From Detroit to Raleigh: Neo-Nixonian Right Wing Moves to Crush Diversity Policy in Wake County

As a result of President Roosevelt issuing an executive order in 1941 to forbid discrimination in defense industry hiring, huge numbers of African-Americans moved to Detroit to work in industrial and manufacturing jobs that had been only pipe dreams until that time. To contain the influx of blacks, however, within the restricted boundaries of the City of Detroit, racist leaders used residential redlining, "restrictive covenants, white preferences, and discrimination by real estate brokers" to assure the separation of the races (Grant, 2009, p. 146). Detroit's black population grew from 4 percent in 1930 to 40 percent in 1970, even as the leafy suburbs surrounding Detroit blossomed and flowered, thanks to VA and FHA policies that advocated for the creation racially and economically "harmonious" neighborhoods, i. e., whites only.

In 1971 the NAACP legal team sued the City of Detroit for its ongoing history of deliberate policies to create and maintain apartheid housing, as well as segregation of the public schools. The NAACP's most recent evidence was the City's nullifying of a school integration plan in 1971. Federal District Court Judge Stephen Roth, a conservative Democrat, ruled in favor of the NAACP. Here is part of Judge Roth's opinion, as quoted by Grant (2009):

The city of Detroit is a community generally divided by racial lines. Residential segregation within the city and throughout the large metropolitan area is substantial, pervasive and of long standing. Black citizens are located in separate and distinct areas within the city and are not generally to be found in the suburbs. While the racially unrestricted choice of black persons and economic factors may have played some part in the development of this pattern of residential segregation, it is, in the main, the result of past and present practices and customs of racial discrimination, both public and private, which have and do restrict the housing opportunities of black people. On the record, there can be no other finding (p. 146).

Judge Roth's decision was upheld by a three-judge federal Appeals panel, and after the State of Michigan joined Detroit in a further appeal, a full federal Appeals Court affirmed Judge Roth.

In 1974 the U. S. Supreme Court, stacked with Nixon's three new picks who had passed his anti-integration litmus test (see pp. 150-156 of Hope and despair in the American city: Why there are no bad schools in Raleigh), reversed the three previous legal conclusions by the lower courts to strike down, in a 5-4 decision (Milliken v. Bradley), a new Detroit desegregation plan that sought to remedy generations of racist policies, both public and private.

Some school systems pushed on with efforts to desegregate schools, and Wake County, North Carolina was one of them. In 1976, the city and county consolidated their school systems and created a pie-chart configuration of districts that assured that each district got some urban children, with no school getting more than 40 percent minority. In later years, when it became apparent that the Reagan and Bush Courts would put the final nails into the coffin of Brown v. Board of Education, Wake County began to focus desegregation efforts by economic status, rather than skin color. They opened many magnet schools, which attracted large numbers of suburban children to choose schools in the city. And they focused on a culture of excellence and equity, that extended to every child. They recruited teachers and principals who wanted to teach in diverse schools, and they gave big bonuses for National Board certification. Test scores soared, and achievement gaps narrowed. Today there are no bad schools in Raleigh.

All of this makes the Business Roundtable, conservative racists, and the Oligarchs in charge of the U. S. Department of Education very nervous, for if this model of diverse, excellent public schools can be spread to other municipalities, then not only will public education be saved and transformed, but white privilege will be further challenged, desegregation will become a reality, and the apartheid corporate charter industry will go bust. That is why the Republican Party is spending big bucks in North Carolina to get their functionary toadies elected. The most recent election shows the conservatives now with a 5-4 majority on the Wake County School Board. The dismantling of successful economic integration in the public schools is the top priority, as the following piece makes clear. Will this be another Milliken v. Bradley?


WAKE COUNTY (WTVD) -- A large crowd showed up at Tuesday's Wake County School Board meeting as the debate over proposals supported by the new majority of the board intensified.

It turned out that the school board member who introduced the proposal to change mandatory year-round schools decided to withdraw the motion Tuesday, but not before getting an earful from dozens of parents.

Board members listened to public comments for several hours on changing the diversity policy and ending mandatory year-round schools.

"Diversity is not a policy of convenience," student George Ramsey said. "It is a policy of necessity."

"Academic excellence cannot occur without diversity," parent Vickie Adamson said.

Most of the 70 people who signed up to talk seemed to be at odds with the new majority, and asked them to re-consider their proposed changes.

Some went as far as claiming that those changes would lead to re-segregation of the schools.

"Where's the plan," opposer Gary Disnukes said. "Where's the budget. I urge this board to take a step back and not be in a rush to fulfill campaign promises before all ramifications of these promises are understood."

A minority of those present, however, did offer the board support.

"My hope would be for the opposition to embrace the new school board members ... improve the graduation rates and overall academic achievement for our children," supporter Judy Gladden said.

Board members later decided not to take a controversial vote at the end of the meeting.

The school board plans to come up with questions to send out in a survey to parents and make decisions based on their feedback.

The cost of doing the survey ranges from a few thousand to as much as $144,000 depending on how it's conducted.

The board wants responses back by March, so it can work out the school calendar.

Meanwhile, the NAACP is asking the school board for 45 minutes to present some of their concerns at next month's meeting.

The NAACP says it is worried policy changes could essentially re-segregate the school system.

It's not clear if the board will say yes.

How California can save $500 million every year

Sent to the Santa Monica Mirror, Dec 19, 2009

State Senator Fran Pavley noted that the state legislature needs to cut $6 billion from the budget in the next few months ("Pavley On State Budget Crisis," Dec. 17-23). Here is a way of accomplishing nearly 10% of that right away, and with additional savings each year: Dump the high school exit exam. Studies of high school exit exams show that they are useless: They do not lead to higher employment, higher earnings, or improved academic achievement. In fact, researchers have yet to discover any benefits of having a high school exit exam.

Stephen Krashen


Sources:
Warren, J.R., Grodsky, E., and Lee, J, 2008. "State High School Exit Examinations and Post-Secondary Labor Market Outcomes." Sociology of Education, 81: 77-107

Grodsky, E., Warren, J.R., and Kalogrides, D. 2009.
"State High School Exit Examinations and NAEP Long-Term Trends in Reading and Mathematics, 1971-2004." Educational Policy, 23 (4): 589-614

Resisters to Race to the Top are Right

Race to the Top Resisters are Right
Sent to USA Today

Those opposing California's participation in Race to the Top (RTTT) are not anti-progress: They are right. ("As schools struggle, California politics slow education reform," Dec 15). Education Secretary Arne Duncan has made it clear that the RTTP national standards plan will lead to national tests, promising far more testing than ever before. At a time when children are overwhelmed with tests, when No Child Left Behind has turned schools into test-prep academies and when education is facing severe budget cuts, the last thing we need is more standards and tests.

There are better ways to help California's education budget: USA Today notes that going along with RTTT will give California a one-time payment of "up to $700 million." California can save $500 million EVERY YEAR by dumping its useless high school exit exam, Studies of exit exams show that they do not lead to higher employment, higher earnings, or improved academic achievement.

Stephen Krashen



As schools struggle, California politics slow education reform

By Juliet Williams, The Associated Press
SACRAMENTO — To education reformers, a $4.3 billion school funding competition from the Obama administration seemed like just the push California needed to start making long overdue changes to restore academic luster to the state's public schools.
But the drive to dramatically turn around a faltering system that serves more than 6 million children has run into political reality in a Legislature dominated by special interests. The result could leave the state with the nation's largest public school system ill-positioned to compete for the so-called Race to the Top funds.
Officials estimate California stands to gain up to $700 million.
Lawmakers meeting in a special session on education called by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are considering competing Democratic bills. Both are intended to clear the way for California's federal application and to deal with some of the same issues, such as increasing the number of charter schools, revamping state tests and restructuring the worst-of-the-worst schools.
But how they propose to reach those goals is vastly different, and it's unclear whether the versions can be reconciled in time for the state to meet a Jan. 19 federal application deadline.
A Schwarzenegger-backed bill by state Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, and the state superintendent of public instruction gives parents more say in what happens to failing schools and makes it easier to evaluate teachers and principals based on student achievement. It also would let parents move their children out of failing districts.
After narrowly passing the state Senate in November, with several Democrats opposing it or opting to sit out the vote, that measure is now stalled in an Assembly committee. One of the most powerful and well-funded political interests in the state, the California Teachers Association, is lobbying against it.
The teachers union instead backs different legislation offered by Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica.
Reform advocates say that legislative package, which passed the Assembly on Thursday, does not go nearly far enough to fix California schools. Because of that, they say it wouldn't stand a chance in a competition against other large states such as Florida and Texas, which already have made bold school reforms.
Schwarzenegger has supported many of the changes included in the federal guidelines since taking office but has not had the political muscle to get the changes through a Legislature controlled by Democrats, who receive campaign funding from the teachers union.
He said he will veto the Assembly legislation if it reaches his desk, although that is unlikely because the Senate already has passed much tougher reform measures.
"This is a Race to the Top, not a race to mediocrity or the status quo," Schwarzenegger said.
The Republican governor has been blunt about the Assembly's effort, saying its Democratic majority simply wants to water down the tougher Senate legislation. The Assembly bill, he said, won't provide a real shot at the federal money in a state that has sustained billions of dollars in education cuts during the last three fiscal years.
"The kids and education need every single dollar," Schwarzenegger said.
California's education system was once considered a national model that bred a generation of scientists and entrepreneurs, but the state has fallen to near the bottom among states in school funding and academics, earning a D in academic achievement this year from Education Week magazine's annual national schools survey. Students perform below the national average on nearly all measures, with black, Hispanic and poor children faring worst.
Nearly 2,800 of its schools are considered to be failing by federal standards.
The dispute over whether to enter the federal competition and, if so, how strong the reforms should be is dividing Democratic allies and discouraging reformers who had hoped for historic change.
Margaret Fortune, a California State University trustee who once served as an education adviser to Schwarzenegger, said she has become disillusioned. Many lawmakers put partisan interests ahead of reasonable changes in school policy, she said.
"If they were responsible leaders, they would stand up and say, 'You know what? We're leading a broken system, so we need to turn around and fix it, because this is shameful,'" said Fortune, who now runs an independent teacher-training program and has launched several charter schools.
Representatives of the California Teachers Association and other influential education groups, including the California School Boards Association, argue that the state should approach Race to the Top cautiously. They say lawmakers should not rush headlong into major reforms for what amounts to a relatively small pot of one-time federal money.
California, which will spend $50 billion on K-12 education this fiscal year, stands to receive between $300 million and $700 million if its application is successful.
The teachers association opposes provisions in the Senate bill that would allow parents to transfer students in persistently failing schools to other districts, expand the number of charter schools without imposing new restrictions on them and allow parents to lobby for closure or conversion to a charter when schools don't improve.
The union says the Senate legislation lacks legislative oversight in making the changes.
Patricia Rucker, a legislative advocate for the CTA, urged lawmakers during a hearing on both bills to "resist the temptation to simply race for dollars for the prestige of winning an award and a competition and instead (ask) what is the overall goal of education reform in California?"
Many reform advocates say slow progress isn't acceptable in a state where one in five high school students drops out.
"I just don't have the patience for incremental change any more," said Assemblyman Juan Arambula, an independent from Fresno who left the Democratic caucus earlier this year. He sided with Republicans in opposing the Assembly bill and backing the more stringent Senate version.
Some Democratic lawmakers, particularly Hispanics and blacks, are feeling pressure from both sides: the teachers union, which opposes dramatic changes, and community groups that are frustrated by a persistent racial achievement gap.
Alice Huffman, president of the state NAACP and a former political director of the CTA, testified before the Assembly Education Committee that reforming the state's faltering schools is an urgent civil rights issue. She said she has nieces and nephews who have graduated from California schools yet cannot read and write.
"I'm just going to say that if we don't get this done, we have really blown it one more time," she said.
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office is urging lawmakers to take the Obama administration's education reforms seriously, warning that they are likely to provide the framework for new federal education guidelines, putting at stake billions of dollars in federal money.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Charter Enrollment = $$$$ for For-Profits

From a posting at Seeking Alpha: Stock Market News, Opinion & Analysis, Investing Ideas, discussing the financial prospects of Entertainment Properties Trust (they do business - lucrative business - with the Imagine Schools folks):

There is also news this quarter about our Public Charter School portfolio. The third calendar quarter is when we get our first enrollment counts for our Public Charter Schools. This of course substantially determines their reimbursement revenue for the school year.

Our aggregate enrollments were right on top of where they were last year, about 12,700 students representing 86% occupancy this year compares with 12,900 students, 87% occupancy for last year. This level of performance correlates with about a 1.8 times coverage of the rent obligation, a level with which we are comfortable and is consistent with our underwriting.

...

With regard to our Charter Public School investment, we now have our 2009/2010 enrollment certifications and we’re happy to report that our portfolio stands at 86% occupancy and should generate a strong 1.8 rent coverage.

Our total numbers reflect a reduction of approximately 200 students across the entire portfolio of schools. This reduction however, can generally be identified as a few schools in which the local economy has experienced a severe downturn which has caused significant family disruptions and relocations. Specifically, we’ve seen this scenario being played out in our Las Vegas school.

It is important to remember however, that our school portfolio is structured as a mass release for all 22 locations and as I stated earlier, on an overall basis, the portfolio is demonstrating strong rent coverage.

Only a Third Party Will Have a Chance to Restore American Democracy

Look at any area of government at the Federal level under the Obamaites, and all one can see is evidence of the continuation of rule by the same Oligarchs who were handed the reins of power under the Cheney/Bush regime. Instead of blatant disregard for criticism, however, now we have a PR machine headed by the simpering David Axelrod, who is intent upon a false image of change while protecting Reptile Rahm and his corrupted pragmatism.

In defense, we have Cheney enabler, Gen. McChrystal, put in charge of military-industrial machine in Afghanistan, where private contractor numbers have soared and the war criminals at Blackwater remains in charge of most State security.

As for the economy, Obama continues the Bush bailouts and the policy of rewarding Wall Street and protecting the casino capitalists in charge of our retirement plans and jobs. Meanwhile, poverty climbs and hope fades.

In education, we have a steroidal version of NCLB taking form, with RTTT and the LEARN [sic] Act, which pick up steam toward privatization and the cognitive sterilization of children as young as 3. And unending testing, pay-per-score plans, and teacher deprofessionalization.

On the environment, we have a continuation of Bush policies with a happy face painted on. Copenhagen will yield nothing because coal and oil interest continue to own the White House.

And health care, well, that puts the bow on the package, no doubt. There could never be a better example of how little difference a sweeping Democratic majority can make in a town controlled by corrupt capitalists, who have no regard for the desires or will of the majority. Please do read Howard Dean's op-ed today at WaPo.

DEAN in 2012. Obama is Done.

For Profit Diploma Mills Collect Billions: Students and Taxpayers Left with Piece of Coal

From Pro Publica:

. . . .A recent investigation by the Government Accountability Office found instances of for-profit schools’ engaging in outright fraud to sign up unqualified students [3] (PDF) and warned that "the government cannot be assured that its student aid funds are only provided to students who have an ability to benefit from higher education.’’

Earlier this week, the department made public the default rates for students who graduated three years ago [4], reporting that students at the larger for-profits were defaulting at a rate of around 20 percent. Those are similar to levels, last seen during the early 1990s, that prompted the last major changes in how government regulates the industry.

Previously, the department published data only for defaults in the two-year window after students graduated. In general, those were relatively low. The numbers released this week show that by year three, the rates rise dramatically, as this chart shows. [2]

The three-year rates for some schools are high enough that, if those rates continued for another couple of years, those schools would no longer be permitted to write federal student loans [5] and grants, which cost the federal government $117 billion [6] (PDF), according to the Department of Education. The stimulus package pumped another $15 billion into education grants. The largest recipients [7] of both programs are for-profit schools. . . .

"The Best the Republicans can do is try to bring the government to a halt."

Much respect, Bernie.

Imagine: Breaking the Law

From the stellar folks at the Journal Gazette, who have proven that a critical journalists can impact public policy for the better:

Imagine’s closed votes broke law, expert says

Board denies any secret dealings on Texas school plans

Kelly Soderlund

The Journal Gazette

The local Imagine Schools board violated state law by not voting in public on a series of resolutions related to opening two charter schools in Texas, Indiana’s public access counselor ruled.

The ruling by Andrew J. Kossack was prompted by a complaint filed by The Journal Gazette that alleged Imagine Fort Wayne Charter School Inc., the non-profit board that oversees the Imagine MASTer Academy, violated Indiana law that relates to public meetings.

Instead of voting within the public view to create the schools, appoint and remove board members and name their own board president, Don Willis, to head one of the Texas boards, Imagine board members separately signed a resolution giving their consent.

Ball State University is also investigating whether the Imagine board violated state law, the result of a Journal Gazette investigation that described a lack of local control over two charter schools in Fort Wayne.

“The (Open Door Law) explicitly states that ‘final action must be taken at a meeting open to the public. Final action means a vote by the governing body on any motion, proposal, resolution, rule, regulations, ordinance or order,’ ” Kossack wrote.

...

Continue reading here.

Charter Lies

The folks at the LA Times were kind enough to print a story (in the truest sense of the word) by Jed Wallace, president and CEO of the California Charter Schools Association. In "Who's watching charter schools," Wallace argues that charters are just as - if not more - transparent and accountable as their traditional public school peers. The piece is shocking due to its lack of accuracy, multiple lies/deceptions, and downright baseless claims:

Take, for example, the IRS Form 990, a required federal filing for tax-exempt organizations. Every year, non-profit entities that operate charter schools must file 990 forms, which contain detailed information on corporate spending, governance policy and leadership compensation, among other things. The information on these forms is accessible to the public via the non-profits' Web sites.

Jed clearly hasn't spent any time actually doing research on charter schools - I'd personally send him a crisp $5 bill if he can name a single charter school that actually posts their 990 forms on their own website. These forms are generally available through guidestar.com, but not until they're processed by the IRS, which generally takes some time. Additionally, I've sent multiple requests to organizations that do not have their 990 tax forms posted online, and I've yet to hear back from any of them (phone calls, too, are brushed aside; I've also gotten the, "I'll get back to you" line, one of Duncan's favorite tools for avoiding questions he doesn't want to answer - they never get back to you). Detailed information, Jed? You've got to be kidding me.

Public charter schools face just as much accountability as any other public entity. Our problems are not buried beneath bureaucracy, as the problems at Green Dot that have recently come to light illustrate. Our issues are brought to the surface and dealt with appropriately, proactively, judiciously and publicly.

...Green Dot initiated an internal review of expenses and as a result, founder Steve Barr repaid about $51,000 to his organization. Simply stated, charter schools work well and are more able to do their jobs and get results without piling on additional layers of bureaucracy.

None of the Green Dot stuff was actually brought to light publicly by the corporation - it was only printed in one paragraph buried in a 990 tax form, a form that precisely zero journalists actually look at (one well-known blogger/journalists even told me s/he's "too lazy to look at anyone's 990s" - that's a direct quote). Yes, the Green Dot stuff came out after a few bloggers picked it up (myself included), but this was months after the scandal. Additionally, Green Dot has never responded to any of my e-mails about the spending - and even a phone call placed to them was brushed off.

Wallace also drops this bogus statement:

charter schools operated by non-profit entities arguably have more disclosure requirements imposed on them than traditional public schools, as they must also comply with the requirements of non-profit corporation law.

Non-profit corporation laws are extremely loose - there's far less information that can really be gleaned from 990 tax forms than Mr. Wallace lets on. Sure, there's some information available on these forms. School districts, on the other hand, are required to comply with open government legislation, which can be used to provide citizens with a wealth of information about their government spending. However, open government legislation is almost completely wiped away when governments contract out services to private corporations (yes, Green Dot is a privately-run corporation - they're not for-profit, but they're still entirely private). Please - correct me if I'm wrong here, but this statement by Wallace is a downright lie, at least in my experience.

Recently, I was able to get information on the salaries of many district employees in my home district (the Portland Public Schools), which I cannot do for Green Dot. True - Green Dot does list the pay of their top five employees - but they're not required to disclose much else than that in terms of pay. I've been able to get my hands on contracts between my district and a privately-run company (the company, on the other hand, wouldn't have to provide this to me).

The statement I find most concerning, however, is this one:

Charter schools have every incentive to maintain that freedom by being effective self-policers in addition to complying with the accountability measures I've described

Tell me, Jed, do you honestly believe the hedge-fund supporters of these charter schools are capable of self-policing? Can you tell me, with a straight face, that Charter Schools USA can self-police themselves when their profits are at stake? Sure sounds like the same reasoning behind the Wall Street deregulators: just give us the free reign to operate as privately-run organizations and the body public will benefit from this set-up. I don't buy it, Jed.

[Jed's predecessor, Caprice Young, made over $250,000 for her work at the CCSA. Check out the cast of characters on CCSA's board of directors. Until recently, a Broad COO, Kevin Hall, and Kevin Johnson served on the groups board as well. All information pulled from the groups 990 tax form, available here]

Rotherham's Shop Sanitizes Commissioned Charter Report That Challenges Party Line

The gossip on Ed Sector's censoring of the Thomas Toch's research has been cresting. Here is a clip from the latest at Ed Week on the controversy:

“Toch presents a compelling indictment of the ‘new philanthropy’s’ primary investment strategy for education reform. His arguments should be available to all and addressed on the merits,” he wrote in his entry on the This Week in Education blog. “Instead, someone at EdSector hacked away at Toch’s evidence until it fit the rhetoric of CMO advocates.”