Sign up for our newsletter
Contact

Triggering reform

January 23, 2013 By

Opinion
by Steve Williams, Opinion Page Editor
Victorville Daily Press
January 22, 2013

The reasons for the fierce teachers union opposition to successful completion of California’s Parent Trigger law by parents of Desert Trails students were obvious, particularly to the unions themselves. They knew that if the Adelanto school was converted to charter status, unhappy parents all over the state would be encouraged to follow suit.

And they also feared that if a reorganized Desert Trails school performed successfully — i.e., if its students improved and performed better on state-mandated tests — even more parents would start pulling the trigger.

Those fears have been, it turns out, justified. During the week the Los Angeles Unified School District accepted Parent Trigger petitions from parents of children who attend 24th Street Elementary School, one of the worst-performing schools in the district. According to the Los Angeles Times (a down-the-line union backer, it should be noted), John Deasy, superintendent of the LAUSD, pledged to work with the parents to enact “fundamental and dramatic change” at the school.

The victory for LAUSD parents came little more than a week after the Adelanto School Board unanimously approved a Parent Trigger plan by parents of students at Desert Trails Elementary after more than a year of delays. Union-supported delays, obviously.

The Parent Trigger, for those whose attention has been occupied elsewhere, is a reform mechanism begun in this state in 2010, in which parents of failing schools may force a school district to undertake specific reforms, including sending their children to a different public school, converting the school into a charter school, or receiving opportunity scholarships to send their children to the private school of their choice.

As we said, teachers unions nationwide have been fighting Parent Trigger and charter schools for years, claiming charters are mostly failures and that they bleed funding from the public school system. To less and less avail, judging by increasing evidence.

Last last week, the Center for Education Reform, a Washington, D.C., organization, released its 14th annual Charter School Laws Across the States Ranking and Scorecard. It showed that more than two million students are now attending in excess of 6,000 public charter schools. Still, the Center noted that only four states improved their laws since the first report card on the movement was issued last year. In other words, union opposition has kept most of the country from improving the system designed to reform and reinvigorate K-12 education. Thankfully, California is one of the four.

What the teachers unions in particular (and unions generally) oppose is individual choice. In education, unions fiercely oppose vouchers, which are designed to allow parents to pick the school they want their children to attend. They also, obviously, fiercely oppose charters, which allow parents who can’t pick the schools they want their children to attend, to at least change the schools their children must attend. What they instead seek is to monopolize education.

We would be remiss if we failed to point out that if the present public education system performed even adequately, let alone excellently, there would be no outcry for reform. Sadly, it doesn’t. And parents are finally demanding change. And choice.

Filed Under: CER in the News

Parent Power Index Scoring Rubric

January 22, 2013 By

January 22, 2013

Download or print your PDF copy of the Parent Power Index Scoring Rubric

Click here for more on Parent Power Index Methodology.

Filed Under: In the States

Utah praised for abundance of charter school options

January 22, 2013 By

by Ray Parker
Salt Lake Tribune
January 18, 2013

Utah ranks 11th in the nation when it comes to charter school programs, according to a new national study.

The Beehive State earned an overall “B” grade in charter education, according to the Center for Education Reform, a pro-charter Washington, D.C., nonprofit.

The group’s latest evaluation of states’ charter laws includes other categories deemed important for education reform: parental choice, online learning, teacher quality and transparency.

“These are the hot-button issues in education reform today,” Jeanne Allen, the center’s president, said Thursday. “We’ve been ranking charter schools for 14 years.”

Still, there is one area the group does not specifically look at that’s of interest in Utah: graduation rates.

Recently, Utah education officials looked at charter high school graduation rates, which ranked among the highest and lowest in the state: from 27 percent to 100 percent. The overall state graduation rate is 78 percent.

State officials said charter schools need to do a better job of tracking students if they leave the school before graduating. The students could have graduated at another school, but were posted as not graduating from their charter schools.

Allen said the same problem exists on a national level.

“We don’t have a level playing field as far as data,” Allen said. “Are charter schools doing poorly because they’re doing poorly or because of the [inadequate] data?”

The center has studied and evaluated each state’s charter school laws since 1996.

In its latest evaluation, the center had mostly positive comments about Utah in four of its five categories.

Under “charter schools,” center officials wrote of the state on its website: “Utah’s charter school law is considered strong because it provides equitable funding to charter schools, facilities funding and a strong authorizing system that includes capable independent bodies such as universities and the semi-independent state charter board.”

As for “school choice,” center officials wrote: “Utah has one private school choice program [special-needs vouchers]. The state does have a charter school law. Utah allows for limited public virtual schooling. Open enrollment exists, both for intradistrict and interdistrict public school choice.”

The group praised the state’s online learning: “Due in large part to the leadership of the Utah Legislature, Utah has adopted multiple student-centric policies designed specifically to harness the power of technology.

Primarily through the passage of SB65, the Statewide Online Education Program, and charter policy enacted over the last decade, digital learning has become available in some form to all Utah students.”

Its “transparency” also was praised: “Utah has a very parent-friendly website that provides easy to understand school report cards as well as information on the Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship and charter schools. The 40 local school boards in Utah are elected during the November general election.”

But when it comes to “teacher evaluations,” the group said Utah has some work to do. “Neither tenure decisions nor license advancement and renewal are based on effectiveness,” the group wrote. “Eligibility for dismissal is not a consequence of multiple unsatisfactory evaluations in Utah, and ineffective classroom performance is not a ground for dismissal. The state does not ensure that the appeals process for dismissed teachers is expedient; however, a last hired, first fired policy is prohibited during layoffs.”

Among the nation’s 43 states with charter school laws, the center ranked them as follows: four states earned an “A,” nine got a “B,” 19 received a “C” and 11 states were given a “D” or “F.”

Allen said it’s not only charter school laws but the other four categories that make for education reform.

“As policymakers consider changes to their charter school laws, they also need to be mindful of what it takes to have truly great education reform policies across all issues,” Allen said.

The center’s 2013 Charter School Laws Across the States Ranking & Scorecard can be found at Edreform.com/in-the-states, which will be available to the public Tuesday.

“Charter and traditional schools don’t have to be on opposite sides anymore,” said Kim Frank, of the Utah Charter Network. “The main reason to see charter schools in Utah grow is you have smaller schools. And with new and innovative programs, that information can be shared with all schools, and all ships rise.”

Filed Under: CER in the News

Group gives Michigan ‘A’ for support of charter schools

January 22, 2013 By

Detroit News
January 18, 2013

Michigan earned an “A” for its charter school laws, according to a report card issued this week by the Center for Education Reform.

The organization issues the assessment annually, ranking states according to the strength and quality of their charter school laws.

Michigan was ranked No. 4 on this year’s list, up from No. 5 last year. The top four all received a letter grade of “A” on the report card, including Washington, D.C., Minnesota and Indiana.

Michigan received high marks in the areas of authorizer quality, school autonomy and teacher freedom. It got low marks for facilities and funding equity.

Michigan has passed a number of charter school reforms in the past two years, including lifting the cap on university-authorized charter schools and removing many of the limits on cyber charter schools, along with strengthening accountability measures for all charter schools.

“Michigan’s ‘A’ is very well-deserved,” said Dan Quisenberry, president of the Michigan Association of Public School Academies.

“This report card is an accurate reflection of the positive strides we’ve made and the work that still needs to be done. The climate for quality public education in Michigan is much better now than it was a couple years ago, but as the report card points out, charter schools still aren’t being treated equally when it comes to equity in funding and facilities. We’re an ‘A’ now, but we need to be an ‘A-plus’ if we want our educational system to be truly great.”

On Monday a report released by an independent analyst of charter schools shows charter school students in Michigan and Detroit are out-learning their public school counterparts.

The study, done by Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes, found the typical Michigan charter school student school gained more learning in a year than a district school peer — an advantage of about an additional two months of reading and math learning.

The learning advantage was even greater for students in Detroit charter schools, which make up 27 percent of the state’s charter students, on average gaining nearly three months achievement for each year they attend charter schools.

Filed Under: CER in the News

National Report Card for Parents Released

January 22, 2013 By

Top Ten States on Parent Power Index© provide roadmap for lawmakers 

CER Press Release
Washington, D.C.
January 22, 2013

The nation’s “Top Ten” states that provide more expansive opportunities for parents also tend to yield higher growth rates in student achievement, according to the most recent national rankings on the Parent Power Index© (PPI) released today by The Center for Education Reform (CER). Indiana ranks No. 1, followed by Florida, Ohio, Arizona, D.C., Louisiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Utah, in enacting policies that allow for more parental empowerment, expansive educational choices, sound teacher quality measures, wider access to digital learning and more transparent data. These states’ policies correlate highly with increased student growth, particularly among lower socio-economic students, over time.

The PPI is an interactive, web-based tool that ranks the United States based on how much power a parent has over their children’s education. While there is a growing body of data and information available to parents, policymakers, educators and the general public, the PPI is the first and only comprehensive evaluation of state education policy that is geared towards parents, continuously updated in real-time, and now, provides an arsenal of state and local resources.

“All across America, parents are demanding more power over their children’s education, but the task of sorting through all the information out there is daunting,” said Jeanne Allen, president of CER. “There are a variety of resources available to evaluate how students are achieving, but there is widespread disagreement about what constitutes sound education reform policy.” Allen continued: “As the mother of college students, I liken the PPI to a cumulative GPA, which is a composite of grades from varying professors. In this case, these professors are among the nation’s leading authorities and critical evaluators of education policy.”

The latest rankings on the Parent Power Index© are a resulte of the release of CER’s 14th annual Charter School Laws Across the States Ranking and Scorecard 2013. Washington became the 43rd state to allow charter schools and only four other states made improvements to their charter laws last year.

In addition to charter schools, the Index evaluates states on school choice using data and analysis provided by the The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, The National Council on Teacher Quality’s detailed analysis in its annual State Teacher Policy Yearbook, Digital Learning Now’s evaluation of state policies based on 72 metrics, transparency of data, school board elections and Parent Revolution’s analysis of parent trigger laws. It also looks at local media reliability on education issues and if state executives are reform-minded. Further evaluation across all of these Elements of Power is ongoing and continuously updated at https://2024.edreform.com/in-the-states/parent-power-index/.

The Parent Power Index© also reveals that a majority of states are barely making the grade when it comes to policies that allow parents to exercise choices, engage with local school boards and have a voice in the education systems that surround their children.

“The Index’s ‘Top Ten’ prove that when parents have access to options and good information all children can succeed,” Allen said. “Lawmakers need to look to these exemplars and the policies that have afforded parents greater power elsewhere and act fast to bring real education reform to their respective states. Parents and voters have declared that mediocrity is no longer acceptable, and our elected officials have a mandate to fix our educational and economic problems for good.”

Filed Under: Press Releases

Share Parent Power

January 18, 2013 By

Share this link with other parents to let them know about Parent Power!

You can also download and print a copy of this cartoon to pass out and share with other parents in person.

Filed Under: Activism

School Choice is — and was — Bipartisan

January 17, 2013 By

January 17, 2013

We’ve got a treat for you this Thursday afternoon with this blast from the past letter we found in our archives and couldn’t help but share, especially with National School Choice Week only 10 days away and an Arkansas Senator just yesterday proposing new school choice legislation :

(click on the image to see a copy of the actual letter)


 

October 18, 1990

Representative Polly Williams
State Capitol
Room 18 East
P. O. Box 8953
Madison, Wisconsin 53708

Dear Polly:

I read Don Lambro’s recent column about your version of the school choice bill in Milwaukee. I am fascinated by that proposal and am having my staff analyze it. I’m concerned that the traditional Democratic Party establishment has not given you more encouragement. The visionary is rarely embraced by the status quo.

Keep up the good work.

Sincerely,
Bill Clinton

Filed Under: Commentary, Edspresso Tagged With:

Mississippi Senate approves expanded charter school bill

January 17, 2013 By

by Jeff Amy, Associated Press
Sun Herald
January 17, 2013

A bill to expand charter schools in Mississippi easily cleared the Senate on Wednesday, and attention shifts to the House for the second year.

In a 31-17 vote, the bill had two Democratic supporters but no Republican opponents. The vote came after more than three hours of debate, a day after Senate Bill 2189 was introduced and passed by the Senate Education Committee.

Charter schools are public schools that agree to meet certain standards in exchange for freedom from regulations. Mississippi has a charter school law that allows a small number of its schools to convert to charters, but none has done so.

Wednesday, the Center for Education Reform, a pro-charter group based in Washington, called Mississippi’s law the “worst charter law in the country.”

Proponents said charter schools can improve achievement in Mississippi. “I think more than anything this is about closing the achievement gap in our state,” said Senate Education Committee Chairman Gray Tollison. The Oxford Republican wrote SB 2189.

Opponents, though, fear charters will weaken traditional schools by skimming motivated students and money. “The overriding concern is what is going to happen to school districts when you start separating students out,” said Sen. Hob Bryan, D-Amory.

Coast officials weigh in

Superintendents in South Mississippi had mixed reactions to the Senate’s bill.

Wayne Rodolfich, superintendent in Pascagoula, said he thinks the state should concentrate on improving the failing schools rather than open more schools.

“If you have a magic way of improving education, give us all that flexibility,” he said. “Let all of us do it.”

He also is concerned about money for current programs.

“Funding is going to be a major issue,” he said. “I think it’s important that we don’t destroy existing programs for charter schools. You can’t underfund education and then expect it to excel.”

Arthur McMillan, superintendent in Biloxi, agreed, adding a district shouldn’t open a new school for a small percentage of students.

“If charter schools work and you have a failing school, why not turn the whole school into a charter school?” he said.

Gulfport Superintendent Glen East said he would be willing to try charter schools if they would help students in failing schools.

“I’m not opposed to anything that’s going to help children,” he said. “If we can help children who want to be in an outstanding school, then let’s do it. I’m tired of being 50th (Mississippi’s ranking among the nation’s schools).”

The bill would give districts rated A or B a veto over whether charters can be put there, but those rated C and lower districts wouldn’t get a veto.

Most school districts in South Mississippi wouldn’t be required to allow a charter school to open under the bill.

In South Mississippi, it would apply to three school districts: Moss Point, Pearl River County and Picayune.

The state Department of Education has said it would like to see the rule apply only to districts that received a D or an F.

Governance, financing

A seven-member board would approve charter schools and oversee them, with three members appointed by the governor, three members appointed by the lieutenant governor and one member appointed by the state superintendent.

Students would be allowed to cross district lines to enroll in charter schools, and a local tax contribution from the home district would go with charter students, as well as state aid.

On to the state House

No House bills regarding charter schools had yet been introduced Wednesday evening. But many House members favor allowing C-rated districts to have vetoes as well, and House Speaker Philip Gunn, R-Clinton, has said the House bill imposes a limit of 15 charters a year.

Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves, also a Republican, fought to deny vetoes to C districts last year. He said after the vote Wednesday it is important to have a law “that allows for the largest number of students possible having a public charter school option.” But he didn’t rule out a compromise.

Supporters Wednesday included two black Democrats, Sampson Jackson of Preston and Willie Simmons of Cleveland. Simmons said Tollison made changes that won his vote. He said the charter school law might dovetail with Simmons’ proposal to create a model school in Sunflower County to bolster parent involvement and social services for students.

“It will give them an option at the local level if they desire to utilize the charter school option,” Simmons said after the vote.

Changes from last year

Among the changes Tollison made between 2012 and 2013:

– Requiring applicants to show evidence of “adequate” community support and to analyze the impact on other public and private schools in an area.

– Explicitly banning private school conversions or new charter schools created by private school groups.

– Requiring charters to serve a proportion of under-served students at least 80 percent as large as the share of under-served students in the charter’s home district. The bill defines under-served as students with low family incomes, poor academic performance, special education needs or limited fluency in English.

– Ordering that the authorizing board must close a charter school if it is rated F for two consecutive years or if the school’s performance is the bottom 20 percent of all schools statewide when the five-year contract runs out. Charters could get reprieves for “exceptional” circumstances.

– Requiring 75 percent of teachers to be certified, and the remaining quarter to earn certification within three years. Last year, the Senate bill required only 50 percent of teachers to be certified.

Tuesday, senators amended the bill to require a shutdown after two years of F ratings. Tollison’s draft had said three. The Education Committee amended the bill Tuesday to ban schools that operate entirely online.

Filed Under: CER in the News Tagged With: ,

Hard-hit districts push back against charter schools

January 17, 2013 By

by Daveen Rae Kurutz
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
January 17, 2013

Western Pennsylvania school districts that are losing students and money to charter schools are fighting back.

The Penn Hills school board this week approved spending $3,500 a month for two years of advertising on TV and the Internet. Thirty-second ads will promote the Penn Hills Senior High School that opened last month.

The neighboring Woodland Hills school board awarded a $13,000 contract on Wednesday to develop infomercials to air on public access television.

Districts traditionally have not advertised schools, but their charter-school counterparts have, attracting a growing number of students.

Woodland Hills will pay $13.9 million — nearly 17 percent of its annual budget — to charter schools this year to educate more than 1,150 children who live in the district, the most students among 49 suburban districts the Tribune-Review surveyed. About 22 percent of eligible students there go to charter schools. Penn Hills is sending 787 students to charter schools at a cost of $8.1 million.

“It‘s cost us personnel. It‘s cost us programs,” said Tara Reis, a Woodland Hills board member and parent. “When you see these kinds of numbers, it‘s staggering. That‘s why we don‘t have reading specialists or an after-school tutoring program or pre-K programs anymore.”

Since the Legislature approved charter schools in 1997, 175 have opened statewide. Sixteen are online only. The charters are privately operated but funded by tuition payments from districts.

Supporters say they offer a better education than traditional public schools.

“I feel like a charter school gives us public education with a private-school feel,” said Ivelisse Torres of Penn Hills, whose daughter, Chloe, attends first grade at Imagine Penn Hills Charter School of Entrepreneurship, which opened in 2012.

Districts such as Woodland Hills are fighting reputations for low test scores and violence.

“The parent perspective is that the environment (in the school district) isn‘t conducive for the child,” said Bob Fayfich, executive director of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Public Charter Schools. “There‘s violence in the school, not a focus on learning.”

Reis said Woodland Hills needs to highlight that the district and high school met minimum test score levels. Its infomercials would include a five-minute piece outlining positive things happening in the district; two one-minute spots sharing student experiences and alumni perspectives; and several 30-second ads themed “Woodland Hills … where diversity works.”

Butch Santicola, spokesman for the Pennsylvania State Education Association, the state‘s largest public teachers‘ union, said districts “have sat back and been in defensive mode.”

“Charter schools are a game-changer, no doubt,” said Joseph Domaracki, interim associate dean of the College of Educational Technology at Indiana University of Pennsylvania. “Public schools have to do more to maintain their populations. It‘s a reality.”

Districts responded slowly. Some started cyber programs.

A group of Westmoreland County districts offers courses through e-Academy, a cyber program the Intermediate Unit began. About 600 students participate, including 30 at Norwin‘s Center for 21st Century Learners. Some take traditional and cyber classes, said Tracy McNelly, Norwin‘s assistant superintendent of secondary education.

“What districts are seeing is that it‘s sort of stopping the bleeding,” said Allie Arendas, distance learning specialist for Westmoreland Intermediate Unit.

This year at Quaker Valley schools in the Sewickley area, more students enrolled in the district‘s QV e-Learning program than in charter schools.

“I don‘t know that I have a crystal ball, but competition and choice seem to be the rule of the day,” said Quaker Valley Superintendent Joseph Clapper. “Public school districts, in my opinion, shouldn‘t shy away from that.”

Districts asked state lawmakers for help. A bill to create a commission to study charter school funding passed the Senate but stalled in the House last year.

Sen. Jim Brewster, D- McKeesport, who publicly supported Propel Schools, acknowledged problems with the charter concept because charters siphon money from public districts.

“Right now, it‘s a feeding frenzy,” he said.

Melissa Hart, a lawyer who as a state senator was among sponsors of the charter school law, said she‘s pleased with their development.

“For some kids, the charters have been a real savior in some areas,” Hart said, noting that “no piece of legislation is perfect.”

“I‘m happy … that parents and families have more freedom on where to send kids without having to pay to send them somewhere. I think that‘s a good thing.”

Making the grade

More than 2 million students attend more than 6,000 public charter schools, according to the Center for Education Reform in Washington.

Its 14th annual Charter School Laws Across the States Ranking and Scorecard concludes that fewer than half of the states can meet the demand for charter schools and state laws must improve to ensure growth and sustainability.

The report ranks Pennsylvania 14th in the nation, giving its law a B grade. Among the nation‘s 43 charter school laws, the center gave four As, nine Bs, 19 Cs, and Ds or Fs to the remaining 11 states.

The center evaluates charter school laws based on their construction and implementation, and whether they ensure quality learning opportunities. To read more: https://2024.edreform.com/in-the-states.

Filed Under: CER in the News Tagged With:

D.C. leads nation in strength of charter school laws, report says

January 16, 2013 By

by Lindsay Layton
Washington Post
January 16, 2013

The District leads the nation in terms of the strength of its public charter school laws and their implementation, according to a new report issued Wednesday by a national group that supports charter schools.

The Center for Education Reform released its annual report card, in which it examines and rates the charter school system in every state, and found that less than half the states have good, effective charter school laws.

Charter schools are publicly funded but privately run schools, some of them by for-profit organizations. First created 21 years ago, there are now about 6,000 charter schools across the country, educating roughly 2 million students, according to the center.

The District, where more than 40 percent of public school students attend charters, leads the nation in terms of the amount of financial support given to charters and the amount of autonomy they possess, among other things, the center said. The District was ranked at the top last year as well.

In contrast, Virginia and Maryland were ranked among the worst states in terms of public charter laws and implementation.

The report card is available at www.2024.edreform.com/.

Filed Under: CER in the News
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »