Latest News and Comment from Education

Thursday, June 4, 2015

Are students better off in charter schools? State says it’s unsure | The CT Mirror

Are students better off in charter schools? State says it’s unsure | The CT Mirror:

Are students better off in charter schools? State says it’s unsure



Amid the ferocious debate about whether Connecticut students are better off in charter schools, the State Department of Education has released the results of its first-ever research on the subject.
It provides little clarity.
"The results were a mixed bag," Education Commissioner Dianna Wentzell told the state education board Wednesday. "In some cases, students in Choice programs made greater academic gains than their peers not enrolled in these programs, thereby closing achievement gaps, while in other cases they did not."
Wentzell warned the board members not to draw strong conclusions from the findings. "Choice programs" is a term for public charter schools, regional magnet schools and suburban schools that enroll inner-city students through the Open Choice program.
Whether students are better off in charter schools compared to their neighborhood schools has been a topic of considerable debate at the state Capitol this year as Gov. Dannel P. Malloy pushed the legislature to spend $12.5 million more next year to expand enrollment in charter schools.
Tuesday, sharp differences of opinion were on full display in Hartford as legislators sent a bill to the governor's desk that increases state oversight of these publicly funded, privately operated charter schools.
"The data is clear: Charters in Connecticut are delivering results for our students," said Jennifer Alexander, the leader of ConnCAN, a charter-advocacy organization, in an email to reporters Tuesday. "Connecticut's charter schools outperform their host districts."
That assertion has been reinforced in a barrage of television advertisements recently -- ads that say charter schools deserve more state funding because "40,000 students are trapped in failing schools."
Some legislators, and many educators, aren't buying it, however.
"Some of the things they are lauding them for are questionable," Sen. Edwin Gomes, D-Bridgeport, said on the floor of the Senate early Tuesday morning.
The years-long, highly technical research attempted look into the performance issue.
The study looked at the testing outcomes for students in third and sixth grades in charter, magnet and neighborhood schools in Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven and Waterbury during the 2010 school year. These students were compared to the proficiency rates of like students in suburban and rural schools.
Following students for two years starting in Grade 3 (from 2010 to 2012)
Proficient in math and reading in 2010Proficient in math and reading in 2012difference from non-urban schools in 2010difference from non-urban schools in 2012
Students in charter schools63.6%58.2%-15.3%-27%
Students in regional magnet schools48.458.1-30.5-27.1%
Students in non-choice schools in urban districts43.9%48.3%-35%-36.9%
The results found that by 2012, the achievement gap among the third grade cohort of charter students and their non-urban peers had grown by 5.4 percent. The gap for the six grade cohort narrowed by 8 percent.
"The inconsistent findings between cohort 1 and cohort 2 are puzzling," the 41-page report states. "It cannot be said with certainty that clones of these [school] choice programs, or an exportation of specific pedagogical techniques and strategies used, will necessarily ensure similar performance successes for urban students."
This research is long overdue, many legislators say.
"Before I do any investing, I want to know my rate of return." said Sen. Marilyn Moore, D-Bridgeport, on the Senate floor. She was referring to a proposal to spend nearly $100 million each year on charter schools.  Twenty-one Democratic Are students better off in charter schools? State says it’s unsure | The CT Mirror:

The ultimate in school choice or school as a commodity? - The Washington Post

The ultimate in school choice or school as a commodity? - The Washington Post:

The ultimate in school choice or school as a commodity?




tarting next school year, any parent in Nevada can pull a child from the state’s public schools and take tax dollars with them, giving families the option to use public money to pay for private or parochial school or even for home schooling.
The new law, which the state’s Republican-controlled legislature passed with help from the education foundation created by former Florida governor Jeb Bush (R), is a breakthrough for conservatives, who call it the ultimate in school choice. And they are working to spread it nationwide: Lawmakers in Georgia, Iowa and Rhode Island considered similar legislation this year.
Democrats, teachers unions, public school superintendents and administrators are alarmed, saying that the Nevada law to provide private school vouchers is the first step toward dismantling the nation’s public schools.
lthough other states increasingly have allowed tax dollars to be used for private school tuition, most limit the programs to students with disabilities or from low-income families. A few states, such as Indiana, have expanded the option to the middle class.
Nevada’s law is singular because all of the state’s 450,000 K-12 public school children — regardless of income — are eligible to take the money to whatever school they choose.
“It’s just a huge victory for the children of Nevada and all of us who have been working on this for so many years,” said Robert Enlow, chief executive of the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, an advocacy group dedicated to the principles of free marketeer Milton Friedman. “What this will do is continue to spread ripples across the country. . . . This bill shows that you can actually politically get it done.”
Supporters of the Nevada plan said lawmakers were obligated to give students alternatives to public schools in the state, which regularly scrapes bottom when compared with other states on academic achievement.
“Nothing works better than competition,” said state Sen. Scott Hammond, the chief sponsor of the legislation. The Las Vegas Republican said he was The ultimate in school choice or school as a commodity? - The Washington Post:

Time to break up the Los Angeles school system | EdSource

Time to break up the Los Angeles school system | EdSource:



Time to break up the Los Angeles school system

Carl Cohn
467
Now that the recent school board elections are over in the Los Angeles Unified School District, there will be the usual calls for a new beginning and getting down to the serious business of charting a bright future for the 600,000 or so deserving students that the board is privileged to serve.
Such a view ignores the fact that LAUSD’s governance structure is fundamentally broken and needs to be replaced by smaller units of school governance that are much more capable of delivering educational change that better serves students and their parents. In addition to being nimble and flexible, smaller school districts are physically closer to the parents they serve, and can initiate change strategies in a much more timely fashion. For example, Long Beach UnifiedGarden Grove Unified and ABC Unified are all known as urban districts that can move quickly to implement needed changes that parents care about.
Ten years ago, while a faculty member at the University of Southern California, I served as the federal court monitor for the Modified Consent Decree, the blueprint for improving services to students with disabilities in the behemoth district.
During moments of frustration with the district’s intransigence, I would sometimes say to the courageous disability advocate lawyers representing the plaintiffs that I had a tough time figuring out how students and their parents benefited from maintaining the district at its current size, and that breaking it up into smaller units would better serve students’ interests.
They would quickly counter: “Now, Carl, if you broke it up, you’d get a lot of Comptons or Inglewoods, which might be even worse than what you’re getting now.” And I’d came back with: “You might also get some Long Beaches, which would be a vast improvement over what these kids and parents are getting now.”
The argument for breakup becomes even stronger today when you consider the important equity promise of Gov. Jerry Brown’s remarkableLCFF/LCAP school funding reform initiative, which places even greater authority at the local level to get things right for kids. When Los Angeles Unified screws up, more than half a million California youngsters are denied a critical opportunity to get a decent education during their one shot at using education to alter their life chances.
The missteps of the district are legion – everything from expensive attorneys arguing for the district that a middle school student was mature enough to consent to have sex with a teacher to the billion-dollar iPAD and MiSiS technology debacles and school board elections where records have been broken for adult special-interest-group spending.
No single event better captures the failure of this system than the recent revelation that 75 percent of the current class of 2017 is not on target to meet the school board’s 2005 adopted policy requirement that all students must meet UC/CSU A-G college entrance requirements in order to receive a high school diploma. For urban school boards, there’s more to policymaking than adopting well-intentioned higher standards. An important part of the job is to make sure that staff develops timely implementation plans without waiting 10 years to check progress. No matter how much we adults may wish it so, not all youngsters need to go to college.
Urban school boards like Los Angeles need to first deliver on the basics before they start adopting high school graduation requirements that are higher than those in the Palos Verdes and Palo Alto school systems. Last October, you had students at Jefferson High School still walking the halls and in auditoriums without scheduled classes even though school had started back on Aug. 12. Even worse, you had a superintendent giving a deposition in court (Cruz v. California) that he was powerless to get these students scheduled in the right classes, and that he needed assistance from the State of California to get this basic responsibility done.
I often wonder how the Long Beach school community would react to school starting in August and high school kids still without classes in Time to break up the Los Angeles school system | EdSource:






Report: Despite D.C. school reforms, disparities persist in system - The Washington Post

Report: Despite D.C. school reforms, disparities persist in system - The Washington Post:

Report: Despite D.C. school reforms, disparities persist in system




The District’s public schools have made promising improvements after seven years of intensive reforms, but many disparities persist in academic resources and performance between poor and affluent students, according to the National Research Council.
In a much-anticipated report released Wednesday, the council offers an independent evaluation of the effects of sweeping school reform measures put in motion in 2007, when then-Mayor Adrian M. Fenty took control of the city’s schools and appointed Michelle A. Rhee as schools chancellor.
The council said that the District’s poor and minority students are still far less likely to have a quality teacher in their classrooms, perform at grade level and graduate from high school in four years. Although performance on standardized tests has improved for all groups, the city’s academic achievement gap has not diminished.
Rhee’s efforts to change the schools attracted national attention as she clashed with union leaders and vowed to upend the status quo. Many urban school systems have regarded some of the changes, including new teacher evaluations and academic standards, as models. But what researchers told the D.C. Council’s Education Committee on Wednesday is that there are no quick solutions and that many years of hard work remain ahead.
“Patience is of great importance in all these endeavors,” said Diana C. Pullin, professor of educational leadership and higher education at Boston College, who helped write the report.

The report recommends that the city make addressing disparities its primary objective. It emphasizes a need for more centralized data collection across all D.C. public schools, including charters, which now enroll 44 percent of the city’s public school students. The data would be maintained by a single agency that has ultimate responsibility for monitoring and overseeing the quality of Report: Despite D.C. school reforms, disparities persist in system - The Washington Post:

Defies Measurement - what happens when the wrong people make decisions for schools.

shine on productions - Defies Measurement:

Defies Measurement
a documentary
Picture
Picture

Defies Measurement strengthens the discussion about public education by taking a much-needed, fresh, hard look at why it is so important to address the social and emotional needs of every student, and what happens when the wrong people make decisions for schools.



PRAISE FOR THE FILM


“Puckett has done a superb job of creating a clear, comprehensible picture of the complex forces that are crushing public education. If you get frustrated with trying to explain the complex and crushing forces arrayed against what we know works in education, this film is a great resource. It is not sensationalized, it's not super-slick and it's not hyperbolized. It is a calm but relentless and clear raising of the alarm and showing what we know to do well, and how we are being taken down a failed and fruitless road. Watch this film. Share this film. Spread the word about this film.”

-Peter Greene, “Curmudgucation

 
Shannon Puckett ratchets up the tension and knowledge methodically by gathering an all-star cast of education policy experts, parents and others— Diane Ravitch, David Berliner, Linda Darling-Hammond, David Kirp, Karran Harper Royal, Mercedes Schneider, Jason France, Howard Gardener and many many many others (y yo)… These are the critical voices and expertise noticeably absent in Davis Guggenheim’s Waiting for Superman. Puckett’s filmmaking is markedly more imaginative and accurate than Waiting for Superman. She clearly improves upon that effort. It could be said that Defies Measurement is kryptonite for Superman’s attempt to discuss what is ailing our nation’s schools. The movie has an acute sense of the unnerving aspects of education reform agenda, the film Defies Measurement made me simultaneously disappointed, angry— and yet with the Chipman backdrop— hopeful for an alternative student and community centered era in public education.”

-Julian Vasquez Heilig, “Cloaking Inequity

"This documentary is fantastic! As an academic I can assure anyone who may not know the research that Defies Measurement is entirely in line with our best knowledge and the people interviewed are top experts. Every American should watch this film -- period."
-Salvatore Babones


"I sat and watched the entire movie just now, in one sitting. Defies Measurement defies words. It is a power-packed, one-hour, brilliantly done, tour de force. I've shared it widely, as per my "promise" on the download page. Thank you for making this available for all to view."
-Deborah Abramson Brooks Wsm

"Powerfully accurate!!"
-Donna Allen-Krug

“By far, the most important film I've viewed on education since getting involved 3 years ago in Common Core research. Anyone supporting Common Core/PARCC after seeing this is hopeless. Our children deserve better than this national disgrace mandated by the federal government.”-Carol Dufrene

 “I just sat down and watched Defies Measurement in its entirety. What an impressive work…this is a must see for anyone who cares about kids and public education. I was particularly impressed with the repeated admonition that we must focus on citizenship. We know tests scores and test prep will not make our children productive citizens! Thank you, Shannon.”
-Linda Allen

 
“This is a marvelous film!!! Watch it! Talk about it! Share it. That which is essential is invisible to the eye. That which is essential is invisible to the test!”-Tom Casper

 
“It is the best amalgamation I’ve seen of all the reasons why equity, not “test-taking-excellence” should be our goal for education in America. Supporting all children and families would be a huge first step.”
-Susan Keeney

 
“The film IS stunning… Tony, Diane, Mercedes, et al: Thank you! Please anyone and everyone, view this film and spread it like WILDFIRE to everyone you know and love. . . . .This film is a gift, an energizer, a motivator, a source of inspiration, a muse, and most of all, it is SATURATED and DRIPPING with the TRUTH!”-Robert Rendo

 
“I just watched this film and it should be required viewing for every parent, teacher, administrator and politician in this country! I am the parent of an eighth grader and a sixth grader who both attend a public Montessori school (and I couldn't be more grateful for that!). Although Chipman was not a Montessori school, it very well could have been. Experiential learning is so much more valuable than any standardized test could ever be...Thank you!!!”
-Pam Hricik

 
“Parents/guardians, please watch this film NOW.”-Joe D’Andrea

Behind Grass-Roots School Advocacy, Bill Gates - NYTimes.com

Behind Grass-Roots School Advocacy, Bill Gates - NYTimes.com:

Behind Grass-Roots School Advocacy, Bill Gates




INDIANAPOLIS — A handful of outspoken teachers helped persuade state lawmakers this spring to eliminate seniority-based layoff policies. They testified before the legislature, wrote briefing papers and published an op-ed article in The Indianapolis Star.
They described themselves simply as local teachers who favored school reform — one sympathetic state representative, Mary Ann Sullivan, said, “They seemed like genuine, real people versus the teachers’ union lobbyists.” They were, but they were also recruits in a national organization, Teach Plus, financed significantly by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
For years, Bill Gates focused his education philanthropy on overhauling large schools and opening small ones. His new strategy is more ambitious: overhauling the nation’s education policies. To that end, the foundation is financing educators to pose alternatives to union orthodoxies on issues like the seniority system and the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers.

In some cases, Mr. Gates is creating entirely new advocacy groups. The foundation is also paying Harvard-trained data specialists to work inside school districts, not only to crunch numbers but also to change practices. It is bankrolling many of the Washington analysts who interpret education issues for journalists and giving grants to some media organizations.
“We’ve learned that school-level investments aren’t enough to drive systemic changes,” said Allan C. Golston, the president of the foundation’s United States program. “The importance of advocacy has gotten clearer and clearer.”
The foundation spent $373 million on education in 2009, the latest year for which its tax returns are available, and devoted $78 million to advocacy — quadruple the amount spent on advocacy in 2005. Over the next five or six years, Mr. Golston said, the foundation expects to pour $3.5 billion more into education, up to 15 percent of it on advocacy.
Given the scale and scope of the largess, some worry that the foundation’s assertive philanthropy is squelching independent thought, while others express concerns about transparency. Few policy makers, reporters or members of the public who encounter advocates like Teach Plus or pundits like Frederick M. Hess of the American Enterprise Institute realize they are underwritten by the foundation.
“It’s Orwellian in the sense that through this vast funding they start to control even how we tacitly think about the problems facing public education,” said Bruce Fuller, an education professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who said he received no financing from the foundation.
Mr. Hess, a frequent blogger on education whose institute received $500,000 from the Gates foundation in 2009 “to influence the national education debates,” acknowledged that he and others sometimes felt constrained. “As researchers, we have a reasonable self-preservation instinct,” he said. “There can be an exquisite carefulness about how we’re going to say anything that could reflect badly on a foundation.”
“Everybody’s implicated,” he added.

Indeed, the foundation’s 2009 tax filing runs to 263 pages and includes about 360 education grants. There are the more traditional and publicly celebrated programmatic initiatives, like financing charter school operators and early-college high schools. Then there are the less well-known advocacy grants to civil rights groups like the Education Equality Project and Education Trust that try to influence policy, to research institutes that study the policies’ effectiveness, and to Education Week and public radio and television stations that cover education policies.
The foundation paid a New York philanthropic advisory firm $3.5 million “to mount and support public education and advocacy campaigns.” It also paid a string of universities to support pieces of the Gates agenda. Harvard, for instance, got $3.5 million to place “strategic data fellows” who could act as “entrepreneurial change agents” in school districts in Boston, Los Angeles and elsewhere. The foundation has given to the two national teachers’ unions — as well to groups whose mission seems to be to criticize them.
“It’s easier to name which groups Gates doesn’t support than to list all of those they do, because it’s just so overwhelming,” noted Ken Libby, a graduate student who has pored over the foundation’s tax filings as part of his academic work.

An early example of the increased emphasis on advocacy came in 2008, when Mr. Gates teamed with Eli Broad for a campaign aimed at focusing the presidential candidates on issues like teacher quality and education standards. The Gates Foundation spent $16 million on the effort.
Mr. Gates later acknowledged that it achieved little, but in the years since, the foundation has helped leverage sweeping changes. Its latest annual report, for instance, highlights its role — often overlooked — in the development and promotion of the common core academic standards that some 45 states have adopted in recent months.
The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, which developed the standards, and Achieve Inc., a nonprofit organization coordinating the writing of tests aligned with the standards, have each received millions of dollars.
The Alliance for Excellent Education, another nonprofit organization, was paid $551,000 in 2009 “to grow support for the common core standards initiative,” according to the tax filings. The Fordham Institute got $959,000 to “review common core materials and develop supportive materials.” Scores of newspapers quoted Fordham’s president, Chester E. Finn Jr., praising the standards after their March 2010 release; most, including The New York Times, did not note the Gates connection.
“What Gates got for their money was an honest review,” said Mr. Finn, a longtime advocate of national standards. “All I could say to Gates before the common core came out was that we were hoping the new standards would be good.”
The Center on Education Policy, which calls itself “a national independent advocate,” was awarded $1 million over two years to track which states adopted the standards. Its president, Jack Jennings, said he had nonetheless publicly criticized the Gates stand on other issues, including charter schools and teacher evaluations. “I feel free to speak out when I think something is wrongheaded,” he said.
In 2009, a Gates-financed group, the New Teacher Project, issued an influential report detailing how existing evaluation systems tended to give high ratings to nearly all teachers. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan cited it repeatedly and wrote rules into the federal Race to the Top grant competition encouraging states to overhaul those systems. Then a string of Gates-backed nonprofit groups worked to promote legislation across the country: at least 20 states, including New York, are now designing new evaluation systems.
While the foundation has given money to both the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, totaling about $6.3 million over the last three years, some of its newer initiatives appear aimed at challenging the dominance that unions have exercised during policy debates. Last year, Mr. Gates spent $2 million on a “social action” campaign focused on the film “Waiting for ‘Superman,’ ” which demonizedRandi Weingarten, the president of the federation.
In 2010, the foundation gave $500,000, to the Foundation for Educational Excellence, founded by Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida.
In 2009, the foundation spent $3.5 million creating an advocacy group to buttress its $290 million investment in programs to increase teacher Behind Grass-Roots School Advocacy, Bill Gates - NYTimes.com:

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Petition REPEAL Charter School Act of 1992 in CA Ballot Initiative

Petition REPEAL Charter School Act of 1992 in CA Ballot Initiative:

REPEAL Charter School Act of 1992 in CA Ballot Initiative





Ballot Initiative to REPEAL the Charter School Act of 1992
As many of you know the charter school movement is at the heart of the corporate takeover of our public schools
Charter schools cherry pick students, falsify records, commit enrollment fraud, close down community schools, destroy jobs, bust up unions and segregate students where we now see essentially a three tiered system--- charter schools in affluent neighborhoods lacking students with behavior issues, lacking students with special needs and lacking students who are English Lagrange learners- these charter schools tend to have highly qualified credential teachers; then there are the charter school in low income areas where many teachers are unlicensed and the third tier is everyone else in traditional public schools. Charter schools are draining funds from our traditional public school system
Charter school receive public funds but have private, often secret school boards unaccountable to the taxpayers.
The charter school profiteers have essentially stolen our money and destroyed lives. We will never see the huge amounts of money that has been squandered away- it is gone.
Please share the recent report entitled Charter Schools Cheating Communities Out of Millions. See below link:
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/04/29/fraud-waste-and-lies-charter-schools-cheating-communities-out-millions-dollars
"Charter schools act like they have a 'get out of accountability free' card," said Jonathan Stith, spokesperson for the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools. (Image courtesy of report)
Enough is enough.
It is time for the people of California to come together and take back our public schools from the profiteers.
A REPEAL is long overdue. The billionaire game is over and we the people are not going to put up with it anymore.
To place a repeal of the charter school act of 1992 on the ballot will require approximately 370,000 signatures. I know more than this number wishes to vote for repeal, but we need to know who you are so we can make this happen.
So, for those of you who are saying YES, it is about time, we need your help and we need to know who you are.
We need to assess that the numbers are there to support this. So, reach out to your friends, your family, your social and/or political groups..and provide us with names, county of voter registration and contact information.
The way this works is that for now we build support, get contact information because once we file the proposed initiative, a clock starts ticking, and we only have 150 days to gather actual signatures. All the signatures must qualify 131 days prior to a statewide election.
So, for November 2016...we must start gathering names now and obtain organizational support...file by early Spring 2016 just to obtain a Title and Summary that allows us to gather signatures and begin gathering actual signatures to qualify for ballot prior to end of June 2016 .
Keep in mind to qualify for ballot is not enough, we need time to promote the initiative before the actual election as well.
Time is of the essence.
So, even if you might not have the time to help spread the word about this, please let us know who we might contact, who might be able to help in this effort. And please at least give us your name and contact information.
Let's take back our public schools from the profiteers
Even if you can only provide us with a few names at this point, please do so, every name will count as we move forward.
Remember these are OUR schools built up with our tax dollars, not sitting their to have corporate interests bilk them for millions of dollars. Please sign today that you would vote for a Repeal. Also we need your name, county of voter registration and both an e-mail and phone #.

New CPS board appointee resigns from organization that got a school contract | Chicago

New CPS board appointee resigns from organization that got a school contract | Chicago:

New CPS board appointee resigns from organization that got a school contract





As one wealthy member of the Chicago Board of Education accused of conflicts of interest with the school system is about to end her term, her replacement has chaired the board of a politically connected nonprofit awarded a $250,000 contract by Chicago Public Schools.
Deborah Quazzo’s investments in companies doing business with CPSattracted the eye of the CPS inspector general after the Sun-Times revealed an increase in CPS business to companies in which she had invested since her appointment in June 2013 — for a total of about $3.8 million. The millionaire will leave the Board of Education at the end of the month along with three other members.


“I notified the mayor’s office and CBOE leadership that I would not seek another term earlier this year,” Quazzo said Tuesday in an email. “It was a total honor to serve and I will continue to serve as I have done prior to and while being on the board.”
Mark F. Furlong, a longtime BMO Harris Bank executive and recent LEAP Innovations board chair, was picked by Mayor Rahm Emanuel to fill one of the four vacancies. The mayor did not mention in his announcement Furlong’s role at LEAP, a technology nonprofit that was awarded a $250,000 contract by CPS in August. Furlong received no pay for his service and has resigned from LEAP.
Furlong could not be reached for comment. A BMO Harris spokeswoman said the mayor’s office requested all questions be directed to Adam Collins, who did not respond to Sun-Times messages.
Furlong was a founding board director at LEAP in late 2013 when the nonprofit incorporated with the secretary of state’s office, though tax filings show — and a LEAP spokeswoman repeated — that he received no compensation for his service. The organization was founded by Phyllis Lockett, formerly of the charter-backing New Schools for Chicago and of The Renaissance Schools Fund, to connect tech companies and educators to “help pilot the best teaching and learning tools,” according to LEAP’s website.


Furlong resigned from LEAP by telephone on Friday, according to LEAP spokeswoman Jennifer Cline. He also retired from BMO Harris as of June 1.
CPS has paid LEAP $65,000 to date, procurement records show but has a renewable annual contract authorizing the district to spend up to $250,000 this year for “consulting services.”
Quazzo, who championed LEAP’s services, abstained from that vote. She also abstained from a vote on a $6 million CPS contract to a company she invested in called Think Through Math but has voted to expand seats at charter schools that also are her companies’ customers.
Quazzo told the Sun-Times she saw no conflict of interest between her roles as steward of the cash-strapped school system and as a private investor. In addition, she has promised to donate any profits from her investments or the sale of the companies for a year after her term on the board ends, totaling about $2,600 to date.
The inspector general continues to investigate.
Also leaving the Board are Andrea Zopp, who resigned May 20 to seek a U.S. Senate seat; Carlos Azcoitia, an education professor at National Louis University; and Henry Bienen, president emeritus of Northwestern University.
In addition to Furlong, joining the board are the Rev. Michael Garanzini, retiring president of Loyola University; Dominique Jordan Turner, president and CEO of the Chicago Scholars Foundation; and Gail Ward, a 35-year veteran of CPS who served as the first principal of Walter Payton College Prep.
“If you look at the four people that I appointed,” Emanuel said Tuesday, “they bring a new set [of eyes], a fresh level of energy to see CPS through what it needs through the next stage.”
Action Now, which advocates for working-class people and called for Quazzo’s resignation in the wake of the the Sun-Times’ revelations, said Emanuel’s changes hardly clean house and “fall woefully short of [February’s] voter mandate for an elected representative school board.”
Spokesman Aaron Krager said that “Emanuel’s appointees do nothing to divert from the ways of the past. . . . These new appointees reaffirm the mayor’s commitment to privatizing Chicago’s public school system.”

What the election said about the kind of schools Philadelphians want | Philadelphia Public School Notebook

What the election said about the kind of schools Philadelphians want | Philadelphia Public School Notebook:

What the election said about the kind of schools Philadelphians want 





 The primary election was, among other things, a referendum on what kind of schools Philadelphians want and how they think they should be governed.

Taken together with polling data, the election results show that the forces for corporate education reform, headquartered locally in the Philadelphia School Partnership, are losing the fight for hearts and minds, despite a seemingly limitless amount of money, a well-oiled public relations machine, and many friends in high places, including the media.
For years the mantra of school choice advocates has been that “people are voting with their feet.” It was their way of saying that parents want their children enrolled in charter schools. But in the recent primary, people voted with their ballots. The results suggest that the “dump the losers” approach to school reform does not reflect how Philadelphians are thinking about education, in so far as elections reflect popular opinion.
A year ago, State Sen. Anthony Hardy Williams, a strong advocate for charters and school vouchers, was widely regarded as the likely Democratic nominee for mayor. With a trio of Main Line billionaires ready to spend whatever it takes and the blessing of party chair Bob Brady, many Black elected officials, and ward leaders, Williams was regarded as a formidable candidate whose race it was to lose.
The coming together of a winning coalition around James Kenney happened, in part, because important elements of the labor movement, Black political leadership, and community-based education justice advocates were energized around defeating Williams. This coalition aggressively championed investment in neighborhood public schools and sought to expose his ties to right-wing elements that embrace privatizing education, tax relief for big business, and undermining labor unions.  
Not only Kenney, but all the candidates, with the exception of Williams, opposed charter expansion and signed a PCAPS letter calling for the School Reform Commission to vote no on all new charter applications this year. Williams was isolated as the only candidate prepared to support charter expansion, even though it would deepen the District’s fiscal crisis. 
Williams, as many have pointed out, did not run a very effective campaign and sometimes soft-pedaled his school-choice message. However the American Cities PAC kept up a steady stream of school-choice commercials, and Williams clearly was identified with this position. His crushing defeat has to be seen as a repudiation of the policy agenda that is his only claim to distinction.
And let’s be clear, this election was first and foremost about education. A poll of likely voters conducted by the Inquirer, which showed Williams badly trailing Kenney a week before the election, also found that 37 percent of those asked said education was their top concern -- number one on the list by far. The victory of longtime public schools advocate Helen Gym, who was not endorsed by the party and whose campaign relied on the energy of education and social justice advocates, underlines the point. So, too, does the big response to the ballot questions on whether to abolish the School Reform Commission and extend pre-K education.
Polling data shows the primary vote aligns with public opinion on education issues. A poll released by the Pew foundation in March found that three-quarters of polled residents gave city public schools low marks and a majority continue to view charters favorably. Fifty-eight percent said they believe charters improved education options and helped to keep middle-class families in the city; but this is down from 62 percent in 2013. A third of those polled think charters take too much money away from traditional public schools and lack oversight, up from 26 percent in 2013.
While charters have significant support, 55 percent endorsed a statement calling for more spending on traditional public schools, while 35 percent called for creating more charter schools and other options.  
This reflects the strong continued support for neighborhood public schools. Low marks for performance but continued support suggest that people understand the devastating impact of budget cuts and recognize expanding charters will further aggravate the problem.
The Pew poll also highlights, as does the ballot question results, the low esteem in which What the election said about the kind of schools Philadelphians want | Philadelphia Public School Notebook: