankly, the government hammerlock that currently exists in K-12 education doesn't.

Whose Fault is Atlanta's "Brain Drain"? (Ken De Rosa)

mtigani — Wed, 10 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution confusingly reports that Georgia’s Clayton school district’s change to Direct Instruction (DI) this year is to blame for its substantial loss of teachers. Yet a few paragraphs down we learn that the teacher loss has been ongoing for at least three years.

Clayton County had the highest turnover rate for regular teachers among metro school districts between the 2003 and 2005 school years, statistics show.

How does a change in curriculum this year cause losses in previous years? Perhaps something else is causing the losses? We'll never know because the article jumps right to a disgruntled teacher who claims to be leaving because DI is “too scripted” and that she “no longer uses her expertise to assess students individually and tailor lessons to their weaknesses.” Our intrepid reporter fails to catch the inconsitency in the teacher's claim. The “teaching expertise” the teacher is referring to was resulting in a large number of students who were failing academically. That’s why the district changed to DI. Ironically enough, considering she hates scripts so much, this teacher appears to be following the same script we get from other critics of DI. According to Zig Engelmann, the creator of DI, “The main complaints are that the programs require teachers to follow a script, which supposedly limits their creativity, and that the programs are boring.” But, these claims have not been substantiated by research. “Good teachers become superior DI teachers. Although the program may be boring for some teachers, it is not for the students. The rate of misbehavior is a lot lower during the structured DI periods than it is during less structured times of the school day.” And, there are many good reasons why DI uses scripts instead of allowing teachers to teach in the same manner which previously wasn’t working with many students. The scripts are based on extensive research regarding student retention, and every aspect of every script is based upon results that were demonstrated through research. The great advantage of this approach is that every teacher using the script becomes the beneficiary of that research and will probably teach much more effectively than if left to her own devices. We next learn that this disgruntled teacher “has a master's degree and has taught reading for 14 years." This is an appeal to authority without any authority. To find out what a teacher has actually taught, you have to look at what the students have actually learned. But, the reporter doesn't give us any statistics on student learning in this district. And I don't trust the inflated scores on the Georgia state test to be a reliable indicator of student success. The only thing I can vaguely find approaching a standard, though it is rife with selcetion bias, is that the high school students are performing over a 100 points below the national average in the SAT, even though only abouthalf the students took the tests. No doubt these were the smart ones. Another teacher also considered leaving because of DI and claimed that teachers “don't feel they are getting respect… We don't have any input on anything." And there we have the real reason for the discontent: teachers aren’t being permitted to continue what they’ve always done even though it was resulting in lots of academic failure. It’s all about the teachers and their precious feelings, not whether the students are actually learning. At this point the article gets around to telling us the reason why the administrators brought DI in. “Administrators said they were trying to bring research-based methods into the classroom and standardize lessons so children who changed schools midyear didn't get lost." The new approach also ensured that lessons built on each other from year to year. Seems reasonable enough to me. Then we finally hear from a teacher who liked DI. "I would base my 34 years of experience on saying that it does work." I suppose that counts for something, but wouldn't it be a little more persuasive to hear from an administrator or teacher from a school that successfully implemented DI? How about the City Springs School in the inner city of Baltimore. In 1998 the City Springs School was the worst school in Baltimore, which is quite an accomplishment considering the general wretchedness of the schools in Baltimore. CTBS/TerraNova scores for the fifth grade were 14th and 9th percentile for reading and math respectively. Then they changed the curriculum to DI and five years later the scores improved to 87th and 79th percentile respectively. That's about as good as it gets. The principal of the City Springs School has said “It bothers me that the critics say, ‘Oh, Direct Instruction, so robotic.’ It’s what you make it.” Whether a curriculum is engaging to pupils and helps them learn depends on how teachers teach it. “Any curriculum can be boring to a kid,” she said. “If you give the kid motivation—that they are achieving—you’ve got them.” Who would you rather have teaching your kids? Kenneth De Rosa blogs at D-Ed Reckoning.

Divining the murky future of LAUSD

edspresso — Thu, 18 May 2006 17:07:00 +0000

So School Me ~~takes a wild guess~~ ~~breaks out the crystal ball~~ examines "high tech, precisely calibrated, success-predicting instrumentation" to determine whether Villaraigosa's LAUSD takeover proposal will succeed. You know, if these guys decide to play along, it could really get interesting. (Hey, don't laugh--they're already trying to decide who the next American Idol will be, and if Gore will run in 2008. That's chicken feed compared to L.A. education!)

School board votes send a message, but are folks listening? (Derrell Bradford)

fguest — Mon, 15 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

April 18th in New Jersey saw citizens from across the state vote down almost 50% of proposed school budgets. This low level of approval, when viewed as a product of the typically low voter turnout of budget and school board elections, has sent a resounding message to the New Jersey school establishment. Indeed, when one considers the state's "spend spend" take on school reform, and its widely known equity history for urban school systems under the Abbott v. Burke cases, the defeats are a heads up for many other places in the nation looking to finance their way out of poor school performance on the backs of suburban property owners. Briefly, the Abbott decisions identified 31 districts believed to have too little property wealth to fund their school systems at a level sufficient to ensure the students therein received the state's constitutionally mandated "thorough and efficient" education. There were many reforms adopted under the Abbott decisions, but the most important was a court mandate that these 31 "special needs" districts spend at the same level as the state's wealthiest districts. To that end, New Jersey now has seven of the country's top ten school districts over 10,000 students in terms of per pupil funding. Newark tops this list with a nearly $1 billion budget this year for its 42,000 students. Newark pays approximately 10% of its own school costs, with almost 80% being distributed in the form of aid granted directly from the state. The result of this spending? Seven of the cities 13 high schools have student failure rates on the state's high school exit exam of over 65%, with two in the 80s. Clearly, Abbott students are not getting the education we are paying for. Of course, state aid is a zero sum game. And every dollar that goes to a district that only pays 10% of its school costs does not go to a district that pays 90%. Indeed, this aid distribution has led to near 10% annual property tax increases in non-Abbott municipalities over the last five years. This pressure drove what amounted to a statewide referendum on school budgets. This school finance arrangement has fractured New Jersey into three economic camps, with families in rural and middle-class communities feeling the heightened pressure of both the Abbott rulings and the wealthy school districts to which Abbott funding is indexed. A state legislator, during a recent discussion of school finance, said that soon, "only the filthy rich and obscenely poor" would be able to live in New Jersey. What is interesting, however, is the newly established position of education interest groups that an increase in the income tax would relieve property taxes and the heavy dependence upon them for school costs. Nothing could be further from the truth. And any long-term New Jersey resident knows that income tax increases have already been proposed and passed already. Each time the increase was supposed to cap the property tax problem...yet here we are again. A discussion of revenue as it relates to schools is just one side of the coin--the side the education establishment prefers residents see. The real exchange, however, is had on the flipside, and involves the salaries, benefits, expenses, perks, and other line items that constitute school spending. Increasing revenue from $10 to $12 means nothing if your expenditures rise from $14 to $20. And despite spending caps, many school districts are seeing their expenses increase at a pace far greater than the rate of inflation. With all due respect to enrollment spikes in some districts, the single largest line expenditure in any school budget is salaries. The New Jersey Education Association, NJ School Boards Association, and others continue to negotiate raises and benefits that far exceed those accorded New Jersey's common citizen, and that far outstrip the ability of most municipalities to support them without exorbitant property tax increases. This is where the real change must be made. We also must address the educational value of these increases. In 1972, the average NJ SAT verbal score was 530. In 2004, it was 508. All this while, even in inflation-adjusted dollars, the expense of education has risen to stratospheric levels. Simply put, a 10% increase in the annual school budget is not returning a 10% increase in student achievement, or student experience for that matter. In fact, it's barely holding even. School spending has remained a third rail in this state, and in many other states, for far too long. Even New York, with its current school funding issues and the Council for Fiscal Equity's Abbott-like suit for nearly $5 billion in school funding increases in New York City alone annually, and almost $9 billion for capital projects, is blindly pursuing the road long traveled by New Jersey. With this in mind I submit that, if someone wants to live in New Jersey, keep a house, and support a family, it's time to put on some rubber gloves, and grab that rail with both hands. Derrell Bradford is deputy director of E3.

Education News for Monday, May 15

Daily News — Mon, 15 May 2006 20:16:00 +0000

Star Parker: The NAACP and vouchers - Why would an organization that calls itself the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, whose motto is "Making Democracy Work Since 1909," oppose individual choice and freedom and dedicate itself to promoting public policy that guarantees the perpetuation of black poverty? (more)

New ideas on school choice needed - Six years after a court settlement scrambled student assignment, 47 community activists are giving Pinellas schools something the two opposing attorneys never did. (more)

Newark's hope - CORY Booker rode to victory last week in Newark's mayoral race by pledging to end corruption, patronage and ineffective government - problems that have plagued New Jersey's biggest city for decades. (more)

AZ budget contains more school choice - The perennial battle with Napolitano over school choice is likely to catch fire again. The plan contains several school-choice measures that Napolitano has opposed. A $5 million corporate tuition tax credit that Napolitano reluctantly let pass into law earlier this year would be doubled to $10 million. (more)

UPDATE:

AP: Education law leave children behind - The Department of Education on Friday ordered every state to explain how it will have 100 percent of its core teachers qualified -- belatedly -- in the 2006-07 school year. (more)

Poll: Voters oppose tax increase for schools - By a wide margin, Wake County voters would rather avoid a tax increase than keep students from attending mandatory year-round schools, according to a poll for The News & Observer and WRAL-TV. (more)

GOP's quiet power broker - With his prized school voucher program heading down the tubes in the final days of the legislative session, Jeb Bush and his allies worked ferociously to flip some key votes. Who better to pressure than state Sen. Dennis Jones, a strong Republican who displays pictures of Barbara Bush in his Treasure Island home and George W. in his office? (more)

GOP Lawmakers Deal a Setback to Governor Bush in Florida - Seven months before Gov. Jeb Bush leaves office, his chance of leaving a legacy on his signature issue of education has been significantly impaired by state legislators from his own Republican Party. (more)

Correct voucher policy? Stick to McKay vouchers - Gov. Bush and other school voucher advocates could have made more progress if they had focused exclusively on the only voucher idea that makes sense. (more)

CON: An air of scholarship, but contention is not proven - The Fraser Institute, on its website, credits itself with having moved people to a "recognition of the importance of market competition." Though Michael Walker, one of the institute's founders, would like us to view the report card on British Columbia's Elementary Schools as a scholarly analysis, it could be seen as a marketing initiative that ranges from the creation of a need to a description of the means to satisfy it. (more)

PRO: Giving parents a clear, unambiguous picture - Over the years, the Fraser Institute's report cards -- now annually rating more than 5,500 schools in four provinces -- have become increasingly popular. (more)

The Catholic-School Crisis - One of the city's most reliable institutions for educating minority and poor children is dying, and New York politicians are doing nothing about it. (more)

Institute on Race and Poverty report released today reveals... - A new report being released today (Monday, May 15) by the Institute on Race & Poverty (IRP) at the University of Minnesota reveals the disturbing extent of school segregation in the Twin Cities region. However, the authors of the report envision a brighter future if an already successful school choice program is expanded and existing affordable housing programs are broadened. (more)

Charter Schools Dominate Scores - Maricopa County charter schools have a lock on top reading scores. -- A recent New York Times editorial on the failure of charter schools inspired me to do a little checking. Feel free to play along on your computer. (more)

Union mask slips on charter schools

edspresso — Mon, 15 May 2006 21:01:33 +0000

In this week's Communiqué, Mike Antonucci teachers unions' true feelings on charter schools. (Mike included some pix, so click the links for some gorgeous eye candy.)

D.C. Vouchers: Year Two (Katie Newmark)

fguest — Tue, 16 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

The second year report on the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (pdf) focuses on participation. It’s just an appetizer—the main course, a study of the effect of the vouchers on achievement, is coming next year—but this report still has some interesting stuff to chew on. Participation increased in the second year, a sign that people like the program:

More students applied for the scholarships (3,126 vs. 2,692), even though there were fewer spots available. The program is now operating at capacity.
All the schools that participated in the first year returned for the second year, plus ten more schools, bringing the total from 58 to 68. That’s an increase from 53 percent of all District private schools to 65 percent. The enthusiasm of private schools suggests that, contra the fears of some school choice advocates, accepting vouchers does not impinge on their “privateness” with burdensome government regulation—at least not yet.

If you’re worried that vouchers create church-state entanglements:

Of the 63 participating schools for which a religious affiliation could be determined, 28 are Catholic, 14 are religious but not Catholic, and 21 are independent.
Of the 10 schools that joined in the second year, 6 are independent. (The others are non-Catholic religious schools.)

There’s mixed news on equity issues:

In the first year, for some grades, fewer public school students applied than there were spots available, so some of the scholarships went to students already attending private schools—which offended the usual suspects. In the second year, however, no scholarships went to students already attending private schools.
As designed, students from schools designated as “in need of improvement” received priority. About 40 percent of the scholarship applicants over the two years of the program were from schools in need of improvement, and they were more likely than other students to receive the scholarship.
On the other hand, about 11 percent of applicants were from schools with achievement scores in the bottom quartile of all D.C. public schools, while almost one-quarter were from schools in the highest quartile.

And finally, there was good news for the data geeks:

A high-quality statistical analysis of the effect of vouchers depends on being able to compare scholarship recipients to students who wanted a scholarship but didn’t receive one. The program was designed to allow for this setup: if more students applied than there were spots available at that grade level, the scholarships were awarded by random lottery. As a result, the first two years of the program produced 1,387 students in the “treatment” group of scholarship recipients and 921 in the “control” group of unsuccessful scholarship applicants. For the most part, the two groups are statistically similar. This sample size is large relative to other voucher studies, and “will be sufficient to detect Program impacts of at least a moderate and educationally meaningful size.”
In other, non-jargony words, researchers will be able to conduct rigorous, meaningful analysis of the effect of vouchers.

After you digest all of that, start gearing up for next year’s report about vouchers and achievement. No matter what the conclusions, it will surely cause a ruckus. Can’t wait! Katie Newmark is a research assistant at the American Enterprise Institute. She blogs at A Constrained Vision.

Education News for Tuesday, May 16

Daily News — Tue, 16 May 2006 09:14:58 +0000

Teachers' Union urges voters to pass school budgets - The New York State United Teachers Union has launched a million dollar ad campaign asking voters in nearly 700 school districts to pass the budgets for education spending. (more)

Spellings: Encourage Girls in Science Ed - Low participation in math and science activities by girls is keeping them from achieving their full potential and weakening the nation's ability to compete, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said Monday. (more)

U.S. Asks Panel to Add It Up - Seventeen mathematicians, cognitive scientists, and math educators were named today to a presidentially appointed panel that, in the words of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, is supposed to tell U.S. math teachers "what's most effective in the classroom." (more)

Texas legislature passes school finance measure - Texas lawmakers reached the top of a mountain they've been climbing for more than three years Monday, handing Gov. Rick Perry a plan that will change the state's school finance system and, they hope, resolve the lawsuit that hundreds of school districts brought against the state. (more)

US divided about educational outsourcing - Welcome to the latest trend in the world of outsourcing. With the students in the US increasingly relying on overseas tutors, online tutoring has become the newest industry to be outsourced to other countries. (more)

Teachers union president faces 3 rivals - Baltimore Teachers Union President Marietta English is facing three challengers as she asks teachers to elect her to another term. (more)

How Sanford’s vision of ‘choice’ can fit with tax reform, school progress - South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford talks the loudest about private school choice. But he also supports public school choice — charter schools, magnet schools, open enrollment within and even between districts. (more)

Schwarzenegger, Villaraigosa Forge an Unlikely Partnership - The two California politicians find common ground in a mutually beneficial relationship that could pay off at the polls. (more)

Graduating Ahead of the Class - Teen will get college degree, and then finish high school. (more)

Energizing engineers - High schools try to interest more kids in a lucrative field that badly needs fresh talent. (more)

Some districts add School Choice seats - A handful of school districts near Springfield, Massachusetts have decided to increase the number of School Choice seats they will offer next year. (more)

It's like Christmas for critics of public schools - Opinion: Three news events from the last week have highlighted the insane way that Californians are attempting to improve the state's public school system. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NH: Pass HB 76, open escape valves - The entire Manchester school district has been designated In Need of Improvement, and this spring school administrators said they expect that the district will not make AYP again next year. (more)

In Portland, school choice foes, fans set to spar again - Just as Portland Public Schools wraps up months of debate about school closures and reconfigurations, a new debate is just beginning. (more)

Sanford's vision of choice - If you ever got to a point where you were funding kids and you put the money in the kid, it would lead to complete portability, which is something I’m after, and it would lead to equity, which is something y’all are after... (more)

FL: Teachers union is for Smith and Davis - Underscoring the competitive nature of their rivalry, Jim Davis and Rod Smith ended up Friday with a dual endorsement from the state's teachers' union in their Democratic campaigns for governor. (more)

UPDATE:

Ed Week commentary: Redefining 'rigor' for a new century - (subscription required) One of the hottest topics in education is high school reform. Public- and private-sector initiatives to redesign high schools, strengthen the curriculum, and improve results for students abound. (more)

DC eyes plan for shared space - Ed Week (subscription required) Under the plan, a charter school in the Knowledge Is Power Program, or KIPP, network would open this coming fall in the building now occupied by Washington’s Scott Montgomery Elementary School. (more)

AZ AIMS test survives challenge for now - A judge on Monday declined to suspend the AIMS exit exam as a graduation requirement for this year's high school seniors. (more)

Alan Bonsteel: Schools failed the exit exam - We are nearing a day of reckoning for California's failed public schools. The day is fast coming when a quality education in a school freely chosen by the family is considered not a privilege, but rather, a fundamental human right. (more)

College at warp speed

edspresso — Tue, 16 May 2006 17:38:00 +0000

A 17-year-old family friend is graduating from high school a year early. She will attend college this fall. And if you think that is going to college too fast, try this on for size:

Like other 16-year-olds, Joycelyn Nguyen of Simi Valley is jazzed about getting her driver's license. She likes to hang out with her girlfriends and admits that she sometimes procrastinates and often doesn't make her bed in the morning.

Joycelyn said she's looking forward to starting her senior year of high school in the fall, but first she has another milestone to savor — graduation Thursday from Moorpark College.

Joycelyn took her first community college class when she was 13. Since last August, she has attended the High School at Moorpark College, where teens from throughout the region take their math, science and foreign language classes, as well as electives. Moorpark is the largest of Ventura County's three community colleges.

The alternative two-year high school for juniors and seniors has been around for six years, and in that time, at least half a dozen students have received their high school and junior college diplomas in the same month. But Joycelyn is the school's first student to complete community college before finishing high school.

Before anybody out there starts hyperventilating about pushing kids too fast:

The school, which has graduated more than 250 students so far, is designed to appeal to teens who don't feel academically challenged, are bored or feel out of place in a traditional high school setting. Courses at the High School at Moorpark College place more emphasis on writing essays, teamwork and class discussion. There are fewer tests and limited class lectures.

Also, it's not as though Nguyen will go straight into the workforce: she wants to go on to UCLA to go into medicine. Overall, we don't see too many downsides. And even if we did, who cares? After all, the choice was ultimately up to the parents, no?

NCLB Choice = No Choice (Neal McCluskey)

fguest — Wed, 17 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

When Secretary Spellings announced a few weeks ago that NCLB hasn’t provided nearly enough school choice, no one should have been surprised.

Since day one, it’s been no secret that in the districts where parents need choice the most, it’s been offered the least. Chicago, for instance, made stonewalling on choice into an art form in the law’s first year, chiseling down the number of children eligible for transfers from 125,000 to 2,407, and in the end letting only 1,165 move schools. In Detroit, it wasn’t until March 2004 that the school district announced that it had finally figured out its choice plan – for the 2003-04 school year. And this year, the Alliance for School Choice and the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education launched a suit against the Los Angeles and Compton Unified school districts for restraining choice; in woeful Compton no child has ever received a transfer to a better school.

This was completely predictable. Who would really have thought that a federal law, assembled by a “bipartisan” team, would have had any kind of meaningful choice? Were politicians really going to throw special interest groups like the NEA, AFT, and NSBA under the proverbial school bus by giving parents some control over their children’s education? Hardly!

Parents just don’t have the political power they need to influence Washington the way entrenched special interests – who owe their livelihoods to captive children and taxpayers – do. Heck, the NEA has been chartered by Congress and owns its own huge headquarters in Washington, where every day 600 people work to expand the union’s intake of children and money.

The wise men who crafted America’s Constitution knew that if power were concentrated in the national government the politically adroit would abuse it and squash liberty. That’s why the Constitution gives the federal government control over only a very limited list of areas – among which you will not find education – and leaves authority over all others to the states and people. Too bad we’ve been ignoring the Constitution for decades.

Ultimately, if parents want to have real choice, it cannot come from Washington, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of education special interests. No, it’s going to have to be taken at the local and state level by parents demanding their right to choose and refusing to vote for anyone who would deny it.

Neal McCluskey is a policy analyst with Cato's Center for Educational Freedom.

Education news for Wednesday, May 17

Daily News — Wed, 17 May 2006 09:16:15 +0000

New Hampshire poor kids' hopes may die in backroom deal - After three years of hard work and changes, the state Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill to allow low-income students to choose a public or private school that fits their needs. New Hampshire’s shameful 25 percent dropout rate is confined largely to children from lower-income families. (more)

Jeb Bush pauses at next political step - Every second, a digital clock on Gov. Jeb Bush's desk counts down to the moment in January that his term ends, a reminder that one of the most powerful figures in American politics is about to step off the public stage. (more)

Board presses voucher issue - The seven-member board, all appointees of Gov. Jeb Bush's, told state Education Commissioner John Winn on Tuesday to come up with strategies to protect Florida's remaining voucher programs from legal attack. (more)

UPDATE:

All-day kindergarten returns as AZ budget issue - State funding for all-day kindergarten is shaping up as a major budget issue at the Legislature for the third straight year, this time with a Republican proposal to partially roll back a major policy initiative of Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano. (more)

Florida, Wisconsin tying more strings to vouchers - Ed Week (subscription required) When the Florida Senate took up a measure this month designed to protect voucher programs from legal challenges, the chamber couldn’t have been more divided: The bill was defeated by just one vote. Two days later, however, another voucher bill won unanimous Senate support. (more)

NCLB panel gathers views on testing and data collection - Ed Week (subscription required) The No Child Left Behind Act imposes the wrong kind of testing on schools, educators need better systems to interpret the test data they get, and the federal government should help pay for the mandates it imposes... (more)

Poll: Are smart kids left behind? - ...more than half think smart kids are being left behind because educators are focusing their efforts on lower-performing students. (more)

LA leaders want clout in LA Unified - Amid increasing concerns about Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plan to take control of the Los Angeles Unified School District, leaders from other cities within the district are considering alternatives that would give them increased authority over schools. (more)

Prom oting special education in Catholic schools - Although some Catholic campuses offered programs for children with special needs, there wasn't one that could accommodate her 14-year-old son, who has mild cerebral palsy and intellectual disabilities.. (more)

NPR: America's troubled schools need reform now - Link to NPR to listen to Ed Gordon's commentary. (more)

Charter school advocates raise pressure on cap - With just a month left before lawmakers leave Albany and head home to campaign for re-election, charter school advocates are dramatically increasing pressure on the Assembly speaker to lift the statewide cap on the independently run schools. (more)

UPDATE:

Thousands of Latino Parents and Leaders are Demanding School Choice - Parents and Latino leaders across the nation are calling one ducation and political leaders to give Hispanic children greater choice in education. (more)

Can Matt Johnston get a witness?

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 13:34:00 +0000

Matt Johnston has descended from the mountain with the Ten Commandments. Lemme hear an amen!

One parent who just can't take anymore

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 14:00:00 +0000

Christine Maddox Ellerbee of Camden, New Jersey writes:

As a parent, I have done all I can do. Many of us find ourselves in the same boat. We have agitated for change, made phone calls and visited anyone who would listen. We have formed organizations, started scholarship funds, even taken to the streets. All this in an attempt to get those with position and influence to do something to improve the public school product and public school experience of our children.
We have been patient even as our schools floundered in academic rankings, failing to graduate our children and terrified us daily with horrific conditions no one should have to endure. We have begged for access to alternatives to these schools so our children will at least feel safe. But no matter what we do, we are unable to change the fundamental politics that hold our children as prisoners in a failing system.

Go read the whole thing.

High-tech cheatbusting

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 14:16:04 +0000

Cheating is bad. Very bad. And it's also very foolish--especially when you're up against a highly-equipped chemistry teacher.

Surprising comments against smaller class sizes

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 14:23:40 +0000

Interesting arguments against smaller class sizes from a TFA teacher. (Hat tip to this week's Carnival of Education.)

Super-sized compensation

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 17:12:00 +0000

Very interesting op-ed point/counterpoint in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution over that paper's recent exposé on superintendent compensation. From the editorial board:

In other words, before taxpayers can decide for themselves whether Hall and other school superintendents deserve the money they're being paid, taxpayers first have to know what that compensation actually is.

They have to know something else as well — how well school leaders are performing in the job. But here again, voters are kept in the dark by most school boards.

While school boards evaluate superintendents annually, those evaluations are deemed private documents, and state law allows local boards and superintendents to decide whether to make those evaluations public. Most do not, and those who technically make the documents available to the public often make the process so cumbersome that citizens give up and go home.

A notable and laudable exception is the city of Gainesville, which posts Superintendent Steven Ballowe's evaluation scores each year on its Web site.

By shrouding evaluations in secrecy and burying the pay perks in the fine print, metro school boards stymie taxpayers interested in learning whether their school superintendents are doing a good job and whether their compensation for that job is legitimate or larcenous.

Herb Garrett, executive director of the Georgia School Superintendent's Association, fires back. While it was almost certainly unintentional on his part, some of Garrett's comments are awfully revealing:

Virtually without exception, superintendents oversee one of the largest enterprises in any community. It is not unusual for a local school system to have the largest "taxi fleet," the largest "restaurant operation," and the biggest payroll of any "business" in a community. Viewed through this lens, the salaries and benefits listed in the recent article hardly seem out of line.

This very accurate statement is also extremely disturbing. The biggest endeavor in many, if not most, communities is the public school system--bigger than any company or business in town. Is it any wonder that many school reformers are aghast at the level of girth and bureaucracy American school districts have achieved?

Setting fringe benefits over and above base salaries is a common practice across the country and in Georgia. It is common in the business world. And if a superintendent is to have CEO-type responsibilities, such additional benefits seem appropriate. I agree that a superintendent's total compensation package should be open to public scrutiny so as to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.
I take issue, however, with the editorial board's position that all superintendents' evaluations should be made public. Unfortunately, the superintendent evaluation process can often be quite perfunctory in nature, and it is one that is not guaranteed to yield a significant amount of useful information.

Perfunctory: characterized by routine or superficiality, or lacking in interest or enthusiasm. And even this simple evaluation should be withheld?

However, if a local board and its superintendent can, as part of negotiating the superintendent's contract, agree on a limited number of understandable and measurable objectives upon which the superintendent's performance can be accurately evaluated, then I don't see why that information could not be as public as the rest of the contract.

A "limited number" of objectives. Ladies and gentlemen, behold the face of today's hidebound, self-serving educrat.

Villaraigosa vs. LAUSD, under a microscope

edspresso — Wed, 17 May 2006 20:38:35 +0000

Can't get enough of Los Angeles Unified School District takeover talk? This is the article for you.

A Think Tank’s Credibility Tanks (Nancy Salvato)

fguest — Thu, 18 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

I was amused, as I’m sure are many others, to read about a group of education researchers involved in what is being called “The Think Tank Review Project”. Driving my laughter was the discovery that the funding for this endeavor comes from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. The Board of Directors for this organization reads like a “who’s who” of NEA and Midwest Education Association executives. Evidently, the Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU) at Arizona State University and the Education and the Public Interest Center (EPIC) at the University of Colorado will be joining forces with “Think Twice” which has already begun monitoring the Buckeye Institute, Ohio; Center of the American Experiment, Minnesota; Heartland Institute, Chicago; Wisconsin Policy Research Institute; the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Michigan; the CATO Institute; Manhattan Institute; Heritage Foundation; and others. Interestingly, topics garnering their interest are findings which advocate privatization in education, the very ones which the NEA fights tooth and nail to discredit publicly in the media. These include: Charter Schools and Public School Choice; Vouchers and Tuition Tax Credits; Deprofessionalization of Teaching; NCLB and Accountability/Testing; Sorting and Stratification of Opportunities; Privatization and EMOs; Education of English Language Learners; Virtual/online learning; School Funding; and Home Schooling. Because of the source of their funding and the objects of their interest, one would have to be suspicious of this group’s motivation. Furthermore, sowing the idea that traditional think tanks have little credibility among academic researchers, hoists a red flag about whose interests are being served by this project. Any person who visits a think tank on the web can read the “about us” section to know what ideological agenda is being served, be it conservative or liberal. Although think tanks advance agendas, they certainly do not disguise their “ideological arguments” as research, as is suggested by co-director Kevin Welner, who because he heads the Education and Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has his own agenda. It is laughable that Welner criticizes "think tanks" for an ideological bias, while his group accepts money from the NEA to discredit the very think tanks which discredit the education monopoly which serves the union. It is hard to believe his statement that, “The project's reviewers are independent scholars who probably do not know the source of the project's funding and are not pressured by the Great Lakes Center.” The grand unveiling of this project is so transparently disingenuous; it should be dismissed at a blink of an eye. One can only hope there are no public funds going toward this blatantly special interest endeavor…but with bridges being built to nowhere, what are the chances of that? Nancy Salvato is president of The Basics Project.

Education News for Thursday, May 18

Daily News — Thu, 18 May 2006 09:08:42 +0000

Flexibility Granted 2 States in No Child Left Behind - After years of hearing state officials appeal for more flexibility in judging schools, the federal Department of Education is opening the door for a new way to measure student progress under the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Decision could force school voucher group disclosures - A South Carolina group that has pushed for vouchers and tax credits for children to attend private schools might have to disclose how it is spending money after a State Ethics Commission decision Wednesday. (more)

University hopes to ease teacher shortage - Teacher-retention figures are bleak locally and nationally, but one Georgia university hopes to do its part to add to the teacher pool. (more)

More High-Schoolers Go To College For Credit - Thousands of Connecticut high school students are tackling college courses in a trend that educators hope will open more doors to higher education, a new state report says. (more)

'No Child Left Behind' means 'No Common Sense Allowed' - Opinion: No Child Left Behind is Big Brother's latest scheme for improving students' reading and math skills. (more)

New student test sought - A task force is calling for a new statewide testing system for Delaware students. (more)

Fla. Board Presses Voucher Issue - School vouchers didn't make it to the 2006 ballot, but that won't stop the state Board of Education from pressing the issue. (more)

Governors push access to preschool - Heeding studies showing that investing money in kids before kindergarten increases their chances of graduating and staying out of jail, nearly half of governors this year are pushing for -- and many are getting -- more funding for preschool education. (more)

Delaware school-rating plan rejected by federal officials - Delaware's proposal to rate schools a different way under the No Child Left Behind law has been rejected by the federal government. (more)

Many schools fear Prop. 82 has too many strings - Opinion: Preschools by the dozen have surprised advocates of California's Proposition 82 this spring, insisting they favor the concept of universal preschool advanced by the current initiative, but don't like what it might force them to do. (more)

CFO said he'd reinvent Florida high schools if elected - Noting Florida’s poor high school graduation ranking nationally, Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Gallagher pledged Wednesday to reinvent the state’s high schools to yield a 90 percent graduation rate by 2020 if he’s elected. (more)

UPDATE:

Spellings announcement regarding NCLB sanctions - Ed Week (subscription required) U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings has announced plans to expand a pilot initiative under which school districts may reverse the order of key consequences for schools’ low performance under the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Study: Universal preschool will raise achievement - In a report released Thursday, the National Institute for Early Education Research said it conservatively estimates the state would get back $2.78 for every $1 it invests in the Proposition 82 preschool program. (more)

SC tax credit issue drives superintendent race - The vote will likely be a litmus test of Gov. Mark Sanford’s views about expanding school choice to include tax credits for families who choose to send their children to private schools. (more)

Certified teachers lack edge - Education Week (subscription required) Teachers certified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards are for the most part no more effective in producing student academic progress than teachers without the special status, a long-awaited study concludes. (more)

Has Maine island town found crack in school choice law? -The residents of one Maine island town believe they have found a way to use public money to pay for religious education without violating state law, adding a new wrinkle to the debate over school choice. (more)

USA Today Opinion: Title XIX shouldn't be used as academic weapon - It is common knowledge that American schoolboys are faring poorly compared with girls. The average 11th-grade boy has the writing skills of an 8th-grade girl. Boys receive a majority of the failing grades, while girls garner most of the honors. (more)

Katrina students lag in test scores - Just one in six high school sophomores displaced from Louisiana by hurricanes Katrina and Rita passed a standardized test that is a precursor to the exam they must pass next year to graduate. (more)

Jar Jar Rawls: Why Eduwonk is Wrong on McKay (Dr. Matthew Ladner)

fguest — Thu, 18 May 2006 16:21:00 +0000

So I’m a complete Eduwonk nerd. I admit it. Visit the site several times per day. My therapist says it is good to talk about it.

So what do you do when you are a nerdy fan and your hero makes a big mistake? Watching Eduwonk position himself to the left on the anti-school choice jihadis at the Palm Beach Post on the issue of school vouchers for children with disabilities left me feeling like the Star Wars fanatic who camped out in 1999 only to be greeted by Jar Jar Binks as a reward.

Apparently, the geekeratsi provided Lucas with some important feedback, as Jar Jar all but disappeared from the following movies. In the same spirit, I offer the following information to Eduwonk. “But the PBP really lost me when on Saturday they quasi-embraced what I consider the worst of all three Florida private school choice programs, the McKay special education vouchers,” Eduwonk wrote.

The McKay Scholarship Program is not just the best of the voucher programs in Florida, but in fact, the best voucher program in the country.

The liberal political philosopher John Rawls wrote in his influential work “A Theory of Justice” that societal ethics should be decided as if behind a theoretical “veil of ignorance” whereby no one would be aware of what their position would be in a forthcoming society. While many contest Rawls’ philosophy, it is hugely influential in left of center thinking. Accordingly, let’s ask the question: does today’s system of education for children with physical and neurological disabilities remotely approach that which would likely be created behind a “veil of ignorance” under which everyone and everyone’s child had an equal chance of suffering from a disability?

The short answer: not even close. While federal special education law stands as a landmark piece of legislation protecting disabled students from discrimination, huge problems surround the education of children with disabilities. Parents register enormous dissatisfaction with the lack of services provided to their children; researchers point to the over-identification of minority students and out-of-control costs; and teachers vent their frustration with the amount of red tape and paperwork involved.

The conservative Fordham Foundation and the liberal Progressive Policy Institute (specifically, Eduwonk in a previous life) teamed up to summarize this situation as follows: “For this program that has done so much is also sorely troubled. America’s program for youngsters with disabilities has itself developed infirmities, handicaps and special needs of its own…we are not educating many disabled children to a satisfactory level of skills and knowledge. Too often we are frustrating their parents, distracting their teachers, hobbling their schools, and making it harder to keep order in their classrooms, all this despite the best of intentions and the most earnest of efforts by families, educators, and policymakers.”

In 2001, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Progressive Policy Institute published an edited volume on the functioning of IDEA. Eduwonk was one of the editors of this tome, and I was one of the many contributors. This volume broke something of a taboo against criticizing IDEA by exposing a legion of problems with special education. These problems included but are not limited to the fact that IDEA emphasizes procedure over student achievement, that an alarmingly large number of children have been inappropriately placed in special education due to poor early reading instruction, and racial bias in placement of minority children.

Growth in special education has made IDEA simultaneously costly and ineffective. By some estimates, 40 percent of the increase in K-12 spending has gone into special education. Special education, in short, does too little to help children with disabilities and too much to harm children without disabilities. Jay Mathews of the Washington Post noted that the available research “suggests that the special education system has led to widespread, if well-intentioned, misuse of tax dollars and has failed to help kids.” (Jay Mathews, “When Special Education Falls Short,” Washington Post, December 11, 2001.)

The McKay Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities represents a radical departure from the normal operation of the special education system. McKay makes a school voucher available to any special education student in Florida public schools. This program is the largest school voucher program in the country, with approximately 375,000 eligible special education students and more than 18,000 students participating.

The program has been expanding rapidly, with approximately double the number of students utilizing McKay vouchers this school year than in the 2002-03 school year. Students with an individual education plan (IEP) enrolled in a Florida public school are eligible to participate. Private schools meeting minimal requirements, including financial soundness and compliance with nondiscrimination regulations, can participate in the program. The maximum amount of each student’s voucher is equal to the total cost of educating that child in public school.

WHO IS ELIGIBLE, AND HOW IS MCKAY WORKING OUT?

Children in special education programs are disproportionately poor. Special education children are 50 percent more likely to be living in poverty than the general student population, and substantially less likely to be living in a household with a family income above $75,000. Sixty-eight percent of disabled children have family incomes below $50,000 and are 50 percent more likely to be living in poverty than the general population.

In addition, African American students are substantially overrepresented in special education programs nationwide. African American students are 1.45 times more likely to be classified as disabled, 2.99 times more likely to be classified as having mental retardation and 2.21 times more likely to be classified as having emotional disturbance than all other groups combined.

The McKay program therefore serves the most disadvantaged population in our public school system: children with disabilities, disproportionately poor and minority. How is the program working? The Manhattan Institute conducted a parental satisfaction survey of both parents who had used the program to transfer and parents who had used a McKay scholarship to transfer but had subsequently returned to a public school. The survey found 92.7 percent of current McKay participants are satisfied or very satisfied with their McKay schools while only 32.7 percent were similarly satisfied with their public schools. McKay parents found that their child’s class size dropped dramatically, from an average of 25.1 students per class in public schools to 12.8 students per class in McKay schools. In public schools, 46.8 percent of disabled students were bothered often and 24.7 percent suffered physical assault, while in McKay schools, 5.3 percent were bothered often and 6.0 percent reported assault.

Most telling of all, more than 90 per cent of parents who had withdrawn their child from the program believe it should continue to be available to those who wish to use it.

So McKay parents like McKay, even if Eduwonk does not. But what about Eduwonk’s concerns?

The Crux of the Eduwonk Critique of McKay

Eduwonk is concerned that McKay creates a perverse incentive for parents to seek a disability label. The logic is very clear: get a label, get a voucher!

Eduwonk has good reason to be concerned about mislabeling, but should be far more concerned about school districts than parents as a source. The vast majority of the growth of special education has been the large increase of students classified as “learning disabled.” School districts often label children as learning disabled when teachers perceive a discrepancy between classroom performance and innate intellectual ability. Such a vague standard is subject to error and abuse. Students with learning disabilities constituted only 21 percent of all special education disabilities when Congress passed the EAHCA, but by 1998 that figure had more than doubled to 46 percent. While the number of students with clinical disabilities (such as autism, blindness, deafness or mental retardation) has remained nearly constant since 1976, the percentage of total students classified as learning disabled (LD) has more than tripled- from 1.8 percent of all students to 6 percent of all public school students. (For a discussion of the economic and environmental factors behind disability rates, go here for more Jay P. Greene--Ed Week subscription required.)

Recent medical research into learning disabilities demonstrates a strong link between ineffective reading instruction and later learning disabilities. Analysis by a team of medical doctors, led by Dr. Reid Lyon of the National Institutes of Health, presented evidence that improper reading instruction has lead to an enormous increase in the number of students labeled as having specific learning disabilities. The medical evidence strongly suggests that children who do not receive proper reading instruction in the early grades develop learning deficiencies, which are easily mistaken for learning disabilities.

Such “teaching disabled” children require extensive remediation to achieve grade level in reading. Yet unlike children with a neurological disorder, teaching-disabled children have conditions that could have been prevented with proper reading instruction in the early grades. Lyon’s medical team found that rigorous early reading instruction could reduce by 70 percent the number of students identified as learning disabled. Lyon and his coauthors estimate that, nationwide, nearly two million children have preventable learning disabilities.

Labeling children as disabled when in fact no disability exists does substantial harm to each mislabeled child. The erring district may seriously damage a child’s self-image and confidence in their capabilities. During his 2001 testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, then U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige underscored the long-term damage mislabeling inflicts on minority children:

For minority students, misclassification or inappropriate placement in special education programs can have significant adverse consequences, particularly when these students are being removed from regular education settings and denied access to the core curriculum. Of particular concern is that, often, the more separate a program is from the general education setting, the more limited the curriculum and the greater the consequences to the student, particularly in terms of access to postsecondary education and employment opportunities. The stigma of being misclassified as mentally retarded or seriously emotionally disturbed, or as having a behavioral disorder, may also have serious consequences in terms of the student's self-perception and the perception of others, including family, peers, teachers and future employers.

In the edited PPI volume referenced earlier, Dr. Lyon wrote, “From its inception as a category, LD has served as a sociological sponge that attempts to wipe up general education’s spills and cleanse its ills.” Children with disabilities therefore not only represent a large and growing percentage of public school students, but also a pool of students who are far more intertwined with the failures of the general education system than is commonly recognized. Kids who have been mislabeled are victims of the system and will usually be well behind academically. Making them eligible for a voucher to go to a school which might serve their needs for a change seems like the least we could do. School districts that want to prevent this are cordially invited to stop mislabeling children.

The McKay program creates countervailing pressure against the perverse incentives of the special education system. Mislabeling is a phenomenon overwhelmingly driven by school districts, not by parents. The perverse incentives are legion: extra money, test gaming, and segregation of difficult students, a far greater problem than scheming parents angling to get their kids labeled.

Ah, Eduwonk would say, a voucher is a far greater incentive than extra SAT time. True enough. The fact of the matter is, however, that a parent cannot become eligible for a McKay scholarship without an Individual Education Plan, and cannot get an Individual Education Plan unless granted by the school district. If the district believes that a child has no disability and is simply angling for McKay, they have the ability and incentive to turn them down.

If Eduwonk wants to move public schools out of the dark ages of a profoundly unscientific method of labeling SLDs, sign me up. Improve early childhood reading instruction? Yes please! Universal screening and early childhood remediation? Let’s talk!

Transforming a legit concern into a boogey man fear to deny the worst served kids in the public school system the chance to benefit from a wildly popular and beneficial program? Leaving our most disadvantaged students in a frustratingly dysfunctional system with only the rich kids having access in the form of a lawsuit? As either John Rawls or Jar Jar Binks would say (but both would agree) “that smells stinkamuss!”

Dr. Matthew Ladner is director of state projects at the Alliance for School Choice and is a senior fellow at the Goldwater Institute.

Kids (literally) carrying union water?

edspresso — Thu, 18 May 2006 19:55:00 +0000

A teacher's union is suing the school district for the right to send their newsletter home with students:

The complaint comes after the district denied a request from the union, the Park Ridge Education Association (PREA), to include its newsletter, "Teacher Talk," along with the "take-home" packet given to students every other Thursday. District representatives said that, according to district policy, the newsletter is not appropriate material for the packet.
The PREA, a branch of the Illinois Education Association, filed a complaint in U.S. District Court Feb. 13. The suit claims the school district has denied the union's rights to free speech and equal protection under both the U.S. and Illinois constitutions. The PREA also filed a complaint with the Illinois Labor Relations Board, said PREA President Fred Klonsky.

The newsletter in question is here. The union's reaction is a bit lacking, though:

School policy limits material sent home in the packet to notes from teachers and information about school-related activities and organized student groups. It excludes items of a political or sectarian nature and solicitations from for-profit groups, non-school related organizations and organizations not within the district boundaries.

The PREA maintains that "Teacher Talk" is not political in nature, Klonsky said. "It is not an explicitly pro-union newsletter," he said. "...It's not a propaganda piece."

Not a propaganda piece? Then explain the next paragraph:

Klonsky said the newsletter was started after the 2003 teacher strikes in order to "ease the tension in the community" and "let the community know more about the good works the teachers are doing in both the classroom and in extracurricular activities." It includes stories about classroom activities and district initiatives, and one recent issue included some facts about the union's purpose and teacher population.

In other words, the newsletter was intended to rehabilitate and maintain the union's image. Sounds like propaganda to us.

Having read the newsletter, we tend to agree that it's really apolitical. In all likelihood, the union should probably be allowed to send the newsletter home with the kids, or the district should be required to clarify its policy on things like this. But to say that a union publication is neutral is like saying this blog doesn't take a position on vouchers.

National Education Standards….They’re Back! (Kevin Kosar)

fguest — Fri, 19 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Over the past six months, the need for national education standards has been talked up. The idea, in short, is that the U.S. should have brief written statements of the skills and knowledge children should attain at each grade level for each subject area. The federal government would either encourage or require states to base their schools’ curricula on these standards. Education colleges, in turn, would train would-be teachers in the standards. Much of the talk has come from those in the federal education policy circles. In November 2005, the progressive think-tank, the Center for American Progress, released a report that declared, “The federal government should support the crafting, adoption, and promotion of voluntary, rigorous national curriculum standards in core subject areas….” Education Week, the newspaper of record for school news, recently carried an op-ed by Diane Ravitch arguing for national education standards. Ravitch, a former assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of Education, also participated in an online chat on Education Week’s website, where she advocated a “national core curriculum.” [Disclosure: the author once was a research assistant to Prof. Ravitch.] Meanwhile, Denis Doyle, a long-time observer of schooling and education policy, wrote about national education standards in his online newsletter in January. And, in March, Education Sector, another think-tank, has hosted a debate on… yes, national education standards. Outside this wonky loop, the New York Times editorial board has made inchoate rumblings about establishing some sort of national education standards policy. “It will be impossible to improve math and science education until we assess teachers’ preparedness based on the same high standards in all parts of the country,” it opined on January 24 th . Whether these teacher education standards should also be used in the classroom, though, the Times has not made clear. Proponents tend to justify national education standards on two grounds. Some argue that for America to remain economically competitive with other nations, our students needed to be more learned. Other advocates see national standards as a tool for equity. Different children attend schools with challenging curricula, others, all too often in poor and non-white communities, do not. This is not fair; thus, national standards are needed to see that all students receive a rigorous education. So… A man named George Bush occupies the White House and there is talk of establishing national standards. Pardon me for quoting New York Yankee legend, Yogi Berra, but, “It’s déjà vu all over again.” Fifteen years ago, President George H.W. Bush announced his America 2000 plan, which advocated drawing up “world class standards” and achievement tests. Over the next two years, the Department of Education, National Endowment for the Humanities, and National Science Foundation awarded grants to fund the development of national standards. Scholars and experts would draft standards and a national board of citizens, scholars, and others would then review the standards and provide feedback to the authors, who would revise the standards. In a nod to tradition, the Bush administration did not intend to impose these curricular guidelines on schools. Rather, the standards would be produced and states free to use them or not. It was an interesting idea, but it died a violent death at the hands of politics. In October of 1994, the standards for U.S. history were about to be unveiled. Lynne Cheney, the former head of the National Endowment for the Humanities who had helped fund the creation of the history standards, savaged the standards for political correctness in the Wall Street Journal. A hullabaloo erupted and editorial pages and talk radio were flooded with outraged voices. In January of 1995, the Senate passed a resolution condemning the standards by a vote of 99 to 1. Not only were the history standards dead, all national education standards were condemned as unlawful and deleterious federal dabbling in local affairs. This history is relevant to today’s consideration of national education standards because it would appear that the same impediments to enacting national standards that existed then exist now. First, there is the thirty-five year old federal law (20 U..SC. 1232(a)) that declares “No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system.” Then there is the matter of politics. First, the tradition of local control over educational curricula goes back a long way, all the way back, in fact, to the 1600s, when European settlers first settled on this continent and erected schools. While the federal government has crept further and further into schooling over the past century --- especially since 1965 --- its role in the schools remains quite limited. Less than 10 percent of school funds come from the federal government. Schools remain, very much, local institutions. Second, schools’ curricula have always been an intensely political matter. Politicians and parents alike have fought tooth and nail over using curricula to “Americanize” students, and to teach them “temperance” and “sex ed.” In the past year, there have been episodes reminiscent of the “Scopes Monkey Trial” of a century back, with local school boards mandating that science courses provide theistic explanations of the origins of life. While national education standards may make good sense as policy, politically they would appear to be as doomed as they were 15 years ago. Although scholars and experts may be best qualified to draw up schools curricula, the rest of the public will not stand by idly as the content of their children’s education is devised. Inevitably, the question of what schools should teach brings up values questions, about which everyone has opinions. Kevin R. Kosar, Ph.D., is the author of Failing Grades: The Federal Politics of Education Standards (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2005) . This article originally appeared on History News Network.

Education News for Friday, May 19

Daily News — Fri, 19 May 2006 09:27:06 +0000

Lawmakers willing to work on No Child law - Lawmakers said Thursday they were willing to make the No Child Left Behind law more flexible, but warned there won't be a lot of extra federal money to help pay for it. (more)

Villalobos gets foe: Bolaños - Alex Villalobos, until recently a rising star in the Florida Senate who paid a steep price for crossing the governor on education issues, got another dose of reality Thursday: a challenger for the first time in 14 years. (more)

UPDATE:

Urban decay: Catholic schools in cities are closing. We need vouchers now - Wall Street Journal (subscription required) Catholic schools produce results far better than their public counterparts for a fraction of the cost. On last year's New York State reading and math tests, fourth and eighth graders in Catholic schools scored 7% to 10% higher than public-school students. (more)

Under pressure, NBPTS releases full study - Ed Week (subscription required) The national organization that grants teachers advanced certification today released the text of an unflattering study. (more)

L.A. takeover update

edspresso — Fri, 19 May 2006 13:18:23 +0000

Villaraigosa is making some concessions:

Bowing to pressure from neighboring cities, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has amended his takeover plan for Los Angeles area public schools to grant their mayors veto power on all decisions except the budget.

Villaraigosa originally hoped to get a bill before the Legislature that would grant the Los Angeles mayor 80 percent voting power on all major decisions, with 27 other cities in the Los Angeles Unified School District sharing the remaining 20 percent.

He recently amended his plan, however, to grant veto authority to the other mayors if a majority of them disapprove of his actions, including hiring or firing a superintendent. Villaraigosa would still retain 80 percent voting power on budget issues.

"We wanted to be responsive to the other mayors, and they were concerned about the proportional vote and that they would have no influence," said Thomas Saenz, counsel to the mayor.

L.A. Times take here, which mentions this:

Five cities in the school district's southeast corner — South Gate, Huntington Park, Bell, Cudahy and Maywood — have been working to form a joint-powers authority that would allow them to govern schools within their boundaries, an idea that Villaraigosa supports.

Under the terms of that proposed agreement, the cities would hire a local superintendent and take control of a portion of the district's $6.8-billion budget.

It remains unclear whether the cities could legally form such a coalition or whether the move would require state legislation. Also uncertain is what role the five cities would play on Villaraigosa's proposed council.

So could the LAUSD leviathan finally be broken down just a bit? And would that necessarily be a bad thing? It depends on who you ask: School Me, saying Villaraigosa has emboldened the opposition, lowered its ultra-calibrated Predict-O-Meter^TM.

Debates

fguest — Fri, 19 May 2006 19:20:00 +0000

We would like to thank those who have participated until now. Prior debates were on national standards, universal preschool and the 65% solution. Keep watching this space for future debates!

If I Can Get Along with Union People, You Can Too (Mike Antonucci)

fguest — Tue, 23 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

I started the Education Intelligence Agency nine years ago, with the idea that those who needed to know about the teachers’ unions would welcome a single, comprehensive source for such information. One-stop shopping, as it were.

I assumed that NEA and AFT members had a pretty good working knowledge of how their unions operated and what they were up to, so it seemed to be a good bet that most of my readers would be outsiders. But from the very beginning, EIA picked up a lot of union members as readers. Outsiders ask all the time if I’m “afraid” of what the unions might do to me. Many of them cannot believe that I annually attend the NEA convention (and biennially, the AFT convention) in perfect safety and comfort. “Don’t they hate your guts?” is a question I’ve heard many times. Let me state for the record that NEA and AFT members, officers and employees as individuals are no different in person than any other group of people in any other walk of life – liberal or conservative, rich or poor, dog or cat people. By and large, they are courteous, kind and even-tempered. Some of them do hate my guts. Some of them disagree with me loudly. But I’ve never received as much as a minor threat, a pie in the face, or anything more frightening than the mal occhio. On the contrary, the overwhelming majority of union people I encounter are very nice to me. We’ve had long and sometimes heated discussions… about the Crusades, the Civil War, running marathons, web page layout, and the best method for cracking a polyalphabetic cipher. Regardless of how they feel about my views, they read – and seem to enjoy – the EIA Communiqué. I’ve thought a lot about why this should be so, and I’ve concluded that virtually all communication in the teachers’ unions is vertical. That is, locals report to states, who report to national, and the process is reversed. There is little opportunity for horizontal communication, for Iowa to know what’s going on in Nevada. So, I provide that. The other reason is because of what I report, which Education Week so picturesquely called “the smelly stuff that leaks onto the floor.” To union insiders, this is the same kind of stuff that gets passed around at staff meetings, or at the bar after a conference. The unions never, never, never report negative or embarrassing news about themselves. Yet it exists, and requires, shall we say, unofficial means of distribution. This love/hate relationship has led to many strange liaisons between myself and the unions over the years – to the point where I have done research work for union affiliates (once being paid with restaurant coupons to avoid any record of the transaction), and helped a staffer prepare for a job interview with a union affiliate (he got the job). Edspresso wanted to know if there were one story I did that “set off” the union more than any other. There was. It wasn’t about money, curriculum, merger, Lesbian and Gay History Month, or any other topic you might suspect. It was about the candidacy of retired Rear Adm. John F. Sigler for the position of NEA executive director in 2000. I published the story, and have it on impeccable authority that a lot of scurrying went on at NEA headquarters. The candidates were told not to speak with me, and NEA absolutely freaked that I knew about the admiral. Three days later, John Wilson was chosen (cause and effect, I believe, but I’m willing to be corrected). The worst part of that story is that two weeks later I tracked down the admiral through a member of his Naval Academy graduating class. He told me he couldn’t discuss the NEA situation with me. “But the position was filled,” I said. [Silence.] “They did tell you, didn’t they?” I asked. [Long silence.] “No.” [Long silence on my end.] Over the years, I’ve saved my favorite quotes from NEA members, officers and staff about EIA. Here is a sampling: * I don't want to be tarred and feathered by my colleagues, but I want to tell you that you continually and consistently get it right. * “You were mentioned in a [union staff] meeting today…in order to chill blood and strike fear into hearts.” * “When you were flying those C-130 transports for the Air Force, did you make any trips to Nicaragua for the Contras?” * “They must have contacts all over the country. The speed with which they find out what is going on is amazing and frightening.” * “I’ve always been impressed with your ability to report on events taking place in rooms where you’re not allowed.” * “Please know that I shall continue to depend on you as the best and most reliable source of information about what’s going on in NEA and AFT – but don’t quote me on that!”

* “I have worked for the [teachers’ union] for almost ten years. Your reporting on the day to day issues I run into are unmatched by any other source.”

So my advice about dealing with union people is pretty much the same as the advice I give about dealing with reporters: treat them like individual human beings, instead of representatives of a cause, and you will find that some of them will be more than happy to reciprocate.

Mike Antonucci is director of the Education Intelligence Agency. He blogs at Intercepts.

Education News for Tuesday, May 23

Daily News — Tue, 23 May 2006 09:31:47 +0000

Hawaii Family Struggles With Racism, Failing Public Education System - Hawaii families don't know about their options under NCLB. (more)

Milwaukee's lessons on school vouchers - As one of the few programs in the country, Milwaukee offers a high-stakes test case for both camps. Yet researchers are only beginning to take a comprehensive look at how successful it's been. (more)

Chicago restructuring 185 schools under No Child Left Behind - Nearly a third of the city's public schools will undergo "restructuring" because they've consistently failed to improve test scores under the No Child Left Behind Act, the district announced Monday. (more)

California exit exam stymies trustees - You know the frustration caused by the legal battle over the school exit exam has reached a new high point when a prosecutor urges his colleagues to ignore the law. (more)

Teachers seeking pay hike - With the threat of mayoral takeover hanging over Los Angeles Unified School District, the teachers union has opened contract negotiations with a demand for a 14 percent, one-year raise for its members. (more)

When districts pull sweets from menus, schools lose bucks - While health advocates applaud the decision earlier this month by soft drink makers to voluntarily restrict the on-campus sale of full-calorie drinks nationwide, school administrators are bracing for belt-tightening. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

It takes parents too to teach - With one year in Hillsborough County public schools behind him, 23-year-old Adam Wood is a rarity. (more)

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em and change their tune - I have a suggestion for the public schoolteachers of Florida, but they probably aren't gonna like it. They should think about becoming Republicans. (more)

Education Schools Inadequately Prepare Elementary Teachers How to Teach Reading - Ed Week (subscription required) Education Schools Inadequately Prepare Elementary Teachers How to Teach Reading. (more)

Smaller Not Necessarily Better, School-Size Study Concludes - Ed Week (subscription required) When it comes to high school size, smaller might not be better, concludes a national study presented yesterday at a conference sponsored by the Washington-based Brookings Institution. (more)

Heavy turnover in New York's principal ranks - More than half the principals in the New York City public school system have left their jobs over the past five years, opening the way for a remarkable influx of often younger newcomers, some in their 20's and 30's with impressive credentials but little teaching experience. (more)

Half of Indiana's schools failing - About half of Indiana's schools and more than a quarter of the 293 school districts failed to meet federal expectations in math and reading in 2005, including a growing number of Marion County township schools. (more)

USA Today: Teachers learn dated methods - Most U.S. undergraduate teacher-education programs give prospective teachers a poor foundation in reading instruction, according to a new study by a Washington-based non-profit group that is working to reform the nation's teacher-education system. (more)

Former teachers union official sentenced - Former Washington Teachers' Union official Gwendolyn M. Hemphill was sentenced yesterday to 11 years in prison for helping embezzle more than $4 million from union coffers and using some of the money to buy lavish personal items. (more)

Senior dumbness in Arizona

edspresso — Tue, 23 May 2006 13:50:48 +0000

"Is our children learning?" Here in sunny Arizona, apparently they don't learn to avoid doing really, really stupid things.

Police weren't laughing Monday over a supposed "senior prank" by a Peoria High School student they accused of showing up on campus wearing a ski mask.
Police were called and the school, 11200 N. 83rd Ave., was placed in lockdown for nearly 2 ½ hours as more than two dozen officers searched for intruder, fearing that the masked man possibly was armed.
The student, Zubair Hussaini, 18, was arrested in a nearby neighborhood after the masked man fled from the campus, said Mike Tellef, a Peoria police spokesman.
"He told the officers he was not armed and did this as a 'senior prank' after being dared by another student," Tellef said.
Hussaini was taken into custody and booked in a Maricopa County jail on charges of interfering with an educational institution and obstructing governmental operations, both misdemeanors, he said.
Police recovered a ski mask and yellow tee-shirt believed to have been worn by the intruder, but no weapon, Tellef said.

Numbskull. (Hat tip to Education Wonks.)

NYT story: digging a bit deeper

edspresso — Tue, 23 May 2006 14:50:45 +0000

The Roosevelt Union Free School District on Long Island spends around $10,500 per student, more than $2000 above the state average. For special ed students, they spend (hold on to your hat) nearly $32,000 per pupil, 80% more than the statewide average.

An acquaintance who grew up on Long Island said Roosevelt is infamous for being the worst district in the area, and the numbers reflect it. Test scores are abysmal. Based on this, the 2004 graduation rate was 48 percent. So in that light, maybe this isn't such a surprise after all:

Four years after taking over the failing Roosevelt schools on Long Island, state officials released an audit yesterday criticizing the school district's management for continuing fiscal irregularities, including paying for a $6,000 trip to Argentina and the South Pole.
Other issues raised in the audit included a lack of oversight by a state-appointed local board, a two-year delay in a school aid payment of $120,000 because of late paperwork, failure to follow bidding and contract approval procedures, the lack of a textbook inventory, the storage of blank checks in unsecured places and lax procedures under the former treasurer, who has been replaced.
In a telephone interview, the current superintendent, Ronald O. Ross, generally agreed with the findings of the audit. Many of its 62 recommendations have already been carried out and the rest will be, he said. Part of the period covered by the audit preceded his arrival, and he attributed many of the mistakes to incompetent aides he had since removed.
The audit questioned trips arranged by Mr. Ross and a previous superintendent. The trip to Argentina, scheduled by Mr. Ross through a national group of superintendents, was what the audit called a 13-day "professional development" conference that included a cruise to the Antarctic. Though the trip was canceled, the $6,010 cost was not refunded. The audit questioned the trip's "reasonableness and necessity."

What gave us pause, though, was this:

Mr. Ross rejected criticism of the foreign trips.
"Yes, I need time off, and I might need to go not only to the South Pole but also to the North Pole," Mr. Ross said. What he learns on such trips benefits students back home, he said. The audit claimed that Mr. Ross canceled the Argentina trip because of "the potential for opposition within the community." But he denied that, saying he was simply too busy to go. "Why would I let some old biddies in the community stop me?" he said.
Mr. Ross criticized Newsday, which reported the audit yesterday, saying it was leaked to discredit him in "a political hatchet job."
"We started teaching Chinese in the first grade, our choir performed at Carnegie Hall, the students put on an event for Darfur, we entered the robotics competition, we have a cosmic ray detector built by students, we added Advanced Placement classes in high school and we started a chess team and it came up second to Jericho," Mr. Ross said. "But no one is talking about any of those things. Instead, it's focusing on a trip I didn't even take." (emphasis added)

Mr. Ross. Public schools demand more accountability for charter schools and voucher schools--but when said accountability is applied to public schools, it becomes a "political hatchet job"? And if you're not willing to answer to "some old biddies in the community", would it be fair to conclude that, no, you're really not accountable to the public?

One last thought. The in-state tuition for CUNY-Brooklyn College is $4,353. For the amount this district is spending per pupil, you could send two kids to college. Congratulations, New York: your tax dollars at work!

Improving Education Is A Great Idea, But Prop. 82 Is Not (Peter H. Hanley)

fguest — Wed, 24 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Proposition 82 on the June ballot in California, like all things that are too good to be true, sounds great until you really take a look at exactly what it will do and exactly who will benefit. The fact is Prop. 82 will do very little to help our struggling K-12 system or the kids most at risk. California’s K-12 education system struggles with a 30% dropout rate and additional tens of thousands of students that cannot pass a basic skills exit exam geared to 8th and 9th grade curricula. Dismantling today’s public-private preschool system that works and gives parents choices in favor of duplicating our public education bureaucratic morass makes no sense. The current preschool system already serves 62% of California four-year olds. Under the most optimistic scenario for new enrollments the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst can devise, Prop. 82 will add 99,000 new four-year olds in 2010 when it takes full effect, raising those served to 80%. The irony here is that the majority of kids that will be served by Prop. 82, including 76% of children from California families in the top one-third of incomes, are already being served by our current system. So how much will the new preschool bureaucracy cost? With $2.6 billion in new taxes the cost would be $6,753 per student for three hours of instruction—easily the most expensive program in the country and nearly as much as California taxpayers pay to fund a full day of instruction in the current K-12 system. But when you look at the costs for new enrollments—meaning kids who are not served by the current system—the astronomical cost is $26,262 for each of those new four-year olds! Moreover, a significant percentage of this public money will flow to affluent families. Only 8.4% of funding from the new tax will enroll “high risk” kids who otherwise would not have gone – those lower-income and minority children with achievement gaps. What possible public benefit flows from subsidizing affluent families in the face of California’s continuing structural deficit that limits funding of K-12, children’s health insurance, road and bridge maintenance, and affordable housing? In all likelihood this program will cost much more than proponents are suggesting. Quebec’s universal preschool program, projected to cost $235 million over five years, now runs $1.7 billion every year. California parents could be forced to pick up the tab because hidden in the fine print of this measure is a provision allowing the state to assess user fees for parents with kids in this preschool program. Proposition 82 lights the fuse for cost explosions. First, the shift from community-based preschool to public schools will likely create a shortage as community schools close in the face of the law’s blatant bias towards public schools. Second, this supposed “free” preschool will increase demand, most effectively exercised by affluent families. In Quebec, families from the top 30% of income occupy half the preschool seats. Third, Prop. 82’s $2 billion in public school construction projects, intended largely to replace already existing capacity in community schools and consistently subject to cost overruns (think Bay Bridge!), will likely be insufficient. Fourth, all preschool teachers will be required to obtain both a B.A. and a yet-to-be-developed early childhood teaching certificate, despite no evidence that a B.A. improves teacher effectiveness at the preschool level over simply taking basic community college classes in early childhood development. Combined with California’s projected need to hire 100,000 K-12 teachers in the next decade and the introduction of mandatory collective bargaining into preschools, labor costs will soar. Four-year-old preschool attendance nationwide grew from 16% in 1965 to 66% today. By any measure U.S. academic performance is flat or has declined. While many factors are in play, if universal preschool were the panacea advocates claim, some evidence reflecting the billions of public and private preschool dollars spent should be discernible. RAND Corporation’s recent study did not support any significant academic benefit from preschool for middle class children. Other research shows preschool benefits for low-income kids dissipate by third grade. Let’s better target the $3 billion California already spends on preschool and child care to kids at risk, not build a costly new public feeding trough premised on faulty assumptions. Peter H. Hanley is executive director of California Parents for Educational Choice and an elected school board member in California’s San Mateo Union High School District.

Education News for Wednesday, May 24

Daily News — Wed, 24 May 2006 09:54:54 +0000

Appointees try to boost vouchers - The old rap on the Pentagon is that the generals keep wanting to refight the last war. You could say the same thing about Florida's Board of Education. (more)

Dropout data raise questions on two fronts - Economist Larry Mishel was troubled by high school graduation statistics that contradicted what he thought was good research. That was particularly true of data used by many politicians and pundits to bemoan a 30 percent dropout rate in American high schools. (more)

Parents should thank strict teachers - In conversations I've had with teachers, Scottsdale parents tend to involve themselves in their children's education - but not always in positive ways. (more)

UPDATE:

Feds' teacher rules strain rural Arizona areas - Veteran teachers have to prove they are highly qualified through a combination of years of experience, college course background and professional development. (more)

Ed Week commentary: Bridging differences - (subscription required) A Dialogue Between Deborah Meier and Diane Ravitch. (more)

NAEP science scores essentially flat except at 4th grade level - Ed Week (subscription required) At a time when educators, elected officials, and corporate leaders are fretting over American students’ weak science skills, new test results show that the nation’s middle schoolers made no progress in that subject over the past five years... (more)

Choice, SES would flip under NCLB pilot plan - Ed Week (subscription required) Building on an initiative piloted this school year in Virginia, participating districts could offer students a choice of supplemental educational services, or SES, a year before having to provide the option of transferring to a higher-performing school. (more)

UPDATE:

Education becoming top issue for DC - Homeowners, business leaders and newcomers with a financial stake in the District's economic revival are pushing the troubled D.C. school system to the top of the city's political agenda in a landmark election year when voters will choose a mayor and council chairman. (more)

New Orleans schools try to work together - State officials fielded myriad questions Tuesday from parents and teachers curious and at times baffled about how public schools will operate in New Orleans this fall, now that the local district, the state Department of Education and independent charters have control over various campuses throughout the city. (more)

LA Times opinion: Preschool: the best policy money can buy - Are public investments in preschool good for children's educations and for their well being? Do they make sense for society?After five decades of research, the answer is unequivocally yes. (more)

A Christian group finds its way into public schools - On a recent sunny afternoon at Stuyvesant High School, the track team warmed up in the lobby. On the sixth floor, the school newspaper staff assembled to listen to a speaker. Outside, a cluster of students gathered to pray. (more)

CA teachers union supports governor's school friendly budget - Leaders of the California Teachers Association took the unexpected step Tuesday of endorsing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget and launching a lobbying effort to ensure its passage. (more)

UPDATE:

High School Exit Exam Reinstated - The California Supreme Court today reinstated the state's high school exit exam one week after a Superior Court judge issued a preliminary injunction against the test that students need to pass to graduate. (more)

Polite Agreement or Something We Can Use? (Barry Garelick)

fguest — Thu, 25 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Education Secretary Spellings recently announced the formation of a presidentially appointed panel that was formed to address math teaching. According to the charter of this panel, one of its purposes is “to foster greater knowledge of and improved performance in mathematics among American students.” The panel is charged with producing a report in two years, which must contain recommendations pertaining to how math instruction can be improved in the U.S. In particular, the report must address the skills necessary for students to acquire competence in algebra and to prepare them for higher levels of mathematics. The workings of the panel are not the type of thing that makes the front page of newspapers, the top story on TV news, or what is talked about in the local cafes. To hear about this you need to drop in to the blogs (like Edspresso), or the various list serves on the internet devoted to math education. There you will notice some discomfort among those who think that the way math is currently taught and the present crop of math texts being used in the U.S. is just fine. They have openly expressed dismay at the inclusion on the panel of people who have been vocal critics of reform math, stating "This panel is filled with hacks, toadies and stooges. Can you say ‘show trial’, children? Have you ever seen the old reels of the Communist Party Congresses in Moscow?” Allegations of pre-conceived conclusions then follow. The rancor of the above comment is not unusual to those familiar with the never-ending debate between the mathematics and education communities in what has come to be known as the “math wars”. The debate revolves around on state math standards, math texts and how math should be taught. Reformers advocate the concept of “discovery learning” in which students discover what they need to know by being given “real life” problems, frequently without providing the information and skills necessary to solve them. Such approach is at the heart of a series of math texts funded through grants from the Education and Human Resources Division of National Science Foundation and based on standards developed by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). NCTM has had enormous influence over the math standards and texts used by most states and districts in the United States—standards and texts that, in the view of the mathematics community have resulted in dumbed-down, or “skills-lite” curricula. The formation of the panel comes at an unusual time in the long and storied history of the math wars. Some see the formation of the panel as a possible end to the math wars, at a time when there has been some communication between the mathematics community and the NCTM. Yet at the same time, school districts are continuing to adopt the controversial texts, school boards are continuing to tell parents to “trust us”, and protests from mathematicians and others that the math texts are not doing the job are labeled as ideological arguments—and are ignored. The real issue is about math content, but few people get that yet. Instead, the arguments center around pedagogy and how the brain works—anything except what are the basic facts, skills and concepts of math that students must master (like they do in Asian countries). Maybe that's why the panel has five psychologists but only two mathematicians. It doesn’t take a PhD in cognitive science to know that to teach students how to think you need to teach them things to think about. Nevertheless, the panel’s discussions about content may be eclipsed by discussions about learning and teaching theory. One hopes that the traditional backlash will stop and real dialogue will begin. If it were about how to teach dancing, there would be little argument that you have to teach basic dance steps. What I hope does not happen is that the panel ends up in polite agreement that it’s important to learn facts but then publishes a report recommending that students continue to discover what they haven't been taught.

Barry Garelick is an analyst for the federal government and lives in the Washington DC area. He is a national advisor to NYC HOLD, an education advocacy organization that addresses mathematics education in schools throughout the United States.

Rhode Island parents vs. teachers union

edspresso — Fri, 19 May 2006 13:50:15 +0000

Education Partnership in Rhode Island has released a new report blasting teachers union contracts. Anchor Rising has the goods.

Teach to Whose Test? (Karen Braun)

fguest — Mon, 22 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

If you're a homeschooler who thinks No Child Left Behind and standardized testing doesn't affect you, think again. Recently, ACT issued a report, "Ready for College and Ready for Work: Same or Different?" Quoting from the press release:

"This landmark report makes it clear that we must ensure high school is relevant and rigorous for all students," said Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, chair of the national Governors Association Education, Early Childhood, and Workforce Committee. "We need to bring accountability and focus to our classrooms in order to prepare graduates for the fiercely competitive global economy, whether their next step is college or a career."

"Rigor with relevance" are the new buzz words in education and the reform that is pushing toward consistent standards in all 50 states. It should also be no surprise that the ACT commissioned this report. Or that they are actively endorsing uniform standards and testing. They have a lot to gain with uniform testing. In a separate post on my blog, I focused on how career tracking and universal preschool are two mechanisms that are being used to further the state's economic goals at the expense of children. There is another component that the government is "investing" in as well. Testing and high school exit exams. Standardized testing is closely tied in with career tracking and managing the economy. Right now California is in a court battle for their high school exit exam. We are also hearing about problems with the SAT test. Despite these negative reports, there is one test that is gaining a lot of positive press, the ACT. They are positioning themselves to be the "test of choice" in education. Several states are considering or have already adopted this test as their state high school exit exam. Kentucky is the latest. The Bluegrass Institute defends this decision:

By approving legislation requiring all 11th-graders to take the proven ACT assessments, the 2006 General Assembly took an important step toward reducing Kentucky's undue reliance on the inadequate Commonwealth Accountability Testing System (CATS). The new law additionally adds high-quality testing for eighth-graders and high-school sophomores. The results of these new, nationally normed tests will provide earlier identification of areas where students need assistance - and identify the educational opportunities needed to close those gaps - to prepare for their dream career or college opportunity.

The article also highlights Colorado, Illinois, and Michigan as states that have adopted the ACT as their state exam. To twist an old cliche, "This is not your father's ACT." It is paid for by the state and has changed dramatically. They have added a work skills component all with the goal of job readiness. Quoting again from the Bluegrass Institute:

Students planning to immediately enter the workforce after graduation will also take ACT's Work Keys assessment, a business skills-oriented test that many employers require. High scorers will receive a Kentucky Employability Certificate from the state's Cabinet for Workforce Development, giving them a competitive advantage for better jobs. (emphasis added)

As more and more states adopt the same test, such as the ACT, to replace their state exams, we could end up with a de facto national exam. (By the way, having the SAT lose credibility greatly helps this effort.) It will interesting to watch how California resolves their testing situation. This is all a back door way of regulating not just curriculum but the economy as well. Employers and colleges will require an "Employability Certificate" (CIM) in the same way they look for a high school diploma. Here's how Oregon described the certificate (CIM) from their Dept. of Ed. website:

When you apply to attend a college or university, to get a job, to join the military, or to do volunteer work, the CIM can help you prove why you should be admitted, hired, or allowed to join. It shows you did more than just attend school, take classes, and graduate with a GPA. It shows you worked hard to achieve high standards - standards that people respect in the world beyond high school.

Testing and certification have implications for our society as a whole. Those who homeschool will be affected by the educational structure that is required for a managed economy. Standardized testing is the oil that makes the engine of this type of economy run. The state needs compulsory schooling and testing to ensure that all children are taught what they need to know to be a good citizen in the global economy managed by the state. Those without the certification will be at a competitive disadvantage. And the only way to be certified is by taking the test. If all of this sounds a bit farfetched and conspiratorial then let me remind you again of the words of Governor Jennifer Granholm from my state of Michigan. She said this in her state of the state address this year.

Now, when it comes to education, we will have one overarching goal: to become the best-educated workforce in the nation. To do that, we will give our children the tools they need to be successful in the classroom and in the 21st century economy.

The whole purpose of education from the state's perspective is to do well on a test, to get a good job, to compete in the global economy. A uniform standard and test will move us toward the goal of a state managed workforce. That's why Florida will require middle and high school students to declare a career major. So is it any wonder that ACT president Richard Ferguson recently said, "Teach to the test, please." No thank you, Mr. Ferguson. My children are not a commodity in the state's workforce. It's none of the state's business what my children want to be when they grow up. And teaching to your test is not why we educate our children. Karen Braun homeschools her six children in Michigan. This article previously appeared on her blog, Spunky Homeschool.

Education News for Monday, May 22

Daily News — Mon, 22 May 2006 10:59:33 +0000

Eugene Hickock: More children left behind - Imagine being the parent of a child enrolled in a school that isn't working. You can't send him to a private school because you can't afford it, nor to another public school because there's no room. (more)

Few takers for vouchers - Ohio: Few public-school students have signed up for the state to pay their way to a private school this fall, and time is running out. (more)

185 failing Chicago schools to undergo $5 million in changes - Up to a third of Chicago's public schools are supposed to undergo radical "restructuring" this fall after being branded as chronic failures by the federal No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Return later for more education news.

UPDATE:

FL teachers say testing undervalues them - Keying teacher pay to student outcomes - the method usually proposed for measuring a teacher's value - seems about as fair as ranking a dentist's performance on how many cavities he fills in a year. (more)

Breaking up is hard to do?

edspresso — Mon, 22 May 2006 13:46:02 +0000

Connecting the dots...

School Me earlier said Villaraigosa's appeasement of smaller cities wanting greater autonomy from LAUSD weakened his takeover efforts.
The LA Daily News cheers on the move of the smaller cities.
School Me now suggests the ongoing disorganization of the mayor's opponents have increased the odds of takeover.

It sounds like the mayor may very well succeed in taking over LAUSD. The only question is what the district will look like when the dust has settled.

Words of Wisdom from Dick Morris (Clint Bolick)

fguest — Mon, 22 May 2006 17:08:18 +0000

School choice activists gathered recently at a conference hosted by the Gleason Foundation were treated to words of wisdom from an unlikely source: Bill Clinton’s political guru, Dick Morris.

Morris had lots of observations about the school choice movement, its prospects, and potential winning strategies. Some struck me as on-target; others, wide of the mark.

But one thing he said seemed to me particularly sage: that the No Child Left Behind Act was the biggest gift the school choice movement has ever received.

It sure didn’t seem that way when it was enacted. At the slightest hint of opposition from Sen. Ted Kennedy, President George W. Bush dropped private school options from the bill faster than my beloved San Francisco 49ers fell out of contention in the NFC West last year. From that point, NCLB seemed irrelevant to the school choice movement, with a golden opportunity to create private school options fumbled away.

As a policy matter, NCLB seemed like another massive unfunded federal mandate. While not all of their complaints have merit, local public school bureaucrats surely are right when they complain that the cost of federal mandates outweigh the funds that accompany them. I’m still agnostic about whether the law’s costs, especially in terms of the expansion of the federal role in education, outweigh the benefits.

But now it’s starting to look like there was something more to it, whether intended or not—one might almost call it an act of “strategery.” First of all, tens of thousands of kids in failing schools are receiving tutoring. Too many children are receiving it from the same people who are failing to successfully educate them during the day, but many others are receiving it from private providers who boast a proven track record of success. Many kids who are in failing schools most of the time now are in effective educational environments for a few hours a week, at least.

But more important than that, for the first time since the milestone "A Nation at Risk" report over two decades ago, Americans finally are gaining a glimpse of just how miserably and intractably bad a vast number of our public schools are. That is because NCLB requires states to rank their schools. It’s true that the states get to choose the standards, many of which are absurdly low; and that many states are playing games by excluding many minority and special-needs students.

That makes it all the more revelational that roughly one-quarter of all American public school students are in schools that their own states have deemed to be failing. Even more than that, nearly two thousand schools across the nation are chronically failing—that is, they have been failing for at least six years. That spells crisis, with a capital “C.”

But the law doesn’t stop there—in addition to limited supplemental services, the law entitles every child in a failing school to transfer to a better-performing public school within the district. Trouble is, there’s not a single large urban school district in the country that can pull that off, because there are far more children eligible to transfer than there are seats available in better-performing schools.

What that means is that NCLB is making more clear than ever before that public schools alone cannot solve the crisis of inner-city public education. No Child Left Behind is a hollow promise without genuine school choice—including inter-district transfers, charter schools, and yes, private schools.

Somewhere, somehow, federal lawmakers figured that out in the context of disabled children. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, if a school district fails to provide an “adequate” education to a disabled child, it must freight private school tuition. School districts all across the country do just that.

But under NCLB, a child in a failing school who lacks a meaningful public school option is entitled to...a tutor, maybe. Not only that, but there is no private cause of action to enforce any of the “rights” under the law. Instead of No Child Left Behind, there are millions left behind. Nationwide, only one percent of children in failing public schools have received transfers. In Los Angeles and Compton, the transfer rates are .02 percent and zero, respectively.

But wait—there is a hammer, and it is held by U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, who can cut off federal Title I funds to schools that fail to comply with transfer provisions. When Spellings assumed her position, it appeared that her main role under NCLB would be handing out waivers. But lately she has taken a decidedly different posture, perhaps recognizing that NCLB could be the President’s best chance for a positive and enduring legacy.

Responding to legal actions filed by the Alliance for School Choice and the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education, Spellings recently fired off a letter to California officials seeking their investigation of the complaints and adding her own concerns about problems with supplemental services in Oakland and Stockton. Spellings noted that although compliance with NCLB is primarily a local concern, she alluded to her own responsibility to enforce the law and her power to withhold funds for noncompliance. She surely will have other opportunities to get tough as similar actions are filed in other large urban school districts.

The harsh reality is that large urban school districts can’t comply. There simply aren’t enough seats in better-performing public schools. So something has to give: either the Administration’s will, NCLB’s exclusion of meaningful options—or the dreams and opportunities of millions of American schoolchildren, mostly minority and low-income, who are consigned to failing schools.

The Bush Administration has proposed adding private options for some children in chronically failing schools. It’s a start. But surely the reactionary forces supporting the status quo will resist until enough members of Congress on both sides of the aisle resolve to do something to rescue those kids. The moral case is clear and compelling: no child should be forced to stay in a failing public school.

NCLB is far from perfect. But Dick Morris is right: with its emphases on transparency and accountability, at least NCLB is providing a long-overdue wake-up call, making the case for school choice more compelling than ever.

Clint Bolick is President and General Counsel at the Alliance for School Choice.

Bioscience High School

edspresso — Mon, 22 May 2006 17:59:00 +0000

No, really--that's the name of the school:

At the new Bioscience High School in Phoenix, students will tap data into laptop computers and splice DNA in labs that would rival what is typically seen at colleges and research facilities.
The school building itself will be a teaching tool, with invisible sound barriers between study areas, cooling and plumbing systems left exposed for study, and impressions of fossils set into concrete walls.
The school, which opens in August, is in an ideal location: the heart of a downtown Phoenix biomedical campus that includes the global headquarters of the Translational Genomics Research Institute, the University of Arizona College of Medicine and the Arizona Biomedical Collaborative, a joint research endeavor of the state's three universities.
"They're going to be right smack in the middle of it," said MaryAnn Guerra, chief operating officer of TGen, whose daughter, Raleigh, 14, plans to attend Bioscience High. "It's just such a wonderful opportunity."

Pretty cool. The school's website is here.

Weighing In on the Graduation Rate Debate (Dan Losen)

fguest — Wed, 24 May 2006 13:44:00 +0000

(Note: Dan Losen was quoted in this Washington Post story on graduation rates. We linked the story in today's news, where Dan left the following comment. We are posting it here with his permission. -ed.) I'm among the experts debating this issue. I'm disappointed in Mishel whose work I usually hold in high esteem. I've read Mishel's book and it misleads the reader by ignoring obvious inconsistencies in data on New York City, Florida and Chicago that he relegates to the appendix. In fact, wherever Mishel looks at actual student record data that he deems reliable, he too finds a dropout crisis. This is contrary to his own conclusions based on surveys with admitted problems of years surveyed, sample design, and undercounts. Specifically, Mishel's survey-based estimates of the national rate graduation rates are 15% to 35% higher than the actual record data he argues are accurate in Florida, Chicago and New York City, the places he looked at more directly. Mishel finds that Florida's four year graduation rate for Blacks is about 55%, and Hispanics about 60%, and these rates Mishel admits are inflated by counting GED recipients as graduates. In Chicago, Mishel finds that Black 19 year old males have a graduation rate of 39% and Hispanic males 51%. In New York City Mishel points to an extended 7 year completion rate for all students of just 60%. The New York City rates he cites are actually about 44% for the 4 year graduation rate according to the State of New York. Mishel ignores the fact that only the 4 year rate meets the requirements for evaluating schools and districts under the No Child Left Behind Act. These alarmingly low numbers are consistent with the analysis from Chris Swanson and many other researchers, besides Jay Greene, that we have relied upon at Harvard. Mishel's own numbers indicate a crisis. There is an urgent need to address the crisis facing minority youth. Improving the data collection should be part of these efforts rather than cause for further delay. Finally, Mishel offers no useful recommendations and would have us wait many years until we have more accurate data before we address the problem. He acknowledges the crisis in urban schools where we find high percentages of minority youth yet appears to want to stay the course, which would continue to put minority students at a great disadvantage. Daniel J. Losen is a Senior Education Law and Policy Associate with the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. He is also a co-author of Losing our Future: How Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis.

California exit exam ruling stayed

edspresso — Wed, 24 May 2006 18:22:15 +0000

The California Supreme Court issued a stay:

The California Supreme Court today reinstated the state's high school exit exam one week after a Superior Court judge issued a preliminary injunction against the test that students need to pass to graduate.
The high court granted a request by the state education department to lift the injunction and referred the case to the state appellate court for further action.
With graduation ceremonies fast approaching at many schools, it is not immediately clear how the Supreme Court's decision today affects the thousands of high school seniors who have failed the exam and would have been prevented from receiving their diplomas.

School Me comments. Dave, who gave us the heads-up, is ecstatic.

Warping recent history in Florida

edspresso — Wed, 24 May 2006 18:31:00 +0000

Gotta hand it to the Lakeland Ledger--as demonstrated here, they're nothing if not consistent.

The old rap on the Pentagon is that the generals keep wanting to refight the last war. You could say the same thing about Florida's Board of Education. Let's see now: The Florida Supreme Court has struck down Jeb Bush's much-touted Opportunity Scholarships voucher program. In response, Gov. Bush asked for a constitutional amendment to authorize vouchers. But the Republican-led Legislature declined to send one to the voters. (Having read the polls, lawmakers, most of whom are running for re-election, understood that voters don't like vouchers.)

Actually, the vote was almost entirely along party lines, so it was more of a partisan affair than the sort of ship-jumping affair this editorial makes it out to be. And it took six Republicans defecting to bring the amendment down. On top of that, both amendment votes had simple majorities but not the supermajorities required under the Florida Constitution. Upshot: the votes weren't nearly the bloodbaths this editorial would have you believe.

Lawmakers did pass a bill lumping Opportunity Scholarships into another voucher program that has not yet been declared unconstitutional. Whether that will pass legal muster is anybody's guess.

Not quite. As pointed out here, the bill in question is basically a grandfathering measure--it puts the 733 kids in the Opportunity Scholarships program that was struck down into the corporate tax credit program. However, the measure doesn't create any new vouchers as such. It may or may not survive court battles, but the program as it is presently constituted will not exist under the new law.

What's wrong with this picture? The Board of Education exists to make policy for public education. The Florida Supreme Court threw out Bush's voucher program because it diverted money away from public schools and into private schools in violation of the state constitution's mandate to maintain a free and high quality system of public education.
There is something subversive about Board of Education members -- literally, stewards of public schools -- making it their official business to champion vouchers.

First off, that wasn't quite the court's reasoning--the decision rested largely on a question of "uniformity". As we've mentioned before, Andrew Rotherham and Frederick Hess addressed this back in January:

While the majority in the court decision seems not to have thought of it, any effort to honestly or faithfully apply their decision spells a death sentence for a number of popular reforms in Florida and sets an unfortunate precedent for elsewhere. Public charter schooling? Certainly not uniform in provision or operations. Specialty schools and tutoring programs? Neither uniformly available nor operationally standard. Programs for gifted students? Hardly uniform. Efforts by some districts to promote collaborative management, reward outstanding teachers, or adopt new curricular models? None of this is uniform either.

Nor should these or other ideas be uniform. Standardization was a reasonable goal sixty years ago, when fewer than half of Americans graduated high school and attention to sameness may have been the only sensible way to pursue equitable educational provision. We have seen how that experiment turned out, however. It worked okay for many students, especially those in comfortable communities, but standardized schools proved to be profoundly unsuccessful at educating those with nonstandard needs.
(snip)
In searching for every conceivable wrench to throw at the Florida voucher program, the Florida decision brings to mind Roe v. Wade. Just as many supporters of a woman's right to choose now realize how the shaky legal reasoning of Roe and the ensuing politics have hurt rather than helped their cause, so those who oppose vouchers but believe in choice and customization may find themselves grasping a Pyrrhic victory in Florida. Let the NAACP and the National School Boards Association beware.

But let's examine the Ledger's premise--that the enactment of school choice in Florida undermines the state's constitutional mandate to provide a "free, high-quality system" of public schools. As pointed out here:

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a standardized test given periodically to a national sample of students in select grades. NAEP is often called "The Nation's Report Card." Florida ranks fifth in improvement in fourth-grade reading out of 37 states for which scores are available both in 2002 and in 1998, the last time the reading test was given. Florida's improvement in eighth-grade reading scores was even more impressive, ranking second out of 34 states.

This means that Florida education has improved faster than in almost any other state since the NAEP was last given. The major event in Florida education in that time has been the implementation of two major school reform movements: accountability and choice.
(snip)
The new NAEP scores also show that throwing more money at education without structural reforms doesn't produce results. Florida made top-tier gains on NAEP despite school spending increases over the same period that ranked 47th in the nation. Meanwhile, big-spending states that haven't made significant reforms showed lackluster gains in NAEP scores. Of the five states that have made the largest increases in per-pupil education spending since 1998, counting only states in which test scores are available, three states have neither school choice nor tough accountability programs. These three states (Rhode Island, Wyoming and New Mexico) ranked in the bottom half of the nation in NAEP score gains. States with the highest absolute level of spending (rather than the biggest spending increases) but no serious education reforms also landed in the bottom half of the nation.

The new NAEP results should encourage Florida to stand by education reforms as they come under louder and more strident attacks from the defenders of the status quo. While it is reasonable to allow seniors to graduate despite failing the FCAT exam if they have good SAT scores, Florida should resist other policy changes that might allow students without basic skills to get diplomas or that would limit parents' ability to choose their children's schools. The Nation's Report Card shows that real reform has brought real results, while states that just throw money at the problem are falling behind.

So did it ever occur to the Ledger that maybe--just maybe--the Florida DOE is trying to protect some remnant of school choice because they see that it is helping produce results?

Here's an education "reform" that's sorely needed. Let's hope that Gov. Bush's successor, who will be elected this fall, will appoint Board of Education members who support and believe in public education.

And how does the Ledger define "believe in" and "support"? Probably by increasing spending and raising taxes--because, you see, $21 billion simply is not enough.

Spellings discovering NCLB wiggle room?

edspresso — Wed, 24 May 2006 20:29:00 +0000

Alexander Russo issues his thoughts on Spellings's proposed changes of the SES/choice requirements in NCLB.

Education News for Tuesday, May 30

Daily News — Tue, 30 May 2006 09:58:01 +0000

Can't Complete High School? Go Right Along to College - It is a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland idea. If you do not finish high school, head straight for college. (more)

Unions' retirement advice is failing teachers - Some of the United States' largest teachers unions have joined forces with investment companies to steer members into retirement plans that frequently have high expenses and mediocre returns. (more)

Why Supe Selection Is Like Judging a Dog Show - By the end of this column I will have selected the next superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District. Because I believe that the children, parents, teachers and citizens of Los Angeles are entitled to transparency in such deliberations, I invite you to join me as I work my way toward a decision. (more)

School choice focus of forum - School choice — at least a version that would grant tax credits to some parents who enroll their children in private schools — revealed clear differences for viewers who watched Sunday’s televised debate featuring five Republicans running for South Carolina superintendent of education. (more)

Parents Answer Cellphone Ban in N.Y. Schools - They say the crackdown is too strict and imperils children's safety. But the mayor holds the line. (more)

GOP's missed chance: No choice for NH parents - Editorial: Republicans in the state House of Representatives might have missed their best chance to implement one of their platform planks. (more)

It adds up: How teachers in Palm Beach County could earn six-figure salaries - Looking for a job with eventual six-figure earning potential? You might consider teaching at a Palm Beach County school. (more)

Will school closures do job? - As Seattle Public Schools prepares to shutter as many as a dozen school buildings, there's growing concern that closures won't save as much money as expected. (more)

Mayor Faces School Skeptics - In an effort to shore up support for his quest to win control of the Los Angeles public schools, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will go to Sacramento today to lobby business and labor leaders, as legislators warn that the major initiative of his term could be in trouble. (more)

A Mostly Easy Road for Chief of Schools - His wife's illness is the one issue overshadowing Jack O'Connell as he runs a less-than-stressful campaign for reelection as California's superintendent of public instruction. (more)

Exit-exam shift not the best answer for high schoolers - Opinion: The California legislature should vote down an effort to weaken the state's high academic expectations. (more)

Education earmark shows Los Angeles now in political power - A look at a $1 billion earmark for Los Angeles Unified School District--and what it means for the perpetual school finance battles in California. (more)

UPDATE:
CA initiative renews preschool debate - From coast to coast, states are pushing to get more 4-year-olds into classrooms like Cheryl Smith's thriving pre-kindergarten group at Cool Spring Elementary School in Adelphi. (more)

Ohio EdChoice voucher participation - With the application deadline fast approaching, 561 students, 1.2% of those eligible, have signed up for the new statewide EdChoice school voucher program. Despite this slow start, there is good reason to believe that this voucher program can fulfill its promise of offering true education choice to those who need it most. (more)

Wisconsin yanks school's voucher status - State officials ordered Sa'Rai and Zigler Upper Excellerated Academy out of Milwaukee's voucher program Friday, citing possible fraud in student applications. (more)

With more choice has come resegregation - A school-assignment system established in 2001 to give San Francisco parents more choice has resegregated many schools across San Francisco. (more)

Education News for Thursday, May 25

Daily News — Thu, 25 May 2006 09:22:27 +0000

Justices Restore Exit Exam - Thousands of struggling high school seniors are likely to be denied a diploma after the state Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated California's exit exam, a hotly debated gauge of competency in math and English. (more)

Villaraigosa Supports Reinstatement Of Exit Exam - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and school Superintendent Roy Romer praised Wednesday the state Supreme Court's decision reinstating the California High School Exit Exam as a graduation requirement for 2006. (more)

Will Blagojevich's school reform plan work? - If Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich gets his way, the state lottery would be sold or leased to raise $10 billion for his school reform plan. (more)

'Great' educators not enough under law - Teachers, some with decades of teaching experience, have to prove their worth under federal guidelines that require 100 percent of teachers in core subjects be "highly qualified" by June 30. (more)

65 Percent Solution: Gimmick or Gold Mine? - A very lengthy article on the 65% solution. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NYT: Test shows drip in science achievement for 12-graders - The first nationwide science test administered in five years shows that achievement among high school seniors has declined across the past decade... (more)

School performance gap falls along racial, economic lines - Seventy-four percent of Wisconsin’s 10th-grade students were proficient or advanced in reading, while 70 percent of students were proficient or advanced in math. (more)

S.C. Rep. Bill Cotty is against vouchers - ...tax credits or anything else that takes South Carolina’s resources and focus off of our central challenge — educating the kids who aren’t getting educated, who aren’t employable, who make our state less attractive to investors. (more)

U.S. a failure at evaluating teachers - A group called the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards has come up with a process designed to recognize top-notch teachers.. (more)

New York Post, Ryan Sager: Voice for Kids - Parents vs. special interests... (more)

US DOE warns of fake e-mails about NCLB - Ed Week (subscription required) The U.S. Department of Education is seeking to debunk widely circulated e-mails that erroneously say the No Child Left Behind Act mandates that students who fail their 10th grade reading and math tests must accept an inferior high school completion certificate... (more)

Blast from the past

edspresso — Thu, 25 May 2006 18:39:36 +0000

What he said.

Why the government can't tell which teachers are good

edspresso — Thu, 25 May 2006 18:42:00 +0000

Some lucid thoughts on merit pay from the Dallas Morning News:

The problem is that teacher quality gets evaluated on credentials, not quality. How many hours of math classes you took in college. Whether you've filled out the paperwork for a certain certificate. Whether you've gone back to get a master's degree.
The federal "highly qualified" standard, for instance, is primarily about what hoops a teacher has jumped through, not how good of a teacher she is.
But there are awful certified teachers and terrific uncertified ones. There are amazing teachers with just a bachelor's degree and terrible ones with a doctorate. Plenty of research has shown that quality doesn't align neatly with credentials.
Differentiating good teachers from bad ones has always been a touchy subject. Take salary. Great running backs get paid more than benchwarmers. Great trial lawyers get paid more than mediocre ones. So shouldn't the best teachers get paid more than the worst?
In Dallas ISD, an amazingly talented 15-year veteran teacher makes $46,176. And a thoroughly mediocre 15-year veteran teacher makes...$46,176.
(There are a few ways those figures can budge by a couple thousand bucks. But they're tied to things like job titles and credentials – not individual performance.)
There have been a few stabs at "merit pay" proposals around the country, but most have flopped. Teachers, rightly, have complained that most such plans would reward teachers primarily on their students' test scores. That's not fair because teachers in Dallas get different kids to work with than teachers in Highland Park or Plano.
But why can't a teacher's quality be judged the way everyone else's is? Not on some mechanized system tied to test scores, but by their bosses' evaluation of their performance.

Read the whole thing. (Although if we were ~~Jenny~~ Katie Newmark, we would be leveling plagiarism charges right about now.)

Time out for the NYT

edspresso — Thu, 25 May 2006 20:04:39 +0000

Whitney Tilson takes the New York Times to task over their coverage of charter schools.

Schools Failed the Exit Exam (Alan Bonsteel)

fguest — Fri, 26 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman struck down California's new high school exit exam last week, saying the test is unfair to students who have been shortchanged by substandard public schools. The attorney who filed the lawsuit, Arturo Gonzalez of the San Francisco law firm Morrison and Foerster, said, "There is overwhelming evidence that students throughout the state have not been taught the material on the test. And many students have been taught by teachers not credentialed in math and English." His lawsuit pointed out that many students who failed the exit exam had attended overcrowded schools. Had it not been for this court ruling, in June an estimated 8 percent of California high school seniors would have failed to earn a diploma because they had flunked all attempts at the exit exam. That 8 percent failure rate would be sad enough if this had been a real high school exit examination. In fact, the math portion is really an eighth-grade level test and thus better-suited as a middle-school exit exam. Further, if the 30 percent of our kids who drop out of high school had been given that same exam, the vast majority of them likely would have failed also. We then might have seen as many as 38 percent of our high school seniors failing to achieve eighth-grade math proficiency. With this kind of massive failure and so much at stake, what is holding us back from taking the next logical step and advocating making attractive alternatives available for these kids, who so much need a break? In fact, the federal No Child Left Behind act mandates such alternatives. On March 23, disadvantaged minority families supported by the national Alliance for School Choice announced that they were taking action against Los Angeles Unified School District as well as the Compton district, demanding immediate relief from schools failing to teach basic reading and arithmetic. The requested relief was in the form of a transfer to a quality school. On May 1, U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings wrote to state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell and asked him to take action on the complaints against Los Angeles Unified and Compton. She also noted concerns about compliance with the No Child Left Behind mandates by the Oakland and Stockton school districts. In all four districts, Los Angeles, Compton, Oakland, and Stockton, the numbers of children trapped in failing schools so vastly outnumbers the available openings in high-performing public schools in any of the districts that simply allowing transfers within the districts will never solve the problem. And all four districts are so heavily racially segregated that shifting kids within the districts won't begin to integrate their schools. What would meet the requirements of the law is some combination of allowing transfers to high-performing public schools outside the districts; allowing existing schools within those districts to convert to charter schools; and giving students in failing public schools scholarships to attend private schools. Judge Freedman's ruling will, of course, add pressure to the public outcry for quality schools for all. If the court finds – as it surely will – that many public schools are not meeting legal limits on class sizes, it could mandate making available scholarships to schools that observe small class sizes. And, if it finds that many teachers of math and English do not have college degrees in their subjects, it could order scholarships for students to attend schools with properly trained teachers. We are nearing a day of reckoning for California's failed public schools. The day is fast coming when a quality education in a school freely chosen by the family is considered not a privilege, but rather, a fundamental human right. Alan Bonsteel is president of California Parents for Educational Choice. This article originally appeared in the Orange County Register.

Education News for Friday, May 26

Daily News — Fri, 26 May 2006 09:31:45 +0000

Solve FCAT mystery of 10th-graders' scores - the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test is good at diagnosing problems. But as any doctor would tell you, diagnosis is not treatment or a cure. (more)

States open wallets, tackle big agendas - years of belt-tightening in the first half of this decade have given way to modest tax cuts and extra spending, particularly on education... (more)

CA students appeal exit ruling - Students who sued the state for discrimination after failing the high school exit exam asked a state appeals court Thursday to immediately hear their claim that the requirement should be suspended so they can graduate this year. (more)

Ohio early school advocates say children unprepared - Success By 6 released two reports Thursday that contain dreary statistics about the literacy readiness of preschool children in Hamilton County and Cincinnati. It also has a plan to address their deficiencies. (more)

UPDATE:

Universal Preschool Campaign Pushes to Sway Latino Voters - Their children have less access to such programs and often need English aid, say backers of Prop. 82. Affluent would get unneeded help, foes say. (more)

Katrina evacuees graduate from high school in Houston - resident and Katrina evacuee Travis Hill-Williams, 17, who graduates from Jones High School, talks about his experiences during a Houston Independent School District news conference. (more)

States boost eduspending

edspresso — Fri, 26 May 2006 10:00:00 +0000

According to Stateline, a number of states flush with unexpected tax revenues are increasing education spending: Arkansas, Georgia, and Kansas are just a few. And take a look at how much Wyoming is about to start shelling out.

On a related note, it's interesting to see how the improved economy is forcing Washington D.C. to take a hard look at education.

Homeowners, business leaders and newcomers with a financial stake in the District's economic revival are pushing the troubled D.C. school system to the top of the city's political agenda in a landmark election year when voters will choose a mayor and council chairman.
Polls show education surpassing taxes, crime and affordable housing as the top concern among voters across the city. In a survey late last year for mayoral candidate and D.C. Council member Adrian M. Fenty (D-Ward 4), almost 60 percent of those polled said education is the city's biggest problem, followed by housing at a distant second.
Mayoral contenders are hearing the same message on the campaign trail from childless couples worried about property values, business executives struggling to find qualified workers, and parents frustrated by the poor condition and academic performance of public schools.

Read the whole thing.

SIDE NOTE--An e-mailer reminds us that all these states obviously haven't studied recent history in Kansas City.

UPDATE: Goofed and left out the main Stateline link! Fixed now.

Furious backpedaling

edspresso — Fri, 26 May 2006 14:30:04 +0000

In case you doubted the influence of the teachers' unions in the Democratic Party:

After a long day of campaigning recently for the state Assembly seat he seeks as the capstone to his political career, Democrat Frank Quintero sat down to a debate and, when asked if he supports school vouchers, gave what he later called a "halting, feeble yes."
The one-word response and his mention of vouchers later in the evening forced Quintero's campaign for the 43rd Assembly District into damage control. He retracted the comment later that week, saying he opposed vouchers - government funding to help parents with private school tuition.
But opponents seized on his original statement to portray him either as a waffler or a danger to public education.
The weekend after the May 1 debate, California Teachers Association members stood outside Quintero's campaign office to hold him accountable. A week later, the California branch of the National Organization for Women released a poll suggesting voters took exception to the voucher statement.
Both organizations had already endorsed Paul Krekorian, Quintero's Democratic opponent in the June 6 primary. But the price Quintero paid for what he calls a slip of the tongue reveals the dangers of straying from the message in a campaign.
"Obviously in a Democratic primary, that's not the thing to say, that you support school vouchers," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles-based think tank.

Understatement of the year. (Hat tip to A Constrained Vision.)

More on the Ohio choice program

edspresso — Fri, 26 May 2006 15:08:00 +0000

The Columbus Dispatch is reporting that the Ohio school choice program isn’t getting many nibbles:

Few public-school students have signed up for the state to pay their way to a private school this fall, and time is running out.
Although there are roughly 13,000 Franklin County students eligible to apply to attend private schools on the state’s dime, only 148 have so far.
Across Ohio, as many as 14,000 private-school vouchers could be offered. But as of yesterday, 561 students had signed up. The deadline to apply is June 9.

Allow us to fill in the gaps. In its first year of existence, the Milwaukee voucher program had 743 students. The D.C. program had around 1000. Same with Florida. But the Ohio program is expected to rival or exceed previous first-year efforts. No, it won’t be anywhere close to the cap, but as pointed out in the article, no program ever opens with every voucher being taken.

Furthermore, we’re getting reports that a lot of private schools are waiting until school wraps up this week or next to send in their applications. Expect a major rush on the program within the next seven to ten days, which should help fill out those projected numbers.

Also, it’s worth noting that, as pointed out in the article, it takes time for word to get around on the program. By calling it a “scholarship” program, many parents assume that only high-achieving students are eligible. That’s one of several reasons it takes three to four years for choice programs to really have a measurable impact. And with the Ohio Department of Education not lending any real muscle to the marketing effort, it will be a pretty big deal if the program is able to achieve the expected applicant numbers.

Voucher discussions

edspresso — Fri, 26 May 2006 15:15:00 +0000

Jenny D.'s recent posts on school choice have sparked a whole lot of discussion. (Check out the threads for lots of interesting commentary.)

We're obviously just a bit late to this party, and it's kind of hard to add a whole lot to what has already been said over there, but that obviously won't stop us from trying! A few observations in no particular order.

First off, it seems like much of the discussion--especially in the first post--took place with no reference to places like Milwaukee and Washington D.C., where choice programs have been in place for years. Many of the questions about distribution of vouchers, admission requirements, special ed issues have been addressed through some degree of experience. Of course, not everybody is happy with the conclusions that have been reached--see Eduwonk's response to Matt Ladner on Florida's special ed vouchers. (And why does he keep calling it Edpresso? But we digress.) It would be worthwhile to discuss what has already taken place in areas where voucher programs have been in place for a while, and what has been learned throught that experience.

Another closely connected point is that there seems to be an assumption that school choice is an all-or-nothing deal. Notwithstanding the hyperventilating on the part of some, the mainstream school choice movement is not seeking to simply shut down the public school system in favor of private enterprise. This statement will probably infuriate the hard-core libertarians out there, but we'll just come out and say it: the public school system is here to stay, and no form of school choice is going to change that.

Which dovetails to our third point: the reason school choice won't destroy public schools is because it hasn't. Fifteen years of vouchers in Milwaukee, and oddly enough the public school system hasn't disintegrated. As mentioned yesterday, school choice appears to have done Florida some good. But it seems like some of the questions were framed along those lines. We agree that hypotheticals are certainly valuable in the framework of a discussion, but at some point the exchange really does need to come back to reality.

One last thought. In that second post, Jenny posed this question:

If the public schools were, in your estimation, doing a good job educating kids in academics, would you want school choice? Why?

If McDonald's is doing a good job feeding you, would you want to eat at Subway? Why? Maybe because of the virtues of competition?

Taking a long look at Milwaukee

edspresso — Fri, 26 May 2006 15:58:00 +0000

Overall, it's hard to complain a whole lot about this Christian Science Monitor article on the Milwaukee choice program. A few remarks...

Just because Jack Jennings and the NEA don't like the present body of research on Milwaukee doesn't mean it isn't persuasive.
The article talked about the closing of voucher schools as though it were a bad thing. We are among the first to applaud when a bad voucher school is shut down, because to be quite blunt, if they couldn't get the job done, they had it coming. Compare that to substandard public schools which, unlike failed voucher schools, manage to stay in business year after year.
Now to the juiciest tidbit of all. Starting next year, long-term data will finally be taken for the purposes of a longitudinal (read: long-term) study of the quality of Milwaukee voucher schools. A variety of people/groups quoted in the article lamented the lack of long-term data available on the program. One organization in particular was the AFT's Center on Accountability and Privatization ("After this many years there ought to be some hard data, and there's not"). What wasn't noted in the article is that voucher advocates have been pushing for this for several years--and that Gov. Doyle vetoed the legislation at the request of the teachers' union. Now why on earth would the union fear a scientific study of the choice program by a nonpartisan organization? We don't know. You'll have to ask them!

LAUSD--The Enron of Education (Bill Grundfest)

fguest — Mon, 29 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

"Which side are you on, boy... Which side are you on..." -- Pete Seeger song, which got him blacklisted I started my morning with a happy 3 year old insisting I go outside to hunt snails, and a 9 month old cooing in his high chair...my wife had coffee already made (!) and the dog, the birds and the fish had been fed...it was a good morning...but then (cue ominous music) came... the LA Times, with a front page story about the LAUSD - the Los Angeles Unified School District - an organization whose leaders act just like the CEOs of Enron. An entity that gets me standing in my PJ's on a dining room chair, yelling "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" How is LAUSD like Enron? 1. Just as the leaders of Enron (and many publicly held companies) behave as if the company is their personal property, and theirs for their own gain, LAUSD administrators act as if they own the school system. They use our kids as pawns, as tools to keep money, jobs and power. Make no mistake, public education has NOTHING to do with educating our kids. It has EVERYTHING to do with the many school unions keeping the jobs of their members. For the unions, THAT is the acid test of any new reform program. NOT "Does it help the kids learn?" but "Does it keep our jobs, money and power?" They decide that first and then they "spin"... they dress up their positions in terms that sound like they give a damn about us and our kids future. Nonsense. If they cared, they'd all quit. 2. Just as the leaders of Enron kept lying to the public, claiming things were going great, even as THEY KNEW the company was going bankrupt, LAUSD knows full well that they are leading an academically bankrupt organization. Now they're spending hundreds of thousands of public dollars on lobbyists and PR consultants to convince the public that they're doing fine, and we should stay the course. (And forget about allowing the mayor to take over the school district. Horrors! A man who's heroically willing to say "Hold ME responsible," when everyone else just spends years passing the buck.) 3. Enron leaders claim they did nothing wrong, that they were taken down by investors' panic and speculators. Just like Enron, LAUSD similarly claims, "It's not our fault." For years LAUSD has produced nothing but excuses for failure (oh, to be fair, they also produced several generations of high schoolers who can't read), and has never taken responsibility for the utter failure of their service to us. According to them it's the fault of everything from poverty to parents, to immigration to nutrition. Well, there are only two choices: either they don't know how to educate these kids or these kids are too stupid to be educated. I know the answer to that, as do you. Let's ask them. 4. Enron was owned NOT by its leaders but by the public who invested their 401K money and their childrens' college tuition funds in their stock. Peoples' lives were broken. LAUSD leaders have also broken the lives of thousands of kids. The LAUSD is not owned by the leaders of its unions, nor by the Board of Ed, nor even by the teachers. It is owned by you. Parents. Until parents step up and TAKE--no, DEMAND--that ownership, there is no reason for school leaders to change anything. They've proven that. It would be great to be able to, as LAUSD asks, "to work together". But that time has passed. They've caused too much damage. The only change will come with a fight. And it will pit LAUSD versus our kids. "Which side are you on, boy... Which side are you on..." Bill Grundfest lives in LA with his two boys, a dog, two cockatiels, fish and a wife who loves him. He's a TV writer/producer with numerous Emmy nominations, a Golden Globe Award and a car that gives him trouble.

Merit pay getting traction?

edspresso — Mon, 29 May 2006 10:00:00 +0000

Are the unions finally coming around to the idea of merit pay?

The state’s two largest teachers unions did something few expected with Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s plug for merit pay — they didn’t dismiss it.
Leaders with the Illinois Education Association and the Illinois Federation of Teachers — which together represent more than 210,000 educators — say they could support tying pay to classroom performance … if pay is not tied to test scores alone;
… if local teachers have a hand in designing the salary deal;
… and if it doesn’t shortchange teachers in schools dogged by poverty, high drop-out rates or violence.
“We’re not opposed to exploring this if it’s done in a way we believe gives our people a voice in the process,” Illinois Education Association President Ken Swanson said.

Here's hoping.

Choosing a Charter School—The Pain of It All (Kevin R. Kosar)

fguest — Tue, 30 May 2006 05:00:00 +0000

A few years ago, I landed a very good job in Washington, DC. After a few months, I dropped to my knee, and asked a lovely woman to marry me and join me in DC. She agreed. Lucky me. After living in New York City, we both had hoped to maintain a critical part of what we considered urban living— the ability to walk to work and shops. After a bracing search, we managed to land an old row house on Capitol Hill. There is a convenience store 500 feet from our front door, there are a few restaurants within five blocks, and we both can hoof it to our jobs. Lucky us. Then we got pregnant. Among the things that we began pondering – equipping the nursery, acquiring books on babies, etc. – was the question of public schools. Sure, the kid needn’t enroll for over four years. However, if our current school options proved inadequate, then we may need to move to another part of town or to another city. Which means figuring out where to move, which is a lengthy process and a pain. Since my wife is busy carrying the baby and working full-time, I volunteered to assume the task of beginning the research. My examination of the data available on DC’s schools confirmed what I had read elsewhere. Generally, the government-run schools in DC are not doing well. The elementary school just two blocks from our home was typical. Among fourth-graders, only 30 percent were scoring proficiently or better in mathematics. The reading scores were abysmal— just 14 percent of pupils performed at the proficient or advanced level. The District of Columbia does have an open enrollment plan, whereby parents can apply to place their child in a school other than the one in their neighborhood. However, the demand for placements in the few good schools in the District is high. Public school choice in DC, then, is more of a lottery than a viable option for parents. Unlucky us.

So, quickly, my thoughts turned to charter schools. One would think that my wife and I were well positioned to evaluate this option. I coauthored a study on urban school achievement and have written a book on education standards and my wife is a numbers whiz. We are two people with advanced degrees and a desire to find a good school for our child. So how did it go? Not especially well.

I began by attempting to sift through the data provided through the website of the District of Columbia Public Schools. The objective? To acquire a summary of the test scores of DC’s charter schools. Round and round I went, through webpage after webpage, poking about. No luck. I had to print out the 2004 test results for reading and mathematics from each of the charter elementary schools then set them side by side to get a sense of how the schools were doing. Unfortunately, the report cards did not include the addresses of the schools, forcing me to look elsewhere for this information. Then I needed to consult a map to determine where in DC the charter schools were and whether they were reachable in a reasonable amount of time during the morning rush hour. I also wanted some information about the curricula of these schools. What books are used to what end is much of what learning is about. And…

At this point, the larger moral of this tale may be painfully evident. The charter school movement was designed to provide parents with options. Parents would be free to choose and private operators would be forced to compete for parental school dollars. The result would be more and better options for parents. Hoorah for the market!

Yet, in moving from a bureaucratic non-choice system (where parents sent their children to the governmentally assigned neighborhood school) to a mixed public system (with assigned schools and charter options), we have placed huge demands upon parents. Shopping for schools is much more difficult than shopping for toothpaste. For all my research, I haven’t even enough information to put the initial menu of options in front of my wife’s fair nose. Unlucky us.

Assuredly, parents benefit from having options. However, in order to shop intelligently, they must acquire and digest heaps of information. The World Wide Web provides some data, but the school search task remains time-consuming and, except for data geeks, challenging. Just a few hours into our search, my desk began looking, perhaps, a bit like a general’s during a war—a computer screen aglow on with multiple windows showing colored charts, a printer spitting out paper covered with numbers, stacks of papers, a map with circles scrawled on it, calendars for plotting dates for site visits or at least drive-by views… I could see how many parents might begin this process only to cry out, “No more—it’s just too much!”

This, then, seems to be a challenge for government or enterprising private parties—providing parents with clear, concise, and up-to-date information about the charter schools in their communities. The whole model of charter schools depends on it. Without good information, only a minority of parents who want to send their kids to charter schools will be able to wisely choose schools, the market for charter schools will remain underdeveloped, and the quality of charter schools sub-optimal. Unlucky all of us.

Kevin Kosar is the author of Failing Grades: The Federal Politics of Education Standards (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2005).

California parents don't know about free NCLB tutoring?!

edspresso — Tue, 30 May 2006 09:57:00 +0000

We're shocked, shocked!

Thousands of students in Inland schools are not taking advantage of the free tutoring available to them under the No Child Left Behind Act.
Minimal efforts to notify parents, lack of transportation for students and low parent interest are reasons cited by many school-district officials, tutoring providers and parents.
In 2004-05, about 800,000 students across the state were eligible to receive the free tutoring that certain schools are required to offer when they fail to meet academic-performance targets for three years in a row. However, only 12 percent received the services, according to a report by the state Department of Education.
Nationwide, only 16.6 percent of the 1.4 million students eligible in 2003-04, the latest year with numbers available, received tutoring.
In Riverside and San Bernardino county school districts, the percentage of students participating in free tutoring programs range from zero to about 34 percent.
In a speech last month, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings said districts must do a better job of reaching out to parents and telling them their options.
"More than half of school districts didn't even tell parents that their children were eligible for these options until after the school year had already begun," Spellings said.

Why, you would think there was some kind of pattern here!

Sense and Disability: A Second Reply to Rotherham (Matthew Ladner)

fguest — Tue, 30 May 2006 13:16:22 +0000

Andrew Rotherham and I are out to prove everyone wrong by demonstrating that it is possible to have a civil debate about school vouchers, in this case, school vouchers for children with disabilities.

In an earlier post I explained why I thought Florida’s McKay Scholarship program was, despite Andy’s misgivings, the best school voucher program in the country. Unconvinced, Eduwonk replied, raising 4 main objections. As it turns out, I completely disagree with each of these contentions. Let’s take them in turn:

1. McKay creates an incentive for parents to seek disability labels, possibly creating a disincentive for districts to provide special education services to anyone.

This is an empirical question. Andy has conceded the over-enrollment problem, while theorizing that McKay will dissuade districts from enrolling special education. All of the other perverse incentives still exist to over-enroll students into special education, however, and a quick check of the data reveals that the special education rate in Florida moved from 14.9% in 2000 (first year of McKay) to 15.7% in 2005. Is this evidence of parents seeking labels for McKay? No, these figures are exclusive of McKay. If McKay has influenced special education rates at all, it has only done so at the margin thus far, and (if so) only perhaps slowed the rate of growth a tiny bit.

2. McKay is not really needed because it is already possible for children with disabilities to attend private schools under IDEA.

Andy is correct that IDEA gives some access to private schools, but neglects to mention that this access is highly skewed to the wealthy. Nationwide, nearly 2 percent of all special education students attend private schools paid for by public school districts that fail to provide an adequate education. Such placements are sometimes the result of a consensual agreement between a school district and a parent, but more often the result of a lawsuit or the threat of a lawsuit. Low-income parents typically lack access to the services of an attorney with specialized knowledge of special education law, making such placements primarily the province of the well to do. The McKay program serves the interests of parents by equalizing access to a private placement without the need to fight a legal battle. The parent simply must express dissatisfaction with the services provided at the public school. The McKay program protects the interests of districts by capping the total amount of a voucher to be equal to the amount provided for the education of the child, while adverse court decisions sometimes result in “Cadillac placements” costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Andy references the special education train wreck in Washington DC. Similar to the rest of the district, the special education services in DCPS can be politely described as “troubled.” Opportunistic lawyers have made themselves a fortune by winning large judgments and Cadillac private school placements for DCPS children in private schools. A McKay system in the District would short-circuit this entire process by allowing dissatisfied parents to seek better services in private schools without the need to sue, and simultaneously protect the financial interests of the district by limiting the maximum amount of the scholarship to the amount that would have been spent on the child’s education anyway. The kids win, DCPS wins, and the only “cost” is that a few lawyers have to find someone else to sue.

My conversations with those advocating for children with special needs and the parents of special needs children over the last few years have a common theme: school districts are skilled at figuring out who they can push around. The opening interview of this study on race and special education in Arizona is a repulsive example, and it was not hard to find. McKay equalizes access to private schools among the rich and poor and gives leverage to parents who cannot access specialized special education attorneys.

3. Since McKay is designed to help those being poorly served by public schools, we should see a skew towards severe disabilities in the McKay population, but we do not.

4. The learning disability category is murky and inaccurate, making an LD designation a poor basis for eligibility for a voucher. “Singling out just special education students for vouchers like this is not the way to expand educational choice. It creates more problems than it solves.”

Andy implicitly assumes that the parents with the children with the more profound disabilities will naturally be the least well served by their public schools and therefore argues that we ought to see McKay students skew towards the higher end of the disability scale. I believe this assumption is unjustified. Parents with mild disabilities may very rationally expect their children to succeed academically with some extra help and may become the most dissatisfied when that in fact does not occur.

John Stossel’s recent special (I know I’m running the risk of having Andy’s head explode in rage by citing Stossel, but stick with me Andy) taped an IEP meeting in South Carolina for a high school student. The principle stated that she saw progress with the student and was not concerned. The child’s mother returned repeatedly to the fact that her son was reading at a fourth grade level as a 15-year-old and was very frustrated. As it turned out, she had good reason to be frustrated. ABC footed the bill for private tutors and the student’s reading level increased by two grade levels after a mere 72 hours of tutoring.

Therefore, I am not the least bit surprised that parents of LD kids have taken their fair share of McKay Scholarships. Andy is uncomfortable with them being eligible, I am not. I’m uncomfortable with them needlessly academically rotting like the kid above while the school collects extra money. Andy is as well, but is suffering apparent cognitive dissonance at the thought that voucher program might be helpful in solving the problem.

As I said in the previous post, I’m all for vigorously reforming the process of SLD identification, improved reading instruction, universal screening and remediation, etc. Nor do I argue that McKay will solve all the problems of special education. I’m simply arguing that the McKay scholarship program represents a substantial improvement in the delivery of educational services for disabled children.

Having addressed the objections raised in Eduwonk, I will empirically test a theory of my own. I believe that Andy’s opposition to McKay, perhaps as a matter of reflex, has more to do with his general opposition to vouchers than to his opposition to McKay. “Of course, in the end McKay really isn't about IDEA or special education anyway. It's about vouchers,” Andy wrote. Ah, well, no. I believe McKay stands on its own merits as a valuable reform of special education regardless of the broader school choice debate.

Here is the test: Ohio has a voucher program which is like McKay, but limited to children with autism. It would be quite simple to design a McKay program that would be limited to “non-murky” special needs designations. Although I view the exclusion of SLD children as unwise, as they have been victimized and are, as Andy admits, “teaching disabled”, I would support the Ohio program as an improvement over the current system. How about you, Andy? There are plenty of children with autism whose parents lack the resources to pay private school tuition and/or hire a special ed attorney to get them a school setting that they are comfortable is serving their needs. There are other families being financially crushed by the expense of keeping a child with autism in a private school, sometimes after having had a horrible experience in a public school. Can you support this program, or does the “v" word scare you away?

P.S. Andy had a couple of interesting comments in his post, most notably that I can make a bundle selling my copies of Rethinking Special Education my contention that school choice represents a solid Rawlsian reform is “debatable.” I must confess that I am an odd person to debate Rawls, but no less a source than Andy’s fellow Clintonite Matthew Miller quotes Rawls directly (page 83 of the Two Percent Solution):

“To Rawls, fair equality of opportunity primarily means that ‘the government tries to insure equal chances of education and culture for persons similarly endowed and motivated, either by subsidizing private schools or establishing a public school system.’”

I think that the public school system in America has been such a dreadful, tragic failure at providing this kind of equality of opportunity, steering the best teachers to the rich kids, keeping the poor kids in the most corrupt and dysfunctional schools etc.

Debatable? Indeed, but a debate that I will welcome. Bring it on.

Dr. Matthew Ladner is director of state projects at the Alliance for School Choice and is a senior fellow at the Goldwater Institute.

Bypassing high school

edspresso — Tue, 30 May 2006 17:31:00 +0000

Back in February, Bill Gates called high schools "obsolete". It seems some students agree with him:

It is a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland idea. If you do not finish high school, head straight for college.
But many colleges — public and private, two-year and four-year — will accept students who have not graduated from high school or earned equivalency degrees.
And in an era of stubbornly elevated high school dropout rates, the chance to enter college through the back door is attracting growing interest among students without high school diplomas.
That growth is fueling a debate over whether the students should be in college at all and whether state financial aid should pay their way. In New York, the issue flared in a budget battle this spring.

Of course, the question will immediately arise as to whether this is in a dropout's best interests--if they couldn't handle high school, how on earth can they expect to handle college? The article goes into some detail discussing that issue (it seems to be a mixed bag overall). But there's another facet to this issue that is worth addressing. The Gates Foundation's recent study found that boredom was a big factor in some students' decision to drop out (p. iii):

Nearly half (47 percent) said a major reason for dropping out was that classes were not interesting. These young people reported being bored and disengaged from high school. Almost as many (42 percent) spent time with people who were not interested in school. These were among the top reasons selected by those with high GPAs and by those who said they were motivated to work hard.
Nearly 7 in 10 respondents (69 percent) said they were not motivated or inspired to work hard, 80 percent did one hour or less of homework each day in high school, two-thirds would have worked harder if more was demanded of them (higher academic standards and more studying and homework), and 70 percent were confident they could have graduated if they had tried. Even a majority of those with low GPAs thought they could have graduated.

To be accurate, there are no single answers as to why students drop out. For these students, terminal boredom probably wasn't the only reason, or even the biggest reason. But if a student is fed up and wants out of high school, what's wrong with him/her moving on to junior college? We let students graduate from high school early. So is it necessarily a bad thing if a student is commits to college in lieu of a high school diploma? We get an unmotivated student out of the classroom, freeing up some tax dollars and classroom space, and make it at least a little more likely that the student, now paying tuition, will take a little more ownership in his/her education.

It's also worth pointing out that setting the age of adulthood at 18 is a relatively recent development. As early as the late 1800s, a 16-year-old was considered an adult, with all the corresponding rights and responsibilities. In that light, maybe it's not entirely surprising that so many juniors seem to come down with senioritis.

No school choice for lawmakers?

edspresso — Tue, 30 May 2006 18:48:16 +0000

We spotted this over the weekend:

I called a lobbyist and asked him for a number: how many of the 212 members of the New York State Assembly and the New York State Senate send their children to private schools? These are the people who make the rules for the public-school system. As the state constitution says, "the legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a system of free common schools, wherein the children of the state may be educated." How many of them, after they do their constitutional duty, send their children to those schools? Or, after they pass laws affecting the public schools, how many send their own kids to private schools?
He couldn't tell me. (In fact, considering the age of most lawmakers, he said the real question has to do with the legislators' grandchildren.) The answer, however, should be well-known.
Because common sense suggests that legislators who have children in public school will be especially interested in improving them, why not make it a requirement: the children of legislators must go to a public school.
Oh, we will make some allowances for very special situations depending on the needs of the child. But we won't make allowances based on the wallet of the legislators, or the decision that what is good enough for everyone else is not good enough for his or her kid.
In addition, the same rule will apply to administrators in the New York State Education Department. You want to make and enforce education regulations? Wonderful, and your children will be in the schools where those regulations apply.
One final piece. If you are an officer at the state level in a teachers' union, either the National Education Association of New York or the New York State United Teachers, your kids are in public schools. If you lobby for more public funding for education, as well as protecting the rights of accused teachers, place your children in those schools.
If the people responsible for shaping the public-school system have their own children in them, we won't be surprised when the schools are more effective. In addition, we can expect the distance between the best and the worst to shrink when influential people must register their children in poor schools.

The Chalkboard finds the idea atrocious:

Horrible, horrible, idea. Cruel, even.
No one - no matter who they are - should ever be forced to send their kids into an educational environment that wastes a child's time, puts him or her in danger, or limits their ability to have a productive adult life in our democracy. Just because someone is an elected official doesn't mean they should send their kids to crappy schools.
It just would be nice if they thought of the rest the parental planet when they voted on education issues.

But the school choice movement has actually been here before. From Clint's book Voucher Wars, p. 28:

Back in Milwaukee, Polly Williams (the Wisconsin legislator responsible for enacting the Milwaukee voucher program-ed.) was still shaking things up. She had learned that most of the Milwaukee Public School teachers, like many urban public school teachers around the nation, sent their own children to private school. Yet they had the audacity to challenge the school choice program. Fine, said Polly: if the public schools are good enough for our kids, they ought to be good enough for their kids. So she announced that she would sponsor legislation making it a condition of employment that public school teachers send their own children to public schools. The response was death threats on Polly's home answering machine. Tongue in cheek, I had to advise Polly that her proposal would be unconstitutional--public school teachers, like all Americans, have a constitutional right to send their children to private schools. But the point about the union's hypocrisy was brilliantly made.

And, of course, public schoolteachers are still much more likely to send their children to private schools. Not that there's anything wrong with that!

Education news for Wednesday, May 31

Daily News — Wed, 31 May 2006 09:42:49 +0000

Fossella talks to bishop about NY tuition tax credits - In an effort to drum up support for federal legislation that would give parents of students in parochial and private schools a $4,500 tax credit to help pay for tuition, Rep. Vito Fossella reached out yesterday to the leader of the Brooklyn Diocese. (more)

Lazy FL media focuses on wrong story - The Associated Press reports that the Democratic candidates for governor are unknown to the citizens of Florida. Not only is that a clipping to be filed in the "lazy story" pile, but it's also an indictment of a slumbering media. (more)

Preschool benefits grossly exaggerated - A Rand Corporation study that claims universal preschool will deliver $2.62 in benefits for every dollar spent by California taxpayers has been thoroughly discredited ... (more)

Come back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

AP:Black, Hispanic pupils see school as tough - Black and Hispanic students see school as a more rowdy, disrespectful and dangerous place than their white classmates do, a poll says. (more)

UPDATE:

49% of parents got first choice schools in Lee - Only 49 percent of parents got their top choice during Lee County's second round of school choice registration, down from 82 percent in the first round. (more).

Parents: Know educational choices - With the application deadline fast approaching, 561 students, 1.2 percent of those eligible, have signed up for the new statewide EdChoice school voucher program. (more).

Fossella and the Bishop - Albany botched education tax credits when lawmakers took up the issue this spring, but if New Yorkers are lucky, a New York congressman will do better in Washington. (more)

America's Opportunity Scholarships for Kids: School Choice for ... - Millions of students across the United States are enrolled in persistently failing public schools. During the 2004-2005 school year, 2,112 Title I public schools were identified as having failed to make adequate yearly progress for five or more years. This represents 23 percent of all Title I-eligible schools. (more)

Opinion: Strengthen what works in Michigan's schools - Good schools change lives. That's why the Skillman Foundation just awarded $1.5 million to 32 elementary and middle schools in Detroit that we believe are making a difference in the lives of local children. (more)

Teacher responsibility

edspresso — Wed, 31 May 2006 10:00:00 +0000

Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial:

"The biggest revolution caused by No Child Left Behind is the revolution in education research," says Georgia State University's Gary Henry, a scholar in educational policy and evaluation. "We are getting better at figuring out what works. But what we are seeing is almost nothing that has a very large effect."

Even when the research shows a gain, it's a very small gain produced under the best of circumstances. That's because most reforms only tug at the edges and don't address central flaws in public education: A teacher's track record of improving student performance is hidden from public view, and that performance is not used as a factor in teacher salaries.

Researchers agree that the most reliable predictor of teacher success is past success. So what parents ought to look for is a teacher who has demonstrated gains in student scores from one year to the next. That track record is more telling than a teacher's academic credentials or experience. Yet, parents never see that crucial piece of the puzzle.

"We should, as parents, have that full data," says Henry. "We have the capacity here in Georgia to make that data available. Basically, it is a flip of a switch. That would empower parents to really be active."
Apparently, that's just what schools fear, a flood of active parents armed with data showing that Ms. X raises test scores year after year and Mr. Y does not. Because that would force schools to do something about Mr. Y— either offer him professional development or suggest a career change.

Meanwhile, Ken De Rosa examines a report on a Charlotte high school and notes this comment:

As the school year draws to a close, the principal is still pushing a two-pronged mission: Get students to take responsibility for their own success. And get teachers to believe in students. (emphasis added)

Ken's commentary:

So, the students have to take responsibility for learning while the teachers don't quite have to take responsibility for teaching. They just have to "believe in students." I suppose believing is better than nothing.
I'm wondering how a student is supposed to take responsibility for learning if the teaching isn't any good. Isn't good teaching, which starts with teachers taking responsibility for teaching well, a prerequisite to any student learning?

Economics of public schools

edspresso — Wed, 31 May 2006 12:42:00 +0000

George Mason University economics department chair Donald Boudreaux describes the economic behavior of public schools:

Government K-12 schools, as now run everywhere in the U.S., will never excel at educating students. The reason is that each school gets its students and its budget without having to compete for them.
Imagine if, say, supermarkets were run the same way we run schools. Everyone in my county would pay taxes to fund the county supermarket system; each one of us would then be assigned one specific county supermarket at which we are allowed to shop.
Of course, once in our assigned store, all the groceries that each of us gets are "free" -- meaning, we don't have to pay for them on the spot. If the products and services supplied by the supermarket are of poor quality, we're not allowed to switch to other county markets; we must, instead, complain to politicians.
The managers of the supermarkets will agree that their stores offer abysmal service and undesirable products; they will assert that this sad fact is caused by underfunding. We will be warned that only by paying higher taxes will we have any possibility of getting better supermarkets.
So our taxes will rise and funding for supermarkets will increase. But quality will remain poor -- and the excuses offered by the government-employed managers of the supermarkets will remain that they need yet more funding.

Kind of like I said here. Except, you know, more professorlike. (Hat tip to Hispanic Pundit.)

The next round in the LAUSD takeover wars

edspresso — Wed, 31 May 2006 13:22:18 +0000

Villaraigosa pitched his takeover plan to the teachers' unions yesterday. Predictably, they sounded, shall we say, less than enthusiastic:

"I don't doubt his commitment, but I feel as a relatively new mayor that there are so many other things on his plate," said Mary Bergan, president of the California Federation of Teachers, which adopted a resolution earlier this year opposing mayoral control of schools. "I don't know what kind of upheaval it would bring."
The California PTA has not taken a position on the takeover plan, but President-elect Pam Brady said she was impressed by Villaraigosa's overture to her organization.
"I felt like we were listened to, like he was open to us taking any position, whether it was in opposition or not," Brady said. "He honestly laid his plan on the table and understood that some people will like it and some people won't."

Meanwhile, back on the ranch...

In Los Angeles, the mayor's takeover plan took a drubbing at a special hearing called by the Los Angeles Board of Education. The meeting was ostensibly held for the board to hear "case studies" of how other cities have managed mayoral control of schools, but, with one exception, no effort was made to present the mayors' points of view.
The board had invited speakers from parent organizations in New York, Chicago and Detroit, all of which have experimented with mayoral control of education, and a mayoral aide from San Francisco, which has not. Either implicitly or explicitly, all of the speakers warned against a mayoral takeover in Los Angeles. School board members responded with some of their sharpest remarks about Villaraigosa's effort.
Carmen Colon, a parent from Brooklyn who is president of the Assn. of New York City Education Councils, warned that the school takeover by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg had marginalized parents with a relatively trivial advisory role.
"All I can say to you is, it's your city, it's your school, it's your child, and don't let them forget that," she said.
Ismail Vargas, assistant director of a parent group in Chicago, said the school takeover in his city by Mayor Richard M. Daley had resulted in a more aloof, less responsive school system.
"This is the problem of mayors trying to take charge of the public education system," he said. "We call this the public education system — it's for the public, not for the mayor."
Shanta Driver, a parent from Detroit, described the short-lived mayoral control of the schools there as "a complete disaster."
"Any time you have a proposal for improving the schools that you can't get a majority of the school board to back, you know that proposal stinks," she said.

In light of these developments, School Me has broken out the Predict-O-Meter ^TM again. Guess which way the needle turns?

Failier Failyur how does it go again?

edspresso — Wed, 31 May 2006 19:50:00 +0000

Good for a laugh.

Titanic Victims Argue Over Color Of Lifeboats (Bill Grundfest)

fguest — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

In the battle over possible mayoral control of the failed LA school system, the LA Times has once again rushed to cover the south end of the north-facing teachers' unions. Presenting not one pixel of the picture of the disaster that is LAUSD, the Times article wants us to believe that ALL PARENTS oppose mayoral control - nay, ANY change - of LAUSD operations. Let's look at some highlights:

...disgruntled parents in Los Angeles warned the school board about the shortcomings of mayoral control.

Really? L.A. parents are so happy with LAUSD's 50% high school dropout rate, and the graduation of high school kids who can't compete in the real world because they read and compute at a 4th grade level that they want the people who did this to their kids to stay in charge? Is that believable to anybody? Look at the failing - no, FAILED - LAUSD middle schools. What percentage of 7th graders are proficient in math? Well, in the HIGHEST scoring middle school, the answer is... 62%. That was the best. In the middle school my family is faced with, only 23% of 7th graders can do 7th grade math. And the numbers range down to... 3%. Could the Times have printed that? Sure. So we know what they're agenda is. After all, would it not show how insane the arguments are for minor tinkering--or as the status quo-ers call it, "working in partnership with us"?

Mary Bergan, president of the California Federation of Teachers, which adopted a resolution earlier this year opposing mayoral control of schools, (said) "I don't know what kind of upheaval it would bring."

Any change to the status quo will be vilified by the teachers unions as "upheaval". The fact is that upheaval is exactly what LAUSD needs. Let's be clear: The job of the teachers union is to protect the JOBS of teachers, NOT to advance the education of your kids. If there is a reform that would educate the kids, but cost teachers jobs, the unions will OPPOSE it and call it very bad names. After all, it is NOT the LA Students Union or the LA Parents Union - it is the TEACHERS' union.

...at (an) Los Angeles Board of Education... meeting... with one exception, no effort was made to present the mayors' points of view.

Forget about LAUSD having hearings in public - how do they have the guts to show their faces in public?

Shanta Driver, a parent from Detroit, (said) "Any time you have a proposal for improving the schools that you can't get a majority of the school board to back, you know that proposal stinks," she said.

On the contrary; if the school board opposing it is LAUSD, it means you may be on to something terrific.

L.A. Unified board member Julie Korenstein (said) Mayor "Villaraigosa doesn't care who he knocks aside along the way."

Hopefully this will include Julie Korenstein. Meaningful change requires that people get knocked aside. She continued...

"How wonderful it would have been," she said, if Villaraigosa had offered a partnership instead of a challenge to the school board. "Can you imagine having a mayor say, 'Let me help you raise money for the schools?' …. But that was never up for discussion."

FEMA had all the money in the world, and yet their massive INCOMPETENCE left Katrina victims to suffer and even die. Would more money help FEMA? No. How dumb does Ms. Korenstein think we are, that we will continue to believe that more money poured into LAUSD's FEMA-like incompetent system will help anything? The status-quo-ers accuse the Mayor of playing politics. If the Mayor was concerned about politics (ie: re-election), he'd stay AS FAR AWAY FROM THE EDUCATION SYSTEM AS POSSIBLE. He'd do what previous mayors have done - stand on the sidelines, muttering "hey, it's not my job, but yes, isn't it awful?" This mayor is a hero... he knows the kids of LAUSD are in crisis. What the Board of Education and LAUSD are doing is going down with the ship - and dragging our kids into drowning with them. The mayoral lifeboats don't guarantee anything, but they are the only hope we have. It is time to lead, follow or get out of the way. Next time: Formation of a new National Parents Union. Bill Grundfest is a happily married (he is told) parent of 2 boys and owner of several dogs and birds. The fish mentioned in last week's article has gone on to his reward. In his spare time, of which he has none, he is forming the National Parents Union. If you'd like to take part, he can be reached at bgrundfest at aol dot com.

Education News for Thursday, June 1

Daily News — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 09:17:12 +0000

The Destruction of Education in America - Opinion: The federal government should get out of the education business. (more)

Experts Will Study How to Improve Math Teaching in U.S. - A new committee of experts will look for the best ways to improve math education in the United States. The effort is part of the American Competitiveness Initiative that President Bush discussed in his State of the Union message in January. (more)

State Schools Chief Lauds Exit Exam in Santa Rosa - California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell told students, faculty and school officials at Santa Rosa High School this afternoon that the 2006 high school diploma "will mean more than any other diploma ever granted." (more)

NCLB Rebellion Growing - Growing resistance to the No Child Left Behind Act has not gone unnoticed by the U.S. Department of Education. But while some state officials push for implementation changes, advocates say adhering to NCLB is critical to closing the achievement gap. (more)

Can't read this? - Neither can nearly 90% of blind schoolkids, and proponents say the decline in Braille instruction is leading to illiteracy. (more)

LAUSD's bad PR - Editorial: Would Superintendent Roy Romer, or some other ranking LAUSD official, care to explain why, exactly, the district needs the services of an expert in public relations and political campaigns? (more)

LAUSD's answers rest with teachers - What will it take to solve the problems facing LAUSD? A guest opinion column by United Teachers Los Angeles president A.J. Duffy. (more)

Westminster Board Rescinds Superintendent Job Offer - Trustees of the troubled Westminster (California) School District left students, teachers and parents baffled Wednesday by withdrawing a job offer to a superintendent seven days after it voted to hire her. She says she suspects her ethnicity is a factor. (more)

Advice to Congress: Dump part or all of 'No Child Left Behind' - Utah's schools chief has some advice for Congress: Dump some or all of No Child Left Behind, or change the rules to resemble the Utah Performance Assessment System for Students and other state initiatives. (more)

Aid to Philadelphia Schools - Editorial: What the Pennsylvania General Assembly has proposed taking away from the School District of Philadelphia, it should restore. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Poll Shows Education Is Concern Locally - Harold Kirchheimer has voted twice against Jeb Bush. Or as Kirchheimer put it, he voted twice against school vouchers. (more)

For Many, Education Is Another Storm Victim - For hundreds of children at Renaissance Village, this is their lost year. After fleeing Hurricane Katrina, they have landed in a vast gravel moonscape of government trailers, lacking even a playground. (more)

New film highlights city schools of choice - Geography might not be fate - although an old saying assures us it is - but it can be darned convenient at times. (more)

BR gives school choice a tryout - For the first time in the district's history, the Bridgewater-Raynham Regional School Committee has adopted School Choice, a program that allows schools to accept children from outside the district. (more)

Opinion: Lofts or new school? In imperfect world, no easy choice – IN A PERFECT world, the decision about who should own the old Durham Elementary School would be a no-brainer: It should go to Independence Charter School. (more)

Think tank blogging

edspresso — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:18:00 +0000

QandO looks at old school organizations (MSM and politicians, among others) dipping a toe in the blogosphere and notes this:

Surprisingly — to me, anyway — Think Tanks have been relatively slow to take advantage of the blogosphere, and relatively unsuccessful when they do. The Cato Institute has recently moved into the blogosphere and they seem to be doing it fairly well, but they seem to be the exception. Other think tank blogs (From The Heartland, for example) seem to be fairly cautious or inexpert at promoting themselves. I'm not sure why that is, but I suspect that, though a good blogger can always turn out a good blog for a think tank, think tankers don't necessarily make a successful blog.
Anyway, those are my candidates for successful blog adapters. Who else is leading the pack in the evolution of blogging?

I tend to agree that think tanks haven't embraced blogs as quickly as one might expect, but it's not entirely surprising. Think tankers--i.e. analysts/wonks--write for academia and policymakers, and such output generally doesn't make for edgy online material. That definitely needs to change, though, and quickly. (Personally, I continue to wonder when Goldwater and Fordham will start blogging--they're practically halfway there.)

I don't know if we at Edspresso are on the front end of blog evolution, but I'd like to think we offer a different twist on blogging. We're somewhere between a group blog and an online magazine, and interesting things already appear to be happening. I'm still quite pleased with this, for example.

As far as blog innovation goes, vlogging ("video blogging" for the uninitiated) looks to be the next big thing, so by extension the hybrid convergence thing going on over at Hot Air seems pretty nifty to me. With the price of admission continuing to drop through increasingly cheaper means of delivery, it's only a matter of time before more hands get in on the game. Which, of course, begs the ever-present question of online media: will the business model ever become truly self-sustaining?

Watchdogfight

edspresso — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:19:00 +0000

In April we addressed the Think Tank Review Project. Then Nancy Salvato took a swing at the group. Now Checker Finn breaks out the brass knuckles. Excerpt:

We at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation always thought it passing strange that so opinionated a group would set itself up as impartial arbiters. After all, TTRP is a collaborative effort of the Education and Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado , and Arizona State University 's Education Policy Research Unit. The latter is run by Alex Molnar, who has for years opposed charter schools, privatization, and half (or maybe three-quarters) of every other education reform and reform idea worthy of attention. How can a contestant also play umpire? How can a butcher be fair to vegetarians? How, for that matter, can a leopard change his spots?
We predicted that this group, from neutrally referring other people's research, would climb right into the ring and start sparring, perhaps with gloves, perhaps barehanded. Now we have evidence that this is the case. And guess whom they're sparring with? Us.
Either TTRP is not impartial, which is what we believe, or they can't read. The latter seems unlikely but in Arizona , home of whole-language guru Ken Goodman, one can never assume.

Read the whole thing, as they say.

LAUSD PR fiasco

edspresso — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:19:00 +0000

Looks like LAUSD shot itself in the ~~foot~~ chest of late. From the LA Daily News:

Would Superintendent Roy Romer, or some other ranking LAUSD official, care to explain why, exactly, the district needs the services of an expert in public relations and political campaigns?
The Los Angeles Unified School District has a monopoly over schooling for most kids in L.A. It has no product to sell, no competition to worry about. Its only concern should be providing the best possible education to the 700,000 students in its care.
Yet like the shameless Department of Water and Power - another monopoly that needlessly hired flacks to bolster its image - the LAUSD has called in the spin doctors to manipulate public opinion. And now it's spent $1,500 or more of taxpayer money to bring in a bunch of activists and parents from around the country to lobby against Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's education-reform plan because they don't like the reforms taking place in their towns.
If the district wants some public-image advice, here's some for free: Get serious about fixing your problems, improving education, lowering the dropout rate. Slash the massive bureaucracy and hold staff accountable. Empower parents. Stop kowtowing to the demands of public-employee unions and neglecting the needs of communities.

And from the LA Times, on Tuesday's attack of the takeover plan where the board flew in parents from other mayoral takeover cities:

The tirades from these ringer parents prompted some whoops of approval from the audience as members of the board sat back with satisfied smiles.
The smiles faltered a bit when the mother from New York complained that Bloomberg standardized the curriculum throughout the district. One of the L.A. administration's proudest accomplishments has been standardizing the reading curriculum, which improved scores in the elementary schools. And the Chicago father's pep talk turned awkward when he railed against charter schools for giving parents no voice. The board has approved more charter schools than any other board, and the schools are so popular that L.A. parents queue up for spots in them.
The bash — in both senses of the word — turned more somber at the end, when the meeting opened to L.A. parents. Several lambasted the district, saying that their experience with the board was not exactly welcoming. One parent noted that this was the first time her group had been invited to a meeting. If the board weren't feeling the heat from Villaraigosa, she said, such an invitation would probably never have come. Her remarks seemed to embarrass the board members — or maybe they finally realized what an embarrassment the afternoon's charade had been.

And if you think they're angry, just check out this guy.

Spelling it out for Eric Zorn

edspresso — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:26:00 +0000

First WaPo's Richard Cohen questions the use of algebra. Then ink-stained wretch Eric Zorn has this to say about spelling bees.

You will not catch me griping this week that spelling recherche words is an outmoded skill -- like writing in cursive or solving math problems on a slide rule -- and not a worthy challenge for a prime-time, broadcast network competition.
The finals of the Scripps National Spelling Bee -- airing live tomorrow from 7-9 p.m. on ABC (WLS-Ch. 7) -- is certain to feature a battle of junior brainiacs attempting to spell words you've never heard of and that they will never be called upon to spell again in their entire lives.

"Brainiacs"? How mature and considerate of you, flinging juvenile pejoratives at 12-year-olds. (Side note: I'm really tired of hearing yet another writer trot out the slide rule as a metaphor of obsolete ideas and institutions--the little gadget did get us to the moon, after all.)

Knowing how to spell "appoggiatura," the winning word of 2005, or "autochthonous," the winning word of 2004, is very, very close to a useless talent; a talent that has no real-life application outside of contests in which you are asked to spell "appoggiatura" or "autochthonous."
Yet the same thing is true of other contests that have long been more popular with the viewing public than spelling bees:
Figure skating, for instance.
There might be a one-in-a-billion chance that, sometime in your life, you will be without a dictionary or Internet access and be badly in need of a flowery synonym for indigenous for a final draft of an important document. Being able to summon "autochthonous" would then come in handy.
But there is no chance whatsoever that life will unexpectedly require you to peform a double toe-loop.
The ability to strike a golf ball straight and far has zero application outside of golf.
And so on.

Before we go any further, a personal disclosure: I was a spelling bee competitor in grade school. Not a terribly successful one by any means, but I did well enough: in 6th grade I was runner-up in my school. And--heaven protect me from the hysterical laughter sure to ensue from this confession--my senior year I made it to the Texas state competition (yes, crimson red Texas continues to hold spelling competitions for high schoolers).

So based on past experience, let me first say that Zorn's assertion that spelling bee competition experience has no wider application is really quite laughable. Yes, the arcane vocabulary used has no use outside of the Bee. But doesn't the ability to retain information and perform under pressure mean anything these days? Elsewhere in the post Zorn takes potshots at "rote memorization", but he would do well to rethink that particular position (methinks I hear Ken De Rosa sharpening his knives).

Furthermore, what I gained as a competitor has only been a benefit later in life. In my later journalism studies and present career as a professional writer, I can say the ability to dissect words into prefix and suffix, to be able to glean at least a cursory understanding of a word I've never seen by knowing its root, has saved me some trouble and effort down the road. Moreover, understanding of some of those vague words helped me in my later efforts to learn Spanish, which I now speak fluently. And wouldn't Zorn agree that spelling accuracy is something of an asset in the newsroom?

In short, I say the spelling-as-sports analogy is a rather poor one.

So no. The thing in my bonnet about the bee is that the final spell-off is a poor way to crown the nation's best young speller.
Each kid gets a different word in the do-or-die elimination words, and at the highest levels of competition -- see the amazing documentary "Spellbound" -- their success often depends on whether they were lucky enough to haved studied that particular word.
Whether a word is "hard" or not too often depends on whether the child has memorized it -- making the finals more like a trivia contest than a pure academic challenge.
Think of having a golf tournament in which each player played a different course and the best score won. Or an uneven-bars gymnastics championship in which each contestant had to compete on randomly adjusted equipment.
A true spelling contest would require each entrant at every stage to attempt in writing to spell the same list of difficult words, with only the top scorers advancing-- something that the early rounds of the National Spelling Bee finals does incorporate.
A roomful of kids taking a long written exam would be pretty dull TV, I admit. But think about 30 kids in 30 soundproof booths using keyboards to spell 10 wicked words, with the top scores advancing to the next round of 10 words and so on.
A perfectly fair, neatly dramatic way to ensure that viewers will not be pococurante (indifferent, nonchalant; the winning word of 2003) about spelling bees.

The written exam format he's describing is pretty much how the Texas spelling competitions are held. (The link is to the elementary and junior high competitions, but they're basically run the same as the high school contests.)

Having done both oral and written competitions while in school, I'll be the first to say that the latter is a lot less stressful. There's a reason this sort of competition has spawned Spellbound and Akeelah and the Bee: each kid is basically a solo performer, largely alone on stage, there to shine or stumble under the eyes of both the judging panel and his/her opponents. It's an unbelievable pressure cooker environment of the sort many adults will go to great lengths to avoid. I'll further agree that, if fairness is the desired goal, the written format is certainly preferable.

But frankly, the oral format bears far greater resemblance to the real world. Sometimes you don't have all the information, or have depend on getting a lucky break, or have to make a decision based on your best judgment or gut feel. And sometimes, you have to make the big moves with everybody watching. Sometimes, life just isn't fair. And isn't preparation for the real world what we want out of our schools?

Also, another wrinkle in the Texas competition is worth considering:

At least 80 percent of the test will come from UIL “Word Power.” Outside words may include:
(1) Words of common usage (e.g., gosling, hemorrhage);
(2) Words and proper names currently in the news;
(3) Words which by their formation or origins build vocabulary and promote the study of English. These include words with affixes, roots, and suffixes which appear in words on the printed list by being different parts of speech, and other words of interest for the general lessons which they teach about language. (emphasis added)

Since part of the test is drawn from current events and outside (I recall "Saddam Hussein" and "perestroika" being on the test my senior year), this is one example of how it takes more to win than just having one's nose stuck in a study guide for six months straight. I know Zorn's comment about spelling bees having nothing to do with real life was directed specifically at the NSB, but it still shows that these sorts of competitions are, or could be, about more than just mechanical regurgitation.

One final point. By my own admission, I wasn't nearly as successful at the oral bees in elementary school and junior high as I was in high school. Maybe you'll say I don't perform well in the sudden death environment of the NSB competition. I say it was for a far simpler reason: when I got to high school, suddenly I cared, and I actually put forth the effort to study for the competition, something I never really did in elementary school.

There are a variety of reasons I wasn't terribly diligent about studying in the lower grades, which are the subject of an entirely different post (and one quite unrelated to an education reform blog). But what finally clicked with me in high school is that, if I do everything I can to achieve something, but still fail, I can walk away disappointed, but with my head held high. Is it possible other competitors discover the same thing along the way?

High schools modeled after colleges?

edspresso — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:52:13 +0000

According to this Arizona Republic story, that's where high school is headed:

American high schools are on the brink of changes that could make them nearly unrecognizable to students who just got their diplomas.
Gone may be the large campuses teeming with kids and the classmates of similar age on similar schedules that have them all graduating together.
Campuses could be converted into small, specialized schools, and students could have individual learning plans built around their declared high school major.
If it sounds more like college, that appears to be the goal.
The national movement to reshape high school is being championed by educators and sought aggressively in some states, such as Florida. It is happening in small ways in Arizona but likely will pick up pace as the effort and ideas spread.

And just who is spearheading this change?

Business leaders, allied with governments, are driving the trend. They fear that even high schools in the wealthiest neighborhoods have grown complacent. They complain schools are not producing graduates able to keep up with global demands for creative workers adept at technology and able to quickly learn new skills.
Many leaders also fear the growing number of children living in poverty, whose learning lags behind their wealthier peers, will intensify the problem.
"The business community sees this as a matter of crisis," said Susan Carlson of the Arizona Business and Education Coalition. "There is a growing awareness, and we're having to come to the political will that kids have got to be more focused."

A couple of years ago I was talking to an PR executive with one of the bigger agencies in Phoenix. He said a survey had been conducted to find out why more California-based corporations weren't more interested in relocating to the more affordable areas.

One of the biggest reasons: the poor quality of education here. Consider it a moment: as a corporate executive, you're making mid-six figures. You can send your kid to school anywhere. You don't want a good school--you want the best money can buy. And frankly, the best money can buy in this state still doesn't measure up to some of the cushy private academies in California. And if you're rich and can't get what you want, that should tell you what your middle (and upper-middle) class employees won't be able to get for their kids either, making relocation an even less desirable alternative.

But here's the thing omitted by the article. What has made our colleges so successful? The fact that they have to compete for students. Yes, they get significant funding from both public and private sources. Yes, they attract philanthropists. But in that light, the ability of students to decide where they want to spend their tuition money becomes an even more necessary component (the better a school performs, the more likely it is to attract philanthropy dollars and private/public partnerships). It has worked for our colleges and universities. Why wouldn't it work for K-12?

EdChoice Voucher Participation (Matthew Carr)

fguest — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

With the application deadline fast approaching, 561 students, 1.2% of those eligible, have signed up for the new statewide EdChoice school voucher program. Despite this slow start, there is good reason to believe that this voucher program can fulfill its promise of offering true education choice to those who need it most. When these early participation numbers are placed in the context of other successful voucher programs around the country it becomes clear that EdChoice is setting off on a path that is remarkably similar. The first year participation rates for some of the largest and best-known voucher programs around the country provide some context. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the first year of their voucher program had 341 participants, which was 0.7% of all eligible students. Now, there are 15,035 participants, 20.5% of all eligible students. In Florida, the McKay voucher program for special education students, currently the largest voucher program in the country, had 977 participants in its first year of existence, a utilization rate of 0.3% of all eligible students. Today, the program serves 15,910 students, 4.3% of all eligible students. The new voucher program in our nation’s capital, which just finished its first year, had 1,015 participants, which amounted to 1.7% of those eligible to participate in the program. With state education officials expecting a rush of last minute applications, it appears likely that the Ohio EdChoice program will have a larger percentage of eligible students participating in its first year than any of these programs. And the experience from other voucher programs tells us that these numbers will likely grow in the coming years. But there are several barriers to participation that have come to light in the course of implementing EdChoice that need to be addressed before the next application season if such growth is going to be realized. The Cleveland voucher program offers guidance on what aspects of implementation work well, and those that hinder participation. The Cleveland program has had a consistent participation rate of between 7.5% and 8% during its first eight years. The relatively high initial rate was achieved because of the fact that every parent in the Cleveland Municipal district could apply, provided their income was below a certain level. With EdChoice the rules of eligibility, based on school buildings rather than districts, have created a confusing and gerrymandered voucher program. It is not a parent-friendly program. Yet the Cleveland program has not seen the same amount of growth as many other similar programs. This is due in part to the fact that the application process is cumbersome and must be done through a government office, rather than through a private school. Another factor has been the uncertainty of the eligibility that was created by the grade-level restrictions that were imposed by the legislature. From these experiences we have learned that participation growth is tightly connected to stability in eligibility rules. The EdChoice program should be opened to as many students as possible, and based on clear and simple criteria. If parents do not know that there are vouchers available, and face a complex application process, participation rates are not likely to grow. When comparing EdChoice to other voucher programs’ initial participation rates, the numbers are encouraging. But there is still a lot of work to be done to help parents know they have a choice and how to use it. Matthew Carr is Director of Education Policy for the Buckeye Institute. This article previously appeared here.

Education News for Friday, June 2

Daily News — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:17:32 +0000

Boston area school district gives public school choice a tryout - For the first time in the district's history, the Bridgewater-Raynham Regional School Committee has adopted School Choice, a program that allows schools to accept children from outside the district. (more)

No Child Left Behind a success, Boehner says - U.S. House majority leader John Boehner said NCLB is making an impact. (more)

Test results announced - With valuable tax dollars, and the possibility of private school vouchers lurking for failing schools, Florida's FCAT results are closely watched. (more)

NY, Chicago activists oppose Los Angeles mayoral school control - Activists in New York and Chicago are circulating an open letter warning parents in Los Angeles not to support their mayor's attempt to take control of their school district. (more)

Johnson says school vouchers are dead, but tax credits might work - According to Georgia Senate President Pro Tem Eric Johnson, vouchers face too many political hurdles to be passed by the General Assembly, but tax credits may pass. (more)

A Tale of Two Towns - Editorial: Does New York Rep. Edolphus Towns support education tax credits or doesn't he? (more)

Union still spends lavishly - The Washington Teachers Union spent tens of thousands of dollars for a river cruise, an annual conference and public relations consulting in fiscal 2005 despite posting more than $600,000 in debt for the second consecutive year. (more)

L.A. schools: Get out while you still can - Editorial: Cities worried about mayoral control over LAUSD should be able to opt out. (more)

Romer reveals reform plan - As California announced Thursday that 14 percent of Los Angeles Unified School District's Class of 2006 had failed the mandatory exit exam and will not graduate this month, Superintendent Roy Romer unveiled a $36 million program to overhaul some of the district's lowest-performing high schools. (more)

ARGH! Just give us the records! - Long Beach wants public papers from LAUSD on the plan for a campus to serve Carson students. LAUSD says no. So Long Beach files suit. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

LAUSD roundup

edspresso — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:31:14 +0000

Interesting LA Times editorial on the LAUSD takeover wars:

ONE MAJOR OBSTACLE TO the Los Angeles mayor's plan to take control of the Los Angeles schools is that they aren't all Los Angeles schools. They're also the schools of Carson, South Gate and a couple dozen other cities, whose residents are understandably worried about having their schools governed by a mayor they don't elect. Paradoxically, the best way for them to retain power over the Los Angeles Unified School District may be to leave it.
(snip)
There might not be 50 ways to leave your district, but these cities have a range of options. The most obvious would be to secede formally but contract with the Los Angeles schools. If the L.A. district doesn't do the job right, the cities could move to their other options: contracting with one or more charter operators; contracting with or joining another adjacent school district, or banding together to form a district of their own.

From the mayors' standpoint, the best option would be to use the threat of secession to ensure that Villaraigosa takes care of their students. But first, secession has to be a viable threat.
Under current law, seceding from a school district is a long and uncertain process. But because the Legislature is already expected to consider a bill that would remake L.A. Unified, it could also consider a provision that would allow its component cities to secede if they wish. Villaraigosa may even be able to drum up more support for his takeover plan if he adds such an escape clause.

In other words, break up the district. For whatever reason, the editorial staff chose to call it "secession" instead. Which may actually be a bit more appropriate, seeing as how it looks like a civil war of sorts is well on its way.

But as Villaraigosa makes the rounds to drum support for a takeover, Superintendent Roy Romer trots out a reform package of his own:

As the state announced Thursday that 14 percent of Los Angeles Unified School District's Class of 2006 had failed the mandatory exit exam and will not graduate this month, Superintendent Roy Romer unveiled a $36 million program to overhaul some of the district's lowest-performing high schools.
While Romer's plan has been in the works since September, its release coincides with district efforts to fend off a takeover by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has blasted LAUSD for its high dropout rate and spotty test scores. It would include hiring teachers and counselors and renovating facilities at 17 Los Angeles high schools, none of them in the San Fernando Valley.
"There's a myth out there that we're not doing anything, (a myth) that the mayor sometimes contributes to. We're doing a good deal and we're going to do a good deal more, and that's showing in our scores," Romer said in an interview. "It's a program to jump-start the reform of these schools. ... We have to improve the academic performance of these schools. We want them to graduate and to complete the A-G (mandatory college preparatory) curriculum."

And speaking of civil war, the city of Long Beach is suing LAUSD for records access. The incredulous tone of this article is kinda funny...

The dispute within the dispute began in January, when Long Beach Assistant City Attorney Mike Mais asked for records related to the new school. He was thorough, seeking 40 types of documents -- minutes of meetings, correspondence, e-mails, technical reports, environmental studies -- that would fill several boxes if delivered.
Apparently unwilling to arm its adversary, LAUSD denied the request.
The rationale: that Long Beach is ineligible to ask for documents -- even public ones -- from another public agency. The one-page denial was drafted by Robert Baldridge, a paralegal in the LAUSD Office of General Counsel.
"We are unable to make those records available," he wrote, "because this request is coming from a government agency, as opposed to a member of the public, which is in contradiction to the California Public Records Act and is prohibited."

Maybe some enterprising Long Beach resident would be interested in requesting the records and then lending them to the city?

Who you callin' "low-class"?

edspresso — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 20:33:36 +0000

So Andy calls Edpresso (sic) "a low-class joint (Matt) frequents from time to time."

Know whut?

Ah really resemble that remark.

(Thanks to Averell for the spiffy, realistic pic.)

I do not have green eggs and ham (Val Prieto)

fguest — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Imagine, if you will, that you have a child in your local city or county’s public school system and your government pays all of the costs associated with your child’s education. Let’s say your child is your typical third grader and does relatively well in his standard academic courses – reading and writing, arithmetic, science. He’s consistently brought home A’s with a rare B every once in a while and you are quite proud of him. But then the day comes when he is to enter the fourth grade and you get a letter from your local school that your son will be transferred to a different school. A school much farther away from home and one that specializes in “at risk” children. “At risk children?” you ask your self, knowing full-well that your son is the exceptional student. Smart. Honest. Well behaved. Always does his homework. Never missed a day of school. So you go to your local school and ask to meet with his administrator. “Surely there must be some mistake” you say to the administrator. “My son is a great student. Straight A’s. Never sent to the principal’s office. Never absent.” The school administrator looks at you straight in the eyes with a serious frown. He pulls out a thick file, tosses it atop his desk and opens it. He begins sifting through pages and you notice that he is going through your sons school file. The file seems pretty thick for a third grader. “It must be a mistake,” you repeat to the administrator. “These things happen sometimes. My son is…” “It is not a mistake,” the school administrator interrupts. “Your son has been found to be a troublemaker.” He is quite stern in his response. “My son is nothing of the sort,” your voice raises a decibel or two. “He is the epitome of a great son.” “Perhaps then,” the administrator says with a slight smirk on his face. “The trouble makers are his parents.” He then begins to read off the file on his desk, your son’s school file. Why did you not vote in the last election? Why are you not a member of the Party? Why have you had more than family members in your home? Why have you been seen in public talking to certain individuals? Why were you not in attendance at the last event at the Square? Did your brother not leave the country illegally? And on and on. Every single aspect of your life, how many hours you’ve worked, who you have met with, what you have in your refrigerator, where you have visited, what you have bought, what you have eaten, everything, is recorded in your son’s school file. Every step you take is directly related to your child’s – and your family’s - ability to progress. You are a parent of a Cuban child in Cuba. I relate this short story just to give you a little background on how things actually work in Cuba. It will help you understand just why the issue of “Vamos a Cuba”, the controversial children’s book currently being debated in Florida, is so important to the South Florida Cuban-American community. The book, found some weeks ago in the reference section of an elementary school library in Dade county, is part of a series of books by publisher Heinemann/Raintree, and is intended to be a non-fiction book about school children in Cuba. Yet it ignores the one vital aspect of school life in Cuba described by the story above. It offers a rather peripheral view of Cuba without a true glimpse of the reality that Cuban school children and their families face daily. For example, there’s also nary a word in the book about las safras and las cosechas, where children are bused to the countryside to do their compulsory work on the fields, cutting cane or tobacco or whatever the crop du jour may be. They spend weeks away from their families, living in the countryside in makeshift dilapidated structures with little or no amenities. And every child must meet his daily quota for the harvest. The debate over said book has garnered plenty of media coverage, and valid arguments can and have been made by both sides. Solutions from the outright removal of said book from all County School Libraries to companion literature being attached to the stamping of a book plate on the book stating that it includes false and inaccurate information have been made. The committee set up to review the book meets once again on Monday, June 5th, where a compromise is hoped for. I happen to agree with Matthew Pinzur, who has been covering this controversy for the Miami Herald, when he states “This issue is not going away.” Just read the story at the beginning of this post once again, and then put yourselves in a Cuban-American parent’s shoes. It is those same vocal parents that have lived through childhood in Cuba. It is those same vocal parents that know just how flawed Vamos a Cuba is. It is those same vocal parents who are exercising a right denied them in Cuba and protesting. And chances are, it is those same parents who will have to live with the committee’s decision, most assuredly much to their chagrin. Ultimately and by proxy, Fidel Castro will have had a say in their children’s education, if the local library organizations leadership is anything like that of the American Library Association. Personally, I’m not at all comfortable with the banning of books or their removal from libraries. And there’s really no need to deface the book with a warning label or force kids to check out another book or two to accompany Vamos a Cuba. I’ve got a simple solution. One which should make all parties involved happy: Put the book where it belongs, in the FICTION section. Right there next to Nancy Drew and Charlotte’s Web, a few bookshelves away from Green Eggs and Ham. Val Prieto is the son of refugees who escaped from Cuba shortly after Fidel Castro came to power. He lives in Miami and blogs at Babalú.

Education news for Monday, June 5

Daily News — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 09:26:02 +0000

An A+ Choice - Rep. Vito Fossella writes about storm is brewing in education on National Review Online: The recent announcement that the Archdiocese of New York would close eight schools across the city mirrors a nationwide trend that’s been gaining momentum. (more)

Special ed tuition a growing drain on D.C. - The District spent $118 million last year on the tuition of special education students attending private schools, an expense that has increased 65 percent since 2000... (more)

Charter schools are an experiment that worked in Delaware - "Charter schools are not equal." That refrain is often uttered in Dover and among the entrenched who harbor misconceptions about charter schools and their role in Delaware's public school system. (more)

In gilded age of home schooling, children have private teachers - In what is an elite tweak on home schooling — and a throwback to the gilded days of education by governess or tutor — growing numbers of families are choosing the ultimate in private school: hiring teachers to educate their children in their own homes. (more)

Pre-K success depends on teachers - critics of universal preschool have cited a study showing that pre-K not only fails to narrow the achievement gap between rich and poor children, but also hinders students' social development. (more)

Come back later for more education news.

Portland: the next Milwaukee?

edspresso — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 12:16:00 +0000

From the Oregonian:

H ow long, Portland, how long? How much longer will we consign North Portland students and their parents to public schools that have systematically failed them for decades?
At the end of another school year in the Jefferson High School cluster -- at the end of yet another year where we talk, talk, talk about doing something to improve the public schools there -- the questions are worth asking yet again. Happily, they were being asked last month in a forum sponsored by the Cascade Policy Institute and the Black Alliance for Educational Options. By Portland parents who are more interested in actually educating at-risk kids than making more plans to educate at-risk kids.
About 100 people -- half of them white, half of them black -- gathered at the Emmanuel Temple in North Portland to listen to Dr. Howard Fuller, the former superintendent of Milwaukee Public Schools and founder of the Black Alliance for Educational Options. "I've seen the virtue of giving parents choice," he told The Oregonian editorial board earlier that day.

Too much good stuff to quote further. Just go read the whole thing.

Eduwonk Question Time on McKay Scholarships (Matt Ladner)

fguest — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:00:46 +0000

{Scene opens to a packed chamber of the British Parliament for Eduwonk Question Time. A number of studies anxiously await the chance to pose a question to the Eduwonk.}

Mr. Speaker: “Questions to the Eduwonk- Chapter 10 of Rethinking Special Education-Nasty Brutish…and Often Not Very Short: The Attorney Perspective on Due Process”

Nasty, Brutish, etc: “Number 1 Mr. Speaker!”

{Eduwonk rises from the bench, places a book on the dispatch box, and answers}

Eduwonk: “This morning I presided over a meeting of the Education Sector Staff and blogged like mad. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today.”

Speaker: “Chapter 10!”

Chapter 10: “Thank you Mr. Speaker. Does the Eduwonk recall editing me? Isn’t it odd for him to claim that the process of some special needs children attending private schools through the legalistic process is adequate when we described the process that can lead to such placements as “blunt, costly, time-consuming, and otherwise imperfect instrument to accomplish its assigned task” in 2001? Does he recall the part where we concluded “The current due process regime is very complex and technical, and thus difficult (if not nearly impossible) for parents to navigate successfully without legal representation or well-trained parent advocates?”

Eduwonk: “It is the position of this blog not to support school vouchers for disabled children unless they can sue their way out of the system. School officials know best about these sort of things, and if they do not, you can attend a school of choice after proving malpractice with a fancy attorney. Can’t afford one of those, well, tough!”

{Backbenchers grumble, the opposition sits with jaws agape in stunned silence}

Speaker: “Chapter 13 of Rethinking Special Education!”

Chapter 13- The Little Known Case of America’s Largest School Choice Program: “Number 1 Mr. Speaker.”

Eduwonk: “I refer the honorable study to the reply I made some moments ago.”

Chapter 13-“Does the Eduwonk recall editing me? Does he recall my extensive quote of Senator McKay:

"‘I talked with the state education commissioner,’ recalls McKay. ‘I told him ‘Look at what happens when the parents come in with a lawyer who can quote the case law. The state ends up paying for a private placement.’ We were doing a great job in empowering the powerful. My question was: What about the rest of the parents?’”

“Does the Eduwonk recall our conclusion that ‘School choice may well be a way to serve special needs students in keeping with the expansive ideal that originally animated the IDEA?’”

Eduwonk: “Uh yeah, um, that was Hokanson who edited that one! Or maybe Finn! That was long ago in another job anyway! And let me repeat, it is the position of this blog not to support school vouchers for disabled children unless they can sue their way out of the system. Um…they….um….create a perverse incentive, or something!”

{Grumbling grows louder, laughter audible from the opposition bench}

Speaker: “Order!” (Waves gavel threateningly at studies, who reluctantly quiet themselves)

Speaker: “Edpresso McKay Posts One and Two!”

{Edpresso McKay Posts One and Two Stand at the Opposition Dispatch Box}

Edpresso McKay Posts: “Mr. Speaker, is the Eduwonk aware that he has contructed a straw-man in his last post on McKay, arguing that we, and I quote, “It's CATO-like in its certainty that these problems can't be fixed within the program but only through vouchers” when in fact we said specifically:

‘I’m all for vigorously reforming the process of SLD identification, improved reading instruction, universal screening and remediation, etc. Nor do I argue that McKay will solve all the problems of special education. I’m simply arguing that the McKay scholarship program represents a substantial improvement in the delivery of educational services for disabled children.’

{Opposition bench erupts with a chorus of HEAR! HEAR!}

Speaker: Order! ORDER! ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!

Speaker: “One and Two, please continue.”

Edpresso McKay Posts: “Thank you Mr. Speaker. In addition to straw-man construction, the Eduwonk seems to be ignoring the substantive points raised. He raised concern that districts would be less likely to provide special education services under McKay, but there is no evidence to support this from Florida disability rates. Eduwonk said ‘Ladner seems to be saying that parents need McKay because they're not empowered in the current system. But accepting that point is an argument for fixing a problem in IDEA, not creating vouchers.’

With all due respect, Mr. Speaker, they’ve had 31 years to ‘empower parents’ in the current system. Isn’t that long enough to wait? The survey results from McKay parents indicate that they love the program, and there isn’t any harm to anyone else. Can the Eduwonk seriously ask us to believe that McKay is “lousy policy” based on the unsubstantiated fear some tiny number of kids might be mislabeled on account of McKay when Chapter 12 of his own report finds that the current system has mislabeled over 2 million students? Isn’t it time for a change?”

{Opposition benches roar with approving guffaws and jeering of the Eduwonk, the speaker vainly attempts to restore order, Eduwonk backbenchers grimace, Eduwonk loosens his tie and slowly approaches the Dispatch box}

Eduwonk: (TO BE CONTINUED AT www.eduwonk.com)

Dr. Matthew Ladner is a former director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice, and is presently vice president of research at the Goldwater Institute.

Money and decisions in LAUSD

edspresso — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:40:00 +0000

For some folks, $36 million just isn't enough:

A coalition of teachers union officials, students and parents Saturday demanded more money for Los Angeles Unified School District's lowest performing schools, describing a plan to inject $36 million into 17 high school campuses as a welcome start but not enough.
Complaining about large class sizes, crumbling buildings and a shortage of counselors, speakers at a rally near Los Angeles High School also called on district officials to allow the schools, rather than the district, to decide how to spend the extra money.
"We applaud the district and think this is a step in the right direction, but we are concerned, and we would like to make it clear that these 17 schools should get a lot more than $2 million each," said Edgar Sanchez, a history teacher at Washington Preparatory High School. "Parents, students and teachers must have more autonomy to the make the decisions on how the money is spent." (emphasis added)

The underperforming, bloated bureaucracy that is LAUSD already gets $13.4 billion a year. $2 million more per school is a big chunk of change. And not only is it not enough, but now students should get some control over the purse strings?! We're all about the money following the students, but this isn't what we had in mind.

Nobody was minding the shop?

edspresso — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 18:33:00 +0000

One ~~Pennsylvania~~ New Jersey school board is suddenly wondering how their superintendent scored some serious bonuses:

The Camden Board of Education summoned Superintendent Annette D. Knox to a special meeting last night to have her explain how she earned $17,690 in bonuses the last two years.
The bonuses came to light after The Inquirer reported this week that Knox received the money in 2004 and 2005 without board approval or knowledge.

In a recent exchange in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, one superintendent defended their rather lucrative contracts saying that they run enterprises that rival most local businesses. Well, what sort of business would allow a top lieutenant to score a massive raise like this without its knowledge?

CORRECTION: See comment below--that should have been New Jersey, not Pennsylvania. My mistake.

Sorry--wrong Alliance

edspresso — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:12:00 +0000

This fellow overdoes things just a bit:

For Chase Morgan and Shan Mullen of the Alliance for School Choice, progress is to be measured by how many schools are forced to close, regardless of what the immediate impact on families and children may be.

Chase Morgan? Shan Mullen? Never heard of 'em. Probably because Morgan and Mullin (correct spelling) are with the Alliance for Education, a group out of Seattle with which we have no affiliation. And since that group is devoted to Seattle-area public schools, it's likely they would have more in common with the blogger in question than with us.

Education news for Monday, June 12

Daily News — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:30:42 +0000

FL voucher change strands students - This means an uncertain summer for parents and students involved in the Opportunity Scholarship program, which the Florida Supreme Court struck down in January. (more)

Ohio Voucher games - The Associated Press reported last week that with a June 9 deadline approaching for enrolled students to apply for the scholarships, the Ohio Department of Education noticed an enrollment spike in underperforming schools. (more)

A lifeline to high school dropouts - ...nearly a third of students who began as freshmen four years ago dropped out of high school and will not receive a traditional diploma. (more)

When poor kids get poor teachers - we see that few people who purport to represent the interests of our minority and poor populations have yet to address what is perhaps the most important social and economic issue of our time... (more)

Milwaukee public schools - Some learn, some just show up - Every Milwaukee Public Schools high school has industrious students, dedicated teachers. But in many classrooms they can seem few and far between. (more)

Perhaps not all affirmative action is created equal - NOW that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases challenging racial balancing in public schools, some conservatives hope the end of affirmative action is near. (more)

Alan Bonsteel: Education department hides dropout crisis - In 2001, California enrolled 499,505 ninth grade freshmen, and in 2005 graduated 355,217 seniors, for an alarming 28.9 percent dropout rate - not even counting kids who dropped out of middle school and never even started high school. (more)

Spelling gutting - Spellings—who first helped design and then enforce the law during four years at the White House domestic-policy shop—has been methodically gutting No Child Left Behind since about the time she became secretary. (more)

USA Today: New Orleans schools aim higher - The last lesson Gil Wilson taught before Hurricane Katrina still fills a chalkboard inside abandoned Lafon Elementary School. Recently, on a warm Sunday morning, he donned a jacket and tie and interviewed for another job within the same school system. (more)

Not enough teachers 'highly qualified' - Florida school districts are failing to meet another provision of the No Child Left Behind Act that ensures students get teachers who know the subjects they teach. And Florida is not alone. (more)

There goes the enrollment - Public school enrollment is dropping fast in some of the most notoriously crowded neighborhoods of Los Angeles as soaring rents and property values displace low-income, mostly immigrant families. (more)

Charter schools become safety net for parents - Charter schools have become popular in part because parents see them as havens from the violence in public schools. (more)

Ohio voucher applicants sparse - About 2,500 students statewide had applied for Ohio's new voucher program just hours before the deadline, leaving unused almost 11,500 vouchers worth tens of millions of dollars for private-school tuition...."(This) is more applications received than any other voucher program ever awarded in the first year of implementation across the country," said J.C. Benton, spokesman for the Ohio Department of Education. (more)

NYC takeover of schools gets mixed reviews - Four years after taking control of New York's struggling school system, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has earned praise from many education observers across the country. (more)

Crist rolls out education plan - Advocating big property tax cuts and big pay raises for some teachers and touting an endorsement by Sen. Mel Martinez, Charlie Crist barnstormed through Florida this week in hope of cementing himself as the front-runner in the Republican governor's primary. (more)

New Orleans parents choosing charter schools - Charter schools looking to open in Orleans Parish for the first time since Hurricane Katrina may not know where they'll be, but it looks like they'll be crowded. (more)

Check back later for more education news

UPDATE:

Voucher games - supporters of vouchers in the Ohio legislature have explained the rationale often and loudly: Tuition vouchers are an escape route to superior private education for students who are enrolled -- ``trapped'' is the more sinister description -- in failing public schools. The purpose is to give low-income families an educational option available to their neighbors with higher incomes. Clear? Apparently, the point hasn't been made clearly enough to prevent some families from trying to game the system. (more)

Voucher change strands students- Asia Brown loves her Christian school in Orlando and the state-funded scholarship that paid her tuition for two years. But judges have shut off the money for her and more than 700 other Florida students. (more)

Make it work- Ohio’s first foray into a statewide school-voucher program clearly has some kinks, but they can be worked out. The most surprising bump in the road to better school choices for families is that most of the 14,000 vouchers available statewide have no takers. (more)

On a (B) roll - School officials in Washington are finally getting the picture that the one-size-fits-all approach to public education simply doesn't fit. In attempts to "reform" the system, both the Board of Education and the superintendent have agreed to close some unneeded school buildings and work with charter schools to accommodate that growing student population. (more)

Pupils' futures show disparity in city- Malcolm Lawson, a 14-year-old Baltimore boy with a head full of rap songs and a knack for solving math equations, will go to a rigorous college preparatory school this fall. (more)

Teacher: union has failed us

edspresso — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:31:00 +0000

Last Friday we said that teachers unions' first concern is not the interests of children, but their dues-paying members. However, if this teacher is to be believed, NEA-Alaska isn't even doing that terribly well:

I joined the Fairbanks Education Association almost 29 years ago. For most of those years, I was actively involved in “my” union. I was proud to work as an advocate for teachers. I processed many grievances, served on bargaining teams, recruited new members and served as FEA president.
FEA (our local), the National Education Association-Alaska (state) and NEA (national) were, I believed, organizations that walked their talk.
It is, therefore, disheartening to now find myself retiring from the school district as a nonmember who believes “my” union betrayed its most basic principles and values. It has also fundamentally violated the First Amendment rights of all agency fee payers by requiring, as a condition of employment, payment of a “representation fee.”
This compulsory fee has, in part, been used to defend the behavior of the union’s highest paid “at will” employee. NEA-Alaska’s executive director, Tom Harvey, is named in a lawsuit that was filed by the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2001 alleging that he sexually harassed and discriminated against three female employees of NEA-Alaska.
Because many leaders and members of NEA-Alaska and FEA either denied or ignored complaints from our own employees, it took the EEOC and eventually the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to force the hand of the NEA-Alaska Board to pay the $750,000 in back wages and medical expenses the EEOC said they were owed. If you include dues money spent during the litigation process, I believe the total cost is close to $1.5 million.
When a business allows a supervisor to bully employees, it sends a bad message. When a union allows it, the message is exceptionally bad since a union is the kind of organization that claims to champion the respectful treatment of workers.

It only gets worse. Go read the whole thing.

Why I voted for our local school budget (Randy Shain)

fguest — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

I don't normally do this but I felt compelled to write about something more personal - our town, Port Washington's school budget vote. Port Washington is a smallish, character-laden town on Long Island's North Shore- yes, the Gold Coast. I decided to vote Yes, even though I get all the arguments put forth by the No voters. Yes, we spend $21,000 a student in our district (surprisingly, this fact does not seem to generate much ire), but in return 97% of our students go to college, with 10% of last year's class purportedly being accepted to Ivy League schools. Moreover we spend less than most surrounding towns, if that can be believed, and voting No to the budget has little if any role in resolving the nettlesome teachers’ contract issue. Though I certainly am on the side of rewarding better teachers rather than merely those who have hung around the longest, my town is hardly the ideal petri dish for this experiment to take hold. But having listed these reasons, it somehow feels like the rabid pro-budget voters might be missing something crucial. Reading about my hometown New Jersey voters’ dissatisfaction, I started thinking about this more. I, too, was tempted last year to vote No, based mainly on the idea that all around me were stories of school budget scandals and thefts, including a long-running, multi-million dollar rip-off perpetuated by some folks formerly of Roslyn, now inhabiting a 9x12 cell. Without knowing the specifics, I think a reasonable hypothesis for my New Jersey brethren voting no to school budgets would be the impact of similar situations that have been reported on there. If true, the people in charge who stole or wasted money now have done so twice: once to the existing students, and once to the future students. So off to the Middle School I went. Before going home, I agreed to hand out flyers at the train station, urging people to vote yes (tangent: I did not wear anything identifying me as a yes voter, and in fact held the flyers upside down, yet people's reaction was generally negative. I couldn't totally figure this out; one of the candidates explained that people feel guilty for shirking their civic duty and thus seeing someone else do so much - not that handing out flyers for an hour and a half should qualify me for a purple heart - makes them embarrassed. Sounds plausible, but I sense that people are also sick of being told what to do, and being assaulted with messages from telemarketers, spam, and the like. Anyway, it was unpleasant.) What hit me, following my reading of the now-popular book Freakonomics is this bit of circularity (is this a word? if not it should be): our town is a desirable one for four reasons, two of which, the proximity to NYC via train and the proximity to the water/shore, are not going away. The third reason, the aesthetic, is already disappearing, in my opinion, as more old homes are torn down to make way for double or triple Lego houses on the same plot. Yet this has an appeal to some people too, as reflected by rising real estate values. The fourth, and in my mind clearly THE most important item in desirability, ergo real estate values, is the school system. So think of it this way, people who argue that we spend too much on these schools (and again, as anyone who knows me knows, I think taxes in general are way too high for everyone, owing largely to waste, Congressional Pork, programs that never die, etc.): the reason your taxes are so high is because your home is so valuable. The reason your home is so valuable is because the schools are excellent. So you can bemoan paying more for these schools, but then you need to consider that the home you have that you can sell for $900,000 likely would be worth a third less were the schools to be perceived as poor. You can't have it both ways, and as always, it’s better to keep a huge portion of a lot of money than 100% of nothing. Sooooo, the old cliché seems to apply here: in for a penny, in for a pound. We are already voting Yes to extraordinary spending, and have already "chosen" our schools, merely by living here and paying the overall taxes that we do on the North Shore. Once there, it makes little sense to dither over another few hundred dollars, which around here doesn't even cover a night out with your spouse once you pay the sitter and particularly when the school results have been as good as they have. (Why am I picturing Sally Struthers and a little sad-faced kid now?) So even though our system is not perfect, it still does amazingly well, and given its importance, we need to make sure that nothing interrupts this level of service. Sermon over. UPDATE: Port's Budget passed by a huge margin. Randy Shain blogs at True Schools.

Education News for Tuesday, June 6

Daily News — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 09:20:38 +0000

Jeb puts seal on a massive education-reform package - Florida students will soon be required to choose majors in high school, and middle school students will begin planning for college and careers, according to a massive education package signed by Gov. Jeb Bush on Monday. (more)

Black educators divided on Villaraigosa schools plan - While some black educators have expressed their determined opposition to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plan to take control of the expansive Los Angeles Unified School District, others say they are very much in favor of the mayor's ambitious effort to reform K-12 education here. (more)

Voucher-Eligible Schools See Last-Minute Enrollment Spike - Troubled public schools in Ohio where students are eligible for vouchers saw a sudden spike in enrollment as the school year wound down last week, with parents and administrators at private schools realizing thousands of the scholarships were about to go unused. (more)

Mandate Aside, Private Tutors Aren't Always An Option - Across the country, educators say, many poor, rural schools are having trouble following the No Child Left Behind requirement to provide tutoring to struggling students. (more)

Universal Preschool in California: Why David Brooks is Wrong - Opinion: Why the New York Times columnist is wrong on California's Proposition 82. (more)

High court to weigh school racial balance - The Supreme Court agreed Monday to take up two cases that could mark a historic shift in the role of race in education and spell the end of official efforts to integrate the nation's public schools. (more)

Ruling Against Integration Plans Could Add to L.A. Schools' Burden - Like many urban school systems around the country, the Los Angeles Unified School District will be watching this fall when the U.S. Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of desegregation programs in Seattle and Louisville, Ky. (more)

District clears charter school catering to Mexican students - Responding to allegations of discrimination, the school district has concluded that an elementary school catering to students of Mexican descent is following its charter, officials said Monday. (more)

Study shows U.S. falling behind in science - Opinion: Dismal new results on U.S. student performance in science ought to spur Congress to pass President Bush's competitiveness agenda this year - and to extend his "No Child Left Behind" program to high schools. (more)

A poor 'choice' - Opinion: After reading the platforms of some candidates for South Carolina superintendent of education, I'm amazed. They speak of vouchers and school choice, ideas that seem detrimental to public education as well as highly impractical. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

WSJ: Early warning: Today's special election in California should send a message to out-of-touch Republicans - Two years ago Francine Busby, a Democrat and school board member in suburban San Diego, ran for Congress and was trounced by Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Today Cunningham is behind bars, and Ms. Busby has a very good shot at winning a special election to serve out the remainder of his term. (more)

New Orleans schools charter a new course - Katrina gave the city an ironic gift: a fresh start on an education system long in a shambles. The state has taken control of most campuses. (more)

Bishop DiMarzio emerges in debate over schools in NY - These days, Brooklyn's leading Catholic cleric is talking about the need for tax credits to help parents offset the costs of tuition at private and parochial schools. (more)

Ed Week: Dual Orlean's systems grow in storm's wake - (subscription required) Nine months after Hurricane Katrina crippled the New Orleans school district, two distinct systems of public schools are slowly emerging in the city. The highly unusual arrangement is fraught with questions, from the small—What should we call it?—to the large—Will it work? (more)

Ed Week: Conservative House GOP group flexes policy muscle - (subscription required) As debates raged last year over how much federal aid to provide in response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, including to help schools, a coalition of staunchly conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives insisted that lawmakers try to save money in other places to pay for hurricane relief. (more)

Ed Week: Unions' deals with brokers raise issues - (subscription required) The New York state attorney general’s office is close to announcing a settlement with the 525,000-member New York State United Teachers over a relationship between the union and ING Group, a large financial-services company based in the Netherlands. (more)

Miami Cuban kids' book update

edspresso — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:37:00 +0000

The book stays. Val Prieto is, of course, unhappy.

Former D.C. teachers' union treasurer going to prison

edspresso — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:43:00 +0000

Sentences have been handed down:

The former treasurer of the Washington Teachers' Union is headed to prison for ten years for his role in looting millions of dollars from union funds.
James Baxter was found guilty last year along with former union office manager Gwendolyn Hemphill. They were both convicted of conspiracy, fraud, embezzlement and money laundering.
Hemphill is serving an eleven-year sentence, and former union president Barbara Bullock, who pleaded guilty, is serving a nine-year term in prison.

Hopefully this has run its course in D.C.

(In an entirely unrelated note, I've never seen such a snazzy union website intro as this. WTU members, watch your dues at work!)

Union/school district collision

edspresso — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 18:33:00 +0000

Could a strike be that far off?

The union representing St. Louis Public Schools teachers on Sunday issued a vote of no confidence in the district administration.
About 600 union members voted unanimously, said Mary Armstrong, Local 420 president. The vote took place at an emergency meeting called to address several issues that arose at the end of the school year, primarily the notification of more than 1,000 teachers that they will have to reapply for their jobs under a federal- and state-mandated reorganization plan.
Teachers can list their preferred assignments, but the district will have the final say about where they will be teaching when classes resume in August. Teachers are not likely to lose their jobs, but could wind up at a different school, even teaching a different grade or subject.
Other issues involve payroll mistakes, summer school assignments and salary schedules.

The teachers' union is like any other union: they're ultimately concerned about the wellbeing of their members. Remember that if the union does strike and a whole lot of schoolkids are left in the lurch.

A thoughtful question

edspresso — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 20:08:06 +0000

Randy at True Schools asks: "what is the benefit to kids of having teachers unions?"

Discuss.

The Arrogance of the Not-My-Fault Generation (Nancy Salvato)

fguest — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

I can only imagine how the conversation went. Teacher A: If Teacher B told you that you couldn’t work on the project in her room, what would make you think it would be okay to work on it in my room? Student: Uh, I don’t know (looking down, knowing that he tried to pull a fast one and was caught). Teacher A: What do you think you should do to resolve this matter with Teacher A? Student: Tell her I’m sorry? Teacher A: (half joking) Well, I think Teacher A is pretty upset about this. If I was you, I’d get down on my hands and knees and beg her for forgiveness. Student: (realizing everything might work out) Well, OK. Teacher A: (laughing, thinking humor might ease the tension, break the ice) As a matter of fact, I’d probably crawl to her room, to show her how badly you feel about trying to play us against each other. Student: (complying) I will. Laughter ensues while the student crawls into the other teacher’s room, begging forgiveness. Everyone moves on. Only this is not what happened. Everyone didn’t move on. One teacher is on leave and the other teacher no longer works for the district where the incident took place. The school district was forced to pay the student $50,000 for suffering humiliation. Having worked in the field of education for most of my professional life, I find it incredibly frightening that teachers with perfectly honorable intentions can end up losing their jobs and schools lose money over incidents such as this. Truly, at another time, in another era, at most the teacher might have thought over what transpired and issued an apology because they unknowingly made the kid feel bad. “You know it was all in fun, kiddo. We didn’t really want to come down too hard on you at the end of the year, but we wanted you to know it wasn’t acceptable. No hard feelings, ok? Oh, and what is that in your mouth?” The kid smiles at being caught for the third time that week and realizing the teachers aren’t really that bad; they’re just doing their job. “We’re cool.” Certainly, there couldn’t have been any malicious intent. Any teenager with a sense of humor would have taken the bait and it would have been a story for the ages. Teachers working in middle school know all about what passes for humor at that age. Some of them try to add a little levity to the classroom by trying to joke with the kids. Sigh. I’m so tired of political correctness. In another scenario, the focus would have been on the student, who did not follow the directions and tried to find a loophole. The reality is that he should have received a detention for trying to manipulate the adults who were in charge of him and given no credit for the assignment which should have been completed at home. The teachers, though, from all accounts liked him and tried to use humor to make their point. Recently, I heard this conversation transpire in a classroom between a teacher and a group of students huddled around her. Teacher: (answering student arguing with her about being in danger of failing) “Who is it hurting when you don’t turn in your assignment? Is it hurting me? No, it’s hurting you. How can I grade an assignment if it isn’t in front of me? Now all of you know that you lose 11 points a day until the assignment is turned in, but I’m going to give you a break and only take off 22 points even though all of you should be receiving Fs because it has been over five days since the due date. I’m giving all of you class time to complete and turn in your late work.” Response from one boy in the group of students: “No, its hurting you because if all of us receive bad grades then our parents will know that you are a bad teacher because this many people shouldn’t receive such low grades and then the principal will have to fire you for doing a bad job.” No kidding, I listened to this and the teacher didn’t respond. She had several kids around her and I’m not sure she really heard him, so many were trying to explain themselves. I did, though, and when he saw me looking at him, he said to me, “It’s true, you know.” I did know… however, dumbstruck at his arrogance, I just looked at him in amazement. Joke or not, the district must pay student $50,000. Nancy Salvato is president of The Basics Project.

Education news for Wednesday, June 7

Daily News — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 09:29:15 +0000

Gov. Bush signs bill giving vouchers to children in stricken program - The new law will allow qualifiying students to receive vouchers from an unchallenged program for children from poor families, which is financed through corporate tax credits. (more)

Education a priority in South Carolina governor's race - Gov. Mark Sanford says he'll resume his push for tuition tax credits and vouchers for parents to send their children to private schools if he is elected to a second term. (more)

California voters reject Prop. 82 - California voters soundly rejected Proposition 82 Tuesday, crushing the hopes of early childhood education advocates who hoped to make universal preschool public policy in the nation's most populous state. (more)

Persistently failing schools keep growing - For many of America's schoolchildren, however, far too little has changed. Millions were enrolled in persistently failing public schools back in 2000, and millions are enrolled in failing schools today. (more)

Prop. 82 defeat--rundown

edspresso — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:08:00 +0000

California's preschool initiative went down in flames, 60% to 40%. Link dump below the fold.

Rob Reiner ~~weeps bitter tears~~ comments on the defeat here:

"I want to extend an invitation to our opposition, to those who voted against universal preschool, who have all said preschool is the right thing," Reiner said. "They might not agree with how we wanted to do it, but I'm here to ask them to help us -- come up with another way."

Rob, we might just take you up on that idea. (Hat tip on that to Sharon Hughes, who is pleased with the defeat.)

This is a bit dated (May 25), but still worth a link: if the San Francisco Chronicle opposes the idea (!), you just know it's in deep trouble.

LA Times postmortem here. (And if you're interested in the gorier details of this saga, School Me! has a handy timeline here.) Meanwhile, Hit n' Run over at Reason sums it up:

As Lisa Snell of the Reason Foundation (the nonprofit that publishes Reason Online) laid out in the great detail, Prop. 82 was a ridiculous waste of money that would have cost some $100,000 per new preschooler incarcerated. So good riddance to bad rubbish.

(Side note: Anti-82 site Tykes On Trikes appropriately listed Lisa--who blogs here--as one of their heroes in the fight against the proposition.) Similar sentiments from Neal McCluskey over at Cato at Liberty: "Congratulations to California voters for keeping their preschools from becoming, well, like the rest of their schools." More blogospheric joy (or maybe relief?) here, here, and here from Right on the Left Coast. And Daryl Cobranchi is pleased.

No statement yet over at Preschool California's website. How odd!

Meanwhile, Holy Coast suggests that the pollsters botched it bad on Prop. 82:

This margin is hard to believe given that just a few days ago the pollsters were telling us that Prop. 82 had been polling with a slight lead for most of the campaign, but had dropped slightly behind in the final days of the campaign. The pollsters really kicked this one.

Our response to Rob Reiner

edspresso — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:03:00 +0000

In the wake of Proposition 82's decisive defeat, chief benefactor Rob Reiner issued this open invite:

"I want to extend an invitation to our opposition, to those who voted against universal preschool, who have all said preschool is the right thing," Reiner said. "They might not agree with how we wanted to do it, but I'm here to ask them to help us -- come up with another way."

Fair enough. Here's what we propose.

First off, it's important to examine just what Proposition 82 contained:

Prop. 82 would have taxed the state's wealthiest residents to provide a free year of preschool to every 4-year-old. The tax-the-rich initiative, which had the support of Hollywood activists and labor unions, seemed a sure winner when it was first unveiled earlier this spring.

But at make-or-break time at the polls, this comment seems to sum up voter sentiment:

"Prop. 82 sounded really good, but the more I looked at it, the more I realized it was subject to shenanigans,'' said David Yomtov, a San Jose resident who said he voted against it. ``Kids should go to preschool, but it didn't sound like Prop. 82 would help the families who most needed the help.''

For more nitpicky dissection of the initiative, we heartily suggest checking out last month's Edspresso debate between Joanne Jacobs and Universal Preschool's Susanna Cooper. In any event, the upshot is this: California voters clearly weren't enthused about forking over a big chunk of cash for a program that wouldn't help those who need it most and would foist help upon those who need it least.

But as Alan Bonsteel points out, this idea isn't going away:

It’s very clear that an intelligently-drafted universal government preschool initiative in a high-turnout election in California, and without the baggage of political scandal, would have passed.
Throughout the nation, the debate that the K-12 school choice movement will face is whether we try to hold off government-run universal preschool forever, or whether we fight back with parental choice for universal preschool, including private and religious preschools. My own point of view is clear: if we do nothing, universal government-run preschool will overrun us and make K-12 school choice that much harder to achieve. We should counter with intelligently-designed universal preschool, or preschool for the disadvantaged only, that empowers families with freedom of choice.

In that vein, let's look at Florida's voluntary pre-K program. Unlike California, this program, as noted, is voluntary. Unlike California, parents may choose to take their kids where they like. Unlike California, the program primarily uses private providers instead of creating a whole new government infrastructure. Unlike California, providers have a wide range of flexibility in terms of how they design their programs and the sorts of personnel they can hire. Unlike California, this program didn't require a tax increase. And unlike California, Florida's voter-approved state constitutional amendment (!) won handily at the polls. Is it any surprise the program is popular with parents?

So union hyperventilation over Florida vouchers aside, we ask the folks at Universal Preschool to consider what the state has achieved. Why wouldn't it work in California in 2008? The comment thread is wide open. Better yet, if you want to submit a guest article to respond, drop me a line at rbootsREMOVETHIS at allianceforschoolchoice dot org.

Education News for Thursday, June 8

Daily News — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 09:17:39 +0000

Principal says he didn't order assault of KABC-AM reporter - The principal of a Los Angeles charter elementary school said Wednesday that neither he nor his staff ordered the assault of a KABC-AM radio reporter last week. (more)

Is Every "Choice" a Good One? - Opinion: Is every "school choice" policy currently in existence and on the drawing board necessarily a step forward, or could leave us worse off than when we started? (more)

Unschooling unpopular, but it's growing trend - Opinion: The message is startling in its simplicity: Let's let the kids decide what they want to learn. (more)

Doing pre-K right will cost more - Editorial: Florida voters wanted to give 4-year-olds a "high quality" prekindergarten, but lawmakers are still playing low-ball. (more)

Teachers union broadens to include other education workers - California's largest teachers union has voted to allow non-teaching educational workers including secretaries and bus drivers to become members. (more)

Many parents unhappy with school choice - In what could be the final year of the controversial public choice system that decides what schools Rockford, Illinois kids will attend, 81.5 percent of the 5,381 Rockford students whose families registered children for kindergarten, sixth or ninth grade got the school they wanted. But nearly 1,000 students did not. (more)

Vouchers abused, state says - Legal or not, ethical or not, some private-school parents are enrolling their children in struggling public schools they don’t intend to send them to, in hopes of using state money to pay tuition. (more)

Daley defends school property tax increase - It was the 10th time in the 12 years since his school takeover that Mayor Richard Daley has allowed the Chicago Board of Education to raise property taxes to the maximum allowed by the property tax cap. (more)

School chief seeks 10% spending hike - After promising to show fiscal restraint after two years of outspending revenues, Sarasota County (Florida) Superintendent Gary Norris plans once again to dip into reserves to operate schools next year. That decision comes as the district is enjoying the largest voter-approved tax in its history and saving money by laying off as many as 50 teacher's aides. (more)

3,300 fail exit exam, graduate anyway - More than 3,300 high school seniors graduated from Indiana public schools last year even though they flunked the state's graduation test five times. (more)

UPDATE:

Peter Schrag: School reform for dummies: A short primer - Jane David's and Larry Cuban's little 120-page book, "Cutting Through the Hype: A Taxpayer's Guide To School Reforms," will never generate hot headlines. It's froth-free, and provides little ammunition for the chicken littles of American education or for the peddlers of the magic bullets of one or another all-purpose school reform. (more)

School choice vs. diversity -The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear two reverse-discrimination school cases - one from a white mom in Louisville- that could alter public school policies nationwide nearly as profoundly as Brown v. Board of Education (1954). (more)

Archdiocese lets students have a choice -Why are well-funded teachers unions so fervently opposed to school choice for poor, mostly minority, kids? (more)

"Gov. Bush Signs Bill Strengthening Oversight of School Voucher Programs" - Governor Jeb Bush signed into law a bill increasing oversight of Florida's two remaining school voucher programs, months after the state Supreme Court struck down the third program at least partly because there was so little state control over public money at private schools. (more)

"Web School Draws Pupils, Critics" - Oregon's biggest virtual school ends next week after an inaugural year that drew nearly 700 students with soaring demand that could double its size this fall, eventually making it the largest school in the state. Through marketing and word of mouth, the taxpayer-funded charter school has attracted hundreds of home-schooled students and others looking for an alternative to private or regular public school. (more)

"Schools Await OK on Changing Standards" -The number of Massachusetts school systems that fail to meet No Child Left Behind standards on state tests could plunge by more than 75% if federal officials approve a state request to relax the rules. The Bay State tops the nation on test scores, but 64% of its school systems are now labeled in need of improvement. Under the current system, the state judges school districts on their overall test scores and the average scores of eight subgroups, over two years. (more)

Good intentions, wrong decision - The Christian County Board of Education likely meant well when it made the decision to deny school choice to the parents of newly enrolled elementary school children. (more)

School choice advocates open Columbus office - The Washington-based Black Alliance for Educational Options celebrated the opening last month of its Columbus office by holding an informal June 1 group discussion with voucher and charter school advocate Virginia Walden Ford. (more)

An African-centered success story - Before starting their project, a quartet of fifth-graders at J.S. Chick elementary school decides to make a pledge. They raise their right hands and promise they'll do their best work to honor Malcolm X. Then they busily create a collage and an essay about his life as a civil rights leader, a one-time prisoner, and a Muslim. (more)

LAUSD: break it up

edspresso — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:00:00 +0000

That's the recommendation from the LA Daily News:

What parents and teachers and students and anyone who cares about the state of education wants is for academic achievement to improve in the classrooms of the Los Angeles Unified School District.
But that isn't going to happen to the satisfaction of anyone except the entrenched bureaucrats and the lackluster school board members.
And if improving the LAUSD means breaking it up into manageable pieces, stripping the school board of its power or mayoral control, then so be it.

Read the whole thing.

More Prop. 82 numbers

edspresso — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 15:03:00 +0000

The more you look at Prop. 82, the uglier it gets:

According to the final tally of ballots cast, 60.9 percent of voters statewide opposed Prop. 82 while just 39.1 percent supported it.
The initiative, which needed a simple majority to pass, narrowly prevailed in just three of California's 58 counties: Alameda, Imperial, and San Francisco. In conservative Orange County, 73 percent of voters came out against it.
"It was a tough environment for initiatives,'' said Prop. 82 spokesman Nathan James, who said that low voter turnout worked against the campaign. ``A lot of the Democratic base wasn't there to weigh in.''

And the headline of the article? "Universal Preschool Advocates Vow to Continue Efforts." If they're trying to figure out where to begin anew, they could do a lot worse than by starting here. And they probably will! (Also check out Mike Antonucci's postmortem here.)

Education news for Friday, June 9

Daily News — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 10:50:30 +0000

Poor kids' teachers are off the subject - One in five teachers of core subjects like math, science and English in poor public middle and high schools across the state lack sufficient training in the field they teach, according to a study released yesterday. (more)

Proposal: tell parents about failing kids - Parents whose kids are underperforming in school would get a mandatory phone call or e-mail from the teacher, under a bill backed by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and to be introduced this month. (more)

Texas law allows for school turnovers - Nonprofit foundations run by the leaders of high-tech giants such as Dell and Microsoft could be in line to take control of low-performing Texas schools, under a law signed last week by Republican Gov. Rick Perry. (more)

Denver archdiocese offers vouchers - The Archdiocese of Denver is offering vouchers to 250 low-income students to let them attend Catholic schools. About 2,500 seats are vacant at 33 of the archdiocese's 39 schools in Denver. (more)

Update:
Vouchers Abused, State Says - Legal or not, ethical or not, some private-school parents are enrolling their children in struggling public schools they don't intend to send them to, in hopes of using state money to pay tuition. The Ohio Department of Education is seeking legal advice after hearing that parents of private-school students are taking that approach to the voucher program. (more)

New Law Provides Schools Money To Teach Basic Values - Minnesota will spend $1.5 million to finance "character education" programs in public schools designed to reinforce basic values such as being on time and telling the truth. Character education is increasingly common in schools nationwide as teachers mix in discussions about obedience, self-control, politeness and dependability with the usual academic fare. The programs can involve simply discussing values as they arise in other subjects to full-blown courses of study. (more)

Black, Hispanic Students Cite Problems in Their Schools - African-American and Hispanic teenagers are more likely to say serious academic and social problems exist in their schools than are their white peers, a Public Agenda survey has found. Teenagers share similar views on some aspects of education regardless of their race or ethnic background. For instance, more than seven in 10 report that their teachers have high expectations for them, and more than two-thirds say they have had at least one teacher who got them interested in a subject they usually hate. (more)

GOP hopefuls for lieutenant governor meet in last debate -The three Republican candidates for lieutenant governor met for a final time Thursday evening in a wide-ranging debate that marked the trio’s last joint appearance before Tuesday’s vote. (more)

saying GOODBYE TO PUBLIC SCHOOL is a sad necessity -The eighth-graders, in their yearbook photos, share a conspiratorial look, like maybe they know something the rest of us haven’t figured out yet. The teachers at Foreign Language Academy always said this class was special. From kindergarten on, the children treated each another with unusual care and respect. There wasn’t a mean kid in the group. (more)

Archdiocese offers vouchers - The Archdiocese of Denver is offering vouchers to 250 low-income students to let them attend Catholic schools. About 2,500 seats are vacant at 33 of the archdiocese's 39 schools in Denver. (more)

Schools have another year to do better- If the Putnam County School District does not meet federally and state mandated Adequate Yearly Progress guidelines next year, the district would be subject to a state takeover, the district’s director of federal programs said Thursday. (more)

Transfer policy up for overhaul - The future of Portland Public Schools’ school transfer system is on shaky ground after an audit of the system blasted it for being too complex, poorly managed and not transparent enough, and for not serving lower-income students equitably. (more)

Public school families slow to sign up for education alternative - State school officials will give students at some of Ohio's most troubled public schools a second opportunity to sign up for vouchers this summer after the first chance at free money for private education generated lukewarm interest. (more)

Owen sticks up for teachers

edspresso — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 18:30:00 +0000

File this one under "Dogs and Cats Living Together": Owen of Boots and Sabers quotes this...

A report from the Education Trust, a widely known advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., released today a study that strongly decried practices that put weaker teachers in front of needier students nationwide and cited Milwaukee and Wisconsin as examples of the problem.
Using data from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, the study said 26% of teachers in the state who work in schools with high rates of student poverty had less than three years of experience, compared to 12% of teachers in low-poverty schools. Similarly, 28% of teachers in schools with large minority populations had less than three years experience, compared to 11% in schools with few minority students.
The report said the same pattern held true within Milwaukee Public Schools, where the percent of teachers with limited experience in low-income, high-minority schools was much higher than in other schools.

...and then cuts teachers some slack!

I can’t blame the teachers for wanting to work in a better environment and using their job experience to leverage a better work situation. Everyone else does the same thing.

Quite so. It's rational self-interest, a quality endemic to capitalism. Owen suggests a number of potential fixes. But he omits a critical question: Why do the unions continue to say they're looking out for your children? A commenter over at Joanne Jacobs summed it up quite well:

I'm a teacher and member of NEA and UTLA (United Teachers Los Angeles). Unions, whether teachers or auto workers, et al. are about two essential things: wages and working conditions. Period. I'm not naive enough to believe that NEA/UTLA really cares about improving pedagogy or properly spending TAXPAYER money.

While it certainly isn't coming from Owen, it's important to point out that the rhetoric about teachers' unions looking out for the best interests of the children is so much nonsense. Indeed, when San Diego's superintendent tried to make one of the very changes that Owen suggests--offering bonus pay to teachers willing to move to troubled schools--the teachers' union shot it down. (Follow the link to see more union stonewalling on similar reforms, particularly merit pay.) When it comes to getting quality instruction to poor kids, the unions aren't part of the solution, they're part of the problem.

EXCLUSIVE: Governor Perry's hidden $6.1 billion budget shortfall (Peyton Wolcott)

mtigani — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 18:11:00 +0000

At the same time Texas Governor Rick Perry is circulating ads promoting property tax cuts ("Homeowners and businesses will save $15.7 billion on school property taxes") achieved during the 79th Legislature's third special session, called specifically to solve problems with constitutionality and funding in paying for Texas public schools, just emerging is that the special session actually created a $6.1 billion shortfall* for which there is no fix save an unrealistic forecast of an unprecedented ten-year cycle of boom--or the more realistic and plebian fixes, trimming government spending and increasing sales taxes. Because Texas has no state income tax, schools are funded far less by the state (the Texas Permanent School Fund's disbursements are currently at $765 million) and much more by local property taxes ($18.6 billion). Under 1993's Robin Hood, many districts are approaching the $1.50 M&O and $0.50 I&S cap per $100 valuation, which scheme the Texas Supremes found unconstitutional as it amounted to an illegal state property tax, and gave the Legislature a June 1, 2006 deadline to find a cure; hence this last special session. So the Lege has just passed a series of bills which will lower the maximum property tax to $1.00 in two years for districts already at $1.50 M&O, and make up the difference with a revised business franchise tax meant to close the business-friendly Delaware Sub loophole, with an additional $1.00 cigarette tax along with a new used car tax, all projected to yield a $4.2 billion revenue stream by fiscal year 2009. But at the same time, Lege appropriations are projected at $10.3 billion by FY 2009 and include a $2.4 billion across-the-board teacher pay increase over the next three years, $600 million in teacher awards, and $275 per high schooler for reducing dropout rates and college prep.

The 79th's 3rd's legacy: You do the math

Appropriations by FY 2009 $ 10.3 billion Revenues by FY 2009 $ 4.2 billion Shortfall $ 6.1 billion

Robbing Peter to pay the piper When questioned yesterday about the $6.1 billion shortfall, the governor's spokesperson Kathy Walt said, "The revenue sources you cite [above] represent only those bills passed during the special session. They do not reflect the surplus, nor do they take into account new revenue estimates that will be generated prior to the start of the 2007 regular session. The tax measures passed by the legislature will go into a property tax reduction fund to pay for future reductions of property taxes. Should additional revenues be needed beyond what these taxes generate and is available from surplus, general revenue (GR) funds could be used. The new tax measures represent only a small portion of revenue that flows into GR." Huh? Public education to be funded by a $23 billion 'hot check'? Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, who is running as an independent against Perry in this November's gubernatorial election, said in certifying HB 1, the largest single piece of legislation this session, "Perry's entire plan is a massive increase in business taxes that will increase the state's budget by $6 billion a year [and] leave a $23 billion hot check." Another state official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said yesterday, "All of this money, this surplus the governor's talking about, is already dedicated. And a $6.1 billion income spike is unrealistic, unless it comes from a combination of further cutting state government expenses and increasing the sales tax. The problem there is that you only get $2 billion per penny of tax, and our sales tax is already one of the highest in the nation. So the 10% budget cut the governor announced yesterday afternoon represents the first element of what we knew had to come in order to fund this boondoggle, and the next will be an increased sales tax. Even though right now we're awash in fuels tax money, how long will this continue? The governor's saying we've got to boom like this for the next ten years." War of the Worlds Put simply, while a major conservative premise is that cutting taxes will boost the economy, the corresponding liberal premise is that more money needs to be spent on governmental services. Perry's 79th Legislature's third special called session delivered both a tax cut and increased spending which appears to not even pass the constitutionality threshold. While according to Governor Perry's press release "this is one of the most significant legislative accomplishments for Texas in a generation, because it is one of the most significant steps we have ever taken to improve opportunity for the next generation" and "because of House Bill 1, school finance is now out of the courthouse, and back on constitutional footing,” constitutional law experts such as Charles Rhodes of South Texas College of Law are expressing their reservations. "I have questions as to how long the new financing scheme is going to be considered to be constitutional. I think it's another short-term fix." (NOTE: This is a condensed version of Wolcott's in-depth report, which can be found here.) Peyton Wolcott's school reform website has recently been named "The Smoking Gun of American education." She lives in Horseshoe Bay, Texas. (This entry ©Peyton Wolcott 2006; used with permission.)

The lowdown in Ohio (June 13: now with comment from reporter)

edspresso — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:27:00 +0000

With two articles and a blog post on the subject, it seems Scott Elliott can scarcely contain his glee that a mere 2,568 students--5.5 percent of those eligible--applied for the new Ohio voucher program. His blog post is probably what deserves the most attention.

There’s an interesting contrast in today’s the Dayton Daily News between the political spin and the on-the-street reality on the issue of vouchers. And I enjoyed how one genuine parent voice brought some real clarity to the question of whether Ohio’s statewide voucher program is off to a great start or a disappointing start.

One "genuine parent voice". So parents who might actually be pleased with the initial sign-up are somehow counterfeit? Apparently so, since there are no quotes from any such parents in his blog post or articles.

The Friedman folks helpfully sent some talking points out to Ohio’s pro-voucher crowd with a rebuttal to any media suggestion that the 5.5 percent initial participation in the voucher program is a small number. The group ran a list of other programs and showed initial participation was:
0.7 percent in Milwaukee
0.3 percent for Florida McKay scholarships
1.7 percent in Washington, D.C.
And even smaller in less similar tax credit programs in other states

And deeper in the blog post he says this:

So is the voucher participation low? As someone who tracked the issue pretty closely for the past year, I thought it would be much higher.

And why is that? The unspoken message here and elsewhere is that because the initial participation numbers are fudged or doctored in some way because they were distributed by Friedman in the form of talking points. Elliott has repeatedly been told that initial participation in school choice programs is historically low, and that the Ohio program has the second-highest participation as a percentage of eligible applicants and the highest in absolute number of applicants. So does he think the Friedman folks are making stuff up as they go along? And how high did he expect initial enrollment to be? (ONE OTHER NOTE: given that the programs in question--particularly Milwaukee and Florida--have had significantly higher enrollments in subsequent years, that goes a long way to showing that, yes, school choice programs grow in popularity over time.)

He does bring up some good points here:

But the program was hampered by several factors:
First, the rules changed in the middle of the game when lawmakers expanded eligibility in March. So for months, parents had one message about eligibility only to get another message later on.
Second, the rules are complicated and don’t make it very easy for parents. To apply for a voucher, a student must first apply and be accepted to a private school (which means paying application fees, etc.) and then the SCHOOL must submit the actual voucher application. It’s not a simple process.
Third, I think Husted and others are probably right that it will take time for people to really understand the program and learn the ropes of applying.

And as luck would have it, those first two points (and the third one as well, really) were made by Matthew Carr here (that was from his original article here). But elsewhere in the post Elliott critically references an e-mailed article he received from Carr (probably this one). It's a bit revealing that Elliott needles Carr on one hand and pretty much agrees with him on the other.

But there’s no doubt 5.5 percent participation and as much as 11,000 unused vouchers has to be a disappointment for those favoring this reform.

Well, we certainly favored this reform, and as we already said, we certainly aren't disappointed. Aside from the fact that the Ohio program's initial application numbers have outpaced nearly every other school choice program passed in U.S. history and that there was a huge surge in applications in the final days (many people reported waiting lines at admissions offices at choice schools), there is, as Elliott himself reported, a second application period next month. So the final numbers still have time to climb, and as word continues to get around about the program, rest assured they will.

In short, for the benefit of Matt Ladner, we'll draw a football analogy: Elliott is trying rather hard to give his wrap-up analysis at halftime. In the interests of fairness, the least he could do is wait until the end of the game.

NYC New York teachers' union probe put to rest

edspresso — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:09:00 +0000

From the LA Times, where it all started.

New York's largest teachers union agreed Tuesday to change the way it markets individual retirement plans to its members, ending what authorities called a "silent partnership" with insurer ING Group that saddled teachers with high-cost investments that provided scant benefits.
New York State United Teachers received $3 million a year for endorsing ING annuities but tried to conceal the arrangement from its members, according to the New York attorney general's office. The annuities carried fees and expenses of as much as 2.85% a year, or about three times the cost of many popular mutual fund investments.
"Under the guise of giving objective advice, the union not only endorsed this product, they steered people to it," said David D. Brown, chief of the attorney general's investment protection division. "They ultimately became a sales arm of the insurance company."
As part of a settlement with the state, the union agreed to disclose its endorsement payments. It also promised to work with state authorities to hire an independent consultant to suggest alternative investments to union members and to pay $100,000 to cover costs of the state investigation.
In addition, the union agreed to provide members with annual access to free and objective investment advice and allow the 53,000 people who purchased retirement products it endorsed in the past to roll their balances into a newly endorsed product at no cost.

Mike Antonucci comments.

UPDATE: Correction in title--see John at AFT's comment. My mistake.

New Orleans district goes all-charter?

edspresso — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:24:06 +0000

On the heels of massive charter school funding, this seems like the logical next step:

The nation's first charter-only school district is taking shape in New Orleans - an unprecedented opportunity to reinvent an urban district that was in an academic and financial sinkhole long before Hurricane Katrina.
As education officials scramble to prepare for an estimated 24,000 students expected to return to New Orleans schools this coming school year, they are tapping into the expertise of Chicago's charter leaders, who will help launch this extraordinary experiment over the next two years.

In the unique situation after Katrina, this newfound commitment to choice comes of necessity:

Creating an all-charter system will be the ultimate testing ground for advocates, who believe that a network of well-managed and independent public schools can break the monopoly that exists in many large districts. But (former Chicago Public Schools charter school chief Greg) Richmond said transformation of New Orleans schools was born of desperation rather than politics.
"The education leaders in Louisiana have not been charter school proponents, and they're not doing this to make any kind of point about how good charter schools are," he said. "They just want good schools, and they've seen what we've been able to do in Chicago when you demand quality."

It will be very interesting to watch this unfold over the next two years.

N'awlins relying on charter schools

edspresso — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:53:00 +0000

In the Katrina rebuilding efforts, New Orleans is turning to charter schools:

The charter school movement, already bolstered in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina devastated public schools in and around New Orleans, got another boost Monday when federal officials announced a $23.9 million grant to create new charter schools in the state.

The grant was announced in a news release prior to a late morning appearance by U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings at Belle Chasse Primary School, near New Orleans.

In 40 states and the District of Columbia, more than a million children attend 3,600 charter schools, according to the Center for Education Reform, a charter-school advocacy group.

Nowhere are the percentages as high as in New Orleans, where 18 of the 25 public schools that are operating, or that are preparing to open post-Katrina, are charters.

School choice hits the Crescent City hard. I wonder if it's at least indirectly connected to stuff like this?

State Superintendent Cecil Picard, who effectively took over most of the city's schools, says families returning from other states have seen functional schools, often for the first time. A few are asking him, "Can you promise me that I'm going to come back to something better than I left?"
If outsiders had visited New Orleans the day before the storm, they'd have seen a school district already in distress. Nearly two-thirds of the parish's public schools weren't meeting state standards. The city went through 10 superintendents in 10 years; in 2003, one high school valedictorian needed seven tries to pass the state's 10th-grade math test.
Corruption was endemic. In 2004, the FBI set up a task force inside school district headquarters — a first in FBI history — to investigate "a lot of brazen stuff," says James Bernazzani, New Orleans' special agent in charge. Among the cases: a payroll employee "just started writing herself checks" — for $240,000 in all.
The investigations have led to 26 indictments and 20 plea deals. "It was a failed, corrupt system," state board member Leslie Jacobs says.

In all fairness, the connection between aggressively introducing school choice via charters in the wake of Katrina and the city's historically atrocious public schools is probably tenuous at best. One of the many advantages of choice schools is the speed with which they can be set up, and families just don't have the time to wait for the public school system to get it together. But it's pretty likely that families will demand better for their children once they've seen the comparatively better schools available in Texas and elsewhere.

Some related thoughts on this will be addressed in a future post. In the meantime, kudos to New Orleans for getting these kids some help.

2005: a look back

edspresso — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:33:44 +0000

2005 was a big year for school choice. Check out the 2005 School Choice Yearbook here, and the End of Year Report here.

Education News for Tuesday, June 13

Daily News — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:37:13 +0000

Voucher backer winces at low numbers - As Ohio's new voucher program gets its start, just 5.5 percent of those eligible applied to use tax money for private school tuition, officials announced Monday. Even so, voucher proponents called the program a success, noting it likely will have higher first-year participation than similar programs in Washington, D.C., Florida and Milwaukee. (more)

2nd school voucher sign-up offered - With only 5.5 percent of those eligible applying for Ohio's new voucher program by Friday's deadline, it appeared nearly 11,500 vouchers approved by the legislature would go unused. But those who missed out will get another chance during a second enrollment period July 21 to Aug. 4, House Speaker Jon Husted, R-Kettering, said Monday. (more)

U.S. Gives Charter Schools a Big Push in New Orleans - Education Secretary Margaret Spellings announced Monday that $24 million in federal aid had been awarded to Louisiana for the development of charter schools, more than doubling what the state has already received to help create such schools in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. (more)

Incentive pay enters classroom - Texas teachers are embarking on a massive, quarter-billion-dollar experiment to find out whether big bonuses can produce big gains in student achievement, despite criticism that such plans are largely unproven. (more)

Education chief's race seen as referendum on school choice - Tuesday's crowded, hotly contested Republican primary for South Carolina education superintendent was widely seen as a referendum on choice for South Carolina's public schools. (more)

Do the math: support a teaching standard - Editorial: Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson says she doesn't have any brilliant schemes for tackling the less-than-impressive performance of students in math. But the latest results from the Washington Assessment of Student Learning beg for a strategy. (more)

No Child Left Behind sets unreachable goals - Last in a series of editorials on the effect of NCLB on one Indiana middle school, which was forced to close. (more)

East Penn forgoes some federal aid - In a dramatic move that underscores mounting tension between local school boards and federal government mandates, the East Penn (Pennsylvania) School Board decided to give up some federal funding rather than come under certain provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind school reform initiative. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Ed Week: White House education policy role ebbs and flows - (subscription required) In recent history, the ebb and flow of White House involvement in education policy has often depended on personalities more than on the pull of political tides. (more)

Ed Week: House panel rejects some Bush budget items - (subscription required) A House subcommittee voted last week to cut discretionary funding for the Department of Education slightly next fiscal year, but its plan would partially pay for some proposals in President Bush’s American Competitiveness Initiative. (more)

Ed Week: School reopened as charter under NCLB winds up year one - (subscription required) The bell is ringing in a new chapter for Gompers, a high-poverty school in the gang-plagued area of Chollas View, in southeastern San Diego. (more)

Ed Week: A union chief's defeat stirs debate on leadership - (subscription required) Over the past few years, more than a half-dozen union leaders who have worked collaboratively with their districts have been voted out of office... (more)

Ed Week: K-12 diversity policies at issue in two Supreme Court cases - (subscripton required) By accepting two appeals on the voluntary use of race in assigning students to public schools, the U.S. Supreme Court will likely decide the constitutionality of widespread practices that school districts use to promote diversity. And the decision could affect schools in unforeseen ways. (more)

Jay Greene's education myths - Myths aren't lies. They are beliefs that people adopt because they have an air of plausibility. But myths aren't true, and they often get in the way during serious problem-solving. (more)

Daring to think outside the K-12 structure - The past few decades have witnessed major changes in the substance and rhythm within the individual grades that make up the architecture of kindergarten through 12th-grade education. (more)

Letter from "John Dewey"

ed_admin — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

(This is the first in a series. -ed.)

By way of introduction, my name is not John Dewey but it will have to do for now. I am in ed school (night classes) in a state and county that shall remain nameless as shall my state of mind. I have decided to teach high school math when I retire in five years. I majored in the subject, and have a burning desire to make sure kids learn it correctly.

I recognize that there are probably more than a few blogs out there that operate on the premise of the anonymous mole in ed school telling all. So what makes me different? For one, other blogs simply pale in comparison. For another, no other ed school mole blogs are writing about math.

Math education is in a shambles, starting from the so-called standards put out by the National Council of Mathematics (NCTM) in 1989 and revised in 2000. These standards were then copied by many states that thought they were great. State boards of education paid no mind to the shrieks of horror from mathematicians, simply not believing that the resulting standards took the math out of mathematics in the name of fun, and whose approach for eliminating the achievement gap eliminated the mastery of any math knowledge that matters. The well-intentioned but ill-conceived standards have actually widened the gaps between the rich and the poor by motivating those who can do so to hire tutors for their children, to enroll them in learning centers like Sylvan and Kumon, or to put them in private schools.

Few refuges exist from the multicolored tomes that adhere to NCTM-based standards posing as math textbooks. No one is safe from this modern day invasion of the body snatchers. And just like in the movie, those with the power to do something have already been taken over by the seed pods of ed school dogma. Those who resist are told that everything they’ve heard is false. It’s just ideology not fact, they are told, propagated by math professors who are evil seed pods themselves desiring to turn your kids into dull, listless mathematicians like them. And just to make sure you’re okay with that, they are then told that under these math reform programs at least your kids will learn critical thinking skills. Oh, good. Now I feel better.

I exaggerate, just a bit. Well, no. I take it back. I don’t exaggerate at all. The seed pods who infiltrated NCTM are the same ones who infiltrated the ed schools. As one mathematician I know puts it, the inmates are running the insane asylum. Perhaps it started with the original John Dewey, but something tells me if he saw what is going on now he would say, “No, that’s not what I had in mind. And who was the putz who came up with block scheduling?”

I am a new breed of warrior that is trying to infiltrate from the inside by actually teaching math as it should be taught. This means—I am told by teachers getting ready to retire—that I should teach in a private or a charter school. These teachers have had enough. They view me in the same way as a well-fed restaurant patron looks at the new customers gorging themselves: “How can they eat when I’m not hungry?”

The seed pod way of thought begins early in ed school. For me, it began even before my first day of classes. The short-listed candidates for admission to the grad school of education had to come in for an orientation and interview. Among the many ed school adages we were told that day was: “The way science and math are taught today is not how you were taught.” This said with a kind of taunting, challenging quality with some mumbo jumbo thrown in about “inquiry-based” learning. Another was “The textbook is a resource, not a curriculum.” From what I hear, this “content doesn’t matter” approach only gets worse.

I have just finished my first introductory class which though steeped in the various theories of learning that abound, did not require any essays extolling the “content doesn’t matter” philosophy (though you certainly weren’t discouraged from expressing such sentiment). The course I’m dreading is coming up this fall—a class in teaching methods for math. The syllabus reads like a promotional brochure for the NCTM standards.

Right now I’m studying for the Praxis II test in mathematics—required for licensure and for graduation. It is given by the Educational Testing Service (ETS), the folks that produce the SAT, GRE and hosts of other standardized tests. The Praxis II math content test covers algebra through calculus and requires the use of a graphing calculator. My advisor told me I needed one for the test. To find out where her sympathies lay, I wrote her an email with my observation that with the increasing use of calculators, the rudiments of math were becoming a lost art. My advisor replied that there was a time when writing down the plus and minus symbols was considered a "crutch" and that what is "basic" or "fundamental" or "rudimentary" is by no means fixed and never has been. This is someone with a master's degree in math. I was about to ask her if the multiplication facts had changed, and how long had we been using the plus and minus symbols but decided against it. From what I hear, she’s the one teaching the course I have to take in the fall.

Until next time, I remain faithfully yours,

John Dewey

Education news for Wednesday, June 14

Daily News — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:23:23 +0000

LA Unified to lose millions from drop in enrollment - Enrollment in city schools will continue to drop by thousands of students next year, Los Angeles education officials said Tuesday, and the decline is expected to cost the Los Angeles Unified School District tens of millions of dollars in state funding. (more)

Rudy goes nuclear - A small gathering in Mid town yesterday got a sneak peek at Rudy Giuliani's formula as he gears up for a likely 2008 presidential run. (more)

AP: Agency to examine NCLB loophole - Under pressure from lawmakers, the Bush administration outlined plans Tuesday to examine why some states are excluding huge numbers of children when reporting test scores under the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

SC education race seen as referendum on school choice - State Education Superintendent candidate Karen Floyd received key endorsements from Gov. Mark Sanford and South Carolina's two U.S. senators but had trouble getting past the 50 percent mark in the five-way Republican primary Tuesday. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Education schools to be graded - The Michigan Board of Education unanimously approved a measure Tuesday that will grade the state's college and university schools of education by issuing annual report cards -- part of a series of changes backers hope will ensure high-quality teachers in every classroom. (more)

NY mayor to give more control to public schools - Partly because these schools would largely operate independent of the centralized school bureaucracy, officials said the city would be able to cut a net sum of roughly 210 administrative jobs and pass on some $80 million in savings to the participating schools and related programs. (more)

Glitch in ohio school program; some in need don't qualify for vouchers - Vouchers are off limits to hundreds of other children because state law says students seeking vouchers are eligible only if they are enrolled in and actually attended a school rated "academic watch." (more)

Sanford may face long road ahead - Gov. Mark Sanford defeated challenger Oscar Lovelace in Tuesday’s Republican primary for governor, but his margin of victory foreshadows what could be a difficult race for Sanford in this fall’s general election. (more)

Staton concedes education race to Floyd - Staton, a Columbia businessman who has been active in public school accountability efforts, got 35 percent of the vote, or about 40,000 less than Floyd, on Tuesday. (more)

NY union to pay after inquiry into ING- The attorney general's investigation found that that the union and ING made efforts to hide their close relationship from teachers who were being pushed toward ING's retirement products, which often had high fees. (more)

Millions in charter school grants announced - Three organizations-the KIPP Foundation, the Charter School Development Corporation, and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation-will receive a total of $21.6 million for three grants through the Charter Schools Facilities Grants program, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings announced. (more)

Southern Baptists won't back public school pullout - Leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention refused Wednesday to support a resolution urging the denomination to form a strategy for removing children from public schools in favor of home schooling or education at private schools. (more)

New Orleans charter schools await one last OK - Wrapping up its first major phase of selecting new operators for struggling New Orleans public schools, the state is poised this week to approve the opening of four more charter schools for next school year. (more)

AZ veto ends parents' school wish - Gov. Janet Napolitano rejected Senate Bill 1040, which would have paved the way for this small group of parents to send their children to their district of choice, the Cave Creek Unified School District. (more)

Find ways to get top teachers in underperforming schools - It doesn't take an expert to figure out that the level of success students attain is related to the quality of their teachers. (more)

Former teacher endorses merit pay

edspresso — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:06:48 +0000

Jerry P. Lightner, former teacher and head of the National Association of Biology Teachers, says this:

Providing a modest salary boost to teachers who outperform their colleagues seems like a reasonable move. Throughout most of society, employees who do outstanding work are generally rewarded with salary raises and job advancement more rapidly than mediocre workers. However, this has not been the situation for classroom teachers. With rare exceptions, teachers are locked into a rigid pattern of salary increments based on academic degrees and years of experience. Two teachers, each with a master's degree and 7 years experience, usually receive identical salaries, even though one may outperform the other.

He has a list of suggested metrics. Some of them seem kind of hard to measure, but this is an article well worth your time.

Education News for Thursday, June 15

Daily News — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:48:00 +0000

School-choice group issues report on problems in Camden - Excellent Education for Everyone, a Newark-based organization that supports school choice, renewed its call today for tax credits to support private-school scholarships by issuing a "white paper" that cataloged controversies plaguing the Camden district. (more)

Gap grows in how schools graded - For the first time since the state and federal grading systems began clashing four years ago, Gov. Jeb Bush said Florida’s system is a better gauge than the one that anchors the education agenda of his brother, President Bush. (more)

School Reform Alone Can Never Fully Close Achievement Gaps, Says WestEd Policy Perspectives Paper - News release: School reforms to close the academic achievement gap among our nation's children cannot fully succeed unless supplemented by reform in the social and economic institutions that affect children's ability to learn, according to a WestEd Policy Perspectives paper by Richard Rothstein, Research Associate at the Economic Policy Institute. (more)

Board Approves Alliance Of Public, Charter School - The D.C. Board of Education approved a collaboration yesterday between an underenrolled public elementary school and a charter middle school that supporters praised as an innovative -- and unprecedented -- approach involving the nationally acclaimed KIPP organization. (more)

School choice a key issue in superintendent's race - The stage is set for another referendum on vouchers, tax credits and expanded school choice in South Carolina. (more)

Beleaguered school panel wants stronger ethics rules - After revelations on a number of questionable moves by Philadelphia School District officials, the School Reform Commission yesterday asked for tougher policies on ethics. (more)

Advocates demand Abbott school reform - As New Jersey's investment in its neediest schools comes under rising scrutiny, several children's and community advocates yesterday demanded the state do a bet ter job of making sure the money is spent wisely. (more)

Racial balancing helps attain equal education - Opinion: The U.S. Supreme Court is on shaky ground after taking a couple of cases that deal with race and public schools -- a subject around which the justices should tread lightly. (more)

Program provides cash for teachers, staff - The Blue Valley School District of Overland, Kansas approved a school-based award pilot program for the 2006-07 school year. The program awards compensation to classified and certified staff in participating schools that reach their goals. (more)

Teachers union settles with Spitzer - The New York State United Teachers yesterday agreed to adopt a series of reforms and pay $100,000 to cover the costs of the investigation by Attorney General Eliot Spitzer into the practice of cajoling members into ING retirement plans. (Free registration required) (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Primaries set up fall contests over schools - SEN. TOMMY MOORE drew a clear line toward the fall election Tuesday night when he declared that “I haven’t turned my back on public education; I’m not trying to dismantle public education.” (more)

There’s a parallel to 1998 governor’s race, but it’s not what ... - LEARNED IN 1998 that I couldn’t predict what South Carolina voters are going to do. So I’m not going to repeat my mistake of saying there’s no way a little-known, uncharismatic state legislator can unseat the sitting Republican governor this fall. (more)

Booker Has Unity in Newark; Trick Now Is to Keep It - Cory Booker finally has what he wants. He will take over for Mayor Sharpe James on July 1 with a landslide victory behind him and — thanks to Tuesday's runoff — unanimous support on the Municipal Council. (more)

Justices stuck in the past over "racial balancing" plans - The Supreme Court is on shaky ground after taking a couple of cases that deal with race and public schools — a subject around which the justices should tread lightly. (more)

By choice, GR schools a bigger draw than ever - Grand Rapids slowly is becoming a destination district for students using the county's school choice plan. (more)

Report Calls for Changes in No Child Left Behind Act to Help ... - A new report from The Century Foundation proposes that the federal No Child Left Behind Act should be revised to enable more low-income students to attend good middle-class public schools - a strategy that has already been successful in raising achievement in a number of local school districts.(more)

School Reopened as Charter Under NCLB Winds Up Year 1 - On a recent sunny morning here, a student rings a brass bell he carries around the front courtyard of Gompers Charter Middle School. But the sound doesn’t just signal that it’s time to start school, explains director Vincent M. Riveroll, who greets students as they file in for the day. (more)

Teachers union contract in jeopardy -With a little more than two weeks left on its contract with the United Teachers of New Orleans and no negotiations under way, the Orleans Parish School Board refused Wednesday to extend the current contract, suggesting collective bargaining might soon disappear at the only four public schools in the city where it is in effect. (more)

The union is a fickle friend

edspresso — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:09:08 +0000

Some Maryland county council members running for reelection have discovered the hard way that you cross the unions at your peril:

An endorsement on the Montgomery County teachers union’s coveted apple ballot has always carried considerable weight in the minds of county voters.
This year, in a wide-open election season, the biggest surprise of the union’s endorsements involved four incumbent County Council members: Philip M. Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg, Nancy M. Floreen (D-At large) of Garrett Park, Marilyn J. Praisner (D-Dist. 4) of Calverton and Michael L. Subin (D-At large) of Gaithersburg, the longtime chairman of the council’s Education Committee, each failed to receive the union’s endorsement.

Four Democrats, all failing to secure the union's support. And why?

Union President Bonnie Cullison said at Thursday’s announcement in Rockville that Subin and Floreen failed to get backing because they voted to delay a cost-of-living adjustment for teachers and other county employees in 2003.
‘‘In the case of Marilyn Praisner and Phil Andrews, the 2003 vote is the baseline,” she said. ‘‘They tend to take a more moderate approach to the budget.”

Read carefully. The union dropped their support over a single vote--to delay a pay raise! Look, I might (and I do stress might) be able to understand if they had voted to cut funding or something along those lines. But they were merely postponing it, not cutting it entirely. I guess it's just another reminder of the unions' brand of hardball.

Rudy comes out swinging

edspresso — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:29:12 +0000

Dean Esmay sees this from a Rudy Giuliani speaking event...

The red meat for conservatives, however, came in the Q&A: An audience member asked Giuliani what he would do on education as president.
Without deflecting the loaded premise of the question (no announcement yet, folks), the former mayor launched into an impassioned brief for school choice. "A president has to know the role" of the federal government, he said. "It's more of a leadership role." But as that leader, he would emphasize, "choice and vouchers."
As mayor, he said, he thought he could do for the schools what he did for the police department and other city agencies. But he learned he was wrong. The education bureaucracy and the teachers unions were too deeply entrenched. What's needed, he said, "is to go to a choice system and break up the monopoly."
Even if they believe it, "most Democrats can't say to you what I just said," he told the crowd. "They're not allowed to."
What's more, he said, there's not as much support even among Republicans for school choice as one might think. The GOP's electoral base is largely suburban, and suburban schools are doing just fine. Some suburban parents might even see school vouchers and other choice programs as a threat to their cushy status quo. These suburban Republicans simply aren't affected by what's happening to our urban schools.
"They're just not thinking of the good of the country in general," he said - taking a forceful swipe at the selfishness of a group of voters that he may soon be courting.
But he's not going to forget about choice, he said, because it's a civil-rights issue. He recalled when a private philanthropy offered low-income kids in New York City a chance at scholarships to private and parochial schools - a sort of private version of the public voucher program he'd like to see. There were 167,000 applications for a relative handful of spots. The rest of the kids were left stranded.
"I'll never forget that number," he said.
And conservatives are unlikely to forget his political courage.

...and says, "That's it. I'm officially on the Rudy bandwagon."

Well, he sure got our attention.

Vamos a Cuba is gone

edspresso — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:23:00 +0000

The controversial book is out the door:

A controversial children's book about Cuba -- and similar books from the same series about other countries -- will be removed from all Miami-Dade school libraries after a School Board vote Wednesday that split Hispanic and non-Hispanic members in an incendiary political atmosphere.

Some are suggesting the board overreached:

Legal experts said the board's action appeared to be unconstitutional. A 1982 Supreme Court case ruled that school boards have wide discretion to determine which books go on shelves, but ``that discretion may not be exercised in a narrowly partisan or political manner.''
The high court's ruling in that New York case, Board of Education v. Pico, cited an example of an inappropriate book-banning -- ``if an all-white school board, motivated by racial animus, decided to remove all books authored by blacks or advocating racial equality and integration.''
Courts typically give school boards more discretion in choosing instructional materials -- and Simon, the ACLU director, said he could envision ''a perfectly reasonable judgment being made'' to remove a book that was not considered age-appropriate.

However, he said, ``the court was adamant that books couldn't be removed because of content.''

As with so many aspects of public education, the battle continues over how much say parents get in the system. (By the way, is Simon hinting at a lawsuit?)

We're still waiting for Val Prieto, whose Edspresso guest column on this is here, to weigh in. In the meantime, check out this from Miami Herald edureporter Matthew Pinzur, who cowrote the article above. It's a very interesting take on the electoral dynamics at work here. (And you can only get it online--the paper didn't have space to run it, so it lives on in cyberspace. Viva la blogosphere!)

Union jumping overboard in New Orleans

edspresso — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:31:00 +0000

As the Crescent City looks to make a full transition into charters, the union is refusing to play ball:

With a little more than two weeks left on its contract with the United Teachers of New Orleans and no negotiations under way, the Orleans Parish School Board refused Wednesday to extend the current contract, suggesting collective bargaining might soon disappear at the only four public schools in the city where it is in effect.
(snip)
...the new landscape of public education in New Orleans has left little room for collective bargaining, with a combination of charters and state-takeover schools that are not subject to the union's agreement and can employ teachers on year-to-year contracts. Only the four schools still operated by the local district are subject to the agreement.

But here's the thing: it doesn't have to be this way.

During a break in the meeting, (union president Brenda) Mitchell said (school board member Una) Anderson approached her earlier in the day about the possibility of the union applying for charters to operate the district's remaining four schools.
But Mitchell said she would not be interested in that option because she thinks the four district schools should remain public schools in the classic sense.

The union isn't exactly being shut out of the new look of New Orleans schools; it's choosing to walk away. And it doesn't have to. The union's sister organization in New York is working with charters. So what's stopping UTNO?

Education news for Friday, June 16

Daily News — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:13:05 +0000

Louisiana charter schools win grant - The charter school movement, already bolstered after Hurricane Katrina devastated public schools in and around New Orleans, got another boost Monday: Federal officials announced a $23.9 million grant to create new charter schools in the state. (more)

Is there a second act for Jeb Bush? - Winding up his second term as Florida's governor, the other Bush says he doesn't want to run for president. Not everyone believes him. (more)

Assembly speaker warns Villaraigosa that school takeover plan is in serious trouble - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's attempt to take over the Los Angeles public schools is in serious jeopardy in the Legislature, according to one leading Democrat who urged the mayor Thursday to intervene in hopes of salvaging his plan. (more)

A school makeover in Mapleton - A school district outside Denver has galvanized students and parents with a daring experiment in public school choice. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

PA:Ed's fundraising lead called ominous for Swann - Big contributions from the state teachers union and the Democratic Governors Association has allowed Gov. Rendell to maintain a $10 million fundraising lead over Republican challenger Lynn Swann, even as Rendell spent another $2 million for TV ads. (more)

WSJ: Educational Supplements - (subscription required) Tutoring as a concept is, of course, nothing new. Where would the 19th-century novel be without pretty young governesses presiding over schoolrooms in country estates? Outside of literature, tutors have long been a fixture of both ends of the bell curve. (more)

New Iowa teachers will have to pass test - New elementary schoolteachers in Iowa will have to take a standardized test to receive a teaching license.This comes after officials from the U.S. Department of Education threatened to withhold millions of dollars in grants because the state’s licensing system did not include a content-based test. (more)

Too many special education students? - According to the Virginia Department of Education, more than two-thirds of Virginia's school divisions -- including several counties around Richmond -- have a disproportionately high number of minority students in certain areas of special education. (more)

DC Board approves alliance of public, charter school - The D.C. Board of Education approved a collaboration yesterday between an underenrolled public elementary school and a charter middle school that supporters praised as an innovative -- and unprecedented -- approach. (more)

SC primaries set up fall contests over schools - Sen. Tommy Moore drew a clear line toward the fall election Tuesday night when he declared that “I haven’t turned my back on public education; I’m not trying to dismantle public education.” (more)

LAUSD takeover plan run aground?

edspresso — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:24:56 +0000

California state lawmakers have told Antonio Villaraigosa that it's now or never:

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's attempt to take over the Los Angeles public schools is in serious jeopardy in the Legislature, according to one leading Democrat who urged the mayor Thursday to intervene in hopes of salvaging his plan.
Democrats and Republicans alike voiced doubt about Villaraigosa's quest to overhaul the Los Angeles Unified School District, the centerpiece of his year-old administration that has prompted aggressive lobbying campaigns by district leaders and the powerful state teachers union.

School Me! has more (although it hasn't consulted its highly-calibrated Predict-O-Meter^TM).

Katrina voucher program extended

edspresso — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:27:57 +0000

Yes, we're happy, and no, we're not the least bit ashamed of it.

Put yourself in the shoes of one of these children for a minute. Your home having been wiped out by Katrina, you're in an entirely different home in an entirely different city. You likely live in a cramped hotel or apartment, probably continually surrounded by a low level of mayhem.

Then you're expected to go to school? Where, precisely? The school up the road might not only have space, it may not even be standing anymore.

Even if you're diametrically opposed to any notion of school choice, please understand that these kids--157,000 of them--were thrown into a desperate situation, one in which many of them remain. Even Ted Kennedy, a longtime opponent of vouchers, broke down and co-sponsored the original program. And out of the havoc of Katrina, a new opportunity for these kids has arisen. Don't believe me? Ask them yourself.

So while this additional funding is good news, it's time for the states to step up. This program--the largest school choice program in history--is set to expire next year. If if something isn't done, these kids will be left stranded. Louisiana seems to be getting in gear, but the bottom line is that if state legislatures don't move in, these kids will be kicked out of school. Again.

Education news for Monday, June 19

Daily News — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 09:18:30 +0000

Pawlenty: Schools in 'silent crisis' - Gov. Tim Pawlenty says there's a "silent crisis" in high schools where too many teenagers lack motivation and that's why Minnesota needs to change the way its high schools are run. (more)

NYT: How schools pay a (very high) price for not teaching reading properly - Most parents are so relieved to find help for their children that they never look back at the public schools that failed them. (more)

Race still part of the equation for equal education - A half century after federal troops forced white schools in Little Rock, Ark., to accept black children, setting off a wave of forced integration across the South, a plan to make different races attend school together can still spark a fight. (more)

Dick Morris: Albany's school test - THE Legislature adjourns in the next few days, and the fate of education reform hangs in the balance. Under pressure from the teachers' union, lawmakers limited the number of charter schools in New York to 100, a cap that's now been reached. It's the special interests vs. the children - will legislators raise the cap? (more)

Under pressure: public schools need competition - Accountability produces results. Competition produces accountability. Isn't it time our traditional public schools were subject to the same competitive pressures private and charter schools face? (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

AZ budget compromise a credit to both sides - Gov. Janet Napolitano and Republican lawmakers were seemingly locked in another titanic clash of wills and widely disparate visions. Permanent tax cuts vs. increased spending on education. (more)

Assembly Speaker Warns Villaraigosa That School Takeover Plan Is in Serious Trouble - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's attempt to take over the Los Angeles public schools is in serious jeopardy in the Legislature, according to one leading Democrat who urged the mayor Thursday to intervene in hopes of salvaging his plan. (more)

More public schools providing free, high-quality pre-k programs - Lots of American children, at least one third, aren’t cutting it in kindergarten. They don’t know their letters and numbers, or even how to hold a book right side up. (more)

Ohio voucher program is in good shape - I read with interest the June 9 editorial "Make it work," on the new Ohio EdChoice Scholarship Program, and take this opportunity to provide information regarding our efforts to implement the program. (more)

Charter schools' oversight may shift - For the first time since the District's charter school movement began 10 years ago, D.C. Board of Education members are seriously considering the idea of giving up their authority to regulate the publicly funded and independently operated schools. (more)

UPDATE:

Charter school strives to open - Charter school reopening hinges on progress report. Board members of Chesapeake Science Point Charter School are confident that the school will get the approval of the Anne Arundel County school board this week. (more)

New Orleans on track to open charter schools - The nation's first charter-only school district is taking shape in New Orleans - an unprecedented opportunity to reinvent an urban district that was in an academic and financial sinkhole long before Hurricane Katrina. (more)

New chance for N. Orleans schools - Long before Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, the city's public schools were a disaster. (more)

Opinion: Offer more help to learn English -Some Iowa students who are learning English don't receive enough help. Leslie Mata was one of them. (more)

UPDATE:

Ed Week (subscription required):

Ohio Moves to Stem Abuse of New Vouchers - The Ohio Department of Education this month put school districts on notice that some parents have sought to game the state’s new voucher system for students in low-performing schools. (more)

Congress Approves Additional Hurricane Aid for Schools - Congress gave final approval last week to a measure that provides $235 million to schools educating students displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and extends the deadline for schools to decide how to spend the money. (more)

N.Y .C. Schools to Gain Freedom Under Empowerment Plan - Principals at more than 300 New York City schools could gain greater power over hiring, budgets, and curricula next school year in exchange for high performance in what Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is calling a dramatic step in his 4-year-old effort to improve the nation’s largest school district. (more)

Ladner's Hail Mary (Matthew Ladner)

mtigani — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

NOTE: This is the last in a series of posts responding to thoughts made by Eduwonk with respect to Florida's McKay Scholarship Program for special needs children. Earlier articles by Ladner may be found here, here and here. -ed. So, it is 4th and five from the 8-yard line with only seconds to go in the McKay debate. Both teams are exhausted from battling it out for four quarters. Eduwonk has a 6-point lead, but Ladner has the ball. Ladner makes a few last points before the whistle blows: -Eduwonk’s claims that severe disability kids should be over-represented in McKay, but private schools specializing in high-end disabilities have their cost structures determined by the law-suit/outsourcing system of the status-quo (i.e. they may be built around $100k per year, while the McKay offers only a maximum of $21k per year or so). Given that children with severe disabilities are being served by McKay, just not over-served, this seems like a small problem rather than a horrible flaw. -Eduwonk cites the special education meltdown in Washington D.C. as some sort of cautionary tale for McKay. I don’t get it. With 2,283 students costing the DCPS $118 million per year, the average tuition scored through the status-quo lawsuit system is a mind-boggling $51,000 per year. In the meantime, the entire state of Florida spent about $97,000,000 to give 15,910 students McKay Scholarships. In other words, Florida gave choice to about seven times as many students while spending 18% less. This doesn’t take into account all the litigation costs that DCPS must be enduring. Far from a cautionary tale against McKay, this is something DCPS should implement pronto to protect their budget from the deadly combination of rent-seeking lawyers and their own special education incompetence. The key improvements of McKay: no need for a lawsuit, students are entitled to take only the money allocated for them, rather than scoring some gigantic bounty. -Ultimately, McKay is about providing a more level playing field and giving the most disadvantaged and most poorly served group of students in the public education system a shot at attending a school that will focus on their needs. Any of us who are the parents of young children are in essence sitting behind the Rawlsian veil of ignorance - we don’t know whether our children will ultimately struggle with a disability or not. Education sophisticates like Andy and myself can probably navigate the horrible maze of special education if need be. We can access attorneys, etc. McKay simply makes the whole process easier and cuts everyone a square deal by giving them funds equal to the public school funding. -At the beginning of this debate, I describe McKay as the nation’s best voucher program. I still believe that. It serves terribly disadvantaged children, and does so efficiently, and their parents love the program. Sure feels like a game winning touchdown to me!

Dr. Matthew Ladner is a former director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice, and is presently vice president of research at the Goldwater Institute. A graduate of the University of Texas, he prays devoutly before a statue of St. Vincent in the direction of Mecca Austin five times a day.

Homeschooling: It's More Than an Education Alternative (Thomas Croom)

mtigani — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Every parent of a homeschooled child has a set of reasons why they decided to take the plunge and forever subject themselves to funny looks from strangers. I thought at first my reasons were anything but typical, but now I realize mine are the culmination of what would happen to any child not properly excised from public school at an early age. That being said, there are some atypical aspects to my story. My “child” is actually my wife’s 15-year-old nephew who I will call Jay. Jay is above average intelligence, having scored high, above average or very good on practice IQ tests and on PSAT’s. This may seem at first glance to merely place him the realm of above average with most kids, but he really has no foundational basis for his intelligence and testing abilities. The public education system will do anything to keep a student “on track” with his peers. And as I learned this year, staying “on track” has little to do with intellectual progress. I believe my nephew’s primary problem in school was a lack of focus, direction, discipline, challenge, expectations or responsibility (if those things can be summed up into one primary problem!) that collectively allowed him to fall behind his peers academically and intellectually, while maintaining his “proper” grade assignment with his age cohort. I believe problems in his private life have been leading to problems in his social life. As a teenager this is perfectly natural. However, a 15-year-old’s social life is essentially school, and when Jay’s personal problems started spilling into his academic and intellectual world, no barrier was there to separate the two. He was smart enough to realize no matter what his actions he took, he would ultimately be forgiven and have another chance to make things right, make up work, or receive extra credit in order to earn a passing grade and stay “on track.” Combined with his unique mental skills – he has a nearly photographic memory and near instant recall ability – he has all the tools necessary to ignore the academic aspects of school and, when needed, focus long enough to “memorize” information in a matter of minutes to pass any test. Those traits and tools, when mixed, lead to loads of free time in an environment where students are more interested in cell phones, text messaging, looks, poor speech, poor dress, outrageous behavior, sex, drugs, rule breaking, etc. This all, naturally, led to him having severe discipline problems and what would end, ultimately, in expulsion from public school. Compounding problems was the lack of attention, leadership, and accountability from his teachers and school administrators. Their actions, or lack of, gave this very smart kid all the nonverbal cues he needed to act out. Jay would tell us about how two of his teachers would put assignments on the board and frequently spend entire class periods on the Internet searching for music or cruising dating sites. In other classes, such as English, many stories and “assignments” were nothing more than read along with a tape-recorded narration! And, occasionally, movies were played instead of reading the actual text (this happened most often in biology). I shouldn’t lead you to believe that my wife and I were completely unaware of the situation or that every teacher acted in a manner to compound the problems. We tried to intervene as early as the first nine weeks of the school year. We communicated weekly with teachers and administrators. At one point we actually called the school to request they search Jay and his lockers, on a regular basis, for possessions we knew he was hiding at school to keep from us. The school administrators were more than willing to help and began a random search process that we hoped would encourage Jay to think twice about his actions. We appreciate the administration responding to our requests, but ultimately we didn’t get the support we needed, or had hoped for, from the teachers. We were told one week everything was fine and told the very next week he had failed to turn in assignments or complete tests … in the previous week! The teachers nearly always would respond to us incredulously when we would ask why they didn’t tell us when he was actually not doing the work. They would simply say they were too busy that week, or with everything going on they had other priorities. They were never too busy to respond to our emails, mind you – just to busy to tell us what was actually happening. At some point Jay simply quit going to school and after nearly two months we learned he had missed up to three weeks in several of his classes. Incredibly the school administration offered to put him on an attendance contract that required him to go to class and do his work. In return he would receive passing grades for both the current, and past, nine weeks which he had already failed. I thought it was ludicrous at the time because it reinforced the situation I described above, but I went along because our primary goals were to get him out of high school and on with life. Imagine our total lack of surprise to see this kid, who not only refuses to actually study outside of school, but had not actually been in some classes for nearly a month, immediately start posting A’s and B’s in all his subject course work. Although I didn’t know it yet, that would be the factor that helped me decide on the home school option. It wasn’t his failure that clued us in to his abilities and problems; it was the ease with which he passed every class after having practically no course work for months. After his expulsion we decided homeschool was the best option. My wife and I are both college-educated with multiple degrees each, fervent advocates of home education, school choice, parental responsibility and accountability in the school system. There was an element to putting our “money where our mouth is,” but ultimately it was about what’s best for Jay. We feel like he needs oversight just as much as he needs education, and we didn’t think he was receiving either in the “system.” Now that we are actually doing it, I can’t believe we didn’t just do this from the start! Thomas Croom is a political strategist and consultant in Tallahassee, FL. His blog, PEER Review FL (PRFL), is a syndicated conservative group blog with opinions and analysis of Florida politics, education, entertainment, and occasionally, religion.

Charter schools reach for the stars?

edspresso — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:00:00 +0000

This sounds pretty cool:

Imagine a math and science high school with lab classes conducted by staff from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Or a high school of the arts with access to the stages of the Pasadena Playhouse and the exhibits of the Huntington Library.

These and other innovative ideas are included in a new report set for release today that calls for a radical restructuring of the Pasadena public school system, which has been struggling with administrative and financial woes, falling enrollment and demographic flux.

The report suggests partnering with community institutions such as Caltech, the Norton Simon Museum and Huntington Hospital to create a system of magnet schools that would offer the three Rs but also specialize in distinctive subject areas such as health sciences, languages or college preparation.

Richard D. Kahlenberg, the report's author, said the goal is to achieve a greater socioeconomic mix in the public schools by offering unique educational settings to attract middle-income families who have largely abandoned public campuses in favor of private schools.

Our post-secondary network of colleges is first-rate. And lest we forget, JPL is running the Mars exploration mission. Why shouldn't we try to link all this cool stuff to K-12?

The rising tide in action

edspresso — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:40:00 +0000

Back in March, we noted a Massachusetts school district that took a much more sane response when faced with an exodus of children due to public school choice: figure out how to improve and keep the kids! Now we find that the district is walking the talk:

Students are opting out of the Pittsfield schools at a far greater rate than they are opting in, costing the city roughly $840,000 this year. Now, the School Committee must decide what to do about it.
The committee spent $24,000 on a study to determine why 233 children used the state's school-choice program to leave the district for schools in Lenox, Great Barrington and Williamstown, among others.
Pittsfield attracted just 65 students via school choice, creating a net loss of 168. Each student takes $5,000 in state funds with them, and special-education students leave with even more.
Mayor James M. Ruberto, who holds a seat on the seven-member School Committee, said the city must have a focused discussion on school choice, and hopes the study will be the starting point.
"This brings attention to the issue. We have data that is current and fresh, and more than just anecdotal. Will it help? Absolutely, because it will force us to look at the education system like parents look at the education system," Ruberto said. (emphasis added)

This happened because of school choice, not in spite of it. It's kind of obvious the administrators weren't taking this kind of approach before. But when kids (and, by extension, money) started flowing out of the district, suddenly the administrators were made to care. Go read the whole thing.

South Carolina and the Politics of School Choice (Anna Varghese Marcucio)

fguest — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 15:10:00 +0000

It's been just about one week since the South Carolina primaries, and we in the school choice community were hoping that the results would get us one step closer to finally, FINALLY improving school choice opportunities for the families who need it most. Unfortunately, the results gave us more of a mixed bag rather than a definitive referendum for choice.

The good news is that Governor Mark Sanford won the Republican Party's nomination to run for re-election. His margin of victory, however, wasn't overwhelming. Karen Floyd, candidate for state education superintendent, was able to escape the June 27th runoff by getting just about 50% of the vote despite the crowded field of candidates. School choice advocates are hopeful that the one-two punch that is Sanford and Floyd will be powerful enough to win the hearts and minds of traditional and non-traditional supporters of school choice. ("Non-traditional" being the keyword here. But I'll get to that in a second.)

While Sanford's and Floyd's primary victories were sweet, results from several state legislative races were a bit sour. Of the fourteen contested Republican House races, eleven incumbents won. So what's the problem? The problem is that many of them voted against school choice legislation in 2005 and again in 2006. So it was our hope that these guys would get booted and be replaced with some free-thinking, reform-minded candidates who could finally get a win for families who have yet to access real educational options. Unfortunately and not surpisingly, incumbents are virtually impossible to beat (unless you live in Pennsylvania).

Only four out of the above-referenced fourteen incumbents voted in favor of school choice. And Dan Bowen was the only pro-school choice candidate who successfully ousted an incumbent (Becky Martin). We also looked at a few open seats, and thankfully three of the four seats will have pro-school choice candidates on November's ballot. The race is on.

Which leads me be back to my point about non-traditional supporters. If we are to get anywhere in the Palmetto State, or any other state for that matter, we need to broaden our cadre of advocates. Having a reform-minded ("Republican") governor and legislature is a great start, but it's not good enough. Traditionally, Republicans have been more supportive of school choice than Democrats. However, we've seen a growing number of non-traditional supporters, i.e. minority Democrats, come onboard. And it's imperative that we get more onboard and keep them onboard. Why is it that the primary beneficiaries of school choice opportunities tend to be minority, low-income, urban dwellers, but their elected officials tend to be Democrats who consistently vote against school choice? We've been saying for years now that this can't be just a Republican issue. We've been saying for years that school choice isn't and shouldn't be partisan. But it still is. And we need to find a way to reach out to more people who can see that this is about parental options, making a dent in the achievement gap, opportunities for those who don't have the means to access them. It's not just about free-market opportunities or (as the teachers' unions would have voters believe) crippling the public education system. Until we start positioning school choice in a slightly different light (or know our audience), we'll continue to keep Democrats away and we'll continue to see some of our own allies, vulnerable Republicans, leave us for the decadence of union support.

Governor Sanford and Karen Floyd are true and vocal champions for school choice, and I hope they can use the momentum from last week's primaries to not only reinforce the minds of their most ardent supporters, but also develop new avenues of support from those who have access to, and can influence, non-traditional advocates. And maybe a couple years down the road we'll focus as heavily on the Democratic primaries as we have on those of the Republicans. And if that happens, the hope of real systemic reform for the kids who need it most will be fully realized.

Anna Varghese Marcucio is a director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice.

"Parental" opposition to LAUSD takeover

edspresso — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 18:34:22 +0000

According to this, parents are rising up against Villaraigosa's proposal:

Some L.A. Unified parents rallied outside Bob Hope Airport in Burbank Monday morning to urge Villaraigosa not to involve the state legislature.
Tenth-district PTA leader Scott Folsom said he doesn't want decisions to be made in "the back rooms of Sacramento."

At first this story piqued our interest. But wait a minute...the PTA?

Today the PTA supports all of the (NEA's) positions, including increased federal funding for education and opposition to independent charter schools, to vouchers and to tuition tax credits for private and religious schools. This "parent" group lobbies for teachers to spend less time in the classroom and to have fewer supervisory responsibilities like lunchroom duty. Moreover, they want a pay scale for teachers that is based on seniority, not merit. In November, the PTA even helped to defeat California's Proposition 74, which called for limiting teacher tenure by extending the probation period for new teachers from two to five years, a proposal designed to give administrators more time to weed out bad instructors.
With polls indicating that the union label is a liability with the public, an arrangement has developed whereby the NEA provides needed financial support for the PTA, which in turn bolsters union positions at the grass-roots level. As one union official put it: "[T]he PTA has credibility . . . we always use the PTA as a front."
Not only does the PTA support the NEA on issues that protect the public-school teachers' monopoly, the parent group also speaks up in favor of the NEA's more radical curriculum ideas, like sex-education programs that replace "don't" with "how to" and that propose the inclusion of a gay/lesbian unit starting as early as kindergarten.

In that case, color us skeptical.

Is there a pattern at work here?

edspresso — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 18:43:00 +0000

One New Hampshire father says the NCLB school transfer option has been terrific:

It’s been two years since Bill Chisholm chose to take his son Bobby out of Amherst Street School after he attended kindergarten there. Chisholm said he’s been pleased with the education his son has received at Charlotte Avenue School, where he will finish up the second grade this week.
“Since we’ve made that decision, we have not regretted it in the least,” said Chisholm, a parent of two.
That’s not to say, however, that Chisholm believes his son wouldn’t have gotten an equally good education at Amherst Street. But Chisholm, who moved to the city in 1998, said he and his wife, Lori, made the decision based on Amherst Street School’s status as a “school in need of improvement,” a result of the school’s insufficient test scores.

Oddly enough, few parents have taken advantage of the option. And once you drill down into the article, it becomes kind of obvious why:

As required by law, the school district sends out a letter in the summer, informing parents that they have a choice to pull their children out of their current schools and switch them to one of the schools selected by the district.

The letters, however, take a while to get to the point, something Chisholm said he noticed right away. The letter sent home to Amherst Street parents last summer doesn’t tell them they can change their child’s school until the second page.

Chisholm said some of the parents he talked to didn’t even know they had that option.
(snip)
The letter arrived in mid-August, meaning he had to scramble in time for the start of school. Chisholm said one of the first things he noticed at Charlotte Avenue was the increased level of parent participation.
“They have parent nights that are packed at Charlotte Ave.,” he said, compared to Amherst Street, where Chisholm said parent involvement was lower.
Educationally, however, Chisholm said he wouldn’t be able to really compare the two schools until his daughter, Danielle, enters kindergarten next year. Chisholm said he doesn’t believe his son was shortchanged at Amherst Street, educationally or otherwise.
“I live next door to a teacher at Amherst Street,” he said. “There’s no questioning the dedication of the folks over there.”
Chisholm said he didn’t feel like he got any interference when he expressed his interest about switching schools. The staff at Amherst Street “could not have been more helpful,” he said.
District administrators, on the other hand, made their feelings clear that they didn’t approve of school choice, said Chisholm, but they worked with him to make it happen. (emphasis added)

So the district waited to send out the letter, buried the transfer option information deep in the letter, and dug in their heels when he tried to exercise his rights? Wow, that sounds just like LAUSD and Compton!

What's interesting is that principals (er, these principals) seem far less opposed (or at least more neutral) to the transfer option than district administrators. In any event, it sounds like what has happened in Los Angeles and Compton is hardly contained to those two districts.

Education News for Tuesday, June 20

Daily News — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 09:51:47 +0000

Education reformers need a plan to address core concerns - Opinion: If you sit around a table with a bunch of business leaders and talk about public education in South Carolina, it's clear pretty quickly they think more needs to be done. (more)

Mayor, rivals renew LAUSD fight up north - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa returned to the Capitol on Monday in an effort to rescue his troubled strategy to overhaul Los Angeles Unified, even as school district leaders lobbied state lawmakers to kill the plan. (more)

Villaraigosa Reaches Out to State Teachers Union - Seeking to jump-start his stalled bid for control of the Los Angeles public schools, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa sought a compromise Monday with an old ally that has become his chief nemesis, the state's largest teachers union. (more)

Here's a Happy Birthday Present for Uncle Sam - Opinion: The No Child Left Behind law has had the unintended effect of pushing civics, social studies and history from local curriculums. (more)

Pride of Edmonton Isn't Just the Oilers - Opinion: Most Americans assume the pride of Edmonton, Canada, is its hockey team. But education policy experts know that the pride of Edmonton is its school district, which is fast becoming a model for school districts across the United States. (more)

Public money shouldn't go to private schools - Editorial: Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano's concessions on the vouchers put public money where it does not belong and, more important, move the public subsidy of private education several notches forward, to the detriment of public schools. (more)

70 Lima pupils apply for voucher program - As of the recent first application deadline, 2,568 Ohio pupils had enrolled in the program, representing about 5.5 percent of the 46,215 eligible pupils. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Governor, GOP leaders procure their pets - EV Tribune editorial -Just about every side gets a treat from this budget pie, assuming Napolitano doesn’t repeat last year’s theatrics and veto portions of the package. The governor fought successfully for nearly all her new spending priorities including completion of full-day kindergarten funding in two years instead of three and $100 million for teachers’ pay. (more)

Napolitano agrees to limit vouchers to private schools - Arizona's first-ever tuition voucher program will be limited to private schools, including parochial schools. (more)

Grad rate debate continues

edspresso — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:57:00 +0000

Eduwonk links to this EdWeek report on graduation rates. Maybe Dan Losen or Joydeep Roy will comment? We sure hope so!

Mystery unfolding in Baltimore?

edspresso — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:05:00 +0000

A lot of people are asking questions about this sudden resignation.

Baltimore's schools chief said yesterday that she will resign after steering Maryland's lowest-performing school system through three years of modest achievement gains amid clashes with the state government that have become an issue in the gubernatorial campaign.

Bonnie S. Copeland's resignation announcement came on the eve of the release of state test results for elementary and middle schools -- scores Maryland uses to judge whether schools are meeting the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind law or falling short. Year after year, Baltimore has had more schools labeled in need of improvement than any system in the state.

Yet Copeland and other Baltimore officials, including Mayor Martin O'Malley, a Democratic candidate for governor, have depicted the city schools as being on the rise. State officials, including Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R), have said the progress is not enough and have demanded shake-ups to improve lagging schools.

A few thoughts based on the article:

While Education Wonk is appropriately screaming bloody murder over the condition of Baltimore's public schools, I don't know that it's entirely fair to lay the blame for all of it completely on Copeland. The way the WaPo article tells it, she inherited a big mess when she took the job. For whatever it's worth, now the situation appears to merely be awful rather than a crisis.
Seems like electoral politics are definitely a factor. With candidates from both parties trying to outdo one another in calling Baltimore schools a crisis, she may have decided her job was on the line anyway.
On second thought, was Copeland dodging this bullet?

Copeland's announcement came less than three weeks after the school system's chief operating officer, Eric Letsinger, was fired amid questions about whether he tried to pay for a fishing trip with school funds.

So was Copeland a casualty of the gubernatorial election cycle, financial corruption, or her own job performance? Like I said--it's a mystery!

Teach for America growing

edspresso — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:17:00 +0000

Interesting article on the growing popularity of Teach for America.

It's the strongest job market in years for new college graduates, with salaries and perks rising accordingly. But one of the country's hottest recruiters this spring promised low wages, exhausting labor and just a brief break before work begins.
Teach for America is surging in popularity. At sites around the country, the 17-year-old nonprofit has begun training about 2,400 recent graduates for two-year teaching stints in disadvantaged schools, nearly triple the figure in 2000.
Nearly 19,000 college seniors applied; more than four in five were turned down. At the University of Notre Dame, Spelman College, Dartmouth College and Yale University, more than 10 percent of seniors applied.

But TFA definitely appears to have goals well beyond the classroom:

Some critics note less than one-third stay in the classroom after their two-year stints. But Teach for America says about two-thirds have remained involved in education, if not as teachers, then in research and policy. In many cases, some start charter schools, Teach for America said. The organization counts 10 alumni in elective office, including Natasha Kamrani, recently elected to Houston's school board. The goal is 100 alumni in public office by 2010.

It's worth pointing out that TFA has some far-reaching goals that extend beyond the classroom. As alternative education spreads by way of charters and other forms of school choice, is it possible we'll see something along these lines from other organizations? Assuming this hasn't already happened, what if KIPP decides to get some of their people into policy positions? That might be a good thing.

Education News for Wednesday, June 21

Daily News — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:11:07 +0000

Big city schools struggle with dropout rates - Students in a handful of big-city school districts have a less than 50-50 chance of graduating from high school with their peers, and a few cities graduate far fewer than half each spring, according to research released on Tuesday. (more)

US dropout rate high, but how high? - The national dropout rate is notoriously hard to pin down, and the latest effort to do so - showing alarmingly low graduation rates in some parts of America - is likely to intensify the statistics wars. (more)

Report on Dropouts Boosts Villaraigosa's School Takeover Effort - New study shows a 44% graduation rate for L.A. Unified. Villaraigosa refers to the report while promoting his school takeover effort. (more)

NYT: A third of U.S. dropouts never reach 10th grade - More than a third of high school dropouts across the nation leave school without ever going beyond the ninth grade, according to a report released here on Tuesday. (more)

Newark's school choices grow bleaker - As the school's sole guidance counselor, Ms. Ameiorsano hadr particular reason for gratitude. Every one of her 35 seniors had been accepted to college, the third year in a row she had posted a perfect record. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

Update:

The holes of a voucher system- School choice advocates really want one thing -- they want us to reimburse them for the costs of sending their kids to private schools, in many cases, religious schools. In this case we have a rant by Israel Teitelbaum, who is described as co-founder of a "grassroots" organization. In fact, in Morris County, there is little grassroots support for the breakup of our excellent public school system. (more)

Capturing Our Future - The tide may be running in favor of Democrats in much of the country - though President Bush's free-fall in the polls appears to have ended - but in Michigan, Governor Granholm, tabbed as a Democratic star only four years ago, is in deep trouble. (more)

Governor, GOP leaders procure their pets - We just have to pause for a moment to consider this startling fact from the proposed new state budget adopted early Saturday morning by the Arizona Legislature. (more)

Ohio Moves to Stem Abuse of New Vouchers- The Ohio Department of Education this month put school districts on notice that some parents have sought to game the state’s new voucher system for students in low-performing schools. (more)

Helping Children Move From Bad Schools to Good Ones - In May, the U.S. House of Representatives began hearings on the federal No Child Left Behind Act, with an eye to reauthorizing the legislation next year. Given the enormous gaps in achievement between income and racial groups, the central question is how the federal government can better support states in reaching the law’s lofty goal: making all public school children, poor and wealthy, black and white, “proficient” in reading and math by 2014. (more)

District pursues prekindergarten grant - The School Board Tuesday night approved an application for a grant for the program, which is expected to cost about $68,000. The money is awaiting the district's completed application for the program for 24 pupils, district officials said. And by adding a small amount of money, the district hopes to open the program to more than 24 students and offer morning and afternoon sessions. (more)

Graduation Rate Exception: Hispanics - Connecticut has one of the best high school graduation rates in the nation but lags behind when it comes to graduating Hispanic students, according to a national study released Tuesday. (more)Graduation rates tell of two Minnesotas- Fewer than half of Minnesota's black high school students end up getting their high school diplomas, according to a new study by Education Week magazine. That's a graduation rate for black students that's one of the lowest in the country, further evidence that a big achievement gap exists between Minnesota's white students and students of color. (more)

Graduation rates tell of two Minnesotas- Fewer than half of Minnesota's black high school students end up getting their high school diplomas, according to a new study by Education Week magazine. That's a graduation rate for black students that's one of the lowest in the country, further evidence that a big achievement gap exists between Minnesota's white students and students of color. (more)

Ed. Dept. to Weigh NCLB Subgroup Issues - The Department of Education plans to re-evaluate how many students’ test scores districts and schools will be permitted to exclude when determining whether they’ve met annual educational goals under the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Education dilemma pushes many outside -Now that they are expecting their first child, the Cuchras reluctantly are weighing a move to the suburbs, where they expect to find better public schools. (more)

School choice explodes in Arizona!

edspresso — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 17:51:00 +0000

After passing a corporate tax credit for disadvantaged children in our home base of Arizona earlier this year, we thought we'd had a great run this year in the Grand Canyon State.

But we got signals from the Legislature that more was possible. So we pushed. And here's what we've achieved:

Democrat Gov. Janet Napolitano allowed an increase to the corporate tax credit of $5 million, along with 20%-per-year growth, to pass into law without her signature.

Napolitano also had the opportunity to give choice scholarships to disabled children (along the lines of the McKay program) and--in a first-of-its-kind program--give foster children the opportunity to select better schools.

Before you read any further, you need to be sitting down.

Unlike the tax credit, the governor did not send those two bills over to the Secretary of State to go on the books without her signature.

She signed them into law. In the process, she became the first Democrat governor to sign new voucher legislation into law.

Lest we forget, this is the same governor who issued three vetoes in January on various tax credit programs (two of them within 24 hours of each other). And that's after her veto last year. Which makes this latest development all the more stunning.

We heartily commend Gov. Janet Napolitano for allowing the corporate tax credit increase and signing these new programs into law. Arizona parents just got more opportunities to choose better options for their children.

In the meantime, it's time to gear up for battle. The two new scholarship programs combined cost $5 million. That's around 0.13% (yes, slightly more than a tenth of a percent) of $3.8 billion in eduspending. But since any school choice program is too big, the unions have (predictably) made it clear they're going to sue.

No problem--we've been there before. See you in court!

LAUSD takeover plan takes shape

edspresso — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 19:49:00 +0000

School Me! is reporting that the takeover plan is starting to get some serious traction:

Mayor Villaraigosa made a rough sketch of his schools plan known this morning, announcing that he had reached a compromise with legislators and the teachers unions. The mayor's office reveals that Sen. Gloria Romero and Speaker Fabian Núñez will author the bill, which will be introduced in the California State Senate by the end of the week.

But as they say, the devil is in the details. For just a few of them, go read the whole thing.

Education News for Thursday, June 22

Daily News — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:55:32 +0000

Governor signs budget with tax savings, school dollars - Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano on Wednesday signed into law a budget that will create two small school voucher programs for disabled and adopted children. (more)

$10 billion budget is signed into law - In Arizona, school-choice advocates were ecstatic over the budget because it doubled the size of a new corporate tuition tax credit for private-school scholarships from $5 million to $10 million. The budget also included vouchers for parents of disabled and foster children for private-school education. (more)

The End is Nigh - Commentary: Arizona's new voucher program is sure to bring a court challenge from teacher unions, who say the state constitution bans the use of public funds for religious schools. (more)

Deal Puts Mayor on Verge of Major School Control - After tough negotiations with two forceful teachers unions, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa struck an agreement Wednesday that would give him significant sway over Los Angeles' troubled public schools but fall short of the total takeover he had sought. (more)

Kowtowing to Teachers' Unions - Opinion: The obstacles the teachers' union puts in the way of educational progress - opposition to merit-based pay, blind support for incompetent but tenured teachers, shackling principals with rigid work rules - doom our public schools to mediocrity. (more)

In School's Waning Days, a Focus on the Focus - A look at how the atmosphere of New York schools change with the end of school near. (more)

Teachers and Politicians … Puh-Lease Listen To Us - Opinion: I'm not sure why or how it got to be this way, but I'm frustrated that so much of public schools' time and energy is spent negotiating process-laden, adversarial relationships. (more)

Retired Math Teacher Concerned About Students Recently Promoted - Opinion: I know some of those promoted will have difficulty in high school because they really don't read well or they have great difficulty in math. (more)

Vouchers may cost city schools $350,000 - Springfield (Ohio) City Schools’ budget could suffer a significant financial blow from the state’s expanded school voucher program. (more)

Performance Gap on Tests Uneven for Black Students - Black students trail white students more in mathematics than in reading, especially in middle school grades, an analysis of Maryland test scores shows. But the achievement gap for Hispanic students is virtually the same in both academic subjects, a contrast that perplexed some school testing experts. (more)

'It's a great deal for our kids' - Opinion: Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa explains his compromise plan to reform L.A.' s public schools. (more)

Fixing L.A.'s schools - Editorial: Although it's not quite the victory that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa sought when he declared he wanted to take control of the massive Los Angeles Unified School District, the political compromise that the mayor worked out in Sacramento after marathon negotiations is a step in the right direction. However, there are still many critical questions left unanswered. First and foremost: Where's the accountability? (more)

Should No Child Left Behind be left behind? - Some Utah legislators disagree with the State Board of Education's position on reauthorization of the federal No Child Left Behind education reform act, and they want Utah's congressional delegation to know it. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Toe-Hold Strategies - Opinion: Clint Bolick, president of the Alliance for School Choice, explains how Democrats are coming around to school choice. (more)
School choice missing its goal - Four years into the school choice plan, Pinellas families remain reluctant partners in its main goal: to voluntarily integrate the school system. (more)

School choice missing its goal - Four years into the school choice plan, Pinellas families remain reluctant partners in its main goal: to voluntarily integrate the school system. (more)

Amen - New school choice measures usher in new era - Like millions of college kids, I was a fortunate recipient of a Pell grant. The Pell is a cash coupon you can use for tuition at colleges from ASU to Amherst. Yesterday Arizona made history by adopting similar programs for students in elementary, middle and high school. (more)

Interest grows in alternative education options - In a recent report on Choice in Education among Canadian provinces, Alberta ranked number one, providing the most choice in the country for education of its students. However, some parents and teachers right here in the province feel that’s not enough.(more)

Charter school conflict still hot - The dispute between the Visual and Performing Arts Charter School and Sacramento City Unified School District -- which oversees it – continues…(more)

Toe-Hold Strategies (Clint Bolick)

edspresso — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:25:00 +0000

When the Arizona legislature concludes its 2006 session in a few days, it will set a record for school-choice legislation by enacting four new or expanded programs allowing disadvantaged children to attend private schools. Even more remarkable: The programs were enacted in a state with a Democratic governor.

Yet Arizona is not an aberration. Already in 2006, a new Iowa corporate scholarship tax credit bill was signed into law by Gov. Tom Vilsack; and in Wisconsin, Gov. Jim Doyle signed a bill increasing the Milwaukee voucher program by 50%. Gov. Ed Rendell may expand Pennsylvania's corporate scholarship tax credit program, as he did last year. Messrs. Vilsack, Doyle and Rendell are all Democrats.

And last year, hell froze over: Sen. Ted Kennedy endorsed the inclusion of private schools in a rescue effort for over 300,000 children displaced from their schools by Hurricane Katrina. As a result, tens of thousands of kids are attending private schools using federal funds, amounting to the largest (albeit temporary) voucher program ever enacted. Before that, a voucher program for the District of Columbia was established with support from Democratic Mayor Anthony Williams and Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Joseph Lieberman.

What gives?

The Democrats are not exactly untethering themselves from the education establishment. While some (like Messrs. Williams and Lieberman) are converts to the idea of school choice, others (like Messrs. Kennedy, Vilsack, Doyle and Rendell) remain generally opposed.

Still, school choice has experienced unprecedented legislative success over the past two years for a few underlying reasons. First and foremost, the school choice movement is acting smarter. Instead of taking the unions and their massive resources head-on, advocates are adopting toe-hold strategies, pursuing small programs addressing specific problems that are difficult for politicians to oppose. The strategy makes sense from a moral perspective, for it focuses assistance on the neediest schoolchildren.

It also works politically, because choice begets choice: Once the Rubicon is crossed and legislators vote to adopt a school choice program--no matter how small or targeted--it becomes easier to support a new one, or expand the old one, the next time around. Hence, of the seven new school choice programs enacted last year, six were in states that already had school choice. The seventh was a program for disadvantaged children in Utah, which was expanded this year. At the same time, pro-school choice legislators are bargaining hard, exchanging increases in public school funding for private school choice.

Arizona offers a classic example. The state already has so much school choice--open public school enrollment, more charter schools per capita than any other state, individual scholarship tax credits--that it's more or less impossible for opponents to demonize it. So accepted and popular is the idea that when Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano proposed a full-day kindergarten public school program last year, she called it school choice because, after all, families could choose whether to enroll their children.

This year, the Republican legislature enacted a $5 million corporate tax credit to provide low-income children with scholarships to attend private schools. Ms. Napolitano vetoed it twice before allowing it to become law without her signature.

In a budget compromise between the governor and legislature reached last week, the corporate scholarship tax credit will be doubled this year, and increased by 20% each subsequent year, until it grows to nearly $21 million and 7,000 students by 2010. Additionally, Ms. Napolitano agreed to a voucher program for children with disabilities (similar to programs in Florida and Utah) and a first-of-its-kind voucher program for disadvantaged children in foster care.

In return, Republicans agreed to Ms. Napolitano's statewide full-day kindergarten program and salary increases for public school teachers. Both sides will now see which reforms work better: Pouring more money into public schools, or greater choice and competition. Fortunately, both parties are learning that the two approaches are not mutually exclusive.

Another factor inducing a more supportive or tolerant attitude toward school choice among Democrats is that they are running out of viable alternatives. The U.S. Department of Education reported recently that three million children are attending chronically failing schools--that is, schools that have failed to satisfy minimal state standards for at least six consecutive years.

Under the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act, children in schools failing to make adequate progress are entitled to transfer to better-performing public schools within the district. Trouble is, the number of children eligible to transfer vastly exceeds the number of seats available in the better public schools. In Los Angeles, for example, only two of every 1,000 children in failing schools have transferred.

For Democrats who truly believe in social justice, that presents a terrible dilemma: Either forcing children to remain in schools where they have little prospect for a bright future, or enlisting private schools in a rescue mission. Democrats are increasingly unwilling to forsake the neediest children.

For children in chronically failing schools, the day of reckoning is fast approaching: Legislation to add private school options to NCLB will be introduced next month. Democrats who supported private school relief for Katrina children to alleviate a disaster will be forced to confront the reality that New Orleans schools were in crisis long before the hurricane appeared--and so are millions of other children in inner cities across the nation.

Arizona is evidence of the possible. Although she could have allowed them to become law without her signature, as she did with the corporate scholarship tax credits, Gov. Napolitano yesterday became the first Democrat to sign new voucher programs into law. For children with disabilities or in foster care, how the bill became law is of little moment; but by affixing her imprimatur, Ms. Napolitano conveyed powerful symbolic evidence that the future for school choice is bright.

Clint Bolick is president of the Alliance for School Choice. This article previously appeared in Opinion Journal.

What's In a Name? (Robert Teegarden)

fguest — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 17:54:00 +0000

In a rather poignant moment in the movie, “Schindler’s List,” Isaac Stern, the captive Jewish comptroller of Oskar Schindler’s factory, shares a toast with Schindler in which he tries to explain that he knows what is his fate, he knows the inference in the language “final solution.” Stern says to Schindler, “Do we have to invent a whole new language (just to explain what’s going on)?” The presumed answer is “Yes.” And just like “Schindler’s List,” we have to invent a whole new language in education.

The words used by the Arizona Education Association president John Wright in the recent letter posted on their website about the newly-enacted state budget have been co-opted to suggest something they really don’t mean, and not designed to intend by their origins. And these are the people teaching in Arizona schools.

But first, what exactly is the Arizona Education Association? The title suggests a learning institution. It’s not. The use of the adjective "Arizona" suggests that all educators in the state, all professional pedagogues, are part of this association. They’re not. Maybe they’re all invited, but only some choose to participate. Not so. The picture on their website would suggest that kids are part of their association. They’re not. There’s an inference about students and how much they care. But do they really? Just who are they, then? It’s the government teachers’ union. Period. What’s their job? To get as much money and benefits for their members as possible. Do they really represent their students? To quote the famous Al Shanker, former head of the American Federation of Teachers, “When school children start paying union dues, that 's when I'll start representing the interests of school children.” Like Al Shanker, the association’s budget article doesn’t mention students once. That’s very telling.

The association says that they oppose “this budget and takes offense that it was negotiated in secrecy, voted on in the middle of the night, and that educators were not consulted about, or alerted to, the inclusion of vouchers.” I’m wondering if the business of the Legislature is any more secret than that of the teachers union? A lot of votes happen in the middle of the night; it’s the nature of the business. There were a lot of people in the seats observing the proceedings. Where were they? They say that “educators were not consulted.” Actually, a lot of educators were consulted. Maybe they just chose not to be involved. The letter goes on to complain that “they were not alerted.” The association has just as much access to government, in fact, probably more, than the average citizen. But finally they get down to brass tacks. What’s their big complaint? This budget includes the introduction of the “v” word, vouchers.

Let’s see, vouchers… I wonder what the big fear is? Early childhood vouchers are available for child care… I guess they’re okay. There are Pell Grants and Stafford loans to go to college. They’re vouchers. And from where I sit, the greatest educational public policy program of the 20th century was not the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of the Johnson era. It was the Montgomery G.I. Bill from 1944. Guess what? It was a voucher! What did it do? Well, G.I.s were given a chit, a voucher, and told “if you want to further yourself, go to the college program of your choice, give them this and you’re on your way.” No fuss, no muss. If you didn’t like the program, if it wasn’t up to your standards, if it didn’t fit, you moved. The resources (like your book bag or pencil case) went with you. So why do the K-12 government school people fear vouchers? They have worked for millions in the past. They’re working for millions of kids all across the United States right now. What’s wrong with Arizona?

They talk about the “lost revenue (due to) the continued expansion of corporate tax credits for private schools.” Clarification! These are NOT tax credits for private schools. These are tax credits for citizens, part of the public, to choose a school for their kids consistent with their values. These are tax credits for students, not institutions. “Lost revenue” presumes that this money out there (wherever "there" is) is already part of the state coffers; until it’s paid in taxes, it’s still private money. Who knows what other credits are out there that may yet negate those “lost revenues”?

The association summarizes by saying “Arizona could have made significant educational strides.” They’re finally RIGHT! That’s exactly what happened. Arizona did make significant educational strides this year. It said, “Folks, you have a choice in education just like you have in groceries, health care, and recreation.” The government doesn’t tell us that we must shop at the Piggly Wiggly market, the government doesn’t force us to go to the government hospital (God forbid!), and we are not compelled to only go to Lake Powell for family outings. We have some good old fashioned 1st Amendment freedoms to choose.

They moan that, “The tax cuts, along with the inclusion of tax credits, and vouchers jeopardize public education funding for the future and sabotage the potential to build a stronger Arizona.” But they forgot to mention that it brought about $260 million in new spending for schooling. Hmmm…

But then, finally, we get down to brass tacks. “Tax credits and vouchers violate AEA’s core principles and values.” But they still get it wrong. They go on to say, “Taxpayer dollars must not be used to subsidize private and religious schools. There is a fine line between expanding school choice and advancing a deliberate attack on public school funding. “There are no government funds used to “subsidize” any private or religious schools. If it’s a tax credit, it’s NOT GOVERNMENT MONEY. It belongs to a private citizen at that time. But even with a (dare I say it) voucher, the government doesn’t subsidize, support or enfranchise. Who gets the support? Kids, parents, families. They choose. They just didn’t choose you.

But not once did the Arizona Education Association talk about benefits to kids, to their students. Not once did they talk about plans to use this extraordinary windfall of $260 million new dollars to help overcome the woeful results of government schooling in the state. Not once did they talk about how to assist families in the education of their own children. Then why are they associated?

After all, that’s what I thought education was all about…

Robert Teegarden is director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice.

David versus the textbook

edspresso — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 18:57:00 +0000

The Vamos a Cuba flap is emblematic of a significant problem in the K-12 education system: the collision of competing values mixed with the lack of parental power in the system. In fact, it's sort of an offshoot of another highly contentious process: the selection of textbooks. Fortunately, an army of Davids could help unravel this mess.

This has been on my mind since I ran across it in May.

As younger, inexperienced teachers are thrown into classrooms to meet new federal standards, as much as 90 percent of the burden of instruction rests on textbooks, said Frank Wang, a former textbook publisher who left the field to teach mathematics at the University of Oklahoma.
And yet, few if any textbooks are ever subjected to independent field testing of whether they actually help students learn.
“This is where people miss the boat. They don’t realize how important the textbooks are,” Wang said. “We talk about vouchers and more teachers, but education is about the books. That’s where the content is.”
If America’s textbooks were systematically graded, Wang and other scholars say, they would fail abysmally.
American textbooks are both grotesquely bloated (so much so that some state legislatures are considering mandating lighter books to save students from back injuries) and light as a feather intellectually, flitting briefly over too many topics without examining any of them in detail. Worse, too many of them are pedagogically dishonest, so thoroughly massaged to mollify competing political and identity-group interests as to paint a startlingly misleading picture of America and its history.
Textbooks have become so bland and watered-down that they are “a scandal and an outrage,” the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a nonprofit education think tank in Washington, charged in a scathing report issued a year and a half ago.

So who's to blame for this situation?

The culprit is the system by which many states choose what books their students will read. Because the market is a small one, textbook publishers must cater to the whims of elected school board leaders in the biggest states that buy the most books: Texas and California, which control a third of the national market, the Association of American Publishers estimates.

Few elementary and high school textbook publishers “can afford to spend millions of dollars developing a textbook series and not have it adopted in these high-volume states,” the Fordham Institute said.

So the operating philosophy is one of “superficial compliance with the rules, not a focus on results,” Wang said.

Texas vs. California. Red state vs. blue state. Social conservatives vs. liberals. Even if you haven't read the article, you can probably guess where the discussion goes from there.

Here's the thing, though: with tens of millions of school kids out there, is the market for textbooks really that small? Of course not; were the process liberalized, the market would prove to be massive. But the actual purchasers of said textbooks--state committees--artificially turn the market into a de facto oligopoly. Indeed, the article (page 2) suggests that the solution is indeed found in flattening the whole process:

Wang, Ravitch and others have what they call a radical proposal: do away with the approval process altogether and let teachers and local school officials choose their own books.
“The system is resistant to the entrepreneurial spirit,” Wang said. “There isn’t a mechanism for encouraging innovation in education because of systems like this adoption process.”

But there may be signs of change on the horizon: hordes of computer-wielding educators! Enter Norm Nemrow. Starting in the early 1980s, the master's-level accountant began teaching college-level accounting as a pastime.

In 1982 Nemrow helped form a company; he and his partners bought, managed, and sold more than 11,000 apartment units before selling their business in 1985. Having achieved some financial independence, he struggled to find his next pursuit. "I played some golf, taught early morning seminary, took art classes, built a home, and tried some other projects but was basically unfulfilled."
So in 1991 Nemrow and his wife, Cindy, moved their family to Provo, and he began to "pester" K. Fred Skousen (then dean of the Marriott School) and W. Steve Albrecht (then director of the School of Accountancy) for a chance to teach (at Brigham Young University).
"They didn't seem too interested in me until I offered to do it as a volunteer," Nemrow says with a smile. "You know how budget conscious accountants can be." He now teaches Accounting Principles, the same course he taught as a graduate student, to about 1,200 students each semester. A popular professor, he has twice been voted Overall Best Teacher by the Student Alumni Association. On the BYU student-produced Web site StudentReviews.com, one student calls Nemrow "the best teacher I had at BYU by far. Going to his class was a treat, and two years later I remember everything."

What's so special about Nemrow's class? Saying that textbooks "are going to be obsolete in a number of years," he built his entire curriculum himself.

In his Accounting 200 class, Nemrow uses a CD instead of a textbook. Nemrow started using the CD format for his classes during Spring Term.
"I wanted to create a more effective and efficient way to teach the course," Nemrow said.
He said 75 percent of his Spring/Summer students prefer the way the class is done with the CD, rather than the traditional format.

Nemrow is presently on hiatus, so I verified this with Earl Stice, the BYU professor presently looking after Nemrow's project: The six-disc set of CDs is sold at the campus bookstore for $65. A new accounting textbook costs $130. As they say, do the math. More on his against-the-grain class here:

Norm Nemrow's sixth-grade son recently approached him to ask for help with pre-algebra homework. Nemrow, a Marriott School accounting professor, scanned his son's pre-algebra textbook in hopes of refreshing his memory. Thinking the text explanations weren't very clear, Nemrow asked his son if the teacher had demonstrated how to work the problems. "Yes," his son said. "But I can't remember how she did it."

This incident reinforced Nemrow's strong-held belief in the value of his latest teaching innovation: introductory accounting on CD-ROM. This approach combines an audio-video lecture presentation with synchronized graphics allowing students to control the learning process. "With a simple mouse-click, students can listen as often as is necessary to learn and reinforce important concepts. There isn't always time in class to repeat material for students who need assistance," Nemrow said. "But this way, students can stop the CD, slow down, take notes, rewind—whatever they need to fully understand the lecture concept presented."

In other words, it's superior technology, especially for the computerized world of accounting.

How have Nemrow's peers reacted to his outside-the-box approach? By all accounts, they can't stand it. It's too new, too different, too radical. But as Nemrow points out, this is where everything is headed. Besides, he's pretty much untouchable. As badly as Nemrow's colleagues might love to take him out behind the woodshed, his runaway popularity among students likely gives him a lot of flexibility with school administrators.

Rest assured, the digital invasion is the next move. Many textbooks already include a CD-ROM of some sort to supplement the main text. And in three classes I took in college, at least one of the required books--in some cases, the main book--was a customized course packet sold at a particular bookstore, generally costing around $30. It wouldn't be a big leap at all for a teacher to merely burn all that material to CD-ROM. Better yet, what if all that content were simply put on the school's server for students to download?

In short, the Internet now threatens yet another Big Media behemoth. But that's the university. Could this work for K-12--grade school teachers building their own digital textbooks? Aside from the fact that the arrival of widespread digital media is pretty much unavoidable, I say such an approach--ground-floor control over content and curriculum fused to the ultracheap delivery means of digital media--would allow educators and parents alike to neatly sidestep the red-vs.-blue nonsense that appears to have hijacked the textbook industry. California could teach six-year-olds about safe sex, Texas could teach intelligent design, and everybody else could figure out something in between.

And I think there's something more fundamental driving this sort of thing. What led Nemrow to spearhead this sort of thing? Because he saw a need to fill, because he saw something that could be done better--ultimately, because he enjoys what he does. (In fact, he loves it so much he donates his salary back to the school each year. So forget untouchable--he's dang near bulletproof.) As Glenn "InstaPundit" Reynolds said in An Army of Davids (p. 92), "Beware the people who are having fun competing with you!" I daresay at least some educators would, well, have some fun getting to design their own curricula. And if that happens, that curricula is very likely to be better.

I further think this would go a long way to separating the wheat from the chaff where teachers are concerned. What better way is there to get inside a teacher's head, to really find out how well a teacher knows his or her core subject(s), than to see what that teacher proposes to teach his or her classes? Could this turn out to be a reliable metric for reforms like merit pay?

Of course, there are all sorts of issues here I haven't touched on. In particular, copyright issues would get awfully hairy (after all, who owns knowledge?). Furthermore, this definitely factors into the national standards debate. And the self-driven CD courses taught at a university are pretty much out of the question for third-graders. But the means by which Ravitch's proposed solution could come to fruition are, in fact, already here. Homeschoolers have been doing this sort of thing for a while now. Why should traditional schools be excluded?

(For more on Nemrow's course go here, here and, for a contrarian view, here.)

Meanwhile, back in California: LAUSD takeover roundup

edspresso — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:14:00 +0000

While we celebrated yesterday, Villaraigosa put the finishing touches on a deal with the unions and legislators for his takeover plan. Here's a rundown...

Very lengthy LA Times here:

After tough negotiations with two forceful teachers unions, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa struck an agreement Wednesday that would give him significant sway over Los Angeles' troubled public schools but fall short of the total takeover he had sought.
Under a compromise expected to be drafted by Friday and considered by the Legislature next week, Villaraigosa would effectively gain veto power over the selection of the superintendent, and that official would assume most budget and contracting authority now handled by the elected Board of Education, the mayor's aides said.
Teachers and principals, meanwhile, would have new authority to shape classroom instruction, loosening the district's reins on how best to teach — a change the union has vociferously sought for years.
The current seven-member Los Angeles Unified School District board, which the mayor has accused of micro-management, would lose virtually all of its authority to oversee billions of dollars in contracts and make line-by-line changes in the district's $7.4-billion operating budget.
District officials attacked the agreement as a late-night, back-room deal that would harm the district, and they discussed the possibility of litigation.

This whole thing has made the LA Times an interesting study in contrasts. While Villaraigosa is given some op-ed page real estate to tout the compromise, the editorial board has soured on him--just two days after applauding the move. In an "I told you so" moment, School Me! says that lots of people are going to fight this once the initial euphoria wears off. Right on cue, the LA Daily News offers some rather qualified praise and goes a bit deeper in describing opposition to the deal:

Blindsided by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's announcement of proposed school-reform legislation, angry LAUSD board members, the superintendent and parents vowed to fight it and said too many questions are unanswered.
Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Roy Romer said an outline of the proposed legislation makes it unclear whether his successor would report to the L.A. mayor, the school board or a council of mayors.
"Who's going to be the person in control?" asked Romer, who plans to leave his post in the fall.
Board member Jon Lauritzen echoed Romer's concern: "No one can serve two masters," he said.
School board members vowed to fight the legislation and seek a productive partnership with the mayor, union members, teachers and parents.
"I wouldn't have expected anything less from a mayor who believes he's the education guru, the mayor whose education was saved when he came to a public school, a mayor who sends his kids to private schools," said Julie Korenstein, who has served on the school board for 20 years.
"Mr. Mayor, what are your grandiose plans for curing the ills you profess? Are you going to play with the lives of 727,000 students so you can become the next governor?
"I will not go down without a massive fight."
Even though the mayor fell short of his goal of full control of the LAUSD, a group of parents said they would fight to block the scaled-down version being proposed.
"What concerns us is that none of the parents were ever talked to," said Scott Folsom, president of the 10th District Parent, Teacher, Student Association. "... All we are asking for is a serious discussion between the mayor, the school district and parents to discuss what is in the best interests of the children of the district."

Also, check out this interesting nugget from the Sacramento Bee:

And Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who typically does not take positions on bills before they reach his desk, said he would sign this one -- even before details have been worked out.
In a written statement, he praised Villaraigosa's "bold leadership" and said the legislation "is exactly what needs to be done."

It seems like this thing has an awful lot of political momentum right now. The question is whether it will retain that momentum in the face of what promises to be a pitched battle against the administration and parents.

Education News for Friday, June 23

Daily News — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:06:35 +0000

Attacks aside, school choice is the right choice - AZ Rep. Steve Yarbrough: I am indeed a supporter of school choice. I am also a product of and strong supporter of public education, which is the key to the future of more than 80 percent of our current students. (more)

Romer: Antonio sold out - The powerful teachers union in the Los Angeles Unified School District would get unprecedented control over what kids are taught and how schools are run under a deal brokered by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to save his reform plan, LAUSD Superintendent Roy Romer charged Thursday. (more)

Chaos creates opportunities - David Kirkpatrick from the U.S. Freedom Foundation writes about New Orleans schools. (more)

AZ Legislature wraps with something for everyone - The budget includes $2.5 million each for education vouchers for two programs, one that allows disabled children to attend the school of their choice at state expense, and the other providing the same benefit to former foster children who have been adopted. This sets an uncomfortable precedent of spending public dollars for private and parochial school tuition, but ended up being a bargaining chip. (more)

Ohio charter schools oversight criticized - State education officials handed out millions in federal dollars to charter schools, but failed to have an effective system in place to ensure that the money was being spent properly, Auditor Betty Montgomery said Thursday. (more)

Swann details his plan to boost education in PA - Lynn Swann, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, yesterday laid out his education platform in the most detailed fashion so far, pledging to double funding for the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program and to earmark the additional money for low-achieving schools. (more)

NY unions seek joint bargaining with city - Sixteen labor unions that represent about half of New York City's municipal work force have formed a coalition to bargain on wages and benefits, a move intended to strengthen their leverage and speed negotiations. (more)

Update:

Attacks aside, school choice is the right choice – I was disappointed but not surprised to read on the very first day of the campaign that Donna Wallace chose to initiate a personal attack on me, my work and my ethics ("Use state tax dollars for underfunded public schools," My Turn, June 15). Mark Pentz, I understand a little bit of how you must feel. (more)

Swann details his program for boosting education in Pa - Lynn Swann, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, yesterday laid out his education platform in the most detailed fashion so far, pledging to double funding for the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program and to earmark the additional money for low-achieving schools. (more)

Educators praised for progress -State Superintendent of Education Inez Tenenbaum praised educators Wednesday for making "remarkable" improvements in South Carolina's schools, but she also warned that challenges such as combating poverty, boosting the graduation rate and preparing students for a global economy remain. (more)

School choice past and future

edspresso — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 19:47:00 +0000

Just spotted this: a recording of Robert Enlow of the Friedman Foundation speaking on the recent history of school choice programs across the nation. Pretty nifty to see--er, hear--where we've come from and where we're headed.

Kicking the Ed School Blues ("John Dewey")

mtigani — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

The fan mail is rolling in and paparazzi are following me to work every day despite the great lengths to which I’ve gone to protect my identity. Some people are telling me ed school is just a minor annoyance, but once the door to my classroom is closed, the class is mine to do with as I wish. Others tell me pick a school where there are no “math police” who make sure I teach the program du jour. Of all the comments, two in particular stand out. One from a friend who asked if I thought I was making a difference with this little venture into blog space. The other asked whether I thought I’d be making a difference teaching in a system that prevents effective math teaching in a world infiltrated by NSF, NCTM/ed school dogma and math police. I don’t know the answer to the first question. But I’m in ed school, where there are no wrong answers. So here goes. Will this little blog venture make a difference? Well, what I do know is that ed schools—without benefit of blogs or internet cafés—have made a huge difference in this country. A bad one. Therefore, the more people informed of the debate the better, particularly those on the fence. This brings up the second question: if the seed pod infiltration is so effective (see my last letter for what this metaphor means) what is the chance for change with only a few enlightened teachers battling the math police? My answer to the second question is based on the fact that I’ve never had an original idea in my life. Being part of the baby boomer generation means that whatever so-called original idea is in my head is also in the heads of thousands of other people. Which means that many people getting ready to retire and who have science or math backgrounds may also be looking into teaching. There’s strength in numbers. (No pun or content intended.) If my class at ed school is any indication, four of the five future math teachers in the room were of my vintage. And if it’s any consolation, I believe that four out of the five future math teachers tended to ignore what was taught. (I think this might extend to other disciplines as well). In the class I just took, the professor one night espoused the ubiquitous ed school philosophy that one of the biggest hurdles to conquer in teaching math is students’ math anxiety. He provided an example. He handed out a problem that asked in what position was a table held while moved, if it produced a scratch on the floor that was in a northeasterly direction? The problem could have many answers, a concept beloved by ed school types who believe that problems with only one correct answer limit students’ critical thinking skills. “Open-ended” problems with many answers, on the other hand, reduce math anxiety because it relieves the pressure to produce THE correct answer. Students are thus liberated to be creative and use “higher order thinking skills”. I pointed out that the problem was not so much open-ended as it was ill-posed. “Yes, it is ill-posed,” he agreed. There were no arguments in this class; only insights, discussions, and agreement. This is ed school: there are no wrong answers. Just the “greater truth” which will eventually prevail. No such epiphanies occurred that night, however. One student said that the scratch-on-the-floor problem actually made her more anxious because she wasn’t sure what she was doing wrong. The teacher said “Yes, I agree,” and concluded that perhaps the best way is to tell the students at the outset that there is more than one right answer. I suggested asking the students what additional information should be provided to make the problem well defined. “I agree,” he agreed again. He talked some more about math anxiety. The ed school of thought holds that if you just relax and get over the anxiety, the greater truth will prevail. Not a word about how inadequate preparation may play a role. “At-risk” students are particularly vulnerable to math anxiety according to ed school wisdom. One instructor the professor knew was quite good with such students. He told how she gave each student a name having to do with a concept in algebra. One student was called “perfect square trinomial”, another was “binomial”, and so forth. (They may have had name tags). Their task was to learn how each of them “related” to one another, thus forcing them to learn what these terms meant. Which would be great if the only goal of an algebra class were to master vocabulary and get in touch with one’s inner polynomial. Perhaps this is all that is expected of these at-risk students, since they seem to have different “learning styles” than the rest of us. There were no comments from the class as the professor told this tale. The future math teachers said nothing and showed no emotion, not even a grimace. In the papers I wrote for the class, I took on many of the beliefs about how best to teach math. I don’t know what the others said. I only know the professor said he agreed with me. I’m trying to enjoy this illusion while it lasts. In eternal agreement, I sincerely and faithfully remain, John Dewey

More university involvement in K-12

edspresso — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:36:13 +0000

We recently reported that high schools may start to resemble universities before long. More evidence of this can be found here:

Now that Wildcat Secondary School has a building and a staff, it's ready for the most important part: students.
Enrollment has begun for the only charter school in Arizona sponsored by a state university, in this case the University of Arizona. Richard Reyes, the charter school's director, said they're looking for 160 sixth- and seventh-grade students in the first year.
"We wanted smaller class sizes," he said. "We didn't want it to be too big. It's more personalized instruction."
The Wildcat School, one of four charters opening in Tucson this fall and one of 92 in the city, will be primarily a math and science academy. And though it is open to any Tucson resident and is free, the school's application says a student's parents must not be a graduate of a four-year university.
(snip)
Arizona State University also is getting into the charter school act. Officials there are setting up plans for four charter campuses to begin operations in 2007 and phase in through 2009. The schools' goals haven't been fully formed yet, but each campus will correspond to one of ASU's four campuses, said Maggie Mangini, ASU's director of university-school partnerships.
Starting next month, the staff will begin looking for models to follow, including the Wildcat School and a charter school at the Minneapolis Zoo, she said.

And this is pretty neat:

Val Griffin, a mother of three, had the future of her children — and her country — in mind when she signed her son and daughter up for what few people would consider a lighthearted summer activity.
"I wish they'd go to school all year," Griffin said as she picked the kids up from PREP, the Prefreshman Engineering Program at the University of Texas at San Antonio. "So many countries are so far ahead of us with technology."
The eight-week summer program helps middle school students get a leg up on math, science and engineering, and it's just the kind of activity that New York teacher William White would have applauded.
In 1906, White tested his students' math skills before and after summer vacation. He found they'd lost speed and accuracy after the long break and, with that, discovery launched the fear of so-called "summer learning loss" or "summer slide."
That's the term educators use for the brain drain students can suffer after a summer spent vegetating in front of the television or hanging out at the pool.

More on the program here. It seems there's a clear trend of connecting secondary schools with the university system, which overall is a very good thing.

Education News for Monday, June 26

Daily News — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:07:24 +0000

Study casts doubt on "boy crisis" - Jay Mathews from the Washington Post writes about the NAEP findings that over the past three decades, boys' test scores are mostly up, more boys are going to college and more are getting bachelor's degrees. (more)

The wrong way to argue charter schools - The undercard of the marquee fight over whether or not to lift New York's cap on charter schools is a vitally important battle over how to define these schools' success. (more)

PA: "Buts" are hurdles for charter schools - Though some education reformers tout testing as a way to evaluate success, for some students the real test is simply surviving to the next day. The situation is not hopeless, however. Charter schools in Philadelphia and across the commonwealth have created a haven for students that allow the fundamental need of safety to be met - setting the stage for learning. (more)

Utah PAC fueled with out of state funds - An infusion of out-of-state money is raising the profile and influence of the Utah political action committee Parents for Choice. Organized five years ago, the advocacy group for private-school vouchers and tuition tax credits has given $64,000 to 21 state Legislature candidates this year. (more)

UPDATE:

Charter schools increasingly popular with parents - A decade ago, charter schools existed largely on the fringes. Many were startups operating out of rented church basements -- alternatives to failing urban schools that struggled to teach the basics. (more)

Education-linked PACs active in races- A pair of education-related political action committees are active in legislative primary races this year, utilizing telephone banks and mailing lists as well as making contributions to favored candidates. (more)

School vouchers deal angers some - Nearly half a billion dollars. Full-day kindergarten in every school. Raises for teachers. Millions more for special education funding. (more)

Residency rule's demerits at least merit a discussion- It's hard to spot the St. Francis-Milwaukee boundary as it splits hedges on the southeast side. You have to inspect the stamp in the sidewalk concrete to know which side you're on. (more)

Outsiders fund 'school choice' PAC- Parents for Choice in Education has a grass-roots image and a name ready-made for focus groups…(more)

Other Voices: Increase school choice in Virginia - Public education is on the verge of collapse in this country. Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft Corp., last summer told a summit meeting of the nation's governors that America's high schools are obsolete and unable to teach students what they need to survive in today's global marketplace and that creative new ideas are needed to meet these challenges. (more)

School's Out, but Few Are Cheering at Doomed St. Columba - As one boy walked out the door of St. Columba school in Chelsea yesterday, his cheeks were streaked with tears. Another student's grandmother fell quiet and turned away from the building to keep from crying. On the sidewalk, parting handshakes between teachers and parents were somber. (more)

White House Proposes National Opportunity Scholarship Initiative - This spring, the Bush administration proposed an initiative to give thousands of underprivileged children in failing public schools the option to attend private school. A report from the U.S. Department of Education released in February found more than 2,100 public schools have failed to meet adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) for five or more years. (more)

Statistics Released on Second Year of D.C. Vouchers - The official evaluation team for the D.C. voucher program released its descriptive report for the program's second year in May. According to "Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Second Year Report on Participation," by Georgetown University's Patrick Wolf, Westat's Babette Gutmann, and Chesapeake Research Associates' Michael Puma. (More)

Boys Behind in Graduation Rates: Study - A wide gender gap in high school graduation rates is most pronounced among minorities in large urban school districts, according to a report from the Manhattan Institute. (more)

Clint's WSJ column and LAUSD

edspresso — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 14:36:00 +0000

Quite a few edublogs responded to Clint's recent WSJ article. One of those responses connects nicely into events currently unfolding in California.

While Eduwonk has a see-I-told-you-so moment--maybe he and Matt Ladner will go another round?--Alexander Russo points this out:

The thing that jumps out at me from Clint Bolick's gleeful WSJ piece about recent progress on vouchers ('Toe-Hold Strategies') isn't so much that some state and federal Dems are crossing over and supporting vouchers (in DC, for Katrina) or that voucher advocates have adopted a "toe-hold" strategy to get around powerful teachers unions.
Rather it's that Democrats and school officials have done such a bad job pushing for public school choice in NCLB and elsewhere that they've created room for voucher advocates to jump in. Or, as Bolick puts it, they're "running out of viable alternatives." No big surprise, then, that Dems are going to have to consider voucher options when NCLB gets reauthorized. (emphasis added)

What first caught my attention about this is how cleanly it circles back to something Eduwonk keeps banging on about:

...the idea that we restrict the choices that parents have in the alleged service of the greater good just doesn't fly in a society like ours. One inescapable theme of the last 40 years of school reform is that if unsatisfied parents can walk, one way or another, they will. What's different now is that low-income families can increasingly walk through ideas like vouchers. That ought to discomfort public school supporters more than it apparently does.

In other words, stonewalling choice options is politically unwise, to say the least. Which is at least one reason why LAUSD and Compton Unified School District would do well to change course.

When we filed our administrative action against those two districts in March, hundreds of thousands of children in both districts were (and remain) eligible to transfer to better schools. In L.A., a whopping 527 students--0.2%--had transferred. In Compton, none--none--have done so. To understate the matter, that would tend to indicate that parents have not been properly informed of their options under NCLB, which that law requires schools to do.

Predictably, the districts sloughed us off, in the process disregarding statements by Margaret Spellings both directly and indirectly on the situation. From here, we'll continue to pursue all legal options, so this isn't over by a long shot. But what is vital to consider is that the playing field in Los Angeles has been radically altered by way of Villaraigosa's takeover plan. With the deal recently cobbled together (our rundown is here, but of course School Me! follows every move of this thing), the opposition is starting to take shape. The LA Times is reporting that the plan could bring the union an intramural fistfight:

Villaraigosa's elaborate plan to take control of the Los Angeles Unified School District grabbed the attention of rank-and-file teachers Thursday, the day after it was announced. While some applauded it, many disagreed with him — and their own union leadership.
In close consultation with teachers unions, the mayor agreed this week as part of a sweeping reform plan to let schools choose their own instructional methods and effectively do away with top-down centralized programs.
Villaraigosa said this week that his plan, which the Legislature is expected to consider soon, would spawn "the kind of environment that really can be an incubator for great ideas and success."
United Teachers Los Angeles has long chafed under what it considers overly rigid mandates from the district's top officials, and the union has wanted more leeway for teachers to decide what works best at their schools.
But teachers and principals at several L.A. Unified campuses said the mayor's proposal could ravage districtwide reading and math programs that they say have brought continuity to thousands of classrooms and helped drive up standardized test scores over the last six years.

Furthermore, it sounds like parents may be gearing up to oppose the move. From the LA Daily News:

Even though the mayor fell short of his goal of full control of the LAUSD, a group of parents said they would fight to block the scaled-down version being proposed.
"What concerns us is that none of the parents were ever talked to," said Scott Folsom, president of the 10th District Parent, Teacher, Student Association. "... All we are asking for is a serious discussion between the mayor, the school district and parents to discuss what is in the best interests of the children of the district."

Folsom's edubio reveals an individual awfully integrated into the LAUSD machinery. His blog reflects an awful lot of opposition to the takeover. Upshot: this is the last parent Villaraigosa wants opposing him. If Folsom is able to gather enough likeminded parents and teachers, the takeover plan could hit a rather nasty roadblock.

In this context, LAUSD's response to our administrative action is all the more laughable. From what parents are saying, they haven't been told about much of anything, either by the district in terms of their NCLB rights or by City Hall concerning the takeover plan. And some would argue this MO of entirely shutting parents out of the process fits LAUSD--the bloated, labyrinthine bureaucratic nightmare that is the nation's second-largest school district--like a glove.

So here's some unsolicited advice for Villaraigosa. You've managed to build some political momentum for your takeover. Good for you. But if you don't act fast, you could face the likes of Folsom leading a mob of angry parents. So bring him and other parents to the table. And do it very publicly, with lots of fanfare, press conferences and photo-ops. It's about time parents were consulted--about what they as parents want for their children, what Villaraigosa wants to make happen, and what their legal options are. If you don't, those parents--who are increasingly empowered via school choice--will have little reason to believe LAUSD under you will be any different than LAUSD under the school board.

UPDATE: In a lengthy must-read column, S chool Me!'s Bob Sipchen shares the following anecdote to underscore why he's pessimistic on the Villaraigosa deal.

Also known as "Scarecrow," Deshawn is a Fremont High senior I wrote about a few weeks back after he finally, and with great joy, passed the state's high school exit exam. Following an interview, we had decided to grab a bite. As we left the crowded apartment he shares with his sister and her children, he mentioned that he might want to be a chef someday. Sizzler was his idea of a fancy joint. I decided The Times could treat him to a better steak.
(United Teachers Los Angeles president A.J. Duffy and Villaraigosa chief of staff Robin Kramer) were seated in the front room as we walked in, engaging in one of the hundreds of meetings, planned or serendipitous, required to make any big political deal coalesce. I understand.
I stopped to say hi, and introduced the big kid in baggy clothes beside me. The maitre d' then led us to the far reaches of the restaurant, where he seated us next to a shaved-head dude who was so drunk or drugged that he toppled onto us as he tried to stand. The service stank.
Deshawn understood what was happening, and savored his steak anyway. My enjoyment was undermined by the symbolism. Being treated as if you don't count, after all, is what too many L.A. Unified students have come to expect.

Arizona voucher reax

edspresso — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:51:00 +0000

The East Valley Tribune gets reaction on Arizona's new voucher programs. Highlights:

“If you had asked people at the beginning of this session to bet this would happen, you would have gotten very few people making that bet,” said Chuck Essigs, a lobbyist for the Arizona Association of School Business Officials, former Mesa Unified School District official and an observer of the Arizona Legislature for more than 25 years. “It would be like a 50-to-1 long shot at the Kentucky Derby.”

Yet, to some educators, it’s precious little to celebrate. John Wright, president of the Arizona Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, has posted an ominous message on the AEA Web site: “The deal is not worth the damage.”

An "ominous message". Gasp! In case you missed it, here's our reply to that statement by Robert Teegarden, our director of state projects. Horrors!!!

Eric Kurland, president of the Scottsdale Education Association, said he believes Napolitano did the best she could do in tough circumstances, but he is not happy with the trade-off.
“There are some things in the budget that are not palatable. Vouchers are among those, because they’re taking money away from public education,” he said.

"Taking money from public education", eh? Let's go back and look at how the final budget turned out.

Nearly half a billion dollars. Full-day kindergarten in every school. Raises for teachers. Millions more for special education funding. When it’s all tallied up, Arizona’s public schools will get an increase in state funding of more than $480 million — more than double the amount they have been getting each year for the past 15 years...
While state law required the Legislature approve an increase of at least $217 million for teacher pay, benefits and enrollment growth, lawmakers went above and beyond that, adding another $100 million.
Napolitano also convinced lawmakers to push up the timeline for implementing statewide full-day kindergarten, allotting enough money to bring the program to every school by the 2007-08 school year.
Next year, $118 million will go for kindergarten programs — more than triple the $38 million spent on the program this year.
In the 2007-08 school year, the state will increase that by $80 million to a total of $198 million — more than five times the amount spent this year.
In addition, the budget includes a $5 million increase for special education students and $5 million more for school districts’ transportation costs.
But in order to get these measures, Napolitano had to agree to spend $5 million on new voucher programs that allow children who are disabled or in foster care to attend private schools with taxpayer dollars.
The budget also doubled the size of corporate tuition tax credits for private schools, allowing businesses to donate up to $10 million for private school scholarships for lowincome students.

School choice programs are getting $20 million. Public schools are getting nearly half a billion dollars. Look, just be honest--this isn't about the money, it's about the monopoly, isn't it? Go read the whole thing.

CORRECTION: It has been brought to my attention that the first quote is in reference to the overall increase in eduspending and not to the voucher programs in particular. My mistake.

Gates Foundation supersized

edspresso — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:49:00 +0000

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which already enjoys a $24 billion endowment, just got a raise:

Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett said Monday his decision to leave most of his wealth to charity now was "logical," adding that he feels "terrific" about the reversal of his long-stated plan to distribute his billions upon his death.
Buffett, the second richest man in the world, announced his plans to gradually give 85 percent of his wealth to five foundations in an exclusive interview with Fortune magazine published over the weekend.
The vast majority will go to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, run by Microsoft chairman - and the world's richest man - Bill Gates and his wife, Melinda. The foundation, which has about $30 billion in assets, focuses on world health as well as improving U.S. libraries and schools. Buffett's contribution will double the foundation's current assets.
"I feel terrific," Buffett said at a meeting Monday at the New York Public Library and monitored by Webcast. "This has been coming for 50 years; the exact method became clear in the last year."
The plan calls for Buffett to donate 10 million Berkshire Hathaway class B shares of stock to the Gates' foundation, another 1 million to the Susan Thompson Buffett foundation, named for his late wife, and another 350,000 shares each to the three foundations run by Buffett's three children, Susan, Howard and Peter.

Though the Foundation has supported laudable structural reforms, and Bill Gates has pronounced public high schools a failure, the Foundation has not yet taken the bold and necessary step of supporting school choice. Perhaps the infusion of resources will make it more willing to consider different approaches that could enhance its prospects for delivering high-quality opportunities for all schoolchildren.

Education News for Tuesday, June 27

Daily News — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:17:01 +0000

Debunking the fictions that block school reform - Opinion: A coalition of unions published a glossy report this month complaining that poverty was largely to blame for the poor performance of Rhode Island's public schools. Not surprisingly, perhaps, the document discounted any responsibility by the unions for poor student performance, or any need for greater accountability by teachers. (more)

Study shows more quit school than previously reported - Editorial: The fact that three of every 10 children who enter high school in Indiana never receive a diploma should be a priority concern to all. (more)

Aspiring teachers experience diversity - Pennsylvania education majors participate in a Philadelphia program designed to help them understand racial and ethnic differences. (more)

Take it to the people - Editorial: The defenders of the education status quo in L.A., most notably Superintendent Roy Romer, members of the school board and the bloated bureaucracy they support - are apoplectic over Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's reform plan. To overcome this massive resistance, Villaraigosa is going to need to do what he does best - appeal directly to the people. (more)

Improper spending alleged in Camden - State investigators are looking into whether two Camden (New Jersey) principals improperly spent tens of thousands of dollars of district money on a big-screen plasma television, iPods, laptops, and other electronic equipment. (more)

No Child Left Behind input sought - During the next few weeks, some Utah legislators will be weighing in on the potential reauthorization of No Child Left Behind. Most want to either throw it out or make some adjustments. (more)

Invest less in tests, more in learning - Opinion: While proposed changes to the Delaware student testing program are welcomed improvements, they still leave open a fundamental choice in our state: Will we continue to invest in a custom, multi-faceted assessment system, or will we join the states that restrict investment in testing in order to drive more resources into improving teaching and learning? (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

FOR SCHOOL EQUALITY, TRY MOBILITY - DUMB liberal ideas in education are a dime a dozen, and during my time as superintendent of Houston's schools and as the United States secretary of education I battled against all sorts of progressivist lunacy, from whole-language reading to fuzzy math to lifetime teacher tenure. Today, however, one of the worst ideas in education is coming from conservatives: the so-called 65 percent solution. (more)

The Charter Fight Ahead - That the obstructionism of the United Federation of Teachers and its pawn in Albany, Sheldon Silver, prevented the Legislature from lifting the limit on the number of charter schools is a defeat, but it may have its virtues. (more)

False choice, no choice - The Quinnipiac University Polling Institute inadvertently offered a false choice to Pennsylvanians about how to lower property taxes. The results of a recent survey indicated there was overwhelming support to raise the state sales tax in order to lower property taxes. However, the Quinnipiac analysis of that finding can easily mislead anyone who accepts the implication that there are only two choices. (more)

Mo. Considers Tax Credit for Scholarships- A plan to create tax credits for individuals and businesses that contribute money to K-12 scholarship organizations was introduced in both chambers of ... (more)

Arizona Charter Makes Top 100 List
When Newsweek released its list of the top 100 high schools in the nation May 1, a charter school in Tucson made history. (more)

Can Political Leaders Find the Courage to Liberate Education? - This is the final installment of a seven-part series showing why charter schools do not have the freedom needed to create significant educational improvements ... (more)

Overhauling a Broken Educational System -From the first paragraph of his book's introduction, Frederick Hess sets forth a contrarian view of today's American public schools that suggests significant ... (more)

Diverse Panel of K-12 Leaders Backs Weighted-Student Method of Funding A diverse group of leaders in K-12 education policy are advocating a dramatic change in the way schools are financed, saying they should receive money based on the number and types of students they serve and that principals should determine teacher pay, professional development, and many other matters currently set by districts. (more)

Parents May Not Recover Expert Fees Under IDEA, Supreme Court Rules The main federal special education law does not authorize parents who prevail in a dispute over their child’s individualized education program to recover expert fees, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled today. (more)

Troubled charter schools can just swap sponsors
The (Cleveland) P lain Dealer: June 27. Some of Ohio's charter schools are like the guy whose doctor told him he was drinking too much, so he changed doctors. "Sponsor hopping"—the practice of a charter school leaving a rigorous sponsor in favor of a less demanding one—might not rival alcohol abuse as a social problem. But as many charter schools decide this week whether to re-sign contracts with their current sponsors, it's enough of a problem to concern even charter school supporters. (more)

State agency will have say on charter school approval - A new state agency will take over responsibility for approving and overseeing charter schools, under a law signed Monday by Gov. Jeb Bush. (more)

Tracking educorruption, Texas-style

edspresso — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:53:00 +0000

Once again, Peyton Wolcott does edureporters' jobs for them.

The next chapter in the school student finance debate

edspresso — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:57:00 +0000

The big buzz in the edusphere right now is Rod Paige's NYT column, where he kills two birds with one stone: while simultaneously taking a swing at the 65% solution, he talks up a different concept also being endorsed by Fordham:

Instead of gimmicky fads, we need fundamental reforms. One good idea now picking up support is "weighted student funding." Under this approach, each child receives a "backpack" of financing that travels with him to the public school of his family's choice. The more disadvantaged the child, the bigger the backpack.
When that money arrives at a school, principals have freedom to spend them as they see fit. Does the school need to pay more to snag a top-notch math teacher? Are extra hours needed to allow for intensive tutoring? Principals would be able to allocate resources accordingly; accountability systems like No Child Left Behind give them strong incentives to make good decisions.
What about reducing administrative waste, the primary aim of the 65 percent solution? Weighted financing handles this better, too: because principals are given full control over their budgets, they can choose whether to forgo a new coat of paint — or, better, consultants and travel expenses — in favor of an additional classroom aide.
Weighted student financing was pioneered in Edmonton, Alberta, in the 1970's and has now been tried in a handful of cities including Houston, San Francisco and Seattle. These experiments have shown considerable promise. In Edmonton, education reforms based on a weighted system helped turn the city's struggling public schools into some of Canada's finest — 80 percent of students regularly score at or above grade level on standardized tests.
Perhaps the best thing about weighted student financing is that it's a reform both liberals and conservatives can support. Liberals should like the extra investment in needy children; conservatives should appreciate its positive effects on deregulation and school choice. That's why Democrats like John Podesta, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, and former Gov. Jim Hunt of North Carolina have joined Republicans like me and former Education Secretary Bill Bennett in supporting weighted financing. When it comes to educating our children, we should all put politics aside.

It's got broad bipartisan support--hey, Eduwonk has signed on, so you know it's got legs!

The thing that's vital to consider here is alluded to in the title of this post. Rather than funding schools, where the money tends to get absorbed in great big bureaucratic sponges, the funding in this concept is tied directly to students. But for more on our point of view, let's hear from Clint.

Education News for Wednesday, June 28

Daily News — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:26:23 +0000

AZ Legislature of 2 minds on poorest schools - In a matter of a few days towards the end of the session, Republicans passed two bills: one that speaks to those school's amazing success and another that speaks to their miserable failure. (more)

NY union seeks rule change for charter schools - The head of the city's teachers union is latching onto a recent spate of firings at a Brooklyn charter school to push Albany to make it easier for teachers at charter schools to join the union. (more)

New Fl law makes it easier to start charter schools - The Florida Schools of Excellence Commission, created when Gov. Jeb Bush signed a House bill Monday, will pave the way for more charter schools in the state. (more)

2006 South Carolina elections - Education, particularly vouchers or tax credits versus public schools, is one such issue.Sanford has supported school vouchers in the past and as governor has advocated for tuition tax credits for private school tuition. (more)

The issue of government operated schools - Government operated schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Compulsory education laws spawn prison-like schools with many of the problems associated with those prisons. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Ed Week (subscription required) Report Urges Business Groups to Advocate for High-Quality Preschool Programs - In a new 74-page report released today, the Washington-based business public policy group maintains that costly academic-remediation programs are draining state and federal budgets... (more)

Report tracks MN rising school spending - Despite declining enrollment, Minnesota schools are spending money faster than the rate of inflation, according to a report released Tuesday by State Auditor Patricia Anderson. (more)

MN governor offers college tuition to top students - Gov. Tim Pawlenty offered a deal Tuesday to those students: Graduate in the top 25 percent of your high school class or score well on college entrance exams and go tuition-free to any Minnesota public college. (more)

LA Times editorial: Confusion instead of school reform - The state's plan for Los Angeles Unified's schools has too many ingredients and dices responsibility too finely. (more)

CNN: No summer vacation for failing schools - Lou Dobbs: For just about a third of all high school students in this country, summer brings no respite from the failure of our public education system. (more)

Improving public school choice in California

edspresso — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:27:00 +0000

The San Juan Unified School District northeast of Sacramento is making some noteworthy changes to its public school choice program:

The San Juan Unified School District board unanimously approved major changes to its open enrollment policy Tuesday night, likely affecting how many students will win admission each year to the most popular schools.
The new policies are part of what Superintendent Steven Enoch called a "customer service" approach to managing enrollment across the district.
In probably the most significant change, a school will accept students through the open enrollment process until its physical capacity is reached. Currently, the district caps enrollment at the most-requested schools to ensure less-popular schools have adequate enrollment.

Good for them. If a preferred school has room, why not let the kids in? Answer:

Trustee Thomaysa Glover suggested the proposal would hurt less-popular schools.
"We're happy when we can fill a certain school, but … I feel a little bit uncomfortable with how that would affect schools surrounding schools that are in high demand," she said.

Education isn't about the schools--it's about the children. If they can get a better deal at a different school, let 'em go.

Also, it's kind of interesting that they're called "less-popular" or "schools surrounding schools that are in high demand." Great pains are taken to avoid calling these schools "bad", "unperforming", or otherwise undesirable.

High-tech texts (or: all the cool kids are doing it)

edspresso — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:32:00 +0000

So last week I put together a lengthy post on how the spread of technology can help resolve the ongoing problems in textbook selection. What timing! Melissa Wiley, who wrote here, here and here on the related issue of selecting a homeschool curriculum, also has an Edspresso article out today on the same subject. (Side note: Melissa is hosting this week's Carnival of Education, which links to my post from last week.) And Mike Petrilli also wrote here about harnessing high-tech in the classroom.

Let's explore this just a bit further. Possibly one of the most exciting aspects of this is the liberty it allows educators to innovate. Melissa's posts indicate a dizzying array of curriculum options (some of which, in the best traditions of the Internet, come free of charge). Just think of the freedom that could be extended to public schoolteachers if they were allowed a bit of flexibility to build their own curriculum.

However, a potential trainwreck could be on the way, especially after reading Mike's thoughts on reliance on technology:

To be sure, well-conceived technology could make inexperienced teachers more effective, and might even allow for larger teacher-to student-ratios. Yet great teachers have little to fear on this score. The best media tools in the world won't be half as effective without an informed, passionate instructor guiding them through it.

Mike said this in connection with the potential barrier of teachers' unions stonewalling efforts to pour more money into classroom technology. (For a huffy response, visit NCLBlog.) But where I see that some educators could (rightly) complain about this is the use of technology as a crutch. As Sarah has pointed out here and here, improved technology via calculators may have inflicted harm on students' ability to grasp mathematics.

So increased technology cuts both ways: increased opportunities for creative liberty, and increased opportunities for intellectual laziness. How do we find the middle ground?

School Choice Victories (Anna Varghese Marcucio)

fguest — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:32:47 +0000

If there ever was a time to expect the unexpected, it was last week when Governor Napolitano (D-Arizona) signed three new school choice programs into law, and when the overwhelmingly Democratic Rhode Island General Assembly approved a scholarship tax credit program for low income families. It was a banner week for school choice advocates, and it came as a welcome surprise.

While Arizona boasts a healthy charter school movement and other forms of school choice, Rhode Island is a relatively new player in this game; and the scholarship tax credit proposal could have been viewed by many to be on the far end (i.e. scary end) of the school choice spectrum. Yet it sailed through the House and Senate with relative ease. Thanks in large part to the masterful lobbying effort by Bernard Healey at the Diocese of Providence, as well as the hundreds of phone calls and emails from Catholic and Independent school parents, the program was approved by a legislature that is ideologically opposed to any form of private school choice (fully one-third of the legislature are public school teachers). So why didn’t the union pursue its now predictable attack on this proposal? Why didn’t they come out swinging? What happened?

Some think it was timing. It’s been a bad year for unions in Rhode Island. Relationships have soured; the union has boycotted some legislators, while other legislators have boycotted the union. Another possible reason might be that the proposal was not a stand-alone piece of legislation; it was a small part of the governor’s budget. It would have been far more vulnerable had it been introduced as a separate bill. Another possible reason might be the very real fact that the Ocean State is overwhelming Catholic, and proud of it. If you weren’t raised in a Catholic school, you have kids in a Catholic school, or you have relatives who work in a Catholic school. Catholicism and an unhealthy allegiance to the Red Sox is what comes to mind when one thinks of Rhode Island (that and great Italian food). And it’s the devotion to a good Catholic education that may have won it for Rhode Islanders.

This brings me to my next point: charter schools in Rhode Island vs. private schools in Rhode Island. The Ocean state has about 11 charter schools currently in operation. Waiting lists for these charter schools are off the charts, as indicated to me by Governor Carcieri. The number of kids on waiting lists sometimes exceeds the actual number of kids enrolled in the school. Clearly there’s demand for more seats, more schools. Yet there’s been a moratorium on the approval of new charter schools for two years, with no end in sight. Any attempt to improve the weak charter law is batted down almost immediately. And we’re talking about public schools here. Most people would argue that charter schools are a much more palpable alternative than scholarships/vouchers. That doesn’t seem to be the case in Rhode Island. And it reinforces my hypothesis that, in Rhode Island, it might have more to do with a generational allegiance to nonpublic education than it is about providing an array of educational options for all families.

Whatever the reasons or the implications, we are thrilled and invigorated by the legislature’s courage in approving this much-needed scholarship program for the children most in need. It’s good for the kids, it’s good for the schools. And now the work begins. Implementation of the program will not be without challenges. But a small coalition of school leaders and parents was created out of the advocacy effort, and they will be the driving force behind the push to get families signed up, scholarship-granting organizations set-up and businesses in line to make donations. Congratulations to everyone who worked hard to make history in Rhode Island.

Anna Varghese Marcucio is a director of state projects for the Alliance for School Choice.

UPDATED 6/28--A Deeper Look at the Graduation Rate Debate (Dan Losen vs. Joydeep Roy, with comments by Larry Mishel)

fguest — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:51:00 +0000

Of all the debates we've done so far, this one has been the most spontaneous.

On May 24, we linked to this Washington Post story on the graduation rate discussion currently in progress among a number of analysts. One of the experts quoted in the story was Daniel Losen, a Senior Education Law and Policy Associate with the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University and co-author of Losing our Future: How Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis, who left a comment in reference to the Edspresso link that we decided to turn into a stand-alone article. Joydeep Roy, one of the authors of the EPI study that questions conventional wisdom on graduation numbers (and was also quoted in the WaPo article), answered with this comment. This has led to a back-and-forth exchange in our comment threads between the two. For the benefit of our readers, we are posting all remarks from both Losen and Roy side by side in this single post. And unlike our prior debates, we'll keep this one going as long as we continue to receive remarks from the participants.-ed.

UPDATE 19 JUNE: Today's response is from Larry Mishel, one of the co-authors on the EPI study.

Losen, May 24:

I'm among the experts debating this issue. I'm disappointed in Mishel whose work I usually hold in high esteem. I've read Mishel's book and it misleads the reader by ignoring obvious inconsistencies in data on New York City, Florida and Chicago that he relegates to the appendix. In fact, wherever Mishel looks at actual student record data that he deems reliable, he too finds a dropout crisis. This is contrary to his own conclusions based on surveys with admitted problems of years surveyed, sample design, and undercounts. Specifically, Mishel's survey-based estimates of the national rate graduation rates are 15% to 35% higher than the actual record data he argues are accurate in Florida, Chicago and New York City, the places he looked at more directly.

Mishel finds that Florida's four year graduation rate for Blacks is about 55%, and Hispanics about 60%, and these rates Mishel admits are inflated by counting GED recipients as graduates. In Chicago, Mishel finds that Black 19 year old males have a graduation rate of 39% and Hispanic males 51%. In New York City Mishel points to an extended 7 year completion rate for all students of just 60%. The New York City rates he cites are actually about 44% for the 4 year graduation rate according to the State of New York. Mishel ignores the fact that only the 4 year rate meets the requirements for evaluating schools and districts under the No Child Left Behind Act.

These alarmingly low numbers are consistent with the analysis from Chris Swanson and many other researchers, besides Jay Greene, that we have relied upon at Harvard.

Mishel's own numbers indicate a crisis. There is an urgent need to address the crisis facing minority youth. Improving the data collection should be part of these efforts rather than cause for further delay.

Finally, Mishel offers no useful recommendations and would have us wait many years until we have more accurate data before we address the problem. He acknowledges the crisis in urban schools where we find high percentages of minority youth yet appears to want to stay the course, which would continue to put minority students at a great disadvantage.

Roy, May 24:

I am one of the co-authors of the Economic Policy Institute book disputing the current conventional wisdom that minorities have only a 50-50 chance of graduating from high school with a regular diploma. Here is my quick response to two of Dr. Losen’s assertions.

Dr. Losen writes in his comments that “wherever Mishel looks at actual student record data that he deems reliable, he too finds a dropout crisis”. While this depends on what one means by the word “crisis”, it should be pointed out that we refer to the NELS:88 survey as the gold standard, and it is indeed a longitudinal tracking of actual students over time (for a period of 12 years). The results from the NELS show that minorities have close to a 75% graduation rate. Similar high-quality longitudinal surveys also indicate that the rates have been steadily rising over the last 30 or 40 years – see Tables 3 and 4 in our book, available here, which compares NELS:88 to High School & Beyond and NLSY97 to NLSY79, and also Figures C and D - except possibly for black males during the last decade.

Dr. Losen also argues that “Mishel's survey-based estimates of the national rate graduation rates are 15% to 35% higher than the actual record data he argues are accurate in Florida, Chicago and New York City, the places he looked at more directly.” It is hardly surprising that the national graduation rates for blacks is significantly higher than that for blacks in inner cities like Chicago and New York City. White males in Chicago graduate at a rate of 58% - this does not imply that the national graduation rate for whites is 58%. (Even Greene and Winters’s estimate of white male graduation rate is 74% - see this Manhattan Institute study.)

Our aim in this study has been to create a better understanding of the true challenges we face and the progress we’ve made, and help lead the way to better targeted solutions for continuing to close the remaining gaps. Understanding where we are and how far we’ve come can help identify what has been working in American public education. There are significant problems to be addressed - the minority graduation rates are still low and there are significant gaps in completion between whites and Asians on the one hand and blacks and Hispanics on the other. In some inner cities like Chicago black males have only a 40% chance of completing high school with a regular diploma. However, we believe that unless we know the true picture we are unlikely to correctly address these problems.

Losen, May 30:

This blog debate highlights two of the fundamental problems with Mishel and Roy's analysis: Mishel and Roy don't have great data and they use the wrong standard for evaluating the current health of our high schools, especially with regard to Black and other minority students.

Their strongest assertions are linked to a comparatively small number of student outcomes for the Class of 1992. Their "gold standard," the NELS 88, is a 12-year-old estimate based on a national sample of about 20,000 students. Those unfamiliar with the survey will be surprised to learn that the actual number of Black students in the sample was approximately 1,456 students. Most, but not all, of these Black survey responses were confirmed by looking at their actual student records. That may be an excellent sample as surveys go, but does not come close t o the accuracy that might be achieved if we looked at individual longitudinal student record data from every district and state in the nation. As Mishel and Roy point out, the fact that most of those surveyed in the national sample were confirmed with actual student records is what makes NELS Golden.

As Dr. Roy points out, in their book, NELS shows that back in 1992 only 63.2% of Blacks students graduated "on time." Researchers who use NELS agree that this number should be adjusted downward somewhat because of bias in the sample of Blacks in particular. This is because Black youth are disproportionately incarcerated, homeless or have disabilities, and would not be accurately represented in the NELS sample which excluded those populations. The reported 63.2% does not reflect any of the adjustments for such bias.

Not only are the sampled data suspect, the extended years graduation rate is the wrong standard. We should agree that the vast majority of high schools are designed (and budget their resources) so that successful students will take four years, from grade 9-12 to earn the credits they need to graduate high school with a real diploma. If we accept that premise, then schools and districts should calculate and report the “on time” graduation rate. As Congress required in No Child Left Behind, the graduation rate is the percentage of students that graduate in the “standard number of years with a diploma.” In regulations the administration clarifies that GEDs and other alternative certificates should not be counted when calculating graduation rates. Other measures of school completion do have important value, but an estimate of a four year rate, which is the “standard number or years,” and based only on real diplomas, should be the primary measure we use to evaluate the efficacy of our high schools.

From the start, Mishel and Roy ignore the fact that Chris Swanson’s graduation rate estimate was created purposefully to be used as an “on time” graduation rate to meet the needs of evaluating schools and the requirements of NCLB. Over Swanson’s objections, Mishel and Roy treat his estimate of a four year “on time” rate as if it were a 6 year rate creating an apples to oranges comparison. Further ignoring the fact that Swanson’s numbers are for the Class of 2001 and the survey sample they use is for the Class of 1992, they insist Swanson is seriously exaggerating the actual rate. They rarely compare his “on time” rates to the 62.3%, or other “on time” rates.

The more important problem is that rates based on outcomes of 5, 6, 7 or more years is a poor indicator of how well a particular high school or district is performing, or whether a particular education reform is having the desired impact. But Mishel and Roy rarely discuss the “on time” 63.2% figure for the Class of 1992, and prefer the 74% number. If we stick to comparing apples to apples, we would have narrowed the difference between the 4 year "on time" 50% estimate for Blacks that we report based on Swanson’s data, and their 4 year estimate of 63.2%, reducing the difference from 25% to 13% percentage points.

But there are further problems: Mishel and Roy’s survey sample of 1,456 Black students is particularly useless for understanding the recent condition of education in urban school districts, or for poor southern states, where most Black students live. Places similar to Florida, New York and Chicago.

With only 1,465 actual students from across the nation in their 1992 sample, and no state or district results in the NELS to start with, it becomes apparent why Mishel and Roy rely more on "non-gold standard" measures (surveys lacking student record confirmation) to dispute our claim that Black and Latino and Native American students, and especially males from these groups, are experiencing a severe problem in many poor and racially isolated districts all across the nation.

The best way to check the current 2006 value of Mishel and Roy’s national estimates for the Class of 1992, is to see whether their older data accurately represents individual student records today. Unfortunately, that’s impossible to do on the national level. All they can give us are these data from Florida, Chicago, and New York.

In Florida the data come from over 200,000 individual longitudinal student records in all. As a result, we have the “golden” student records of tens of thousands of Black students from 2003, not just a sample of 1,456. Mishel calls these data “much better estimates of graduation rates.” The data show that Blacks had an “on time” graduation rate of 54 % in 2003. I regard this data as upwardly biased, and Mishel admits as much in the footnotes, because Florida counts and reports GED recipients as graduates and also removes from the denominator those students who leave school to attend alternative education programs, when they should be counted against the graduation rate. But, despite the serious concerns that the graduation rate reported in Florida overstates the “on time” graduation rate, it is safe to say that the rate based on individual student records would unlikely be any higher than 54%. The data from Chicago and New York suggest even lower rates for Black students. With no racial breakdown, the State of New York reports an “on time” graduation rate of 44% based on tens of thousands of longitudinal student records – Roy and Mishel’s gold vein. And even this estimate is biased because New York excludes from the cohort the records of any student not in school for 5 consecutive months before the count was taken in grade 9. In Chicago, the golden measure yields a 39% graduation rate for Black male19 year olds in 1999 and 30.8 % for Black males in 1998. According to Mishel and Roy, these rates present “an accurate picture of high school completion by entering 9th graders.”

Although in each case these golden rates, based on tens of thousands of students, yield rates far below the NELS “on time” estimate based on just 1,456 Black students, it is theoretically possible that we would find very very high rates for Blacks elsewhere to balance out the reliable data from two of America’s largest urban districts and one Southern state. But if that were the case we would have heard about such unusual districts by now. Or perhaps New York, Chicago and Florida are much much worse than any other districts and states as Dr. Roy asserts.

In our series of reports, including Dropouts in California, and Book, DROPOUTS IN AMERICA, The Civil Rights Project has examined studies of individual schools by researchers Balfanz and Letgers at Johns Hopkins, recent longitudinal student record data from Los Angeles, detailed district enrollment data from every state analyzed by Swanson of the Urban Institute, and research from many other scholars. Based on the collection of research, we argue that there is a very serious problem in many schools and districts, especially poor urban schools with high levels of racial isolation. Districts in crisis can be found in every state of the nation.

Not only do a multitude of studies from independent scholars across the country yield results that are consistent with the 50% estimate, but Mishel acknowledges that Swanson’s method yielded nearly identical results as Chicago’s “golden” longitudinal record data, the same sort of data that distinguished the NELS as gold. Moreover, our most recent report on the crisis in California revealed that in Los Angeles Latinos and Blacks combined have a 48% graduation rate. Once again, this was based on “golden” longitudinal individual student identifier data analyzed and reported by Dr. Julie Mendoza. I have no reason to doubt that our 50% estimate would prove to be fairly accurate if we had the golden data we all desire from across the nation. While neither The Civil Rights Project, nor Mishel and Roy, can say with absolute precision just how bad the situation currently is, we assert that we have ample evidence of an urgent problem and that this crisis is real and needs action now.

Roy, June 2:

Before getting into details it is important to clarify the issue. The NELS shows a black graduation rate of 75% while the Swanson-Urban Institute methodology that Dr. Losen favors shows a 50% rate. It seems that Dr. Losen is questioning the sampling of the NELS and saying that a failure to properly sample blacks leads to an overstated graduation rate. We have not found any scholar who claims that there is any sizeable sampling problem in the NELS (we have asked Losen in prior private communications to provide us people we can talk to about this, as we take such issues seriously) and no one has ever made an argument that sampling problems could explain a 25 percentage point difference in the black graduation rate. If there were such a problem then the vast literature based on the NELS, at least as regarding blacks, would need to be disregarded.

Now to the details. The NELS:88 sample began with 25,000 students – 24,599 to be precise. Of these, 16,321 were white, 3,011 were black and 3,177 were Hispanics (see A Profile of The American Eighth Grader: NELS:-88 Student Descriptive Summary, page 103, Appendix A, A-3). The weighted percentages were 71.4% for whites, 13.2% for blacks and 10.4% for Hispanics.

So the actual number of black students in the sample was over 3,000 rather than 1,456 as Dr. Losen claims. The features of the NELS that make it unique and the best dataset to calculate graduation rates are – a large nationally representative dataset; longitudinal tracking of 8th graders till their high school graduation and beyond; multiple rounds of interview with sample members, resulting in low levels of attrition rates from the sample; and checking of graduation status against actual school transcripts to minimize self-reporting bias.

Anyone interested in knowing more on the methodology or results from the NELS should check up the NELS:88 webpage at the Department of Education website, which lists all the different publications and products. People should also check the new report by Cliff Adelman at the U.S. Department of Education, The Toolbox Revisited: Paths to Degree Completion From High School Through College.

Dr. Losen also incorrectly asserts that the NELS sample is not representative because Black youth are disproportionately incarcerated, homeless or have disabilities. Neither of these has any significant effect on the estimates, even the minority ones. First, incarceration is not a problem because we are talking of tracking students beginning in their 8th grade. As the U.S. Department of Justice reports, overall only about 0.2% of all state prisoners were under age 18 – see Bureau of Justice Statistics bulletin for April 2005. Accounting for incarcerated youth is more important when we talk about educational attainment of people aged 25-29 years old or following people in longitudinal surveys even if they enter prison. However, our results from the 2000 census clearly show that incarceration biases the results only for black males, and even then the effect is not large, certainly not enough to believe that there’s a 50% graduation rate. We either include incarcerated populations or adjust for their presence when we examined household surveys.

A second widely used and respected survey – the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor – actually includes the prison population in its sampling framework and comes to the same conclusions. The NLSY shows that the graduation rate with a high school diploma (excluding GEDs) was 82.2% for people aged 20-22 in 2002 – 85% for whites, 75% for Blacks and 76% for Hispanics (see Table 3 in our book).

As I mentioned in my earlier response, the initial round of NELS:88 had under-sampled that portion of the special education population that is most severely mentally or physically disabled. However, coverage of this population was improved in the first follow-up by the fact that in the base year ineligibles study, nine of the 23 students excluded because of physical barriers to participation, and 140 of the 322 students who had been excluded because of mental barriers to participation, were reclassified as eligible. Similarly, 49 of the previously ineligible sample members were found to be eligible in the second follow-up followback study of excluded students; of these 49 excluded students, 44 had been previously excluded due to mental disability and 5 for physical limitations (link).

A recent Department of Education study (see article in Education Week) finds that there has been a significant improvement in school completion and academic performance of youth with disabilities. Comparing the 1987 cohort with the 2003 cohort, the report shows that school completion rate of youth with disabilities increased and the dropout rate decreased by 17 percentage points during this time period. About 70% of the 2003 cohort had completed high school by the time the data were collected. The rate of postsecondary education participation by youth with disabilities more than doubled over this time.

Dr. Losen argues that “researchers who use NELS agree that this number (black on-time graduation rate of 63%) should be adjusted downward somewhat because of bias in the sample of Blacks”. However, we have not seen any researcher using the NELS argue this before – it would be useful to refer to the particular researchers and their studies. As stated above, we have previously asked Dr. Losen for articles we can read or people to talk to who have such views of NELS.

Dr. Losen also argues that because the NELS:88 graduation rates were for the Class of 1992, they are not relevant now and in particular, cannot be compared to recent estimates. However, the Greene and Swanson estimates of graduation rates for the early ‘90s are very similar to their estimates for recent years. For example, for the Class of 2001, Greene’s numbers (Tables 8-11) are as follows - Total 70%, Whites 80%, Blacks 55%, Hispanics 50%. Swanson’s numbers (page 20) for the same graduating class are 68% for Total, 75% for Whites, Blacks 50%, Hispanics 53%. So given that Greene and Swanson estimates for the early 90s were far off from the NELS estimates, they are likely to be significantly off in recent years as well.

Dr. Losen incorrectly claims that we “ignore the fact that Chris Swanson’s graduation rate estimate was created purposefully to be used as an “on time” graduation rate”. However, it is impossible for Swanson to compute an ‘on-time’ graduation rate because the available data only provides all of the diplomas granted each year- early, on-time, and late. This is something Greene readily acknowledges and Swanson never challenged us on this p oint at a seminar at the Urban Institute. If Losen wants to believe that the graduation rates are on-time because Swanson has labeled them as such, that is his prerogative. However, we would like to know how that late diplomas are distinguished from others in the calculation.

Dr. Losen wrongly claims that we believe the state and city estimates on graduation estimates to be the “gold vein”. As I mentioned in my earlier response, while working on graduation rates based on state and city student longitudinal data records, we became aware that without a true national-level student identifier system, it is difficult to convincingly take account of the ‘leavers’ problem – that is, whether students who leave a school district or state really do enroll somewhere else, or they drop out. There are often other issues regarding these estimates – mostly related to how different states define different aspects of enrollment and graduation. Hence we decided to put the discussion in an appendix. Note that these problems are not shared by the NELS, which is a national sample.

Our purpose in bringing the state and city estimates to the front was to show that estimates based on student longitudinal records- the same data relied on for enrollment and diploma counts, organized differently and better- yield much higher (ten to fifteen percentage points) graduation rates – both overall and for individual races as in Florida and New York City - than the measures used by Dr. Greene and Dr. Swanson for Florida and New York City. Even in Chicago, where the differences in levels is not very high, Swanson’s CPI and Greene’s measure show quite different trends compared to those based on student longitudinal records, and hence are inappropriate. It is especially bizarre for Losen to claim that the low graduation rates observed in New York City and Florida support his view. In fact, the graduation rates are unacceptably low. However, if Losen relies on Swanson’s and Greene’s computations nationally, and we show that their estimates for these areas are substantially less than better measures, it is hard to understand how that supports Swanson’s and Greene’s national estimates.

Finally, Dr. Losen claims that “a multitude of studies from independent scholars across the country yield results that are consistent with the 50% estimate”. This is incorrect, in that the studies are only done by a handful of researchers – Dr. Jay Greene, Dr. Chris Swanson, Dr. John Warren at the University of Minnesota – and a few others. All these studies rely solely on the administrative data on enrollment and diplomas, and moreover, they introduce population or other adjustments which impart serious bias to their estimates, particularly for minorities. There are estimates from Walt Haney using the same underlying data that show far higher graduation rates. It is not so much that these researchers rely on the CCD enrollment and diploma data: it is the choices they make in using the data that lead them to vastly understate graduation rates, particularly for minorities. It is interesting to note that when Dr. Warren claimed the superiority of his methods to those of others including Greene and Swanson, he did so by virtue of the fact that his estimates came closest to the NELS:88 estimates (see the section titled Validating the ECR in his article at the Education Analysis Policy Archives, page 18).

Losen, June 12, 9:41 a.m.:

A third fundamental flaw of Roy's and Mishel's is that they are myopically concerned with only one thing, data analysis, and would wait until another generation of poor and minority youth are lost before they would consider serious action on a national scale. This paralysis by analysis is deeply disturbing to those of us whose work is dedicated to remedying the crisis faced by poor Black and Latino youth in far too many schools and districts across America.

Typical of our exchange, is this comment of Dr. Roy's, "It is especially bizarre for Losen to claim that the low graduation rates observed in New York City and Florida support his view. In fact, the graduation rates are unacceptably low."

What Dr. Roy fails to realize is that my view, and that of The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, is that there are unacceptably low graduation rates for Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans and other disadvantaged youth. If the "on time" rate back in 1992 was 63.2% and not 50%, that would still be a crisis. But the fact remains that where we have gained access to tens of thousands of longitudinal student record data (from the current century) those individual state and district “on time” rates have been more consistent with a 50/50 Black and Latino “on time” estimate rather than either the 1992 rate of 63.2% or the 1994 rate of 74%, that latter of which Mishel and Roy would have people believe more accurately describes the condition of education for Blacks in 2006.

Mishel and Roy don’t have data for evaluating schools, districts or states. Nor do they have much to crow about if they focused on “on time” graduation rates. So they revert to apples and oranges comparisons of “on time” enrollment based estimates to extended year survey based estimates. That leaves folks wondering as to why they treat the “on time” information, even the NELS 63.2% rate, as irrelevant to the portrayal of a crisis for Black students in our schools?

Despite Roy’s assertion,The Civil Rights Project does not rely on any one source, or just enrollment data to assert there is a crisis. I’ve already said that an “on time” rate of 63.2% would suffice. In addition, not all sampled data support their insistence that NELS 88’s rates from 1992 or 1994 are the most accurate indicators for 2006. Consider, for example, that according to the 2005 NAEP data, nearly half of all Black and Latino students in grade 8 scored “below basic” in reading. I would not be surprised if most of these non-readers fail to graduate “on time” with a diploma. Keep in mind that below basic is two steps below proficient. This is just more evidence that in 2006, our primary concern about a crisis for Black and Latino students, and the quality of schools and districts they attend, is not exaggerated.

So the most important issue, obscured by Mishel and Roy, is that our public schools, K-12 are not providing adequate educational opportunities for these minority students, while subjecting them to unjust high stakes exit exams and encouraging students to dropout rather than stay in school. The “on time” rate is more important for evaluating our schools and districts, especially in the face of these problems and the disproportionate burden they impose on poor and minority youth.

We know the NELS has great value for some purposes, but ultimately it is also a survey with sampling biases and other shortcomings. In our book Dropouts in America: Confronting the Graduation Rate Crisis, Phillip Kaufman writes, “Since NELS is a sample survey, it is subject to the same potential for bias due to non-response and undercoverage bias that the CPS has.” (p. 119-120) He also points out that that the NELS was designed, “to provide national estimates of dropout and completion rates and, except for very large states, cannot provide statistically reliable state estimates or any school district estimates.”

We join Mishel and Roy to the extent that we aren't happy with the current lack of clear and transparent data, an d we both call for much better tracking of individual students to get a much better understanding. Apparently they don’t believe the "on time" graduation rate is the most important for evaluating schools and education reform policies. I'm disappointed that Mishel and Roy give no significant time whatsoever to the “on time” rate of 62.3% when they boldly insist there is no crisis. Instead they submerge that piece of information and repeatedly highlight the least useful estimates for describing the state of education for Black students, that's the 6 year, 74% rate based on a small national sample of students where fewer than 1,456 of the surveyed responders actually had their student records confirmed. I strongly urge Mishel and Roy to consider the reaction of the White middle class if they learned their "on time" graduation rate was 63.2%.

On another more technical note: Roy claims the number in NELS is actually 3,000. But after attrition, according to a reputable NELS researcher, for Blacks, the number in the sample that started at about 3,000, was reduced for a variety of reasons to 1,456 by 1992 – at least as far as the “golden” group of students for whom most had responses that were checked against actual student records. So while Roy insists I made an error, and skirts over the attrition in his blog response, his book shows how the original 25,000 in the sample shrunk to about 20,000 or less, as detailed on page 73 of Roy’s appendix. If Roy insists the gold standard is based on 3,000, I’d accept those numbers if he takes an oath that there was no attrition in the Black sample and that nearly all of the 3,000 original Black students not only remained in the sample, but had their transcripts checked to confirm their survey responses in 1992 or 1994. What I’d really like to know from Roy is just how many of the 3,000 original Blacks had their survey responses checked against their school records in 1992. That number, which would be the only “golden” data they have for Blacks, is likely even less than 1,456.

Instead of acknowledging the weaknesses of the data they use, Mishel and Roy repeatedly prefer to mislead the public by posting op-eds that call the crisis “exaggerated.” To their credit, you can find the data that undermines their assertions in their own book, but rather than insisting that honorable researchers like Swanson and Warren are exaggerating, they should give equal time to the fact that that "on time" graduation rates are unacceptably low for Blacks and Latinos according to NELS, and by any method, and that the survey data they use offer little current or specific information on the current health of increasingly racially isolated schools and districts serving predominantly poor Black and Latino youth.

In summary, Mishel and Roy don't have great data, and give far too little attention to “on time” graduation rates. Ultimately, they miss the point. For Black, Latino and other disadvantaged youth, there is more than enough information depicting low graduation rates to call the situation a crisis and urgently demand an improvement in educational opportunities.

Larry Mishel, June 19, 8:18 a.m.:

I am taking the response to Dan Losen over from Joydeep. This is difficult to do for several reasons.

Personal Attacks
First, Losen’s tone is way off the reservation and his personal attack is shameful. Consider how he starts his last contribution, saying Joydeep and I:

“….are myopically concerned with only one thing, data analysis, and would wait until another generation of poor and minority youth are lost before they would consider serious action on a national scale. This paralysis by analysis is deeply disturbing to those of us whose work is dedicated to remedying the crisis faced by poor Black and Latino youth in far too many schools and districts across America.”

I am not sure what his basis is for saying we do not favor any serious action on a national scale, that we see no problems or that we do not care about disadvantaged students? We certainly have stated that there are too many dropouts, especially for low-income and minority students. We highlight the existing racial and ethnic gaps in graduation and show the black-white gap is even larger than what the regular CPS data show (the Hispanic-white gap, however, is smaller than previously thought, though still large). Is it because we do not scream about an undifferentiated across-the-board high school dropout ‘crisis’? As for policy implications, you can read below what we think they are. And, has Dan Losen cornered the market on concern for minority youth? Puhhhleeeze. Dan is only embarrassing the worthy organization, the Harvard Civil Rights Project, with which he’s associated. At EPI, which I lead, we speak truth to power every day of the week. We certainly do not accept any lecture by Losen on our commitments or motives. Because of Losen’s tone and personal attacks this will be our last attempt to intellectually engage him—there will be no more postings from us.

A Useful Engagement
A second difficulty is that Losen does not practice empirical social science (as far as we can tell, he does not do any data analysis) so he does not discuss measurement issues in ways that allow useful engagement. How could that be done? For starters he could identify his critique of our evidence by stating what he thinks is wrong with the data we rely on or how we analyzed the data. He could then identify the size of the error or bias result from any flawed data or methods. He might even acknowledge weaknesses in the methods he endorses and try to reconcile estimates of graduation rates. Losen, rather than engage in this manner, dismisses empirical findings and whole datasets based on the simple assertion of a bias. That is, Losen blasts out critiques without any assessment of whether they matter worth a darn. They do not.

Joydeep tried to jumpstart a useful discussion at the start of his last contribution:

‘Before getting into details it is important to clarify the issue. The NELS shows a black graduation rate of 75% while the Swanson-Urban Institute methodology that Dan Losen favors shows a 50% rate. It seems that Losen is questioning the sampling of the NELS and saying that a failure to properly sample blacks leads to an overstated graduation rate. We have not found any scholar who claims that there is any sizeable sampling problem in the NELS (we have asked Losen in prior private communications to provide us people we can talk to about this, as we take such issues seriously) and no one has ever made an argument that sampling problems could explain a 25 percentage point difference in the black graduation rate. If there were such a problem then the vast literature based on the NELS, at least as regarding blacks, would need to be disregarded.”

As far as I can tell, Losen has never made any claims that his alleged problems with the NELS can explain the difference between a roughly 75% graduation rate in NELS and the 50% rate he seems to be comfortable with. Nor has he identified any researcher or research paper that has made a serious (actually, any) critique of NELS. It is curious that Losen cites Kaufman saying the NELS can’t produce state or local estimates. First, Kaufman actually identifies the NELS as the best source of data. Second, the point Kaufman is cited for- NELS doesn’t produce local estimates- is not an answer to why Losen’s preferred method for analyzing local data (the Swanson measure) yields a 25 percentage point lower graduation rate for blacks at the national level than that of the NELS—if Swanson’s methods are so far off at the national leve l they can’t possibly be worth anything at the local level.

What we have offered
We have compiled or analyzed all of the data we could find, assessed it, and tried to correct biases that we could identify (accounting for high and rising incarceration of black men; including the military and institutional populations into the analysis; develop estimates of GED receipt from ACE data; examine sampling coverage issues and more). We have presented the best estimates from household survey data, including the decennial census, and from national longitudinal data such as the NELS and the NLSY. We find that all of these other data show graduation rates for minorities that are far higher than those found by Greene and Swanson—the conventional wisdom.

We have specifically examined the methods used by Greene and Swanson in their analysis of enrollment and diploma data and have shown how specific choices they make in using the CCD lead them to seriously understate graduation rates, especially for minorities (in our report and in a Q&A).

Swanson’s measure is the one Losen likes the best. We have shown how Swanson’s use of ninth grade enrollment as his estimate of those entering ninth grade is wrong: around 20% of minorities in ninth grade have been held back and are not ‘entering’ ninth graders. The consequence of using ninth grade enrollment instead of eighth grade enrollment (to avoid what is called the ‘ninth grade bulge’) is to artificially lower minority graduation rates by 12-13 percentage points. We have heard no rebuttals of this critique from Losen or anyone else. We think this is because there is no reasonable response.

So What?
Does it really matter whether the overall graduation rate is 83%, as we estimate, or the now conventional number of 67-70%, as Greene and Swanson (and the National Governors Association) claim? After all, estimates of lower dropout rates still represent a greater than desired population of dropouts.

Our findings do not negate that there are definitely places and populations where dropping out is far too frequent – in some, horrifyingly frequent. There are definitely dropout problems that require comprehensive action so as to improve students’ life chances and to address class and race/ethnic gaps in graduation. But there is also an important value in getting the facts correct and especially in recognizing improvements over time. Touting a 50% graduation rate for minorities is not only factually incorrect but can also too easily encourage mischaracterizing the black student population as too hard to reach or as being disinterested in education. Identifying that three of every four black youths get a diploma and another 13% receive a GED is both factually correct and appropriately acknowledges the striving and persistence of black students.

Artificially low graduation rates also lend themselves to supporting a misdirected across-the-board indictment of schools. Inaccurate characterization of success in high schools can lead to misguided or wrongfully-targeted reform efforts. It can lead to efforts similar to sending homeland security funds to Montana and Idaho rather than to New York and Washington. Recognition that there has been progress in improving graduation rates might lead to an examination of what some schools must be doing right, practices that might be supported and extended to other schools. A misguided across-the-board indictment of schools might also lead to equally misguided radical reforms that could be harmful.

In truth, the dropout problem is concentrated in about 20% of our high schools. If we examine graduation rates by socio-economic status, we see that there is only a 3% dropout rate for the upper three-fifths of students, by socio-economic status. (This calculation includes GED recipients as high school completers). Yet, the bottom fifth had 27% who failed to complete high school in any way, and only 62% who obtained a regular diploma. The next higher fifth had 13% who failed to complete high school. So, there are definitely populations that are not successfully completing high school and getting diplomas, which is bad for those children and bad for the country.

Interestingly, among students in the lowest socio-economic fifth, black students have the highest probability of completing high school, greater than that of low-income whites and Hispanics. This is another reminder of how intertwined race and class are in our society.

To the extent we have a dropout crisis; it is primarily a crisis of youths at the bottom of the socio-economic scale, regardless of race (although race is clearly the key factor in allocating students to the bottom fifth and plays a far-too important role in our society). To address their problems we need comprehensive efforts to improve these children’s schools, alternative programs and the building up of second-chance systems. But we also have to think about the lives of these students outside of school and the disadvantages they faced even before they ever got to school (there are huge education disparities by income and race when students start kindergarten!). This means fighting poverty through better jobs and wages, providing early childhood development programs, creating stable housing, providing health care and fighting crime. That is certainly a national program we think is worth fighting for every day.

Losen, June 28, 1:48 p.m.:

Apples v. Oranges

I'm happy to end this debate, but here is my response to Mishel: I find this debate intensely frustrating in tone and substance because I admire Mishel's other work. I take serious issue with their responses to me in this blog, treatment of the wide range of work in our book Dropouts in America, and their misstatements and omissions of relevant facts in their published work on this particular topic.

1. Mishel says, “For starters he could identify his critique of our evidence by stating what he thinks is wrong with the data we rely on or how we analyzed the data. We have not found any scholar who claims that there is any sizeable sampling problem in the NELS (we have asked Losen in prior private communications to provide us people we can talk to about this, as we take such issues seriously).”

Social Scientists do criticize NELS. Kaufman, now deceased, raised serious concerns about the NELS and all methods. In our book, Dropouts in America: Confronting the Graduation Rate Crisis, Kaufman goes into detail to unpack numerous concerns regarding the bias in both the CPS and the NELS, emphasizing the racial bias. He states: " NELS and CPS may both have serious coverage problems in their realized samples. Minority students and schools may be so seriously underrepresented in their sampling frames that it leads to great systematic bias in both surveys." (p.125). I think most readers would regard “GREAT SYSTEMIC BIAS” as a “sizeable” reason to proceed with caution.

Besides the work of the late Kaufman, Gary Orfield, Harvard Professor at the Graduate School of Education and the Director of The Civil Rights Project, has asserted a significant problem with racial bias in the NELS but has no interest in this wrestling match. Chris Swanson, one of the most prominent researchers using an enrollment based estimate, actually cut his teeth as a researcher on the NELS data set working with this data for five years at the National Opinion Research Center, the organization most closely associated with the survey development and use. He has raised numerous issues with the data, and I a nd others have made Mishel aware of his objections. Robert Balfanz, Senior researcher at Johns Hopkins specializing in high school reform has also told Mishel of NELS bias.

But Mishel erroneously asserts: “As far as I can tell, Losen has never made any claims that his alleged problems with the NELS can explain the difference between a roughly 75% graduation rate in NELS and the 50% rate he seems to be comfortable with. Nor has he identified any researcher or research paper that has made a serious (actually, any) critique of NELS.”

So in addition to Mishel’s failure to see what Kaufman had written, or acknowledge what I and others have told him, part of the problem lies in Mishel’s contingency, that “nothing can explain the difference between a roughly 75% graduation rate in NELS and the 50% rate he seems to be comfortable with.” In other words, for Mishel, nothing short of explaining away the entire difference between a 50% "on time" rate, and a 75% extended years estimate will do. This is a very weak defense dependent on the very issue that is in dispute. Mishel and Roy assume the validity and accuracy of their 75% benchmark, an extended years estimate, not an “on time” estimate. That is part of what we are debating about. I think that there is likely consensus among education researchers that the 4 year enrollment based estimates should not be compared to an extended years estimate. I’ve yet to read any researcher support Mishel’s comparison of a four year estimate with an extended year estimate. In a recent New York Times piece, Claudia Golden, a Harvard economics professor who does her own education research weighed in on the debate between Mishel’s assertions and those based on enrollment data. “They’re using two different types of data, and each has its own problems,” she said. “The truth lies somewhere in between.” So Mishel and Roy can ask for more names, but if they insist on an erroneous method of comparison, I doubt we can resolve the misleadingly large gap that Mishel has constructed.

2. Mishel says, “I am not sure what his basis is for saying we do not favor any serious action on a national scale…”

My basis for saying this comes from the conclusion to their book which reads as follows:

"Unfortunately, the only data available at the school district level are the CCD data that we judge to provide inaccurate estimates of high school completion. This suggests that measures of high school completion at the school-district level WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO WAIT until data systems that track individuals are available.... Doing so will require a national system and sufficient resources for schools to track 'leavers.' WE ARE SKEPTICAL THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN ANYTIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE." (Emphasis added). The rest of the conclusion calls for more research, better assessment of bias in the CPS and better understanding of the role of GEDs. Laudable goals, but from my perspective these do not qualify as "serious action on a national scale." To their credit, in other places they do say, in reference to their estimate of a 25% dropout rate that "we must fix this glaring social problem." However, I don't think that my critique of their underwhelming conclusion was unwarranted, nor cause to feel ashamed.

As a civil rights advocate who works with civil rights leaders at the national, state and local level, I can guarantee Mishel that folks are concerned when the state of education for poor Blacks gets masked over by national statistics or suggestions that we can’t do much without more research and better data. For the record, the “paralysis by analysis” is a line from a speech about graduation rates given recently by John Jackson, the National Policy Director for the NAACP.

3. I do not doubt the good intentions of Mishel and Roy. I do accept that they care. I'll choose not to escalate the personal attacks. I would instead agree with Mishel's concluding blog paragraph. I too see the need to address poverty and all of the related problems. These are critical pursuits. I also do not consider schools as the only arc to navigate these troubled waters. Unfortunately, Mishel’s published report doesn’t delve into the kind of solutions that would help in the near future and gives no specific guidance on how to address the crisis in poor urban school districts in a serious way. I'd add that the fact that we urgently need to solve numerous problems in many aspects of society need not distract educators from addressing a crisis in our public schools, especially for minority students. Our work at The Civil Rights Project has highlighted how schools, districts and states have failed to acknowledge the graduation rate crisis for many years, choosing to focus on test scores alone. Research suggests that if we can improve graduation rates there would be substantial benefits to all involved.

4. Mishel and Roy have yet to explain why it is when schools are evaluated on a “four year” rate, they focus only on the extended years graduation rates? On “The News Hour,” I was glad to see Mishel provide a range for Black graduation rates, yet he still emphasized the 75% figure. I’ve repeatedly asked Roy and Mishel to justify the emphasis on the extended years survey rate when the primary issue is the health of schools and districts. Over and over I ask the question, but they have yet to provide an answer. The law requires an “on time” or four year estimate. We should know about other rates, too, and I am all for second chances, but we should provide the supports and resources to schools and districts to improve the four year rate, and that rate should be central to evaluating the health of our schools and districts.

5. Mishel and Roy err in implying that The Civil Rights Project relies on just one data set. Our book looks at the issue from many viewpoints and has data from Swanson, Balfanz, Hauser, Kaufman, Rumsberger, Allensworth, Haney, McPartland and more. The book is far more comprehensive than a discussion of reporting accuracy. For arguments sake, I have agreed to assume the accuracy in 2006 of the NELS 88 survey, which provided a 63.2% "on time" graduation rate for Blacks, nationally, for the Class of 1992. The central point I make is that by many measures, including NELS 88's "on time" estimate there is a serious crisis.

6. I raise the Florida, New York and Chicago longitudinal data deemed "much better" by Mishel and Roy, as evidence that the crisis is not “seriously exaggerated,” an assertion that Mishel and Roy have failed to prove. I point out that the "on time" rates in these locations cry out for urgent action. While they try to use these data, unsuccessfully, to cast doubt on one particular set of estimates, they ignore the fact that Black "on time" graduation rates of between 30.8% and 55% derived from these data suggest a true crisis. While these limited data don't prove that either their 63.2% "on time" estimate or preferred "74%" estimate is wrong, it should make Mishel and Roy think that there could be many many schools, districts and states closer to 50%. Given the Florida, New York City and Chicago data, if the 74% rate they assert describes reality for the nation, then their national rate, at best, masks over the far harsher reality in too many districts across the nation. The other possibility is that their sample of 1,041 Black respondents for the Class of 1992 doesn't accurately describe the Black graduation rate in 2006. Given that these three very significant sources of data do not come even close to their estimate, I'm surprised that they refuse to acknowledge the possibility that their estimates are way off. The Civil Rights Project has been fighting this battle for over five years. We didn't focus on this issue to advance a particular estimate, instead w e believe in using the best evidence available from multiple sources to show that this urgent problem has gotten far too little attention until very recently.

7. Contrary to Mishel’s assertion, I do raise fair doubts about Roy and Mishel's methods and conclusions. Swanson and Greene have also criticized his methods in their published response to Mishel’s opinion piece in Education Week. I have checked my assertions with senior education researchers, and don’t need a Ph.D to raise these important questions. They assert that the NELS estimates from 1992 and 1994 gives them an unimpeachable gold standard, and that therefore they had the real truth on their side. Roy has also asserted that my numbers were in error. But, according to a highly regarded researcher, there were 3,000 Black students in the original sample, but the 1988-2000 cohort is much smaller. Of the roughly 1,456 in the sub-sample, there were only 1,041 black respondents who actually had their transcripts checked. This 1,041 constitutes the “golden” cohort that made up the "on time" graduating Class of 1992. Some of those in the sample were in private school. While I can’t say with precision how far off the numbers are, I can say that there are serious problems with using this sample of public and private students for the Class of 1992 to assert factual knowledge of the public school graduation rate for Blacks in 2002. Mishel’s is far from an ideal method. The highly esteemed education researchers I have checked in with think that the questions I raise about the representation of the verified students, concerns about bias in the sample, the contrary evidence from Florida, New York and Chicago, and aligning years for comparing estimates are all legitimate issues and reason for doubting the accuracy of NELS.

8. What is the affect of the bubble? I have challenged Mishel on this in private. As far as asserting there is an urgent crisis, high grade retention is more evidence of problems with high schools. While the bubble has the potential to deflate reported rates, it also has the potential to inflate graduation rates, or it can have no impact.

Simply put, if the retained 9th grade students, and non-retained 9th grade students both had a 50% diploma rate, the “on time” rate would have no significant impact from the bubble. If we accept for arguments sake Mishel’s assertion that about 25% of Blacks are retained in grade 9, we can derive their success rate by comparing the on time NELS with the extended years NELS diploma rates of 63% and 74%, a difference of 11%. In other words 11/25 retained Blacks earned a diploma if NELS is correct. That is a 45% success rate for the Black students in NELS that were retained at grade.

So if we assume that Mishel is right about the retention rate for Blacks, and that based on NELs there is a 45% success rate, then the bubble impact would be close to 0 where the four year enrollment estimate of graduation rates was 45%. If we use the enrollment based 4 year estimate of 50% the bubble would have a only a minor deflationary impact. The only way the bubble has a significant impact is if a much larger percent of the retained students fail to graduate. But that would call into question Mishel’s extended year estimate of 74%.

The point is, most researchers agree that in the real world, where retention rates are high, and dropouts among retained students are also high, the bubble would likely deflate graduation rates, but only between 1% and 5% under most circumstances. Mishel makes unrealistic assumptions, not supported by his NELS 74% estimate, to exaggerate the impact of the bubble. Folks like Robert Balfanz, of Johns Hopkins, who do both empirical work with national data sets and qualitative analysis of struggling urban schools, have tried to explain to Mishel and Roy that the bubble can inflate or deflate the graduation rate, and that the enrollment based estimates are far closer to the reality they see in the data as well as in their experience, first hand. In any event, The Civil Rights Project is one of the leading advocates for more accurate graduation rates and has worked with numerous others to develop model legislation on this point.

Conclusion: Ultimately, the technical debate returns to whether Mishel’s assertion of exaggeration is true, or whether he is the one exaggerating the difference between estimates. I assert that the estimates based on enrollment are not precise but very informative. Roy and Mishel arrive at a very different understanding, but mostly because they compare the apples of school enrollment data with Mishelian oranges, that take many more years to ripen.

Check back for a response from Roy or Mishel.

Education News for Thursday, June 29

Daily News — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:54:00 +0000

Teacher Union Speaks Out Against Closing Schools - Leaders of the Chicago Teachers' Union went before a City Council committee Tuesday to spell out their objections to the public schools' Renaissance 2010 plan. (more)

Reform for L.A. Schools Advances - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's bid to assert significant control over the Los Angeles Unified School District cleared its first legislative hurdle Wednesday, with state lawmakers voting 7-1 in support of his plan despite expressing deep reservations. (more)

Mayor clears hurdle No. 1 - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's controversial Los Angeles school-takeover plan cleared one of its first significant legislative hurdles Wednesday, winning approval from the Senate Education Committee even as lawmakers, school officials and parents questioned whether it would really help schools. (more)

Union bosses today, school bosses tomorrow - Editorial: In the muddled deal for authority over L.A. schools, one thing is clear: The teachers union would win. (more)

Antonio's Theory of Relativity - Can Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa really claim victory with his compromise school plan? (more)

Passing Marks - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s plan for L.A. Unified still faces another committee, the full Senate and the state Assembly. But Wednesday’s 7-1 committee vote sent some strong messages to partisans on both sides: The train is leaving the station, and Democrats are going to send the bill to a welcoming governor no matter how many questions are raised regarding the new L.A. Unified flow chart — one crafted in a burst of late-night negotiations just last week. (more)

Napolitano defends acceptance of school-choice measures - Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano said Wednesday she still opposes vouchers, but accepted several measures helping students afford private schools to gain legislative approval of additional spending for all-day kindergarten, teacher pay and other priorities. (more)

It's a Wrap! - A super-sized legislative session comes to an end in Arizona, with education the big winner of the budget negotiations. (more)

Panel calculating how U.S. schools should teach math - The National Math Advisory Panel is holding its second-ever meeting in Chapel Hill, North Carolina this week, with members discussing ways to raise math achievement of students across the United States. (more)

Unions: For the Children? - Opinion: Who would obstruct the fight against sex trafficking of children? The Vancouver Education Association (VEA) comes to mind. (more)

State needs to step up - Editorial: Massachusetts has long boasted of the strongest public schools in the nation. It's discouraging to see new data showing we're losing ground. (more)

How did primary affect the schools? - Both sides of Utah's education reform debate are claiming victory after this week's primary election. (more)

Reforming the school district - Los Angeles teachers and residents weigh in on the mayor's LAUSD takeover plan. (more)

Parents applaud, complain as LAUSD proposal advances - As California lawmakers push ahead with a radical shake-up of the Los Angeles Unified School District, parents are as divided as the politicians over the plan promoted by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. (more)

Teacher unions to merge Sept. 1 - New York's two teachers unions will officially merge Sept. 1, creating a lobbying entity 600,000 strong. (more)

Do teachers get a summer vacation?

edspresso — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:09:00 +0000

Get Schooled has a pretty interesting blog discussion on this subject. Check out the comment thread for some entertaining thoughts on both sides of the debate.

More on K-12/college partnerships

edspresso — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:45:00 +0000

Taking remedial classes in college is pretty typical for most high school graduates. The Dallas Morning News explains why:

The answer lies partly in the unique history of American education, according to Michael Kirst, an education professor at Stanford University.
"We built two mass, disconnected systems. The K-12 system built up on its own, and higher education grew away from it," Dr. Kirst said. Over time, they've developed in "splendid isolation" of each other.
In England, Germany and many other developed countries, the two systems developed together. They have a long history of cooperation. For instance, together they create tests for college admission and placement, Dr. Kirst said. And here?
Many states require students to pass a test built on their state's curriculum – in Texas, the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills – to graduate from high school.
But to get into many colleges, students must take the ACT or SAT, tests that were created by national companies and that don't really reflect the skills states require for graduation.
Then, many colleges give another test once kids arrive to place them in classes.
And often, the K-12 and collegiate tests don't even resemble each other. For instance, students can use calculators on the math portion of the TAKS, but not on many college entrance and placement tests.

Coming on the heels of yesterday's post on the growing partnerships between K-12 and universities, this history--which, I think, most of us intuitively understand but never really acknowledge--kind of helps fill in the picture a bit as to why the disconnect exists in the first place. Finally, these parallel universes seem to be joining together. Faster, please. (Hat tip to Education at the Brink.)

Villaraigosa and the LA Times: parting of the ways

edspresso — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:43:00 +0000

The colorful minds behind School Me! are still off vacationing, so we haven't heard a lot of commentary from them yet on the progress of the takeover plan. But one thing is clear: Villaraigosa has lost the LA Times editorial board on the idea.

United Teachers Los Angeles opposes merit pay for top-performing teachers. It makes the firing of bad teachers almost impossible. It's against allowing administrators to assign teachers to the schools where they are needed most. It's sharply critical of charter schools. The union doesn't like having a unified curriculum, and it thinks that teachers shouldn't have to put up with training from coaches.
In other words, the union is largely opposed to most reforms that demand more of teachers. (Individual teachers, many of whom applaud changing the schools to benefit students, are another matter.)
One of the biggest criticisms of the school board has been that the union wields too much power over its decisions because the union is by far the biggest donor to board candidates. Mayoral control of schools, in theory at least, dilutes that power because mayoral candidates draw from a larger pool of donors, and a mayor's decisions receive more public scrutiny.
So much for theory. As it turns out, a mayor eager to work out a legislative compromise — and who has a long history with the teachers union — can hand far more to the union than the school board has ever agreed to.

And here's the stinger:

A weakened school board, as beholden to UTLA as ever, makes an ideal negotiating partner for a powerful union. A superintendent who isn't answerable to the board gives the union enough wiggle room to continually challenge district policy. A situation in which no one is dominant provides a perfect opportunity for the strongest player to emerge as the leader of the district. And UTLA is a strong, well-financed player. No wonder (UTLA president A.J.) Duffy likes this deal so much.

Go read the whole thing.

UPDATE: The editorial didn’t tell the whole story on just what Duffy said at yesterday’s hearing. Mike Antonucci fills in the blanks:

In testimony before the California Senate Education Committee, Duffy defended the deal between UTLA and Mayor Villaraigosa by saying:

"This bill has been criticized for fragmenting authority over the system so that no one person is accountable, but that is precisely the genius of this legislation."

Duffy is absolutely right. It takes sheer genius to craft a proposal so cleverly that an operation involving tens of thousands of employees, hundreds of thousands of students, and billions of dollars holds no one accountable.

Bravo, sir.

Who would have thought Duffy would be so forthright about it?

Searching for a cause in Sausalito

edspresso — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:57:00 +0000

From time to time I've mentioned the disastrous Kansas City experiment, which tends to be a rallying point for those who dare to contradict the Kozol doctrine that increased spending will cure all that ails American education. Looks like somebody didn't get the memo, because we have a Kansas City for the new millennium:

Sausalito Marin City teachers are the highest-paid in the county, with an average salary in 2004-05 of $70,981 compared with the Marin average of $58,256. The district has three schools, an annual budget of almost $5 million, an enrollment of 283 K-8 students, and a pupil-to-teacher ratio of 14 to 1. Per pupil expenditure is $22,232, three times the state average.
Still, more than 50 percent of the district's students fail to graduate from high school - sparking an attempt by trustees to turn around the district's educational program.

This is a school district that has nearly everything in its favor. It has a tiny number of students overall. It has a ridiculously small class size (i.e. student/teacher ratio). While it includes the city of Marin, which tends to be low-income, it also includes the upscale town of Sausalito in its boundaries. And it has more money than it knows what to do with. But performance has been so odious that parents traditionally flee the district for private schools!

Poor academic achievement in the Sausalito Marin City School District has rendered the concept of public neighborhood schools largely meaningless as dozens of children in the district, both black and white, flock to private schools.
Even the district's relative wealth - it spends $22,232 per pupil annually, more than three times the state average - is not enough to coax students into the district.
"They are really being deprived of an education," said Marin City resident Catherine Shine, whose youngest daughter, Olivia, 6, attends private St. Patrick School in Larkspur, and oldest, Ashley, 13, briefly attended the district's Willow Creek charter school before attending Mill Valley Middle School.
"These kids are getting a (poor) education and nobody seems to care. É I can't figure out where the money goes."
George Stratigos, president of the Sausalito Marin City School District Board, said Shine's complaint sounds familiar.
"Those were my words from 10 years ago," he said.
Nearly a decade ago, Stratigos led "Project Homecoming," a successful recall campaign of the school board that culminated in his ascent to the position of board president. In an interview at the time, he vowed to change "the long-standing culture of failure of the Sausalito Schools District to a culture for excellence."
In effect, Stratigos said, his goal was to attract would-be private school students to the public schools.
Today, Stratigos and another recall proponent-turned-trustee, Shirley Thornton, invoke nearly identical language to describe the district's condition.

It's been ten years. And nothing has changed. More on Stratigos here. His blog is here. And other Marin Independent Journal stories on this may be found here and here. (Hat tip to Alan Bonsteel--who, come to think of it, really should start blogging--for bringing this to my attention.)

Education News for Friday, June 30

Daily News — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:22:54 +0000

Nation's "best schools" fail minorities - Many of the high schools on "Newsweek's" popular annual lists of the nation's top 100 schools have glaring achievement gaps between the races and high dropout rates, according to a new report. (more)

South Carolina and tuition tax credits - The commission is being sued by South Carolinians for Responsible Government. The group wants the state to give parents tax credits or money to help pay for private school tuition. (more)

Reading gains slowing, study says - A No Child Left Behind report's author says that states inflate progress. California's gap between state and federal scores is among the smallest. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

Teachers' Unions as Monopolies (Michael J. O'Neal)

mtigani — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 05:00:00 +0000

One can only chuckle at the bumper stickers on SUVs whose drivers look forward to the day when schools get all the money they need and the Defense Department has to hold a bake sale. Bake sale indeed. Annually, public education is a $446.3 billion enterprise. That’s a whole lotta cookies. Now, the Idaho Education Association wants taxpayers to pony up $180 million more each year for increased funding for education through a 1 percent sales tax hike. A penny here and a penny there, and soon, as the late Senator Everett Dirksen might have said, you’re talking about real money. You’ve gotta hand it to the teachers unions. They’ve made sure that when the public pie gets sliced, the profession gets its “just desserts”—and then some. In 1960, annual spending on public education nationwide was about $3,000 per student. In the years since, that amount has swollen to over $9,400 per student. Those are inflation-adjusted dollars, so spending on public education in real terms has more than tripled, with dubious results. For years the teachers unions have sustained a PR campaign that should be the envy of corporate CEOs everywhere. Take the issue of charter schools. Charters expose the cost bloat and inefficiency of the typical school system by doing a better job for about a third less money. They do so primarily by reining in administrative costs, in contrast to school systems generally. In 1960 American public schools limped along with one administrator for every 13.6 students; by 2002 they apparently needed one for every 8.1 students. The unions, predictably, maintain ongoing jihad against charters, wanting the public to believe they siphon money away from “real” public schools—though maybe it’s the “real” schools that are siphoning money away from charters and other alternatives that would provide taxpayers and kids better results for less money. Yet in 2005 the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union, donated $500,000 to a Washington State anti-charter group called Protect Our Public Schools—an Orwellian name, given that charters are public schools. Another gambit the unions have perfected is to focus on state rankings in spending per student. Now in any ranking along any metric, by definition one state has to be first and one has to be last. A state’s position in the ranking by itself means nothing. I’m just guessing here, but North Dakota probably doesn’t provide much of the republic’s exotic fruit, but no Fargo newspaper is going to report with apocalyptic anxiety that North Dakota “ranks a grim 49th in papaya production” (ahead of Montana, maybe). Yet that’s exactly how state rankings on education spending are reported, as though public spending were a contest. Some states, though, spend less because their cost of living is lower. Or they use their taxpayers’ money more efficiently than others—like Utah, which outperforms Idaho with about $1,500 a year less per student. Then there’s the touchy subject of teachers’ salaries. Whenever the issue arises, the union spin machine gets oiled up to crank out press releases like confetti at a ticker-tape parade. Aided by a compliant press, they pull a sleight-of-hand to create the impression that the starting salary of a 23-year-old with a bachelor’s degree is indicative of salary levels for the profession as a whole and that teachers everywhere are toiling for salaries in the mid- to high $20K range. In fact, starting salaries for newly minted teachers compare quite favorably with those in such professions as journalism and social work—non-technical professions staffed from roughly the same labor pool (i.e., those lacking aptitude for or interest in such technical fields as mathematics or engineering). Further, salary grids provide automatic increases with years of service. The result? The average teacher salary is $46,000, well above the U.S. median income and roughly 20 percent higher than average teacher salaries in other developed countries. Add in generous fringe benefits, usually 25 percent or more of base salary, and an entirely different picture emerges. The teachers' union cartel is a larcenous monopoly. Now, like nineteenth-century robber barons, they’re compounding their larceny by trying to enlist the state to force consumers of their product to fund their monopoly. Old John D. Rockefeller would’ve been proud. Michael J. O'Neal is a columnist for the Moscow-Pullman Daily News (where this article originally appeared) and a freelance writer. He lives in Idaho.

Charter school fistfights

edspresso — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:12:00 +0000

The lawsuits are flying right and left in Colorado.

Lawsuits quietly making their way through state courts could put an end to an agency that grants public school charters over the objection of local school boards.
At issue is the Colorado Charter School Institute, established by the legislature in 2004. Seven schools authorized by the institute so far will enroll an estimated 3,000 students next fall.
Local boards of education see the institute as an end-run around a portion of the Colorado Constitution they interpret as giving them authority over all publicly funded schools in their districts.
"We want to keep the decisions about educational opportunities and choices at the local level, where the taxpayers are," said Poudre school board chairwoman Jana Ley.
"The public ought to be able to come to our meetings and say, 'Yes, we want this (charter school)' or 'No we don't want this, and here's why,' and . . . there (are) people there who will listen to that," Ley said.
Poudre, which serves Fort Collins and surrounding areas, filed a lawsuit in June in Denver District Court claiming the Charter School Institute is unconstitutional. Boulder and Westminster brought similar suits in 2005.
The Boulder and Westminster suits have been combined and are scheduled for trial in October before Judge Joseph Meyer.
The cases are being followed even in school districts where charters have not been controversial, said Jane Urschel, the associate director of the Colorado Association of School Boards.

Charter schools, by definition, are public schools. A bunch of local residents got together and applied for the charter. As to public support for the school, it will ultimately be made manifest through that school's performance. Ley's problem is that these schools aren't public enough, or public in the correct way. Needless to say, Democratic Rep. Terrence Carroll, whose legislation established the Institute, is seething at the litigation:

"This lawsuit's clearly about a distrust and hate of charter schools by our local school districts, and that's about as blunt as I can be," Carroll said. "It's really a revolt against reform."

Check out the article to find out how he's fighting back.

Has the Gates Foundation bitten off more than it can chew?

edspresso — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:16:00 +0000

Alexander Russo thinks out loud about the Gates/Buffett philanthropic leviathan:

I wonder -- as many others probably do -- how the new money is going to be divided between education and health. Whatever the division, I wonder whether an even bigger amount of money to give away every year will help the program folks at Gates, or pressurize their thinking in ways that won't help them think and act as wisely as possible.

Here's why I'm optimistic. If Gates ran Microsoft--a much bigger organization than the Gates Foundation will ever be--successfully, I imagine he'll get the hang of philanthropy. And Buffett's natural skepticism, and ability to pick winners, is legendary. If he says the Gates Foundation is a safe bet, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Yes, the organization has problems--as Russo notes, the foundation is only at 300 staffers, which probably wasn't enough before the Buffett Bonanza came into the picture. And they've made more than a few missteps so far. But I imagine they'll get the kinks worked out soon enough.

Unions looking out for their own--period

edspresso — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:19:00 +0000

Edwize goes after a Brooklyn charter school with a pipe wrench over the firing of teacher Nichole Byrne Lau, allegedly for questioning the school's pay practices. (This came, by the way, after Lau received overwhelming praise from her principal, other faculty members and students.) The school founder and CEO, who apparently never learned the first rule of holes, then reportedly said the teacher was fired because she "hates children and she's a racist." Every New York newspaper is reporting on this, so click a link for more information. Edwize sums up thusly:

That is why teachers in charter schools, like teachers in other public schools, need unions. And it is also why, as the case of Nichole Byrne Lau so pointedly illustrates, students in charter schools need to have their teachers protected by unions. If there was a union at the Williamsburg Charter High School, the students in that school would still have one great, wonderful teacher of English.

Joe Williams response provides some important perspective:

...if this one is for real, there is already a process in place to protect the teacher here, and the school's charter could (and should) be revoked if the allegations of union-busting are true.

We wholeheartedly agree that, if these allegations are true, the school richly deserves to be stripped of its charter. And while the UFTies are appropriately full of righteous indignation, there are other avenues for redress present (imagine lawyers presently strapping on the brass knuckles right now--rest assured there will be an awesome legal brawl over this). But Joe has another salient point on the union's posturing:

...I think Leo is making a stretch when he suggests that all charters need unions just because of one dude who seems to be on an ego trip.

Actually, it's not Leo--it's his boss. The Sun's report on the situation suggests the UFT may be using this as an agenda vehicle:

The head of the city's teachers union is latching onto a recent spate of firings at a Brooklyn charter school to push Albany to make it easier for teachers at charter schools to join the union...
In recent months, the union has tried to stop Albany from increasing the number of charter schools allowed under state law. While the state Senate voted in favor of the governor's push to raise the number of allowed schools to 250 from 100, the Assembly left Albany for the summer without voting on the measure.
Ms. Weingarten said she wants any legislation that allows for additional charter schools to include language that protects teachers who try to organize and ensures an expedited process so that administrators cannot interfere in organizing drives or harass pro-union workers. In that process, teachers could sign cards rather than have a secret-ballot election to form a union.
The policy director for the New York Charter School Association, Peter Murphy, called the union's efforts "counterproductive." He said that the charter law already stipulates a complaint process for teachers and that a school can have its charter revoked for violating a teacher's rights.
"She's exploiting this issue to try and organize the easy way, by having it mandated," Mr. Murphy said of Ms. Weingarten.

We make no secret of the fact that we generally view the teachers' unions as a major obstacle--not just to our efforts, but to any meaningful education reform. And in spite of what Edwize and likeminded unionistas would have you believe, it's not because we get warm fuzzies by seeing teachers indiscriminately shown the door by all-powerful principals.

It's because of stuff like this: the utterly insane process one must follow to fire a New York City public schoolteacher, brought to you almost singlehandedly by the unions. It is, for all practical purposes, nearly impossible to do so, no matter how bad he/she is. And if that's the case, what principal is going to waste his/her time on the mediocre ones--those who really don't measure up, but haven't done anything utterly reprehensible?

One of the advantages choice schools report enjoying over their public counterparts is the liberty to independently make personnel decisions. Free of the thickets of union laws, bylaws and regulations, they don't have to wade through a sea of paperwork and spend prohibitive amounts of time and money getting a slipshod teacher out of the way. Is it any wonder charter schools shudder at the thought of union contact?

The UFT has far more control than administrators in deciding which teachers go to which schools. It opposes merit pay. It has enormous power in deciding curriculum (another major advantage choice schools enjoy). Is it any wonder the New York Daily News ran a series of editorials last year practically begging the UFT to make some changes during contract talks last year?

If the unions were simply in the business of protecting and elevating good teachers, then we would probably count them as allies. But the unions are in the business of protecting and elevating all teachers, regardless of ability and quality, at any cost. That's the problem.

Changes

edspresso — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:13:00 +0000

There are a couple of changes coming your way on Edspresso.

Regular readers know that the Featured Commentary section features a new article each day. That changes on Monday, when the section will become a weekly offering, with all new articles being posted on that day. After next week, the new edition of Featured Commentary will appear on Tuesdays. (Because of the Fourth of July, we decided to move next week's edition to Monday.)

Now, take a look at the tabs at the top of the screen. "Our View" is changing to "Daily View." It will no longer be restricted solely to folks with the Alliance, but will also include other third-party remarks that are too time-sensitive for the weekly editions of Featured Commentary.

As always, we welcome third-party submissions. And now, we have two platforms to run those submissions instead of just one.

Education News for Monday, July 3

Daily News — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 09:56:58 +0000

LA Unified losing staff to charters - Amid the continuing growth of charter schools in Los Angeles, hundreds of teachers and administrators have left the city's school system to take jobs at the independently run campuses. (more)

"Data" proves each side's schools case - The high-stakes public relations battle over Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's bid to take over Los Angeles public schools has escalated into a duel as much over statistics as over politics. (more)

Give PA parents more choices to educate their children - The Educational Investment Tax Credit (EITC) program set up by the commonwealth more than five years ago hardly addresses the demands of Pennsylvania parents looking to transfer their children out of public school. (more)

School choice offers much - Polling indicates that 90 percent of Arizonans approve of school choice and the Legislature was apparently paying attention. (more)

FL teachers' union plan blitz on NCLB - The head of the country's largest education union said Sunday that teachers welcome the accountability measures imposed by the No Child Left Behind Act - and will demand the same from Congress when the measure comes up for renewal in 2007. (more)

UPDATE:

Swann and education - If Lynn Swann is daring Pennsylvanians to take his "comprehensive" education reform policy seriously, the Republican gubernatorial nominee will be ignored. Especially when voters learn what he ignored. (more)

Graduation rates improving, chancellor says - In signs that New York City's historically abysmal high school graduation rates are on a solid upswing, Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein reported strong numbers yesterday for the senior classes at 15 of the new small high schools that are a centerpiece of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's effort to revamp the school system. (more)

Sipchen and Friedman

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:49:00 +0000

We see a lot of meaning in this very important article, where School Me! columnist Bob Sipchen sits down with Milton Friedman. But rather than simply break out in thunderous applause every 10 seconds or so, we'll just chip in here and there:

“Vouchers,” (Friedman) says, “should have been a Democratic proposal. I don’t think the unions can continue to succeed in making it an act of faith that if you’re a Democrat you’re against vouchers. That’s resting on a pile of straw.
“It’s not going to last. It’s impossible, really, literally impossible for me to conceive that you can keep on sticking to this failing system, this terrible system that does so much injustice.”

Funnily enough, that point about Dems and school choice puts Eduwonk firmly in Friedman's corner. (Nobody tell Rotherham, though!) Meanwhile, what injustice is of concern to Friedman?

“It’s very clear that the people who suffer most in our present system are people in the slums — blacks, Hispanics, the poor, the underclass.”

Which helps things circle around nicely to his point re: Democrats. From a political standpoint, it's utterly illogical for Democrats to continue to stonewall on school choice, because those who stand to benefit the most from school choice--and, not surprisingly, those who are consistently favor it the most--are...drum roll, please...low-income minorities!

We don't say this to drive Democrats away. As Anna pointed out elsewhere, school choice is not and should not remain a strictly Republican issue, and the Alliance is vitally interested in making a nice, big tent to bring in as many Democrats as possible. For Dems, school choice should be a no-brainer. Liberals demagogue school choice at their electoral peril.

One last point:

A big fan of freedom, Friedman objects to public schools on principle, arguing — as he says most classic liberals once did — that government involvement by nature decreases individual liberty. But it’s the decline of schooling at the practical level, especially for the poor, that seems to exasperate him...
At heart, he remains a pure capitalist. He would like to see government get out of schooling entirely. As a pragmatist, he figures that if the government must spend money on education, it should give it to parents to spend, on private schools if they wish.

Idealistic, doctrinaire libertarians get warm fuzzies at the thought of getting government out of education entirely. But there's a cold, hard reality that must be reckoned with, and it is this: what you want you are never going to get. Government involvement in education is here to stay, and school choice is the best alternative you are going to have.

Go read the whole thing. (And note Bob's question of the week at the bottom of the article.)

The 100 best schools in the U.S.A.

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:50:00 +0000

Are they really the 100 best schools in the U.S.?

Many of the high schools on Newsweek’s popular annual lists of the nation’s Top 100 schools have glaring achievement gaps between the races and high dropout rates, according to a new report.
Education Sector, an independent, nonpartisan education think tank, collected student performance data for the 100 schools in Newsweek’s 2005 “America’s 100 Best High Schools” issue. Its report — “Why Newsweek’s List of America’s 100 Best High Schools Doesn’t Make the Grade” — suggests that the formula the magazine uses to compile its list is too narrow.
“While some schools on Newsweek’s list may be among the best in the nation, a closer look at the data reveals that many do not meet a reasonable definition of a good high school,” the report says. “Indeed, some of the schools on the list have such significant achievement gaps that they should be on a list of schools needing improvement rather than on one for best schools."
“So many of the schools on the list have such significant gaps in achievement among their student subgroups that it calls into question that entire Newsweek enterprise.”

The list's creator responds:

Jay Mathews, the creator of Newsweek’s formula, says the narrowness of the Challenge Index is one of its strengths.
“Its narrowness and simplicity means that readers can easily see what I am doing and judge for themselves if it makes sense to them,” says Mathews, an education reporter at the Washington Post. “Since the rating involves two easily obtainable numbers, they can do the arithmetic themselves for their own schools and see how they compare to those on the list.”
He says that if Newsweek used more sophisticated measures like the adequate yearly progress requirements in No Child Left Behind, it would “leave the reader lost in a statistical jungle, as he or she is with the U.S. News college list.”

Of course, this just opens up the whole debate over judging quality and performance in schools. But if it's true this list applies merely to those in a certain economic bracket, then would it be fair to say that even our best high schools are mediocre?

Trading curricula?

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:51:00 +0000

When it comes to teachers designing their own curricula, one entrepreneur is putting his money where is mouth is:

Teachers are selling their original lectures, course outlines and study guides to other teachers through a new Web site launched by New York entrepreneur Paul Edelman.
The site, teacherspayteachers.com, aims to be an eBay for educators. For a $29.95 yearly fee, sellers can post their work and set their prices. Buyers rate the products.
"It's a way to pat teachers on the back, to value what they do," Edelman said. "They create the material night after night. The best way to value that is to put a price on it."
Lots of Web sites offer lesson plans that can be purchased or downloaded for free. Yet Edelman says they don't cover a fraction of what teachers themselves have come up with. By offering them a way to make a buck, the 33-year-old former teacher says he's found a niche.
He's banking on it. Edelman cashed in his retirement fund and maxed his credit cards to launch the business in April. He keeps 15 percent of every sale, but he knows the only way he will really make money is by getting "teacher-authors" to pay the membership fee.
So far, he's recruited about 80. That includes eight former state teachers of the year who got free lifetime memberships.

Recording companies spent years suing Napster and similar file-swapping services into the ground trying to squash MP3s. Then along came Apple, and three years later the record companies are still looking rather dumb. And so it is with the textbook industry. As the article points out (as I did in the link at the beginning of this post), the ever-present problems related to copyright law must be addressed. But the moral, as with the MP3 wars, is this: fighting superior technology is an exercise in futility.

Pennsylvania, Democrats and school choice

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:57:00 +0000

In my earlier post on today's School Me! interview of Friedman, I made the assertion that Democrats can no longer afford to stonewall school choice. It seems some Democrats have gotten the message.

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell just signed into law an expansion of that state's Education Tax Credit Program, increasing the amount available from $44 million to $54 million. In the process, he became the fourth Democratic governor to sign school choice legislation this year:

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano signed into law two new voucher programs for disabled and foster kids and let a new corporate scholarship tax credit program and its expansion become law without her signature.
Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack signed legislation creating a new individual scholarship tax program.
Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle signed a bill expanding the Milwaukee voucher program.

Our thanks go out to Rendell for making this happen. This year states have approved more than 25,000 new scholarships for children to attend private schools. A total of eight states that have either new or expanded school choice programs this year. And just think--it's barely July!

A Russian works to fix U.S. math education

edspresso — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 17:52:00 +0000

Sometimes it takes somebody from the outside looking in to help fix a problem.

A Russian-born mathematician has created a nonprofit program that he thinks will revolutionize education in the U.S.
He created Reasoning Mind because he had a dismal opinion of American education, from kindergarten through high school.
This Web-based math program "does not merely incorporate technology into teaching. It is based in technology and capitalizes on the power of technology to deliver information and content," Dr. Alexander R. "Alex" Khachatryan said.
The results from a pilot program during the 2005-06 school year were impressive. At-risk students at a Houston school and advanced math students at a school in College Station were introduced to Reasoning Mind.
"At the inner-city school, the test group's average improvement from the pre-test to the post-test was 67 percent, while the control group improved 6 percent," Dr. Khachatryan said.
"The test group students also demonstrated extraordinary results – a 20 percent higher passing rate – on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills test, despite the fact that only three out of 48 problems directly checked students' knowledge of the two math units covered by RM in the pilot," he said.
Dr. Khachatryan also says that it took only one semester to close the achievement gap between the scores of the predominantly Hispanic students of the inner-city school and those of the average white student in Texas.
Advanced math students in the program also improved 49 percent on a test that measures in-depth knowledge of ratios and proportions.

And just what motivated Dr. Khachatryan to put this together?

The impetus for Reasoning Mind came seven years after Dr. Khachatryan and his family came to the U.S.
His son, George, then 12, had been in three public and four private schools, and "the experience was absolutely shocking," Dr. Khachatryan said.
(snip)
Dr. Khachatryan says American colleges are among the best in the world, but he was appalled at the anti-intellectual aura of the K-12 educational system.

Comparison of U.S. universities to K-12? Check. An Army of Davids approach to curriculum design? Check. Edspresso: your vision into the future of education!

Oh say can you see...

edspresso — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 15:48:00 +0000

On the heels of another school choice victory, we're off to enjoy some hot dogs, fireworks, and--above all--liberty. Happy Fourth of July--we'll be back tomorrow! (And thanks to this site for the pretty picture.)

Education News for Wednesday, July 5

Daily News — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 12:50:26 +0000

Union moves to lobby Congress for change - With a thundering shout of ''aye,'' an overwhelming majority of delegates from the nation's largest education union approved a plan Monday to aggressively lobby Congress for reform of the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

More than 2,500 in Ohio apply for school vouchers - 2,568 students statewide have applied for the new Ohio EdChoice voucher program. (more)

Analyst: Boys in `real trouble' - An economist and editor in New Mexico disagrees with a recent study downplaying the so-called "boy crisis" in America. (more)

Florida system ensures schools fulfil their role - An Australian columnist takes a look at Florida education reform. (more)

'Academic Redshirting' Is Getting a Mixed Report Card - The popular practice of delaying schooling is not necessarily helpful, researchers say. (more)

Public benefit - Editorial: Leaders of both the city of Los Angeles and the L.A. Unified School District seem to have lost sight of an important fact as they squabble over funds: The money belongs to the public that both government entities serve. As such, the two bureaucracies should be on the same side. (more)

National Education Association does not help teachers - Letter to the editor: Educators are blamed for all the lame politics of the school board while the NEA stands idly by. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

The good news about K-12 education in Balitimore - Sad news abounds about Baltimore City public schools, including students’ shockingly low test scores and notice that Bonnie Copeland, CEO of the school system, will depart this week. But happy news does exist about effective schooling alternatives for low-income local families. (more)

Full speed ahead for Children’s Scholarship Fund - The Erickson Difference” is the mantra of Bob Erickson’s flagship retirement community Charlestown in Catonsville. But this past Wednesday, Bob and Nancy Erickson were making a difference of another kind. (more)

Will, not money, brings improvement - Let's look at the recent "Nation's Report Card," published annually by the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics. Nationally, in reading, only 13 percent of black fourth-graders and 11 percent of black eighth-graders score as proficient. (more)

More facts to belie myth that schools are beyond repair - THE POLITICIANS have been so busy arguing over whether to give up on our public schools that most people failed to take proper note of how busy those schools have been climbing to the top of some pretty impressive national rankings. (more)

Teachers Unions and Public Schools: Who Needs 'Em? - It's healthy at moments such as this, when powerful forces clamor for quick and sweeping reform, to reconsider tenacious ideas, even those that the collective wisdom has deemed insane if not satanic. (more)

School choice offers much - Polling indicates that 90 percent of Arizonans approve of school choice and the Legislature was apparently paying attention. (more)

Voucher theft defendants to get new trial - Three Christian school employees accused of stealing thousands in school voucher money will be retried after a Polk County jury deadlocked to end a seven-week trial. (more)

Wheels of education reform start to turn today - Education policymakers are busy figuring out how to implement a complicated education reform bill that takes effect today, although students won't notice the difference until this fall. (more)

Maine in violation of No Child Left Behind - The federal government says parts of Maine’s educational assessment system, including giving all 11th-graders the SAT, don’t comply with the standards of the No Child Left Behind Act and is giving the state 20 days to show it’s making improvements. (more)

Educators Send Message on No Child Left Behind Act - A few educators surveyed by the nation's largest teachers' union would like to throw out the entire No Child Left Behind education act. (more)

Disabled girl wins round in ed funds fight - A family whose quest for special education services was championed a decade ago by President Bill Clinton has taken their latest battle to the federal courts, where a judge gave them a temporary reprie ve. (more)

Bronx Sixth Graders Master Mysteries of the Biology Regents - New school for applied math and science has 11 and 12-year-olds scoring well on high school biology exams. (more)

Blame game topic: failing schools - Threats from Florida's education commissioner to crack down on low-performing schools could lead to a showdown with Miami-Dade's superintendent. (more)

Commenting on Friedman and Sipchen

edspresso — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:21:00 +0000

There have been a number of comments on Bob Sipchen's article/interview with Milton Friedman. We decided to respond to this one.

First, Friedman claims that teachers' unions are to blame for the increasing bureaucratization and centralization of school districts, but, with all due respect, he has it backwards. As Joel Spring and other historians of American education have shown, teachers' unions emerged in response to the increasing bureaucratization and district centralization that took decision-making out of their hands. Ironically, the administrators who pushed such policies sought to copy the management strategies of the private sector that Friedman so reveres.

So the power to make decisions with respect to childrens' education rests either with the unions or with administrators--but never with parents. Therein lies our biggest complaint with the process as it is presently constituted. Of course unions formed to contest the centralization of power--because unions exist first and foremost for the benefit of their members.

Second, Friedman asks the question whether people would prefer their automobiles produced by the government or by private industry. But the analogy reveals the weakness of comparing education--a social good, with automobiles--a commodity. If schools are going to work like the auto industry, some people will be able to afford Hummers, many others will be forced to accept second-hand clunkers, and still more will be unable to afford anything more than--gasp--public transportation. Ironically, Friedman's analogy undercuts his claims about equality and fairness that, unfortunately, Mr. Sipchen makes no effort to scrutinize.

Two responses. First off, let's dig a bit deeper into the car analogy. In spite of the drumbeat of criticism towards GM and Ford, if one looks at the cars that are presently being manufactured today, there really isn't such a thing as a truly bad car. Aside from very few exceptions, one can buy a car that will be at least reasonably reliable, and in most cases it will be extremely reliable. In other words, even the cheapest car out there will run quite well.

We don't deny that the machinations of market principles can in some cases be pretty ugly. Nor do we deny that there will be, by definition, inequality in terms of the educational options that will be produced. But we fearlessly assert that the overall quality of the array of options that will become available will far exceed the quality currently available in the monopolized education system. We would like low-income parents to be able to choose a Hyundai Accent as opposed to the Yugos that are presently foisted upon them, especially in cities like Los Angeles. Lloyd's suggested solution leaves them with equality in mediocrity.

Second, Lloyd speaks of school choice as one or the other. We continue to say that we are not the least bit interested in dynamiting the public school system and starting over. Just as bloggers will never put Big Media out of business, school choice will always exist alongside the public school rather than supplant it.

Third, on this question of "fairness," Friedman bemoans the lot of the mother who must pay for her own child's private education and still subsidize the public education of her neighbor's child. Free market ideologues like Friedman would have us beleive that there is no such thing as social responsibility, that we need only look out for ourselves and let the devil take the hindmost. Yet, when my neighbor's child is educated, he or she has a chance to become a productive citizen with a sense, one hopes, of the social responsibility of providing the same for the next generation. In that way, Mr. Sipchen, we are a nation, not simply a loose aggregation of individuals caring only for ourselves.

This is the social good argument: education benefits everybody, so it's too important not to fund publicly. Well, if the market can't be trusted to educate a child, how can the market be trusted to feed a child? If Lloyd is going to be consistent, shouldn't he also argue for the government to take over the agriculture industry? Probably not.

Fourth, while I agree that the schools have problems, there is simply no evidence that teachers' unions, whatever their faults, are primarily to blame. The problems primarily stem from a myriald of social and economic factors over which teachers' unions have little or no control. Yet union-bashing is so much easier than tackling seemingly intractable social problems in our economy and in our students' neighborhoods and homes.

We quote from the LA Times editorial page:

United Teachers Los Angeles opposes merit pay for top-performing teachers. It makes the firing of bad teachers almost impossible. It's against allowing administrators to assign teachers to the schools where they are needed most. It's sharply critical of charter schools. The union doesn't like having a unified curriculum, and it thinks that teachers shouldn't have to put up with training from coaches.
In other words, the union is largely opposed to most reforms that demand more of teachers. (Individual teachers, many of whom applaud changing the schools to benefit students, are another matter.)

The San Diego Union-Tribune has a much more barbed criticism that helps illustrate how the union is a huge part of the problem:

Under the calcified status quo, those who are shortchanged the most are largely students of color in low-achieving inner-city schools. Here's why:

The stale seniority system devised by teachers unions applies not only to salary levels but also to school assignments. Therefore, teachers with the most seniority get the first pick of schools. This means the least experienced teachers are assigned to what unionized teachers regard as less desirable classrooms – those dominated by poor students, many of whom do not speak English as their first language. As soon as a green teacher has gained a few years of service, the seniority system allows him to transfer to a more affluent suburban school.

This rigid system concentrates lesser-paid neophytes in inner-city classrooms and higher-paid, seasoned teachers in the suburbs. A report by the Education Trust-West, a policy group that focuses on the needs of poor and minority students, documented this glaring disparity in teacher quality. It found that low-performing schools in California's 10 largest school districts, including San Diego Unified, generally are staffed by lower-paid teachers with limited experience. The best and brightest teachers are assigned to schools in prosperous white neighborhoods.

San Diego Unified Superintendent Alan Bersin sought to remedy this by offering bonus pay to experienced teachers who would take assignments in low-performing schools. But even this limited version of merit pay was promptly killed by the teachers union.

Back to Lloyd's criticisms:

One final point. The American public education system is an extraordinary institution. We have the most diverse student population on earth and we have perhaps the most educated, and certainly the most vibrant, workforce in the world. If public education in general, and teachers' unions in particular, are to be blamed for the system's shortcomings, fairness and intellectual honesty dictate that they should also be praised for its successes. Yet, fairness and intellectual honesty were two things missing from this column.

It was our outstanding post-secondary system of colleges, universities and tech schools that has produced that workforce. And in that post-secondary system exists a stunning array of choices, complete with publicly-funded vouchers and fi nancial aid in the form of the GI Bill, Pell Grants, and federally-subsidized student loans, along with countless state-funded scholarships and grants. And amazingly, not only has that system of choice not destroyed our universities and colleges, we have a post-secondary system that is the envy of the world. So if market forces haven't inflicted mortal damage upon post-secondary schools, why would they wipe out K-12?

Australian: Real ed reform is happening in Florida

edspresso — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 16:02:00 +0000

As I commented last week, sometimes people on the outside looking in make the best observations. Take this from Australia, for example (yes, it's a long quote, but it's a long and important column):

For too long, the social engineers in charge of teaching used the classroom as a leveller, where no one failed and no one excelled. Or, if a student was failing or excelling, you wouldn't know it from the school report dropped on the kitchen bench. In the weird world of educrats, the focus on outcomes-based education is code for hiding the real outcomes of students.
That information under-load promoted mediocrity for students and teachers alike.
Protecting their own backsides from a caning for poor performance, that is just the way the teachers' unions want it. Greg Combet may daydream about unions one day running the country again, but in our schools unions still rule. Indeed, nowhere is the power of unions more pernicious than in our schools.
Unions have been dragged kicking and screaming to the table on the issue of transparency and accountability in our schools. Last year, when former federal education minister Brendan Nelson suggested that schools start delivering meaningful information to parents, unions and their supporters defaulted into hysteria.
NSW (New South Wales) Teachers Federation president Maree O'Halloran started waving around the teachers' industrial award that prevents the public release of comparative data on school performance. This information would lead to school leagues tables and we - meaning union members - don't want that, she groaned. Other teachers' unions also preferred the report that doesn't report.
With unions as their paymasters, state Labor governments also resisted even these modest reforms. As Nelson said at the time: "Money is the only thing that brings them to the table."
Just how meek those reforms are becomes obvious when you look at what's happening in some American states. In the US a few weeks ago for the American Australian Leadership Dialogue organised by businessman Phil Scanlan, I learned about real education reform. And it's all happening in Florida.
With textbooks such as Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice by Numbers - which includes chapters on Multicultural Math - the US is home to the same sort of politically correct gimcrackery that infects our schools.
In 1999, Florida decided to see how its students were doing. Governor Jeb Bush introduced the nation's most far-reaching and controversial reforms premised on three ideas: testing, transparency and accountability.
For a quick comparison of where we're at compared with Florida, click on the state's Department of Education website (www.fldoe. com). The wealth of information you'll find there puts the information void on our own state education websites to shame.
Bush's A+ program involves so-called high-stakes testing of all students from grades three to 10. It's high stakes because consequences flow from the results. Schools are graded between A to F depending on the performance of their students and, hold on to your seats, in those schools that attract two F-grades in any four-year period, students are given vouchers to attend private schools. As one pundit wrote, it was "the first money-back guarantee in the history of public education".
That the brother of George W. Bush is driving these education reforms will have left-wing union folk frothing about right-wing conspiracies. But the results prove that sunlight is indeed the best disinfectant. In a nutshell, once Florida started testing their students and making schools accountable for the results, student achievement levels kept rising.

Thanks to the Florida Supreme Court's recent legal contortions having partially undone one of Bush's main reforms--namely, school choice--it remains to be seen whether Florida will be able to hang on to its gains in education. But it's somehow reassuring to know that we aren't the only nation having to lock horns with the teachers' unions. Read the whole thing. And to better appreciate the columnist's criticism of "Rethinking Mathematics", see Moebius Stripper's thoughts here (warning: language).

Watching the NEA Convention

edspresso — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 17:25:00 +0000

Mixing work with play? Or maybe he just had nothing better to do with all those frequent flyer miles? No matter; Mike Antonucci is watching the NEA's every move at the union's annual convention, held this year in sunny Orlando. (And when it's all over, he'll jump up and shout, "I'm going to..." Oh, never mind--that's too easy a joke, even for me.)

Education News for Thursday, July 6

Daily News — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 09:53:17 +0000

`No Child' Law Leads States to Weaken Student Tests, Study Says - U.S. states are "dumbing down" their grade-school tests, where high failure rates could bring penalties under the federal ``No Child Left Behind'' law, University of California researchers reported. (more)

Changing NCLB Is Top Topic at NEA Convention - (edweek.org--registration required) A majority of the 8,200 delegates at the National Education Association's July 2-5 annual convention overwhelmingly approved a plan that would push for aggressive changes to the federal No Child Left Behind law, which is up for reauthorization next year. (more)

L.A. schools dispute becomes data battle - The high-stakes public relations battle over Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's bid to take over Los Angeles public schools has escalated into a duel as much over statistics as over politics. (more)

Kati Haycock 'Takes Five' - An interview in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel with Kati Haycock, director of the Education Trust, on closing the achievement gap. (more)

Revolution in the classroom? - A look at the parents and educators behind the first charter school in Ventura, California. (more)

Family-Like Program Opens Brave New Chapter for Black L.A. Students - A look at the Village, a program that follows the African proverb "It takes a village to raise a child." (more)

Teachers' union seeks No Child revisions - An overwhelming majority of delegates from the nation's largest education union approved a plan this week to aggressively lobby Congress for reform of the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Teachers matter - NYT editorial - The No Child Left Behind education act, passed by Congress four years ago, was intended to correct the corrosive inequality that has plagued public education from the start. (more)

Morgan Brown Named Head of Innovation and Improvement at the U.S. Department of Education- USDOE news release - The Assistant Deputy Secretary coordinates the implementation of the public school choice and supplemental services provisions of the president's No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Ed Week: Federal funds might be withheld from states for failing to meet NCLB testing provisions - (subscription required) The U.S. Department of Education has notified 10 states that it intends to withhold a portion of their state administrative funds under the Title I program for failing to comply fully with the testing provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act by the end of the 2005-06 school year. Those funds would instead be diverted directly to school districts. (more)

Ed Week: As deadline looms, report says states showing little progress in addressing teacher quality - (subscription required) By tomorrow, all states must submit revised plans to the federal government detailing what they plan to do during the coming school year to meet the teacher quality requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

UPDATE:

California Schools Could Lose Aid over 'No Child' Law - California has until Aug. 15 to come up with a plan to allow more students to transfer out of low-performing schools in its largest school districts. If the state fails to meet that deadline, the U.S. Education Department has threatened to withhold part of the $700 million it provides California for high-poverty schools. (more)

Teachers matter

edspresso — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:18:00 +0000

the New York Times:

Skeptics have often expressed doubt that good teachers would make any difference in the lives of the country's poorest students, who typically show up in first grade not at all prepared to learn. The Education Trust study, which draws on a treasure-trove of data from several states, clearly refutes this notion. The most important data set comes from Illinois, where researchers scrutinized the work and qualifications of 140,000 teachers, all of whom were assigned quality ratings based on several indicators, including where they attended college and how much experience they had.
The Illinois study found teacher quality mattered a great deal in high-poverty high schools, where students with highly rated teachers were about twice as likely to meet state standards as similarly situated students elsewhere. Teacher quality even trumped course content, and it did not take paragons of achievement to make the difference. For example, students who took Algebra II at schools with average teacher quality ratings turned out to be better prepared for college than students who had completed calculus at schools with low teacher ratings.
Taken together, the multistate data cited in the study show that teacher experience makes a profound difference in student performance, as do teacher literacy levels. The facts are especially clear when it comes to the crucial areas of math and science, where teachers who have majored in the subject areas generate better student performance than those who majored in outside areas.

Those who try to downplay teacher quality seem to make a sort of chicken-and-egg argument: fix the outside social problems like poverty (which, of course, can only be remedied by increased spending), and student performance will improve. But studies like this point out that the chicken and egg are reversed: fix teacher quality and student performance will improve--which will, over time, help remedy the social ills of poverty. In any event, we're certain Ken De Rosa will be shocked, shocked at this.

(Hat tip to Randy Shain at True Schools, who is back from vacation and blogging hard.)

The clock is ticking in California

edspresso — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:19:37 +0000

In the wake of our administrative action, the U.S. DOE has leveled an ultimatum:

In an unprecedented move, Spellings has given California six weeks to come up with a plan that would allow students in failing schools throughout the state to transfer to a better school this fall.
If the state does not submit a plan that Spellings deems adequate, Doherty says the education secretary will withhold part of the $700 million California is due to receive this fall in federal Title I funds, which are earmarked for high-poverty schools. And that, department officials say, is no empty threat.
California officials told NPR that what the U.S. Department of Education is asking for is going to be a logistical nightmare: Every failing school -- and every school district -- where parents have tried, unsuccessfully, to transfer their children out now faces a six-week deadline to make sure those students find a new school.
California officials said lawyers for the state will likely examine the letter from Washington to see whether they can challenge the Aug. 15 deadline, because under No Child Left Behind, there is supposed to be a process in place that gives states time to review and appeal any complaint or lawsuit. This process now appears to be out the window.

Read the whole thing--in typical NPR style, it's a lengthy story, including quotes from Clint and LAUSD superintendent Roy Romer. Audio for the story will be up at 7:30 p.m. ET.

Education News for Friday, July 7

Daily News — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 09:03:28 +0000

AP: 34 states could lose education funds - Most states are failing to pass muster with the government over student testing and may lose money unless they improve quickly. (more)

Matthew Ladner: School choice offers way to improve AZ schools - This year, the Tucson Unified School District received more funding per student than ever before, about $8,400. Even with inflation, spending per pupil in Arizona public schools has tripled since the 1960s. (more)

AZ state schools chief sues education department - State schools chief Tom Horne made good on a threat Thursday to sue the federal government over how the standardized test scores of students learning English are counted in Arizona. (more)

LAUSD parents demand change - Frustrated by what they called low academic performance and unresponsive teachers and politicians, dozens of parents from around the Los Angeles Unified School District gathered downtown Thursday for the first meeting of the Los Angeles Parents Union. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Open the FloodGates - When Warren Buffett announced his philanthropic merger with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation two weeks ago, Bill Gates described one of the motives behind dispensing untold billions: "We really owe it to society to give the wealth back." (more)

Okatie pupils offered choice to transfer (South Carolina) - Parents of Okatie Elementary School students have the option of sending their children to a different elementary school this year, but those who wish to do so must act soon. (more)

Tennessee's No Child Left Behind testing fully approved - Tennessee is one of only 10 states to be granted full approval by federal officials for its testing of public school students under the No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

How No Child Left Behind challenges one WI school district- David Harswick, a teacher at Green Bay Prebble High School, attended the National Education Association's annual meeting in Orlando, where the Bush administration's education reform initiative was a major agenda item. (more)

Florida Faces Aid Cuts Over No Child Left Back Law - Florida and most other states are failing to pass muster with the government over student testing and may lose money unless they improve quickly. (more)

Second Chance for School Choice - A quarter-century ago, Washington D.C. voters considered a ballot initiative to bring widespread school choice to the District. (more)

Ohio districts start e-schools - Shawn Elias kept getting in trouble at Berea High School for talking to classmates. (more)

Florida among states falling short on No Child, report says - Most states - including Florida - are failing to pass muster with the government over student testing and may lose money unless they improve quickly. (more)

NEA and NCLB: second verse, same as the first?

edspresso — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:15:00 +0000

At the high point of the NEA's annual conference, the teachers' union has decided enough is enough on NCLB:

An overwhelming majority of delegates from the nation's largest education union approved a plan this week to aggressively lobby Congress for reform of the No Child Left Behind Act.
The National Education Association has fought to change the measure since its beginnings in 2001, but this is the union's most organized effort to date, said Joel Packer, the NEA's policy manager on the act.

They've been on the "reform NCLB" bandwagon since 2001? That led Mike Antonucci, who forced himself to sit through the whole conference, to suggest that the AP was reduced to recycling news. In predictable calls for higher pay, the union also called for a national minimum wage of $40,000. That drew criticism from one teacher; after pointing out some obvious problems with differences in cost of living, he had this to say:

Has NEA taken into account what districts will have to do to pay first-year-teachers $40,000 a year? It will cause less advancement in pay for teachers in general. The best and most experienced teachers will have to make less to pay more to the teachers who barely know what they're doing. Ultimately nobody will end up making as much money because of this.
It simply makes no sense.

Education News for Thursday, July 13

Daily News — Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:11:00 +0000

E3 leads charge for vouchers - Excellent Education for Everyone, a small nonprofit organization, is taking credit for exposing scandals that have rocked the Camden, New Jersey school system and now plans to launch a massive battle to overhaul urban education reform. (more)

Suit to ask N.J. to ease transfers for pupils - Parents from around the state plan to file suit against New Jersey and several poor-performing school districts today for the right to let their children transfer to other schools, public or private. (more)

New Jersey Families Using State Constitution as Justification for School Vouchers - In the newest tactic of the school choice movement, a group of families in New Jersey is piggybacking on a decades-old school-funding lawsuit and using the state's constitution as justification for school vouchers. (more)

Supporters of school vouchers filing suit - School voucher advocates plan today to file a class-action lawsuit against the state and at least two dozen school districts in the first major legal effort to bring the hotly contested use of vouchers to New Jersey. The top teachers union calls legal action "a PR stunt". (more)

Upper Grades, Lower Reading Skills - Teaching reading has long been considered the job of primary grade teachers. But some educators are calling for more attention to be paid to the reading needs of middle and high school students, many of whom are struggling to master this critical skill. (more)

Schoolbooks Are Given F’s in Originality - Textbooks by different authors use substantially identical language to cover several subjects. (more)

Angry board spurns dropout study - City school board members angrily denounced a study that estimates 35 percent of high school students -- including nearly half of all black male students -- drop out of Pittsburgh Public Schools. (more)

UTLA leaders back mayor's school reform - After hours of heated debate late Wednesday, United Teachers Los Angeles leaders voted narrowly to back Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plan to reform Los Angeles public schools through new legislation in Sacramento. (more)

L.A Teachers Chide Union for Deal With Villaraigosa - Disgruntled members of the city's potent teachers union called a special meeting Wednesday night, demanding union officials explain and justify the deal they struck with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to reform the Los Angeles Unified School District. (more)

Antonio's Big Test - July is ushering in a season of creeping doubt for Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and his plan for L.A. Unified, a complex bill that would give Villaraigosa veto power over the hiring and firing of the superintendent, yet preserve the elected seven-member school board — albeit with a diminished role. (more)

56 New Orleans Schools to Accept Students for New Year (Education Week registration required) - The Louisiana Department of Education has issued a list of 56 New Orleans public schools that will be accepting students for the coming school year, more than double the 25 that were opened this past year. (more)

Official touts progress of No Child Left Behind - A U.S. Department of Education official said Wednesday he’s pleased with the reaction lately to the federal No Child Left Behind Act. (more)

Getting the business - When businesses get involved in education, it improves America's ability to innovate and stay competitive, according to U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Parents sue schools to have public pay to send kids elsewhere - AP coverage of the NJ class action lawsuit. (more)

Parents sue NJ schools so students can transfer - 1010 wins: A group of New Jersey parents plan to file a lawsuit Thursday against the state and some of its low-performing school districts to allow their children to switch schools - and have the old schools pay for it. (more)

Ed Week: Choice advocates seek voucers as remedy for NJ students in low-performing schools (subscription required) - In what they are calling a national test case, voucher proponents have launched an effort to use school choice as a remedy for students in 97 New Jersey schools... (more)

NEA vs. homeschoolers

edspresso — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 17:36:57 +0000

Home Education Magazine notes that the NEA hasn't budged in its policy on homeschooling. (Hat tip to--as you might have guessed--Cobranchi.)

Poverty and education

edspresso — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 20:39:32 +0000

Anchor Rising takes a good look at union determinism vs. reformer optimism.

Education News for Monday, July 10

Daily News — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:04:23 +0000

School choice spreads with tax credits - In 2001, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge battled with Democratic state legislators to create a corporate scholarship tax credit program to bring the state’s families school choice. (more)

Ohio plan would put flexibility in school funding - Ohio’s school-funding system is a mess. In recent years, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional four times, levies have become an annual event in many districts and charter schools are pitted against each other and against districts for access to state dollars. (more)

To retain students for D.C. voucher program, higher income rule sought - Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on the District, intends to introduce legislation Thursday that would increase the income guidelines to 300 percent of the federal poverty line.. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

City Adds Funds For Catholic, Jewish Schools - The New York City government is starting quietly to fund local parochial schools. The City Council is allocating $1 million of taxpayer money in this year's budget to purchase school buses for Jewish schools. Last year, the City Council paid $2.5 million to put computers in Jewish and Catholic schools. (more)

Plan would put flexibility in school funding - Ohio’s school-funding system is a mess. In recent years, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional four times, levies have become an annual event in many districts and charter schools are pitted against each other and against districts for access to state dollars (more)

To Retain Students, Higher Income Rule Sought-A senator on the D.C. Appropriations subcommittee plans to introduce legislation to increase the income guidelines for the District's federally funded school voucher program to prevent hundreds of students from being forced out of it in the next three years, officials said. (more)

School choice offers way to improve Ariz. schools - This year, the Tucson Unified School District received more funding per student than ever before, about $8,400. Even with inflation, spending per pupil in Arizona public schools has tripled since the 1960s. (more)

Schools targeting consumers – On a one-mile stretch of Elida Road, three large billboards await families thinking about where to send their children to school this fall. They might choose Heir Force Academy and the “free school supplies” the billboard reminds people of, or Quest Academy, which claims on its billboard “A Passion for Teaching.” (more)

Alison Lake: Fostering education stability - Thousands of miles away in Arizona, a small but significant program hatched here in Maryland became law in June. But Maryland’s 11,500 foster care children, 7,000 of whom are in Baltimore City, have yet to benefit from this program designed by The Maryland Public Policy Institute. (more)

Friedman reax

edspresso — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:00:00 +0000

The LA Times has some letters to the editor on the paper's recent article on Milton Friedman.

Means testing in DC

edspresso — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:30:00 +0000

A fistfight is brewing over the D.C. voucher program:

Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on the District, intends to introduce legislation Thursday that would increase the income guidelines to 300 percent of the federal poverty line, from 200 percent, according to an aide in his office. The aide said a potential exodus of 150 students a year could threaten a federally mandated evaluation of the program, which has about 1,650 students.
Under the $14 million-a-year program, low-income District students in kindergarten through 12th grade receive scholarships of as much as $7,500 each to cover tuition and other expenses at private and religious schools in the city.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) blasted the plan to change the income guidelines and called for the Government Accountability Office to investigate the voucher program.
"The wholesale grandfathering in of all parents regardless of the circumstances of the increase in family income violates a cardinal principle of the voucher program and of every federal program for low-income families," she said in a statement Thursday.

Katie of A Constrained Vision offers a potential solution:

Thinking beyond the constraints of the federal evaluation, I think the lesson for voucher program design is that if you're going to have means-testing, the benefit should phase-out as income rises, not drop abruptly to zero at a certain income threshold. And where programs do have sharp income cut-offs, private scholarship programs could serve a useful role helping voucher families make the transition.

Of course, the devil would be in the details as to precisely how and when that phase-out would take place. But it could a little more workable than the all-or-nothing approach that presently exists.

LA teacher on takeover deal

edspresso — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 16:02:00 +0000

LAUSD English teacher Doug Lasken is less than optimistic on the takeover:

The California Teachers Association and United Teachers Los Angeles were set to kill mayoral control, but they have done a 180-degree turnabout, moving from vocal opposition to vocal support. Endless e-mails tell members that “takeover is dead” and that we have a great deal coming in AB 1381. Why the dramatic change? The unions don't really explain it, relying as they do on membership's docility. But the clear suggestion from vague pronouncements is that local control over curriculum will be greatly enhanced.
So what's wrong with local control of curriculum?
Potentially, a lot.
California students are highly transient. Do we want a different reading theory facing students in each district? The state is well into a major reform involving explicit phonics instruction, most notably in elementary schools implementing the Open Court program, which replaced the previous use of “whole language.”

"Whole language"? Heaven help us. (For those who aren't aware of California's disastrous experiment with whole language, go here for a harrowing account.) Meanwhile, Lasken offers an interesting take on why the unions threw their support behind the deal:

The tacit promise of local control of curriculum, in the minds of many, is that under the mayor's plan neither the state nor the district would have the authority to mandate explicit phonics instruction. This could help explain why the unions, whose curriculum mavens loved whole language, did its switcheroo. The same goes for Jackie Goldberg, termed-out assemblywoman and former L.A. school board member who supported whole language as a board member and routinely denounces explicit phonics in the Assembly. Goldberg, who hopes to be LAUSD superintendent under the new regime, just did the same 180 as the unions.
Admittedly, the motives of Goldberg and the unions are a matter of speculation, but that's the point. The unions, Goldberg, in fact everyone currently supporting the plan — including the mayor himself — are saying nothing about AB 1381's impact on curriculum. We are asked to fast track this thing on the basis of slogans and pressure.
After the roller coaster our kids have been on, we deserve better than this. At the very least, we need the mayor to come forward, show some knowledge of curricular issues, and indicate where he stands. (emphasis added)

Did Goldberg support this hoping to cash in a favor once she leaves office? If so, this deal is getting more odorous by the second.

Second Chance for School Choice (Dan Lips)

fguest — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

A quarter-century ago, Washington D.C. voters considered a ballot initiative to bring widespread school choice to the District. When the initiative went down by a margin of 9-to-1, then-Mayor Marion Barry crowed that its defeat sent the message that “nobody ought to mess with our public schools.” Since 1981, not messing with the District public schools has resulted in hundreds of thousands of largely low-income and minority children passing through a school system that left them with some of the lowest achievement rates and highest dropout rates in the nation. In the 25 years since that vote, as many as 50,000 students have dropped out of D.C. high schools -- almost enough to fill RFK Stadium. Twenty-five years later, D.C. parents are giving school choice a second look, and they like what they see. The result: sweeping education reforms that affect all District schools. Today, the city’s 65 public charter schools enroll 20,000 children -- more than a quarter of the District’s total student body. These students learn in schools that are free from many regulations that govern traditional public schools but, in turn, must meet performance standards. Charter schools have embraced this flexibility, adopting innovative education models. For example, a KIPP (Knowledge is Power Program) Academy in the southeast neighborhood has dramatically increased the tests scores of its largely low-income student population. The KIPP school was the highest performing middle school in the District last year. The Thurgood Marshall Public Charter High School in Anacostia, created by Georgetown Law graduates, focuses on college preparation and a career in law. All 18 of the school’s first graduating class were admitted to college in 2005. In addition, 1,700 children attend private schools using vouchers through the federally funded D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program. Research shows that opportunity scholarships have improved parents’ satisfaction with their children’s school. The Washington Scholarship Fund, which manages the voucher program, received nearly two applications for every available scholarship. The school system has begun to respond to the competition. D.C. Schools Superintendent Clifford B. Janey recently announced plans to replace the current, top-down administration of the system with one designed to give public school leaders more autonomy. Principals would control as much as 90 percent of the money budgeted to their schools, as opposed to the current 60 percent, precisely so they could innovate and compete with charter schools. The School Board is now moving to identify schools to be closed or consolidated. Thanks to all those students in charter or private schools, 147 D.C. school buildings are now underused, according to a recent report from the 21st Century School Fund. Meanwhile, seven new charter schools are scheduled to open in 2007. Those of us who support school choice welcome the fact that the D.C. public school system is taking these steps to innovate and improve in response to competition. We’re happy that the wheels of change seem poised to turn much faster in the next 25 years than they have since 1981. Mr. Lips is an education analyst at The Heritage Foundation. This article previously appeared on Fox News.

Education News for Tuesday, July 11

Daily News — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:02:17 +0000

DeVos dollars back school choice - Dick DeVos isn't afraid to pour money into a cause he passionately supports. But nowhere has the DeVos mix of ideological commitment and megafunding been more apparent than in his challenge to traditional public schools. (more)

Schools to receive millions in technology in Microsoft settlement - A total of 135 schools will share $4.7 million in computers and equipment in a settlement of a class-action lawsuit between Vermont consumers and Microsoft Corp. (more)

Report: NEA pays opponents of No Child Left Behind law - The nation's largest teachers union has spent more than $8 million in a stealth campaign against President Bush's education reform law, paying for research and political opposition in an effort to derail it, according to a Washington think tank that supports the law. (more)

Education: An Investment in Our Future - An opinion column by Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) on federal efforts in education reform. (more)

School Improvement by Decree - Editorial: If an amendment to the Washington, D.C. charter requiring the District provide "high-quality" public education is passed, there are three possible outcomes. None of them would be much help to the District's long-suffering pupils. (more)

Boosting access to preschool - Denver's mayor wants voters to decide in November whether to support a sales tax hike to improve preschool access for the city's 4-year-olds. (more)

Learning the lessons of small schools - Editorial: Three small, independently run schools in the San Diego area have produced impressive results, as measured in test scores and parent and teacher approval, in spite of butting heads with the teachers' union and conflicting with the schools whose buildings they share. (more)

Investment focus is charter schools - A venture capitalist recently helped secure $35 million in federal tax credits for building new charter schools in low-income neighborhoods in California. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NY Testing Not Compliant to 'No Child Left Behind' - The federal government has informed New York State that some of its testing methods don't comply with the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Congress evaluating No Child Left Behind Act - As Congress evaluates NCLB, one California Democrat has concerns about how student data is collected and whether funding will be increased as the law is reauthorized. (more)

NEA spends millions opposing NCLB - Washington think tank Education Sector has accused the National Education Association of spending millions in a campaign opposing No Child Left Behind. (more)

Charter operator may get own say - Steve Barr, the founder of the successful Green Dot charter schools, is on the verge of a major breakthrough that could make him the king of Los Angeles charter schools. (more)

State told SAT would fail No Child test, official says - Over federal warnings, Maine adopted the SAT to measure high school achievement, a move that then led the U.S. Education Department to reject the state's testing system. (more)

Call for ‘Weighted’ Student Funding Gets Bipartisan Stamp of Approval (Education Week registration required) - The United States needs a fundamental change in the way it allocates money to public schools—something that will not be easy to achieve even though it is desperately needed, a bipartisan, philosophically diverse group of policy leaders is contending. (more)

Steve Barr: a man with clout

edspresso — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:03:00 +0000

Via EducationNews comes this interesting news: Steve Barr, the man behind L.A.'s phenomenal Green Dot charter schools, could be on the verge of having carte blanche with the state board of education:

On Wednesday, the state Board of Education is poised to vote on giving Green Dot the authority to create independent charter schools without having to first get approval from local school districts.
It would mark the first time a charter operator in Los Angeles won that power, and only the second time in California.
"It's just insurance. We will exhaust all efforts to work with the district but just in case we have this in our hip pocket to use," Barr said Monday.
"We're really trying to figure out how to take research and development (at charters), couple it with political will and create systematic improvement. We're not going to create a district with 1,000 charter schools.
"The goal is for all LAUSD schools to have the basic tenets we know work and eliminate the need for charters."
Without having to fight his way through the bureaucratic and political obstacles of Los Angeles Unified, Barr hopes to demonstrate what works in public schools and spark citywide school reform.

Of course, the usual suspects (UTLA and LAUSD) oppose the idea.

NEA vs. NCLB: follow the money

edspresso — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:09:00 +0000

Flush with dues cash, the NEA has been bringing in plenty of hired guns to fight NCLB:

The nation's largest teachers union has spent more than $8 million in a stealth campaign against President Bush's education reform law, paying for research and political opposition in an effort to derail it, according to a Washington think tank that supports the law.
A report to be released today by the group Education Sector says the National Education Association (NEA) has given at least $8.1 million to education, civil rights and policy groups that have opposed or criticized No Child Left Behind, Bush's far-reaching and controversial effort to reform public schools.
The law's critics cried foul in 2005, when documents revealed that the Bush administration paid TV and radio commentator Armstrong Williams $240,000 to promote it on his syndicated programs. The revelations led to a government-wide inquiry.
For the new report, Education Sector senior fellow Joe Williams examined federal tax forms filed by the NEA. He does not charge that the union broke or evaded the law. But "at the very least, it appears the NEA has actively pursued partnerships" with groups fighting the law, he says.
The donations "are not necessarily a quid pro quo," but they are "a connection worth knowing," says Williams, a former education writer for the New York Daily News.

The full report can be found here. A few nuggets:

On the eve of a 2004 debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Democratic challenger Sen. John Edwards at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Communities for Quality Education advertised on three billboards in downtown Cleveland. All three publicly dared moderator Gwen Ifill to ask the candidates about the shortcomings of the federal No Child Left Behind law.
The eye-catching signs, one of which was located near Cleveland Browns Stadium, pictured Ifill on one side and Cheney and Edwards on the other. They read: "Hey Gwen, Ask them why we pay $1.5 billion to label our top schools failures."
At the time, Ohio had deemed some of the state's top-performing districts—including Hudson and Shaker Heights—to be failing under NCLB. Districts were claiming that they were spending millions of dollars to implement the new law and that teachers' jobs were being threatened. Who better to raise this important question on whether or not the federal law was working than an independent "education advocacy group" with seemingly no horse in the race?
What most Ohioans didn't know, however, was that the "education advocacy group" was essentially a nonprofit subsidiary of the National Education Association.

Communities for Quality Education is not unique in appearing to receive most of its funding from the NEA or its state and local affiliates. Another nonprofit outfit, the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, has supported a host of studies and reports critical of NCLB and "high-stakes testing." All have been funded entirely with money from the NEA and several state affiliates. Based in East Lansing, Mich., the center pays particular attention to issues in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. In addition to receiving two separate payments of $100,000 each from the NEA in the 2004–05 fiscal year, the center collects an additional $60,000 per year in membership dues from state affiliates in the Great Lakes region.
Center officials note that they have never hidden the fact that the center is supported by the NEA. "This financial support does not dictate the mission of the center nor does it determine the topics of research and projects that we support," Teri Battaglieri, director of the center, wrote recently.
To date, however, none of the center's reports on testing or NCLB would be considered supportive of either. Often the center's work, while based on empirical data, is presented in inflammatory ways, usually by overhyping worst-case scenarios and forecasts. One study commissioned by the center declared that nearly all schools in the Great Lakes region would eventually be considered failing under NCLB, one of the scare tactics often used nationally to discredit the feasibility of the law. In the case of Michigan, for example, the report presented a doomsday scenario based on the fundamental requirement that all students must be proficient in their subject areas by the 2014 school year, a goal that many critics—and even supporters—of NCLB believe to be unreachable. At the same time, however, data maintained by state education officials showed that 88 percent of Michigan's 3,670 public schools made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under NCLB in 2005, meaning they were not currently considered "failing schools." Additionally, of the failing schools in Michigan that have been forced to undergo restructuring because of NCLB (a factor that wasn't considered in the union-funded work), 85 percent met state standards in the 2004–05 school year.13 The Great Lakes Center and the NEA's Michigan affiliate are also linked on a personal level: Teri Battaglieri is married to Michigan Education Association Executive Director Lou Battaglieri.

Some of the most powerful voices of support for the NEA's opposition to NCLB come not from groups started by the unions but from outside organizations that already have established relationships and reputations with policymakers, reporters, and editorial boards. The NEA has funded the work of a number of these organizations.
In February 2006, for example, the Harvard Civil Rights Project—a well-known and prolific education policy center run by professor Gary Orfield—released four separate studies that were critical of NCLB. The NEA funded all of them, and that fact was disclosed in each paper, but coverage of the reports by major news organizations such as Reuters and the Chicago Sun-Times made no mention of the NEA funding. Nor did the Civil Rights Project's press release on the research or an NEA press release praising the reports.
"The Harvard Civil Rights Project studies provide the first look at the effects of NCLB on poor, minority children, and the view is more alarming than even we expected," said NEA President Weaver in the NEA release. "Instead of improving education and options for poor, minority students, NCLB appears to present more barriers."
Another long-established think tank that has been vocally opposed to NCLB and receives significant funding from teacher unions is the Washington, D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute (EPI). The institute, which is highly visible in the national press, tends to focus on the impact of other societal problems on schools. EPI's Richard Rothstein, a former New York Times columnist, argued in a 2004 essay in The American Prospect that NCLB and its testing requirements were "doing great and needless damage" to students. The NEA paid EPI $70,000 in 2005, a fact not disclosed in the essay.

As Eduwonk correctly points out, this really isn't the same as the Williams payola flap; there's nothing wrong with the NEA funding likeminded organizations as part of pursuing an agenda. We wonder if that newfangled Think Tank Review over at Arizona State University is going to shine some additional sunlight on these groups! Oh--well, probab ly not.

Education News for Wednesday, July 12

Daily News — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:13:56 +0000

Jersey schools face school choice lawsuit - The fundamental structure of New Jersey's public school system could change if a group of families is successful in the lawsuit they will file Thursday, according to an opinion piece in today's Wall Street Journal. (more)

Remedial education - Clint Bolick writes in the Wall Street Journal about a NJ lawsuit seeking school choice options for New Jersey children trapped in failing schools(subscription required) . (more)

NYT: Teachers and a law that distrusts them - Michael Winerup writes his last education column after four years inside our nation's schools. (more)

School choice could combat SC dropout rate- It was disheartening to learn from Education Week’s national report that our state still has the lowest graduation rate in the nation, but that news should present yet another opportunity to engage in an honest discussion about much-needed education reform. (more)

USA Today: NEA pays opponents of NCLB law - The nation's largest teachers union has spent more than $8 million in a stealth campaign against President Bush's education reform law, paying for research and political opposition in an effort to derail it, according to a Washington think tank that supports the law. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Flaws and Failings- A Preliminary Look at the Problems Already Encountered in the Implementation of the District of Columbia’s New Federally Mandated School Voucher Program. (more)

Pass or fail? Parents find out about schools - On Tuesday, parents found out how their school fared this year. For thousands of families, word that their school did not pass for at least the second year in a row means they can opt to transfer to another school. Eligible families should get letters informing them of their options within the next two weeks. (more)

Catching dropouts - IN LATE summer or early fall, just when the gubernatorial race should be heating up, state education officials are scheduled to release detailed data on high school dropout rates in Massachusetts as part of a wider effort of the National Governors Association. Twenty percent is a conservative estimate statewide but the rates in some urban areas could easily double that figure. (more)

Board cuts back privately run school - The Pinellas County School Board voted Tuesday to amend its contract with a private company it hired in 2004 to educate disruptive children. The district will save $1.7-million by capping at 432 the number of middle and high school students at Oak Park School in Pinellas Park. The board originally authorized Community Education Partners, a Tennessee-based firm known as CEP, to work with 648 students. (more)

Remedial Education (Clint Bolick)

fguest — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 12:24:52 +0000

A world of education reform will change tomorrow when a group of families files a class action lawsuit in Chancery Court in Newark, N.J. They are asking for an immediate and meaningful remedy for 60,000 children trapped in failing schools -- by transferring control over education funds from bureaucrats to parents.

Seeking to vindicate the state constitutional guarantee of a "thorough and efficient" education, the plaintiffs in Crawford v. Davy ask that children be allowed to leave public schools where fewer than half of the students pass the state math and language literacy assessments that measure educational proficiency; and that the parents of these children be permitted to take the pro rata share of the public money spent on their children, to seek better opportunities in other public or private schools. Supporting the families are three prominent New Jersey groups: the Black Ministers Council, the Latino Leadership Alliance, and Excellent Education for Everyone.

The remedy these parents seek is fundamentally different from the one established by more than three decades of litigation across the country. Courts in states like New York, Texas and California have ordered massive increases in school funding to fulfill state constitutional mandates for educational "equity" or "adequacy," all on the belief that more money will boost school quality and student performance. The funds have produced new programs and bureaucracies, but too often they fail to trickle down to the students by way of improved educational quality.

In any area other than education such a remedy would be considered bizarre. Suppose you purchased a car whose warranty promised "thorough and efficient" transportation, and it turned out to be a lemon. If you sued to enforce the warranty, would a court order a multibillion dollar payment to the auto maker in the hope that someday it would produce a better product? Of course not: It would order the company to give your money back so you could buy a different car.

That is what the families in this case are asking for. When children don't learn, they may lose that opportunity forever, so a remedy that offers a hypothetical future improvement is no remedy at all. Only by giving parents control over their children's education funds can they secure good schooling when their children need it -- today. At the same time, the remedy will create a powerful catalyst for failing public schools to get their acts together.

School choice remedies are not unknown in education. Under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that where public schools fail to provide an "appropriate" education, they must pay tuition in private schools. Nationally, tens of thousands of children with disabilities benefit as a result. Likewise, the No Child Left Behind Act mandates that children in failing public schools must be allowed to transfer to better-performing public schools within the district. Only 1% of the eligible children have transferred, however, because of NCLB'S lack of a private school transfer option; and so nearly four million children languish in chronically failing public schools.

New Jersey courts have for their part repeatedly recognized that the state constitution's education guarantee is judicially enforceable; and the state itself has set the minimum proficiency standards to which the defendant school districts in Crawford v. Davy fall appallingly short. New Jersey is also the state that has traveled farthest down the path of pursuing educational adequacy through new school funding and programs -- starting in 1973, when the state Supreme Court first declared the state's school finance system unconstitutional in Robinson v. Cahill and again in 1985 in Abbott v. Burke. Today, dozens of schools in the so-called Abbott districts remain under court control. With abundant funding, some Abbott schools have improved, while others haven't. On balance, however, the New Jersey experience demonstrates that money alone cannot solve the ills of public education.

One of the defendant school districts in the new suit, Englewood City, spends $19,194 per student, well over twice the national average. But at Dismus Middle School, over two-thirds of the students do not have basic proficiency in math and fewer than half are proficient in language arts literacy. Newark, a recipient of massive Abbott funding, spends $16,351 per student and pays its teachers an average salary of $76,213. Yet in 24 of its schools, fewer than half the students demonstrate basic proficiency in math or language arts. At William H. Brown Academy and at Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. School, fewer than one of every 10 students demonstrates basic math proficiency. It's time to try something else for these children.

The lead plaintiff, Van-Ness Crawford, has struggled to obtain a safe and decent education for his three sons in the Newark Public Schools. But by reason of residency and financial circumstances, they are forced to attend Malcolm X. Shabazz High School, where over 80% of the students are failing mathematics. For them the guarantee of a thorough and efficient education is an empty promise. That will change if Mr. Crawford is able to wrest away a pro rata share of his sons' education funds from the officials who have failed his children and thousands of others. Such a remedy also would send a wake-up call to other districts across the country: If they fail to produce, they may lose not only students who currently have no other choices, but the funding that accompanies them.

I grew up in Hillside, a suburb of Newark, in a single-parent, working-class family. In 1975, Hillside High School graduated me with enough skills to secure a scholarship at an excellent college and go on to a successful career in law and public policy. Some 31 years later, Hillside is at the 20th percentile nationally in language arts and math, and scores are plunging for the black and Hispanic students who comprise nearly 90% of its student body. Young people in that community today who go on to higher education and productive livelihoods do so not because they attended Hillside High, but despite it.

That so many schools are obstacles to opportunity stands the concept of public education on its head. To fulfill the promise of high-quality education we must enlist all options, including school choice. For Van-Ness Crawford's sons and millions of other children in failing schools, that option cannot come soon enough.

Clint Bolick is president and general counsel of the Alliance for School Choice. This column originally ran in the Wall Street Journal.

The California charter school insurrection continues

edspresso — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:13:03 +0000

First L.A., now San Diego:

As a venture capitalist, Greg Mauro's job is to find and nurture promising technology startups for investment opportunities. Now he wants to do the same in the public education arena.
The 36-year-old recently helped secure $35 million in federal tax credits for building new charter schools in low-income neighborhoods in California.
San Diego-based Revolution Ventures, where Mauro is managing partner, created Revolution Community Ventures, a community development entity, specifically to apply for the tax credits.
Revolution is working with the Point Loma-based chain of High Tech High charter schools, which received state permission in January to open 10 more campuses in California.

Could the Gates Foundation follow a similar pattern? I would imagine they're watching these developments pretty closely.

Buffett and Green Dot: an open question to Andrew Coulson

edspresso — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:58:00 +0000

Andrew Coulson is a little pessimistic on the Gates/Buffett philanthropic leviathan, pointing out that others have been here before:

Mr. Buffett and the Gateses are not the first to invest over a billion dollars in an ambitious school reform plan. Ambassador and TV Guide mogul Walter Annenberg trod this path during the 1990s, donating $500 million of his own money and another $800 million in matching funds to the "Annenberg Challenge."
Mr. Annenberg's goal was to create exemplary schools and districts that would act as models for the nation. He sought not incremental change, but systemwide transformation. He didn't get it. Though some Annenberg Challenge projects showed promise, at least for a time, their impact on the system as a whole was negligible.
Why? The Wreck of the Annenberg can be attributed to a single fundamental flaw in the ambassador's approach: he assumed that excellence, once demonstrated, would automatically be imitated.
It is easy to see why people who have amassed riches in the private sector might assume that successful models are always mimicked on a broad scale. That is what happens in competitive markets – including competitive education markets.
In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith praised the vigorous education industry of classical Athens, noting that: "The demand for ... instruction produced, what it always produces, the talent for giving it; and the emulation which an unrestrained competition never fails to excite appears to have brought that talent to a very high degree of perfection."

But the "emulation" that Mr. Annenberg was counting on never happened because there was no competition to "excite" it. Absent market forces, America's public school monopoly has no mechanism by which excellence can be routinely identified, perpetuated and disseminated. As a result, there are myriad examples of public school excellence achieved and then lost.

So businesspeople fail because they put their expertise to work in a model that isn't built for it--a model that, Andrew goes on to say, is fundamentally broken due to union ossification and lack of competition. In that context, look at this statement from Green Dot guru Steve Barr:

"We're really trying to figure out how to take research and development (at charters), couple it with political will and create systematic improvement. We're not going to create a district with 1,000 charter schools.
"The goal is for all LAUSD schools to have the basic tenets we know work and eliminate the need for charters."
Without having to fight his way through the bureaucratic and political obstacles of Los Angeles Unified, Barr hopes to demonstrate what works in public schools and spark citywide school reform.

Barr sounds not at all unlike Annenberg: Green Dot will be the model for excellence, LAUSD schools will steal from Green Dot's playbook, and L.A. schoolchildren will be the better for it. But here's my question for Andrew: since we're talking about charters and therefore some element of competition is present, shouldn't there be at least a little more optimism with respect to Green Dot? Feel free to leave a comment in the thread, or fire off an e-mail if you prefer.

NEA conference resolutions

edspresso — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:10:00 +0000

Cross Blogging casts a jaded eye on some of the more questionable resolutions passed last week in Orlando. Go read. (Hat tip to this week's Carnival of Education, being hosted by School Me.)

Eliot Spitzer, champion of school choice?

edspresso — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 17:39:00 +0000

In an interview, Democrat Eliot Spitzer explained his education policy if he is elected governor of New York (hat tip to The Chalkboard):

How would you improve the city schools, and how would you invest the money that may come as a result of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit against the state?

I believe in competition, I believe in accountability, I believe in transparency. We need to see a significant infusion of money, but we have to pair it with increased charter schools, giving principals authority. We have to make sure we address the issue of universal pre-K and early literacy. We need to give teachers incentives to teach at low-performing schools. We have to begin to think about pay-for-performance.

If we don't pair the resolution of this litigation with an effort to change the delivery system, then we will have missed an opportunity.

Funding the schools at the level laid out in the CFE case will cost billions of dollars. Where will the money come from?

I put on the table an $11 billion savings plan in terms of the current state budget. This is something that Controller Alan Hevesi and I have worked over carefully. Those numbers are conservative and they are real. That pays for a property tax cut as well as what we begin to do in education. There will be no tax increase. Over four years we can get to this.

A New York Democrat endorsing merit pay and choice? No wonder it got Joe's attention. Two ways to look at this...

Glass half empty: This gesture is conveniently mated to an eduspending boost and a tax cut. Is he merely tacking to the center leading into the election? And then there's the little matter of the UFT and NYSUT, so my gut tells me he can expect a trip behind the union woodshed any minute now. (If it were New Jersey, they would just settle it the Tony Soprano way and take it out of his kneecaps.)

Glass half full: Three Democratic governors have signed school choice legislation this year. And in the most recent case, Arizona's Janet Napolitano signed two new voucher programs into law over the strenuous objections of the NEA-affiliated Arizona Education Association, essentially telling the union to "jump in a lake". In sum: is it possible the teachers' union hammerlock on Democrats is slipping?

(For context on the CFE lawsuit, go to this Wikipedia entry or this rather disparaging City Journal account.)

CORRECTION: It has been brought to my attention that four Democratic governors have signed two-thirds of all the school choice legislation so far this year. Furthermore, the new legislation they've signed represents nearly all the new funding for school choice in 2006 (around $87 million). So the answer to my question could very well be "yes".

New Jersey reax

edspresso — Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:02:00 +0000

Alliance president Clint Bolick gave advance warning yesterday, and our lawsuit in New Jersey is now a reality. A list of news stories can be found here, but here are a few other links.

Education Week's web-only link (subscription required):

In a series of school finance lawsuits over the past 30 years, New Jersey courts have mandated remedies such as increased spending, mandatory preschool, schoolwide curricula, and state-financed school construction in the state's poorest districts. Courts in Kansas, Kentucky, New York, and several other states also have sided with plaintiffs who have argued that the states inadequately finance their schools.

In other words, the remedies employed until now have focused on the system rather than the students, which is what distinguishes this lawsuit. The most recent school finance lawsuit, Abbott v. Burke, called on the state to increase funding to poorer school districts. And boy oh boy was funding increased: as pointed out in our press release, New Jersey schools now enjoy some of the highest per-pupil spending levels in the nation. In every school named in the lawsuit, per-pupil spending clocks in at more than $10,000, and in some cases, more than $20,000. (For that price, they could just as easily attend junior college full-time. But I digress.)

So what's the reaction of the Education Law Center, the group behind Abbott? Neal McCluskey over at Cato at Liberty takes a look:

This morning, in a story about the disastrous Camden, NJ, public schools, I’m afraid I got my answer:
Camden schools — despite their ongoing problems — have taken positive steps by offering preschool programs, reducing class size and other efforts, said David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center.

“It’s easy to criticize and have some silver-bullet solution that’s untested and unproven,” Sciarra said. “There’s a positive agenda that we need everyone, including the school-choice activists, to get behind.”

I suppose I could hope that when Sciarra attacked a “silver-bullet solution that’s untested and unproven” he was referring to pouring more and more money into improvement-invulnerable public schools, but that’s been tested repeatedly…and constantly found to be a failure. Unfortunately, I guess that means I have my answer.

Meanwhile, the AP is a bit overboard with this headline: "Parents Sue Schools to Have Public Pay to Send Kids Elsewhere". Ignore the fact that a) these parents are taxpayers too and b) whatever they end up paying to send kids elsewhere will almost certainly be cheaper than what the state has been paying in Abbott funding that hasn't produced results. And the lede kind of sums up the tone of the article:

In an assault on New Jersey's education system - and ongoing efforts to fix it - a group of parents has filed a lawsuit calling for using public money to send students in two dozen New Jersey communities to private schools.

So we're committing "assault" on the school system and sabotaging efforts to fix it--efforts which, we are to infer, were going along just fine until our dastardly attack? The folks in Camden might beg to differ.

The face of McKay kids

edspresso — Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:02:00 +0000

One Florida parent/educator is doing what she can for special-needs kids:

Tucked into a Kass Circle storefront near Michelle's Elbow Room restaurant and Pizzaz Hair Design, the Golden Branch Academy still lacks furniture and just got a phone connection.
But if Lourdes Morales' dream becomes a reality, by late August, that storefront will be home to a new educational option for children with special needs in grades 4-12.
Morales, who has 15 years' experience teaching reading and English as a second language at Deltona Elementary and Farnell Middle schools in Hillsborough County, hopes to serve up to 30 students in the four-room suite of offices.
She saw the need for a private alternative while raising her own children, 12-year-old Luis and 15-year-old Laura, both of whom have been diagnosed with autism. Prone to outbursts and obsessive behavior, both needed consistency and individualized attention they couldn't find in public schools, she said.
"Once they get into middle school, they just get lost," she said, referring to some special-needs children. "I've met with parents in the area and the need is great."
Morales hopes eventually to serve up to 30 elementary, middle and high school students with autism-spectrum, anxiety, or attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorders, as well as gifted and ESOL students, in three rooms at the school. For now, she won't be accepting students who need the intensive support of a one-to-one aide.
Each of those groups of eight to 10 students will have its own teacher and will work out of its own cubicle so the students get the individual attention they need, she said.
That's the dream.

Oh, but rest assured the ACLU and assorted teachers unions are doing everything in their power to see that dream denied and Laura and Luis "welcomed back" (shudder) to public school. Remember: for teachers unions, any school choice program, regardless of its form or who it's intended to help, is just too much.

Divergence and Convergence ("John Dewey")

mtigani — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

(This is the third in a series of articles from an ed school student working towards certification as a math teacher. His first article is here, and his second here. For reasons that will likely be quite obvious, he prefers to remain anonymous. -ed.)

For those of you who read my last missive regarding the highly agreeable professor, I’m sure it comes as no surprise that he would be the first to agree with the comments posted that many problems have only one answer—the right one. I didn’t mean to pick on the guy so much. He was merely echoing ed school wisdom about math education. In ed school parlance, when more than one answer exists for a question, the thinking used to come up with answers is called “divergent”. When only one answer exists, the thinking is called “convergent”.

In ed school, “divergence” is considered a good thing and “convergence” looked upon with disdain. I think ed school teachers take an oath to uphold these beliefs as part of an attempt to turn math into a “divergent thinking” type of subject like social studies or English. Such thinking reflects a significant and depressing lack of understanding of what math is about. A math professor recently commented to me about this lack of understanding with respect to how it is taught:

“One problem I see that arises from how math is taught before college is that we get some math majors (who don't all stay majors) who have a completely incorrect notion of what math is. I'm not sure what they think it is, but when they have to take a course like abstract algebra and are asked to do proofs, they think this has nothing to do with math. Exposure to proofs in high school geometry would go a long way toward correcting such misconceptions early on.”

Unfortunately, the emphasis on proofs in geometry has been de-emphasized over the years, thanks in large part to the NCTM standards (see first letter in this series) and what ed schools think math is about. The proofs that exist in today’s high school geometry courses are trivial; many textbooks have turned most theorems into postulates so that geometry has become a collection of “taken on faith” propositions with no proofs offered. Geometry classes have become nothing more than memorization of formulae (areas, volumes, surface areas of volumes) and very few proofs. As part of my recent ed school course, I was required to log in 15 hours of field experience by observing math classes at the high school level. I decided to visit a teacher who teaches honors geometry at the local high school. I had tutored one of her students a few years ago. I recall that she had supplemented the almost proof-less textbook by giving the students proofs to do, but even so, the number of proofs was far less than what previous generations had to do in non-honors courses. I was surprised when I visited her class and saw how she “proved” the Pythagorean Theorem. (This is one theorem the textbook had not yet turned into a postulate.) She handed out sheets of paper on which were drawn a right triangle with three squares extending from each of its three sides. There is a famous proof in which the two smaller squares can be shown via congruence theorems to fit into the larger square of the hypotenuse. Her version, however, was to have the students cut out pieces of the two smaller squares by cutting along lines marked within them and assemble the resulting pieces, like a jigsaw, into the big square of the hypotenuse. This was how she proved the theorem. (Oh, excuse me. This is how she had the students prove the theorem.) “Does this prove the theorem?” she asked. The students said yes, because it showed that the areas of the squares of the two legs in a right triangle equal the area of the square of the hypotenuse. Which is correct for the particular triangle on the sheet of paper she handed out. There was no discussion of how the procedure could be generalized for right triangles for any size, nor why the teacher drew the lines within the two smaller squares where she did. I asked her later if she offered any other proofs of the theorem. “No,” she said. “We don't spend much time on the Pythagorean Theorem in the Honors class simply because they've learned it before.” I visited another class as part of my assignment and observed an algebra 1 lesson. The teacher of that class was actually quite good. He has a provisional license to teach and is getting his degree from the school I attend; even has the same advisor as I do it turned out. One exchange in class caught my attention. He announced they would be starting a new chapter in the book. A student asked “Is there any math in this chapter?” to which the teacher, straight-faced, replied “Yes, but not too much.” Since the algebra text itself is not very good (same authors as the proof-less geometry book) I wondered perhaps if the two of them were making a statement about the book. That wasn’t it. He said the student was a wise-ass. “I was just giving it back to him,” he said. I followed up with an email and asked what he thought of NCTM’s standards and whether our advisor liked them. No reply. I think I may have scared him. That’s too bad; I’m only trying to help. I hope he remains an excellent teacher. I remain faithfully and sincerely yours in divergence of thought, John Dewey

Education News for Friday, July 14

Daily News — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:26:28 +0000

Advisory panel issues LA school reforms recommendations at odds with mayor's plan -As the debate over control of the Los Angeles Unified School District raged around it, a little-watched commission exploring reforms to the public school system formally agreed Thursday to a set of sweeping recommendations. (more)

School choice for kids object of parents' suit - Asbury Park Press reports on Thursday's news conference and filing of class action suit. (more)

Parents sue to remove kids from failing schools - "We're sending our children on a mission of suicide," said Van Ness Crawford, the lead plaintiff and widowed father whose triplet sons attend Malcolm X. Shabazz High School in Newark. (more)

Paterson named in NJ lawsuit - If the state gives an underperforming public school a set amount of money for each student, why shouldn't parents be able to spend that money at a better school? (more)

Congress seeks improvements to NCLB - With the No Child Left Behind law facing renewal next year, Congress is looking at ways to improve the landmark education law. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

School Choice - When it comes to school choice, soon Rockford students may have no choice as to which school they attend. Currently they submit their top three choices to the district, then administrators decide where they are assigned. (more)

People For the American Way Foundation Opposes the 65% Deception- People For the American Way Foundation is a staunch defender of public education. We believe that public education – like an independent judiciary and fair elections – is an essential component of our American democracy. (more)

Senate Appropriations Committee Expands DC School Voucher Program - People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas said today’s Senate Appropriation Committee expansion of the federally mandated District of Columbia voucher program is bad news for D.C. students and schools (more)

Teachers flunk Bush school law - Saying its members believe George W. Bush’s school-funding legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act, gets “a failing grade,” the National Education Association voted July 4 to lobby for a comprehensive rewrite of the statute next year. (more)

Bound Brook schools cited in lawsuit - In an assault on New Jersey's education system, a group of parents has filed a lawsuit calling for using public money to send students in two dozen New Jersey communities -- including Bound Brook -- to private schools. (more)

Suit expands voucher debate- The national school-voucher fight has arrived on New Jersey's doorstep.In an action that could change the face of education in the Garden State, parents of 12 children attending failing public schools in 25 districts sued the districts and the state commissioner of education yesterday. (more)

School-choice advocates file class-action suit - School-choice advocates sued yesterday in an effort to give students in failing public schools, including one in Perth Amboy and three in New Brunswick, the right to attend a different public or private school. (more)

Suit seeks to permit school choice - School-choice advocates filed a lawsuit Thursday that could redraw the boundaries of school districts and affect urban and suburban communities alike…Clint Bolick, president of the Arizona-based School Choice Alliance and an advocate in an Ohio case that led the U.S. Supreme Court to approve vouchers, said state judges have already found that education is a "legally enforceable right." (more)

Bradley grants issued - Grants the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation recently allocated will help the Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra balance its budget and support accreditation of voucher schools. (more)

Parents sue to remove kids from failing N.J. schools - A group of parents on Thursday sued the state Board of Education and 25 school districts, seeking to remove their children from poorly performing classrooms and spend their public education funding at other schools -- even private ones -- in any town. (more)

State board OKs math and science charter school - A special high school for Gwinnett students interested in math, science and technology received state approval Thursday. The State Board of Education approved the county's first charter school, the Gwinnett Charter School of Advanced Mathematics, Science and Technology, said Dana Tofig, spokesman for the state education department. (more)

Mom's dream: A school for children with autism - Tucked into a Kass Circle storefront near Michelle's Elbow Room restaurant and Pizzaz Hair Design, the Golden Branch Academy still lacks furniture and just got a phone con nection. (more)

Assemblyman, parents talk special ed- About 50 San Ramon Valley parents upset with the school district's special-education services met with Assemblyman Guy Houston, who promised to look into their claims. (more)

Mayor Booker Chases Newark Robbery Suspect - Newark Mayor Cory Booker tossed off his jacket and gave chase when he saw a police officer with gun drawn chasing a robbery suspect. (more)

Dallas ISD credit card fiasco

edspresso — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:09:00 +0000

A reader brought this to our attention:

With little oversight, Dallas Independent School District employees swipe their district-issued credit cards hundreds of times a day, spending about $20 million a year on everything from office supplies and textbooks to meals and giveaway trinkets.

About 1,200 cards are in circulation, and they keep the district running. With them, administrators and teachers can buy day-to-day supplies without the hassle of waiting on a district purchase order. But rarely does anyone check up on the card users, review their receipts or question what they've bought.

They're spending on items like this: a $200 blanket and pillow set from The Land of Nod, $1,700 in electric scooters, $200 in moisturizer from Bath and Body Works, and a $24.95 charge to an online dating service, Americansingles.com. The Dallas Morning News examined school district credit card transactions over 27 months, from January 2004 through March 2006 – a $41.5 million snapshot of district spending. Those and other district records showed that only a fraction of purchase receipts are scrutinized, and thousands of purchases run afoul of DISD policy and state purchasing laws. Among the findings:

• Card users were not required to submit their purchase receipts unless asked, and district administrators requested only a small percentage of them. In 2005, district auditors found: "The [district] does not scrutinize [purchase] logs and original receipts."

• Card users routinely buy at businesses that do not have price agreements with the district. One example: DISD has agreements with three companies that sell T-shirts, but this year credit card users spent at least $53,000 at other T-shirt shops, a violation of district purchasing contracts and state procurement laws.

• Card users often can't document what they've bought. The News asked to review receipts for 226 purchases. The district was unable to provide receipts for 43 of them, or roughly 20 percent. In 2003, DISD auditors found similar problems. Under district rules, card users are supposed to keep all original receipts on file in case auditors need them. Those receipts are also public records and, by law, must not be destroyed.

• District auditors highlighted these weaknesses, and more, in two reports, but district officials failed to act on most of their recommendations.

And according to this from 2005, the problem isn't exactly recent.

New Jersey and Camden: giving it the ol' college try--again

edspresso — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:18:24 +0000

After decades and billions of dollars, New Jersey state education officials are once again going to attempt to reform Camden public schools:

Saying, "We have to deliver," the state's top education official pledged to the Camden school board last night a plan to refocus education in the district after a tumultuous school year marked by the superintendent's resignation and state criminal and test-cheating probes.
Acting Education Commissioner Lucille E. Davy and her chief of staff, Penelope Lattimer, said in a rare appearance that they would form a new team to focus on literacy and math during the next three years and to help coach teachers.
Davy called an overall drop in the district's standardized test scores for 2005-06 "alarming." Districtwide, fourth-grade scores dropped 19 percentage points in reading and 14 in math, and some schools showed drastic drops. The biggest was 77 percentage points in math at H.B. Wilson.
Davy said yesterday that she was not prepared to say whether there had been previous cheating. A state report will soon be complete, she said.
"The scores this year are much, much lower," she said after the meeting. "They are alarming to us."
She told the board: "Quite honestly, the results of the tests... indicate to us that we need to think about doing things a little bit differently." (emphasis added)

Now there's a candidate for understatement of the year. (And maybe our lawsuit's slogan!) For more information on Camden's horrific education legacy, check out the Philly Inquirer's links or E3's hair-raising white paper.)

Blog reaction on New Jersey

edspresso — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:23:19 +0000

Jim Wooten, blogger/columnist with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, likes the lawsuit:

There is an answer. It’s contained in the New Jersey suit — though, honestly, I’m not any more desirous of conservative judicial activism than I am of liberal judicial activism. The legislature should do what the suit asks: Give parents a portion of the money set aside to educate their children to be spent as parents choose to purchse the education services their children need. It’s a three-step process: Give parents information about school performance. Give them a stipend or tax credit based on the child’s needs. And, finally, encourage the free market to create new schools to serve like-needs children. Support public schools, but create a new model — one not built for an agrarian economy with stable, supportive two-parent families.
You can’t dump society’s problems at the schoolhouse door, blending classes that include the gifted, slow-learners, the daddy-deprived, discipline problems, the disabled, and those who barely speak English, while expecting success. It’s unrealistic. Give parents choice and the grants to make choice real.

Oh, it's safe to say we would much rather go through the legislature than the judiciary. But the thing is, union stonewalling tends to push most voucher programs into the courtroom.

Cory Booker: Newark mayor, Rhodes scholar, crime fighter

edspresso — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 18:43:16 +0000

Not only is Alliance board member Cory Booker a champion of school choice, nobody--nobody--messes with his town.

Mayor Booker and his guards left Newark’s City Hall around 12:30 p.m. yesterday for a meeting and stumbled upon what appeared to be a confrontation across the street: a police officer and a man in a standoff on Broad Street. The officer held a gun and the man wielded a pair of scissors.
The police later said that the man had just robbed a customer in the City National Bank of hundreds of dollars. In escaping the bank, the man was brushed by a car and fell.
When a nearby police officer went to help him, the man tried to stab the officer with the scissors, but missed, Mr. Booker said. The officer drew his gun as the suspect was running away.
Mr. Booker, 37, who played tight end on Stanford University’s football team, said, “I took off my jacket and gave chase.”
The two officers with him, Billy Valentin and Kendrick Isaac, began running, too.
The guards overtook Mr. Booker and took the man down in front of a parking lot.
Mr. Valentin, 37, a 12-year veteran of the force, said, “He actually didn’t see it coming because he was looking at the officer with the gun, and we came from behind.’’
When Mr. Booker reached the group, he began shouting at the robber: “Not in our city anymore! These days are over!”

And if you think that was good, just wait until he gets to work on school reform.

Education News for Monday, July 17

Daily News — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:24:20 +0000

Public schools perform near private ones in new study - NYT: The Education Department reported on Friday that children in public schools generally performed as well or better in reading and mathematics than comparable children in private schools. (more)

WSJ: Long-delayed education study casts doubt on value of vouchers (subscription required) - Students in public schools perform just as well as their private-school peers when test scores are adjusted for race, socioeconomics and other factors, according to a long-delayed study released Friday by the U.S. Department of Education. (more)

Chester Finn: Private performance, the New York Times gets excited - Predictably, Diana Jean Schemo and the New York Times found front-page, above-the-fold space on Saturday... (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

A costly lesson in supply and demand - L.A. Unified plans to spend millions to train, recruit and keep math and science teachers, who are a hot commodity nationwide. (more)

NCES Study: Some Preliminary Thoughts (Clint Bolick)

fguest — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:27:00 +0000

The edusphere is abuzz over the DOE's release of the NCES study. We're planning to respond further to the study, but first we'd like to point out a few things.

First off, and fatally, the study is comparing apples and oranges. It acknowledges that private school students outpace public school students, but then makes "adjustments" to control for various factors. But the results predictably are skewed in favor of public schools. A huge percentage of poor-performing public schools are slapped with "special needs" labels and removed from testing. Moreover, most children who exercise school choice were doing poorly in the public schools. Without including special-needs students, and without knowing the point at which choice students started, side-by-side comparisons are irrelevant.

Second, choice supporters believe that school choice is the tide that lifts all boats. If we're right--and studies by Harvard's Caroline Hoxby says we are--test scores will rise for both public and private school students. Again, a snapshot tells nothing about the competitive benefits of school choice.

The gold standard for studies on the benefits of school choice comparies performance of students who applied for school choice and were randomly selected for admission with those who applied and were not admitted. So far, all gold-standard studies have found gains for children exercising school choice. Control-group longitudinal studies are underway in the District of Columbia and Milwaukee programs. Those apples-to-apples studies will tell us a great deal about systemic reform prospects for school choice. Unfortunately, the NCES study tells us nothing.

Clint Bolick is the president and general counsel of the Alliance for School Choice.

NCES Study: Friedman Foundation Responds

fguest — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:37:43 +0000

On July 14, the U.S. Department of Education released a study that the teachers’ unions are holding up as evidence that public schools are better than private schools. The study doesn’t actually show this, and is riddled with methodological flaws anyway. If you tell the average American that public schools are better than private schools, she’s likely to respond, “What have you been smoking?” In this case, the evidence shows that the average American is right.

The study tells us nothing whatsoever about the relative quality of public and private schools

It takes raw test scores from isolated years and applies statistical controls for demographic factors like race, income, and disabilities. While the raw scores are higher in private schools, once you apply the statistical controls, public school students actually have similar or even higher scores. The teachers’ unions are rushing to claim that this shows public schools are better than private schools. In fact, as the study itself clearly says, these data show nothing of the kind.

As every education researcher knows, single-year snapshots of test scores reflect student quality much more than school quality. The only real way to get at school quality is to examine year-to-year changes in test scores. A student whose test scores are high is probably just a good student; it’s the student whose test scores are rising who shows the quality of his school. A much more likely explanation for these data is that students who enter private schools tend to have test scores a little lower than other students of the same race and socioeconomic status. That sounds counterintuitive, because we usually think of private school students as privileged. But they are only privileged in terms of their demographic status – which this study controls for. It makes perfect sense that it’s the low performers within each racial and socioeconomic group whose parents will make the sacrifices necessary to put them in private schools. They’re the ones who need it the most.

But don’t take our word for it. The study itself says the same thing – in not one but two big sections labeled “Cautions in Interpretation,” the study forthrightly states that these data tell us nothing whatsoever about the relative quality of public and private schools. The teachers’ unions are just blowing smoke, as always.

The study is shot through with other methodological flaws

Paul Peterson of Harvard University, examining the study’s data, has discovered that the study only produces a positive finding for public schools because it uses the wrong variable to measure Limited English Proficient students. When the correct variable is substituted, the results are positive for private schools. He also points out that public schools are much more likely to classify students as disabled (about 13% versus about 3%). Peterson doesn’t say it, but the main reason for this is that public schools get bigger budgets when they slap the “disabled” label on a child, a perverse incentive that private schools don’t have. If this difference isn’t accounted for, any attempt to compare public and private schools is invalid. Peterson will release his analysis at the annual American Political Science Association meeting this fall.

Andrew Coulson of the Cato Institute has also pointed out that the study controls for variables that are “endogenous,” meaning that they are systematically related to the study’s variable of interest, school sector (that is, public versus private schools). School size is systematically related to school sector, and absentee rates probably are as well, but the study controls for them. “Don’t control for endogenous variables” is straight out of Social Science 101.

A much larger body of much better studies finds that, yes, private schools are better

Those who claim this study as evidence that public schools do better are standing against an enormous scientific consensus. If the available research shows anything, it shows that private schools provide a better education than public schools. The consensus among empirical studies on this issue is as strong as on any social policy question. If social science tells us anything at all, it tells us that private schools do better.

While this study’s method of looking at single-year snapshots can’t even examine whether there’s a causal relationship between school sector (public or private) and test scores, it just happens that there’s a large body of very high-quality research that does allow us to evaluate this connection, and it overwhelmingly finds that private schools do better. The most convincing evidence comes from seven studies using “random assignment,” the gold standard for scientific method. In all seven studies, students who won a random lottery to use a school voucher at a private school had significantly greater test score gains than similar students who lost the lottery and stayed in public schools. Numerous studies using other methods have also produced a strong consensus in favor of this finding.

Greg Forster, Ph.D. is a senior fellow and director of research with the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation.

The School Choice Movement’s Greatest Failure (Andrew Coulson)

fguest — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:16:00 +0000

Both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times jumped on the release of a new study by the National Center for Education Statistics this weekend. The WSJ’s headline was particularly dramatic: “Long-Delayed Education Study Casts Doubt on Value of Vouchers.”

No, it doesn’t.

And it is a failure on my part, as well as a failure of the school choice movement as a whole, that the media don’t understand why.

Taking the study entirely at face value, what it says is this: private school students consistently score better in math and reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) than public school students, but their advantage essentially goes away if you apply a particular set of controls for the differing student characteristics between the two sectors (things such as wealth, race, etc.)

Okay, you say, but if private schools don’t significantly outscore public schools, what’s the point of school voucher programs or other reforms that would give all parents access to the public or private school of their choice? Why, in other words, is the Journal’s headline wrong?

It’s wrong because the point of voucher programs is to create a competitive education industry, and the existing population of U.S. private schools does not constitute such an industry.

A vigorous free market in education requires that all families have easy access to the schools of their choice (whether public or private); that schools are not burdened with extensive regulations on what they can teach, whom they can hire, and what they can charge, etc.; that consumers directly pay at least some of the cost of the service; that private schools not be discriminated against financially by the state in the distribution of education funding, and that at least a substantial minority of private schools be operated for profit.

This set of conditions does not exist in any state in the nation. Instead, American education is dominated by a 90 percent government monopoly that is funded entirely through taxation. The private sector occupies the remaining 10 percent niche, is almost exclusively operated on a non-profit basis, and is forced to charge thousands of dollars in tuition in the face of the “free” monopoly schools that spend an average of $10,000 per pupil per year.

This is not a market.

No study was necessary to point this out.

Competitive markets are characterized by innovation, inexorable improvements in cost effectiveness and the quality of goods and services, and the rapid growth of the most successful providers. None of this has occurred in the U.S. private education sector, precisely because that sector does not constitute a competitive market.

The last great innovation to transform classroom instruction occurred during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson: the invention of the chalkboard, around 1801. Since that time, the pace of innovation has been so slow that a student from the mid-1800’s would immediately recognize a modern classroom setting. The most sought-after private schools enroll only about a thousand more students today than they did a century ago. This degree of stagnation is unheard of outside of the education sector, because it is only in the education sector (at least in liberal democracies) that market activity has been so thoroughly extinguished by government monopoly provision.

Hence, this study of our current small, non-market niche of private schools does not allow any generalization to the sort of outcomes to be expected from a true free market in education—and the creation of such a market is the primary justification for voucher and other school choice policies.

If I were better at my job, and if the school choice movement as a whole had a more effective media machine, this fact would be widely understood and we wouldn’t see fallacious headlines like the one cited above.

A closer look at the findings

That major point having been made, let’s take a look at the study’s findings on their own merits, as an examination of the current crop of public versus private schools.

The first problem with the study is that it collects no data on per-pupil spending in public versus private schools. Private school tuition, according to the NCES itself, is about half of the average public school expenditure per pupil. While private schools have some other sources of revenue, they still spend thousands of dollars less per pupil than public schools even after taking these other revenues into account, and so may be dramatically more efficient even if their absolute achievement levels are comparable to those in public schools. Hence it is possible that, if spending were equalized, private schools would raise student learning substantially compared to current levels (while it has been shown that spending and achievement are largely unrelated in the public sector, this has not been demonstrated in the private sector. In fact, evidence from developing countries suggests that higher spending in private schools DOES increase student achievement).

Next, it is worth observing the specifics of the study’s findings. It reports that there is a small advantage to public schools in 4th grade math, but that this advantage is not present at the 8th grade. It further says that, at the 8th grade, private school students have a small advantage over public school students in reading. One possible interpretation of these findings is that public school students fall behind their peers in private schools the longer they spend in the classroom.

That, of course, is only one possibility. At any rate, it is clear that parents are most concerned with what their children know and are able to do at the end of their k-12 education, so if, by the later grades, private schools confer a significant advantage, this would definitely seem to favor them.

Methodological and Data Problems

All of the above discussion takes the study’s findings at face value. This may be ill-advised, since a preliminary review suggests that there may be real methodological problems and potentially serious data problems. Several of the control variables used in the model seem problematic, including the following.

The rate of student absenteeism

It is entirely possible that sectoral differences in the feeling of community or level of personal attention, ability of school staff to motivate students, etc., could affect student absenteeism. So it is erroneous to treat this as exogenous (i.e., as independent of school sector) and to control for it.

School size

This variable is clearly endogenous (i.e., affected by school sector). Parents tend to prefer schools in which teachers know all the students by name and which create a friendly, community atmosphere. This is much easier in smaller schools, and hence there is a competitive pressure not to get too large in the private education sector. No such pressure exists in the public sector, where contrary bureaucratic incentives encourage large school size. As a result, the average public school is roughly three times the size of the average private school: 521 students versus 182. It is thus unjustifiable to pretend that school size is independent of school sector.

The percentage of students in the Title I program

A report by the Congressional Budget Office notes that “About 97 percent of public schools and 45 percent of private schools participate in the school lunch program.” This vast difference in level of participation by schools may have a significant effect on the share of eligible students who are in fact being served by the program.

Sample specification problems

Between a fifth and a quarter of the private schools selected for the study did not participate. The authors make no serious attempt to analyze non-participants to determine how and to what extent they might differ from participating schools in ways related to student performance. This could bias their results in unknown ways.

It seems likely that public and private sector schools apply the federal Specific Learning Disability label differentially. This label states that children are disabled if they perform at a level below what would be expected for students of their age and intelligence. It does not account for the possibility that poor performance may be the result of poor instruction. Roughly six percent of all public school students are placed in this category, making up nearly half (43%) of all students classified as disabled in the public sector. Among private schools participating in this study, a total of 3 to 4 percent of students are classified as suffering from ANY disability, mental or physical. Because students classified as SLD can be excluded from the test taking pool or given extra time or other accommodations, differential SLD classification rates between the sectors may affect sectoral mean scores (because these students, by definition, perform below the average of their peers).

Instrument selection

Tom Loveless has pointed out in a paper for the Brookings Institution that the NAEP mathematics test does a poor job of measuring the skills that it is purported to measure. Calculator use is allowed throughout, so it does not measure basic arithmetic ability. More advanced topics such as algebra with fractions, are also all but absent, making it a poor test of these more advanced skills. If there are differences in either of these important areas between the sectors, the NAEP will not pick it up. It is natural for scholars to want to analyze the data they have, but readers should be aware of the shortcomings of those data as a measure of both basic and advanced mathematical ability.

Conclusion

Taking all of the above analysis together, this study’s findings would have little bearing on market-based reforms such as vouchers and tax credits even if it were methodologically flawless. Even as a comparison of public schools and the existing (non-market) crop of private schools, it leaves much to be desired because it neglects to consider the substantially higher per-pupil spending of public schools.

But the study, as noted above, is not methodologically flawless. Several of its control variables appear to be misspecified, and so its adjusted test score averages may be significantly biased. It makes no attempt to assess the impact of the non-participation by between a fifth and a quarter of all the private schools selected for participation in the study – another probable source of bias. And it uses a mathematics test (the NAEP) that has been shown to do a poor job of assessing both basic arithmetic and more advanced mathematical skills, thus obfuscating possible differences in performance in these (rather important) areas among the students tested.

In a nutshell: this study does not say what some reporters think it says, and it may not even say what its own authors think it says.

Andrew Coulson is the director of the Cato Institute's Center for Educational Freedom. This article originally appeared at Cato at Liberty.

What the NCES study says about itself (and some other odds n' ends)

edspresso — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:29:00 +0000

This comes directly from the study. First off, from the executive summary, p. v:

When interpreting the results from any of these analyses, it should be borne in mind that private schools constitute a heterogeneous category and may differ from one another as much as they differ from public schools. Public schools also constitute a heterogeneous category. Consequently, an overall comparison of the two types of schools is of modest utility. The more focused comparisons conducted as part of this study may be of greater value. However, interpretations of the results should take into account the variability due to the relatively small sizes of the samples drawn from each category of private school, as well as the possible bias introduced by the differential participation rates across private school categories.

In other words, there's as much variation among public schools as there is among public vs. private, making this overall comparison, in the authors' words, "of modest utility" (or usefulness).

There are a number of other caveats. First, the conclusions pertain to national estimates. Results based on a survey of schools in a particular jurisdiction may differ. Second, the data are obtained from an observational study rather than a randomized experiment, so the estimated effects should not be interpreted in terms of causal relationships. In particular, private schools are “schools of choice.” Without further information, such as measures of prior achievement, there is no way to determine how patterns of self-selection may have affected the estimates presented. That is, the estimates of the average difference in school mean scores are confounded with average differences in the student populations, which are not fully captured by the selected student characteristics employed in this analysis. (emphasis added)

This is particularly important. Far too many people (and, er, unions) want to give these sorts of studies the same weight as a controlled, randomized experiment, when in point of fact such studies just can't carry it. But as Greg Forster points out, the sorts of studies (there have been seven in all) that take a hard look at school choice programs by directly comparing students who receive vouchers to those who tried and failed to do so conclude that, at worst, school choice doesn't hurt. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the programs produce overwhelming benefits across the board, in standardized test scores and parent satisfaction. The unions tend to sidestep these sorts of findings. I wonder why?

Andrew Coulson pointed out a number of flaws in the study, but there's one in particular--the lack of examination of per-pupil spending--that caught my eye:

Private school tuition, according to the NCES itself, is about half of the average public school expenditure per pupil. While private schools have some other sources of revenue, they still spend thousands of dollars less per pupil than public schools even after taking these other revenues into account, and so may be dramatically more efficient even if their absolute achievement levels are comparable to those in public schools. Hence it is possible that, if spending were equalized, private schools would raise student learning substantially compared to current levels (while it has been shown that spending and achievement are largely unrelated in the public sector, this has not been demonstrated in the private sector. In fact, evidence from developing countries suggests that higher spending in private schools DOES increase student achievement).

Even assuming that the study is correct in its findings, public schools still come out looking rather badly. They get roughly double the funding of private schools, but still can't do any better than a statistical dead heat? Based on this level of funding, if public schools (according to NEA President Reg Weaver) really are so "outstanding", shouldn't we expect their NCES scores to be at least somewhat higher?

One final point. Per-pupil spending, church-and-state separation, taking poshots at the "privatization" bogeyman--all these sideshow fistfights tend to obscure a bigger principle: the right of parents to make decisions for their children. We all seem incredibly interested--frankly, in some cases a bit desperate--to cling to some statement from the latest policy wonk wiseman of the minute who has descended from on high with some pronouncement. But parents--well, parents just can't be trusted to know what's best for their children, what's really best or most effective, or believed when they say that a given school or teacher just isn't working for his or her child. That's a facet of the debate that, oddly enough, just keeps getting lost in the shuffle.

UPDATE: My mistake--there have been eight studies on the choice programs, not seven. Greg Forster sends a helpful clarification:

The eighth study found no statistically significant difference between voucher users and the control group. But it only achieved this result by flagrantly violating several fundamental rules of social science; what’s more, Paul Peterson has demonstrated that their analysis was not only done scientifically wrong, but that it had to be done wrong in exactly the way they did it in order to produce a null result; if they had gone wrong in any other way they would still have gotten a positive result for vouchers. So that’s pretty suggestive of what was really going on in that analysis. Unfortunately, most people won’t take your word for it if you tell them this, so my usual approach is to treat this study as totally discredited (which it is) and not mention it unless I have to.

School Choice Spreads with State Tax Credits (Dan Lips and Evan Feinberg)

fguest — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

In 2001, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge battled with Democratic state legislators to create a corporate scholarship tax credit program to bring the state’s families school choice. Five years later, Ridge’s tax credit has strong bipartisan support and is a model for other states. And just two weeks ago, Gov. Ed Rendell, a Democrat, signed legislation expanding the program. The 2001 school choice law offers corporations tax incentives to fund private school scholarships and “school improvement” projects at public schools. Under the law, corporations can claim a tax credit of up to 75 cents per dollar for a one-year contribution and 90 cents for a two-year contribution.\ Initially, the tax credit was capped at $20 million for private school scholarship donations and $10 million for public school donations. Since 2001, it has been has expanded, reaching an annual cap of $44 million in 2005. Businesses have been eager to participate. Last year, contributions hit the cap for private school scholarships just days after tax credits became available, raising $44 million to help 27,000 students attend private schools. But many more children could receive scholarships if more tax credits were available. In 2005, more than 500 companies were unable to participate because of the cap. Responding to this strong demand, this week Gov. Rendell agreed to support legislation that expands the tax credit program—with a new annual cap of $54 million, the expanded tax credit will pay for thousands of additional scholarships. Gov. Rendell’s support demonstrates growing bipartisan support for tax credit-based scholarships. Last month, Republican gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swann proposed doubling the cap for corporate contributions to Pennsylvania’s scholarship program. Gov. Rendell’s office responded by pointing to the governor’s record of raising the cap in 2003 and 2005. Across the country, corporate scholarship tax credits have become a popular way to expand school choice. The pioneer for this model was of Florida, which in 2001 was the first state to create a corporate tax credit for private school scholarship donations. Last year, the program helped 13,000 low-income students attend private schools. Following the success of Florida’s and Pennsylvania’s programs, states across the country are rushing to enact corporate scholarship tax credits. This year, Arizona became the third state to create a corporate tax credit for scholarship donations. The Arizona law will allow $10 million in corporate scholarship tax credits this year and $21 million by 2010. And just last week, Rhode Island enacted a corporate scholarship tax credit, which, capped at $1 million annually, will offer businesses the same partial tax credits that are available in Pennsylvania. The Rhode Island legislation passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. In the guise of tax credits, school choice is now gaining support among Democratic legislators, despite their party’s resistance to most school choice measures. In New Jersey, Assemblywoman Nilsa Cruz-Perez, a Democrat from Camden, joined four other Democrat legislators to sponsor a corporate scholarship tax credit that would create private school scholarships for 4,000 low-income children in Camden, Newark, Orange, and Trenton. In Maryland, Sen. James E. DeGrange, a Democrat, joined with 19 bipartisan cosponsors to propose a corporate tax credit modeled after Pennsylvania’s. Next year, corporate scholarship tax credits will give nearly 60,000 children school choice scholarships. But millions more American children could benefit from the chance to attend better schools. In Philadelphia alone, an estimated 63,000 students attend persistently failing public schools. When Gov. Ridge first proposed school choice for Pennsylvania, he envisioned school vouchers to help lower-income students attend private schools. While corporate tax credits have proven to be a successful path for expanding school choice, additional reforms—including vouchers, tuition tax credits, and education savings accounts—are needed to give all families the freedom to choose the best schools for their children. And as bipartisan support for corporate tax credits grows, these more ambitious school choice proposals may become possible. After all, all children deserve the opportunity to attend a high quality school that best meets their needs. Dan Lips is an Education Analyst and Evan Feinberg is a Research Assistant at the Heritage Foundation. This article previously appeared in the Heritage Foundation's Education Notebook.

Bring Real Choice to Camden (Isabel Santa)

fguest — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Rafael Cordero Molina Elementary School is named after the founder and patron saint of Puerto Rico’s educational system. The commemorative title is appropriate because the school is located in the predominately Puerto Rican community of Camden. However, “El Santo Varon” Rafael Molina would weep if he saw how the school named after him is failing its students. Currently, it takes six years for students to graduate from Molina, and by that time most still do not know how to read or write. Like nearly every other school in Camden this year, Molina Elementary failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Less than half the students passed the state proficiency test in language arts or math. According to No Child Left Behind, a school that fails to meet AYP entitles students to transfer to another school in the same school district. In spite of this federal mandate, not a single student has transferred out. Why? Because no adequate options exist for them. Now, nineteen out of thirty Camden schools failed to make AYP and are labeled “in need of improvement.” Many of these schools have failed for the fifth year in a row. According to NCLB guidelines, that means every child enrolled at those schools - more than 12,000 of the district’s 16,000 students - are now eligible for a transfer. Where can they all go? The handful of Camden schools that did succeed in making AYP are already stretched to capacity; they don’t have any more available seats. Transferring students to an outside school district seems like a reasonable option – in neighboring Cherry Hill, for instance, where more than 90% of students are proficient in math and reading. However, the only way to switch to a school in another district is through the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program (IPSCP). This recently developed program, praised by politicians and school officials, claims to “increase educational opportunities for New Jersey students by providing them with the option of attending a public school outside their district without any additional cost to parents.” In reality, the initiative offers almost no options at all. Only sixteen schools in the entire state actually participated in the program last year, offering a combined total of only 567 open seats. And none of them are in Cherry Hill or anywhere else near Camden. What kind of option is that? In many American cities, charter schools have been a successful way to provide parents with more choices. But the school board here has effectively stifled the charter school movement in Camden. Only three small charters have been opened, and none of them have the capacity to take new students. Wealthier families have long had options. Usually, dissatisfied wealthy families can move to another area where student achievement is higher than urban cities. On the other hand, they can pay to send their children to private schools where they earn good grades and enjoy a safe learning environment. Why are these options being denied to Puerto Rican families in Camden? Hispanic kids at schools like R.C. Molina and their parents cannot continue to wait for promised improvements that might come in five or ten years, if ever. Latino families need a reform that brings real help like means-tested vouchers. Let’s stop perpetuating a system that traps students in failing schools like Molina Elementary. Instead, let’s give the power to the parents so that they can pick the best education for their children. Isabel Santa is the Associate Director of Communications and Research at the Hispanic Council for Reform and Educational Options (Hispanic CREO) in Washington, D.C.

Birth of Parents Union (Bill Grundfest)

fguest — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Los Angeles has taken a huge historic first ever anyplace step, with the formation last week of the LA Parents Union. Readers of this space may recall that a few weeks ago, I went off on a tear about how every entity in the LAUSD had power for one reason - they were unionized. And yet the one entity with the most the lose - parents - had no power. We did the math (we were able to because we didn't go to an LAUSD middle school), and came out with... The Los Angeles Parents Union. Every player in this multi-billion dollar game (and sadly, for everyone except parents, this is a game) calls themselves a "stakeholder." Bullfeathers. To be a "stakeholder" in something, you must have something REAL at stake. If things go south, you must be at risk of losing something. No vulture currently picking at the carrion flesh that litters LAUSD - from the teachers unions to the school board - has anything at stake - they can't even lose their jobs, in spite of LAUSD's FEMA-level incompetence. Only one group CAN and WILL lose their jobs - our kids. The workforce is a competitive place (except for LAUSD where it takes 2 years to fire an actual dead person) and while LAUSD is struggling to learn how to teach 19th-century rudiments, we're in a 21st century globally competitive economy. The kids in other countries are mocking our kids - and rightfully so - while they eat ourt lunch and prepare to take our jobs and economy. Make no mistake, the future of your kids - and this country's economy - lies in a competent education system. We ain't got one. And while we assume America will continue to dominate and have a rising standard of living, that would be a) wrong and b) more wrong and c) already wrong. The 20th century was the American century, the 21st century is not and will not be. It's already lost and we can't get it back.... Unless.... Parent Power. I've had a hand in stirring enough rage in this town that we recently launched the Los Angeles Parents Union. This is not a PTA (ugh), nor a "collaborative". It is a bona fide UNION. The days when parents begged and pleaded for the chance just to have their voices heard so that the status quo folks could condescend, roll their eyes and dismiss them so they could get back to business as usual -- those days are OVER. LAPU is not here to ask, we are here to DEMAND. We demand a seat at the table, and not just A seat, nor even a co-equal seat... but THE DOMINANT SEAT. Hey, LAUSD: This education system isn't yours. It's not your property. IT IS OURS. Contrary to your belief and the Kool Aid you've been serving us, we don't work for you, YOU WORK FOR US. As a Union, LAPU will demand better "working conditions" for our kids, under the credible threat of every possible political action, including: 1. delivering votes to oust - and even recall (more on that in my next blog post) - school board members; 2. delivering votes to install LAPU-supported candidates... it only takes 6000 votes to win a school board election -- we'll have that many menbers in a few months; 3. lobbying our reps; and, if needed... 4. student strikes. Every day a student is absent, LAUSD loses hard cash from the state. These people only understand money and power. They always negotiate with the looming threat of a strike behind them, because they assume we can't have schools without their union members. Oh yeah? Try having schools without students! Where is the rage, people? How much longer are we going to let this group of incompetents march our children oh so gentle into a good night of sitting on rooftops as the fetid waters rise, holding up mispelled signs begging for help... and to have no come help? When your kids ask you one day - and they will, bet on it -- "Mom, Dad - why didn't you fight for me? I have no education, no good job and no future - why didn't you fight for me? Yes, you were only one parent - but why didn't you join with others and fight for me?"...whatever you say, what they will hear is that they weren't worth fighting for. Go to www.smallschools.org. Join the Los Angeles Parents Union. It's free. Then go hug your kids and tell them you're fighting for them. A Los Angeles resident, Bill Grundfest is a happily married father of 2 boys, a TV writer/producer with numerous Emmy nominations, a Golden Globe Award, and a card-carrying member of the Los Angeles Parents Union.

The Missing Conversation, Part 3 (William Loughman)

fguest — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

(The final installment in a three-part series looking at the components of education, and what should be changed to achieve true reform. Part 1 is here, and Part 2 is here. -ed.) In this final installment, we examine other aspects of teacher personnel practices, gender segregation and universal preschool to determine how these practices can impact student performance. -Teacher Tenure and Firing of Teachers: Pertinent Education Factor: Teacher Quality No rules have been more destructive of teacher quality in public education over the past forty years than the rules that regulate teacher tenure and the related matter of the removal of teachers. In California, teachers receive tenure after only two years of teaching. Under the rules insisted upon by the teacher unions and agreed to by the state legislatures, the procedure which must be followed in order to remove a teacher on grounds of incompetency generally consists of an initial hearing, followed by two appeal hearings. It is common for these three hearings to take place over a period of eighteen months (during which time the teacher must still be paid). Some contracts require that a teacher ultimately found to be incompetent be given an opportunity to demonstrate the necessary degree of improvement, which has the effect of making the process practically interminable. All such contracts afford the teacher the full gamut of due process rights, including the rights to be represented by an attorney and to have his or her attorney conduct all aspects of litigation 'discovery.' This litigation discovery commonly consists of written interrogatories, requests for production of documents, subpoenaing of documents, and the taking of oral depositions, under oath, of any person deemed to be relevant to the charge of incompetency or to the defense to the charge. Even when the school district ultimately prevails, the expense to the school district can exceed $600,000.00. If the school district does not prevail, the additional financial expense can be catastrophic. Under the rules in most states, an unsuccessful school district must pay the teacher his or her litigation costs, including attorneys fees. With all of this in mind, school districts have decided to initiate incompetency removal hearings only in handful of the most extreme cases. As a result, teacher tenure has, as a practical matter, become the equivalent of job security until retirement (at which point the 25-year teacher will continue to receive full medical benefits, plus an annual pension totaling at least 80% of his or her highest annual salary.) Approximately a third of the teachers in the public school system would be considered either 'good' or even 'excellent' under any objective criteria. Virtually all of these teachers graduate in the upper half of their college classes and in the upper half among their fellow high school students taking the SAT (scholastic aptitude test). However, many of the teachers in the public school system do not have the sufficient aptitude or knowledge to be effective teachers (regardless of their receipt of an undergraduate college degree and a masters degree in education.) Research has shown that 36% of public school teachers now rank in the lowest quartile grouping for scholastic aptitude among their college-graduating peers, whereas in 1960 only 16% of public school teachers came from the lowest aptitude quartile. (See Hoxby & Leigh, (2003); Corcoran, et al (2002); and Wayne, (2002).) The average scholastic aptitude among public elementary teachers is particularly alarming. Over 76% of the nation's public elementary school teachers either majored or minored in elementary education when earning their bachelor's degrees. (SASS, (1999-2001). The average SAT scores of college students majoring in elementary education have been found to be below those of college students majoring in every other field of study except physical education and special education. (Gitomer, Latham & Ziomek, (1999). With the teacher certification exam in most states requiring a mere 60% correct answer score, or even lower, on subject matter geared to 8th and 9th grade (and occasionally 10th grade) proficiency in math and language skills, virtually any college graduate can surmount the state exam 'hurdle' of the teacher certification process. And with post college schools of education accepting virtually any applicant, and providing virtually every fees-paying student a masters degree in education, almost any college graduate can also complete the teacher certification process. (Many applicants take the state exam after receiving the master's degree in education.) The result is that many persons who have neither the aptitude nor the substantive knowledge to be effective in teaching nevertheless become teachers. Because of the rules of tenure, the situation cannot, as a practical matter, be remedied. School districts and principals cannot simply fire an obviously unqualified and ineffective teacher. The consequences of this collective bargaining-imposed impotence have been disastrous, as the public schools have become increasingly pervaded, both quantitatively and politically, by persons who are not particularly well-educated or knowledgeable and who, not surprisingly, are not effective as teachers. Conclusion: Teacher tenure rules should be abolished. School districts should have the ability to hire and fire exclusively on the basis of manifest or demon- strated ability. Teacher tenure has been a disaster with respect to the most important component of the educational 'conversation,' i.e., teacher quality and effectiveness. -Uniform Rates of Pay for Teachers: Pertinent Education Factor: Teacher Quality Uniform rates of pay for teachers based exclusively on years of teaching or possession of masters or other postgraduate degrees in education operate as a disincentive for qualified teachers or qualified would-be teachers, and operate as an incentive for unqualified teachers or unqualified would-be teachers. It is human nature to want to earn as much as possible in one's chosen profession. It is also reasonable to expect to be compensated according to one's actual abilities. Both the number of years of teaching and the number of education-related degrees have been shown to have no correlation to teacher quality, e.g. Sullivan (2001). Hence, it is common in the public schools for highly effective teachers to be earning the same, or even less, than teachers who are manifestly incompetent. This reality operates as a major disincentive to highly qualified would-be teachers, and it also accounts, at least significantly, for the disproportionately high number of highly effective teachers who leave the teaching profession within five years. Unqualified teachers, or unqualified prospective teachers, on the other hand, are induced by such a policy to become teachers and to remain teaching, as they realize they are being compensated beyond what they would merit on the basis of ability. Conclusion: Uniform pay policies should be abolished. School districts should have the latitude to compensate according to their perception of a teacher's manifest or demonstrated ability and effectiveness, and according to the district's need for a particular subject matter to be taught by a highly qualified person. -Gender- or Aptitude-Segregated Classes: Pertinent Education Factor: Student Receptivity The research has generally found that both female and male students in middle school and high school learn more when they are in classes segregated by gender (with the exception of high-aptitude students). The research also leaves little doubt that high aptitude students tend to learn more when their classroom is comprised of other high aptitude students. (Many school districts nevertheless foreclose the possibility of classroom segregation on the assumption that the students' socialization would be impaired by segregated classes.) Conclusion: School districts should be free to have classrooms segregated by either gender or student aptitude. -Universal Preschool Pertinent Education Factors: Student Receptivity, Teacher Quality Universal preschool is a fascinating issue, because the debate centers not so much on the issue of whether it would be beneficial, as on how it should come about. Although some studies find that preschool actually tends to be detrimental to child development (e.g., Olson (1999), most conclude that a universal preschool system would, on balance, have at least a slightly positive effect on the child. But that conclusion is highly dependent on how such a system would come about. The existing parental choice system of preschool in California enrolls approximately 70% of four year-olds state-wide. These preschools tend to have positive effects on children because of the ability of the parent to carefully match the child's emotional needs with a particular preschool and its particular teachers. However, there is very little, if any, evidence to indicate that this effectiveness would continue under a system run by the state in accordance with regulations driven by the legislature, Proposition 82 (the recent universal preschool voter initiative in California--ed.), and the teacher unions. 'Curriculum content' would become standardized. Moreover, the same marked decline in teacher quality that has plagued the public K-12 schools since the teacher unions' ascent to dominance in education on the wings of collective bargaining is likely to pervade the preschools. The existing private preschools would likely be displaced by the monolithic, state-run system. The consequent displacement of parental involvement is likely to have the same detrimental effect on student receptivity in the classroom and teacher quality as has occurred in the K-12 system. Conclusion: Universal preschool would be a fine idea if it occurred through a voucher system. Otherwise, it should be rejected. Final Remarks The 'classroom conversation' analytic model does not necessarily ensure that the analysis of any proposal for education will be simple. As the last-cited example above indicates, with some proposals the issue is not so much a 'what' as it is a 'how.' But even in the face of that kind of complexity, the analytic emphasis on the essential three components of education remains valid. With that analytic focus, one cannot be thoroughly confused or misled. With that focus any interested person will be able to perceive the existing system, or any proposed remedy or alternative, for what it is. The problem with American public education can be summarized as the impairment of the educational 'conversation,' or 'dialogue.' Similarly, the remedy can be summarized as the recognition and creation of the highest quality educational dialogue. By 'highest quality dialogue' is meant a thirteen-year interaction between the most intelligent, perceptive, and inspired persons in our society, as teachers, and attentive, reflective, and imaginative students. With an accurate perception of both the problem and the remedy, the challenge will then be to transform the existing system into a landscape that actually serves the educational needs of students and the aspirations of their parents, rather than the presumptuous reach of the education bureaucracy and the self-protecting, monopolistic teachers unions. With the analytic model of the 'missing conversation' between teacher and student, let us see education clearly, for its positive aspects as well as for its systemic problems, and in the light of what is attainable. And then, with that clear vision, let us reinstate the dynamic 'dialogue' of learning and cognitive development that has been missing from the K-12 classrooms of this country far too long. William Loughman is a California attorney, an adjunct professor of law at John F. Kennedy University in Pleasant Hill, California, a senior fellow with the Pacific Research Institute, and a member of the Board of Directors of California Parents for Educational Choice.

Why Johnny Still Can't Read (Michael J. O'Neal)

fguest — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

In 1955, the bombshell book “Why Johnny Can’t Read” disturbed a few nesting hornets. A half-century later, per-student education spending in inflation-adjusted dollars has quadrupled, but Johnny (and today’s Jareds and Jessicas) still can’t read. According to the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress, 68 percent of the nation’s fourth-graders are reading below proficiency level. And they’re not outgrowing the problem: In March, the American College Testing Program reported that an astonishing 49 percent of the 1.2 million students who took its college admissions test lack college-level reading skills. Minorities and the poor fare worse: Only 21 percent of blacks, 33 percent of Hispanics, and 33 percent of students from families with annual incomes below $30,000 can master the “complex” reading tasks required for college success. Not counted, of course, are the 30 percent of high-schoolers who drop out. There’s plenty of blame to go around. Too many parents have been dot.conned into buying for their kids every piece of digital silliness Silicon Valley dishes up. Kids who used to sometimes pass the hours with a book—or being read to—now molder in front of computers, DVD players, PlayStations, and X-boxes. They wallow in iconography and visual imagery and “text” impoverished messages in a way not unlike life in the Dark Ages, before the printing press spread the gift of the unhurried but enriching processes of sustained written language. Soon, we’re told, we’ll be able to watch people play video games on television. One quivers with anticipation. But the blame doesn’t stop there. The public assumes that colleges of education are preparing aspiring teachers to teach kids how to read by requiring rigorous courses in how to do so. To test that assumption, the Washington, D.C.–based National Council on Teacher Quality recently launched a sweeping examination of reading courses and textbooks at the nation’s colleges of education. The results are appalling. What masquerades as reading pedagogy is, with few exceptions, a soggy confection of political correctness, collectivist social indoctrination, diversity training, and fluff courses that make basket weaving sound like advanced biophysics. Examples abound. One reading course syllabus says, “Knowledge is … constructed by individual learners through social interaction … learning occurs within a collaborative community.” Another says, “Reading and writing are acquired through social collaborative interactions and life experiences.” A popular reading textbook advocates “classrooms that allow children to design their own route to further knowledge about print; the role of the teacher is supportive assistant.” According to the professionals, then, reading teachers don’t really have to teach reading. Like cheerleaders, they can lend “support” while kids magically teach themselves to read through “collaboration” and “social interaction” and “life experiences”—in much the same way they teach each other to reproduce bodily noises with their armpits. Many of the courses are laughable in their lack of rigor. Here’s an assignment worth 20 percent of the grade in a college course in reading instruction: “After reading the book, design an original cover for it. . . .Make a commercial that convinces others to buy and read the book. Make a diorama of the book.” Here’s another: “Each person will choose a book from the book choice list to discuss and share as part of a small group.… As a group, plan a way to share what you learned about literacy learning and teaching from that book. Some book sharing ideas include poster/murals, puppet shows or plays, reader’s theater, role play, traditional book review, diorama or other 3-D method.” These are teachers in training, captive to professors who in many instances owe their sinecures to taxpayers. They’re going to be your kids’ reading teachers, armed only with dioramas, posters, and puppet shows—and perhaps the ability to strum “Yellow Submarine” on the ukulele. This grotesque abdication of responsibility has lifelong implications for kids. While the colleges of education spout their cant, they deny too many kids a shot at a meaningful higher education, higher earning potential, and more satisfying life work. Worse, they deny kids the ability to connect with the timeless wisdom found in a novel by Faulkner or a poem by Frost, locking the next generation in a twilight world where the written word becomes alien and threatening rather than a source of liberation and enlightenment. Michael J. O'Neal is a columnist for the Moscow-Pullman Daily News (where this article originally appeared) and a freelance writer. He lives in Idaho.

Education News for Tuesday, July 18

Daily News — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:52:00 +0000

Unions drive a hard bargain - The New Jersey Education Association has been called the most powerful union in the state, and it's not difficult to see why. (more)

Suit Seeks School Choice for Underprivileged New Jersey Students - A class-action lawsuit filed against New Jersey school districts and the State Commissioner of Education seeks to win more than 60,000 students in failing schools the right to attend a different public or private school. (more)

Pay teachers more and demand results - Opinion: With student performance still dismal 23 years after a federal report proclaimed “a nation at risk,” it’s just possible that a decisive, bipartisan “grand bargain” can be struck to improve the public schools. (more)

Building a Better School Board - Editorial: If we had our druthers, the Los Angeles school board as it is currently constituted would be abolished. If that can't happen — and it looks unlikely, but we can still hope — then the next best thing may be to give the board a raise. (more)

59 receive EdChoice scholarships - The Ohio Department of Education said Monday that 59 Lima schools pupils have been awarded Ohio EdChoice Scholarships to attend private schools this fall. (more)

Congress should kill No Child Left Behind - Editorial: Members of Congress are wrong to think that the No Child Left Behind law can be fixed, and additional burdens it would place on schools beginning in the fall are further cause for scrapping the 4-year-old federal program. (more)

Educators: No Child Left Behind needs changes - Many educators in South Carolina say the law continues to cause headaches, particularly when it requires that all categories of students must pass state standardized tests. (more)

Private schools not inherently better, national study suggests - When factors such as race and wealth are accounted for, students at public and private schools scored about the same on national fourth- and eighthgrade math and reading exams, according to a U.S. Department of Education report that has rekindled the debate over the usefulness of vouchers. (more)

409 in Dayton to attend schools under voucher plan - Across Ohio, 2,272 students who last year attended low-rated public schools received vouchers from the state paying up to $5,000 toward tuition at private schools. (more)

Check back later for more education news.
UPDATE:

Failing grade on No Child Left Behind could redirect money - The U.S. Department of Education says Kansas gets a failing grade when it comes to meeting No Child Left Behind mandates. And that could cause the Kansas State Department of Education to lose out on a big chunk of federal funding. (more)

Spinning a Bad Report Card (subscription required) - Thanks to a new federal report comparing public and private schools, there’s no doubt that public schools have one huge advantage: the leaders of their unions are unrivaled masters of spin. (more)

Republicans unveil $100 million school voucher plan- Congressional Republicans on Tuesday proposed a $100 million plan to let poor children leave struggling schools and attend private schools at public expense. (more)

On Point: Questionable tactics - When you face a political adversary who will do anything to win, it's tempting to respond with the same unprincipled tactics. Maybe this explains the support of some bigtime school-choice advocates for an unfortunate lawsuit in New Jersey. (more)

Private Performance - predictably, Diana Jean Schemo and the New York Times found front-page, above-the-fold space on Saturday to cover on a new National Center for Education Statistics report, drawn from 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress data, that finds private schools only slightly more effective than public when analysts control for income, race, parent education, and such. (The exception is eighth-grade reading where the private-school advantage is marked.) (more)

Local control is a key issue - All three Republican candidates for the 3rd District Kansas Board of Education seat claim local control of schools as a key part of their platform. (more)

Politics Over Public Education - Today’s introduction of legislation to create a massive, publicly funded school voucher program is a gift to the Religious Right and anti-government activists opposed to public education. Unfortunately, it’s also a step further away from a national commitment to reforms that will strengthen America’s public schools. (more)

Three districts with failing schools could face penalties - Three school districts could face financial penalties unless they can satisfy state officials that they are taking sufficient steps to improve chronically failing schools. (more)

Alexander seeks school choice - U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., joined colleagues in the House and Senate today to introduce legislation that would implement a Bush administration program to give low-income children more opportunities to improve their educational experience.(more)

Secretary of Education and Congressional Leaders Introduce ...- Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, along with Senators Ensign and Alexander, and Representatives McKeon and Johnson, today introduced a massive national private school voucher program. People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas released the following statement. (more)

US senator to introduce school voucher measure - U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said July 14 that he planned to introduce legislation to provide $100 million in federally funded vouchers so that students in low-performing public schools could attend private or parochial schools. (more)

New Jersey union power

edspresso — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:28:00 +0000

A good look at starving teachers in the Garden State:

Cops and teachers who, a generation ago, were underpaid and overworked are now enjoying compensation and working conditions that are the envy of the private sector. Experienced patrolmen in North Jersey routinely make $100,000 or more, and public-school teachers can top out at more than $90,000 and typically pay nothing for health insurance throughout their careers.
Their unions achieved their status through hard work, savvy use of public relations, lots of cash pumped into legislative and gubernatorial campaigns and a dose of good old-fashioned union solidarity. The two labor groups now wield the clout to drive law-enforcement and education policy -- and, in part, determine tax rates -- throughout North Jersey.
The political influence of New Jersey's nearly 500,000 government workers is partly a result of their sheer numbers. Census records show that public employees constitute just over 10 percent of workers in the four counties of northeast New Jersey.
But a Record poll, conducted last month, found that those numbers understated their potential voting strength. Thirty-eight percent of randomly chosen respondents said they live in a household where significant income is derived from public employment.
Government workers are more likely to vote than private-sector workers, according to the poll, by a margin of 66 percent to 48 percent. And their views differ significantly from the general population on issues such as privatization of government services and merit pay.
The NJEA (New Jersey Education Association) has been called the most powerful union in the state, and it's not difficult to see why. The union, which represents teachers and school support staff in all but five New Jersey districts, says that 93 percent of its nearly 200,000 members cast ballots in the 2004 election, compared with 73 percent of New Jersey's registered voters in general. More than 1,100 teachers answered their union's call and volunteered at least three hours to a legislative campaign between the Saturday before the election and Election Day 2005.
"The teachers union makes the Teamsters look like pussycats," said Alan R. Geisenheimer, one-time president of the Bergen County School Boards Legislative Committee. "The question I would ask, is there any legislation the NJEA has asked for that they haven't gotten? I don't know of any."
NJEA leaders agree they have uncommon access to the corridors of power. Unlike some other public employee unions, whose members are concentrated around Trenton, where they work, "every community has teachers in it," said Joseph R. Marbach, chairman of the Seton Hall political science department. "They can be the difference in any local election. They could change what party controls the Legislature."
NJEA executive director Robert Bonazzi said the union's sway is based on its integrity.
"We can be trusted," Bonazzi said. "We have interests and we pursue them in the most ethical way we possibly can, so people in the Legislature feel good about the NJEA."
No doubt the union supports many worthwhile programs: smaller class sizes, family involvement in education and courses to upgrade the skills of its members.
But it also doesn't hurt that the NJEA is among the top political action committees contributing to legislative and gubernatorial races -- $1.5 million over the past three years, according to state records. The state PBA kicked in $218,495 over the same period.
"To some of my colleagues in the Senate, the teachers union is tangible and the general pub- lic is not," said Sen. Gerald Cardinale, R-Demarest. "The teachers union is a monolithic force; the public is not."

As our litigation makes its way through the courts, this will be, as it always has been, one of our single biggest obstacles.

Our driving principle

edspresso — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:11:00 +0000

Reaction to the NCES study has been understandably triumphant from the anti-school-choice side of the aisle, especially from the likes of the AFTies, UFTies and likeminded folks.

But amidst all the discussion--indeed, among most edudebate these days--one party in particular is mysteriously removed from the discussion.

Parents. More specifically, low-income minority parents.

The school choice opposition has done a very good job of making the V-word toxic by equating vouchers with private school subsidies. But when people are told what the word actually means--giving parents the liberty to decide where they want to send their children to school--opposition to school choice tends to evaporate pretty quickly. And the groups that consistently show the greatest approval of school choice are low-income minorities.

It's quite obvious why. When faced with a decaying school, they have the fewest options, and in some cases none at all. They can't exercise the main school choice option available these days, which is moving to a higher-income area for a chance at access to better schools. And if education is the fast track to escaping poverty, those parents and their children by far have the most to lose.

But one thing that strikes me as both tragic and infuriating is that parents--low-income minority parents in particular--are never really asked what they want for their children, what they wish to see done differently. Indeed, many teachers can't seem to decide just what they really want: on one hand, they complain that lack of parental involvement just ruins any attempt at all to teach, and on the other hand those parents who are involved seem to be denigrated, to the point they have earned a new nickname: helicopter parents.

Education reformers claim to have all the right answers: smaller class sizes, increased spending, universal preschool, increased spending, teacher certification, increased spending. (Well, let's face it--it's really mostly just increased spending, because aside from the fact that we are now spending more per pupil in K-12 than many students spend attending college, our schools are just flat broke. But I digress.)

But what if not all parents want smaller classes? What if some parents merely want their kid in front of that really awesome teacher, even if it means being in a bigger class? What if some moms and dads really do want their kid in preschool, but others don't?

The subtext that seems to exist with many reformers is that they know better than parents what their children need--that because of intensive exposure to the best teaching techniques in our fine education schools (snicker), our experts should simply be left alone to tell the unwashed masses what needs fixing. "Trust us," they implore.

Well, we disagree. We believe in the ability of individual parents to make decisions on behalf of their children. They may not choose the way we wish they would. And sometimes they'll just flat screw it up. But more often than not they will choose far better than the anointed wise men, and when they do choose poorly, they'll remedy their errors much faster than the system ever would or could. Contrast that with how the public school system seems to treat parents: as nonissues, minor annoyances, or worse. Never forget that it was the American Federation of Teachers that thought parents "inconsequential conduits" in connection with school choice.

Education News for Wednesday, July 19

Daily News — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 09:23:38 +0000

Spellings promotes voucher program - USA Today: Children in poorly performing public schools need the chance to attend private schools, and taxpayers should pick up the tab... (more)

PBP editorial: Bush-suppresed study dispells voucher myth - The U.S. Department of Education, meaning the Bush administration, last week turned an important study comparing public and private schools into a case study on how to bury bad news. (more)

NYT: Republicans propose national school voucher program - The legislation, modeled on a pilot program in DC, would pay for tuition and private tutoring for some 28,000 students seeking a way out of public schools that fail to raise test scores sufficiently for at least five years. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

NY Times editorial - Public vs. private schools - The national education reform effort has long suffered from magical thinking about what it takes to improve children’s chances of learning. Instead of homing in on teacher training and high standards, things that distinguish effective schools from poor ones, many reformers have embraced the view that the public schools are irreparably broken... (more)

GOP unveils school voucher plan - Wash Post - Spellings, flanked by Senate and House leaders on Capitol Hill, said the "opportunity scholarship" plan would be aimed at helping low-income students "trapped" in poor schools... (more)

Ed Week - Public schools on par with, outperform private schools in some areas, federal study says - (subscription required) When scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress are adjusted for socioeconomics, race, and other characteristics, public school students do as well or better in some categories—such as 4th grade math—as students in private schools. (more)

Civic, business groups oppose LA school takeover - A Valley association and the Independent Cities alliance cite concerns about Villaraigosa's plan for mayoral control of L.A. Unified. (more)

Gov. Bush, FCAT hang over race - Gov. Jeb Bush is popular. The FCAT isn't. The race to replace him may turn in part on which icon is more potent.The Democrats - U.S. Rep. Jim Davis and state Sen. Rod Smith - slam virtually every change Bush has made to Florida's school system... (more)

UPDATE:

Public education will meet challenge with level playing field - This thinly disguised effort to funnel public money to schools that serve only limited populations plays well to the "sound bite" of school choice. (more)

Why Johnny Still Can't Read (Michael J. O'Neal)

mtigani — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

Beyond the Profit Motive (Brett Pawlowski)

mtigani — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 05:00:00 +0000

In a 1970 article entitled “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,” economist Milton Friedman famously argued that a business exists for one purpose: to maximize returns for its shareholders. If shareholders want their money to go to social causes, he said, they’re perfectly capable of making that decision themselves, and the businesses they invested in have no right to make that decision for them – it simply isn’t what a business is set up to do. Given this line of thinking (which remains widely held even today), many people assume that business’ interest in education is simply one more case of companies looking for new markets to conquer. But is it really that simple? Certainly there are companies that sell to the school market, and companies that want to manage schools. But they represent only a small segment of the total business community. The profit motive of this small group of companies doesn’t explain why businesses in almost every industry contribute billions each year to support education, nor does it explain the widespread political support that NCLB, vouchers, and other reform tools receive from businesses that have no interest in running schools. Rather, it is the widely acknowledged crisis in public education that drives the business community – which is essentially both an investor in, and customer of, our schools – to see involvement as an imperative, literally something that must be done to ensure its own future. They see involvement in public education as an investment in the short- and long-term health of their companies, and in the continued strength of the markets they serve. They look for the following returns on their investment in education:

Workforce development – Employers are already complaining about their inability to find qualified workers in nearly every industry, and projections show this shortage of skilled workers will only get worse over time. This is a critical issue for the future health of US businesses, and it has become a mobilizing issue spurring educational engagement on the part of many companies.
Market strength - Companies need more than well-educated employees to operate successfully: they also need an educated public to ensure strong domestic markets and a positive climate for business. They want good citizens to ensure a stable political climate; they want good neighbors to ensure strong communities; they want good workers, not just for their own companies but for all companies, to ensure a large base of people who can afford their products and services; and many also want an educated customer base to ensure that they can use products and services as they were intended.
Stakeholder relations – By becoming involved with a social issue like education, companies who make a substantive investment can improve their reputations among important internal and external audiences. Companies that contribute to a cause can see higher employee morale and lower turnover; better relationships with vendors, legislators, the media, and other external forces; and a stronger brand among customers. The short-term return available through improved stakeholder relations provides an internal justification for a certain level of immediate spending as business strives for the longer-term goals described above.

But one may ask, if it’s a matter of supporting education, why not just write a check and be done with it? Why create all manner of learning initiatives, demonstration projects, contests and the like? And why throw your political weight behind ideas like NCLB and vouchers? The reason is that the business community understands the principles of organizational improvement and adaptation, and understands that in order to move from the status quo towards superior outcomes, there are proven principles and processes that must be applied. Principles like goal setting, measurement and accountability, motivation, investment in (and use of) research, effective allocation of limited resources, and competition have helped to make America an economic superpower. And business realizes, as Jim Collins has said, that nonprofit and social organizations can drive improvement by using these principles and others, even if they set and measure desired outcomes differently. Further, business realizes that schools, by and large, are not following these principles. They see a system with some of the greatest inputs and lowest outputs in the world, as seen in global rankings provided by groups such as TIMSS and OECD. They see no accountability and no objective reporting (at least prior to NCLB). They see deceptive reporting by the states on key metrics such as dropout rates and proficiency scores. They see a disregard for rigorous research, as evidenced by recent reporting by NCTQ. What they see, in essence, is a system that needs drastic reform if it’s going to start producing the graduates that business – and the country – needs it to produce. And that’s why these businesses, who have thrived by applying the principles of effective organizations and markets, now want to infuse them into public education. The business community wants to thrive, but they don’t want to do it by owning the schools: they want to do it by maximizing their investment in schools in order to ensure a strong US workforce and domestic marketplace in the future. And this is one instance in which the self-interest of business serves us all. Brett Pawlowski is president of DeHavilland Associates, a consulting and communications firm that helps businesses help education. He is also the founder of the Business/Education Partnership Forum, an online clearinghouse featuring news, information, and resources for anyone interested in building effective business/education partnerships.

Choice hits Capitol Hill

edspresso — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:14:00 +0000

The school choice movement has enjoyed a great deal of success so far this year, as witnessed in Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and, most recently, Arizona (along with Rhode Island, Utah, Florida and Pennsylvania). And with so many states introducing school choice, it was only a matter of time before the juggernaut hit Congress:

Congressional Republicans on Tuesday proposed a $100 million plan to let poor children leave struggling schools and attend private schools at public expense.

The voucher idea is one in a series of social conservative issues meant to energize the Republican base as midterm elections approach. In announcing their bills, House and Senate sponsors acknowledged that Congress likely won't even vote on the legislation this year.

Still, the move signals a significant education fight to come. GOP lawmakers plan to try to work their voucher plan into the No Child Left Behind law when it is updated in 2007.

"Momentum is on our side," said Rep. Howard McKeon, R-Calif., the chairman of the House education committee.

The article addressed the timing, since this comes on the heels of the NCES study. Spellings's comment:

Spellings said she first learned about the study -- one produced by the Education Department's research arm -- by reading about it in the newspaper. She said the agency must improve the way it releases such reports. But she rejected any suggestion that the department buried the study because it put public schools in a favorable light compared to private ones.

On one hand, I'm tempted to dismiss that statement. But Eduwonk's take is awfully interesting:

...I have a little trouble believing that she hadn't even caught a whiff of it -- she's pretty plugged in and everyone else knew about it. But, that said, the real story here is that the 2002 reorganization of federal education research is actually working. Like the NAEP charter school data from a few years ago, that the politicals were caught somewhat flatfooted is a good thing and shows that the firewalls are having some effect.

And this New York Times story on the voucher bill also mentions this about the study:

Grover J. Whitehurst, director of the Institute of Education Sciences at the Education Department, said that the secretary’s office had received the report for review two weeks before its release.
Mr. Whitehurst said that his office was responsible for failing to alert the secretary to the report’s importance. (emphasis added)

Upshot: between the aforementioned "firewalls" and bureaucratic mishaps, the ball got dropped. Cry me a river, will ya? In any event, I'm hard-pressed to disagree there was a reason it was released on a Friday. But because (as Kevin Drum and Eduwonk have pointed out) this study doesn’t begin to mean what many school choice opponents think it does, also rest assured that we’ve only begun dismantling it. Stay tuned.

Back to the federal bill. Spellings's comment here--again, from the NYT article--pretty much sums up our stance in a nutshell:

Whatever the report’s findings, Ms. Spellings said, parents with children in public schools that repeatedly fail deserve more options.
“The thing we wake up worrying about every day at the Department of Education is grade level proficiency for every child by 2013-2014,” Ms. Spellings said. “Often that will be found in a public school. But when that doesn’t happen, what do we do?”

One of the things I've said before and will continue to repeat is that school choice is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Public schools in Milwaukee, Washington D.C. and Cleveland have not crumbled in the wake of school choice, and they never will--because school choice and public schools will always coexist.

Good public schools have absolutely nothing to fear from this or any other school choice legislation. In fact, this particular bill (which will allow students to attend private or public schools), much like those introduced in Milwaukee, Florida and Cleveland, really isn't meant for them anyway. It's designed for those kids who are presently in schools that have consistently failed to do their duty, kids who are stuck there and have no viable alternatives. Those are the children who would otherwise be trapped while the system took 10 to 12 years getting its act together.

Will it pass? Let's wait and see.

UPDATE: Alexander Russo examines the bill in light of Bush’s stem cell veto and says that while both appear to be “political theater” ahead of the November elections, the legislation might get traction:

What's different about the voucher initiative, it seems to me, is that it could in some form very well pass the House and Senate and become law. More and more lawmakers, including Democratic ones, have voted for vouchers in various circumstances. Public school choice -- including NCLB transfers -- haven't seemed to have worked Ditto for 'restructuring.' And at least some of the Constitutional arguments against vouchers are gone.

That last part is significant, in light of the 2002 Zelman ruling; as has been repeatedly observed, there are essentially no constitutional barriers to school choice on the federal level.

Left vs. right on school reform: the divide breaks down?

edspresso — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 21:03:00 +0000

Back in June, Peggy Noonan mentioned this in passing (hat tip to Hispanic Pundit):

I was at a Manhattan Institute lunch this week at which Rudy Giuliani spoke. He impressed the audience of 200 or so, which was not surprising as it was his kind of group, urban-oriented thinkers drawn not to ideology but to what works and will help in the world. (I am a longtime supporter.) At one point he was asked about national education policy. Mr. Giuliani said he wanted more national emphasis on choice. He spoke of it as a civil rights issue, and told stories to illustrate the point.
Then--this is the part with the sound of the future in it--he laid out the reasons both parties have failed to push the ball forward. The Democrats fear the teachers unions and the educational establishment. The Republicans are heavily represented in and by suburban and country areas, which tend to have good schools, tend to be happy with them, and are wary of a movement they fear might take something from them. And so the students who need the most help, city kids who would benefit the most from creativity, are held captive to a failed public-education monopoly.

Insular status-quo contentment, meet table-thumping union protectionism. In their own way, both are enablers. But if Morton Kondracke is right in this new article, there are signs that the traditional left/right edubattles could give way to bipartisan efforts:

With student performance still dismal 23 years after a federal report proclaimed "a nation at risk," it's just possible that a decisive, bipartisan "grand bargain" can be struck to improve the public schools.

The deal would be: Republicans agree to more equitable distribution of school funding -- including higher teacher pay -- while Democrats agree that teachers should be paid for performance, not just seniority.
Two national initiatives give rise to hope that that the decades-long right-left battle over education, accountability versus money, can be broken at last and the public schools improved.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has launched a project along with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, the liberal Center for American Progress and the moderate America's Promise that will start by publishing report cards on each state's progress on school reform.

And the other national initiative? Kondracke points to the Fordham Foundation's 100% solution:

"Buildings, programs and staff positions are not funded -- kids are," the Fordham Institute proposed in a report issued last month and signed by more than 70 bipartisan education experts, though no union officials.
The report proposed that funding from all levels "follow every student to whatever public school he or she attends," that the amount "vary according to the students' needs" and that funding "arrive at schools as real dollars that can be spent flexibly, with accountability gauged by results rather than inputs, programs or activities."

The "report card" plan is still being decided, so it's probably best to hold comment until they're done hammering out the particulars. But we're very much on board with bipartisan approaches to school reform. As Whitney Tilson, Cory Booker, Dan Gerstein and Tony Colon will all readily attest, we gladly welcome Democrats into the school choice tent. (See also Matt Ladner's recent appeal to Arizona liberals to quit lobbing hand grenades and instead come to the negotiating table.)

Education News for Thursday, July 20

Daily News — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 10:08:00 +0000

Christian Educators Union Sees Many Teachers Leaving NEA Roll - Some Christian teachers in the National Education Association are turning to an alternative group to provide them with liability insurance and legal services in light of that powerful teacher union's endorsement of same-sex marriage. (more)

Where Did the Love Go? - In his battle to take over Los Angeles Unified School District, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa parts ways with billionaire and influential philanthropist Eli Broad. (more)

Venice Parents Organize to Improve Local Schools - Nearly sixty parents of school-aged children gathered to launch a Venice chapter of the Los Angeles Parents Union. (more)

Montana to appeal federal ruling on testing - Montana will appeal a federal ruling that says the state has major problems with student testing required by No Child Left Behind, state Superintendent Linda McCulloch says. (more)

School voucher fans forgot their homework - Editorial: If Washington has $100 million to boost education, there are better uses than directing it toward private schools with minimal accountability and no discernible advantage over public ones. (more)

Education panel debates No Child options - Anti-No Child Left Behind sentiment remained strong Wednesday among several conservative legislators who say they want Utah's congressmen to seek to dismantle the federal law. (more)

District monitoring school choice cases - The Garland school district's racial balancing efforts may be considered constitutional now, but U.S. Supreme Court watchers say there's an outside chance that could change. This fall, the court will hear cases involving school choice programs in Louisville, Ky., and Seattle that often use race to determine which students are accepted at first-choice schools. (more)

Teachers union leader vows to boost activism - The American Federation of Teachers opens its annual convention today in South Boston with plans to increase dues, boost activism, and battle antiunion efforts in states like Louisiana, where thousands of teachers lost jobs and union status following Hurricane Katrina. (more)

Beleaguered Schools Chief Quitting - Accused by opponents of dirty tricks and mismanagement, the superintendent of the Capistrano Unified School District announced his resignation Wednesday, ending a 15-year tenure in which he oversaw academic gains and sharp growth in one of California's top districts. (more)

Back to School - Editorial: A bicameral group of lawmakers in Washington recently rolled out what they call the America's Opportunity Scholarships for Kids Act, which would provide federal money for vouchers that students in failing public schools could use to attend a better private institution. If the bill passes, a big and unlikely if, it will finally put right a serious shortcoming of the No Child Left Behind law. (more)

Expand educational options - Editorial: Modeled on a pilot program already showing positive results in Washington, D.C., the America's Opportunity Scholarships for Kids Act sounds like another promising innovation in school choice. (more)

Lawmakers debate fate of No Child - Many Utah leaders are in favor of scrapping the No Child Left Behind Act altogether -- but it's not unanimous, and even some who want the law gone caution that state leaders shouldn't be too strident about the controversial bill. (more)

Use it or lose it - Editorial: After so many power grabs on the part of the Los Angeles City Council, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa needs to put the council in its place. (more)

Check back later for more education news.

UPDATE:

Parents Get Say Before Year-Round Vote - School board members agreed Tuesday to hear from parents before making a final decision. They do not want to hear about individual concerns, but ideas about the schools overall. (more)

First, Let's Define What Education Really Is - I won't argue with Clint Bolick regarding something being amiss with schools ("Remedial Education," editorial page, July 12). Neither can his contention be disputed that simply throwing more money at schools with hopes of improvement will provide measurable satisfaction. I will, however, argue that pointing all the blame at schools because students aren't measuring up in math, reading, science, writing, etc., misses the primary target for such failures…(more)

Catholic schools helped by vouchers - Cincinnati-area private and Catholic schools will gain 682 new students now that the first round of Ohio Educational Choice Vouchers has been awarded. (more)

Good news for public schools- Don’t feel bad if you missed the news of a federal report showing public school students did as well or better than private school students in reading and math. That’s just what the Bush administration intended. (more)

Bush-suppressed study dispels voucher myth - The U.S. Department of Education, meaning the Bush administration, last week turned an important study comparing public and private schools into a case study on how to bury bad news. (more)

GOP proposal renews push for private school vouchers - Congressional Republicans proposed legislation Tuesday that would give children in under-performing schools the chance to attend private schools with taxpayer money (more)

Half of State Tests Don’t Draw on State Standards, AFT Study Finds - Half of the more than 800 high-stakes state tests given to satisfy the No Child Left Behind Act don’t appear to line up with the states’ academic standards, raising basic questions about using such assessments to judge schools, students, or teachers, argues a report released today by the American Federation of Teachers. (more)

Charter to add high school - A new high school is coming to the Eastside this fall. Irvington Community High School will inhabit a building at Arlington Avenue and Pleasant Run Parkway South Drive. (more)

Durham schools' transfer list grows - Durham Public Schools fared slightly better this year in the number of schools that met tough federal reading standards, but the system added four more schools to the six already forced to allow students to transfer to higher-performing schools. (more)

Area charter school pioneer receives Irvine Foundation award - The man behind Sacramento's Capitol Heights Academy charter school was presented Wednesday with a community leadership award and a six-figure grant for his organization. (more)

Charter academy still homeless as school year nears - The city's first charter school, TIP Academy, had no problem attracting students. Many parents from Encinitas and beyond embraced the school where a Gifted and Talented Education program would be offered to any student, in all subjects and grades. The concept was so popular that a lottery was held to determine which 220 kindergarten-through sixth-grade students would be admitted. (more)

Teacher tenure in New Jersey

edspresso — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 14:48:00 +0000

The Record of Bergen County, New Jersey is running a series of articles on pay scales for public employees. Today's installment: a hair-raising look at tenure.

Daryl DeNitto is one of those teachers.
The kind who coaches the debate team and chaperones the prom. The kind who stays after school when he doesn't have to. The kind students in his history class buy ties for.
He was voted the best teacher at North Bergen High School this year.
Deborah Noone has taught in the same district three times as long as DeNitto. Four years ago, the state determined that she "failed to adequately monitor and supervise" her special-education classroom when two boys and a girl engaged in sexual acts. The district tried, and failed, to get her fired.
DeNitto makes $47,550. Noone makes $86,350.

That's just one example from a lengthy article. Go read the whole thing. (Hat tip to Mike Antonucci, who is en route to the AFT's annual shindig, this year in Beantown.)

NYC charters outperform public schools?!

edspresso — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 16:58:00 +0000

How can this be?

Charter schools in the city are vastly outperforming public schools in their neighborhoods, according to a bombshell state report obtained by The Post.
The just-released study by state Education Department found students in 11 of 16 city charter schools outscored kids in nearby public schools on the state's fourth-grade English and math exams in 2005.
The academic gap widens in the upper grades, the report said, with kids in five of six upper-grade charter schools faring better on eighth-grade English and math exams.
Charters are privately managed but publicly financed schools that have more flexibility in developing a curriculum, hiring personnel and establishing work rules than traditional schools.
The report - to be discussed at a state Board of Regents meeting next week - cited city charters whose kids were top achievers compared to charters in other parts of the state.

But wait...wasn't some study released a few days ago saying private and public charter schools are pretty much the same as public schools? So what's with the discrepancy?

This is a very good illustration of the NCES study's fundamental weakness (which the study's authors themselves admitted): there is so much variation among private schools and public schools that a massive aggregate comparison is so broad as to be useless for practical purposes. But when comparing choice schools to their direct competition--i.e. looking at the choice schools kids transfer to against the schools they came from--studies have shown over and over that kids are far better off. Once again, this study isn't nearly what choice opponents believe it to be.