SUPES Owner's Sketchy Past Revealed As Scandal Deepens for Byrd-Bennett: Chicagoist

SUPES Owner's Sketchy Past Revealed As Scandal Deepens for Byrd-Bennett: Chicagoist:

SUPES Owner's Sketchy Past Revealed As Scandal Deepens for Byrd-Bennett

The SUPES scandal just keeps getting worse for Barbara Byrd-Bennett, who took a paid leave of absence as CEO of Chicago Public Schools on April 17 after a federal investigation began into the $20.5 million no-bid contract she awarded to SUPES Academy. Turns out, SUPES Academy owner and Byrd-Bennett’s former employer, Gary Solomon, is one of the most repulsive people ever, according to information the Chicago Sun-Times was able to gather under a Freedom of Information Act request.

According to court records, while Solomon was the dean of Niles West High School, where he began working in 1992, he was accused of “immoral and unprofessional” conduct, which included using racial slurs, covering up drug and alcohol use by minors, sending sexually explicit e-mails and preying on the most vulnerable female students—Solomon was even caught kissing one of them. He also apparently kept a diary on a school computer, describing his fantasies and writing of one female student, “She is there for the taking.”

(If you don’t have the chills yet, head over to this Sun-Times article to read more about the creepy scumbaggery of Gary Solomon.)

Solomon was ousted from Niles West in 2001 after the district spent $200,000 in legal fees and paid a $50,000 settlement just to get rid of him. In a February 2001 Chicago Tribune article, school board president Robert Silverman explained the decision to settle:

"I am glad it is over," said Silverman, who also noted the settlement terms included an agreement that Solomon will never work for the district again. "We did not have 100 percent certainty that we would win the case. Yet we won 100 percent in certainty that he will not teach in our district again."

After the trials of that case, you might think Solomon would be ruined … but you would be wrong. He was never charged with a crime and actually went on to form three companies with similar missions of consulting for K-12 schools—SUPES Academy, PROACT Search and Synesi Associates—with former Niles West student, Thomas Vranas.

This all leads us to the question: Really, Barbara Byrd-Bennett? What were you thinking? Byrd-Bennett worked for Solomon under SUPES so it’s hard to believe she wouldn’t know of his at-best questionable and at-worst downright abominable past. And in the event that Byrd-Bennett was working in a gossip-free vacuum, there’s also this thing called Google, which one can use for due diligence before hiring someone.

But that’s not even the point. People “do business” with shitty people all the time. The real point is that awarding a no-bid contract when CPS has a $1.1 billion budget deficit is just fucked up.

Mainstream news organizations didn’t seem to pay it much mind back when the contract was awarded in June 2013, perhaps thinking, “No-bid contracts? Pish posh. That’s the Chicago way!” But Catalyst Chicago, an independent reporter on all things related to urban schools, took notice. They analyzed board documents and found that the three-year contract was the largest no-bid contract awarded in three years or more. They also scrutinized Byrd-Bennett’s employment as a coach for SUPES, which she did until she started working as a consultant for CPS.

The contract also got the attention of several well-respected educators and researchers. Diane Ravitch, an educational policy analyst, wrote in a blog post in August 2013: “Chicago has several excellent institutions of higher education that could have done the same job for far less money.”

And Chicagoan Mike Klonsky, a former UIC professor and leader of the Small Schools Movement,noted in a July 2013 blog post:

“A few principals attending the Chicago Supes training now in progress are texting me, telling me what a joke it is. It's not that the sessions are all that bad. It's that the principals themselves have taken it over. They are running it - ‘sharing stories,’ they text me.

‘Inmates have taken over the asylum,’ says one south-side principal … Supes, she says, brings nothing to the table. Any one of a number of local groups or university people could have easily facilitated.
Another text: "We (the intellectually and skill bereft cohort) are now creating the sessions."

Federal investigation into Byrd-Bennett’s staffers and her relationship with SUPES and the other companies owned by Solomon is ongoing. The Chicago Board of Education announced April 20 that it has suspended its principal leadership training contract with SUPES Academy, though $13 million has already been paid out to the company. Currently, CPS school board vice president Jesse Ruiz is serving as interim CEO—the fifth leader of CPS since 2010—and it should be noted that Ruiz voted for the SUPES contract back in 2013.SUPES Owner's Sketchy Past Revealed As Scandal Deepens for Byrd-Bennett: Chicagoist:

BATs Congratulate Senator Bernie Sanders - Badass Teachers Association

Badass Teachers Association:
BATs Congratulate Senator Bernie Sanders

The Badass Teachers Association would like to congratulate you, Senator Sanders, on your recent announcement to run for president.  The Badass Teachers Association is an education activist organization that is nationwide. Currently, we are 55,000 strong with chapters in every state.  We are organizing on the ground to change the conversation back to what public education should be, about children and their future.  BATs have far reaching capability on Twitter, via our website, our blog, and Pinterest.



 Our organization was founded in June of 2013.  BATs fight for strong public education for all children and for teacher autonomy in the classroom. We are a group that refuses to take the blame for our government’s inability to address child poverty and its impact on how children perform in school. BATs fight, on a daily basis, the efforts of big money to privatize our schools and use our children as market capital.

First, and foremost, we appreciate that you have decried a move  toward the “privatizing” of education. http://www.forbes.com/sites/maureensullivan/2015/04/30/bernie-sanders-on-education-5-things-the-presidential-candidate-wants-you-to-know/

On teacher pay we could NOT agree with you more!

“The great moral, economic and political issue of our time is the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality we are experiencing. Something is very wrong when, last year, the top 25 hedge fund managers earned more than the combined income of 425,000 public school teachers. We have got to get our priorities right.”

You views on Pre-school are spot on:

“There is perhaps no issue more important than how we educate our youth. I am very concerned that, on many levels, we are failing our youth. We must do away with the archaic notion that education begins at 4 or 5 years old. For far too long, our society has under-valued the need for high-quality and widely accessible early-childhood education.”

We are very happy to see that you have a long history of voting NO on allowing vouchers  and support reducing class size to 18 children in grades 1 to 3.

Your efforts to overturn Citizens United, a non-profit that supports, and funds, the dismantling of public education, is to be applauded. As teachers and parents we have witnessed the destruction that the Koch Brothers and many other corporate interests have had on public education, our children, and our teachers.

Your fight against Citizens United is strong and grounded.  You have said, and BATs certainly agree, about Citizens United:

“In the United States of America, billionaires should not be able to buy elections,” declared Sanders, to thunderous applause.

“If we do not get our act together, we are moving towards an oligarchic society,” he continued, arguing that, “We have got to fight to defend American democracy.”

http://www.thenation.com/blog/181590/senate-tried-overturn-citizens-united-today-guess-what-stopped-them

We are however disappointed that you did vote YES on requiring states to test students every year and hope that you will revisit that idea.  Please talk to educators, parents, and students to find out how testing and Pearson are on the verge of destroying public education in this country.  Assessing children is needed in education but it must be done responsibly and used to help kids - not to punish them, their schools, and their teachers!
http://www.ontheissues.org/social/Bernie_Sanders_Education.htm

We will be closely watching your education discussions on the following:
1. Charter school expansion
2. Teach for America
3. Annual testing
4. Common Core
5. Support for public education
6. Resource/Support funding low income areas
7. Plans for reducing child poverty
8. Plans for addressing racial inequality and systemic racism that continue to hyper-segregate our school system

In short, we welcome you to the presidential race.  BATs is a strong GRASSROOTS movement and we have been working for change in education for close to 2 years.  We want great schools for all our children.  BATs fight for schools that belong to the public and the communities they serve, not to Pearson, Wall Street, or the Koch Brothers.

***This is NOT a BAT Endorsement for President - just a congratulations***Badass Teachers Association:

Why We Should Trust Teachers to Determine Who is Career and College Ready:

Why We Should Trust Teachers to Determine Who is Career and College Ready

Currently, Washington State law allows five pathways to a high school diploma. These are the SBAC exams, the EOC exams, college entrance exams like the SAT, “collection of evidence” policies set by local school districts and course grades determined by teachers who have spent an entire year observing and helping students learn. Four of these Graduation Pathway options would be eliminated if House Bill 2214 passes. The only option left would be the SBAC test – an unfair high failure rate test that is designed to fail 67% of the students who take the test! Students who fail this test during their Junior year would be required to a take and pass “rigorous” makeup courses during their Senior year to get a high school diploma. 

House Bill 2214 would give Washington state the most rigid and unfair graduation requirements in the nation. There is no need to impose rigid and inflexible graduation requirements on Washington state students as Washington state students have historically excelled on both national and international tests. I have written an article detailing all of the drawbacks of House Bill 2214 which you can read at the following link. 
http://coalitiontoprotectourpublicschools.org/why-house-bill-2214-is-a-crime-against-our-kids

In this article, we will review the research showing that high stakes exams, like the SBAC, EOC, SAT or MAP are not the best way to determine career and college readiness. For many years, large scale scientific studies have shown that the most valid and reliable predictor of career and college readiness is a student's high school Grade Point Average (GPA)– or the average of the combined grades from 24 teachers who worked with the student during their four years of high school. Here are links to and descriptions of three of these studies. 

“Defining Promise, William Hiss, National Association for College Admission Counseling, February 5 2014.” This study found that students who did not submit high stakes tests performed as well in college as students who did submit high stakes test scores. 
http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/nacac-research/Documents/DefiningPromise.pdf

“Predicting Freshman Grades from High School Test Scores, Daniel Koretz, et al, Harvard Graduate School of Education, August 26 2014.” This study found that while high school grades in the state of New York predicted 50% of the variance in college grades that high stakes tests were only able to predict 33% of the variance. 
http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/eap/files/cuny_fgpa_prediction_8.26.2014_wp.pdf

“Validity of High School Grades in Predicting Student Success, Geiser and Santelices, University of California, 2007.” 
In a study of more than 81,000 students entering the University of California system, Geiser and Santelices (2007) found that high school grade point average is the most reliable predictor of college success. This study found that while high school grades were able to predict 31% of the variance in college freshman grades, high stakes tests (SAT) were not able to predict more than 21% of the variance. Note that SAT I is a test of general reasoning and SAT II are tests of specific subjects.http://www.cshe.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/shared/publications/docs/ROPS.GEISER._SAT_6.13.07.pdf

The same study found that high school GPA was also a better predictor of college graduation and college GPA than any other factor. 

What high stakes tests are more closely related to is the family income of the parents. High school GPA is also fairer to low income students because it is not as closely tied to family income as high stakes single point tests. 

Why is it that student GPA is a more accurate predictor of career and college readiness than high stakes tests that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to produce and administer? The simple answer is that each student is unique and has different aptitudes and life experiences. Some students do poorly on high stakes testing despite the fact that they have demonstrated understanding of subjects by doing well in their year long course work (a condition commonly referred to as test anxiety). Teachers who are able to spend time directly with each student are much better at assessing students than any one time high stakes test. 

Why are high stakes exams more closely related to family income than grades? The simple answer is that families with high incomes are able to buy test prep books and pay for test prep courses than poor families cannot afford. 

Why we should trust teachers rather than high stakes tests to judge career and college readiness
This year thousands of students in Washington state are at risk of not being able to graduate due to failing a single high stakes test called the Why We Should Trust Teachers to Determine Who is Career and College Ready:

Corporate Reformer Pretending to be something he isn’t - the wealthy are buying the U.S. one election at a time

Evidence of a Corporate Reformer Pretending to be something he isn’t, and how the wealthy are buying the U.S. one election at a time | Lloyd Lofthouse:

Evidence of a Corporate Reformer Pretending to be something he isn’t, and how the wealthy are buying the U.S. one election at a time

 There are two previous updates that may be found at the bottom of this post. In the 13 days since the last update, NINE more poster sized flyers poured into our mailbox, and it is obvious that Steve Glazer’s wealthy and corporate supporters are outspending Susan Bonilla at least $8 to $1 if not more.

FOUR of the flyers that supported Glazer came from JobsPAC (Chevron and AT&T are two of the corporate supporters that contribute money to this group)—KNOWN SPECIAL INTERESTS!!!

Another FOUR that supported Glazer came from Bill Bloomfield, a millionaire oligarch with a proven history of supporting the corporate education reform movement and corporate Charter Schools—A KNOWN SPECIAL INTEREST!!!

Only ONE flyer was paid for by Susan Bonilla for Senate 2015, and it made no claims against Steve Glazer. Instead, it let us know that Susan was endorsed by the California Small Business Association.

What did JobsPAC have to say?  Two of the flyers claimed Bonilla spent taxpayer money (like all elected representatives do all the way to the U.S. Congress) to furnish her offices and made other allegations. The other two flyers alleged she voted for a bill that would make it harder to fire teachers that abuse kids (THIS IS FALSE) and the governor vetoed the bill (TRUE). At the bottom of the flyers in very small print, they provide the bill number they are referring to. It was AB 375. I looked it up.

Here is a link to the history of AB 375:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB375

I challenge anyone to read the history of this bill and find where there is language that protects teachers who abuse kids!  AB 375 passed both the assembly and state senate by overwhelming majorities. The governor did veto the bill on 10/10/13, and here is Governor Brown’s reason:

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 375 without my signature.

The goal of this bill is to simplify the process for hearing and deciding teacher dismissal cases. I have listened at great length to arguments both for and against this measure. While I agree that it makes worthwhile adjustments to the dismissal process, such as lifting the summer moratorium on the filing of charges and eliminating some opportunities for delay, other changes make the process too rigid and could create new problems.

I am particularly concerned that limiting the number of depositions to five per side, regardless of the circumstances, and restricting a district’s ability to amend charges even if new evidence comes to light, may do more harm than good.

I share the authors’ desire to streamline the teacher discipline process, but this bill is an imperfect solution. I encourage the Legislature to continue working with stakeholders to identify changes that are balanced and reduce procedural complexities.

Sincerely,
Edmund G. Brown Jr.

The flyers paid for by Bill Bloomfield claim that Steve Glazer has a record of fighting for education, but they don’t define what that means. I’ll tell you what it means. It means he has a record of fighting for corporate education reform and corporate Charter schools, that might profit off of our children if Steve Glazer is elected.

****

If you aren’t aware of the war being waged in the United States by a few billionaire oligarchs to remake the United States into a country that fits what they think, then it’s time to wake up and learn how to discover the signs of oligarch funded propaganda designed to manipulate and fool voters during elections. These billionaires are buying their way into the Republican and Democratic parties, and they are libertarians, neo-liberals, and neo-conservatives—and all of them threaten our freedom and way of life, because to win, they subvert the democratic process protected by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

For Instance, for the last few weeks, occasionally, the phone rings, and the call ends up being for one of the candidates running in a special election in California’s State Senate District 7 (where I live) that will be held on May 19.  There are two candidates in this runoff election, and both are Democrats, but I think one of them is a corporate loving, teacher bashing, union hating, corporate reformer pretending to be something he isn’t.

The two candidates are Steve Glazer and Susan Bonilla. Bonilla is in the state legislature and identities herself as an educator. Campaign literature for Glazer claims he is a mayor and a university trustee.

The phone rang a few days ago, and I ended up talking to someone working in Glazer’s campaign, who claimed this was a dirty campaign and inferred that Bonilla was responsible for the dirt and lies. Then this guy went and said that Glazer was running a clean and honest Evidence of a Corporate Reformer Pretending to be something he isn’t, and how the wealthy are buying the U.S. one election at a time | Lloyd Lofthouse:

Susan Bonilla for Senate 2015

Susan Bonilla for Senate 2015: 

Susan Bonilla for Senate 2015:

Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla is a former high school teacher, mayor and county supervisor, who has worked to strengthen neighborhood schools, protect public safety services, and support job growth and working families across the state.

Prior to her election to the State Assembly in 2010, Bonilla served as a Contra Costa County Supervisor and as the Mayor of Concord – the largest community in the State Senate District. While serving her local community, Bonilla built and expanded job-training programs and job creation efforts that successfully helped residents get back to work during the recession.

Additionally, Susan Bonilla authored Assembly Bill 484 – an important and revolutionary change to education policy. Signed by the Governor Brown in 2013, the law enables our schools to phrase out outdated STAR tests and prepare students and teachers for better assessments that reflect the real world knowledge needed in tomorrow’s job market.

Susan has provided steadfast leadership in protecting early childhood education programs, saving transitional kindergarten, which provides our youngest learners the foundations they will need to succeed.

Susan authored historic legislation that expanded health care access for women, created the highest safety standards for California industrial sites while protecting manufacturing jobs, and provided more tools for law enforcement to keep our communities safe.

As a member of Contra Costa County’s Board of Supervisors, Assemblywoman Bonilla created the Foster Youth Employment Program, providing youth in the county foster system job opportunities within the county structure. She also developed partnerships to open the Michael Chavez Center for Economic Opportunity to provide job training directly to residents within the Monument Corridor of Concord.

Prior to serving in public office, Susan was an English teacher in the Mt. Diablo Unified School District. She has a B.A. in English from Azusa Pacific University and teaching credentials from CSU Los Angeles. Susan resides in Concord with her husband, John. They have four daughters and three grandchildren.

Susan Bonilla for Senate 2015:

How to Buy a School District - Education Under Attack

Education Under Attack | Attacks on public education system hurt America:

How to Buy a School District

The Lyons Elementary School District 103 was recently purchased for $11,512.  The district, serving 2,600 students in west Cook County, has an annual budget over $30 million.  What a great deal!

How the school district was bought:

The mayor of one of the five communities the district serves, Chris Getty, decided he should be running the district.

Mayor Getty got five of his henchmen to run for the school board.

Mayor Getty helped the henchmen form the Political Action Committee (PAC)Parents for Student Excellence on 2/24/15.  It’s unusual to form a PAC for school board candidates – even in the Chicago area!

Three days later Getty’s own two PACs United Citizens Party and Citizens for Getty each gave Parents for Student Excellence $975 as seed money.  Why such an odd number?  Because the Illinois Board of Elections must be notified within two days of any donations over $1,000.  $975 keeps it under the radar.

Citizens for Getty hid more expenditures as “in-kind contributions” until after the election.  A few days before the election they spent $10,341.95 on “in-kind” printing and mailings on behalf of Parents for Student Excellence.

Not one of the five board candidates gave a penny to Parents for Student Excellence.  Nor did they bother to show up for the League of Women Voters’ candidate forum.

In addition to the $10,341.95 of “in-kind” contributions Parents for Student Excellence spent $1,169.82 on pictures of themselves (for a flyer) and a mailing service.  The PAC spent at total of $11,512.

So what did they spend it on?  They sent out flyers and emails telling the residents that the district was “in disarray,” students got “bad test scores” and that the current board engaged in “wasteful spending.”  (Riverside-Brookfield Landmark)

The PR blitz worked – four of the five henchmen were elected to the board of education.  And Mayor Getty has given them their first marching orders: fire the interim superintendents and hire his political-buddy as superintendent, fire the Education Under Attack | Attacks on public education system hurt America:

 Beware of AstroTurf Ed Reformers 

Just Like Michelle Rhee's Students first only BETTER

Astroturf lobbying refers to political organizations or campaigns that appear to be made up of grassroots activists but are actually organized and run by corporate interests seeking to further their own agendas. Such groups are often typified by innocent-sounding names that have been chosen specifically to disguise the group's true backers

Just Like Michelle Rhee's

 Students first Astroturf lobbying (only Better) 

Other Astroturf lobbying groups

Just Like Michelle Rhee's

 Students first Astroturf lobbying (only Better

Evaluation regs to be adopted without formal public comment | Capital New York

Evaluation regs to be adopted without formal public comment | Capital New York:

Evaluation regs to be adopted without formal public comment

 ALBANY—State education officials will soon adopt regulations finalizing a new teacher evaluation system, but because of a statutory deadline imposed by Governor Andrew Cuomo and the Legislature, they’ll do so without the formal public comment period that’s typically required by law.

The state education department has worked to offer limited opportunities for the public to weigh in before the regulations are adopted, circulating an email address people may use to send comments and offering another outlet at an Albany “summit” next week.

But department officials will present regulations for emergency adoption at the state Board of Regents’ mid-June meeting, skipping a 45-day public comment allowance with which they are typically required to comply under a statute that allows agencies to promulgate rules with the force of law.

Stakeholder groups blame Cuomo and lawmakers for not providing more time for comment and overall implementation of the controversial, complex system. 

MORE ON CAPITAL

• In a rough budget season, NYSUT head claims victory
• Gillibrand ‘optimistic’ about paid leave in New York
• Cuomo, leaders announce JCOPE review commission

“There really is no time for public comment, and we’re not happy about that,” said Rick Longhurst, executive administrator for the New York State Parent Teacher Association, whose organization pressed lawmakers for a delay in a recent letter. “I don’t know what to do about that, other than to ask the Legislature to call a time out and extend the overall deadline and give everybody a little more time.”

The recently adopted state budget included an overhauled teacher evaluation system pushed primarily by Cuomo, who has pursued policies that would make it easier to fire teachers who are deemed ineffective.

In the budget, Cuomo and lawmakers detailed the new system, which will be based on student test scores and classroom observations, while tasking education officials with finalizing some technical aspects of implementation.

Under the law, the Board of Regents is required to adopt regulations by June 30, after which school districts will have until Nov. 15 to receive state approval for their locally negotiated evaluation plans, lest they lose a scheduled increase in state aid.

As part of officials’ effort to meet the deadline, the board has invited experts to testify at a “summit” on May 7 at the New York State Museum, which is intended to inform their work. Education department staff will then present preliminary recommendations to the board at its May meeting, make changes based on the regents' discussion and then recommend emergency adoption of final regulations in June.

The state’s regulatory process allows for an agency to adopt emergency regulations for 90 days. Officials would then have to publish the rules and accept public comment for 45 days. According to that timeline, the public comment period would not occur until shortly before districts are required to implement the new evaluations.

“To reflect this, we have built in opportunities on the front end to hear from the public,” education department spokesman Jonathan Burman said in an email.

Since the budget was approved, the department has been accepting comments through the email address eval2015@nysed.gov.

The summit, which is invite-only, “will be simulcast to the public, with the opportunity for the public to submit comments,” according to a department memo last week.

Although the Regents board members expect to meet the deadline for adopting regulations, the board's chancellor, Merryl Tisch, announced late last month that the department would use its authority to extend the November deadline to September 1, 2016, for districts facing “hardships.”

Education stakeholders—superintendents, school board members, teachers and others—have been concerned primarily with the deadline for districts, especially because of the risk of losing money. But now that Tisch has offered some flexibility there, they’re also pushing legislators to extend the regents’ June 30 deadline.

And despite the unlikelihood that Cuomo will agree to slow implementation of the new evaluations, lawmakers are considering such a change, in part because of the intense pressure they have felt from constituents since passing the unpopular education provisions of the budget.

State Senate education committee chair John Flanagan, a Long Island Republican and prominent member of his conference, said this week he and his colleagues are discussing extending the deadline, specifically to allow for public comment.

“The most critical aspect of this is the ability for public comment, and one of the overarching themes of our members is, public comment is great, but if the regents and S.E.D. don’t have the time to properly review and incorporate that into their decisions, that seems imprudent,” Flanagan said on Wednesday during an interview on the “The Capitol Pressroom” on WCNY.

“Maybe we should be looking at extending the public comment period,” he said on the radio. “Maybe June 30 is not the best approach.”

In an earlier interview with Capital, Flanagan insisted that the state budget allowed enough time for public comment.

“I believe the actions we took did a couple of things: It provided for public comment,” he said during a phone interview on April 23. “It avoided the issuance of emergency regulations, which would have bypassed public comment. I was very, very clear, as were my colleagues, that we wanted a public comment period."

Flanagan said he expected there to be an “explosion of comments,” especially given how active parents have been on social media, and he said he would understand if the department were not able to respond to each comment.

But, at the very least, “it’s critically important that anyone who sends in comments gets an appropriate acknowledgement that it’s been received,” he said.

Additionally, a group of 18 State Assembly Democrats last week said they would consider extending the deadline.

"If the Regents cannot meet the June 30th deadline, they must inform the Legislature as soon as possible so that the law can be amended,” the group, which included Aileen Gunther of Orange County and Amy Paulin of Westchester County, said in a statement.

Cuomo, however, has insisted the timeline for the evaluations wouldn't change and urged regents to limit the use of the "hardships" exemption.

New York State United Teachers, a statewide union, has pushed the Board of Regents tohold public hearings around the state on the evaluations. Short of that, they’re now asking individual regents to hold hearings in their respective districts, as at least one regent, Judith Johnson of the lower Hudson Valley, has said she would do.

“It’s important for the regents to hold hearings to solicit input from students, parents and Evaluation regs to be adopted without formal public comment | Capital New York:

Jersey Jazzman: One Newark: "Choosing" Segregated Schools?

Jersey Jazzman: One Newark: "Choosing" Segregated Schools?:

One Newark: "Choosing" Segregated Schools?

 Last week, I released a new brief at the NJ Education Policy Forum about One Newark, the one year-old school choice plan in New Jersey's largest city. I think this subject is important enough -- not just for Newark, but for education policy in general -- that it's worth my doing some wonk-to-English translating here to explain what I found.


A little background: last year, State Superintendent Cami Anderson, over the objections of many, implemented a "portfolio" system in Newark that calls for families to choose from a menu of both charter and district schools. The district's role in this system, called One Newark, is supposedly to be both a facilitator and an impartial arbiter, providing necessary information for families so they can make an informed decision.

As I wrote last year, economic theory suggests that consumers need high-quality information to negotiate a market, and that the state-run Newark Public Schools' role in One Newark should be to provide that information. The district does give both charter and district schools ratings under One Newark: "Great," "On The Move," and "Falling Behind."

The problem is that these ratings are tied to test scores, which have enormous biases against schools that serve more students who are in economic disadvantage, or have special education needs, or have more black students, or who even have more boys. Here's the breakdown on student characteristics and One Newark ratings:

This is, to my mind, the central question in whether One Newark will actually help improve the city's education system: What are Newark families actually "choosing"? Are they opting for "better" schools, or merely schools that have differing student populations?

Bruce Baker* has been on this for a while: see here and here. Given the unequal distribution of both students and resources across Newark's schools, it's both unfair and unhelpful to rate schools by test score outcomes. You can't ask a school with more students in disadvantage to compete with a school with fewer of those students, especially if they don't have similar resources.

And we shouldn't be surprised that schools with less challenging students and better resources are more "popular" in a choice system. In fact, given the preliminary release of the results of the initial One Newark applications, that seems to be exactly what happened. Here are the results released by NPS as reported at NJ Spotlight:

Most popular schools under One Newark are "Great" according to NPS. Again, that

- See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2015/05/one-newark-choosing-segregated-schools.html?spref=fb#sthash.kT728Y1k.dpuf

Louisiana Educator: Latest News in the War Against Public Education and the Teaching Profession

Louisiana Educator: Latest News in the War Against Public Education and the Teaching Profession:

Latest News in the War Against Public Education and the Teaching Profession

First the Good News:

HB 330 which would have greatly expanded vouchers, and HB 505 that would have taken away all due process rights of teachers were removed from the House Education Committee agenda for last week. These bills may not be revived partly as a result of the many emails legislators received opposing such legislation. I want to thank many of my readers for communicating with their legislators and informing them that these bills would be destructive to public education. HB 505 by Ivey is however, rescheduled for consideration by the committee this coming Wednesday, but even Governor Jindal has indicated that he may not support it. Please continue your efforts to defeat this horrible bill.

Now for the Continued Attack on the Teaching Profession:

House bill 418 passed a carefully stacked committee of the House Labor and Industrial Affairs Committee Thursday despite much vocal opposition from teacher, police, and firemen unions. This is the bill that would prohibit teachers and other public employees from using payroll deduction for payment of their union or association dues. Our state government is 1.8 billion dollars in deficit, and public employees are subject to layoffs, pay freezes, and outright cuts, yet big business (LABI) and teacher haters want to pass legislation that reduces the influence of professional educators, but does not save the state or local governments one penny!

HB 418 is cynically named the Payroll Protection Bill. These union hating legislators pretend with the use of this title that teachers, police, and firemen are like innocent children who need for their big brothers in government to protect them from the "evil" unions. Payroll deduction will still be available for numerous charities, insurance policies, and even highly questionable cancer polices that are considered by the insurance industry to be little more than rip-off polices. Our big buisness bosses in LABI don't care about the teachers that may be preyed upon by all of these other groups. They only want to protect teachers from their own organizations that are dedicated to fighting for teacher rights and benefits.

Are those big buisness interests such as LABI and CABL concerned about the innaccuracy of VAM ratings, or the serious flaws in the new evaluation system, or the loss of seniority for teachers, or the interference of the LDOE in enforcement of student discipline, or the fact that now some teachers are being required to work many extra hours without pay? No, in fact they helped sponsor and lobby for these changes. But they do want to neutralize their biggest upponents in beating up on teachers!

I am proud to say that even though retired, I am a lifetime member of the Louisiana Association of Educators and I also have great respect and support for the Louisiana Federation of Teachers. I worked for 20 years as a staff member of the LAE and helped to win many important battles for teachers. I am now watching helplessly and frustrated the de-professionalization of teaching. It is sad to regularly get letters from dedicated teachers who are being driven out of the teaching profession because of the many ant-teacher policies and laws passed in recent years.

HB 418 will be going to a vote on the House floor probably the week after next. That means that every Representative will get to vote whether or not they want to deny educators one more benefit and whether they really want to stifle the voice of teachers in speaking out against bad education policies and in favor of improving benefits and status of the teaching profession. No, this won't destroy the teacher unions if it passes, but statistics show that when you deny a group of employees payroll deduction for the payment of union or association dues, the membership of those organizations declines and their influence is curtailed. This bill has nothing to do with Payroll Protection! Its only purpose is to reduce the influence of educators on education policy.

This is both Stupid and Ironic

I got an email from a frustrated teacher not long ago, basically saying the following:

 "I am sick and tired of the teaching profession being blamed for everything that parents are not doing in the rearing of their children. I have never before worked so hard to educate children and received so little support and appreciation for the job that I have done for 20 years.  If they want to take away my payroll deduction for dues, I just may not join in the future." 

All I can say to that is, wow how stupid! This is exactly what LABI wants to accomplish. Surely no one else in the teaching profession could possibly be willing to play into their hands this way. Look, I know how frustrated teachers must be at this point but such a reaction is childish and counterproductive!

I believe educators have a good chance of defeating this repressive and unproductive legislation. LABI is letting it be known that its PAC will contribute to legislators who help them do this dirty deed. But even so, all teachers have to do to defeat it is tell their Representative and Senators to vote No for HB 418! It's all going to be determined by how many emails they get (or don't get) from teachers opposing this.

SB 54 passed to Senate floor by Senate Education Committee

Senate bill 54 by Senator Broome is a well intentioned bill, but will in my opinion do nothing but harm by tying the hands of Louisiana Educator: Latest News in the War Against Public Education and the Teaching Profession: