Rep. Judy Chu asks President Obama to protect the information of 'Dreamers' before Trump takes office - LA Times

Rep. Judy Chu asks President Obama to protect the information of 'Dreamers' before Trump takes office - LA Times:

Rep. Judy Chu asks President Obama to protect the information of 'Dreamers' before Trump takes office

With President-elect Donald Trump vowing to deport thousands of people in the country illegally, Rep. Judy Chu on Tuesday urged the Obama administration to protect the names of "Dreamers," people brought to the country illegally as children who applied for temporary status in the United States.

Trump is expected to unwind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program created by President Obama that gave temporary legal status to Dreamers.

Of the 742,000 people across the country protected under DACA, about one in three are estimated to live in California and state officials are already gearing up for a fight over immigration with the Trump administration.

"These children and families provided extensive amounts of sensitive information to their government, including fingerprints and relatives’ home addresses, with the understanding that it would not be used against them. We promised them security," Chu said in a statement. "Now they are facing a nightmare. When we asked immigrants to come out of the shadows, we never imagined the election of a candidate who ran on a policy of mass deportation."

Chu's staff said she's talking with the Obama administration and federal agencies to determine what legal right to privacy those who applied for the program might have, and what might be done to make it more difficult to use the information to identify people in the country illegally.Rep. Judy Chu asks President Obama to protect the information of 'Dreamers' before Trump takes office - LA Times:

Who is Funding the Backlash against John Oliver's Charter School Critique? — Inside Philanthropy

Who is Funding the Backlash against John Oliver's Charter School Critique? — Inside Philanthropy:

Who is Funding the Backlash against John Oliver's Charter School Critique?

On August 21, 2016, John Oliver stepped into the heated debate around charter schools. His segment reported on mismanagement and misspending at charter schools in several states. It also called into question the free market approach advocated by some in the charter school community. How? By, among other things, hilariously swiping at former presidential candidate and Ohio Governor John Kasich’s comparison between schools and pizzerias.

In response, the Center for Education Reform—a charter school advocacy outfit funded by big names such as the Walton Family Foundation, the Gates Foundation and the Broad Foundation—has launched a $100,000 competition called “Hey John Oliver! Back off My Charter School!” in which it is soliciting responses to Oliver’s segment from charter schools around the country. The organization has noted that funding for this particular campaign will come from “program funds” that it collects from over 1000 donors each year. That said, these big-name funders have a long history of supporting advocacy efforts for charter schools and this effort is just the latest salvo in a long-running battle that is reaching its 25th year.

As the charter school advocacy movement comes of age, even the founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform, Jeanne Allen, has tough words for its leaders. She notes that charter reformers have become “our own worst enemy” and that their agenda comes across as “narrow, hollow and hostile.” Earlier this summer, Allen released a white paper calling for a new direction for the charter school movement while calling into the question the money and muscle of funders and the organizations they sponsor to “struggle every day to defend what already exists.”

From 1991 to 2000, 36 laws were enacted governing the creation of new charter schools and two creating new full school choice programs. Since then, progress seems to have slowed and funders like Gates and Walton are beginning to ask why, even as they continue to cut checks. Part of this trend is obviously due simply to the initial ramp-up and early novelty of the movement when it was just getting started. Still, with all of this investment from major philanthropic institutions and withering critiques from major media figures like Oliver, many in the movement are questioning why it feels like more was accomplished in the early years of the movement than in the recent past.

As much as Oliver’s segment highlighted important distinctions between how charter schools and district schools operate, a 2015 report by the Mind Trust, a charter advocacy organization based in Indianapolis, found that most charters very closely resemble their district school counterparts despite claims about innovation in the sector. This is fueled by risk-averse authorizers and philanthropists who place big bets on well-established models, such as charter management organizations (CMOs), as opposed to radical new ideas.

Despite the mixed record for charters over the past quarter century, as noted by Oliver, major foundation dollars have flowed big time towards charters and away from traditional public schools. In fact, funding for charters increased from 3 percent in 2000 to 16 percent in 2010, while it was cut in half for district schools over the same period, according to Michigan State University researchers Sarah Reckhow and Jeffrey Snyder.

But we wonder what more recent data might show. As we've reported, some emerging big ed funders like Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan are looking beyond charters as they plot to reinvent American education. Personalized learning is one idea with the potential to edge aside charters in the competition for funder dollars, with major attention from Zuckerberg and Gates, as well as others from the tech philanthropy community. 

A great many of the new activist philanthropists coming on the scene are focused on scalable solutions. Yet, as we've noted before, charters have struggled on this front. While large shares of students in some poor cities are now in charters, these schools still only educate 5 percent of all K-12 students—after 25 years of effort and billions of dollars in donor backing. Scaling the charters that are actually good is even harder.

If you're a young tech type looking at what new solution might sweep over and remake the K-12 landscape, it's not clear you'd see charters as an obvious candidate. How enthusiastic do you think Silicon Valley VCs might be about a product that had captured only 5 percent of market share after a quarter-century? At this point, funding charters looks more a bit more akin to backing direct services than fomenting a disruptive revolution. 

All of which is to say that you can understand why charter backers might be so sensitive about John Oliver’s humorous broadside. As we've reported, the biggest charter funders have lately doubled down, but there's a growing struggle underway for the hearts and minds of new funders coming on the scene. 

Related:

• How Walton is Doubling Down on Charter Schools
• If You Thought Charter School Funders Might Be Losing Steam, Think Again
• New Details Emerge About the Most Ambitious Charter School Push Ever

Who is Funding the Backlash against John Oliver's Charter School Critique? — Inside Philanthropy:

Municipal Bond Analysts Seek Greater Transparency from Charter Schools | Diane Ravitch's blog

Municipal Bond Analysts Seek Greater Transparency from Charter Schools | Diane Ravitch's blog:

Municipal Bond Analysts Seek Greater Transparency from Charter Schools

We are well aware that charter schools open and close, sometimes for academic reasons, sometimes for financial reasons. Unfortunately, some of these schools are financed with municipal bonds, which makes them a risky endeavor. The story below is behind a pay wall. I subscribed to The Bond Buyer so I could read it in full. It shows why the NAACP and other organizations are calling for charter school accountability and transparency. It is not good for either municipal finance or for children to have schools that close in the middle of the year without warning.

Racently, the National Federation of Municipal Analysts urged charter schools “to provide detailed financial, academic, and staffing information in primary and secondary disclosure documents.” This is the first time that the NFMA has made disclosure recommendations for charter schools.

“The charter school sector has been very active in the last … four to five years [and] it traditionally has not had a lot of public rating coverage,” said Gilbert Southwell, vice president at Wells Capital Management and co-chair of the NFMA disclosure subcommittee that drafted the paper. “[The RBP] is both educational for our membership but also helps to establish our disclosure expectations when we’re looking at these deals.”

Dean Lewallen, vice president and senior analyst at AllianceBernstein L.P. and co-chair of the subcommittee with Southwell, said the RBP is the product of a year-long vetting process with a variety of market participants and thus reflects “an industry consensus.”

The document’s recommendations begin with key information that should be included in a primary offering statement (POS). According to the RBP, a charter school’s POS should disclose all material financial agreements, including the proposed indenture, loan agreement, capital leases, management agreements, and tax regulatory agreements. It should also include information from twelve other broader topics, like descriptions of facilities and their financing, pledged revenues, and projected cash flows. NFMA also wants descriptions of debt service, repair and replacement, operating and deficit, as well as insurance and property tax reserve funds.

The RBP lists disclosures in a successful charter school POS related to academic performance as well as school management and operations.

“A charter school’s academic performance has been identified as an especially important factor in charter school long-term stability and success,” NFMA said in its RBP. “Consequently, the POS should disclose all relevant aspects of the charter school academic performance.”

Such disclosures should include information covering regulatory authorities that have jurisdiction over the charter school, along with the school’s curriculum and education programs at varying grade levels and how those programs satisfy applicable educational standards, the RBP says. Information on how the school tests students to measure academic growth as well as how recent school data stacks up against historic measurements should be presented in an easily accessible way for investors, NFMA said.

In terms of school staff and management, an effective POS should provide detailed information in eight key areas, according to NFMA, including: charter board membership, compensation, and tenure; information available on the school’s website; management qualification, experience, and compensation; third-party manager control, compensation, and replacement; and charter school teaching faculty, classroom ratios, and teachers’ union affiliation. Additionally, the POS should have information regarding teacher and staff compensation, including retirement benefits, any complaints and claims the school is facing, as well as operating and funding information related to extracurricular activities.

Another important area for disclosure has to do with the school’s facilities, NFMA said. A POS should contain information about the size, Municipal Bond Analysts Seek Greater Transparency from Charter Schools | Diane Ravitch's blog:

ESP Day: Honoring the Hard-Working Women and Men who Help Educate the Whole Student

ESP Day: Honoring the Hard-Working Women and Men who Help Educate the Whole Student:

ESP Day: Honoring the Hard-Working Women and Men who Help Educate the Whole Student

From coast to coast, students, teachers, and parents are rolling out the red carpet in a national day of recognition for education support professionals (ESP), who are integral members of the education team.

As part of American Education Week (AEW) 2016, ESP Day (Nov. 16) focuses on the importance of these school employees, who make up 40 percent of the school staff and take care of students every day, making sure they have the tools they need to succeed in school.

Among the day’s events and activities are appreciation breakfasts, luncheons, and other celebrations to honor the individuals who work behind the scenes to support students and help schools run smoothly.

NEA President Lily Eskelsen García, along with National ESP of the Year Doreen McGuire Grigg and Council for Education Support President Debby Chandler will spend the day today honoring the hard work and dedication of ESPs from Rogers High School in Spokane, Wash. The trio teamed up with the DUDE. be nice Project to pull off a series of surprises!

NEA Secretary-Treasurer Princess Moss Thanks ESPs During American Education Week 2016

At a kick-off event on Tuesday, NEA Secretary-Treasurer Princess Moss—joined by Dawn Lewis, president of the Education Association of Alexandria (EAA)—spent the day yesterday in Alexandria, Va. The duo visited three area schools: TC Williams High School, George Mason Elementary School, and Francis C. Hammond Middle School.

Like any good guest, Moss came bearing a special gift: Each school received from NEA a $1,000 check for programs and services that will benefit staff and students!

“Our school support staff has many needs and this money will go toward helping them in their work,” says Moss.

But more than just the check, the day proved to be a whirlwind of excitement, celebration, and emotion.

“Education support staff are near and dear to my heart because both of my parents were public school bus drivers,” said Moss. “I have an appreciation…for ESPs because ESP Day: Honoring the Hard-Working Women and Men who Help Educate the Whole Student:

Trump's plan to destroy Public Education may face uphill battle

Trump's school choice expansion plan may face uphill battle:

Trump's school choice expansion plan may face uphill battle

WASHINGTON (AP) - School voucher programs in the nation's capital and Vice President-elect Mike Pence's home state of Indiana could serve as a blueprint for a Trump administration plan to use public money to enable disadvantaged students to attend the public or private school of their choice.

President-elect Donald Trump made clear that school choice would be an education priority.

Speaking at a Cleveland charter school in September, he vowed to funnel $20 billion in existing federal dollars into scholarships for low-income students. That's an idea that would require approval from Congress, which last year passed a bipartisan overhaul of No Child Left Behind and is unlikely to alter it in the near future. Still, there are smaller-scale ways Trump could reshape public education.

A first step might be asking Congress to restore funding to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, the country's first federally funded, private school voucher program. The House voted to extend funding earlier this year, but a companion bill has stalled in the Senate.

Gerard Robinson, a resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who advised the Trump campaign on education policy, called the D.C. program "a good place to start."

Created in 2004, the program last year gave vouchers to about 1,200 low-income students. The vouchers are capped at $8,452 for kindergarten through 8th grade and $12,679 for high school. Among the 40-plus schools participating are elite private schools like Sidwell Friends, which has counted among its students Chelsea Clinton and Malia and Sasha Obama.

The idea of allowing public funds to follow individual students to a charter, magnet or private school isn't new. Programs are already in place in states like Indiana, where Pence, as governor, oversaw a dramatic expansion of vouchers in the state. Nearly 33,000 students participated last school year, up from nearly 4,000 in 2011-12. The vouchers are awarded on a sliding scale based on income and family size. For 2015-2016, the top voucher averaged nearly $5,500 for a high school student.

The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the program in 2013, ruling that it didn't violate a state constitutional provision against public funding for religious programs.

At the federal level, Congress considered allowing Title I funds targeted for low-income students to follow them to the school where they enroll, but that idea was ultimately scrapped in the final version of NCLB's successor, the Every Students Succeeds Act.

Vic Klatt, a principal of Penn Hill Group who has worked on federal education policy for more than two decades, says school choice has a better chance now, but it won't be easy.

"There will be tons of support for charters. Full-scale private choice will be a battle," Klatt said at an Education Writers Association panel discussion this week. "It's going to depend on how much emphasis this president and his people put on private school choice as an issue."

Education observers said there are other ways to push that agenda, including tax incentives to move children from public to private schools or a Race to the Top-style grant program in which states are encouraged to adopt choice-friendly policies in exchange for funds.

The Obama administration's Race to the Top competition gave $4 billion to states that vowed to adopt more rigorous standards and turn around failing schools. States that adopted the Common Core standards in math and reading were more likely to win a slice of the pie.

Trump repeatedly promised to "put an end to Common Core," but the standards were adopted by individual states and the new education law explicitly prohibits the federal government from telling states which standards to adopt, Common Core or otherwise.

Trump's campaign plan for school choice was scant on details: He did not say where the $20 billion in federal funding would come from or how it would be doled out.

"I think what you're going to hear from him is a shift from the term school choice to parental choice," Robinson said in an interview with The Associated Press, adding that he was speaking for himself, not the Trump transition team. Robinson has been mentioned as a possible education secretary in a Trump administration.

Research on school choice programs like the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship suggests mixed results.

One evaluation of the D.C. voucher program found students had slightly higher reading scores but no significant improvements in math. A subsequent review of that study, however, found it downplayed results showing higher scores were concentrated among certain groups of students.

"I would have hoped for and expected better results than we saw," said Kevin Welner, director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Some education leaders expressed doubt that Trump's proposal would be roundly welcomed at a time when there has been increasing skepticism of large-scale expansions of alternatives like charters.

Voters in Massachusetts and Georgia rejected ballot measures that would have paved the way for the creation of more charter schools.

"I think you would get a limited number of states that would take advantage of it," said Kristen Amundson, executive director of the National Association of State Boards of Education. "It's not something that is being universally asked for."

___

Armario reported from Los Angeles. Tom Davies in Indianapolis contributed to this report.

___

Follow Christine Armario on Twitter at: http://www.twitter.com/cearmario and Jennifer C. Kerr on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/jckerr9

Trump's school choice expansion plan may face uphill battle:

LAUSD board: If Trump administration asks for student data, district will resist | 89.3 KPCC

LAUSD board: If Trump administration asks for student data, district will resist | 89.3 KPCC:

LAUSD board: If Trump administration asks for student data, district will resist

If President-elect Donald Trump ever attempted to turn the Los Angeles Unified School District’s vast stores of student information against kids or their families in any way, the district’s school board pledged Tuesday to resist that attempt “to the fullest extent provided by the law.”

It’s a commitment plainly aimed at calming the fears among L.A. Unified’s diverse student body, particularly those with ties to the city’s immigrant communities.

Board members unanimously adopted a resolution stating the nation’s second-largest district would “continue to protect the data and identities of any student, family member, or school employee who may be adversely affected by any future policies or executive action that results in the collection of any personally identifiable information.”

The board’s action comes on the heels of widespread student walkouts from L.A. Unified campuses on four consecutive school days following Trump’s election.

Within his first 100 days in office, Trump has said he will begin removing 2 million “criminal illegal immigrants” and propose legislation constructing a border wall.

The 100-day plan does not call for raiding school districts’ student data files in search of information on citizenship status. But some Democrats have raised concerns about what the president-elect will do with data the Obama administration collected through the so-called “DACA” and “DAPA” programs, created by executive action to shield some undocumented immigrants from deportation.

An estimated one out of every 10 L.A. County residents is an undocumented immigrant, according to one University of Southern California study — and L.A. Unified, because of the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court case Plyler v. Doe, is obligated to serve undocumented children living within their borders.

In February, the L.A. Unified board directed district officials not to allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement onto its campuses without a review by the superintendent.

Even after Trump appoints a new justice to the Supreme Court, L.A. Unified school board president Steve Zimmer said he anticipates the district’s obligation to serve all kids regardless of immigration status under Plyler will not change.

"We interpret that to make sure that all schools are safe places and safe zones,” Zimmer said, “and that ICE agents, or any immigration action, does not take place on our school sites.”

The resolution also directs Superintendent Michelle King — along with any other stakeholders who wish to be added as signatories — to send a joint letter "affirming the American ideals that are celebrated in Los Angeles addressed to the President-elect.”

Board member Mónica García said the resolution was not partisan.

“For all of those who are strengthened in this election, we welcome that,” García said. “For all those who are filled with questions in this election, we welcome that.”

Board member George McKenna offered amendments specifying schools could serve as safe zones "to the fullest extent provided by the law.”

“I do not believe we have the authority,” McKenna explained, “to tell our principals and schools that if a federal authority wants to come on to the campus and wants to do something … that we have the authority to resist that.”

McKenna, an African-American, closed debate on the resolution by recalling his upbringing in segregated New Orleans — and noted his joy at Barack Obama’s election in 2008. He echoed the words of songwriter Leonard Cohen, who passed away last week. 

“I shouted hallelujah” he said. “I never thought I would live to see something like that.”

When Trump was elected, McKenna added, “my hallelujah turned into … a cold and broken hallelujah … But I can still say hallelujah because I’m still here … And wherever we stand right now, we must stand together.”LAUSD board: If Trump administration asks for student data, district will resist | 89.3 KPCC:

NANCY BAILEY: Recent Research Shows Vouchers Fail Children

Recent Research Shows Vouchers Fail Children:

Recent Research Shows Vouchers Fail Children

The Trump presidency seems to want to base its education program on school choice. But vouchers have a history of failure. The two most recent studies indicate that students do worse with vouchers.

• The Louisiana Scholarship Program provided tuition to poor students in low-performing public schools. An MIT paper by Atila Abdulkadiroglu of Duke University, Parag Pathak of MIT and Christopher Walters of Berkeley found vouchers didn’t work. Students chosen by a lottery wound up with worse test scores in math, reading, science and social studies than those students in public schools. Children who lost the lottery turned out to be the luckier students!
• This past May a research paper looking at 25 years of vouchers in Milwaukeealso found failure involving vouchers. In “Determinants of Organizational Failure in the Milwaukee School Voucher Program” the study researchers looked at 25 years of data. They examined organizational liabilities of newness, institutional affiliation, market-share, and regulatory environment on the cumulative risk of school failure and determined that 41 percent of all private voucher schools operating in Milwaukee between 1991 and 2015 failed. They concluded that policymakers should reconsider vouchers.

With such problems with vouchers, why is the new President-elect pushing vouchers? Is he that out of touch?

Citations

Atila Abdulkadiroglu, Parag A. Pathak and Christopher R. Walters. “School vouchers and student achievement: first-year evidence from the Louisiana Scholarship Programme.” December 2015.

“School Choice: A Lottery to Lose. The Economist. February 2016.

Michael R. Ford and Fredrik O. Andersson, “Determinants of Organizational Failure in the Milwaukee School Voucher Program.” Policy Studies Journal. May 2016.

Northern, Amber M. “School failure in Milwaukee’s school voucher program.” Thomas B. Fordham Institute. May 2016.

 Recent Research Shows Vouchers Fail Children:

Losing America's Schools

The Fight to Reclaim Public Education

NANCY E. BAILEY

Losing America’s Schools: The Fight to Reclaim Public Education is a call to save one of the last great democratic institutions in America. Corporatization, charter schools, misleading claims of skill gaps, the loss of Separation of Church and State, deprofessionalization, and the over–use of technology all threaten the existence of the schools that belong to all Americans. This book addresses the problems surrounding those issues, and is a tribute to the groups and individuals who are fighting draconian reforms in order to save our public schools. It is the sequel to Misguided Education Reform:... more »

Losing America's Schools: The Fight to Reclaim Public Education, By Nancy E. Bailey, 9781475828627 | Rowman & Littlefield - https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781475828627/

California’s New Embrace of Bilingual Education: An Academic and a Personal Affirmation | janresseger

California’s New Embrace of Bilingual Education: An Academic and a Personal Affirmation | janresseger:

California’s New Embrace of Bilingual Education: An Academic and a Personal Affirmation

Patricia Gandara, the Co-Director of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA, explains the technical significance of Californians’ rejection at the polls last week of the 1998, Proposition 227, which mandated English-only in the public schools. Voters replaced it with Proposition 58, which grants local school districts the right to design their own programs for English language instruction, including bilingual education.

Here is Gandara’s description of what happened last week in California: “As the election results were rolling in across the country signaling that Donald Trump would become the 45th president of the United States, nearly three-quarters of Californians had voted to restore bilingual education in California. The Trump campaign had been overtly anti-immigrant, while the restoration of bilingual education was an affirmation of the valuing of the children of immigrants…  Proposition 58, ‘The Multilingual Education Initiative,’ lifted the ban and expands access to bilingual (usually targeted to English learners) and dual-language programs (that incorporate both English learners and English speakers wanting to learn a second language).”

Gandara briefly summarizes academic research on the benefits of bilingual education of both types: “During the last 18 years, research has been conducted that shows significant benefits to multilingual instruction. Canadians have long been researching the cognitive benefits and concluding that learning in more than one language effectively made students ‘smarter’—they demonstrated a greater capacity for focused attention and avoidance of distractions… In recent years, longitudinal research—following the same children over their entire school career, from kindergarten to high school—comparing those in bilingual and dual-language programs to those in English-only classrooms, has concluded that while the bilinguals start slower, they end with superior outcomes in English, and Latino students perform better in both English and math when enrolled in bilingual programs.”

It is a fine thing that Californians have taken the very step that academic researchers recommend.  It is far more moving to understand how this feels personally to someone who endured the English-only regime that has operated for a long time in California and many other places across the United States.  In Tuesday’s NY Times, Héctor Tobar, a professor of journalism at the University of Oregon, tells his own story as a boy who grew up during California’s New Embrace of Bilingual Education: An Academic and a Personal Affirmation | janresseger:

Rep. Messer Excited for Trump Agenda, Would Be 'Honored' to Serve as Ed. Sec. - Politics K-12 - Education Week

Rep. Messer Excited for Trump Agenda, Would Be 'Honored' to Serve as Ed. Sec. - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Rep. Messer Excited for Trump Agenda, Would Be 'Honored' to Serve as Ed. Sec.

Hoosier School Heist TV is Doug Martin's channel featuring videos of his book tour across Indiana speaking on the corporate takeover of public education. Order Hoosier School Heist at http://hoosierschoolheist.com/.

Follow Hoosier School Heist on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HoosierSchoolHeist

Tweet with Doug Martin at: https://twitter.com/DougMartinED

Republican Rep. Luke Messer of Indiana, one of the foremost champions for school choice in Congress, said he's excited for the "big and bold" education plans he foresees under President-elect Donald Trump, particularly when it comes to school choice. And he also left the door open for serving as Trump's education secretary. 

"I don't know if I'm being considered. But I would be honored to serve," Messer told us, "and I share many of the same priorities for America's education system."

Asked about strong candidates for the secretary's job, Messer mentioned two Hoosiers, former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and former Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, as well as Gerard Robinson, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who separately is helping the Trump transition team on education issues. 

"There's a host of folks that could do the job and do it well," Messer said.

But Messer is clearly excited about Trump's proposal to reallocate $20 billion in federal dollars to promote school choice in states. It's designed to help leverage up to $100 billion in separate state investments in programs to allow students to attend private, magnet, charter, and traditional public schools of their choosing. Messer emphasized the 11 million poor students the initiative is designed to help—and also praised Trump's attention to the issue during the election season.

"Donald Trump spoke more about school choice on the campaign trail than any other candidate in our nation's history," Messer said.

You might remember that Messer's staffer, Rob Goad, worked for the Trump campaign as its K-12 policy adviser. 

Messer has been one of the foremost champions for K-12 choice in Congress. In fact, last year, he sought to allow children receiving federal Title I dollars for disadvantaged students to use that money at the public and private schools of their choice. That plan, however, was not included in what became the Every Student Succeeds Act. Asked about the viability of a similar plan under Trump given that failure, Messer said that a Trump plan wouldn't have to follow the exact same blueprint as his ESSA-related pitch. 

"There are billions and billions of dollars spent by the federal government on education. We can certainly find the money to spend on that program," Messer said, adding then when it comes to how such a program could work, "There are many options. I don't think anyone has decided if Title I is the best option." (Previously, Messer has expressed anxiety about the possibility of a federal "Department of School Choice.")

You might also remember Messer as an advocate for overhauling the nation's privacy laws that govern student data. He's reached across the aisle to work on privacy legislation with Democratic Rep. Jared Polis of Colorado. Messer told us he's optimistic that lawmakers made important strides on the issue during this session of Congress, including the release of a software industry pledge regarding student-data privacy. 

"There's reason to be optimistic because the American people want to see our students protected in the classroom," Messer said. "We've built a foundation for this bill to become a reality in the next Congress."Rep. Messer Excited for Trump Agenda, Would Be 'Honored' to Serve as Ed. Sec. - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

---

Don't miss another Politics K-12 post. Sign up here to get news alerts in your email inbox.

Follow us on Twitter at @PoliticsK12. Rep. Messer Excited for Trump Agenda, Would Be 'Honored' to Serve as Ed. Sec. - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

CURMUDGUCATION: Trump Teaching Lesson

CURMUDGUCATION: Trump Teaching Lesson:

Trump Teaching Lesson

There's an aspect of Candidate Trump's success that I think is both under-discussed and also a good lesson/reminder for those of us in the teaching biz.

Trump never made folks feel stupid.

Seriously. Members of the public would figuratively run up to him hollering, "Good lord, did you see this terrible story on the internet," and without batting an eye, Trump would respond "I know!! Incredible, right?"   Like Walt Whitman, he could declaim at length about his own awesomeness without ever having to belittle the crowd around him to embiggify himself (because he's just that awesome). He is large; he contains multitudes.

Meanwhile, Clinton could not avoid making people feel stupid. She was the stern one, incapable of not figuratively rolling her eyes at the latest stupid thing that voters had said. She would point out something stupid that Trump had said, not understanding that her message was, "How stupid do you have to be to believe this guy?"

People hate feeling stupid. Hate it. But Trump, with all the basic markers of success like money and fame and arrogance-laced confidence, still managed to say to voters, "Hey, you're all cool." And he augmented that with a natural instinct for the use of third person-- the people who were stupid or bad, those people were "them" or "they." Trump invited folks to join him in being the smart one, the smartest one of all, so smart you wouldn't even believe the smartitude. Meanwhile, Clinton et al just couldn't help letting it slip how dumb the think the yokels are, or trying to move the discussion to questions of facts and data and policy and ethical issues like how to treat other human beings, and all that wonky smarty-pants book talk also made some folks feel stupid. You've got a CURMUDGUCATION: Trump Teaching Lesson:

Russ on Reading: Purposeful Reading: Engaging Students in Content Text

Russ on Reading: Purposeful Reading: Engaging Students in Content Text:

Purposeful Reading: Engaging Students in Content Text

I had the opportunity to observe a guided reading lesson in a second grade class last week. The children were reading a book called Wonderful Worms, by Linda Glaser. The teacher did a fine job of introducing the book to the children and worked hard to set the purpose for reading. The teacher said, "I want you to read this book to find out why the author named this book, Wonderful Worms." As purpose setting questions go, this is a good one, because it was general enough to allow the children to think about the whole story and specific enough to allow the students to focus on the main message of the story. As Tim Shanahan has pointed out here, when purpose questions are too specific they may take student attention away from a fuller understanding of the text. The teacher added to the purpose setting by asking the students what questions they had about the story. These questions tapped into the students' own curiosity on the topic and so were also helpful in setting purposes for reading.

Despite these fine efforts by the teacher, not all the students in the guided reading group were buying into it. One boy sped through the pages very quickly and when the teacher went to his side and asked that he read aloud, his oral reading showed lots of speed, but little meaning making. The overall impression was that this child's purpose was to get through with the task as quickly and as painlessly as possible. He wanted to be done with the exercise and comprehension be damned. All the good work of purpose setting was lost on this reader.

Student purposes and teacher purposes are often in competition in a reading assignment. Very often students who are asked to answer questions Russ on Reading: Purposeful Reading: Engaging Students in Content Text:

Doing Well By Doing Good: For-Profit Schools | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

Doing Well By Doing Good: For-Profit Schools | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice:

Doing Well By Doing Good: For-Profit Schools

For all of the three-decade hype about how business practices applied to K-12 schools will make them more efficient and high performing, a short hop and skip through the past half-century of for-profit companies failing in the education market might illustrate how applying market-driven practices to improve schools and make money  at the same time is tough for even shrewd entrepreneurs.

The argument that for-profit schools cannot succeed because they seek to make money out of the public coffer is not one I make here. There are such “good” schools and they  do thrive (see here and here). Keep in mind that other institutions entwine for-profits with public operations such as the space program, hospitals, prisons, and transportation. Government and profit-driven companies have  worked together for decades.

And that is why the historical record of businesses contracting with public school authorities is one that should be known well by the current generation of school reformers.

In 1969, Behavioral Research Laboratory, contracted with the largely black Gary (IN) district to raise test scores in reading and math in the Banneker elementary school. They failed. BRL is no more.

Dorsett Educational Systems in 1970-1971 took over a school in Texarkana (AR) contracting to raise 350 children one grade level in reading and math after 80 hours of instruction. They failed. DES is no more.

In 1970, Westinghouse Learning Systems contracted with Gilroy (CA) to take over the Eliot elementary school to raise test scores in reading and math. They failed. WLS is no more.

I could give many more examples of for-profit corporations seeking to make money from operating schools  through performance contracting when districts were flush with federal funds from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act  in the late-1960s and early 1970s–but I won’t. Failure in doing what seemed to be a fairly straightforward job–raise student test scores–proved unattainable by some of the best and brightest business leaders of the day.

These corporations tripped badly and eventually  disappeared or were swallowed Doing Well By Doing Good: For-Profit Schools | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice: