Friday, April 30, 2010

James Merriman: When Talking Oversight of Charters, Leave the Tricks at Home

James Merriman

CEO, NYC Charter School Center

Posted: April 29, 2010 04:17 PM

When Talking Oversight of Charters, Leave the Tricks at Home

There's been significant ink spillage over a hearing that the foremost critic of charter schools, NYS Senator Bill Perkins, put together last week to supposedly look into how charter schools are regulated.

As I sat through the hearing waiting to testify, I found myself in an odd position. I've always been a firm believer in oversight, regulation, transparency, and accountability for charter schools. As a charter school authorizer for seven years, I built a regulatory regimen that has been praised nationwide.

So why couldn't I muster any enthusiasm for this hearing on charter oversight? Probably because it was the legislative equivalent of a game of three-card monte.
Consider some of the tricks:

• Senator Perkins personally walked his supporters into the hearing room hours before the so-called "public" hearing was to begin, ensuring the closest thing possible to a television clap-track.

• Senator Perkins then opened the hearing with a long statement and forbade other senators the courtesy to do the same.

• Stanford charter school researcher Margaret Raymond flew in from California at the Senator's invitation, only to be yanked from the witness list when he realized her testimony would not support his position. She sat in the hearing room for eight hours and was never called upon, even while Perkins-approved witnesses discussed her research.

The actual hearing wasn't much heavier on integrity. State officials in charge of actually overseeing charter schools were left to languish until the late afternoon, maybe the first time that a hearing on the adequacy of governmental oversight treated the actual overseers as an afterthought.

When they were finally called, the officials were confronted with general allegations that were

City Brights: Rachel Norton : Will Arne Duncan take California to the prom?

Will Arne Duncan take California to the prom?

Is it just me, or is the on-again, off-again California-Arne Duncan romance just like a John Hughes movie? Education Secretary Duncan is like the cute popular guy who stood us up on our last date, coming around again all contrite and promising to make it up to us by taking us to the prom with a limo and everything. Can we trust him? Will his snobby friends accept us? How will it end for sweet, impoverished California?

What I mean is this: there's a lot of speculation out there that California might enter Round II of Race to the Top after all, but take things in a very different direction after our dismal showing in Round I of the national competition for education dollars. The state was reportedly just days away from dropping out of the race entirely, but after some heavy lobbying from Federal officials (Duncan reportedly made a personal call to Governor Schwarzenegger over the weekend, urging that the state resubmit its application), the state has come up with a new idea. John Fensterwald of the Silicon Valley Education Foundation reports:

Instead of revising the state plan and then pitching it again to every district and union local, California would limit its application to a handful of forward-thinking urban districts with predominately minority, low-income students: Long Beach, Fresno, Los Angeles Unified, and perhaps a few others willing to commit to stronger reforms than in the first round.
The state would make the case that the three to six participating districts, with upward of 850,000 students, are still larger than most states, and would set an example for other California districts.

Maybe, but it's still a long shot. We didn't even come close the last time around, largely due to the lack of union support. I don't see that changing if the competition continues to demand things

Joseph Staub: Bill is about money, not education - LA Daily News

Joseph Staub: Bill is about money, not education

By Joseph Staub Joseph Staub is a teacher and writer in Los Angeles.

Posted: 04/29/2010 03:02:17 PM PDT

Updated: 04/29/2010 03:03:13 PM PDT

THE teacher seniority and retention bill now before the California State Senate, SB 95, has little to do with teacher seniority and retention and much more to do with money.

This bill, the supporters of which tout as a way to end the alleged death-grip that incompetent senior teachers have on cushy teaching jobs at the expense of talented new teachers, is actually a cleverly disguised means for school boards to cut costs while appearing to put students' needs first.

Put aside for a moment the fact that SB 955 mandates that "performance evaluations" be a major factor in teacher retention, while leaving out that there are no safeguards that said evaluations will be objective, comprehensive, or fair. And put aside that the bill does not even mention the nonteaching staff that go into making a successful school. Put aside also that the bill turns teacher retention into a political football. As if kids need more politics in their schooling.

Instead, look at one thing the bill neglects to mention: teacher salaries. Now, the bill, as amended on April 13, does mention the word "pay" several times, as well as "compensation" and "salary," and so on, but never in conjunction with teacher performance. And here is the tool with which this bill's cloak of misdirection can be ripped away.

SB 955's supporters say they want to ensure that skilled new teachers are not automatically let go before teachers who may be less skilled but have more seniority. In

short, they want talented, effective, and dedicated teachers - they just don't want to pay for them.

The bottom line is that new teachers - skilled or not - cost far less than experienced teachers - skilled or not. New teachers are also far less likely to make waves, far less likely to stand up for students and their families, and far less likely to point out waste and mismanagement. New teachers are not only good for the bottom line, they also cause a lot less trouble for school boards, which, as we know, are not always models of efficiency, quality or even sanity.

If the supporters of SB 955 were serious about acquiring and retaining the "best and brightest," they would pay those teachers deemed to be superior top dollar for their work. After all, don't kids deserve the best, and don't the best deserve to be fairly compensated?

Why not divide the pay scale statewide into, say, 10 different levels? Teachers who were deemed (by this as-yet nonexistent method of evaluation) to be 9s and 10s get the top money and job security and the responsibility to be teacher leaders; 1s and 2s get the low money and the obligation to improve or get out.

Alberto Torrico: Keeping the Promise of California's Master Plan for Higher Education

Alberto Torrico

Posted: April 29, 2010 01:00 PM

Keeping the Promise of California's Master Plan for Higher Education

Fifty years ago, visionary leaders created California's Master Plan for Higher Education. For decades the master plan provided millions of Californians with opportunities to pursue their academic ambitions and improve their vocational skills. A well-trained and educated workforce entered the private sector and enhanced California's reputation as a state on the cutting edge of the future, creating new and exciting industries, powering our economic growth and engaging in trailblazing research.

Now, however, our higher education system is reeling. The visionaries are gone and our community colleges and public universities are bruised by cuts, furloughs and ever-increasing fee hikes that threaten affordability and access for students across California.

Stories about this decline can be found on campus after campus. A University of California, San Diego professor worries about students' inability to get into the classes they need for graduation. California State University, Sacramento officials consider turning away qualified students because more people want to enroll than the university has funding to handle. A CSU student concludes the system is creating a generation of student debtors.

A report this month by the Public Policy Institute of California finds that the state is confronting two main crises in higher education: budget cutbacks and an education skills gap. By 2025, the state will have a shortage of one million college educated workers relative to demand unless we substantially increase rates of college enrollment and graduation.

Yet with all this daunting news, we spend more on prisons than we do on all three higher education

California Deficit Article | California's education system sucks

California Budget Crisis Diaries: School funding sucks in Cali

By Hoa Quach, SDNN
Thursday, April 29, 2010

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger listens to the discussion concerning the effects of past budget cuts to the state's three higher education systems, while meeting with the chancellors of the Community Colleges, California State University and University of California systems at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Tuesday, April 27, 2010. ( Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)

California Budget Crisis

Worried Californians, a promise from our very own governor and a look at “wasteful” spending in California make up this edition of California Budget Crisis Diaries.

Here’s your dose of CBCD to fulfill your healthy addiction.

School funding: A new poll shows Californians believe they aren’t receiving the quality education they deserve.

Reported by The Orange County Register, the poll is conducted by Public Policy Institute of California and surveys 2,500 Golden State residents.

“According to the survey, 62 percent of Californians believe there is not enough state funding going to their public schools, while 26 percent believe there is just enough, and 6 percent believe schools have more than enough.

When asked how they feel about some potential ways schools may deal with decreased funding, 73 percent of Californians said they are very concerned about teacher layoffs. Fifty-nine percent are very concerned about class sizes getting bigger. Fifty-six percent are very concerned about having fewer days of school instruction. And 49 percent are very concerned about elimination of after-school and summer programs.”

Additionally, the poll “concluded that residents are more worried about education funding than at this point last year.”

On a somewhat related note, another poll shows California public schools lack proper sex education courses.

Education leaders bring advice to Cuesta College - Local - SanLuisObispo.com

Education leaders bring advice to Cuesta College

Superintendent of schools and community college chancellor speak on budget problems

By AnnMarie Cornejo | acornejo@thetribunenews.com

Comments (0) |

Recommend (0)

Two of the state’s key education leaders spoke candidly of the financial difficulties facing California’s community colleges and called for schools to have an increased partnership with the community to make them sustainable.

Jack Scott, the chancellor of California’s community colleges, and Jack O’Connell, the state superintendent of schools, addressed more than 150 local educators, administrators, students and community members Thursday at Cuesta College.

Both Scott and O’Connell said a smoother transition among students from one education system to the next is also needed and will save millions of dollars annually.

Click image to see caption

The impact of state budget cuts to community colleges is visible statewide: there are fewer classes, reduced summer school programs and waiting lists for classes needed to transfer to four-year schools.

“This is a sad picture because we wanted to educate more students but could not afford to do it,” Scott said.

There is no simple solution, he said, making it clear that schools could no longer depend solely on state funding.

“I advise this college to be inventive,” Scott said. “How in these tough times can you be creative and entrepreneurial?”

Scott encouraged community college foundations — the nonprofit fundraising arms of the colleges — to increase solicitations of community money. That, he said, is one way community colleges can continue to offer more than what is required during times of fiscal uncertainty.

“There are people in your community who care,” Scott said, adding that businesses should be asked to step forward and help financially support vocational and technical classes.

Examples of that partnership may be in asking industry leaders to donate expensive equipment for vocational training, he said.

Cuesta College is one of 112 community colleges in California, with

Youth Radio -- Youth Media International: California City and Striking Teachers Agree - We're Broke!

California City and Striking Teachers Agree - We're Broke!

By: Brett Myers and Orlando Campbell

"The vast majority of teachers didn't show up for work today," according to Troy Flint, spokesperson for the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD). That's good news good news for the Oakland teacher's union which says 91% of city teachers participated in today's strike.

With some exceptions, Oakland public schools have a notorious reputation. So much so that the state ceded control of the district in 2003 after the California Legislature passed a $100 million bailout for the insolvent school system. To make matters worse, the city regained control in June 2009, amid a crushing statewide budget crisis, which Flint says makes it "impossible for OUSD to pay teachers what they deserve."

The struggle between teachers and administrators is emblematic of a statewide problem, but both sides agree that the problems in Oakland are a little bit worse. Teachers here are already the lowest

http://www.flickr.com/photos/youthradio/sets/72157623958369182/show/

Most Californians say schools don't get enough funding - ContraCostaTimes.com

Most Californians say schools don't get enough funding

By Terence Chea, The Associated Press

Posted: 04/29/2010 05:18:56 PM PDT

Updated: 04/29/2010 05:33:06 PM PDT

SAN FRANCISCO - Californians are increasingly worried about how state budget cuts are affecting public schools, and they are unhappy with how their political leaders are handling education, according to a survey released late Wednesday.
The Public Policy Institute of California's sixth annual K-12 education survey found that 62 percent of residents believe there isn't enough state funding going to their public schools, a 12 percent increase over last year.
The survey found that 43 percent of public school parents say spending cuts have affected their children's schools a lot - a 15 percent jump - and another 38 percent said their kids' schools have been affected somewhat.
"The poll really indicates the degree of anxiety that the public has about the impact of budget cuts on public education," said Mark Baldassare, the institute's president and CEO. "More Californians are seeing the direct effect of the state's budget problems on children, teachers and the resources in their local schools."
Californians are worried about teacher layoffs, growing class sizes, shortened school years and the elimination of electives such as art and music, according to the survey. And 63 percent want K-12 education protected from further spending cuts.
Despite growing concern about schools, residents are divided over whether to raise taxes to prevent further cuts to K-12 education, with 49 percent in favor and 47 percent against. About 57 percent

said they would support a local parcel tax to fund their schools.
The institute reported that only 16 percent approved of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's handling of education, while the Legislature received only a 15 percent approval rating on K-12 schools. About 46 percent support President Obama's handling of K-12 education, a 12 point drop from last year.
The survey found that education was among the Californians' top three concerns - along with the economy and