New education law's 'flexibility' will require better leadership from Gov. Brown OregonLive

New education law's 'flexibility' will require better leadership from Gov. Brown: Editorial Agenda 2015 | OregonLive.com:

New education law's 'flexibility' will require better leadership from Gov. Brown

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown and education policymakers must keep students' needs front and center as they develop accountability measures to track whether schools are making the progress that they should. (Stephanie Yao Long/Staff)

A few hours after President Barack Obama signed a new law that entrusts states with significant education-reform responsibilities, Gov. Kate Brown broadcast her own pledge to Oregonians.  

In a short statement, Brown said she is "committed to ensuring every student graduates high school with a plan and opportunities for his or her future" and that under the new Every Student Succeeds Act, the state will continue its focus on "equity, high standards and continuous improvement in our schools." She lauded the "flexibility" granted by the new law, which, as The Oregonian/OregonLive's Betsy Hammond reported, transfers the authority to set goals, define progress and select other accountability measures from the federal government to states. 

Healthy skepticism is warranted. Oregon does not do accountability well, whether it's in education or any other number of areas (see our Department of Energy editorial for an example of a state agency that has long escaped it). But more important, how states use their flexibility under the new law can be the difference between a tailored system that rigorously evaluates and seeks improvement for schools and one that hides its failures – such as Oregon's low graduation rate,chronic absenteeism and persistent gap in progress for low-income students with students overall – behind a façade of weak metrics. Oregon's success under the new law will require strong educational leadership from an administration that has, so far, shown little interest in making politically difficult decisions. 

Editorial Agenda 2015

Make Portland a city that works

Get pot right

Smart choices for education

Help rural Oregon

Keep people and goods moving

Foster small business growth

Track health reforms
_______________________________

Read more about the editorial board's priorities for Oregon.

To be fair, there have been other fires to put out since Brown abruptly became governor last February when Gov. John Kitzhaber resigned amid influence-peddling accusations. But it didn't take long for legislators to roll back, with Brown's blessing, one of his key reforms. The Legislature dismantled the Oregon Education Investment Board created by Kitzhaber in 2011 as an effort to comprehensively remake the educational system for children from birth to age 20. 

Personnel changes also set back educational initiatives. State Schools Chief Rob Saxton, a strong proponent of adopting higher standards and expectations in schools, retired from the state to take a lower-profile position with the Northwest Regional Education Service District. And the state's chief education officer, Nancy Golden, whose position was also pared down after Kitzhaber's resignation, retired three months ago. The position has been filled on an interim basis by Brown's education policy adviser, Lindsey Capps, a former teachers' union leader who has no experience as an educator.  

Brown then delivered her own blow as well. A teachers' union-led revolt against standardized tests took hold, resulting in a bill that would allow families to opt their students out of the new, tougher Smarter Balanced exam for any reason. Despite extolling the need for data from such standardized tests to track how well schools are teaching students – particularly low-income and disadvantaged students – Brown buckled and signed the bill. Both the old New education law's 'flexibility' will require better leadership from Gov. Brown: Editorial Agenda 2015 | OregonLive.com:

Rapid response unit aims to counter criticisms of Teach for America - The Washington Post

Rapid response unit aims to counter criticisms of Teach for America - The Washington Post:

Rapid response unit aims to counter criticisms of Teach for America

A nonprofit group has begun a public relations campaign to defend Teach for America against critics of the program that places newly minted college graduates in teaching jobs in some of the country’s most challenging classrooms.

The new campaign, called Corps Knowledge, is an offshoot of the New York Campaign for Achievement Now (NYCAN), a network that supports public charter schools and school choice and wants to weaken teacher tenure laws.

Derrell Bradford, NYCAN’s executive director, said the campaign aims to counter attacks on Teach for America’s image, which some people loyal to the program think has been damaged by “a few disgruntled alumni” and other critics.

Several TFA alumni have written negatively about their experiences, saying that TFA’s five-week training session did not adequately prepare them for teaching in struggling schools and that the two-year commitment that TFA requires adds to the teacher churn in high-needs schools.

[High-poverty schools often staffed by rotating cast of substitutes]

“Some of the best people I’ve ever known have worked for TFA — great, caring, smart — and it’s tough to see your friends get dragged through the mud,” said Bradford, who has $500,000 for the campaign and is aiming to raise an additional $1 million to expand it.

The campaign has one full-time employee, has hired an external public relations firm and will focus initially on social media and on publishing opinion pieces.

The Corps Knowledge campaign is run independently of TFA, although many of those involved in NYCAN and TFA know each other. Matt Kramer, a former co-chief executive of TFA, sits on the board of NYCAN’s parent organization, 50CAN. Kevin Huffman, a TFA alumnus and former Tennessee education commissioner, sits on the board of Corps Knowledge.

“We certainly talk, but this is separate from TFA,” Bradford said. “TFA is letting us take her sister out, and we said we would bring her back on time.”

The campaign plans to highlight the positive stories of TFA, which turns 25 this year. The program is designed not so much to groom career teachers as to inspire recruits to work on the larger issues of urban education in varied ways. And they do: TFA alumni run charter schools and traditional school districts, make state and federal education policy and fill the talent pipeline for an education reform movement that promotes school choice, merit pay and tougher accountability measures for teachers.

But the new campaign also is answering Teach for America’s harshest critics.

One of them, Gary Rubinstein, writes a blog about education that frequently Rapid response unit aims to counter criticisms of Teach for America - The Washington Post:

Campaign Song to Defend Teach for America

YOU PICK!

 
OR

Paving the way toward privatization - EducationNC

Paving the way toward privatization - EducationNC:

Paving the way toward privatization

Legislators embrace vouchers, charter school expansion, disregard calls for accountability

Since taking charge in Raleigh, conservative lawmakers have been steering public dollars into a range of alternatives to traditional public schools that march under the banner of “school choice.”

“Vouchers = theft” — Teachers gather on the mall outside the N.C. General Assembly in 2013 to speak out against state lawmakers’ cuts to public education. (Photo credit: Clayton Henkel)

Beginning as a trickle, but with the potential to become a flood, spending is growing for vouchers to pay tuition at private and religious schools; an expanded roster of charter schools run by for-profit companies; and two virtual charter schools operated by a scandal-plagued company.

Meanwhile, those same legislators are squeezing conventional K-12 schools with budgets that place North Carolina near the bottom of national rankings for teacher pay and per-pupil spending. A central rationale for providing these alternatives is that traditional schools fall short in educating children from low-income households and communities, children of color and children with special needs.

But even as they cite end-of-grade test results and other data to demonstrate the shortcomings of conventional schools, the legislators are requiring no such accountability from voucher programs and charters. So far, there is no evidence that at-risk children fare better on average in the alternative settings and an abundance of anecdotal examples in which they are clearly worse off.

Vouchers for unaccountable private schools

In 2013, legislators opened the door for sending taxpayer funds to private schools, 70 percent of which are religious in orientation and sponsorship. And some are home schools pretending to be something more.

Public School Forum President Keith Poston discusses the decline in public school support over the last five years, as legislative support has grown for vouchers and charter schools.

School vouchers of $4,200 a year, formally known as “Opportunity Scholarships,” are touted as a way to help low-income and minority children who are falling behind in their local public schools by providing access to better options in private ones. The program is strongly embraced by conservatives, but there is concern about accountability in their own ranks.

Near the end of the 2015 legislative session, a group of Republicans in the House banded together to block a proposal by school voucher champion state Paving the way toward privatization - EducationNC:

Much Ado About an Enigma – No One Really Knows What Impact the ESSA Will Have on Public Schools | gadflyonthewallblog

Much Ado About an Enigma – No One Really Knows What Impact the ESSA Will Have on Public Schools | gadflyonthewallblog:

Much Ado About an Enigma – No One Really Knows What Impact the ESSA Will Have on Public Schools

President Barack Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) this week.

The new legislation reauthorizes federal law governing K-12 public education.

In 1965 we called it the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Until today we called it No Child Left Behind (NCLB). And now after a much-hyped signing ceremony, the most definitive thing we can say about it is this: federal education policy has a new name.

Seriously. That’s about it.

Does it reduce the federal role in public schools? Maybe.

Does it destroy Common Core State Standards? Possibly.

Is it an improvement on previous policies? Potentially.

Will it enable an expansion of wretched charter schools and unqualified Teach for America recruits? Likely.

The problem is this – it’s an over 1,000 page document that’s been open to public review for only two weeks. Though it was publicly debated and passed in the House and Senate, it was finalized behind closed doors and altered according to secure hurried Congressional votes. As such, the final version is full of legal jargon, hidden compromise, new definitions and verbiage that is open to multiple meanings.

How one reader interprets the law may be exactly the opposite of how another construes it.

Take the much-touted contention that the ESSA reduces the federal role in public Much Ado About an Enigma – No One Really Knows What Impact the ESSA Will Have on Public Schools | gadflyonthewallblog:

We hold these truths to be self-evident… - Wait What?

We hold these truths to be self-evident… - Wait What?:

We hold these truths to be self-evident…

In her latest column on CT Newsjunkie entitled, “The Time Is Now For Moral Courage – Politicians Can’t Be Bystanders To Hate Speech,” Sarah Darer Littman provides readers with a personal and powerful commentary on the rise of Hate Speech and the importance of standing up and speaking out against the fundamental principles that are supposed to serve as the foundation of our national values.

Sarah Darer Littman writes;

Growing up, I was profoundly influenced by my father’s stories of growing up in the Bronx fearing the hate-filled rhetoric of Father Charles Coughlin’s radio broadcasts. Like his modern day counterpart, Donald Trump, Coughlin was a bona fide media star, with millions of listeners. “When we get through with the Jews in America,” Coughlin spewed, “They’ll think the treatment they received in Germany was nothing.” In December 1938, thousands of Coughlin’s followers took to the streets of New York City, chanting, “Send Jews back where they came from in leaky boats!”

I also remember the deep emotion my father expressed when we found out the method by which his grandparents, who’d remained in Ukraine when my grandfather emigrated to the U.S., were murdered by the Nazis during WWII. Our family knows from personal experience the real consequences of hateful rhetoric.

That is why I am so deeply appalled that the party my father supported is aiding and abetting hate speech. That is why I was so disgusted with former Congressman Rob Simmons’ answer to WPLR’s Chaz and AJ when they posed the question: “Donald Trump calls for a temporary ban on Muslims until our legislators can figure things out — is that nutty?”

Simmons said, “No, it’s not nutty at all.” Simmons claimed that Democrats from “Barack Obama on down” are scared of Trump. I’m an unaffliated voter, and I’m scared of him, but Simmons couldn’t be more wrong (not to 

We hold these truths to be self-evident… - Wait What?:

Well-financed charter schools plan lobbying blitz–where are public schools’ champions? | Bob Braun's Ledger

Well-financed charter schools plan lobbying blitz–where are public schools’ champions? | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Well-financed charter schools plan lobbying blitz–where are public schools’ champions?

Two of the largest national charter school chains–KIPP and Uncommon Schools–will be using their students and their students’ parents Monday in a massive lobbying effort aimed at ensuring the expansion of their businesses in Newark. The drive comes just as resistance to school privatization in the state’s largest school district has collapsed because of a deal between Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and Republican Gov.–and presidential hopeful–Chris Christie.

The lobbying effort–dubbed “Hands Off Our Future–Parent Lobby Day”–is  not aimed at any effort to reduce the number of charter schools in Newark and other New Jersey cities, but rather to block a legislative effort to create a moratorium on new charter schools to study their impact on traditional public schools.

In other words, KIPP and Uncommon Schools, both chains run by boards with close ties to the financial industry, are exploiting parents and students to help grow their businesses–not to protect the education current students are receiving.

 They are being used to advance the financial interests of charter chains, which want to expand.

Diane Ravitch, the former federal education official and now a  nationally known  critic of the corporatization of American pubic schools, pointed out the cynicism inherent in such efforts:

“Your taxpayer dollars have been used to open schools that drain resources from your public schools while selecting the students they want. If your state has charters, you can expect that they will lobby the legislature for more charters. They will close their schools, hire buses, and send students, teachers, and parents to the State Capitol, all dressed in matching T-shirts, to demand more charters.

“Since the children are already enrolled in a charter and can’t attend more than one, they are being used to advance the financial interests of charter chains, which want to expand.”

That’s worth repeating: These children and their parents are not fighting to keep their own schools open, but they are conscripts in a war waged by corporate interests against traditional public schools–a war in which the prize is the $700 billion a year spent annually on public education, a war that can be only be won by the privatizers by expanding their chains and driving out public schools.

What makes the actions of the charter school operators even more cynical is that the moratorium bill is going nowhere–they are using the dead-in-the-water Well-financed charter schools plan lobbying blitz–where are public schools’ champions? | Bob Braun's Ledger:

CURMUDGUCATION: The Charter Bond Time Bomb

CURMUDGUCATION: The Charter Bond Time Bomb:
The Charter Bond Time Bomb

Inspired by the stunning NEPC report on just how deeply and thoroughly charter schools are used as a mechanism for sucking public tax dollars into private pockets, I've been trying to read up on this stuff, in particular by looking through the work of one of the reports co-authors, Bruce Baker (Rutgers University). Baker operates the blog School Finance 101, and it's an excellent resource for those trying to make sense out of the arcane world of, well, school finance.

I'm dipping into Baker's work to lay out one simple progression that takes charters from vexing to terrifying in just a few steps of property acquisition, in the process setting a ticking time bomb. I'm going to try to lay this out in my own words, mainly as an exercise for myself (one of my personal and professional principles of learning is this: want to really understand something? try to write about it), but I recommend you follow the links and read the full originals. (Also, any mistakes in what follows are mine, not Baker's).

STEP ONE: Double Purchase and Zero Ownership

In this piece, Baker explains how the taxpayer buys the same property twice, and ends up with no control over it. Here's how I think it works.

I buy a house. Well, I take out a mortgage on the house. But now I'm on the hook financially for the house. I make my payments. I may even pay it off.

Then Chris comes along and proposes to buy the house from me. And Chris's proposal is that I take CURMUDGUCATION: The Charter Bond Time Bomb:

NCLB Revisionism

Well, that didn't take long.

Some folks are already getting misty-eyed over the halcyon days of No Child Left Behind and grumbling about what has been lost in the newly-minted Every Student Succeeds Or Else Act. The problem with getting misty-eyed is that it seriously impairs your vision.

Take Chad Aldeman (Bellwether Education Partners) in yesterday's Washington Post, who wants us to know what wonderful things we've lost now that No Child Left Behind has been left behind.

In Aldeman's story, NCLB put pressure on schools to improve, and the more pressure it created, the more people fought back.

Over time, as expectations rose, so too did the number of schools failing to meet them. At the law’s peak, more than 19,000 schools — about two-fifths of schools receiving federal funds and one-fifth of all public schools nationally — were placed on lists of schools “in need of improvement” and subject to consequences built into the law...

As the law aged and those consequences rose, it became less and less politically acceptable to tell so many schools to improve, let alone expect states or districts to have the technical capacity to help them do it. 

What Aldeman fails to mention is that the increased failure rate was directly related to NCLB's NCLB Revisionism

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Donna More is more of the same -- if not worse

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Donna More is more of the same -- if not worse:

Donna More is more of the same -- if not worse

As readers know, I support Kim Foxx in her effort to unseat discredited Cook County State's Atty. Anita Alvarez, who covered up the Laquan McDonald murder. But Foxx is not the only one running. There's also Donna More.

I actually think More, who claims to be a "progressive Democrat," would be More of the same -- if not worse than Alvarez.

I mean, what kind of progressive Democrat makes big contributions to Bruce Rauner's and Eric Cantor's campaign war chests? More, whose family wealth alone could transform her into a contender, has also given money to Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald and the disgraced John Ensign. In fact, all of her federal giving history has been to Republicans. 

Friday, More lifted the cap on donations to candidates in the primary race by handing herself a $250,000 contribution (Sun-Times).

More is also a big Rahm Emanuel supporter. She donated heavily to Rahm's campaigns, thinks he should remain in office, and defends him in the video cover-up scandal.

More is a throwback to the Jon Burge era. She was a deputy prosecutor under former Mayor Daley, when he was the State's Attorney. While she denies any Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: Donna More is more of the same -- if not worse:

Can a Supreme Court justice be forcibly removed from the bench? A quick civics lesson. - The Washington Post

Can a Supreme Court justice be forcibly removed from the bench? A quick civics lesson. - The Washington Post:
Can a Supreme Court justice be forcibly removed from the bench? A quick civics lesson.

There he went again.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, whom my Washington Post colleague Robert Barnes called “the reigning champion of provocation at the high court,” just stirred up another controversy with comments about why African Americans might be better off if they are not accepted into top colleges and universities but rather to “slower-track” schools where “they do well.”

Scalia made the comments during a court hearing in a case challenging the race-conscious admissions plan at the University of Texas at Austin. You can read the transcript here, but suffice here to say that  they were labeled downright racist by critics and simply wrong by the more generous.

Not surprisingly, there are new calls for Scalia to leave the court, including a petition on Change.org. Given that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life, is it possible for them to be forced off the bench if they don’t want to go?

Yes — but it’s a most highly unlikely prospect.

The Constitution grants Supreme Court justices a lifetime appointment if they choose to stay by not specifying a time or age limit of service.  The purpose of a lifetime appointment was to give them freedom to make decisions without interference from the executive or legislative branches of government. But the Constitution leaves open the possibility of impeachment and removal by Congress. In U.S. history, one justice was impeached, but not convicted, and one justice resigned under the threat of impeachment.

Section 1 of Article 3 of the Constitution says:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

The single justice impeached but subsequently not forced out was Samuel Chase, a longtime Maryland legislator who was appointed to the court as an associate justice by President George Washington on Jan.  26, 1796, and who served there until his death on June 19, 1811.

In 1804, eight articles of impeachment accused him of allowing his political views to interfere with his decisions.  This description of  events comes from the U.S. Senate’s website:

Samuel Chase had served on the Supreme Court since 1796. A staunch Federalist with a volcanic personality, Chase showed no willingness to tone down his bitter partisan rhetoric after Jeffersonian Republicans gained control of Congress in 1801. Representative John Randolph of Virginia, at the urging of President Thomas Jefferson, orchestrated impeachment proceedings against Chase, declaring he would wipe the floor with the obnoxious justice. The House voted to impeach Chase on 

Can a Supreme Court justice be forcibly removed from the bench? A quick civics lesson. - The Washington Post:

What Scalia’s controversial remarks about African Americans expose about U.S. higher education - The Washington Post

What Scalia’s controversial remarks about African Americans expose about U.S. higher education - The Washington Post:

What Scalia’s controversial remarks about African Americans expose about U.S. higher education

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia just stirred up another controversy with comments about why African Americans might be better off if they are not accepted into top colleges and universities but rather to “slower-track” schools.” Scalia made the comments during a court hearing in a case challenging the race-conscious admissions plan at the University of Texas at Austin. He said in part:

“There are — there are those who contend that it does not benefit African Americans to — to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having slower-track school where they do well. One of — one of the briefs pointed out that — that most of the — most of the black scientists in this country don’t come from schools like the University of Texas….

“They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they’re – that they’re being pushed ahead in — in classes that are too — too fast for them….

“I’m just not impressed by the fact that — that the University of Texas may have fewer. Maybe it ought to have fewer. And maybe some — you know, when you take more, the number of blacks, really competent blacks admitted to lesser schools, turns out to be less. And — and I — I don’t think it — it — it stands to reason that it’s a good thing for the University of Texas to admit as many blacks as possible.”

Scalia’s comments have been slammed by critics as being racist — and defended, too, by conservatives — but less attention has been paid to the following argument: They expose a problem within higher education itself.  Here is a post on that issue, written by Paul Thoma, an associate professor of education at Furman University in South Carolina. This appeared on his blog, where you can find the complete version, and I am republishing it with permission.

[Read the most controversial statement by Scalia on college admissions and race]

By Paul Thomas

There is a story that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is inadvertently exposing: the negligence of higher education to teach the students who walk the halls and sit in the classrooms after being admitted.

First, let me pull away from that specific claim to a broader pet peeve of mine: remediation.

Throughout formal education at every level from pre-K through undergraduate (and even graduate) education, students are commonly labeled as remedial (a designation that suggests the students are not at the proper level for the course they are taking) and thus need some additional services.

This is total hogwash. All students are remedial, and no students are remedial. You see, the essential role of a teacher and formal education is to identify what knowledge and skills students have as well as what knowledge and skills students lack (or need developing), and then to teach those students in that context.

So let’s return to higher education in the United States—where attending college is not a basic right and is often a tremendous burden on students and their families.

A significant number of students are admitted to colleges and universities for the benefit of the institution (full-pay students and athletes, as the most 

L.A. school official criticizes and seeks to limit leaks about superintendent search - LA Times

L.A. school official criticizes and seeks to limit leaks about superintendent search - LA Times:

L.A. school official criticizes and seeks to limit leaks about superintendent search

 important drama involving the Los Angeles Board of Education -- selecting its schools chief -- is playing out in private, and officials this week said they are determined to keep it that way, even though some details are getting out.

Exactly nine district people know precisely which individuals are being considered for the job, according to L.A. school board President Steve Zimmer and others, and he, for one, seems confident that they are keeping mum.

Despite this pact of secrecy, word has spread about some people being considered. They include San Francisco Supt. Richard Carranza, L.A. Unified Deputy Supt. Michelle King and Fremont Unified Supt. Jim Morris, who formerly worked for L.A. Unified.

These three and all others contacted by The Times have declined to be interviewed.

The problem for school board members is that no matter how diligently they try to close the circle, there are documents visible to others, travel arrangements to be made and astute observers in other places and even other cities. And friends, colleagues and family members in L.A. Unified or other districts are under no vow of silence.

The issue matters to board members because they want applicants to aspire to the L.A. job without putting their current position at risk.

“The purpose of conducting a confidential search was to ensure the best possible candidates could apply to lead what we believe to be the most important school district in the nation,” Zimmer said in astatement after The Times revealed some of those under consideration.

In an interview, Zimmer said he wants applicants to know that people involved in the selection process had nothing to do with the leaks.

“People need to know that they can trust us,” said Zimmer.

The nine district people in the know are the seven school board members, district general counsel David Holmquist and board executive officer Jefferson Crain. Also participating is lead search-firm consultant Hank Gmitro.

Managing confidential matters is a regular part of the job for Holmquist and for Crain, who handles documents, meeting schedules and legal compliance for the board.

Current L.A. schools Supt. Ramon C. Cortines, who plans to retire this month, said he lacks complete knowledge about potential candidates and has tried L.A. school official criticizes and seeks to limit leaks about superintendent search - LA Times:

Detroit school 'sickouts' measure system's dysfunction

Detroit school 'sickouts' measure system's dysfunction:
Detroit school 'sickouts' measure system's dysfunction

If there's any measure of just how bad things are in Detroit Public Schools, it's surely a series of "sickouts" — a coordinated mass absence under the guise of sick leave — which  forced seven schools to close Thursday.

Think about that for a minute: Seven schools closed without warning, not because of hazardous weather or some other unavoidable cause, but because tensions between the school district and the teachers it employs are so high.

Seven schools, where 3,989 students expect to learn. Nearly four thousand students, whose parents have jobs, family obligations or other responsibilities, and whose lives are structured around the school day. Thousands of parents, in a city with a 38% poverty rate, in a school district in which 81% of students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and that means parents with jobs less likely to offer paid time off, or the kind of flexibility that allows easy accommodation of an unexpected school closing.

DETROIT FREE PRESS

DPS teacher sick-out forces schools to close

At the same time, it's easy to understand teachers' frustrations.  The district's decline has been well-chronicled, and during the last 15 years of state oversight, its prospects have not improved. Gov. Rick Snyder has proposed a plan to split the district in two, stashing its burdensome debt, its operating millage and its elected school board with DPS, and creating a new district to educate kids, funded by the state-distributed per-pupil allowance and an additional appropriation to compensate for the loss of millage-generated dollars. There is no certainty that this plan will remedy the district's financial, much less academic, failings. And yet it is the only DPS reform plan that's even theoretically viable.

Sickout teachers are rumored to be those allied with former Detroit Federation of Teachers president Steve Conn, ousted by the union's executive board in August. Conn won his post pledging to fight the state's reform efforts and lost it because he violated the union's bylaws and was working to ally the union with the social justice justice group By Any Means Necessary, among other charges. Conn had the support of hundreds of DFT members and still commands respect from many.

And how can you reasonably ask teachers who have taught through DPS's decline — who have, over the last five years, seen four emergency managers try and fail to improve the district's finances  and by extension, teachers' ability to provide the same quality and quantity of textbooks, classroom materials, instructional aides and sheer manpower that students in wealthier districts enjoy — to have faith in yet another reform plan?

Teachers have seen layoffs and pay and benefit cuts and rightly fear that there is more pain ahead.

And yet it is hard to understand what end a sickout serves. The protesting teachers haven’t articulated any immediate goals or immediately actionable requests.

It's the second this month. The first, on Dec. 2, closed three schools. This time, emergency manager Darnell Earley is promising retribution, warning that the district can review sick-leave abuses and that any teacher connected to the sick-out would be "subject to a review" and "appropriate discipline."

DETROIT FREE PRESS

National union to run Detroit teachers' local

It is a snapshot of the DPS status quo, and I can't imagine Detroit school 'sickouts' measure system's dysfunction:

Los Angeles, Oakland Engaged in Broad Charter School War | The California Report | KQED News

Los Angeles, Oakland Engaged in New Charter School War | The California Report | KQED News:
Los Angeles, Oakland Engaged in Broad Charter School War

There’s a new push in the Los Angeles and Oakland public school systems to give charter schools more access to district students — pitting public school advocates against self-described education reformers.

In Los Angeles, the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation, backed by wealthy charter school advocates, confirmed a massive plan last month that would double the number of charter schools in the city over the next eight years.

Charters are publicly funded but independently operated, meaning they do not have to follow all the rules and regulations that govern traditional schools.

Los Angeles already has more charter schools than most cities in California.

“When you have more charters, the performance of the school district actually improves,” says Gregory McGinity, executive director of the Broad Foundation.

The notion that charters improve a district’s performance is still up for debate, but the idea of getting Los Angeles Unified School District’s support to enroll more than half of the district’s 1 million students in charter schools would certainly reshape the country’s second-largest school system.

“If we’re going to make sure that every child has access to a high-quality school, we have to do it together,” McGinity says.

L.A. school district officials are fighting back, and many parents believe creating more charters is not the answer because these schools do not guarantee student success.

“It takes something more than that,” says Rob McGowen, a parent organizer for African-American families in South L.A. “It takes a belief that a black child is a human being and is capable.”

Meanwhile, in the Oakland Unified School District, many parents are opposing a controversial plan that would change the district’s enrollment process so families could put in for district and charter schools with one application.

Oakland also has one of the highest concentrations of charter schools in the state, and the district would be the first in California to take on this reform.

Critics are slamming the plan, saying Oakland Unified should be doing all it can to keep students in district schools.

“We have no right to be the innovators of enrollment when we can’t get the basics right,” says Oakland school board member Roseann Torres. “First we start with our own. Then we can invite others.”

Torres and other critics also say the plan would leave the district with fewer resources to serve students with learning disabilities and behavioral problems.

Charter school advocates, however, say the enrollment proposal would help all families find the best school.Los Angeles, Oakland Engaged in New Charter School War | The California Report | KQED News: