CURMUDGUCATION: Eva Moskowitz Fights Back

CURMUDGUCATION: Eva Moskowitz Fights Back:

Eva Moskowitz Fights Back



Eva Moskowitz, well-paid queen of the Success Academy charter chain, just won the Savas Award from the Reason Foundation. The award is given in honor of City University of New York Presidential Professor and privatization research pioneer E.S. "Steve" Savas, and it recognizes public-private partnership, though since what we're really honoring is privatization, these are partnerships in the same way that mugging is a criminal-pedestrian partnership.

Apparently one of the prizes that comes with the Savas Award is a very friendly and gentle video interview, and ReasonTV delivered an interview for Moskowitz that is softer than a baby's bottom. I have watched it so that you don't have to and, really, unless you have a tub of blood pressure medicine handy, you probably should not watch this. 

The Warm Fuzzy Open

As opposed to a cold open. The piece begins with nice close shots of Success Academy students working hard and studying intensely. The voice-over notes that the halls are quiet and orderly, and it calls the SA schools both successful and controversial.


We toss out a graph that shows just how mightily the school beats other NYC schools on the Big Standardized Test, and you will be not so surprised that these charts are not accompanied by charts showing how Success Academy has a huge attrition rate. The video also does not mention that SA doesn't replace the many students that leave. In other words, SA students may very well get good results on the BS Tests-- but any public school could achieve the same results by pushing out all but its best test-takers.

The voice-over tells us the story of how city councilwoman Moskowitz "sank her political career by speaking out about" how unions were stifling schools (insert stock footage of Randi Weingarten, looking, I guess, amazed at the brave councilwoman calling her on her evil union baloney). So she started a charter, which became a chain, which is "often hailed as a shining example" of what school choice is achieved. Which is a great construction. I myself am often hailed as an educational genius and the inventor of modern rap music. Hey-- you don't know I'm not often hailed as that. You weren't there.

So anyway, Reason Foundation gave her this swell award, and then sat down with her to chat. Here we go!

One of the core ideas of a charter school is that it's partially insulated from politics...?

The interviewer does that sort of vocal lift that turns any string of words into a question. Moskowitz is game.

"Oh. Well," she scoffs. That's probably not reality. There's a cutaway to the interviewer as the next CURMUDGUCATION: Eva Moskowitz Fights Back:

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: A collage of what passes for school reform around here.

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: A collage of what passes for school reform around here.:

A collage of what passes for school reform around here.

Can Duncan save Lucas' ghastly Star Wars Museum?

If somehow we could collage these four articles from today's Tribune, it would offer a realistic look at the current state of what passes for Chicago school reform:

Article #1 --Yes, Arne Duncan is back in town. In case you were worrying about whether or not Obama's former Ed Secretary would land on his feet after the Race To The Top Debacle, fear not. He's doing fine, thanks to billionaire friends like Mark Zuckerberg, Pricilla Chan, and George Lucas.

Zuckerberg and wife Pricilla hired Duncan for a leadership role in their so-called Emerson Collective where he joins up again with his own former U.S. Education Department deputy secretary Jim Shelton to advise of corporate-style reform and privatization matters.

No word yet on how much they're paying him. Whatever it is, it's just chump change to MZ. He's the guy who once dropped $100M to underwrite Newark's version of school reform underGov. Christie and former mayor, Corey Booker. Nobody knows exactly how all that money was spent. But suffice to say, it hasn't done much to improve teaching/learning. Most of it, I'm told, went into the pockets of the charter school operators.

As backup, Arne has secured a spot on the Lucas Museum's Board of Directors. They are all hoping that this appointment leaves a glimmer of hope that the horrifically ugly Star Wars Museum will still end up on the city's valuable lakefront property, for free.

Duncan, who also served as Chicago Public Schools chief from 2001 to 2009,  previously Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: A collage of what passes for school reform around here.:

TFA’s Latest PR Stunt | Gary Rubinstein's Blog

TFA’s Latest PR Stunt | Gary Rubinstein's Blog:

TFA’s Latest PR Stunt

Education Week used to be the gold standard in education reporting.  I can remember how proud I was in October 1995 when, at just 25 years old, I got my first ‘published’ article in a ‘real’ publication, Education Week’s Teacher Magazine, for a piece I wrote called ‘Natural Born Teacher.’  Over the next six years, I was always so proud whenever I’d get a piece accepted into either Teacher Magazine or Education Week.

As the internet grew and Twitter gained popularity, I joined and of course followed Education Week.  Though I’ve found Education Week to be generally slanted toward the Reform side, they are not nearly as bad as something like some of the other sites posing as journalism and they do run some columns by people critical of Waiting For Superman style reform.

Earlier this month I started noticing a lot of tweets from Education Week about the amazing work that TFA is doing.

Here are some examples:TFA’s Latest PR Stunt | Gary Rubinstein's Blog:

The Education System Is Rigged Against Low-Income Students, Even In Kindergarten

The Education System Is Rigged Against Low-Income Students, Even In Kindergarten:

The Education System Is Rigged Against Low-Income Students, Even In Kindergarten

The government’s annual “Condition of Education” report shows disparities continue through high school and college.

Students born into poverty enter kindergarten at a disadvantage to more affluent peers. As they advance through the grades, they receive lower test scores. They’re more likely to drop out and less likely to enter higher education. 

The all-too-familiar cycle, in some ways, is getting worse, according to data in a new report from the National Center for Education Statistics.

The report, titled, “The Condition of Education 2016,” is the 42nd of its kind, produced under congressional mandate by The U.S. Department of Education’s data branch, the National Center for Education Statistics. It outlines the latest data on everything from public school enrollment to the median earnings of degree recipients. 

The report starts with a troubling fact. Low-income students often arrive in kindergarten without a “positive approach” to learning — a mindset that allows them to pay attention in class, follow rules and show excitement for learning. Data collected from kindergarten teachers shows that students from lower socioeconomic households are less likely to demonstrate a positive approach to learning than middle-class and affluent students, which makes it harder for them to excel academically.

“In the early years, even before formal schooling begins, children from socioeconomically disadvantaged households typically have less access to resources that have been associated with learning, such as books and educational toys in their homes and quality preschool settings, than do students from more socioeconomically advantaged households,” the report says. 

Students less likely to demonstrate positive approaches to learning have lower average reading and math scores when they enter and leave kindergarten. They have lower average scores by the end of first grade, and again at the end of second grade.

But there were bright spots for lower-income students. The positive relationship between learning approaches and academic gains is particularly strong for low-income students. That means those students who do have positive learning behavior tend to make meaningful academic gains. 

“Students who were performing at the lower end of that learning behavior scale who never exhibited [positive] behaviors, their gains over time were not as strong as those who exhibited those behaviors often,” said Grace Kena, an author of the report. “Even more interesting, those gains over time were greater for students from lower socioeconomic status households, so having those positive learning behavior skills mastered was helpful to students and most helpful to” students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

In the early years, even before formal schooling begins, children from socioeconomically disadvantaged households typically have less access to resources.

Overall, more students are graduating from high school, although black, Hispanic and American Indian/Alaska Native students are still less likely to get degrees than white and Asian American/Pacific Islander counterparts. After graduating, students from low-income households are more likely to enroll in an occupational certificate program or an associate’s degree program. They are significantly less likely to enroll in a bachelor’s degree program. Students who have high grade-point averages or took advanced high school math courses — like calculus or The Education System Is Rigged Against Low-Income Students, Even In Kindergarten:

APNewsBreak: Rules Proposed for School Accountability - ABC News

APNewsBreak: Rules Proposed for School Accountability - ABC News:

APNewsBreak: Rules Proposed for School Accountability

Proposed federal guidelines would allow states to decide how to use a mix of test scores, academic growth and other measures like chronic absenteeism to identify failing schools and children who are struggling the most.

The guidelines released Thursday spell out a broad framework for states to consider as they seek to improve schools and narrow achievement gaps.

"These regulations give states the opportunity to work with all of their stakeholders including parents and educators to protect all students' right to a high-quality education that prepares them for college and careers, including the most vulnerable students," said Education Secretary John B. King Jr. "They also give educators room to reclaim for all of their students the joy and promise of a well-rounded educational experience."

The proposed rules are the next step in the implementation of the bipartisan education law passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama in December. The law revamps the widely criticized No Child Left Behind Act and returns to states more control over schools and education policy. One key provision of the law is a shift back to states on how schools are held accountable for how they educate their students. Another provision requires more transparency with parents and communities on how their schools are performing.

King planned to discuss the new regulations with White House Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Muñoz during a visit to the J. C. Nalle Elementary School in Washington. The school has been involved in some successful turnaround efforts in recent years.

Under the new law, states may design accountability systems that consider measures beyond test scores and high school graduation rates. The proposed regulations say states may decide what weight to give to each of those indicators of success — and others such as school climate, chronic absenteeism and parent surveys — as long as they measure the performance of all students, including "sub-groups of students" such as racial minorities, kids from low-income families, and special education students.

The accountability plans would have to be submitted to the Education Department for review by July 2017.

Under the proposed rules, states must identify failing schools at least once every three years. Those considered most in need would be:

—the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools

—high schools with graduation rates below 67 percent for all students

—schools with chronically low-performing sub-groups that have not improved after getting additional resources

On transparency, states and districts would have to work with parents to design new, multi-level and comprehensive ratings systems for school and performance. The ratings for schools would go beyond a "pass" or "fail" benchmark and would also include information on how well English-language learners are doing, as well as specific information about how much money school districts are spending per student. The ratings would have to be made available to parents and others, each year, and no later than December 31.

Federal money for school improvements, the regulations say, would continue to be set aside for the schools most in need. APNewsBreak: Rules Proposed for School Accountability - ABC News:

PARCC Gets Parked: What Testing Companies Don't Want Parents to Know

PARCC Gets Parked: What Testing Companies Don't Want Parents to Know:

PARCC Gets Parked: What Testing Companies Don’t Want Parents to Know

Columbia University Professor Celia Oyler posted online a critique of the 4th grade English-Language Arts PARCC exam written by an anonymous fourth grade teacher. In the critique the teacher quoted from specific questions that were on the test.

Then the firestorm hit.

PARCC Inc., citing copyright law and confidentiality agreements, has been stalking the Internet and twitter to get the questions taken down. PARCC also demanded that Oyler identify the offending teacher, which she refuses to do. The teacher, in the post, makes clear that he or she was aware of the legal ramifications of these actions, but felt compelled to inform parents and the general the public how “the high-stakes accountability system has deformed teaching and warped learning in many public schools across the United States.”

Why are testing companies so anxious to keep this analysis from parents and the general public? If the anonymous teacher is correct, and I believe he or she is, testing companies do not want us to know that Common Core and its high-stakes testing regime are a disaster that do a grave disservice to this nation’s children.

As of May 26, 2016 the full posting by Olyer was available on the blogsite of New York Public School Parents which is managed by educational activist Leonie Haimson. Haimson urged education bloggers to distribute the report widely.However, to avoid legal issues, this post reprints the teacher’s critique of the PARCC exam, but deletes the copyrighted questions and “prompts.”

The post begins:

I will not reveal my district or my role due to the intense legal ramifications for exercising my Constitutional First Amendment rights in a public forum. I was compelled to sign a security form that stated I would not be “Revealing or discussing passages or test items with anyone, including students and school staff, through verbal exchange, email, social media, or any other form of communication” as this would be considered a “Security Breach.” In response to this demand, I can only ask—whom are we protecting?

There are layers of not-so-subtle issues that need to be aired as a result of national and state testing policies that are dominating children’s lives in America. As any well prepared educator knows, curriculum planning and teaching requires knowing how you will assess your students and planning backwards from that knowledge. If teachers are unable to examine and discuss the summative assessment for their students, how can they plan their instruction? Yet, that very question assumes that this test is something worth planning for. The fact is that schools that try to plan their curriculum exclusively to prepare students for this test are ignoring the body of educational research that tells us how children learn, and how to create developmentally appropriate activities to engage students in the act of learning. This article will attempt to provide evidence for these claims as a snapshot of what is happening as a result of current policies.

The teacher argues the “PARCC test is developmentally inappropriate.”

The PARCC, which is supposedly a test of the Common Core State Standards, appears to have taken liberties with regard to grade level texts. For example, on the Spring 2016 PARCC for 4th Graders, students were expected to read an excerpt from xxx. According to Scholastic, this text is at an interest level for 

PARCC Gets Parked: What Testing Companies Don't Want Parents to Know:

Six Washington charter schools get a second start | The News Tribune

Six Washington charter schools get a second start | The News Tribune:

Six Washington charter schools get a second start

Six of Washington’s charter schools will get another lease on life under the state’s new charter law, after action by the Washington State Charter School Commission.

The commission, meeting in Tacoma last week, voted to approve five-year contracts with existing charter schools in Tacoma, Seattle and Kent.

Contracts are to be signed by the commission chairman, Steve Sundquist, and representatives of the schools by June 2.

Two other charters operate under the auspices of the Spokane School District. A former Seattle charter, First Place Scholars, has reverted to the private-school status it held before it converted to a charter school.

The commission also authorized three schools — two in Seattle and one in Walla Walla — that plan to open in fall 2017.

WE IN THE CHARTER SECTOR IN WASHINGTON HAVE JUST COME THROUGH EIGHT MONTHS OF TUMULT.

Thelma Jackson, board chair at SOAR Academy

Charters — including SOAR Academy, Green Dot Destiny Middle School and Summit Olympus High School, all in Tacoma — survived a bumpy 2015-16 school year.

“We in the charter sector in Washington have just come through eight months of tumult,” Thelma Jackson, who heads the SOAR board, told the charter commission last week.

She urged the commission to guide discussions among the state’s fledgling charters, so that they can learn from last year’s challenges.

In September, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that a voter-approved charter school law was unconstitutional. By November, the schools had lost state per-pupil funding that had been available under the charter law.

Some of them — including SOAR and Destiny — regrouped under the banner of a small Eastern Washington school district. That allowed them to temporarily receive reduced state per-pupil funding as an alternative learning experience programs.

Summit Olympus, along with its sister school in Seattle, Summit Sierra, bypassed alternative learning funding and instead kept the doors open as homeschool centers for their students.

Private dollars filled in some of the funding gaps.

The Washington State Charter Schools Association gathered private donations and awarded $4.5 million in “bridge” grants to help schools through the rocky first school year.

The association earlier committed $2 million to help kick start several of the schools during their first year as they bought equipment and supplies.

For the coming school year, the association has committed to $1,000 per student at SOAR and other so-called stand-alone charters — those managed by individual operators, rather than by interstate networks such as Summit and Green Dot. Both organizations are based in California.

By March, the Legislature — heavily lobbied by charter supporters — passed a new charter law that kept much of the system intact but changed the source of charter school funding.

Instead of drawing money from the state common school fund, the law directs that money for charters come from state lottery proceeds.

And in a win for public school districts that opposed charters, the law also bars charters from accessing local levy dollars — a practice that would have been allowed had the Supreme Court not acted.

“The loss of local levy money is severe,” said charter commission director Joshua Halsey, who estimated the revenue reduction for the six schools at $17 million.

Charter opponents — including the teachers union, the Washington Education Association — contend changes in the charter law aren’t enough to meet constitutional demands. They have vowed to challenge charters in court again.

Opponents have raised concerns over charter governance. Rather than elected school boards, charters in Washington are run by boards appointed by the nonprofit organizations that manage the charter schools. The new law leaves that structure in place.

Melissa Westbrook, a Seattle public schools activist and blogger, told the charter commission at its Tacoma meeting that the new law does not meet constitutional requirements for the role of the state superintendent.

She also noted the law requires that parents be notified of pending litigation that could shut down charters.

Charter parent Jessica Garcia was at the Tacoma meeting and said she knew of the legalSix Washington charter schools get a second start | The News Tribune:

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/education/article79949727.html#storylink=cpy

 

On negative effects of vouchers | Brookings Institution

On negative effects of vouchers | Brookings Institution:

On negative effects of vouchers

Executive summary

Recent research on statewide voucher programs in Louisiana and Indiana has found that public school students that received vouchers to attend private schools subsequently scored lower on reading and math tests compared to similar students that remained in public schools. The magnitudes of the negative impacts were large. These studies used rigorous research designs that allow for strong causal conclusions. And they showed that the results were not explained by the particular tests that were used or the possibility that students receiving vouchers transferred out of above-average public schools.

Another explanation is that our historical understanding of the superior performance of private schools is no longer accurate. Since the nineties, public schools have been under heavy pressure to improve test scores. Private schools were exempt from these accountability requirements. A recent study showed that public schools closed the score gap with private schools. That study did not look specifically at Louisiana and Indiana, but trends in scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress for public school students in those states are similar to national trends.

In education as in medicine, ‘first, do no harm’ is a powerful guiding principle. A case to use taxpayer funds to send children of low-income parents to private schools is based on an expectation that the outcome will be positive. These recent findings point in the other direction. More needs to be known about long-term outcomes from these recently implemented voucher programs to make the case that they are a good investment of public funds. As well, we need to know if private schools would up their game in a scenario in which their performance with voucher students is reported publicly and subject to both regulatory and market accountability.

---

Recent research on statewide voucher programs in Louisiana and Indiana has found that public school students that received vouchers to attend private schools scored lower compared to similar students who did not attend private schools.[i] This is the kind of research finding that generates a reaction of ‘wait, what?’ Negative effects are rare in education research.

The magnitudes of the negative impacts were large, too. In Louisiana, a public school student who was average in math (at the 50th percentile) and began attending a private school using a voucher declined to the 34th percentile after one year. If that student was in third, fourth, or fifth grade, the decline was steeper, to the 26th percentile. Reading declined, too: a student at the 50th percentile in reading declined to about the 46th percentile. In Indiana, a student who had entered a private school with a math score at the 50th percentile declined to the 44th percentile after one year.

Voucher programs emerged in the nineties in Milwaukee, and later in New York City, Dayton, Ohio, and Washington, DC.[ii] The Milwaukee, Dayton, and New York programs were supported by state and local funds or philanthropies, and the DC program was supported by Federal funds. In each location, students applied to receive a voucher, which would be paid to the private school they chose to attend.

Since then, vouchers and voucher-like mechanisms for supporting private school choice with public funds (tax-credit scholarships, education savings accounts, and individual tax-credits) have exploded at the state level.[iii]

In publicly funded voucher programs, many of the private schools that are recipients are religious organizations. This generates thorny legal issues in the 38 states that have so-called Blaine amendments to their constitutions (which prohibit direct government aid to educational institutions that have a religious affiliation and were originally intended to target Catholic schools in states with large immigrant populations).

Legal issues aside, the present rationale for vouchers—perhaps the rationale—is to help low-income students attend private schools because they will learn more. And if parents look at data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), they would see that, historically, private school students regularly score higher than public school students by 15 to 20 points in reading and math, which is a big difference (on average, NAEP scores rise about 10 points for each grade level). So, a parent might surmise, if their child attends private school, their child’s scores will be higher too. But some part of that score difference arises because higher-performing students select into private schools. Parents do not know howtheir child would score in private school.

And, in fact, studies of vouchers have reported mixed results on scores. Scores improved for some students in some places, and scores did not improve for other students in other places.[iv] The evidence showed higher reading and math scores for black students in New York City, and higher reading scores in the third follow-up year of the DC program. The evidence showed no differences in scores for Milwaukee students in reading, for Hispanic students in New York City in reading and math, and for DC students in math. What little research there has been on other education outcomes reported higher rates of high school graduation in New York City and DC, and higher rates of college attendance in New York City.

None of these earlier studies reported significant negative effects on test scores, which adds to interest in what might be happening in Louisiana and Indiana that could explain negative effects. Is it something about how the research studies were designed, how the programs were structured, the quality of the public schools against which private schools were being compared?

The research designs are unlikely to explain the findings. The Louisiana study used a random assignment experimental design, which is a high research standard for measuring effects. Louisiana private schools that had more applicants than available seats operated lotteries to choose applicants randomly. Students who won the lottery constituted the treatment group, whereas those that lost were the control group. Random assignment experiments are central in medical research and are increasingly used in education. For example, studies of the effects of charter schools have relied on experiments created by school lotteries.[v] And two different teams of researchers studying the Louisiana data reached similar conclusions.

In Indiana, effects were measured by comparing time trends of test scores for students who initially attended public schools and then received vouchers to time trends for students who continued to attend public schools, a ‘fixed-effects’ estimator. This is a lower research standard for measuring effects than experimental designs, but sample sizes were quite large (more than 3,000 voucher students and 500,000 public school students) and the findings are consistent with findings from Louisiana.

There was an oddity in the structure of testing in Louisiana. Tests used there were mandated by the state to be the ones used for the Louisiana Education Assessment Program (LEAP) carried out in public schools. Students that used their voucher to attend private schools had to take LEAP tests, though other students in those schools did not. Because LEAP tests are part of the state’s accountability structure for its public schools, the tests are ‘high stakes’ for those schools but low stakes for private schools. Perhaps students in the voucher group did worse than those who remained in public schools because the public schools taught to the test, whereas the private schools did not.

To address this hypothesis, the Mills and Wolf study exploited the fact that some LEAP tests had more content related to Louisiana state standards, and those tests might favor public school students. The study reported that private school voucher students did worse than public school counterparts regardless of the degree of alignment of the tests with the state standards guiding instruction in public schools.

Maybe students that applied for vouchers were attending excellent public schools rather than mediocre or bad ones, so the private schools that received voucher students were up against the cream of Louisiana public schools. The Abdulkdiroglu et al. study rejected this hypothesis with the finding that Louisiana public schools attended by students applying for a voucher were below average in the state. On the recent NAEP, Louisiana ranked 43rd among states in reading scores of its fourth graders and 49th among states in math scores of its eighth graders. To test the effectiveness of the instruction of voucher students in private schools by comparing the students’ learning outcomes with those of similar students in below-average public schools in Louisiana is not a high bar.

Another possibility that these studies did not investigate is that our historical understanding of the superior performance of private schools is no longer accurate. Since the nineties, public schools have been under heavy pressure to improve test scores. No Child Left Behind and conditional waivers from it under the Obama administration are visible manifestations of this pressure, with various kinds of sanctions for not meeting targets for score growth. Private schools were exempt from these accountability requirements.

A recent study by Wong et al. used NAEP data to compare public schools to private schools from the nineties to 2011.[vi] The study reported that private schools started with higher scores in the nineties—this is the difference between private school students and public school students mentioned at the outset, above. By 2011, the gap had closed significantly, especially in math. The authors concluded that No Child Left Behind improved scores. But a broader conclusion is relevant here. Public schools improved relative to private schools, for whatever reason.

The figure showing national private and public school scores on fourth-grade math indicates some of what the authors found. In 2000, scores of private school students are well above scores of public school students, a gap of 14 points. By 2013, the gap had closed to 5 points. 

The same contrast of public and private schools cannot be done for Louisiana or Indiana per se. Their samples of private schools are too small to meet reporting standards of the National Center of Education Statistics. But Louisiana and Indiana public schools show trends on NAEP similar to national trends. The second figure uses the same national trends as the previous figure (the dashed lines) and adds score trends for Louisiana and Indiana. General improvements in the trend that were evident nationally also are evident in Louisiana and Indiana. In fact, by 2013, Indiana’s public school fourth graders score above the national private school average.

Improvements in scores also are evident for the low-income population of students most likely to apply for vouchers. The next figure compares fourth-grade math scores for all public school students in Louisiana and students eligible for a free or reduced-price school lunch, On negative effects of vouchers | Brookings Institution:

DOWNLOAD

• Download the paper
  298 KB
• 

Billionaire PAC pumps half-million dollars into crowded Penninsula assembly race - San Jose Mercury News

Education PAC pumps half-million dollars into crowded Penninsula assembly race - San Jose Mercury News:

Education PAC pumps half-million dollars into crowded Penninsula assembly race

A super PAC backing education reform policy has spent more than a half-million dollars to support State Assembly candidate Marc Berman, elevating the race's focus on education.

EdVoice, the political action arm of a Sacramento nonprofit network, has spent the money on TV, web and print ads to help Berman, a Palo Alto councilman. That amount exceeds the total sum all eight of the District 24 candidates have spent on their campaigns this year.

Berman faces grassroots organizer Jay Blas Jacob Cabrera, Cupertino Mayor Barry Chang, Mountain View councilmen John Inks and Michael Kasperzak, Menlo Park Councilman Peter Ohtaki, retired Palo Alto engineer Sea Reddy and Palo Alto attorney Vicki Veenker.

Ohtaki is the only Republican candidate and Inks is the only Libertarian in a largely Democratic district.

The top two vote-getters on June 7 will face off in the November general election.

As of Wednesday, the following committees had spent money on ads for Berman: EdVoice Independent Expenditure Committee, $585,613; California Real Estate Independent Expenditure Committee-California Association of Realtors, $143,710; and the California Dental Association Independent Expenditure PAC, $109,576.

Berman, an attorney and former development director of the Silicon Valley Education Foundation, said he has not communicated with the PACs and does not know what attracted them to him.

"I was as surprised as anybody else," Berman said, "when I saw on Twitter that they were spending that amount of money to support my campaign."

Bill Lucia, president of EdVoice, said the group has not been shy about endorsing Berman as the best candidate on public education.

"He already has a track record of it," Lucia said.

EdVoice has raised more than $5.2 million, including $1 million from Arthur Rock, an early investor in Intel and Apple; $1.4 million from William Bloomfield, a retired businessman and education advocate who had failed runs for Congress and the presidency; and $855,000 from Carrie Walton Penner, granddaughter of the founder of Walmart and a staunch advocate for charter schools.

In an interview with The Daily News, candidates vying to represent the district, stretching across two counties from Atherton to Sunnyvale, discussed the first thing they would do if elected.

Berman, who has incumbent Gordon's endorsement, said the first bill he'd sponsor would fully fund universal preschool for every 4-year-old. Legislators approved preschool for low-income students, but Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill last year.

"In Santa Clara County, the average low-income student starts kindergarten 18 months behind their more affluent peers," Berman said. "So by 5 years old these students are already 1.5 years behind some of their peers. "

Berman said an additional $1.5 billion for universal preschool is a smart investment, Education PAC pumps half-million dollars into crowded Penninsula assembly race - San Jose Mercury News:

Big Education Ape: Analysis: EdVoice with an IE for Dodd; Educational Reform Group Has Ties to Vergara Suit and Wa... http://bit.ly/1SJq26U

Big Education Ape: News Analysis: Education fight ‘over shades of Democrat’ | CALmatters http://bit.ly/25csc6L

Big Education Ape: Local legislative races become battleground in statewide fight over education http://bit.ly/1WMlJKA

Big Education Ape: Edvoice pumps cash into Assembly campaign | News | Palo Alto Online | http://bit.ly/1s8OhSi

Big Education Ape: Charter school groups spending big in California legislative races | 89.3 KPCC http://bit.ly/1TYIvJj

California to audit L.A.’s biggest group of charter schools after anti-union allegations - LA Times

California to audit L.A.’s biggest group of charter schools after anti-union allegations - LA Times:

California to audit L.A.’s biggest group of charter schools after anti-union allegations

A panel of state lawmakers on Wednesday voted to audit Alliance College-Ready Public Schools, a move that raises the stakes in a year-long battle over unionizing teachers at the biggest charter organization in Los Angeles. 

Since launching a unionization effort last year, United Teachers Los Angeles and a group of Alliance educators have filed several complaints accusing the charter group of violating state laws that allow educators to organize without fear of reprisal.  

The state’s Joint Legislative Audit Committee approved a request by Sen. Tony Mendoza (D-Artesia) to review expenses incurred by the charter school organization that has been fighting the union’s attempts to organize teachers at its 27 schools.

Mendoza requested that auditors examine whether Alliance charter schools used money intended for instruction on "purposes unrelated to student support and learning." He also asked auditors to determine whether Alliance gave confidential student information to third-party organizations, and for a detailed review of how much money the charter group has spent on attorneys, consultants and materials to fend off unionization.

“Alliance schools are publicly funded,” Mendoza said in a statement. “The purpose of those funds is to educate children inside the classroom -- not intimidate teachers and parents.”

Administrators at Alliance deny wrongdoing. They say the audit is politically motivated because Mendoza, a former UTLA board member, does not have any of the charter’s schools in his district.

"We are sorry that our students are being used as political footballs, but can assure the public, and especially Alliance parents and students, that we refuse to let politics impact the quality of education in our high-performing schools,” said Alliance Chief Executive Dan Katzir. 

Katzir said the charter group will work with state auditors.

The battle over unionizing teachers at Alliance has far-reaching implications in Los Angeles, where a plan spearheaded by the Broad Foundation seeks to vastly expand the number of charter schools. Its impact could also cascade across the country as teachers unions grapple with declining membership amidst the growth of charter schools.

Charters are publicly financed but independently run. Some have formed unions but most resist collective bargaining, arguing that their ability to hire and fire staff without union rules is key to providing good instruction. 

State law allows educators to form a union without fear of retaliation or coercion. At Alliance, unionizing would require majority support from the charter’s 600-plus teachers and counselors. 

United Teachers Los Angeles has filed four unfair-practice claims against Alliance, alleging that the charter group is intimidating employees, conducting surveillance on teachers and blocking organizers at school sites.

In December, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge issued a preliminary injunctionprohibiting Alliance administrators from interfering with efforts to unionize its teachers.

The injunction will remain in place until California's Public Employment Relations Board, which enforces the collective bargaining laws for most public sector employees, completes a hearing process for all four complaints.

See more of our top stories on Facebook >>California to audit L.A.’s biggest group of charter schools after anti-union allegations - LA Times:

California schools need more parental involvement | The Sacramento Bee

California schools need more parental involvement | The Sacramento Bee:

California schools need more parental involvement

Students, parents and teachers line up before the first day of school at Marion Mix Elementary in Elk Grove last August. Randy Pench Sacramento Bee file

Engaging families in schools isn’t just my profession, it’s my passion. I’ve worked for many years helping children with learning disabilities, foster youth and migrant families, and I’ve seen the difference family engagement in education makes for these vulnerable children and communities.

Decades of research have confirmed that students whose parents are active participants in their learning have significantly better school and life outcomes. I’m thrilled that many welcome and needed changes have taken place to engage families in schools. Family engagement is now the law through the Local Control and Funding Formula and the related district accountability plans. But simply making family engagement the law doesn’t help school districts engage all parents, from all backgrounds, in all languages.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article79872242.html#storylink=cpy

Something is still missing – funding.

That’s why California State PTA is sponsoring Assembly Bill 2680, a common-sense measure that calls for a one-time, $15-per-pupil investment by the state from Proposition 98 funds to ensure that local educational agencies measure meaningful and effective parent and family engagement. The Assembly Appropriations Committee is set to hear this and other funding proposals on Friday.

Family engagement may seem like something that should come naturally to all parents. But for English-language learners, foster parents, migrant families, new immigrants, refugees and others, it’s all too often an off-putting struggle. These parents want to support their children and want to have a voice in their education, but don’t know where to begin.

With research showing that schools would need to spend $1,000 more per pupil to reap the same gains in student achievement that an involved parent brings, AB 2680’s $15-per-pupil funding is a bargain.

California parents like me are working to secure funding that allows us to work together with schools as true partners for student success. And we’re not alone: While California State PTA is sponsoring this bill, the California Federation of Teachers, California School Boards Association, Education Trust-West, the Advancement Project, Public Advocates and Families In Schools have joined our effort.

We urge members of the Appropriations Committee to support AB 2680 for all of California’s children: Nothing is a wiser, more meaningful or more important investment. California schools need more parental involvement | The Sacramento Bee:

Justine Fischer of Thousand Oaks is president of the California State PTA. She can be contacted at info@capta.org.