Latest News and Comment from Education

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

L.A. Charters Miss Enrollment Targets by 14,600. So What? - On California - Education Week

L.A. Charters Miss Enrollment Targets by 14,600. So What? - On California - Education Week:

L.A. Charters Miss Enrollment Targets by 14,600. So What?

Existing.jpg


 In the midst of another skirmish in the L.A. Charter School War, new data obtained from the Los Angeles Unified School District show charter school enrollment is 14,620 lower than the charter operators projected in their petitions to operate those schools. 

But the implications of the shortfall are far from clear.  The district tends to see weakness in the viability of charters.  Charter operators think they are being picked on when they seek new schools or renewals of old ones.  Jed Wallace, executive director of the California Charter Schools Association likened the current charter exam process to a "witch hunt."
Less Than 20 Percent of Projections
Back to the numbers:  In the most extreme cases enrollments are less than 20 percent of those projected raising questions among district regulators about the financial and educational viability of those schools.
At the Alliance College-Ready Middle Academy #21 in Sun Valley, the school reported 49 students in the fall of 2015 instead of the 300 it had projected in its charter application.
And at Apple Academy Charter School on Western Avenue, the school reported 326 students in 2015 compared with 1,420 in its charter petition, the largest numerical shortfall among the fiscally independent charters.  Granada Hills Charter High School enrolled 4,467 compared to its charter petition projection of 5,500.
There are 25 charters with fewer than half the students projected in their charter petitions, and the shortfalls are raising flags in the LAUSD Charter School Division.  (The spreadsheet is reproduced at the end of this post.) Jose Cole-Gutierrez, the division's head, said in an interview that the district's experience with 274 charters, the most of any school district in the country, drives it to ask different questions than it did a decade ago.  "Questions of school enrollment have always been important because of viability.  That's nothing new.  We have always asked schools to substantiate their plans.  But now, schools are telling us that there are a lot of factors that they are dealing with given increased competition."
No One Said 'Get Tough'
He vigorously denied allegations that the school board had sought a tough-on-charters approach, a declaration repeated at the school board's meeting.
Charter operators see the situation differently.  At Alliance #21, principal Jonathan Tiongco notes that the school has just opened, and is still scrambling for a facility.  They are building a permanent facility, but in the meantime they've been bouncing between temporary locations.  "Parents are a little cautious with the uncertainty," he said.  "For a while, I had nothing to sell but dirt."  But Tiongco, who brings an impressive background in education technology to his job, says that the school will be on track to meet its enrollment targets in a year or so.
Caprice Young, the president of Magnolia Charter Schools, doesn't see fiscal doom in the under-enrollment.  "That's always the case," she said.  "Enthusiastic school founders overestimate how fast they can start up.  They catch up after a few years."  Magnolia operates 11 charter schools, 8 within LAUSD.  The district's charter schools division raised questions about two proposals for new schools, and they were pulled from the school board agenda rather than face a negative vote.
Several Magnolia schools are among the severely under-enrolled list.  "But for good reason," she said.  Magnolia Science Academy #5, whose student count was 35% of the number projected, was moved 18 miles away from its original site and essentially restarted.  Magnolia Science Academy #6 is genuinely lagging behind expectations, she said, "and we've been able to manage the budget so that they are sustainable."
Charter Operators Cry Foul
Young and other charter school operators have cried foul, charging that the charter school division has changed rules midstream and is over-regulating the independently operated schools.  Twenty-one charter operators, whose schools enroll more than 50,000 students complained in a letter to the LAUSD board that charters were being denied more frequently.
I don't know whether the LAUSD is being fair or unfair to the charters.  Like all businesses, charters love government subsidies but not government regulation.  The relevant question is how the district should manage the growing charter enrollment, or, more to the point, how it should manage district schools facing competition from the charter sector?
I do know that what's happening now isn't working.  Every charter petition becomes an occasion for a mini-trial before the school board.  Supporters pack the school board meeting in what Los Angeles Times reporter Howard Blume called a "regular and lengthy ritual."
30,000 More Charter Students
Even if no more charter schools were allowed to start, already authorized charters would allow 30,000 students to leave district schools and enroll in charters.  In a time when there are fewer students overall in Los Angeles, a shift of this magnitude poses a significant threat to the district's finances, about $270-million by my back of the envelope approximation.
That's even before the fund-raising and school opening efforts of Great Public Schools Now kicks in.
That translates into a lot of adult jobs, so it's no big surprise that United Teachers Los Angeles and other employee unions are raising dues money to strongly oppose charter expansion.
It's also clear that there is increasing demand for charters, magnets, and other schools of choice.  Projections issued by the CCSA show 41,830 students on charter school waiting lists.  CCSA sent me the list along with their methodology that heavily discounts the numbers in areas where there are multiple charters in the same geographic area, thus attempting to correct the count for families that applied to multiple charters.
I do not have a unified count of waiting lists for magnet schools within the district, but approximations for the most popular schools put the waiting list at over 1,000.   And LAUSD runs acomplex application program with detailed instructions, weighted admissions, and even tutorials in how to apply.
Two New Realities about Choice Schools
The juxtaposition of low enrollments and high demand illustrates two realities about trying to oversee charters and other schools of choice in Los Angeles.
First, a charter is not really a contract, in the conventional sense.  Unlike a vendor who gets a contract from the district to provide special education services, copy paper, or corn dogs, charter operators are not actually responsible for producing schooling for a specified number of students. 
Charters are more like drilling rights to an oil field.  If a charter operator thinks it can advantageously educate additional children, it can within the limits of its charter, but it is under no apparent obligation to fill to projections.
Second, the public likes choice, but it also likes a good school in their neighborhood where their children have a guaranteed place.  Running both at the same time is a daunting problem for LAUSD.
Public schools have managed systems of neighborhood schools with attendance zones for more than a century, sometimes well, sometimes in ways that further race and class discrimination.  School systems have run small, selective school choice systems for a long time while maintaining a traditional attendance zone system.  Bronx High School of Science was founded nearly 80 years ago and many big city systems maintain selective schools.  Boston Latin, the nation's first high school, accepted its first student in 1635.
Some school systems, such as New Orleans, have learned how to manage an all-choice system, creating combined application and fair competition systems among competing schools.  The craft knowledge about running an all-choice system is worth understanding for those who think abouthow to apply the lessons of NOLA to L.A. 
Coexist?  But How?
But the LAUSD board and the charter schools division inside the district face a problem of a much larger magnitude: how to get neighborhood schools to prosper and grow academically as they co-exist and compete with the growing number of charters, magnets, and other schools of choice.
I've asked a lot people—academics, researchers, policy wonks, school leaders—whether they have a solution to this problem that does not treat the school district as the educator of last resort.  I've yet to hear a convincing answer.


Spreadsheet of Fiscally Independent Charter School Enrollment, Los Angeles Unified School District 

Report: State must adopt guidelines for parent engagement in schools | EdSource

Report: State must adopt guidelines for parent engagement in schools | EdSource:

Report: State must adopt guidelines for parent engagement in schools



California has established parent involvement as one of eight priority areas that local educators must focus on, but school districts have a long way to go to make that involvement “authentic” and “meaningful,” according to a new report.
The report, issued by Families in Schools, a statewide advocacy organization based in Los Angeles, is urging the state to adopt “consistent, high quality” standards to determine how effectively schools and districts are engaging parents.
It is based on interviews with 30 school district leaders from 14 school districts in California. The report did not identify the names of those interviewed or the districts, offering them anonymity “so that fear or politics would not prevent them from sharing their real opinions and experiences.”
The State Board of Education is currently still drawing up “rubrics” or guidelines for how to assess progress, or the lack of it, in each of the eight priority areas prescribed by the Local Control Funding Formula, or LCFF, the landmark school financing reforms championed  by Gov. Jerry Brown.
School districts are required to draw up a Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) to describe how they will spend state funds to improve student academic outcomes.
Under the financing formula, districts get additional funds for every low-income student, English learner and foster child they serve. Parents must be involved in deciding how these funds are spent — to a greater extent than in any other state, according to State Board President Michael Kirst.  In addition, parents must be involved in decision making at school sites, and in programs for high-needs students.


The Families in Schools report offers a detailed rubric with numerous ways districts – and the state – can measure how well they are engaging parents and families. “These measures establish clear expectations of how schools should engage, reach out to, and partner with all parents, especially those whose students are low-income, English learners and foster youth,” the report states.
But Oscar Cruz, executive director of Families in Schools, said that too often schools have a “compliance-based” approach to parent involvement – such as simply getting parents to a meeting – without forging deeper relationships between parents and their child’s school.
“What is the use of having 60 percent of parents coming to an LCAP meeting, if when they go to their school and their principal doesn’t want to meet with them, and they feel pushed out?” he said.
“Moving from policy to implementation – that is where there is a huge gap,” Cruz said.
Cruz’s organization differentiates parent involvement, which it defines as actions parents take to support their child’s education at home and at school, from parent engagement, which refers to what actions schools take to involve parents in their child’s school and in decision-making there.
Based on its interviews, the report concludes that many districts, regardless of their size, “simply lack the resources and/or expertise to build robust parent engagement programs.”
In addition,  the report says, “school administrators are slow to give teachers and staff the tools and training they need to connect with parents.” Many Report: State must adopt guidelines for parent engagement in schools | EdSource:

Study says charter schools spend more than twice the amount that traditional public school on administration expenses - Tucson News Now

Study says charter schools spend more on administration expenses - Tucson News Now:

Study says charter schools spend more on administration expenses

PHOENIX (CBS5) -

A report set for release Tuesday concludes that charter schools in Arizona spend more than twice the amount that traditional public school districts spend on administrative expenses.
The report, authored by Arizonans for Charter School Accountability and the Grand Canyon Institute, states that public school districts average $628 per pupil for administrative services. Charter schools average $1,403 per pupil.
"We're spending an inordinate amount of money in some of our charter schools for administration, and that money could be used elsewhere in the education budget," said Jim Hall, one of the authors of the study.
The issue of high administrative expenses has become a favorite political topic of Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and the Republican Legislature as they have fended off accusations that they are not funding public schools at an adequate level.
"We have all heard the debate about high administrative costs in public schools, but we never mention charter schools," Hall said.
CBS 5 Investigates received an advance copy of the report, which suggests that some of the state's large charter chains have the among the highest administrative expenses. But the study does not detail exactly what taxpayers and students get in return for those dollars.
"We have no idea how they're spending the money and no way of accessing how they spend the money," Hall said.
Charter schools are required to disclose financial data, but they are not required to list the same detail that traditional public schools do. Public school financial data is turned over to the Arizona Auditor General's Office every year, but charter data is not subject to the same scrutiny.
The Arizona Charter Schools Association released the following statement in response to our request for comment:
"It is disappointing the Grand Canyon Institute would grant legitimacy by allowing itself to be associated with this 'report,' which was authored by an individual and organization with a self-declared mission to tear down charter schools and the broader school choice movement in Arizona. The fact is, some charter schools have higher administrative costs than districts; some have lower. Without a clear explanation of how the data in this report was calculated, it is difficult to respond to the report's conclusions. This much we know, what matters most is not numbers on a spreadsheet. It's school performance. If a charter school isn't succeeding, parents stop sending their children. If a charter is failing, its doors will be closed. That's what real accountability looks like."
We will post the charter school report here on Tuesday when it is released.
Copyright 2016 KPHO (KPHO Broadcasting Corporation). All rights reserved.Study says charter schools spend more on administration expenses - Tucson News Now:

Research: Louisiana's School Voucher Program Harms Student Performance - US News

Research: Louisiana's School Voucher Program Harms Student Performance - US News:

Evidence Mounts Against Louisiana Voucher Program

More research shows the Bayou State's voucher program harms students' academic performance.

Louisiana's private school voucher program – the fifth-largest in the country – is having a negative impact on students who use the vouchers to enroll in private school, a mounting body of evidence shows.
"Most striking, we find strong and consistent evidence that students using a [voucher] performed significantly worse in math after using their scholarship to attend private schools," said Patrick Wolf, the lead author for a series of studies published Monday by the university's School Choice Demonstration Project and Tulane University's Education Research Alliance for New Orleans.
The findings bolster those from a working paper published two months ago by a separate team of researchers that found students who used a voucher to attend a private school experienced lowered math, reading, science and social studies scores. In particular, their likelihood of a failing score increased by 24 to 50 percent.
Taken altogether, the studies come as states across the country mull similar programs and the private school choice sector is hitting a stride: Since 2008-2009, the number of students using vouchers increased by 130 percent, according to advocates'figures.
"One of the central debates about school reform is whether or not school choice improves student outcomes," the reports' authors noted. "School choice reforms, which comprise a broad category of policies aimed at improving public education through the introduction of market forces that may stimulate customer choice and competition between schools, have grown particularly popular since the 1990s."
Louisiana's voucher system provides about 6,700 students with about $5,300 per student, which they can use to pay for tuition at a private school. Only students from families with incomes below 250 percent of the federal poverty line – meaning $60,625 for a family of four, for example – and those whose public school has been labeled by the state as low-performing qualify for the voucher.
More than half of the Bayou State's roughly 1,500 public schools are low-performing.
The vouchers are awarded through a lottery system, and private schools that participate in the voucher program must accept them as full tuition payment, even if the sticker price is higher than a voucher's amount.
Specifically, the new research found that students who were performing at roughly the 50th percentile in their public schools – meaning their performance was average – fell 24 percentile points in math and 8 percentile points in reading below their public school counterparts after one year in private school.
During their second year in private school, the downward trend continued in math, but rebounded some in reading.Research: Louisiana's School Voucher Program Harms Student Performance - US News:

ACT's College and Career Readiness Standards

ACT's College and Career Readiness Standards:

ACT's College and Career Readiness Standards




 On February 11, 2016, the Fordham Institute published its idea of a report on how well a number of assessments align with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Here is a bit of what Fordham Institute wrote about ACT:

ACT Aspire and MCAS both did well regarding the quality of their items and the depth of knowledge they assessed.
Still, panelists found that ACT Aspire and MCAS did not adequately assess--or may not assess at all--some of the priority content reflected in the Common Core standards in both ELA/Literacy and mathematics.
That same day, ACT responded with a statement to the effect that ACT aligns "with college and career readiness standards":
The finding that ACT Aspire assessments adequately assess many but not all of the priority content reflected in the Common Core standards is not surprising. Unlike other assessments included in the study, ACT Aspire is not and was never intended to measure all of the CCSS. Rather, ACT Aspire is designed to measure the skills and knowledge most important in preparing students for college and career readiness. This is a significant philosophical and design difference between ACT Aspire and other next generation assessments. ACT has made the choices we have to align with college and career readiness standards, rather than specifically to the Common Core, and we intend to keep it that way. [Emphasis added.]
According to the above, ACT states that "college and career readiness standards" are not one and the same as CCSS. In fact, based upon the statement above, ACT snubs both CCSS and those who consider CCSS the center of the standards universe by implying that to be aligned with CCSS is a narrow alternative to "college and career readiness."
So, what of these other "college and career readiness standards?"
They are scoring rubrics on ACT's website. ACT calls them ACT College and Career Readiness Standards:
The scoring rubrics used to be called the ACT College Readiness Standards, but in May 2013, ACT renamed them the ACT College and Career Readiness Standards.
And in May 2013- almost three years after CCSS was officially launched- ACT alsoACT's College and Career Readiness Standards: 

Bill and Melinda Gates explain their charitable priorities for the coming year | The Economist

Bill and Melinda Gates explain their charitable priorities for the coming year | The Economist:

Bill and Melinda Gates explain their charitable priorities for the coming year

Up, up and away


SINCE 2009 Bill Gates has written an annual open letter setting out priorities for the charitable foundation he leads with his wife, Melinda. Some have highlighted specific causes: the first picked out reducing child mortality, improving agricultural productivity and raising the standard of education in America. Others have tackled big themes, such as how innovation could be fostered across the global economy. This year’s letter, signed jointly, strikes a down-to-earth tone. On a visit to schools in Kentucky the couple were videoed for a school project. The youngsters asked them: “If you had a superpower, what would it be?” Mr Gates answered “more energy”; his wife, “more time”. On the way home, they decided that the two things they wanted more of were what the world’s poor needed, too. In the run-up to the publication of this year’s letter on February 22nd, they talked to The Economist to explain why.
Much of the foundation’s work is with people, mostly in Africa and India, whose nights are lit by only kerosene lamps or candles. Their lives would be improved by even modest amounts of electricity—and transformed by reliable electricity from a grid, which would allow them to irrigate crops, start businesses and perhaps get jobs in factories. As for time, the value of poor women’s is often set at naught, meaning they must carry out back-breaking, low-productivity work such as fetching water and wood. Freed from these, women could care better for their children and homes, and, above all, seek paid work.
Mr Gates says his wish for more energy for the world encompasses three broad issues. The first is getting energy to people who do not have it. The second is limiting climate change—which will hit many of the same people hardest, since they are subsistence farmers in semi-arid regions, which will become drier and perhaps also more prone to extreme weather events. The third, since some climate change is now inevitable, is finding ways to mitigate its impact.
People in the rich world often think that tackling climate change is a matter of switching to somewhat more energy-efficient lighting, transport and so on, says Mr Gates. Such actions are valuable, but will add up to nothing like enough. The letter works through a simple equation: to keep climate change within bearable limits, total carbon emissions must fall to zero. That means either cutting energy use to zero, or finding a carbon-free way to get all the energy we need.
No one knows—yet—how that could be done. But he describes himself as optimistic that it can be. Will the breakthrough come from harnessing wind energy in the high atmosphere? From some novel type of nuclear fission or fusion? Solar energy twinned with geothermal? Some combination of all these, and more? What’s needed is “perhaps a dozen research efforts, going down each of ten paths,” he says. The investors who fund these efforts will need to be a bit more patient than those who invest in software or pharmaceuticals, two other fields where big bets into unproven technologies are routinely made. Governments, foundations and endowments will probably have to play a part. But considering the prize at stake, he says, what’s needed is not beyond imagining: “a matter of billions, not hundreds of billions”.
Without energy innovation, the world is on course for well above 2°C of warming: “it would be unfortunate to run that experiment.” As people get richer they will use more energy, and other poor countries, notably India, could be expected to follow China’s coal-driven development path. Even with snazzy new options they may, unless prices fall fast enough: poor people need cheap power. Rich countries would then need to change all the faster. And whatever happens next, the amount of carbon humanity has already emitted means that some climate change is already “baked in”. Poor farmers will need better farming techniques and new seeds to raise productivity, and more access to credit, to carry them through rough patches.
Time and energy are linked, says Mrs Gates: much of women’s unpaid labour is on tasks Bill and Melinda Gates explain their charitable priorities for the coming year | The Economist:


Monday, February 22, 2016

Why U.S. states earn poor marks on public ed support - The Hechinger Report

Why U.S. states earn poor marks on public ed support - The Hechinger Report:

Why U.S. states earn poor marks on public ed support

A look at new legislation, and the report that shows there are no ‘silver bullets’ to improve schools



 The recent passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) can provide a new opportunity for states to engage in initiatives to strengthen their public schools.

After the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), states assumed the role of supervisors of compliance, rather than initiators of change.ESSA will shift considerable responsibility for education policy and accountability from the federal government back to the states. Now states will have freedom to alter teacher evaluation systems as they see fit, and will have greater freedom in how they develop accountability systems and how they use the results of tests.
As we embark on this new era of state responsibility and reform, it is important to step back and evaluate the extent to which each state is already supporting (or undermining) its public schools. Such analysis would provide a glimpse into the direction in which states are likely to use their new freedom under ESSA.
The Network for Public Education’s new report entitled “Valuing Public Education: A 50 State Report Card,” provides a window into what policies and practices we can expect from our states. It evaluates how well each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia are presently supporting their public schools, based on objective and measurable factors identified by the Network for Public Education and a research team at the University of Arizona.
The report card gives high grades to states for embracing policies that help make their public schools vibrant and strong — a well-trained, professional teaching force, adequate and equitable funding wisely spent, and social conditions that give all students a better opportunity for educational success. And it lowers the grades of states that have embraced privatization and rely on testing to set graduation standards, promotion standards and teacher accountability.
This is how the report card works: It evaluates states based on six different criteria related to their laws and policies. The report card also considers the measurable effects those laws and policies have on schools. For example, although there are no longer laws that allow racial segregation, a state’s housing and school choice laws affect the Why U.S. states earn poor marks on public ed support - The Hechinger Report:

Louisiana’s middle class finally gets a glimpse of what NOLA parents and students go through - The Hechinger Report

Louisiana’s middle class finally gets a glimpse of what NOLA parents and students go through - The Hechinger Report:

Louisiana’s middle class finally gets a glimpse of what NOLA parents and students go through

Why higher education is not a luxury

Students at Edna Carr High School in New Orleans celebrate graduation. Photo: Andre Perry

Gov. John Bel Edwards sent chills down the spines of Louisiana students and parents when he announced a $28 million funding cut in this year’s Taylor Opportunity Program for Students (TOPS) due to the state’s inability to finance the merit-based state scholarship beyond previously set aside “statutory dedication” money.
Louisiana’s economy is moving into a downturn even as much of the country picks up. While news that colleges and universities would absorb the TOPS funding shortfall palliated Louisianans’ anxieties for the moment, the idea that thousands of people would pay unexpected tuition bills next fall made parents and collegians justifiably feel as if the state placed a basic right beyond its citizens’ reach.
In other words, Louisiana’s middle class families just got a glimpse of what it feels like to be New Orleans public school parents.
Highlighting cuts to TOPS certainly raised the consciousness of the importance of financial access to higher education. But if Edwards’s tactic of using TOPS doomsday scenarios to attract scrutiny to Louisiana’s budget crisis has a greater utility, it is to make the middle class sympathetic to those in which higher education is perpetually out of reach.
Higher education isn’t a luxury.
High school graduation rates have risen over time, but the value of the degree has declined. In 2014 The Pew Research Center found that 22 percent of Americans with a high school diploma lived in poverty, compared with 7 percent of Baby Boomers who held a high school diploma in 1979, when they were in their late 20s and early 30s. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the median weekly earnings of someone holding a bachelors degree in 2014 is $1101 compared with $668 for those with just a high school diploma. The unemployment rate among those with a high school degree is 6 Louisiana’s middle class finally gets a glimpse of what NOLA parents and students go through - The Hechinger Report:




Why are many students with ‘A’ averages being barred from college-level classes?

Remediation is still the rule, despite research showing its limitations



If  community colleges are going to be the new pathway to the middle class, they have a lot of work to do, according to a new study.

They offer degrees that can help low-income and first-generation students gain a foothold in an increasingly competitive job market, yet for years community college graduation rates have remained low. Despite research showing reforms that can improve those rates, most colleges haven’t put those changes in place, the new report shows.
For example, a recent wave of researchsuggests that placement exams are ineffective at judging whether students are ready for college-level work – yet 87 percent of community college students say they are still required to take these exams.
Even more striking, the report found that 40 percent of students who had an A average in high school were placed into remedial classes.
And while there is increasing evidence that remedial education courses act more as obstacles than gateways to graduation, the vast majority of colleges still adhere to that traditional model.
Still, “Expectations Meet Reality: The Underprepared Student and Community College” shows that some colleges have shown significant improvement using models that could be fairly easily replicated and don’t require loads more money.
“There’s been a lot of innovation, and sometimes it comes across as though things are really changing, but this report is really a reality check,” said Evelyn Waiwaiole, the director of the Center for Community College Student Engagement at the University of Texas at Austin, which produced the report and released it Tuesday.
Most students – 86 percent of the 70,000 surveyed – believed they were prepared for college when they first enrolled. Nonetheless, 67 percent tested into “developmental education” – remedial courses that students are required to take before they can enter college classes. Students don’t earn credits for most developmental education classes, but still have to pay for them, and they often eat Why are many students with ‘A’ averages being barred from college-level classes?

Student data being stored and swapped among many agencies | KTVB.COM

Student data being stored and swapped among many agencies | KTVB.COM:

Student data being stored and swapped among many agencies








BOISE - How would you feel if you found your child was being tracked from the minute you registered them for kindergarten, until they enter the work force? Idaho has several agreements that allow and require them to do just that.
Many parents don't realize that their student's personal information is being collected and shared at the state and federal level, among many different agencies.
KTVB talked with concerned parents, as well as the State Department of Education to get to the bottom of why students' data is being stored and shared.
"I believe our youngest, most vulnerable citizens probably should have the most protection of privacy," said Mila Wood, a concerned mother and spokesperson for Idahoans for Local Education.
From the very beginning of the school day, children are shedding data. From the bus stop to the classroom laptop, hundreds of data points are being collected by state, corporate and federal agencies.
"They collect everything, they absolutely collect everything," Wood added. "Actually one of the very first items that kind of brought my attention was this little card in my son's wallet when he was in eighth grade and it's an Idaho Department of Labor card." 
Stacey Knudsen is another parent active in finding out how, where and why her children's personal information is being stored. Sensitive information attached to their individual student ID numbers such as disciplinary actions, meal choices, socioeconomic status and much, much more.
"This information is really sensitive," Wood added.
"When we talk about keeping kids safe, and their data, that's extremely important," said Jeff Church, spokesperson for the Idaho Department of Education.
The Idaho State Board of Education is constitutionally responsible for supervising public education from kindergarten through college.
For that reason, a state-wide data system was created to evaluate and improve the process by which a student moves through the education system in Idaho. The Board works in conjunction with the State Department of Education, which tracks K-12 data.
"We only collect the data that we truly need, whether it be for federal reporting, state reporting or financial calculations and payments out to school districts," Church said. "Over the last year we have gone through a process of removing upwards of 200 data elements within that system."
Department officials say they have been working to collect a lot less data than they used to by asking the question: Do we need the data?
"If we don't for federal or state or financial calculations, we don't need it and we don't want it," Church added.
But parents say they are still concerned because the Department of Education still collects 390 elements and many of those elements are alarming.
"There's certainly not a need for us to be storing the amount of data that we're storing," said Knudsen.
Church argues that the aggregate academic information, like test scores, is crucial for policy-making decisions and measuring Idaho's success compared to other states.
"Seeing the data and how students across the state are doing on math informs the superintendent on policy decisions to say we need to make a change and move toward what works," he said.
Concerned parents believe the problems stem from personally identifiable information that other state, federal and private agencies have access to.
"Where is this information going? Who is utilizing my child's psychometric data?" Wood asked.
Parents also wonder why they are not given the option to give, or deny, consent for the data.
"Nobody can really give us a clear picture of who is accessing and how they're keeping that data safe," Knudsen said.
To protect that data, there is a federal law in place called the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA. But activists say it's become too relaxed over the last several years. In 2014, Idaho enacted its own student privacy law. The Board of Ed says the state-appointed Data Management Council does not allow a free-flow of information because the council oversees any requests to get ahold of any data.
"At no time is an individual student's data utilized for decision-making purposes or for individual purpose of any kind," Church added.
The department shares group and personal data with many state and federal departments, as well as private companies, including, but not limited to:
  • The Department of Health and Welfare
  • Federal Education Facts
  • Smarter Balanced Consortium
  • Title I Student Counts
  • Migrant Student Information Exchange
  • ISAT, College Board
  • Data Recognition Corp
  • Individual Student Identifier for K-12 Longitudinal Data System
"So they are all sharing the data together within our state longitudinal data system," Wood said.
They also share with the State Board of Education, which has agreements with other state and federal agencies such as the Department of Juvenile Corrections, Department of Labor, Department of Transportation, and National Student Clearinghouse.
Knudsen and Wood have plenty of advice for parents that are just finding out about this phenomenon.
"What you think is just between you and the teacher and the school, that's no longer the case," Knudsen said. "Be a little more wary of what you fill out, and really read through the documents that you're signing at school."
Church says parents can contact the the Department of Education and ask to see their child's personal data. Parents must file a public records request, and then meet with a representative in person.
The Board of Education says parents also have the option to go directly to their child's school and request to see the data there, at the source.Student data being stored and swapped among many agencies | KTVB.COM: