What Did Hillary Clinton Really Mean on Charter Schools? - Politics K-12 - Education Week

What Did Hillary Clinton Really Mean on Charter Schools? - Politics K-12 - Education Week:
What Did Hillary Clinton Really Mean on Charter Schools?

So as I'm sure you've read by now, over the weekend Hillary Clinton, a longtime charter fan, had some tough words for charters, specifically when it comes to equity.

And that sent the Internet into a bit of a tizzy as folks tried to parse her words and figure out what they might mean for charters in a potential Clinton administration, take two.

To recap: During a town hall meeting in South Carolina, Roland S. Martin, a commentator for TV One, asked Clinton what she thought of charter schools and school vouchers, which he pointed out, black parents in South Carolina overwhelmingly support some school choice.

In response, Clinton called out charters for not educating the toughest kids, while public schools have to. And she argued that the point of charters is to figure out what works in education, to benefit regular public schools. (Some charter advocates see the school's purpose differently, more as an alternative.)  

It's possible her comments were inspired by recent coverage of problems at Success for All Charter School, detailed in the New York Times and elsewhere.

Click below to watch the exchange, which begins at about the 35th minute:

Here's a condensed transcript of the interview:

Martin: At TV One, we conducted a poll of black parents. And we asked them the question about charters and vouchers. Seventy-four percent of black parents said they were interested in enrolling their kids in charter schools, seventy-eight percent favored school vouchers ... Do you support the expansion of charter schools and school vouchers?

Clinton: I have for many years now, about thirty years, supported the idea of charter schools, but not as a substitute for the public schools, but as a supplement for the public schools.  ... There are good charter schools and there are bad charter schools, just like there are good public schools and there are bad public schools.

Roland: So let's get rid of all the bad and accept [the] good?

Clinton: The original idea behind the charter schools was to learn what worked and then apply them in the public schools. And here's a couple of problems. Most charter schools, I don't want to say everyone, but most charter schools, they don't take the hardest to teach kids. Or if they do, they don't keep them. And so the public schools are often in a no-win situation. Because they do, thankfully, take everybody and then they don't get the resources or the help and support that they need to be able to take care of every child's education. So I want parents to be able to exercise choice within the public school system not outside of it but within  ... I am also fully aware that there are a lot of substandard public schools. But part of the reason for that is that policymakers and local politicians will not fund schools in poor areas that take care of poor children to the level that they need to be.

So the bolded part of her comments is the part that set the edu-internet on fire. Edu-historian turned progressive uber K-12 blogger Diane Ravitch said she'd like to see the feds focus more on accountability for charters.

But in the conservative journal Education Next, Robert Pondiscio argues that wealthier schools are just as likely to counsel out behavior-problem kids as charters.

Charlie Barone, the director of federal advocacy for Democrats for Education Reform was also unhappy. He called Clinton's comments "highly disappointing" and said they seemed to reinforce fears about how her endorsements from both major teachers unions would affect her K-12 platform.

The part that really bummed Barone out? As he sees it, Clinton completely ignored Martin's comments about a poll showing that two-thirds of black parents support expanding school choice, both through charters and vouchers.

So does all this mean that Clinton would be an anti-charter president?

It's hard to say. For one thing, Clinton is hardly the first generally pro-charter Democrat to raise equity concerns. Former Rep. George Miller, D-Calif. and Barone's one-time boss, asked the Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative arm, to look into how charters are serving students in special education—and charters came up short.

Barone says a key difference here is that Clinton said "most" charters fail to serve all kids not just "some." And, he's bummed she seems to think charters are outside the public school system, and only to be used as testing grounds, not as alternative schools.  

But Barone also said it's early in the game, and hard to say at this point how a President Clinton would deal with charters, or other edu-issues.

A lot would depend on who a President Clinton would pick for her education secretary. Plus, politicians tend to sound a bit different during the heat of a campaign. (Just ask U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who toned down his reformy-rhetoric when speaking to the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.)

Another thing to note: Clinton didn't seem to answer the voucher question directly. (In listening to her comments, I'll admit I was kinda confused on this point. I thought Clinton was arguing against vouchers when she said, "I want parents to be able to exercise choice within the public school system not outside of it but within." But that could also be interpreted to mean that she's discouraging charters.)

What do you think she was trying to say? And what do you think of Clinton's comments? Internet blip, or is she seriously anti-charter? Comments section is open!What Did Hillary Clinton Really Mean on Charter Schools? - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Testing, Charters and Strikes, oh my! Video of panel with Jesse Hagopian, Wayne Au and Dora Taylor | Seattle Education

Testing, Charters and Strikes, oh my! Video of panel with Jesse Hagopian, Wayne Au and Dora Taylor | Seattle Education:

Testing, Charters and Strikes, oh my! Video of panel with Jesse Hagopian, Wayne Au and Dora Taylor

On October 17 of this year, Jesse, Wayne and I spoke on a panel at the annual Northwest Teaching for Social Justice Conference sponsored by Rethinking Schools about the testing opt out movement, the recent Seattle teachers’ strike and the Washington State Supreme Court decision on charter schools.

Hope you enjoy it.

Dora

Testing, Charters and Strikes, oh my! Video of panel with Jesse Hagopian, Wayne Au and Dora Taylor | Seattle Education:

Boston Charter Schools - Mayor Marty Walsh Reverses Position on 'School Reform'

Boston Charter Schools - Mayor Marty Walsh Reverses Position on 'School Reform':

Boston's Mayor Goes Full Scott Walker on Charter Schools

Mayor Marty Walsh has broken up with Candidate Marty Walsh.

C'mon, Marty Walsh. This is not acceptable.

The ever-essential Diane Ravitch catches Walsh in the middle of performing what we like to refer to around the shebeen as a "full Scott Walker"—namely, pulling a fast one once you're elected that you never made a part of your campaign. It's not breaking a campaign promise.  It's breaking a campaign presumption, which is supposed to make a difference. Anyway, Walsh beat John Connolly at least partly by accusing Connolly, who is an open ally of the education "reform" grifters, of trying to destroy the public school system in the city where public schools were invented in this county. Now, it appears that Mayor Walsh has broken up with Candidate Walsh. He's cut a deal with some of the most odious practitioners of the school "reform" grift, including the Walton Family of Wingnuts, and he did so under the radar. His goal, a "facilities plan," is to close 36 public schools in order to make way for charters—and, it seems, for the city's parochial schools. Fortunately, a local blogger filed a FOIA request and got her hands on the relevant documents.

The real irony is that, while he's covertly soliciting money from Bill Gates and from the heirs of Sam Walton, Walsh is also squabbling with Republican Governor Charlie Baker's plan to open the floodgates of charterism statewide. The results of this can be seen in the testimony of an administrator from a suburban Massachusetts public school district.​

Ruth C. Gilbert-Whitner, superintendent of the Whitman-Hanson Regional School District in Southeastern Massachusetts, said charter schools have siphoned $309,000 from the district's budget this year, causing drastic cuts in its library services. "Each and every student in the Commonwealth deserves a high-quality education," she said, "[not] a dual system of publicly funded education that charges traditional districts for circumstances beyond their control and requires them to operate school systems under a vastly different set of regulations."

​Charterism is privatization on the public's dime, the worst of all possible worlds. It doesn't matter if the tap gets turned on slowly, or all at once. It's about corporations being allowed by law to get their mitts in the till. C'mon, Marty. You know that's true.​Boston Charter Schools - Mayor Marty Walsh Reverses Position on 'School Reform':

Seattle Schools Community Forum: A Vote of No Confidence in Nyland Coming?

Seattle Schools Community Forum: A Vote of No Confidence in Nyland Coming?:

A Vote of No Confidence in Nyland Coming?

I haven't raised this idea but others have. 

My analysis of the situation is below but here's what made me a "vote of no-confidence" believer; it's a quote from a story that KIRO radio did about the State of the District speech.

He also defended his salary. 

"My raise is not going to solve anywhere near any of the issues that we have on the table," he said. "I have done better than anybody else. I'm gonna take the smallest raise in the district, as far as I know." 

Sadly, he didn't explain why he deserves a raise. 

The raise is about $13K+.  He is offering to donate half of it back to the General Fund for this year. 

I can only gently say that $13,000 won't solve big issues but let's start a list of how it could help (because for some groups/schools, that money is a big deal.)

- fund more ORCA cards at RBHS - I am still waiting on the data from SPS Seattle Schools Community Forum: A Vote of No Confidence in Nyland Coming?:

Anatomy of a School Board Election: When Big Money Wins, Kids Lose | Kaplan for Kids

Anatomy of a School Board Election: When Big Money Wins, Kids Lose | Kaplan for Kids:

Anatomy of a School Board Election: When Big Money Wins, Kids Lose

“Reformers” in Denver are claiming victory, and to some extent they should.  They have been successful in buying a 7-0 school board.  Following is the story of how the last seat was purchased on November 3 and how the big money was able to hold on to the two “reform” seats up for re-election.

Should you not wish to read all of my analysis here are the headlines:

District 1: The incumbent was going be difficult to beat, for while voting for all things “reform,” she has managed to keep most of “reform” out of her mostly affluent, mostly white district.

District 5: There was no way “reformers” were going to lose this seat.  This was the only remaining obstacle to a unanimous board, the only thing standing between  public dialogue and silent acquiescence to all staff proposals.

At large: Had the election been held on Friday, October 28, 2015, the challenger, Robert Speth, parent not politician, would have defeated Board President Allegra “Happy” Haynes.

Now on to the details.

While anti-reformers locally and nationally are celebrating the victories in Colorado’s Jefferson County (Jeffco) and Douglas County (Dougco), we in Denver are left with a unanimous board devoted to continuing the destruction of public education in Denver Public Schools. Those of you unfamiliar with Colorado, briefly, Jeffco and Dougco are suburban Denver counties. They are more affluent and less diverse than Denver. The issues in both counties differ greatly from the “reform” happening in Denver.  Dougco and Jeffco boards were overtly arrogant in their power grabs. Not so in Denver, so while I take my hat off to them and while I am very envious of their victories, Denver is a completely different ball game. Koch brothers’ money along with money from Democrats for Education Reform (DFER)  and some from the Colorado Education Association (CEA) flowed into Jeffco;  Koch brothers’ money flowed into Dougco; unlimited and unknown amounts of money from (DFER) and Stand for Children money flowed into Denver.  Democrats in Denver undoing public education.  Who ever would have thought that possible?

Denver is well down the “reform” road. Ten years. National attention has been showered on Denver Public Schools for its success in implementing the business model in spite of data showing snails’ paced academic improvements. (See here and here).  And while national “reform” publications and institutions try to tell you Denver is a success story, the recent data tell you something completely different.(Center on Reinventing Public Education, Council of Great City Schools, National Assessment of Educational Progress ).  Implementing “reform” is one thing; getting results a completely different thing.  Test and punish should be the mantra of this District as our students, communities, families, and teachers, suffer.  And, ironically, on election day the New York Times published an analysis of a new report which strongly suggests American schools are not failing students.  American society is.  Schools cannot and should not be held responsible for poverty and its consequences.  Society can and should be. Also, on Thursday, November 5, 2015 the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled against part of the state’s punitive teacher evaluation bill SB 10-191. And on the same day the DPS Board of Education had a staff presentation making school closures more institutionalized, including providing the board with predetermined questions! Now, if you are one of seven elected Board members and you need the District staff to provide you with questions to ask, I  Anatomy of a School Board Election: When Big Money Wins, Kids Lose | Kaplan for Kids:

American Education Week to Celebrate the Nation's Public Schools and Educators - NEA Today

American Education Week to Celebrate the Nation's Public Schools and Educators - NEA Today:

American Education Week to Celebrate the Nation’s Public Schools and Educators

November 16-20 marks the National Education Association’s 94^th annual celebration of American Education Week. The AEW festivities will honor the team of people who work in the nation’s public schools, everyone from the bus driver and classroom teacher to the cafeteria worker and administrative staff, plus countless others. The celebration is also an opportunity for school and community leaders to renew their commitment and support for quality public education for all students.

Video: NEA President Lily Eskelsen García announces the celebration of American Education Week 2015.
The 2015 theme, “Great Public Schools: A Basic Right and Our Responsibility,” will be reflected throughout the week of activities. NEA President Lily Eskelsen García kicks off the week with a special video message and blog featuring NEA Education Support Professionals and the important work they do to ensure every child has a great education. The spotlight on NEA ESP members continues throughout the week, featuring a host of resources, from NEA’s ESP Coloring Book to fun facts and videos showcasing the work of education support professionals.

NEA Vice President Becky Pringle and Secretary Treasurer Princess Moss will visit Maryland and Virginia schools, joining state and local leaders in AEW festivities and thanking public school teachers, education support professionals and parents for the work they do every day to make sure all students are safe, ready, and able to learn.

American Education Week’s schedule of activities include:

• Monday, November 16: National Kickoff Day
• Tuesday, November 17: Parents’ Day
• Wednesday, November 18: Education Support Professionals Day
• Thursday, November 19: Educator for a Day
• Friday, November 20: Substitute Educators Day

American Education Week also marks the launch of the new NEA Brand campaign, a year-long advertising campaign promoting the work of NEA members. The ads, which will appear on cable news, social media, digital, and NPR, are designed to tell the story of the great work our members do for each and every student they serve. The ads will run from American Education Week to Back to School week 2016. For more on the campaign, go to www.nea.org/GreatPublicSchools.

American Education week artwork and activities are available at www.nea.org/aew.

Video: “Inspiration”

American Education Week to Celebrate the Nation's Public Schools and Educators - NEA Today:

WTU contract negotiations team - Written by Candi Peterson, WTU General Vice President

The Washington Teacher:

Candi Peterson

Education blogger & activist

Written by Candi Peterson, WTU General Vice President

Statements or expressions of opinions herein 'do not' represent the views or official positions of DCPS, AFT, Washington Teachers' Union (WTU) or its members. Views are my own. 

For the record, I am not a member of the WTU contract negotiations team. Like you are, I am an elected officer and concerned union member. 

From where I sit, it’s not looking good for the negotiations between WTU and DCPS. Let’s just say negotiations aren’t dead, but negotiations seem to have broken off with WTU and members of the Chancellor’s team.

DCPS teachers are complaining because the last contract expired in August 2012, and three years later, they still are without a contract. Having gone this long without a contract, it’s understandable why many teachers’ see no real end in sight.

In reaction to teachers’ concerns about not having a contract, WTU recently released a contract update on October 19, 2015; titled WTU-DCPS Contract Talks FAQs. This fact sheet states:

“WTU President Elizabeth Davis and our negotiators are committed to reaching a new agreement by the end of December. In order to accomplish this, the WTU will direct its focus to engaging in full-time contract negotiations. We’re pushing hard towards that goal….”

We must ask if President Davis is recommending full time contract negotiations, is this a viable option given that most of the members on the negotiating team are  either full-time principals on the chancellor’s team or full-time teachers on the WTU team? Is it likely that DCPS would agree to this when this proposal would require that teachers and principals on both sides would have to abandon their schools/classes for an extended period of time?  Is the end of December 2015 a realistic time frame for the completion of a tentative agreement?  It seems highly unlikely unless Davis has a tentative agreement tucked away in her hip pocket. When did both sides-WTU and DCPS last meet? Was it during last school year (14-15) ?

The WTU FAQ sheet gives the following responses regarding Why negotiations

are taking so long?

“Bargaining can be a long and complicated process particularly when there are significant issues to be resolved. The talks have now stretched over two administrations. The former administration had offered proposals that would have lowered the professionalism and undercut the voice of teachers….

Your bargaining team drafted new proposals that would move us in a better direction …. Time and again, the school district has appeared to take the slow play approach to bargaining. We repeatedly proposed full time negotiations everyday-DCPS said no. We proposed meetings over the summer-DCPS said no. Back in January, we requested the financial and programmatic data essential to informed negotiations nearly 10 months later, we are still waiting. DCPS says it agrees with the goal of finishing by the end of the year, and we are hopeful DCPS actions in the future will represent a real commitment to this aim.

WTU and DCPS shared their respective proposals, and it was clear that we were far apart on some major issues; including protected planning time, class size, supplies and support.”

It’s a given that contract negotiations can be long and complicated and have spanned  two administrations under Saunders and now Davis. This is not news. This explanation  focuses on what former President Saunders’ The Washington Teacher:

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Rahm's hidden corruption tax

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Rahm's hidden corruption tax:

Rahm's hidden corruption tax

As Rahm Emanuel is about to hit city residents with the biggest property tax increase in history, there's another hidden tax we already pay. It's one Rahm never mentioned in recent budget hearings. I  call it the corruption tax, and it's a big one. 

According to a recent study, everyone in this state pays an annual corruption tax of $1.308 and Chicago remains the "corruption capital" of the U.S. with 1,642 public corruption convictions from 1976 through 2013. That total has obviously risen in the past two years.

The latest installment of the tax will go to pay the lawyers defending the CPS Gang of 4, charged or implicated in the SUPES scandal. That's Barbara Byrd-Bennettand her three aides (who've also been named as perps in Detroit's Houghton Mifflin Harcourt corruption scandal) Sherry Ulery, Rosemary Herpel andTracy Martin. While CPS isn't currently on the hook for Byrd-Bennett's criminal defense lawyers, they (we) are still paying a hefty sum for her salary, benefits and golden parachute contributions.

According to the Sun-Times, Chicago Public Schools’ lawyers’ bills for the Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Rahm's hidden corruption tax:

Xavier University's Way to Keep Higher Ed from Becoming the Next Victim of Corporate Ed Reform | John Thompson

Xavier University's Way to Keep Higher Ed from Becoming the Next Victim of Corporate Ed Reform | John Thompson:

Xavier University's Way to Keep Higher Ed from Becoming the Next Victim of Corporate Ed Reform

As Kwame Anthony Appiah reminds us, universities advance great science, literary culture, and the educated citizenry necessary for a democracy, and they do so by bringing a diverse set of conflicting ideas and ideals into a learning culture. The same could be said about the New York Times Magazine's special issue, "Collegeland."

The magazine begins with Appiah's "What Is the Point of College," which explains two competing visions for higher education today - "Utility U." and "Utopia U." The bifurcation is between Utility U., and its goal of getting a good return on your college investment, and Utopia U., which is "about building your soul as much as your skills." The divide goes a long way towards explaining other legacies of the growing corporate dominance of America.

The special issue ends with Nicole Hannah-Jones's "Conscience of the Nation." She concludes with a statistic that should shock all of us into action. In 1978, just 542 black men went to medical school. Even though the nation's black population had increased markedly, last year just 515 black men entered medical school!

In between, Appiah, Hannah-Jones, and the other contributors explain how global and national economic and political forces have changed universities and how transformations in higher education will affect the broader society. To understand their nuanced analyses, however, we must return to Appiah's introduction and the foundation it lays for "Collegeland."

Appiah explains that universities have always been a place to explore both "the qualities of your skills and of your soul." These "are two separate questions that aren't quite separable." But, "college was a pretty good place to work out some answers to both."

In Utility U., Appiah writes "students are consumers; they have needs and desires to Xavier University's Way to Keep Higher Ed from Becoming the Next Victim of Corporate Ed Reform | John Thompson:

Selling the Common Core - Bill and Melinda Gates' Audacious Plan to Control Public Education - Wait What?

Selling the Common Core - Bill and Melinda Gates' Audacious Plan to Control Public Education   - Wait What?:

Selling the Common Core – Bill and Melinda Gates’ Audacious Plan to Control Public Education  

“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none…Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy…” – Ray Bradbury (Fahrenheit 451)

February 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the National Association of State Boards of Education – “to build the capacity of State Boards of Education to better position them to achieve full implementation of the Common Core standards.”

April 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) – “to assist teachers in understanding and implementing the Common Core State Standards.”

June 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the Council of Chief State School Officers – “to support the Common Core State Standards work.”

June 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) – “to promote education policy reform at the state and federal level…”

June 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the National Urban League Inc. – “to promote national and state advocacy, engagement and education reform efforts throughout the National Urban League affiliate movement…”

November 2011:  A Gates Foundation grant to the Military Child Education Coalition – “to develop and execute an advocacy campaign in support of the implementation of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in multiple states by leveraging the voices and Selling the Common Core - Bill and Melinda Gates' Audacious Plan to Control Public Education   - Wait What?:

Shrinking Possible | EduShyster

Shrinking Possible | EduShyster:

Shrinking Possible

How did the vision of what’s possible get so small?

While this Tweet from former school chancellor Joel Klein refers to NYC, he could mean any number of cities where pitched battles over charter schools have raised a complicated question:  Who exactly is a progressive when it comes to education?

Fierce fight
Take Boston, a city embroiled in a fierce fight over whether to raise a state cap limiting the amount of money that can be diverted from public schools to pay for privately-run charter schools. The dispute pits the teachers unionagainst charter advocacy groups, and families (overwhelmingly black and brown) who want more charters against other families (often middle class and white) who fear that continued charter expansion will mean the death of the existing system.

But the story has begun to depart from this familiar narrative. Civil rights leaders like Mel King are joining the chorus of charter critics. At a recent hearing at the Statehouse, the 87-year-old King told members of the Education Committee that charter schools fall far short of what he calls the *Pledge of Allegiance* test. He said:

*If the solution is only meant for a few kids, and all the rest of the kids are left out, where is the liberty and justice for all?*

Bigger vision
When I spoke with King recently, I found it striking just how much bigger and more comprehensive his demands are than the *access to high quality seats* vision held by Shrinking Possible | EduShyster:

What’s Innovative about Charter Schools?

What’s Innovative about Charter Schools?:

What’s Innovative about Charter Schools?

What is innovative about charter schools? What do they do that is so unique it has provided traditional public schools with new methods of working with students? I often hear politicians and charter advocates praising charter schools for what they can give public schools in the way of new ideas. I am wondering what innovations they are talking about.

Before I sound off more though, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Valerie Strauss of the Washington Post Answer Sheet for highlighting my blog post telling Bill and Melinda Gates what is hard for teachers. Also, thank you to Diane Ravitch who echoed Valerie’s post with interesting comments of her own. Thanks to all those who responded with their thoughts and ideas.

And another thank you to Valerie for also showcasing teacher Linda Chantal Sullivan’s post on my blog about what troubles teachers working with ELL students. This issue is especially important today and often overlooked.

I would have responded sooner to all this recognition, but I was visiting New York City and left my laptop at home. It was a nice break, and it was hard to leave behind beautiful Central Park in autumn.

Charters were originally supposed to be for teachers to run—to let them explore new What’s Innovative about Charter Schools?:

As School Meals Have Gotten Healthier, 1.4 Million Students Drop Out of School Lunch Program

As School Meals Have Gotten Healthier, 1.4 Million Students Drop Out of School Lunch Program:

As School Meals Have Gotten Healthier, 1.4 Million Students Drop Out of School Lunch Program

Michelle Obama’s healthy school meal standards have scored not too tasty.

Over a span of three school years, 1.4 million children dropped out of the National School Lunch Program, reports the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

While the first lady’s Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act has brought healthier items to lunch trays, sugary and salty foods that some kids crave were eliminated from lunchtime.

“The decrease in the total number of students eating school lunches during the last three school years was driven primarily by a decrease in students paying full price for meals,” the report states.

“The number of students paying full price for meals declined by two million, a decrease that could be caused by students choosing to no longer purchase lunch at school or by students becoming eligible for free or reduced-price meals.”

The GAO contacted eight school districts in eight states to conduct its report.

“Seven of eight states that GAO interviewed reported that challenges with student acceptance of changes made to comply with new federal nutrition requirements contributed to the decrease,” the GAO report says.

The changes behind the drop in school lunch participants has racked up an additional $1.2 billion that school districts have shelled out in fiscal year 2015.

The School Nutrition Association wrote in a letter to members of Congress last week that the new standards have “added 10 cents to the cost of preparing every lunch and 27 cents for every breakfast.” 

The new lunch content has not been satisfactory to numerous children’s appetites.

“Plate waste” has been a reported issue at schools, according to the GAO. This happens when students take the food offered at lunch, yet choose not to eat the meal.

A January 2014 GAO report shows plate waste, “particularly for fruits and veggies,” to have been reported in 48 states. The GAO observes that plate waste may be on the decline as students adjust to the new requirements.

“In addition, when we asked students what they like about school lunch, As School Meals Have Gotten Healthier, 1.4 Million Students Drop Out of School Lunch Program:

Congress Ought to Do Something Radical, Take ESEA Back to Its Original Purpose: Equity | janresseger

Congress Ought to Do Something Radical, Take ESEA Back to Its Original Purpose: Equity | janresseger:

Congress Ought to Do Something Radical, Take ESEA Back to Its Original Purpose: Equity

In a news blast last week, the Education Law Center challenged Congress to “compel states to fund schools fairly” in any legislation it might pass to reauthorize the federal education law that we currently call No Child Left Behind (NCLB).  Supposedly aides in the relevant House and Senate committees are working on a compromise between very different House and Senate versions passed earlier this year of a new Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).  Whether any kind of compromise can be moved forward in the current Congress remains a question.

In pushing Congress to address equity in the reauthorization, the Education Law Center proposes that Congress add an element to the compromise that neither Senate nor House included in the very different bills passed by the two chambers—an element so unthinkable these days that it hasn’t even been part of the conversation.  This is, of course, ironic, as the 1965, Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)  (of which NCLB is merely the latest reauthorization) was originally designed as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty.  The purpose of its largest program, Title I, was to infuse federal funds into schools that serve either a large number or a high percentage of students living in poverty.

Writing of this year’s ESEA reauthorization debate, the Education Law Center points out: “Conspicuously absent from the debate is the critical need for federal policy to motivate the States to fairly fund their public schools. Federal funding accounts for only about 10% of preK-12 funding.  The states, through their finance systems, determine the lion’s share of school funding, how it’s distributed, and the mix of state and local revenue.  Only a handful of states provide sufficient levels of funding and distribute that funding fairly to address student need as documented in Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card.  Many states have been unable or unwilling to make their funding systems more equitable and adequate.  It is crucial that federal education policies pressure states to improve funding fairness.”

The Education Law Center references the report of the Equity and Excellence Commissionchartered by Congress itself in 2013, a document that charges: “The common situation in America is that schools in poor communities spend less per pupil—and often many thousands Congress Ought to Do Something Radical, Take ESEA Back to Its Original Purpose: Equity | janresseger: