In Case You Missed It – October 14, 2024

Here are links to last week's^† articles receiving the most attention on NEIFPE's social media accounts. Keep up with what's going on, what's being discussed, and what's happening with public education.

Be sure to enter your email address in the Follow Us By Email box in the right-hand column of our blog page to be informed when our blog posts are published.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

"...Ninety-eight percent of Indiana’s voucher schools are faith-based, with restrictive admissions policies that prove “school choice” is, in practice, the “school’s choice.”

Last year, 36% of new state tax funding for K-12 education flowed to voucher schools educating about 7% of Indiana students. Public schools, including charter schools, educated 93% of students but received only 64% of the new funding, according to legislative budget estimates at the time." -- by Karen Francisco in the Colorado Sun

PRIVATE SCHOOLS' CHOICE

Colorado families already enjoy school choice. Amendment 80 would open door to school vouchers.

Private schools choose their students.

From Retired FW Journal Gazette Editorial Page Editor, Karen Francisco, in the Colorado Sun.

In Indiana, I watched a fledgling school choice movement grow from a handful of public charter schools to a voucher entitlement program expected to cost state taxpayers $600 million this year.

The money diverted from public schools is not going to students who live in poverty. An investigation by the University of Notre Dame’s Gallivan Program for Journalism, Ethics and Democracy found the average Indiana voucher recipient is a white female who has never attended public school and comes from a family earning more than $99,000 a year. A family of four earning as much as $220,000 a year now qualifies for vouchers, in a state where the median household income is a paltry $66,800.

None of this comes as a surprise. Indiana’s near-universal voucher program was always the end game for former governors Mitch Daniels and Mike Pence, the legislature’s Republican super-majority and a nationwide network of wealthy donors that included Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump’s former secretary of education.

Emails obtained by The Associated Press under open records law revealed private meetings involving politicians and some of Indiana’s wealthiest powerbrokers — strategy sessions held over cocktails at high-end restaurants to plot out the voucher bill’s passage. A black-tie event at an Indianapolis hotel celebrated the misnamed “Indiana Choice Scholarship Program” — not a scholarship, but a handout to families already sending their children to private and parochial schools.

2024 ELECTION AND EDUCATION

Read the following articles for information about the Harris/Walz and Trump/Vance federal education plans.

Only a Harris-Walz Administration Would Protect Equity and Inclusion in the Public Schools

From Jan Resseger

In 1899, on the first page of The School and Society, John Dewey defined educational equity as essential for the public schools : “What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the community want for all of its children. Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely; acted upon, it destroys our democracy. All that society has accomplished for itself is put through the agency of the school at the disposal of is future members. All its better thoughts of itself it hopes to realize through the new possibilities thus opened to its future self. Here individualism and socialism are at one. Only by being true to the full growth of all the individuals who make it up, can society by any chance be true to itself.”

Certainly, John Dewey didn’t fully anticipate the ugly conversation we are having today—where an attack on Dewey’s principle of equity and on public schooling itself has been mounted by well funded billionaires in philanthropies like the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and Americans for Prosperity, well supplied with ideology and policy developed by the Heritage Foundation and other so-called think tanks, and spouted by billionaire-funded proxies like Moms for Liberty and Parents Defending Education. The ethos underneath the wave of school vouchers passed by far-right state legislators as well as the specific educational policies promoted in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 includes individualistic consumerism and white ethno-nationalism. There is a lot of money being invested today to help us all forget about Dewey’s vision.

One of the most troubling aspects of today’s far right attack on public schooling is that it appears to be a another in a long a series of political reactions against the principle of equity in our public schools. Since the Civil War, according to constitutional scholar Derek Black in his powerful book, Schoolhouse Burning, our society has struggled to realize our long declared principle that all children, no matter their race, gender, or immigrant status have an equal right to education. Black writes that after the Civil War in order to join the union, states were required to guarantee in their state constitutions that no child would be denied the opportunity for education...”

If Trump wins, count on continued culture wars, school vouchers, and a fixation on ending the federal Department of Education

From The Hechinger Report, by Josh Cowen

...With the former president and his allies still denying that he lost the 2020 election, with Trump and his running mate embracing unfounded stories about Haitian immigrants eating household pets and with Trump’s obsession with the size of his cheering crowds, any analytical projection about his future agenda is all but impossible. With such an absence of facts or evidence-based policy designs, we must turn to past actions, current rhetoric and the priorities of Trump’s political alliances for a hint of what could come.

On that basis, we could expect more debates about bathrooms and women’s sports, more inexplicable musings about whether slavery had benefits for enslaved Americans, more spending of scarce resources to put Bibles in public schools and more singling out of kids because of their immigration status.

Many Republican proposals have been well-covered, starting with Project 2025 — the policy agenda assembled by the conservative Heritage Foundation for a new Trump term. Although Trump denies that controversial document speaks for his candidacy, more than 140 former members of the first Trump team had a hand in its crafting.

The key education points in the platform Trump does claim as his own — the so-called Agenda47 and the GOP party platform — strike the same notes of emphasis as those in Project 2025. Indeed, the one-page education “chapter” in the 16-page party platform is all but a summary of its much larger Project 2025 counterpart.

Trump Describes His Plans for Education

From Diane Ravitch

When Donald Trump appeared recently in Milwaukee, he described his plan for the future of the Department of Education. It’s not quite the same as the scenario in Project 2025, which envisions the total elimination of the U.S. Department of Education. Trump imagines it as a “department” with only two employees: A Cabinet Secretary and a secretary.

The severely shrunken Department would focus solely on the three Rs and would somehow mysteriously have the power and personnel to prevent public schools across the nation from teaching anything connected to “woke.” That is, anything related to race, gender, or social justice. How this fictional Department would impose bans on curriculum when federal law prohibits any federal interference in curriculum is not explained. Actually, it’s nonsense.

Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling writes in The New Republic about Trump’s vision for the federal role in education.

^†Note: NEIFPE's In Case You Missed It is posted by the end of the day every Monday except after holiday weekends or as otherwise noted.

###

In Case You Missed It – August 28, 2023

Here are links to last week's^† articles receiving the most attention on NEIFPE's social media accounts. Keep up with what's going on, what's being discussed, and what's happening with public education.

Be sure to enter your email address in the Follow Us By Email box in the right-hand column of our blog page to be informed when our blog posts are published.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

"The future of the United States depends on an educated and empathetic citizenry. It requires us to share a sense of common purpose and recognize our common humanity. It requires an environment that allows every child to thrive and see themselves included in the American story. It requires quality public education. Full stop.

"A historic battle to save this institution and the very idea of good public schools has been underway for some time. It is now intensifying. Attention must be paid." -- Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner in The Battle To Save Public Education

SAVING PUBLIC EDUCATION

Dan Rather and Elliott Kirschner: The War to Destroy Public Education

NEIFPE was formed in 2012 to help support and defend public education in northeastern Indiana. Our Mission Statement (see the rh column on our full blog page) states our opposition to privatization which has increased over the last couple of decades through the actions of the Indiana General Assembly.

It may sound paranoid, but it's hard to watch what's happening and not think that the goal is the destruction of public education.

From Diane Ravitch

Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner wrote in their blog Steady about the importance of saving public education from the forces trying to destroy and privatize it. They remind us and the general public that public schools unite us; privatization is inherently divisive. It is ironic that the red states are implementing voucher plans as the evidence about the failure of vouchers and the null effects of charter schools grows stronger...

It is back to school. Students of all ages flock to campuses and classrooms. Fleeting memories of summer are quickly replaced by tests and textbooks.

Getting into the swing of a new semester has always included an adjustment period, but this is a particularly difficult time for many of our nation’s students and their parents, guardians, teachers, and others entrusted with the education of young minds.

...Few institutions in American life are as essential to the continuation of our democracy as the public schools. In a time of ascendent autocracy, attacks on our schools — how they are run, what they teach, what books they have in their libraries — are among the most pernicious, pathetic, and painful assaults on the health of our nation.

Another Day, Another Voucher Study…

One way the Indiana legislature is damaging public education is by diverting public funds meant for public schools into the pockets of private/parochial and charter school operators. We've mentioned before on this page that the state constitution mandates the General Assembly to support only one school system...the public one. Our legislature is funding three school systems with the money meant for one...and it's not helping our students.

In 2011, when then Governor Mitch Daniels pushed his voucher plan through the legislature, the call was to help poor kids "escape" from "failing schools" (defined as schools with low test scores). Now that we know charters and private schools don't do any better job of educating children -- the main problem is poverty -- the talking points have changed to focus on "choice."

Yet the "choice" is with the school, not the parents. Any private school in Indiana can refuse to allow your child to attend if their test scores are too low, if their parents don't conform to their ideal, if you can't afford to provide transportation, if the students themselves don't conform, or any other reason they can drum up to ensure that only the "right kind" of students attend their school. Public schools accept all students.

From Sheila Kennedy

Okay–I know it’s just one more time beating that horse (an animal quite probably dead by now…), but I can’t resist. Brookings has just issued yet another study confirming the educational downsides of voucher programs.

The study was prompted by the recent expansion of voucher programs and “education savings accounts,” (ESAs) which are functionally the same thing–the use of public money to allow parents to send their children to private schools. That expansion has occurred primarily in states that voted for Trump in 2020, which should be a clue that these programs are based on ideology; their proponents simply ignore that pesky inconvenient thing called evidence.

...This study confirms a number of the findings of previous research: for example, that after expansion of a voucher program or implementation of an ESA, pop-up schools immediately appear, many of which will close rather quickly, and that existing private schools raise their tuition.

The study notes that a decade of research has confirmed that vouchers reduce student academic achievement. Brookings cites studies from Louisiana and Indiana, among others, that found quite substantial declines in student test scores. (Indiana’s pathetic legislature simply ignored the fact that Indiana’s voucher program had demonstrably failed to perform as promised. In its recent session, the legislature made the program available to virtually all of Indiana’s schoolchildren, and is now promoting it heavily.)

SCHOOL LIBRARIES ARE DISAPPEARING

Where Have School Libraries Gone?

Steven Singer makes the case for saving school libraries.

From Gadfly on the Wall Blog

The School Library Journal and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported:

“Between the 1999–2000 and 2015–16 school years, the NCES reports that the profession lost the equivalent of more than 10,000 full-time school librarian positions nationwide. That translates to a 19 percent drop in the workforce, from 53,659 to 43,367. The most rapid declines happened from 2009–10 to 2013–14. The decline slowed from then to 2014–15; but resumed larger losses in 2015–16, the latest data available.”

We see school libraries being closed in Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, Washington, DC, etc. A 2016 report in The Guardian indicates how serious the problem is worldwide:

“Libraries should be a right in schools. We must give pupils the opportunity to go to a quiet place to do extra study or to choose a book to read. It is particularly important to children from deprived areas. Opening a library door helps children open their mind. For many, books are too expensive and a library allows students to borrow them.”

The problems is often one of priorities. Districts would rather spend billions on technology than libraries. However, both are important. Schools should not have to choose. They should make more diligent decisions about which technologies are most essential instead of buying every new techno-fad with huge promises and no track record.

PRAISE FOR WENDY ROBINSON

Robinson's professionalism drew the praise of her peers – and her parent

Karen Francisco who now lives in Littleton, Colorado, retired as editorial page editor of The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette in 2021. In this op-ed she remembers former Fort Wayne Community Schools superintendent, Wendy Robinson who died last week. (The full article is available to subscribers of the Journal Gazette.)

By Karen Francisco in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette**

One of the first challenges Wendy Robinson faced when she was appointed superintendent of Fort Wayne Community Schools came from a school board member who didn’t like the way the district taught reading.

At-large member Kurt Walborn’s criticism of the reading curriculum was well intentioned, of course. His young son, diagnosed with dyslexia, had struggled to read until Walborn sought out a new approach. The frustrated father ran for school board and became a passionate advocate for the one-on-one tutoring technique he wanted implemented at FWCS.

Today, as school boards across the nation are disrupted by right-wing members intent on banning books, challenging public health mandates and unearthing anything that smacks of social-emotional learning, a board member targeting reading instruction seems almost quaint. But it was in writing the story about the standoff between the new superintendent and Walborn that I developed a true appreciation for Robinson’s commitment to students.

While sympathetic to Walborn’s concerns, she insisted that the district would not drop the investment and promise of its comprehensive literacy program for a single, focused reading instruction method.

“Just as he thinks Reading Recovery doesn’t work for all kids, I feel his program won’t work for all students,” she said at the time. “I’m not out to prove I’m right and he’s wrong. Every year, we are going to do our research. We can’t stay stuck in the same methods if they don’t work.”

THE SCIENCE OF READING OMITS SOME SCIENCE

The science that’s missing from science of reading laws

Background knowledge is crucial to comprehension. Without comprehension, children aren’t really reading no matter how well they can use phonics to sound out words.

From Chalkbeat*

In the long-running reading wars, proponents of phonics have won.

States across the country, both liberal and conservative, are passing laws designed to change the way students are taught to read in a way that is more aligned with the science of reading.

...But there has been much less attention paid to another critical component of reading: background knowledge. A significant body of research suggests students are better able to comprehend what they read when they start with some understanding of the topic they’re reading about. This has led some academics, educators, and journalists to call for intentional efforts to build young children’s knowledge in important areas like science and social studies. Some school districts and teachers have begun integrating this into reading instruction.

*Note: Financial sponsors of Chalkbeat include pro-privatization foundations and individuals such as Bloomberg Philanthropies, Gates Family Foundation, The Walton Family Foundation, and others.

**Note: The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette is behind a paywall. Digital access, home delivery, or both are available with a subscription. Staying informed is essential; one way to do that is to support your local newspaper. For subscription information, go to fortwayne.com/subscriptions/ [NOTE: NEIFPE has no financial ties to the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette]

^†Note: NEIFPE's In Case You Missed It is posted by the end of the day every Monday except after holiday weekends or as otherwise noted. The next posting of In Case You Missed It will be on September 11, 2023. Thank you for your support of public education.

###

In Case You Missed It – April 12, 2021

Here are links to last week's articles receiving the most attention on NEIFPE's social media accounts. Keep up with what's going on, what's being discussed, and what's happening with public education.

Be sure to enter your email address in the Follow Us By Email box in the right-hand column to be informed when our blog posts are published.

VOUCHER EXPANSION IN INDIANA

New Indiana budget proposal scales back private school voucher expansion

The Indiana Senate scaled back the increase in Indiana's voucher program proposed by the House of Representatives. Public school advocates and more than 170 school boards spoke out against the massive increase that the House proposed.

From Chalkbeat*

After a chorus of opposition from public school districts and advocates, Indiana Senate Republicans significantly scaled back an expansion of the state’s private school voucher program under their budget proposal Thursday.

The Senate plan would not extend private school vouchers to as many middle-class families as suggested in the House budget proposal and other legislation discussed this session. It also would dramatically curtail a proposal for education savings accounts, which would give stipends to parents of children with special needs who do not attend public schools.

The Senate would nonetheless make the state voucher program, which currently serves more than 36,000 students, more generous than it is currently. Students from a family of four earning nearly $110,000 per year could be eligible for vouchers under the Senate plan. It would raise the eligibility for new students to 200% of the subsidized meal income qualifications and 225% for returning students and those receiving special education, instead of the House’s proposed cap of 300%.

No Pause in Indiana's Push for Privatization

The Senate might have scaled back the House's massive gift to privatization, but an expansion of vouchers is still an expansion of vouchers.

From Live Long and Prosper

The bill now goes to a conference committee where House members will try to put back what the Senate took out. Speaker of the House Todd Huston, whose campaign contributions include $35,000 from Betsy DeVos's Hoosiers for Quality Education (see also here), said that the house will "be negotiating very aggressively" to get back what was taken out so they can satisfy their lust for privatization.

One might even think that the plan all along was for the House to propose an extreme expansion of vouchers, then have the Senate back off a bit to pacify public school advocates (and more than 170 school boards around the state), and settle on a more "modest" increase in voucher money and an ESA plan.

It's still an increase in Indiana's ever increasing move towards total privatization.

FIGHTING VOUCHERS

Scholars show how to challenge voucher discrimination

Steve Hinnefeld explains one possible way to fight against vouchers.

From School Matters

...supporters promote vouchers to expand opportunities for students and families. But, as the programs expand, state officials often enable them to deny those benefits to entire groups of students.

“Vouchers were sold as program that all could benefit from, but the anti-LGBT provisions give the lie to that statement,” Green said.

Charters vs. Vouchers

What's worse, Vouchers or Charters? Both have had their part to play in harming America's public schools, but one has more potential to destroy them altogether. Do you know which one it is? Peter Greene casts his vote.

From Curmudgucation

I have tried (I love a good thought experiment), but I cannot imagine a world with a voucher system that is not really a pay-your-own-way, two or three tier system (with the vestiges of public education occupying the lowest tier). Charters have adopted and tacked on free market ideology as a tool and a desired outcome, but vouchers cannot be separated from it, because the whole concept of vouchers is about replacing shared societal responsibility for maintaining a common good with opportunities for folks to make a buck. At the same time, the wealthy will still get the education they want for their children, while being freed of any requirement to help foot the bill for educating Those Peoples' Children. And I am unable to imagine--nor have I seen anyone propose--a voucher system that works otherwise.

LOCAL FORT WAYNE EDUCATION

PFW allowing student teachers to substitute for local school systems

Purdue University in West Lafayette modified its policy and now allows student teachers to get paid for substituting. Purdue Fort Wayne (PFW), follows suit.

From Fort Wayne's NBC

Back in March, Purdue modified its policy regarding student teachers working as paid substitutes.

“We knew our school partners were struggling with needing subs, so when we heard about Purdue’s move, we wanted to do the same. Student teachers pay full tuition for the experience of working full-time under the guidance of a mentor teacher – they do not get paid. I love that this provides an opportunity for our students to both help their schools and make a financially challenging semester a little easier.”

Isabel Nuñez, director of Purdue Fort Wayne’s School of Education

NACS teachers support masks: Union backs precautions as others voice opposition

The teachers of Northwest Allen County Schools take a stand on wearing masks.

From the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette**

As parents lobby the Northwest Allen County Schools board to relax masking rules, teachers are speaking up in support of mask-wearing and other coronavirus precautions.

Such protocols make in-person instruction possible during the pandemic, protecting students from the greatest threat to their social and emotional health – isolation from classmates and teachers, the Northwest Allen County Education Association said in a statement.

“To safely achieve the 'in-person' structure, precautionary measures such as the wearing of masks and social distancing must be implemented and respected,” the union said. “These precautionary measures allow educators to effectively support the academic success and emotional health of the thousands of NACS students and families in our community.”

FROM DIANE RAVITCH

My Broken Heart

NPE President, Diane Ravitch, told her readers about her upcoming heart surgery.

From Diane Ravitch

I was born in 1938. I’m in pretty good health, considering my age. But one of the valves in my heart has a leak. It must be repaired. On April 8, I am having open heart surgery. The surgeon will break open my breastbone to reach my heart, then wire it back together. He assures me I will be fine, but fatigued, when it’s over.

I have tried to take it in stride, but it’s hard not to find it scary. Terrifying, actually.

Karen Francisco: Why I Fight to Save Public Schools

While she's recovering from heart surgery, Diane Ravitch asked others to write blog posts for her. In this piece, Karen Francisco, editorial editor of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette**, chronicles her journey towards public school advocacy.

From Diane Ravitch

I wish I could say Indiana has seen some success in fighting off the privatization monster, but that’s far from the truth. More than $1 billion has now flowed to private and parochial schools through the voucher program, with no accountability. A scandal involving a virtual charter school cost taxpayers at least $85 million, with seemingly no concern from lawmakers or taxpayers. In the current legislative session, the Republican supermajority is throwing everything at school choice: income limits that make vouchers available to wealthy families, ESAs, full funding for online-only schools and more.

*Note: Financial sponsors of Chalkbeat include pro-privatization foundations and individuals such as Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, EdChoice, Gates Family Foundation, The Walton Family Foundation, and others.

**Note: The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has changed its online access and is now behind a paywall. Digital access, home delivery, or both, are available with a subscription. Staying informed is important, and one way to do that is to support your local newspaper. For subscription information go to fortwayne.com/subscriptions/

###

Comments and Questions From NEIFPE Showing of Rise Above the Mark

On Sunday, August 17, the Fort Wayne Cinema Center, in collaboration with NEIFPE, presented the film, Rise Above the Mark.

From the Rise Above the Mark website...

Rise Above the Mark is a documentary narrated by Peter Coyote that brings to light the heartbreaking realities of public education. It’s the story of what happens when politics enters the classroom.

Public schools are boxed in by current corporate reforms. Rules and regulations restrict vision, depreciate funding, demoralize teachers, and turn students into test-taking machines, robbing them of time to foster creativity.

Rise Above the Mark focuses on Indiana’s struggles with public school reforms—the same types of struggles experienced in schools throughout the United States.

Experts Diane Ravtich, Linda Darling-Hammond, Pasi Sahlberg and others discuss how America can make positive changes to provide an exceptional public school system for all children.

A panel discussion with Northwest Allen County Schools Superintendent Chris Himsel, Karen Francisco of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette and Whitley County Consolidated Schools Business Manager Kirk Doehrmann followed the showing in the Theater.

The following comments and questions were provided by the Cinema Center audience after the film. Some comments and questions were difficult to read. Please forgive any errors. They are in no particular order. NEIFPE answers follow the questions and are highlighted.

###

1. I was wondering if this show will be televised throughout the state? I would also like to hear the panel's reaction to Mitch Daniel's remarks on satellite schools this week.

2. How did the position of the Teachers Unions allow this change to occur? Now, how can the unions reorganize to create influence to move the pendulum back the other direction?

3. 1) Embrace the ISTA Amendment. 2) The Business Plan of Shadow Government. 3) Please talk about poverty and education.

4. Karen, you are a spokesperson for pre-school education. What would you suggest IN should do to move this along? Are vouchers the "way to go?"

5. (COMMENT, RHETORICAL QUESTION) Feels so good to be validated as a public school teacher and to have such a cohesive, fervent, research-driven piece created and presented. I am so thankful to have retired from teaching in Ohio before they started using test scores as a teacher evaluation tool instead of a student diagnostic tool. When teachers are so much about creating a positive atmosphere for students, how can legislators require administrators to treat teachers in such negative ways, creating such a demoralizing environment? My such excellent teacher friends are beside themselves with stress.

6. How do we get state legislators to watch this movie and to engage in these issues?

7. In an age of accountability, how can we show that local control can work?

8. Why test at all? How should school effectiveness be measured?

9. Getting government/politics out of education: How to do it soon? How to "fight" the monied interests? How to change the conversation with the current crop of politicians?

10. Can you identify legislators who are in support of public schools?

NEIFPE sent out a questionnaire to all the candidates running for office. We'll be posting the results of the survey on this blog and on our Facebook page over the next several weeks.

11. How do you think the situation in Ferguson, MO impacts our thinking about the role and necessity of public schools?

12. Get the schools back the right way schools should be.

13. So true is the statement that those who are making all the decisions in education know nothing about teaching. Also, I agree that the legislators in Indianapolis care only about money -- not the students, not public education. Karen Francisco does a great job covering education issues. Keep up the good work.

14. I went to school in NY back in the 70s. I think the point is that teachers allowed to teach and were were allowed to use our minds. In the 50s we as a country got off our butts due to sputnik and cared to kick our education system up.

15. Is there a comparable group of activists in S. IN and other parts of the state?

The Monroe County Coalition for Public Education is in Bloomington.
The Indiana Coalition for Public Education is in Indianapolis.
Other groups in Indiana can be found HERE.

###

Rise Above the Mark -- February 28, 2014, Butler University

A few NEIFPE members (who weren't at the NPE Conference in Texas) attended the screening of Rise Above the Mark at Butler University in Indianapolis on February 28, 2014.

The following videos, taken by our friend Clyde Gaw [Indiana Art Education Advocacy Action Blog], is of the discussion after the film.

Featured in the film along with other educators and parents, are...

Diane Ravitch, educational historian and co-founder of The Network for Public Education, author of Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools
Karen Francisco, editorial writer, Fort Wayne Journal Gazette
Linda Darling-Hammond, Professor of Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, author of The Flat World And Education: How America's Commitment to Equity Will Determine Our Future
Pasi Sahlberg, visiting Professor of Practice at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education, author of Finnish Lessons
Marc Tucker, CEO, National Center on Education and the Economy, author of Tough Choices or Tough Times
Jamie Vollmer, former business executive, author of The Blueberry Story and Schools Cannot Do It Alone

Diane Ravitch with NEIFPE co-founder Donna Roof and Stephanie Bush.

For further information...

Rise Above the Mark

Ravitch tangles with school reformers on Butler panel

###

Karen Francisco: "We're All in This Together"

We are reposting the text of Karen Francisco's general session remarks to ISBA/IAPSS (School Board/Superintendent's Association) fall conference, Sept. 24, 2013. While this is long, it is well worth your time to read because it explains so much of what has happened to public education in Indiana. When you have finished reading it, please send Karen a thank you for all that she does to shine a light on education.

"Thank you so much for asking me to speak today. I have to admit this is a bit disconcerting. Those of you in the audience are usually the people that I’m calling and that I’m hoping will talk. This experience is throwing me off a little bit.

When I’m asked to speak to groups on the subject of education, I like to note the distinction that I am an editorial writer – I write opinion, sometimes my own under my byline, often the opinion of The Journal Gazette editorial board. That’s different from the role of reporters, who are expected to remain neutral. It is an important distinction, however.

The other point I want to make is that I’m speaking today with the full knowledge and support of my publisher, Julie Inskeep, and my editor, Craig Klugman.

Two years ago I spoke to the Indiana Coalition for Public Education and some of my remarks were quoted in a column by Dan Carpenter of the Indianapolis Star. The next day, my editor received a call from the governor’s office. It was apparently an attempt to put me in a bad position with my boss.

Of course, Craig knew that I was speaking to the Indiana Coalition for Public Education and told the governor’s spokeswoman that he was aware of it and that my remarks were not a problem.

Now, I’m not sure what it says about the governor’s office, that speaking to a group of public education supporters would be viewed as subversive.

But I think it probably does say something profound about the very difficult environment in which Indiana public schools have operated for the past several years.

This audience certainly is in the position to know how difficult it has been, and also to know that the real story about your schools has not been told.

That’s what I’m hoping to help you with today -- How to rewrite the story of Indiana public education, or at least how to tell the rest of the story.

Some of you probably remember those old radio spots, where announcer Paul Harvey would offer a news item, pause for a commercial message and then deliver “the rest of the story.” They were entertaining stories, and their lasting effect is as a reminder that there’s often more to what a listener or reader is offered –- another side of the story.

That is certainly true for public education today. While schools always have been subject to claims that they were tougher or better “back in the day” – when people walked two miles uphill – to and from school.

But the criticism today isn’t fueled by nostalgia, but by outside forces – forces intent on painting public education in the worst possible light.

We hear endless references to the “failing public schools.” We hear administrators and teachers described as selfish and resistant to change. Recently, some critics have taken to calling public schools “government schools.” – as if they are horrible institutions in which no one would want find themselves or their children.

You’ve heard some criticism unique to Indiana schools -- some are “Taj Mahal schools” or they are failing schools where children need choices now because they “can’t wait” for things to improve.

And then we hear the lofty language of “choice” – scholarships, not vouchers. Tuition-free, not taxpayer-supported. Schools of choice, not government schools.

It’s very deliberate language from critics intent on controlling the message.

And how have they come to control the message about public education in Indiana? With 24-7 access to information, it would seem that people have every opportunity to learn about public schools – to hear about their successes, about the hard work educators are doing and the tremendous strides they are helping students make.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. There are a number of reasons why, but to talk about the issues facing your business, it’s necessary to tell you a little bit about my business, because I think the two are irrevocably linked.

In fact, if there’s anyone who can relate to the tough climate public schools have operated in for the past few years -- - it’s those of us in the newspaper industry.

Here are some figures for you to think about – and they might resonate even more with those of you who have faced the difficult task of closing schools. In 1983, there were 1,701 daily newspapers in the United States. By 1993, the number had fallen by nearly 200. By 2003, it had decreased by more than 300. Today, there are about 1,375 daily newspapers in the U.S.

The loss of entire newspaper operations obviously means the loss of jobs, but it doesn’t come close to telling the whole story. At the remaining 1,300-plus newspapers, tens of thousands of jobs have been eliminated.

2008 was the most brutal year in journalism. A website called “Paper Cuts” tracks layoffs in our industry. There were 16,000 newspaper jobs eliminated in 2008, counting all areas of production.

In newsrooms alone, 17,600 jobs have disappeared since 2006. I don’t have a breakdown for Indiana newspapers, but I can tell you, having spent 30-plus years in Indiana journalism, that hundreds of newsroom jobs have been eliminated in this state – and they are unlikely ever to return.

So what does that have to do with Indiana public schools?

Well, it means, quite simply, that there are fewer storytellers. There are fewer education reporters to cover school board meetings. There are fewer reporters to write feature stories about outstanding teachers and fascinating new programs. There are fewer reporters to write about technology in the classrooms, or students excelling at college-level work.

It also means there are fewer sports reporters to cover cross country or wrestling or even the biggest football game on any given Friday night.

It means there are fewer community editors to handle honor rolls or spelling bee winners or marching band results.

It means, in short, that much of the everyday good news about public schools is not being reported – the kind of news that in years past connected residents to their schools and made them proud to support them – even if they no longer had children enrolled there.

Unfortunately if a newspaper or TV station looks closely at a public school these days, it’s for a response to ISTEP+ scores, or for comments on budget cuts or some sort of alleged scandal.

Another reason the success stories of public schools are going unreported is that Indiana residents and everyone else have found other ways to read the news they want. Instead of picking up the morning paper or tuning into the local 6 o’clock news, they log onto Facebook, or check their Twitter feeds.

If a mutual friend is urging them to vote against the local school referendum, that’s all they need to know. Or, if a Facebook friend has posted a story about a superintendent retiring with a six-figure benefits package, along with some derogatory comments, that’s all they need to know. If a Facebook friend is extolling the quality of her child’s private-school experience, that’s all they need to know.

Of course, none of this is a problem as far as the parents in your own school districts are concerned. Those who are closest to the schools are those who know them best, and they are pleased with the work being done there. Public opinion poll after public opinion poll tells us this.

The latest is the well-respected Phil Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools. If you haven’t looked at the results of this year’s survey, released just a month ago, you should.

Parents of public school students were asked to assign a letter grade to the school their oldest child attends. 71 percent of those surveyed gave a grade of A or B to their schools. That’s the highest percentage in 20 years, up from 68 percent in 2008.

Parents also believe their schools are safe. Asked if they fear for the physical safety of their oldest child while at school, 88 percent said no, compared to just 63 percent in 1998. Think about that – after Newtown, after Columbine – public school parents feel better about the safety of their schools.

But then there are the respondents who are NOT public school parents. Sixty-seven percent of those surveyed in the Phi Delta Kappa poll, in fact, do not have children in public schools.

Those 67 percent of residents – higher and lower percentages depending on where you live – are the primary targets of those who are painting public schools as inferior, as unsafe and wasteful.

They are counting on the growing influence of social media. They are counting on their ability to control the message. They are counting on the declining availability of local news coverage.

Who are “they”? Yes, I know it sounds a bit paranoid. But what’s that old saying? Just because you’re paranoid, that doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you?

I think public school supporters should take that to heart.

I mentioned my editor, Craig. He’s sort of a gruff, old-school type, who spent quite a few years in Chicago journalism. One thing he stresses endlessly: Follow the money.

For those of you in public education, follow the money likely means following it to that “reset button” pushed in 2009, when $300 million disappeared and has never been returned. It means following the tens of thousands or even millions your school district is losing to property tax caps. It might mean following the thousands of dollars lost with each child who withdraws from your district and enrolls in a parochial or charter school.

In my case, there’s been lots of money to follow. There the money spent on charter schools operated by for-profit education management companies. In one case, I’ve followed the money from Indiana taxpayers to a real estate investment trust in Kansas City. This real estate investment trust, which also owns a couple of charter school properties here in Indianapolis, has holdings in megaplex theaters, ski resorts, water parks, vineyards and public charter schools. It brings to mind that old “Which one of these is not like the others, right?”

In 2011, Indiana taxpayers spent more than $3.2 million in rent – that’s rent -- on just four Indiana charter school properties owned by this real estate investment trust in Kansas City. The company earned nearly $85 million in profits in 2010. Its triple net lease agreement makes the tenant – essentially Indiana taxpayers – responsible for maintenance costs, utilities, insurance and taxes.

In the case of one of the Indianapolis schools, 22 percent of its budget was going to building costs, even as the governor’s office criticized traditional public schools for capital projects and pushed for more dollars to the classroom.

In following the money, I also followed the frequent out-of-state travel the previous state superintendent of public instruction made in 2011. It was a victory lap, of sorts, beginning right after the school voucher bill was approved, signed and kissed – literally—by the governor. And if you don’t believe me, check the YouTube video – it’s the first state law I’ve ever seen signed with a kiss.

Superintendent Tony Bennett traveled across the country multiple times to boast of Indiana’s success in passing a voucher law. When I submitted FOIA requests for travel records and emails related to the trips, I was stonewalled – told that I was not requesting material with “sufficient particularity.”

I was told that records did not exist.

I was told that a staff member who handled the records had just left and there was confusion as to where the information could be found.

I was also told, interestingly, that my requests should not distract the staff from the department’s work. When I asked how the out-of-state travel might be distracting the superintendent and his top aides from their work, I was told it did not; they were busy in crafting rules on vouchers, teacher evaluations and the school A-F system.

We now know, of course, they weren’t having a great deal of success with that A-F system, and that they were spending some time on re-election work, as well.

Where it’s most difficult to ignore the troubling signs, however, is in following the millions of dollars in campaign contributions. Contributions from groups with high-minded names like “Stand for Children Indiana” and the “American Federation for Children.”

If you follow Stand for Children Indiana in the campaign finance database you’ll learn that its physical address is in Portland, Ore.

Follow the contributions to Stand for Children and you’ll find that they came from the pro-school choice mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, and from the head of the pro-voucher Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.

And you’ll see that they flowed last year from Portland, Ore., to Indiana – to the campaign coffers of the former state superintendent, to the Speaker of the Indiana House, to the chairman of the House Education committee and to a Republican member of the Senate Education Committee. They flowed to a candidate who formerly was chief of staff for the Department of Education.

At least I think that’s where it went – the candidate is curiously misidentified – not once, but twice -- on the contribution reports. If you were to quickly search the reports to see if Stand for Children Indiana gave money to this candidate, you wouldn’t find it -- it doesn’t show up in a search of contributions by name. It’s only in carefully searching entire lists of contributions that you find it.

And if you work backward to follow the contributions on that Republican House member’s campaign finance report you’ll find that Stand for Children also is mysteriously misspelled, not once – but twice – as Stand for Childred – again, an error that would throw off a search by contributor.

By the way, voters in that representative’s Hamilton County district might want to ask how it is that a member of the House Education Committee can’t spell the word “children.”

Following the money linked to the American Federation for Children is where things become really interesting, and it’s where you begin to see how intricately connected the so-called school reform movement has become.

The American Federation for Children shows two addresses in campaign finance records. One is in the Washington suburb of Alexandria, Virginia – the other is in Terre Haute, the same address as the law offices of James Bopp. If you’re not familiar with James Bopp, he is a conservative activist, the former GOP national committeeman for Indiana and the legal muscle behind the controversial Citizens United ruling that has allowed unlimited corporate spending in federal elections.

The American Federation for Children is truly the engine in the school reform movement. And while its name suggests a huge, beneficent movement – it’s really a rather small group of uber-wealthy conservatives determined to push school voucher legislation in every state.

The American Federation for Children has contributed nearly three-quarters of a million dollars to Indiana candidates since 2010. With the exception of Tony Bennett, the money was funneled through other committees, primarily Hoosiers for Economic Growth.

Hoosiers for Economic Growth last year contributed more than $1.1 million to Republican Statehouse candidates who, in turn, continued to pass education reform bills, even though many of those same Republican candidates said before the election that it was time to take a break and see how earlier changes were working.

The most expansive school voucher program in the nation was expanded again this year. And now we know that some changes in budget language allowed the governor to create an entire new education agency, one that is essentially autonomous from the Department of Education and Superintendent Glenda Ritz.

The story of education reform in Indiana is so complex – so intertwined – that I’m not sure the rest of the story can easily be told to casual observers. But I would hope that those of you in this room are taking the time to untangle all of the threads.

In Indiana, there is a determined core of ed reformers whose names repeatedly come up, either as campaign contributors, or appointees to education-related boards. Seldom do these reformers have any real experience with public schools – not as educators, not as school board members – In some cases, not even as public school parents.

Remember how I told you my industry and yours are so closely tied? I believe that one factor in the attack on Indiana public schools was that newspapers were not performing the watchdog function that is the heart and soul of our First Amendment privilege. We let you down, quite honestly. Tough, investigative reporting fell by the wayside with newspaper staff cuts. My industry also fell for some of the same misleading charges that have convinced politicians. Solid education reporting was replaced by education reform reporting. Even after the failed experiments of open classrooms and site-based management and more, too few reporters were asking tough questions about unproven approaches.

Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former chief of staff – now the mayor of Chicago (and no friend of public education, by the way)– said “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

No where was that taken to heart as enthusiastically as Indiana. The state’s budget problems became a sort of battering ram at the door of public schools. Even before that giant reset button was hit and $300 million was cut, the state pushed through property tax “reform” -- there’s that word again – that essentially gutted local control of public education. Authority you once had over your budgets and your enrollment is now gone. Anyone who objected – to the effects of property tax caps, or limits on capital budget spending or anything else – was criticized as “protecting the status quo” or worse, putting adults before children.

This was the work of very determined, very clever politicians – Politicians who have been on record for decades as critics of Indiana public schools. They used the recession -- a crisis – as an opportunity to pass laws they had sought for many years. Over time, the policies they’ve pushed will fail, but you and other public education supporters can’t wait for that to happen.

Now, it’s the rest of the story that needs to be told, and what I hope you’ll take from my remarks today, is what really is happening in public schools today. It’s not the story of children trapped in failing schools, held hostage by adults protecting their turf and the status quo.

Telling the rest of the story is truly a case of speaking truth to power.

We saw a very good example of it just about a year ago, when the A to F grades were issued and some brave public school superintendents spoke up to question not the results, but the formula itself.

Now we know the formula might have been “plausible,” but we also know that it was contrived. Don’t believe for a moment that the study of the A-F formula released a couple of weeks ago vindicated or exonerated anyone. That’s the political spin put on it by people embarrassed to have defended it, but you don’t choose a word like “plausible” if you are attempting to clear the air.

In fact, the legislative charge for the study very intentionally directed the authors of the study NOT to investigate the motive behind the grade change. And the recommendations for how a grading system should be established are so contrary to what currently exists that it’s clear the authors didn’t intend to endorse it any fashion.

In telling the rest of the story, it’s important to remind legislators again and again that public school administrators raised the initial questions. And while those legislators are now quick to tell everyone that they already had ordered the system revised – even before Christelgate – the fact is that they wouldn’t have done it on their own.

Another way to tell the rest of the story about public education is to challenge the narrative of failing public schools. If you’re not sure how, I would point you to the work of Vic Smith. I know that many of you here know Vic. He spent 40 years in education, retiring as associate director of the Indiana Urban Schools Association in 2009. As a school board member or superintendent, you should be familiar with the research he has done tracking the progress of Indiana schools. It amounts to 23 years of progress:

Rising attendance rates. Graduation rates. SAT verbal and math scores. ACT composite scores. NAEP scores. ISTEP+ scores. The percentage of Indiana high school graduates going to college. The percentage of Indiana graduates earning an academic honors diploma.

All of these have steadily increased. Not just in the last year since vouchers were approved. Not just since charter schools were approved a decade ago and the competition was supposed to force traditional schools to improve.

No, these improvements that Vic Smith documents have been occurring steadily for 23 years. You need to share this information – you need to tell the rest of the story.

Another point you should make: As Indiana schools have been improving, economic and social conditions have been deteriorating. There have been reports in recent weeks about the dismal economic progress Hoosiers have made.

A Ball State study found that the average per capita income statewide is at a 1996 level. In some counties, it’s much worse – lagging the rest of the nation by 30 years.

The poverty piece can’t be ignored when talking about education. Figures from the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s latest Kids Count report show that in 2010, the food insecurity rate for children was nearly 23 percent. That’s nearly one in four Indiana children living in households where the availability of food is uncertain, insufficient or limited due to economic, physical or other constraints. That’s appalling, and it’s not the fault of public schools.

In 2011, 23 percent of Indiana children lived in poverty. Again, an appalling figure. For many years, Indiana’s child poverty rate was lower than the national average, but it has matched or surpassed the national figure since 2009. Yet our political leaders continue to boast of some sort of an economic miracle in this state.

As public school leaders, you are on the front lines of seeing the effects of these dismal numbers. I can’t imagine that any public school district in the state is entirely immune from them, even if some see it to far greater effect.

Which brings me to an important point in sharing the rest of the story. One approach the school-reform crowd has used to great advantage is the divide-and-conquer tactic. As they have pushed anti-public education measures, they’ve succeeded by telling the legislators whose votes they need that their own district’s schools won’t be affected. Reform is for those “failing big-city schools,” they say. Yet they pass sweeping, statewide legislation that has effects on all schools.

I understand that your first obligation is to your own school districts – and you’ve certainly had enough placed on each of you to keep you busy responding to those issues.

But the fact is that protecting turf within suburban, urban and rural districts has had the effect of hurting all schools. And when any public school is struggling, that struggle becomes a weapon to use against all schools. When speaking on behalf of public education, the message should be that you’re all in this together.

And the message doesn’t have to be defensive. If you know anything about what I write, you probably know that I’m practically a broken record when it comes to the subject of early learning. I never miss an opportunity to point out Indiana’s embarrassing record in providing early childhood education. You all know how long it took to finally get full-day kindergarten in this state, but achieving that milestone still brought us up just to the back of the pack. Indiana is one of just 10 states that dedicate no state dollars toward preschool.

You can accept the argument that we’ve suffered through a recession, but consider that we managed to build a huge state budget surplus and pass along not only a tax refund, but also new tax breaks for businesses.

And the business community already is back looking for more – I received an op-ed article just last week from an economic development group calling for another tax deduction to be approved in the next legislative session – this one allowing manufacturers to take a deduction for domestic production.

I know that all of you are busy, but I haven’t received any op-eds from administrators or school board members calling for investment in early learning. Yet there’s an easy case to be made for it. After you’ve studied Vic Smith’s research on the success of Indiana public schools, look at James Heckman’s work on early learning.

He has this to say:

“Some kids win the lottery at birth, far too many don’t – and most people have a hard time catching up over the rest of their lives. Children raised in disadvantaged environments are not only much less likely to succeed in school or in society, but they are also much less likely to be healthy adults. A variety of studies show that factors determined before the end of high school contribute to roughly half of lifetime earnings inequality. This is where our blind spot lies: success nominally attributed to the beneficial effects of education, especially graduating from college, is in truth largely a result of factors determined long before children even enter school.”

James Heckman is a Nobel Laureate in economics; he teaches at the University of Chicago. Heckman looks at early learning in terms of its value. That’s the rest of the story Indiana legislators and voters need to hear.

I don’t want to finish without giving you some very concrete tips on communicating with audiences beyond your own school communities. I know I didn’t paint an encouraging picture of your local newspaper, but don’t overlook it as an important part of telling your story.

Certainly, you have to respond when controversy arises or something bad happens, but there are ways to encourage local news outlets to tell their audiences more about schools. First, invite them to come and learn what’s new. When they write about it, make a point to thank the reporter, and the editor and publisher for the coverage. When it’s budget time and tough decisions have to be made, share the story behind it before your critics get the chance to control the message. If you’re hoping to pass a referendum, the local newspaper can be your best friend or your worst enemy. Make your case.

Finally, I want to end with some encouragement. I think there are better days ahead for public schools. I think the holes in the education reform story are growing larger every day, and I would like to think that good journalism – and good public policy involving public records – helped expose those holes.

A public radio reporter asked me recently if I call myself an “advocate” for public education. For someone who has spent years consciously avoiding labels of Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, it’s uncomfortable to describe myself as an advocate. But the more I thought of it, the more willing I was to accept the title.

Education historian Diane Ravitch had this to say about public education in her book, “The Death and Life of the Great American School System”:

“As a nation, we need a strong and vibrant public education system. As we seek to reform our schools, we must take care to do no harm. In fact we must take care to make our public schools once again the pride of our nation. Our public education system is a fundamental element of our democratic society. Our public schools have been the pathway to opportunity and a better life for generations of Americans, giving them the tools to fashion their own life and to improve the commonweal. To the extent that we strengthen them, we strengthen our democracy.”

I hope you’ll join me in claiming the title of advocates for public education and help me to tell the rest of the story of the Great Indiana School System."

If you appreciate the outstanding reporting that Karen Francisco does, and if you appreciate the support that the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette gives to public education, please write them a thank you to let them know how important their work is to all of us.

• Karen Francisco (kfrancisco@jg.net) editorial page editor
• Craig Klugman (cklugman@jg.net) editor
• Julie Inskeep (jinskeep@jg.net) publisher

~~~

Not Ready to Exonerate Tony Bennett in School Grading Scandal

The following op-ed, written by Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education (NEIFPE) and the Monroe County Coalition for Public Education (including Monroe County coalition member and public school parent, Jenny Robinson) appeared on Anthony Cody's Living in Dialogue blog titled Indiana Grassroots Groups Not Ready to Exonerate Tony Bennett in School Grading Scandal. It was also posted on the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette's Learning Curve blog, written by Karen Francisco, under the title Reputation rewrite, ed-reform style.

In his article in the September 9, 2013 Education Week, Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute, claims that the recent report on the Tony Bennett grading scandal, commissioned by leaders of the Indiana state legislature, has exonerated Bennett and his staff. Many of us here in Indiana would respectfully disagree.

Most of the state news reports indicated that Bennett’s claims were plausible, which was a curious word choice. There are many ways to interpret the word plausible, which seems to imply there is an appearance of truth, which may or may not be accurate.

Having said that, Steve Hinnefeld states that while acknowledging plausibility, Bennett has NOT been exonerated.

“Grew and Sheldrake said Friday that the report does not ‘exonerate’ or ‘vindicate’ Bennett, nor condemn him. They said it only explains how his team changed the grading formula...”

The only people who would consider the report "exoneration" are those who agreed with Bennett in the first place. To the best of our knowledge, Bennett was never in favor of "grading on the curve" before Christel House didn't get its "A." Perhaps the question that should be asked is this: Would Tony Bennett have made any changes if the supposed error was discovered in any of the large urban public schools like Indianapolis or Ft. Wayne? The answer is absolutely not.

While no one really seems to understand the A-F system, under the revised standards, school wide performance and improvement are predominantly based on standardized tests. At the elementary and middle school level a preliminary score is based on the percentage of students passing several state tests. The high school accountability formula gives significant weight to graduation percentages, incorporates college and career readiness (which is determined by the number of students who pass AP and IB tests or by earning at least 3 college credits, or by receiving industry certification. School districts had complained about the A-F system when Bennett first pushed it through.

While all of this may sound plausible in theory, in practice it does not take into account the variables of school demographics or of poverty levels or of any of the intangibles which work together to create a school environment. Recognizing this, in April lawmakers mandated that Bennett’s system needed to be overhauled and a new grading system be created in its place. These actions came before the grading scandal erupted in July. Currently, the Accountability System Review Panel, a review committee composed of teachers, principals and superintendents, will review the system and create a new one.

Whether what Bennett did was plausible or not is really irrelevant to those of us who are still dealing with the damage that Tony Bennett did to public schools and public school teachers in this state. Bennett’s IDOE issued punitive policies and grades with warp speed and with little transparency. The abrasive attitudes displayed by Dr. Bennett and his IDOE team were both mind boggling and sickening. Mr. Hess indicates in his article that Indiana voters sent Bennett packing because of his style. However, we would argue that Bennett's style was only a part of why we voted him out; his damaging policies were the major reason. His leadership style left little room for discussion or for debate or for field testing. His push to privatize, voucherize, and charterize Indiana public schools has left them reeling financially and has left educators dispirited as they have tried to jump through policy hoops which they knew in their hearts were educationally unsound.

Unfortunately, one of the worst of these initiatives was the A-F grading system, and this and the rest of his agenda is still being carried out by the Indiana reformers that he has left behind. When we look at that grading system, we need to ask what is the purpose of giving schools a letter grade? Is it meant to help improve how a school functions, how children learn, and how teachers teach, or it is meant to label and devalue a school community? If grades are used to label rather than to improve learning outcomes, then perhaps that system itself deserve an F.

Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education and Monroe County Coalition for Public Education

You can access NEIFPE's blog here, and Monroe County Coalition Public Education's blog here.
http://icpe-mcsci.blogspot.com

An additional comment from a parent, Jennifer Robinson, who is a member of Monroe County Coalition Public Education:

I'm a parent of young children, not an educator, and I'm just going to talk about elementary through 8th grade here. Bennett wanted a system where absolute scores on ISTEP, combined with some degree of scoring for growth, was equated with the quality of our schools. It all came down to standardized test performance. In other words, school culture did not matter. Whether children got science and social studies, in the grades which have no ISTEP test for that subject, didn't matter. Whether they had access to school libraries staffed by certified media specialists did not matter. Art, music, P.E., didn't matter, and increasingly in southern Indiana schools lack certified teachers in those areas. Clubs, field trips, community connections didn't matter. Recess didn't matter. Class sizes didn't matter. Whether the teachers had extra knowledge of the subjects they were teaching didn't matter. (It is my understanding that funding for professional development was eliminated in the Bennett years.) Whether kids enjoyed learning and wanted to go to school didn't matter. Whether your child's teachers talked with you didn't matter (our district no longer pays teachers to hold conferences with parents). And if you had a problem with Bennett's system, or felt it was unfair to your school, he didn't want to hear about it. He rejected two pleas from Indianapolis Public Schools that the grading would be unfair to them for the same reasons that Christel House didn't do well. When such pleas came from public school administrators, in his eyes, those were mere excuses.

In my own district, the two schools that had the highest proportion of free-and-reduced-cost lunch both received "F's." In one of these schools, with the economic downturn, there were twenty-eight homeless children. There were kids coming to school who needed to sleep for two hours, and eat, before they could even begin to learn. And Bennett's grades penalized these schools for working with vulnerable children, and they made those children a liability to the school.

But it turned out that his own rules, which he wouldn't have even considered modifying for other schools, could be rearranged at the last minute in the special case of a donor's charter school, a school that he had held up as an example. This was proof for teachers in public schools across Indiana that the deck was indeed stacked against them. Bennett just knew (and it was to his political advantage to believe) that Christel House was a good school, and the whole grading system had to be altered to fit reality as he knew it. It was a grading system that worked on a curve, with a guaranteed percentage of losers. It was to be linked to teacher's evaluations and pay. It had punitive consequences for individual children (who would want to be the valedictorian of an "F" school?) and for neighborhoods branded with failure. And it had been developed with so little care that it could be thrown into disarray and totally rearranged for one school's grade.

If you want to know why Bennett and co. changed the grade, read the e-mails. Thanks to AP reporter Tom Lobianco, they are online for all of us to see.

Tony Bennett emails batch 1

Tony Bennett emails batch 2

Tony Bennett emails batch 3

Tony Bennett emails batch 4

Tony Bennett emails batch 5

Jennifer Robinson, Monroe County Coalition Public Education.

###