Why Oppressing Transgender Students Is An Attack On Public Education

Why Oppressing Transgender Students Is An Attack On Public Education:

Why Oppressing Transgender Students Is An Attack On Public Education

It didn’t take long for conservatives to turn their attack on the rights of transgender students into an attack on another favorite target of theirs: public schools.

In the pages of the conservative journal National Review, the latest screed declares, “The Obama administration just destroyed the traditional American public school.”

First, it’s not hard to miss the dog whistle language in this piece, primarily, using “traditional” as a code word for white, straight and Christian and posing as a victim while arguing for “the right” to discriminate against a vulnerable minority.

Nevertheless, the target of conservative ire is the recent joint announcement from the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education that public schools must allow transgender students to use the restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity.

As an article in Education Week explains, “Amid an escalating legal battle with the state of North Carolina that has thrust that state’s schools into the center of a fight over transgender rights, the letter to the nation’s roughly 14,000 school districts made clear the administration’s position that restricting transgender students’ access to restrooms and locker rooms is discriminatory and could put federal funding at risk.”

Conservative politicians and overly cautious intellectuals are accusing the Obama administration of “overreach” and “being too hasty” in issuing this directive. But many public schools had already been steadily working at ways to accommodate transgender students well before North Carolina started its attack on transgender rights and conservatives around the country gleefully piled on.

Obama’s directive, rather than sparking a new firestorm, merely reinforces what traditional (for real) public schools are meant to ensure all along. And that’s what conservatives hate most.

What Schools Are Already Doing

“Many schools already accommodate transgender students,” another Education Week article reports.

As Evie Blad explains, the furious response to the Obama administration’s guidance on treatment of transgender students “made it seem as if the directions came with no warning or precedent … But followers of school law and transgender student advocacy will tell you that the federal agency already enforced this interpretation in the past and that many schools were already making such accommodations.”

Blad spotlights 14 states with nondiscrimination laws and policies that include gender identity. But numerous local districts and local school districts have also acted to ensure Why Oppressing Transgender Students Is An Attack On Public Education:

“The Data Walls Must Come Down”: My Email To All Delaware Superintendents & Charter Chiefs – Exceptional Delaware

“The Data Walls Must Come Down”: My Email To All Delaware Superintendents & Charter Chiefs – Exceptional Delaware:

“The Data Walls Must Come Down”: My Email To All Delaware Superintendents & Charter Chiefs

When I say I am going to do something, I mean it.  Therefore, in response to my article about the atrocious data walls in Delaware schools I just emailed every single Delaware Superintendent and Charter Chief.  I will be emailing each district or charter school’s board of education as well and ask them to bring forth policy to eliminate these walls of shame.  To echo the departed President Ronald Reagan: “Delaware schools, tear down these data walls!” Like I did last year when I emailed all of them about opt out ignorance in Delaware schools, I am posting the email to this blog:

Kevin Ohlandt <kevino3670@yahoo.com>
To: Burrows Matthew L. <matthew.burrows@appo.k12.de.us>; Holodick Mark <mark.holodick@bsd.k12.de.us>; Fitzgerald Kevin (K12) <kevin.fitzgerald@cr.k12.de.us>; Fulton Robert <robert.fulton@cape.k12.de.us>; Shelton Dan <dan.shelton@capital.k12.de.us>; ANDRZEJEWSKI ROBERT <robert.andrzejewski@christina.k12.de.us>; Blakey Dolan (K12) <dolan.blakey@colonial.k12.de.us>; Phillips Charity <charity.phillips@delmar.k12.de.us>; “susan.bunting@irsd.k12.de.us” <susan.bunting@irsd.k12.de.us>; “bgwynder@lf.k12.de.us” <bgwynder@lf.k12.de.us>; “shawn.larrimore@laurel.k12.de.us” <shawn.larrimore@laurel.k12.de.us>; Phyllis Kohel <pkohel@msd.k12.de.us>; Gehrt Vicki (K12) <vicki.gehrt@nccvt.k12.de.us>; Zych Deborah (K12) <deborah.zych@polytech.k12.de.us>; Daugherty Mervin B. <mervin.daugherty@redclay.k12.de.us>; Marshall Cheri <cheri.marshall@aod.k12.de.us>; “mark.phelps@academia.k12.de.us” <mark.phelps@academia.k12.de.us>; “margie.lopezwaite@laaa.k12.de.us” <margie.lopezwaite@laaa.k12.de.us>; Catherine Balsley <catherine.balsley@ccs.k12.de.us>; “spaoli@charterschool.org” <spaoli@charterschool.org>; “sandra.wilson-hypes@dapss.k12.de.us” <sandra.wilson-hypes@dapss.k12.de.us>; “Angela.Dennis@dcpa.k12.de.us” <angela.dennis@dcpa.k12.de.us>; “calvarez@design-labschools.org” <calvarez@design-labschools.org>; “anthony.pullela@dma.k12.de.us” <anthony.pullela@dma.k12.de.us>; Lamont Browne <lamont.browne@escs.k12.de.us>; “evelyn.edney@echs.k12.de.us” <evelyn.edney@echs.k12.de.us>; “rachel.valentin@ffa.k12.de.us” <rachel.valentin@ffa.k12.de.us>; Patrick Gallucci <patrick.gallucci@fsmilitary.k12.de.us>; “felicia.wennell@Freirecharterschool.org” <felicia.wennell@Freirecharterschool.org>; “tim.griffiths@gls.k12.de.us” <tim.griffiths@gls.k12.de.us>; “kchilds@greatoakscharter.org” <kchilds@greatoakscharter.org>; “smaldonado@kuumba.k12.de.us” <smaldonado@kuumba.k12.de.us>; “courtney.fox@fsma.k12.de.us” <courtney.fox@fsma.k12.de.us>; Linda Jennings <linda.jennings@mot.k12.de.us>; Meece Gregory <gregory.meece@ncs.k12.de.us>; Nick Manolakos <nick.manolakos@odyssey.k12.de.us>; “ed.emmett@pocs.k12.de.us” <ed.emmett@pocs.k12.de.us>; “cordie.greenlea@pa.k12.de.us” <cordie.greenlea@pa.k12.de.us>; Chuck Taylor <chuck.taylor@pca.k12.de.us>; “patricia.oliphant@saas.k12.de.us” <patricia.oliphant@saas.k12.de.us>; “Salome.Thomas-EL@tecs.k12.de.us” <salome.thomas-el@tecs.k12.de.us>

Sunday, May 22, 2016 9:09 PM

Good evening Delaware Superintendents and Charter Chiefs,

The last time I wrote most of you in unison like this was in regards to parent opt out last year when some of you were giving parents a hard time about making a choice for their child.  Today I write to you in regards to data walls in some of your schools.  While I recognize this may not even apply to some of you, I felt it was fair to include everyone to make myself very clear.

Any data wall showing any type of progress by a child compared to others, whether in the classroom, outside of the classroom, in a hallway, in the school lobby, or on any type of system (including a computer system) where even students can see how they rate against their peers is morally and ethically wrong.  Some schools post the names of students and I have seen pictures of students on some.  This needs to stop, right here, right now.  Those of you who are participating in this: do you have any clue what that does to a child?  Especially the ones who rate the lowest all the time.  Do you know what that does to a child’s self-confidence?  You could be comparing someone with an iq of 75 iq to a person with an iq of 125.  In what possible way are any of you okay with this?  Not to mention the potential FERPA violations with some of these.

Therefore, I request that all Delaware public schools take down their data walls by this Thursday, May 26th.  If they aren’t down, I will file FERPA “The Data Walls Must Come Down”: My Email To All Delaware Superintendents & Charter Chiefs – Exceptional Delaware:

Why a social media fight between Campbell Brown and her critics matters - The Washington Post

Why a social media fight between Campbell Brown and her critics matters - The Washington Post:

Why a social media fight between Campbell Brown and her critics matters

Big Education Ape: Campbell Brown Has Blocked Me From Twitter | deutsch29 http://bit.ly/1WJPeNl

Another day, another fight in the education world. This one is worth delving into because it is really not about who said what but about fundamental understandings — and misunderstandings — of standardized testing data and how it drives policy.

This one started when education activist Campbell Brown said that two-thirds of U.S. eighth graders are below grade level in reading and math. Tom Loveless, a former Harvard professor and teacher who researches student achievement, then tweeted that he has never seen data showing that, and asked Brown to explain her sourcing. She said that she was referring to proficiency rates on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

NAEP, as the test is known, is sometimes referred to as “the nation’s report card” because it is seen as the most consistent measure of U.S. student achievement since the 1990s. It is administered every two years to groups of U.S. students in the fourth and eighth grades, and less frequently to high school students. When Loveless told her that NAEP proficiency scores do not refer to grade level, a social media fight ensued between Campbell and her critics.

In this post, Carol Burris, a former award-winning high school principal who got involved in the Twitter exchange, explains why the substance of this debate matters.

I asked Brown to comment about her statement that two out of three eighth graders cannot read or do math at grade level  and why she thinks NAEP proficiency means grade level. She said in an emailed response, which you can see in full below, that “if I were trying to be completely and utterly precise then I would have specified ‘grade-level proficiency,’ instead of ‘grade level’ in the context of NAEP score,” and that “any reasonable person or parent” would understand what she meant.

By Carol Burris

“Two out of three eighth graders in this country cannot read or do math at grade level. We are not preparing our kids for what the future holds.”

The above was the lead message that Slate used to introduce education activist Campbell Brown’s “advice for the next president” video that it posted.  The claim is false.

When Tom Loveless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit think tank in Washington D.C., asked Brown to retract her assertion, an angry, and sometimes amusing, series of Twitter posts and blogs began. Loveless is a former teacher and Harvard professor who is an expert on school reform and student achievement.

Brown’s resistance to correct the record and her dismissal of Loveless’ request is a story worth telling.  It speaks to the problems that arise when advocacy is demanded due to philanthropic funding of a news website, and it speaks to how rhetoric drives the reform agenda, while dismissing any critique as an attack.

Brown was a journalist for years with NBC News and an anchorwoman for CNN, and for a time, had her own series for CNN, entitled “No Bias, No Bull.” The show was canceled in 2010, and Brown reemerged in 2014 speaking out in favor of charter schools and against teacher tenure.

In July 2015, The Washington’s Post’s Paul Farhi reported that Brown was leading a new education news agency called the Seventy Four.  In his description of the new venture, Farhi questioned whether the Seventy Four reported news or advocacy.  He used as examples Brown’s Why a social media fight between Campbell Brown and her critics matters - The Washington Post:

Opt Out 2.0: Snapshot of Spring Testing Season - Education Writers Association

Opt Out 2.0: Snapshot of Spring Testing Season - Education Writers Association:

Opt Out 2.0: Snapshot of Spring Testing Season

With state testing season wrapping up, the decision by some families to skip the K-12 exams in protest this spring has once again sparked widespread discussion – and news coverage around the country.

In San Diego, for example, teachers handed out fliers to parents earlier this month informing them of the right to keep their children from taking state tests, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. A local teachers’ union official cited worries about the amount of testing, as well as its relevance and accuracy for gauging student learning.

In Tennessee, where the opt-out movement appeared to be gaining steam this spring, as reported by Chalkbeat Tennessee and other outlets, it became a moot point after the bulk of state testing for grades 3-8 was canceled altogether in April. That decision followed a series of problems with the administration of the assessments for English language arts and math.

The actions come as concerns have risen about the volume of standardized testing at the K-12 level, its perceived impact on instruction, and its use in evaluating schools, students and teachers.

It will likely be some time before the volume of students skipping state exams this year is clear, and whether the number is higher or lower than in spring 2015, when the issue hit the national education radar in a big way.

In the meantime, debates over the wisdom of having students skip the exams continue to rage.

“Many opt-out leaders see what they’re doing as an act of civil disobedience,” said Robert Schaeffer of the advocacy groupFairTest, during an Education Writers Association seminar in Los Angeles earlier this year.

Schaeffer, who has worked closely with opt-out activists around the country, cautioned that parents and others promoting the cause do not speak with a uniform voice, nor do their agendas necessarily align.

“The opt-out movement needs to be understood as not a top-down thing, but a genuine grassroots, bottom-up movement in which different people in different states have different agendas,” said Schaeffer. He sees opting out as a powerful strategy to build pressure to reduce testing, remove “high stakes” from assessments, and “create space for the development of new and better forms of assessment and accountability.”

Chris Stewart, the director of outreach and external affairs forOpt Out 2.0: Snapshot of Spring Testing Season - Education Writers Association:

Segregation — Racial, Ethnic, and Economic — Dominates Nation’s Schools | janresseger

Segregation — Racial, Ethnic, and Economic — Dominates Nation’s Schools | janresseger:

Segregation — Racial, Ethnic, and Economic — Dominates Nation’s Schools

Last week marked the 62nd anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education to end school segregation.  Coincidentally last week, a small school district in the Delta town of Cleveland, Mississippi that has held out for half a century to preserve separate schools for black and white students was ordered by a federal court to merge its segregated middle and high schools.  The court order ends what Jimmie Gates of the Jackson, Mississippi Clarion-Ledger calls “a five-decade legal battle to desegregate schools in the 12,000-population city in north Mississippi.”  Ironically the court order to desegregate this small, Mississippi school district runs counter to what’s happening as the rest of the nation resegregates.

To recognize the anniversary of the Brown decision, researchers who have been tracking school segregation, desegregation, and resegregation for years at UCLA’s Civil Rights Project—Gary Orfield, Jongyeon Ee, Erica Frankenberg and Genevieve Siegel-Hawley—have publisheda research brief that tracks how the courts and and policy makers have turned away from efforts  to desegregate the nation’s public schools racially, ethnically, and economically.

According to the Civil Rights Project’s researchers, the most racially segregated states today are New York, California, Illinois, Maryland, Texas, and New Jersey.  They add: “The relative decline in the ranking of Michigan, which was often up with Illinois and New York as most segregated, probably relates to the drastic shrinkage of the Detroit Public Schools and suburbanization of black families in that metropolitan area.”

Today, the nation’s most populous and urban northern states post the highest rates of black-white school segregation, while the Brown decision was quite successful in integrating the schools across the South.  Why is that?  “Because of the dramatic changes in southern segregation produced by the enforcement of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, none of the 17 states that completely segregated schools by law (e.g., the type of mandatory segregation that was the focus of the Brown decision) have headed this list since 1970…. The ironic historic reality Segregation — Racial, Ethnic, and Economic — Dominates Nation’s Schools | janresseger:

The Plutocrat’s Lament | EduShyster

The Plutocrat’s Lament | EduShyster:

The Plutocrat’s Lament

Writer Joanne Barkan argues that for plutocrats like Bill Gates, democracy is a nuisance…

EduShyster: You’re the author of a recent case study on what you call Bill Gates’ *charitable plutocracy,* his years’ long, and many millions-ed campaign to bring charter schools to Washington State. In the interest of the data to which Gates himself is so committed, can you reduce your argument down to a series of numbers? Oh, and please speak in bullet points.

Joanne Barkan:

• Number of years required to pass a charter school enabling law in Washington State: 17 (1995-2012).
• Number of statewide ballot initiatives required: 4 (1996, 2000, 2004, and 2012).
• Total dollars spent by charter school supporters in the 2000, 2004, and 2012 ballot initiatives: $18.7 million. (Practically no money was spent by either side in 1996.)
• Total dollars spent by charter school opponents in the 2000, 2004, and 2012 ballot initiatives: $2.04 million.
• Money spent by the Gates Foundation *to give public charter schools in Washington State a strong start* in 2013-2015: $31 million.

And a few other data points your readers might be interested in:

• Net worth of Bill Gates in 2015: $76 billion
• Assets of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2016: $44.3 billion.
• Total receipts of the National Education Association in 2015: $388.8 million.
• Total receipts of the American Federation of Teachers in 2015: $327.6 million.
• Average salary of an elementary public school teacher in Washington state (except in special education) in 2015: $60,140.

EduShyster: One digit missing from the tally above is the number nine. That’s the The Plutocrat’s Lament | EduShyster:

This Post Is Dedicated To All The Teachers Who Said They Wouldn't Amount to Nothing | The Jose Vilson

This Post Is Dedicated To All The Teachers Who Said They Wouldn't Amount to Nothing | The Jose Vilson:

This Post Is Dedicated To All The Teachers Who Said They Wouldn’t Amount to Nothing

Last week, I had the honor and privilege of attending a special presentation from the students of Satellite Academy Midtown High School, a transfer high school just south of Madison Square Garden. Two years ago, assistant principal Paul Melkonian told me he had a vision of getting his students overseas somewhere. (full disclosure: he’s my son’s godfather as per Catholic traditions) I wasn’t stunned, but I didn’t understand to what depths he’d take this project. With the unflinching approval of and collaboration with his principal, Melkonian started putting together his travel abroad project that would take his students to Costa Rica and, as of this year, South Africa.

Through different supports across the city, including the right people from in and out of the NYC Department of Education coming together, these students who the system seemingly discarded got a second chance to prove their doubters wrong. That’s why alternative high schools matter.

That’s also why, whenever I advocate for great schools, I believe we should start rebuilding from what the students who our system has failed. It’s the students we call “dropouts,” “failures,” and “rejects” that need to sit in panels, write white papers, and have photo opps with the cool kids in the glossy photos. We need to do right by all kids, but, when we only work through the average student, we don’t actually address the needs of all kids.

Sea change requires a shift in tectonic plates, right?

Our school system in recent times has tried to squeeze and prune college- and career-readiness out of our students so often that many of us lost sight of why we do this work. The students who wouldn’t function in a traditional, teacher-directed, modular classrooms get pushed out more readily because they intentionally or unintentionally refuse to conform. We keep pretending that, should we all simply sync all of our lessons, differentiate en masse, teach grit and resilience, assess by the minute, and follow the intention of the standards to the tee, we’ll have no problem bringing the achievement This Post Is Dedicated To All The Teachers Who Said They Wouldn't Amount to Nothing | The Jose Vilson:

The Washington Teacher: Rebuilding DC Teachers' Trust Through Transparency

The Washington Teacher: Rebuilding DC Teachers' Trust Through Transparency:

Rebuilding DC Teachers' Trust Through Transparency

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.

Disclaimer: I am not a member of the WTU Contract Negotiations team.

One of the main problems we as a union have endured over the past nine years with past and current Washington Teachers' Union (WTU) presidents'- is that our leaders’ have not effectively made the switch from "classroom teachers" to union leaders.

Without "vision" or a "strategic plan" beyond their own advancement, they all seemed unable to act in the collective best interest of teachers', once they got elected. It is going to require strategic and substantive short and long-term plans, including the "collective wisdom of members", to "rebuild and re-purpose," if the WTU is to survive.

Effective union leaders must first communicate a clear vision and a strategy to the "rank and file" from the outset. Without a plan, we are like pilots flying by the seats of our pants. Certainly a lack of direction and focus can’t help get teachers’ a union contract; improve teachers’ working conditions, students’ learning outcomes, or the state of public education in general. A plan for rebuilding the union has first to be communicated with sufficient input and buy-in from members.

One of the insights I have gleaned as an active and involved union member – is that our leaders sometimes are their own worst enemy. For starters, collaboration, direct communication and transparency with one’s own management team, members of the Executive Board and rank and file are crucial if a union president is going to achieve any measure of success.

I have learned that if you do not have a "bond of trust" with union members who can help you succeed, then any plans you may have will come to a screeching halt, without a base of support.

Of course, if we are going to rebuild, we must first recognize, understand and accept that the membership is the highest authority in the union. However, if the "rank and file" membership remains passive and apathetic, the union will remain dormant. Of course, it's understandable why our members haven't been fully engaged for some time now. The union hasn't done the hard work needed to get members to want to be involved. The most The Washington Teacher: Rebuilding DC Teachers' Trust Through Transparency:

John Merrow and the Delusions of Edujournalism – the becoming radical

John Merrow and the Delusions of Edujournalism – the becoming radical:

John Merrow and the Delusions of Edujournalism

Veteran edujournalist John Merrow claims on his blog: “Education reporting has never been better than it is right now.”

Diane Ravitch mused on her blog about how I would respond to Merrow so here you go.

First, Merrow’s assertion can be true only if edujournalism was criminally horrible in the past to which he is comparing today’s journalism—which is negligently horrible.

Next, since Merrow mentions the Education Writers Association (EWA), his delusional post represents perfectly a central problem with edujournalism reflected in EWA: edujournalists are trapped within an insular norm of reporting that includes both traditional flaws in journalism (objective journalism anchored in reporting “both sides” dispassionately) and contemporary market forces that are contracting mainstream media, resulting in press-release journalism by journalists without the necessary expertise or experiences needed to report on a discipline or field.

In some of his most high-profile work, in fact, Merrow has personified a double failure common among edujrounalist: first, Merrow eagerly participated in the media’s creation of Michelle Rhee, and then, he fumbled badly and inadequately the media’s holding Rhee accountable for her horrible policies and inept (possibly criminal) leadership.

Merrow hangs his praise on several outlets that focus on education:

National coverage is strong: Chalkbeat (now in 4 states and expanding), The Hechinger Report, Pro Publica and Politico Education are providing outstanding national and local coverage. NPR (National Public Radio) has a strong education team, as does the PBS NewsHour (the latter team includes my former colleagues at Learning Matters).  Although Education Week is a trade publication, it remains a “must read” for anyone interested in the both the big picture and the weeds of the business.  (One of my regrets is that when we negotiated the merger into Ed Week, I did not ask for a lifetime subscription!)  There are more interesting education blogs than I could begin to count, and that’s a good thing.

Routinely, however, these exact outlets mangle reporting about schools, teachers, and all aspects of formal education (see, for example, examinations of Education Week and NPR).

The primary mainstream outlets for edujournalism are negligently horrible—unable to rise above press-release journalism, to see through the political manipulation of journalism and education, to listen to professional educators and researchers, or to critically examine assumptions about children/students, teaching and learning, and the purposes of school.

Merrow also celebrates: “When The Tampa Bay Times won a 2016 Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting, that clinched it: education had become THE cool and significant issue to cover!”

Setting aside we eschew all caps and exclamation points in the writing of middle schoolersJohn Merrow and the Delusions of Edujournalism – the becoming radical:

 

Common Core "Field Tests" Boycott

Common Core "Field Tests" Boycott:
Common Core “Field Tests” Boycott

NYS Allies for Public Education (NYSAPE) is calling on New York State parents to support a boycott of new high-stakes assessments being field-tested in grades three-to- eight between May 23 and June 10. NYSAPE asks parents to contact school district offices requesting that they return the field tests to the New York State Education Department (NYSED). While the field-testing takes less than an hour, it contributes to the climate of high-stakes assessment that drives curriculum in the state.

The New Paltz Board of Education has already rejected field-testing its students. On May 4, it passed a unanimous resolution directing its school superintendent to return the field-testing material to NYSED and to inform it that the tests would not completed by students. In an earlier resolution, the New Paltz school board complained that since neither students nor teachers received performance results from field tests, the tests had no educational benefit. They also charged that “this type of assessment is in violation of Pearson’s contract with NYSED which requires that assessments adhere to the American Psychological Association’s testing standards which include the test takers right to receive a timely and understandable explanation of test results.”

In the next three weeks, over 2,300 New York State schools are scheduled to administer the field tests to a quarter of a million students. Many districts have children participate in the field tests without even informing parents. However, parents can submit an opt-out letter so their children are excused from the tests. In addition, some schools are administering Regent field tests in higher grades. Children can also opt-out of these tests.

According to NYSAPE, since 2012, the New York State Education Department has allowed the Pearson testing company to use the state’s children to experiment with test questions for the next year’s statewide exams. Pearson does not pay New York State or local districts for this privilege. Not only that, but New York State pays for the cost of the field-testing.

In 2014, NYSUT, the union representing New York State teachers, supported the campaign against participation in field-tests. New York State United Teachers President Karen Magee declared “NYSUT applauds those school districts that have recently opted out of this year’s field testing. Just as we support parents’ rights to opt their child out of the state tests, we support those districts that are opting out of the field tests. Why should New York state students be unpaid researchers for Pearson?”

Post-It Note: Peter Cunningham, Executive Director of a group calledEducation Post, reposted on Huffington a blog by Tracy Dell’Angela, managing editor of Education Post. Apparently Cunningham and Dell’Angela did not like my response to a New York Times editorial mocking opt-out parents. Education Post claims the purpose of their organization is to promote “honest and civil conversation.” But Dell’Angela’s blog accused me of “frothing” and clinging “desperately to the idea that the status quo is working just peachy in American school,” which is definitely not very civil or designed to promote conversation. When you go to their website, you quickly realize that Education Post is not about “conversation,” but about promoting charter schools, something that is not always clear in their posts. See Mercedes Schneider’s blogs that expose the big money and political power behind Education Post. I also invite Cunningham and Dell’Angela to read some of my other recent posts on charter schools, “Do Charter Schools Really Do Better? Let’s Look at Los Angeles“ and “Success Academy’s War Against Children.“ 

Common Core "Field Tests" Boycott:

What Will It Take to End School Segregation in America?

What Will It Take to End School Segregation in America?:

What Will It Take to End School Segregation in America?

Even though white, African American, and Latino children benefit from sharing the same classroom, there’s growing evidence that more than 60 years after Brown v. Board of Education, it’s less likely to happen: A government study released last week shows that economic and racial segregation in the classroom is increasing nationwide. 

The Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan federal investigative agency, examined Department of Education data and found that the percentage of the nation’s public elementary schools and high schools with a mostly impoverished African American or Latino student body jumped by nearly 10 percent during the last decade. 

RELATED: Black and Latino Parents: Our Kids Aren't Dumb—They're Bored

At a time when postsecondary education is all but required for a middle-class income, those majority-minority schools were far less likely than their suburban counterparts to offer advanced math, science, or college preparatory courses and far more likely to flunk students or suspend them for disciplinary violations. 

Students who attend those schools, experts and analysts agree, are at high risk of being severely disciplined or dropping out before finishing high school and are increasingly likely to end up in the criminal justice system or at menial jobs instead of in college or the American workforce.

More than 60 years after Brown v. Board of Education banned separate-but-equal schools, the study confirms “we’re not going in a direction towards increasing educational equity” between whites and poor minorities, said Carla Shedd, a Columbia University professor and author of the new book Unequal City: Race, Schools and Perceptions of Injustice.

“We’re still putting money towards discipline and policing” of low-income black and Latino students, and “not thinking systematically about the kids being left behind,” Shedd said. 

The problem is “largely an equity issue” in which majority-minority schools get less funding than their white counterparts, said Kimberly Quick, an education policy analyst at The Century Foundation, a nonprofit think tank. 

At the same time, according to Quick, the end of legally mandated busing for desegregation—coupled with housing segregation, the increase of options such as charter schools and private schools, and the failure to adequately fund neighborhood schools—has amplified the problem.

RELATED: Federal Complaint Puts Charter School Segregation on Blast

Busing for racial parity “ended before schools were really desegregated,” she said. 

According to the GAO report, from school years 2000–2001 to 2013–14, “the percentage of all K–12 public schools that had high percentages of poor and Black or Hispanic students grew from 9 to 16 percent.” 

Those schools “were the most racially and economically concentrated: 75 to 100 percent of the students were Black or Hispanic and eligible for free or reduced-price lunch,” a commonly used indicator of poverty,” the report's authors wrote.

Meanwhile, GAO's analysis of education data also found that compared with other What Will It Take to End School Segregation in America?: