Justice Matters

Beyond Teachers

2011-09-16T07:31:00.000-07:00

Steve Perry, CNN education contributor and principal of Capital Preparatory Magnet School, pillories teachers’ unions as the major culprit for schools failing poor kids. Teachers’ unions are the system. Controlling everything from the length of the school day to the salaries paid. “Education is the antidote, and great teachers are the syringe through which the antidote is delivered.”

This interview is worth a read. It comes from a place of sincerity –getting the students most in need the best education possible. But Perry ultimately misses the mark. Perry is overly selective in his facts. Choosing to see only those that point the villainous dagger at teachers while excusing a host of other realities. He denies disparities in spending. Though your naked eye might be enough to allow you to see the difference in spending from a wealthy suburban district to a poor urban district, you can also depend on significant data. The OECD’s study on brick and mortar spending in public education to within district disparities in spending to inter-state spending – money matters.

Perry illuminates the problem we face in “fixing” education. He’s in the schools and fed-up. He advocates for vouchers because he sees parents and kids stuck in bad schools. He knocks teacher unions because they may be the main force he encounters day to day when trying to “fix” his school. This is not how good public policy should be made. It’s akin to having victims of violence set death penalty policy. They know a great deal about violence, but may not see the big picture. That’s where federal policy must have a broader view. One that can take Perry’s passion to fix schools and channel it beyond vouchers to a system designed to meet the needs of all students.

Tavis Smiley on Education Outcomes for Black Boys

2011-09-14T07:55:00.000-07:00

A longtime advocate for public policy to meet the disproportionate needs of the African American community, Tavis Smiley has turned his focus to Black boys in public education. He cites the ironic fact of that America now has its first Black president, meanwhile the graduation rate for Black boys hovers around 50%. He's taking his message to the public via an upcoming PBS special, "Too Important to Fail". For the most part he sounds right on target when defining the problem. We look forward to seeing what solutions his special may pose. Here's a good interview he did with TheGrio.

School’s Back in Session…Is Congress?

2011-09-08T11:56:00.000-07:00

Although Congress is back in session, very little business is likely to take place on ESEA. What looms before the education community is the prospect of budgetary cuts as the Congressional Super-committee commences its work. Education Week’s Allyson Klein gives a great overview of the issues at hand.

Battling Re-Segregation (and the Koch Brothers) in North Carolina

2011-08-15T22:52:00.000-07:00

An excellent piece by Trymaine Lee posted today in the Huffington Post chronicles recent moves by the Wake County, North Carolina school board to end a long-standing, successful integration program. The story reveals just how far ultra-conservative groups (i.e. Americans for Prosperity) are willing to go to turn back the clock on all forms of social progress in the United States.

Behind the Curtain
As Lee reports, Americans for Prosperity – funded by the multibillionaire Koch brothers who brought us the Tea Party movement – fueled a campaign to pack the Raleigh-area school board with right-wing activists. As their first order of business, the board members pushed through a proposal to establish a "neighborhood schools" program in the district, effectively re-segregating Wake County.

Standing Up to Racism
While parents, community members, Department of Education, and the NAACP admirably fought back and postponed the implementation of the plan, it could still be put into effect in the coming school year. However, what's clear is that the "neighborhood schools" plan is nothing but a thinly-veiled attempt at returning to a schooling system that embraces de facto segregation.

It's also painfully obvious that this ultra-conservative movement backed by big money isn't afraid to openly pursue a racist policy agenda.

It's just up to us to have the courage to call them out.

A Bad Idea Blooms

2011-08-10T23:12:00.000-07:00

The New Republic reports today that the Department of Education's new NCLB compliance waivers program may very well be illegal. It's unclear whether the Secretary of Education has the authority to bypass Congress completely and his own set of new requirements for states to adhere to if they still want to receive federal dollars.

Something just feels wrong about this approach. It seems like it's destined to raise at least a few eyebrows among Congressional Republicans and might end up stymieing the Obama Administration during an election year. Strategically, it's a big risk. On one hand, something must be done to nix the ridiculous 2014 proficiency deadline. On the other, forcing states to implement largely untested reforms in exchange for coveted waivers might tempt a protracted court battle at a very bad time in the political cycle.

Is it legal? We don't know. Is it going to be fair to students and teachers? Probably not. Were these reform policies forged democratically and informed by the low-income communities of color they most directly affect? Not by a long shot.

There. It's got all the makings of a bad idea.

Waive to the Top (Yes, That's the Best DC Can Do.)

2011-08-09T15:33:00.000-07:00

So here we are in August 2011. It's been half a year since the Republican-led Education & Workforce Committee took their seats on Capitol Hill, nineteen months since the Obama Administration's A Blueprint for Reform hit the presses, and nine years and seven months since the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was last reauthorized by Congress.

Nine years and seven months and counting. That means we're about to enter the fifth school year that an ESEA reauthorization has been woefully overdue. Yet, as we've stumbled past watermarks and sign posts with No Child Left Behind's bad policies still hanging over us, Washington lawmakers – Democratic and Republican alike – have made no serious attempts to redesign and reauthorize this critical legislation.

Waiving Away Failed Policies
However, with the Department of Education moving to issue compliance waivers, we have at least an attempt to address the nightmarish effects of NCLB. Just how serious or effective this action will be remains to be seen.

Monty Neill of Fair Test argues in today's Washington Post that these waivers could compel states to exchange one basket of failed policies for another, with the same punitive approach that has proved disastrous over the past nine years. Fair Test's Neill suspects that the Obama Administration will use the NCLB waivers as an incentives for getting states to implement Race to the Top (RttT) style reforms.

Here We Go Again...
As we've seen it played out in two nationwide installments, the RttT approach uses students' standardized test scores to make critical staffing decisions. In other words, rather than directly punishing students for their poor performance on bogus tests, the Administration's best idea was to simply redirect the punishment toward teachers and school communities. It's spelled out pretty clearly in the four turnaround models featured in A Blueprint for Reform.

School closures and comprehensive staff shake-ups are disruptive. They are expensive, sloppy, and (worst of all) they hurt students. If Monty Neill is right – and there's no reason to think that anything innovative and truly community-powered will come out of the Department of Education – this NCLB waiver program will prove just as half-baked as policies it's attempting to fix.

Boycott the Tests?
Neill suggest that we can solve this problem by embracing other forms of school and teacher accountability while simultaneously boycotting test-and-punish regimes across the country. Launching such a national movement seems daunting, but it could be the only reasonable course of action given Washington's unresponsiveness and the increasing severity of the problem. If there's enough energy and coordination, this simple strategy could work in the Administration sticks to the test-and-punish approach in transitioning away from NCLB.

So, let Arne Duncan issue his waivers. Let him dismantle NCLB, but also keep him from putting the same punitive policies in its place.

The Degrees We Earn and The People We Value

2011-08-05T20:57:00.000-07:00

Today Georgetown University's Center for Education and the Workforce released their report, The College Payoff: Education, Occupations and Lifetime Earnings. For a nice overview, check-out Education Week's Guest Blogger Nora Fleming's post, More Education Leads to Higher Pay, But Not For All. Here are a few sobering highlights for those of us interested in equity and students of color.
*College degrees are increasing in value relative to high school diplomas. A college degree will earn you 84% higher earnings over your lifetime than a high school diploma. That's up from 75% in 1999. -- When drop-out rates can exceed 50% in schools with majority students of color, we can quickly see the chilling reality behind these numbers.
*A degree can earn significantly less for African Americans and Latinos than for whites. For example, the lifetime earnings of African Americans with Masters degrees doesn't exceed the lifetime earnings of whites with Bachelor's degrees.
*Occupation matters. Depending on your professional choice an associates degree can earn more than a bachelor's degree, this is true on average 28% of the time.

ESEA Update: Why Reauthorize When You Can Just Waive It Away?

2011-08-04T22:47:00.001-07:00

As we mentioned last week, it looks increasingly likely that the Department of Education will soon be issuing waivers to states for selected No Child Left Behind (NCLB) provisions. Such waivers would exempt states and districts that receive them from having to comply with particular provisions of NCLB – the Bush era incarnation of the 1965 Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) – while still receiving federal funding under the law.

Save the Champagne
But before you start celebrating the long-awaited demise of NCLB, consider the good stuff that's in the original ESEA law that states might try to have waived. What one state might see as "regulatory relief," students and teachers might see as programming cuts. For instance, Title I contains numerous provisions requiring schools that receive such aid to spend it on programs that help specific groups of students (typically low-income students of color). A percentage of Title I funds must be spent on parental engagement or after school tutoring, for instance.

We don't know what types of regulatory waivers Secretary Duncan is going to issue in light of Congressional failure to reauthorize, rethink, and rework ESEA. Yet, that point in itself seems pretty illuminating. A single public official – Arne Duncan – is preparing to tell the states that certain parts of federal law can simply be ignored. Wow.

Living With Uncertainty
To be fair, the Administration will likely waive the bad stuff in NCLB; the AYP requirements that states seemincreasingly incapable of meeting. The old test-based regime that results in school closures and disruptive punitive measures is something that should be ignored, but what we really need is a workable reauthorization of ESEA so the Dept. of Education no longer needs to ride a fine legal line. It's not going to happen, but one can dream...

In the meantime, keep your eyes peeled for the first waivers. Several states, including Michigan and Tennessee (of Race to the Top fame), have already applied. Georgia's getting ready to follow suit. Whatever waiver packages Duncan doles out and whatever its terms might be will give us a heads up regarding funding and programming cuts. Then, depending on the fallout, we'll see how Congress reacts as the new school year begins.
,

A Lost Ideological Battle

2011-08-03T20:58:00.000-07:00

Who won?...Ultra Conservatives

We can haggle about the cuts. What's going to be cut and when and how many dollars we'll shave from the deficit. But ultimately, in the wake of the debt ceiling, the ideological war about the role of government was won by the far right wing. What should government do when the country’s in economic distress? Cut. Cut. Cut spending…and protect the rich from paying their fair share. Obama has adopted some of this conservative framework, frankly remarking that the latest debt ceiling deal would be “the lowest level of annual domestic spending since Dwight D. Eisenhower”. That Obama seeks a stamp of fiscal austerity at a moment of national crisis is enough to say that conservative economic lunacy rules the day.

In real terms this will mean a contraction in federal government spending that will likely mean shortfalls and cuts to a public education system with increasing needs. What form those cuts will take is still unclear.

What will this ideology mean for public education?

Fresh from battle, ultra conservatism emerges with a new swagger. They’ve swayed the national economic debate. They even had Rep. Boehner on his heels. We know that emboldened ultra conservatives are bad for pubic education. During the debt ceiling debate, Tea Party members were willing to walk away from Majority Leader Boehner’s plan because it increased Pell Grant assistance. Yes, aid to poor students was a deal breaker! Rep. Denny Rehberg, Republican from Montana, characterized Pell Grants as the “welfare of the 21^st Century” “you can go to school, collect your Pell Grants, get food stamps, low-income energy assistance, section 8 housing, and all of a sudden we find ourselves subsidizing people who don’t have to graduate from college”. Thankfully, this is one of the few things the emerged pretty well from debt ceiling negotiations.

With this new climate, the future of federal education policy may no longer be one of benign neglect or misguided policy ideas. At least you can argue that Ted Kennedy sincerely believed NCLB would help public education. With these ultra conservatives at the wheel, it could mean progressives fighting cruel outright attacks on poor children of color and a concerted effort to end the very presence of the federal government in public education. We thought the Obama Blueprint for Reform was bad. Well, they’ll make the Blueprint look like a Christmas present.

At the moment ESEA legislation is at a grinding halt. But really, after what we've witnessed the past few months, forward movement on ESEA may give one pause. What would an Obama debt ceiling style compromise look like in education? It makes me shudder to think of it.

Hitting the Ceiling: What the Debt Limit Deal Means for Public Education

2011-08-02T22:33:00.000-07:00

President Obama and Speaker Boehner hit the links on Jun. 21 to discuss a solution to the debt ceiling crisis. Seven weeks later, we have a deal that may spell big cuts for public education programs. (Source: Charles Dharapak/AP Photo)

While Washington might be rejoicing over the fact that Congress was able to reach a compromise before the global economy imploded, we don't yet have a solid understanding of what the debt ceiling deal might mean for public education programming at the state level (where the vast majority of education funding is allocated and originates).

Today, the Washington Post shed some light on education's prospects in the budget-cutting deal. The details remain sketchy, but it seems pretty likely that federal spending cuts will put states in a position where spending cuts can be easily justified. After all, while Social Security and Medicare funds are immune from budget trimming, education remains vulnerable.

From the perspective of a state, education budget cuts make perfect sense. After all, we've been told that an extraordinary teacher can handle just about anything – from class size increases to pay cuts. With states facing tremendous budget crises of their own, it seems logical to "trim the fat" in educational programs.

So, in the end, this big compromise that ostensibly preserved the economy will inflict more pain on communities that need the educational programs that are susceptible to cuts. These programs, like Head Start and after school tutoring for low-income students, coud likely be cut in the name of efficiency, in the name of a compromise that saved the very rich the burden of a modest tax increase. That said, nothing's certain yet. We'll have to wait and see what and how much each state decides to cut from K-12 budgets.

What can be said of such a deal other than, "Watch out!"? Watch out, a critical education program that you value or even rely upon may be vanishing soon. That's the way compromise works these days – trading uncertainty for... even more uncertainty.

SOS March, Teachers Fight Back!

2011-08-01T21:00:00.000-07:00

According to organizers some 5,000 teachers and allies descended on Washington DC, Saturday. Flanked by the White House at one far end and the Washington Monument at the other, attendees demanded that Washington end NCLB! The subtext of the march was clear, stop blaming teachers for failures in education. Was it a success? Well, teachers were certainly energized. But what longterm effects it will have on our education policy discourse is as yet unknown. A multitude of voices were certainly present, but what message did they communicate and what might they have missed?

Here is some food for thought:

A. Who? What? When? Where? and Why?, The teacher's argument about school conditions is compelling but they're missing a key ingredient. A substantive discussion about "why" the most prosperous nation in the world has produced such substandard public education. They are great at explaining the "who". Conservatives, Republicans, Obama. Hence the popular "Hey Hey Ho Ho, Arne Duncan has got to go" chant. They can even explain the "what", "when" and "where" about the problem. Our urban schools, deteriorating over time, under resourced, over tested. But the missing part in the rally was the "why". Why are things the way the are? Why has nothing been done? Why are all the wrong things done? Why doesn't anyone seem to care that we're basically killing public schools? This missing x factor diminishes the power of all the rest. The "why" may be the ugly anchor we need to awaken the American public. We hesitate with the "why" because it must include a legacy of racism; both institutionalized and individual. Not all children are being thrown away. Our best public schools rank nicely against those around the world. White and upper class children, have and still do fare far better than their student of color counterparts. It's children of color we've quietly decided are expendable. The inconvenient truth and reality is that the nation's shifting demographic has made this racist foundation impractical.

B. The second missing piece was answering "what needs to be done to truly improve teaching in America's public schools". Merit pay and high stakes testing accountability don't work. But let's concede that there are teachers in the system who need better support and training. What fundamental structures should be put in place to improve teaching? Let's define what a healthy national teaching system might contain. What are other countries doing in the name of great teaching and teaching professionalism? To ignore that the teaching profession isn't in great need of local, state and national assistance to improve the product they offer is to leave your argument vulnerable for others to fill in the blank with bad ideas.

SOS marchers braved the heat to call attention to their cause.

An NCLB graveyard. May imagination, creativity, and critical thinking RIP.

Matt Damon addresses SOS marchers.

The march to the White House

Diane "The Jackhammer" Ravitch!

2011-07-29T22:18:00.000-07:00

Diane "The Jackhammer" Ravitch

It's Day 2 of the SOS conference! Day 1 with Jonathan Kozol was a thrill. Well Day 2 with author Diane Ravitch felt like the rush you get after knocking down a stubborn brick wall. She was clear, tough and methodical, as she drilled into the very foundation of misguided education reform strategies currently so well cemented in public discourse and policy making. One by one she hammered at all the policy proposals this administration and localities around the country have just accepted as good ideas regardless of evidence to the contrary.

Merit pay for teachers, an Obama favorite. There's no compelling evidence to say this works. The teachers say it doesn't work! BANG- went the Ravitch hammer! Even still, New York City who had a failed attempt at merit pay, persists on trying to make it happen. Evaluating teachers based on test scores; another loser. Ravitch was clear. At best it leads to teaching to the test, or in increasing incidences, it leads to cheating and gaming the test to boost scores. WHAMO! Charter schools, this is the real prom queen at the policy ballroom. Everyone seems to want them. Meanwhile at the end of the day, this prom queen's true dance partner seems to be big business. Overall their results are no better than traditional public schools, yet they introduce a profit motive, where only the easiest to serve may benefit, while the hardest to serve youth are left to languish in increasingly under resourced schools. BOOYAH! Teachers don't get fired. Nonsense, Ravitch blasted! Teachers have an attrition rate of 50% in the first five years! With these numbers, surely some are getting fired.

Ravtich cited study after study, expert after expert. She carefully chiseled away at the very foundation of what makes up the nation's current approach to education. It was both cathartic and dismal to hear. But she ended with hope. Fear not, says this Jackhammer of Policy! These misguided reformers may have all the money and power, but things change. This story is not over, we live in a democracy, she argued. "There are more of us than there are of them!" Well said!

Van Jones & Rebuilding the American Dream

2011-07-29T10:03:00.000-07:00

For nearly a year now, Van Jones – Ella Baker Center Founder, environmental advocate, Civil Right champion, and former Obama Administration adviser – has been championing a movement to motivate and organize progressives into action. And, if media coverage is any indicator, Jones' work seems to be paying off.

The American Dream Movement is backed by an impressive array of progressive-minded organizations and action groups, but perhaps more impressive is the fact that the nascent movement boasts a rapidly-growing membership of 127,000. Even more compelling is the Dream movement's premise that most Americans actually support progressive solutions to our most daunting challenges, even if they might not know it themselves.

In a recent NPR interview, Jones is quick to point out that sixty to seventy percent of Americans think the jobs crisis is more important than the on-going debt ceiling debacle. Most even agree that tax rates on wealthy individuals and corporations should be raised in light of the failed recovery. This stands in sharp contrast to the arguments of the Tea Party (to which the Dream Movement has been compared with) that has argued over the past two years that a majority wants to protect "job creators" (AKA The Very Rich) from a modest tax increase.

The American Dream Movement is convincing. It supports strategic investment in our society over clumsy budget cuts. It works to invest in communities of color and to resolve the persistent dilemmas facing the working poor. It stands for a responsible conclusion to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Finally, it recognizes that to get our economy movement again and to effectively invest in our joint future, all members of society must pitch in their fair share.

Again, check them out!

.

Kozol Speaks on Segregation in Public Education

2011-07-28T20:25:00.000-07:00

Kozol in the center, speaking with SOS attendees.

Acclaimed author Jonathan Kozol giving the introductory remarks at the SOS conference today. Jonathan Kozol’s race analysis of public education is compelling! First, it’s just great to hear a thoughtful approach on race in education. Too often we simply ignore the elephant in the clearly racially stratified room. But moreover, Kozol’s argument strikes at the heart of a major problem; our schools are more separate and unequal today than at any time since the 1960’s. Kozol recounted visiting school after school; each filled with black and brown students, and abysmally under-resourced. The numbers he gave are still startling. Per pupil spending for an inner city child is around $6,000-$7,000, while the wealthiest school are spending up to $30,000. He lamented how time and again we refuse to discuss persistent racial segregation. Whatever happened to Brown v. Board of Ed? His argument is old school but a picture of public education today can make you feel like we live in an Eyes on the Prize rerun. The re-segregation of public education is happening around the country, in the South in particular. As a society we seem quite willing to quietly surrender the idea of integration. It was just too hard. And Kozol rightly points out, that this administration has been mum on the subject.

SOS Comes to DC!

2011-07-28T14:32:00.000-07:00

Just as the a political wave of teacher blame seemed certain to drown out their voices, the teacher backed SOS movement has come Washington DC to say, “NO!” Well not just no, but to also shine a light on a new path for education. For the next four days Save Our Schools March and National Call to Action (SOS) have descended on Washington DC, to connect education reform efforts happening around the nation and let policymakers know teachers also have a political voice. Days 1 and 2 are a conference hosted at American University. Then on Saturday, June 30^th , SOS takes to the streets for a rally and march to the White House. It ends on Sunday, with a congress to plan next steps.

On the opening day, the audience was filled with educators and their allies from across the nation. Among the capacity 450 crowd a healthy contingent came from California. They were present and energized. The event co-chair Rick Meyer, may have summed the event up best when he rallied “This is not an academic conference, we are here about action!” The workshops also fit this mold, with discussion ranging from using art for protest, to getting Congress to transform NCLB, to student/teacher organizing to change education. No one could have started things off better than the opening speaker Jonathan Kozol. See more of my blogs for more details.

What do they demand? Well check-out their website. To sum it up, they have four things: equity in funding, end high stakes testing, inclusion of teachers and community in developing public education policy and locally developed curriculum. These demands push against the current popular policy tide stressing charter school expansion, competition for funding and connecting teacher evaluation and pay to test scores. The event rings of teachers saying they’ve had enough of being at the center of what’s wrong with public education. To their credit, they’ve attempted to move beyond the reactionary (even though there’s much to react to) to create a proactive (albeit broad) agenda.

Could you feel Justice Matters’ racial justice platform at work? Well, somewhat. This was a majority white and female crowd, among participants and organizers. Yes, this reflects the teaching profession, but it does present an SOS challenge for making sure the voices, vision and concerns of those most effected (poor Black and Brown folks) gets into the process and outcomes of their activism. But to their credit, some of the workshops and Kozol’s rousing analysis of our “separate and unequal” education system, did show that some of our racial justice message is still in the room.

Budget Cut Fever Sweeps Detroit

2011-07-28T07:22:00.000-07:00

For yet another example of how budgeting crises are affecting schools across the country, see Detroit. The Detroit Public Schools board decided Thursday to cut the wages of its teachers by a dramatic ten percent, saving $82 million to make up for a budget shortfall of over $300 million. Sadly, Detroit's approach seems almost light-handed when compared to recent actions on the parts of districts to close schools and even indefinitely postpone the school year.

Indeed, such evasive maneuvers are becoming commonplace during a phantom economic recovery. For all but the staunchest Keynesians, the cut-rather-than-invest approach seems not just an acceptable, but a necessary way to adjust to a stagnant economy. Yet our failure to invest in public education at this time will have definite consequences down the line. Most tragically, the damage already extends beyond the quantifiable realm of macroeconomic policy.

When a struggling student doesn't have a quality teacher to turn to, when a classroom is left with out of date materials and learning tools, and when whole schools are closed because of the failure of punitive, assessment-obsessed policies, investments in our communities and society are destroyed outright.

Census Report Finds Recession Widened Racial Divide

2011-07-27T08:54:00.000-07:00

The U.S. Census Bureau released alarming data yesterday verifying something we've known all too well for the past three years: Black and Latino communities have been disproportionately hurt by the Great Recession. However, the Bureau's report reveals the extent of the damage, demonstrating that the median wealth of white households is now 18 times that of Latino families and 20 times that of black families.

These numbers are jarring and illustrate a widening income gap (the largest since the Bureau's been collecting income data) between whites and communities of color in the United States. Consider that while the median wealth of white households dropped by 16% during the recession, black households saw their median wealth drop by 53% and Latinos lost nearly 66% of their wealth. These statistics are dismal, to say the least.

Money isn't everything, as they say, but disparity and inequity levy incredibly corrosive effects upon the broader society. As the late historian Tony Judt argued, the levels of income inequality in the United States are uncommon among other wealthy nations. Such enormous income gaps, Judt noted, breed animosity, insecurity, and – most strikingly – unhappiness.

So, in a nation where we're all endowed with the right to pursue happiness, our policies and our economic attitudes are making that happiness harder and harder to find. Whole could and have been written about the causes of the recession, but what caused it is less important than how we responded to it. We didn't take steps to ensure that those who would be most financially devastated by an economic downturn (say Latino mortgage-holders in California and Florida or Blacks employed in manufacturing or the service industry) had some sort of safety net beyond a meager tax refund.

We didn't take those critical steps and now rather than building up our social safety nets, we're tearing them down. Among those social safety nets – perhaps the most critical of them all – is the promise of a quality public education to all children, free of charge. Every time we close a struggling school rather than coming to its aid, every time we cut an after school program to "protect our job creators," and every time we push out a high school student we destroy a safety net and widen the disparity. And yet, this is exactly how we have responded to the Great Recession.
.

Feds Eye Cuts to Black & Latino Programs in Absence of ESEA Reauth

2011-07-22T15:23:00.000-07:00

As the 112th Congress seals its disastrous legacy this month, the once simmering discussion of a reauthorization of the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) has evaporated in the summer heat.While it's all but certain that this session of Congress will not seriously address our nation's pressing public education concerns, the Department of Education is hard at work.Unfortunately, the plan that's taking shape in Washington appears to be based on strategy that could hurt countless Black and Latino students as the new school year gets underway.

If It Ain't Broke, Defund It
Two days ago, Rep. Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL) released an urgent plea, published by The Hill. Hastings' piece focused on a Dept. of Ed. plan to grant waivers to school districts that want to circumvent certain No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements and programs. One such requirement that districts could apply to ignore is a stipulation that they spend a small percentage of the federal funds they receive on tutoring programs for low-income students.

The program, called Supplementary Education Services (SES), serves about 650,000 mainly Black and Latino students each year by providing them with free tutoring to supplement their classroom instructions. What's worse is that the Dept. of Ed.'s own research (confirmed by studies by the right-leaning Rand Corporation) shows that free tutoring for low income students actually works! It improves their test scores, brings up their grades, and, most importantly, it gives them the extra attention that they simply can't get in overcrowded classroom.

Save This Program!
If you've already read Hastings' letter, go back and check out the comments sections. It's a sad display of deep antipathy, and indeed hatred, toward students stuck in low performing schools. While many who've been fixated with the debt ceiling issue are eager to dismiss any federal programs as "hand-outs" and cut them away with relish, again THIS PROGRAM WORKS.

It's cheap, too – only a small percentage of the federal cash distributed to low-income districts. No taxpayer will feel any financial pain if SES stays in place, but at least 650,000 students and their families will certainly feel the difference if this essential provision is waived away.
.

Bronx Charter Punished for Questionable Practices

2011-07-21T13:56:00.000-07:00

A charter school in the Bronx has been placed on probation for breaking New York state laws that require charter admissions to be random. The Academic Leadership Charter School serves students from Pre-K through second grade and has been charged with selectively choosing applicants who are more likely to out-perform their peers.

"Weeding Out" Students
Anna Phillips of The New York Times, reports that students were quietly admitted to the school on the basis of their previous report cards and disciplinary history and not through a lottery process required in charter schools receiving public funding. Such lotteries are typically overseen by an independent third party and are blind to student demographics and previous academic performance. An anonymous teacher at the school has even accused administrators of testing students prior to entry, a practice clearly prohibited by law.

These allegations get right to the heart of the charter schools debate. The school in question appears to have violated a number of laws designed to keep access to publicly-funded charters open and fair. Yet, this is only one case in which unethical activity has occurred. How many other schools are employing similar practices to boost their test scores and disciplinary records? How many other students are being brought into charter schools, not because the school wants to do good for them, but because their performance will do good for the school?

Clearly No Cure-All
Such questions are unanswerable, and perhaps that's the most troubling aspect of the situation in the Bronx. We can't know how many other publicly-funded charter schools are engaged in exactly the same practices, because our states and local education agencies have thus far been ineffective in ensuring compliance with the law. We have been too quick to hand resources and legitimacy over to charter schools in general, hailing them as a panacea for public education.

We can't wait for intrepid reporters to break such stories. Instead, the education reform community must do the mature work of recognizing that not all charters are created equal. It must also ensure that all charters –independent though they may be – must have their admissions processes and practices rigorously monitored by higher legal authorities.

In Memphis: School's Out Forever!

2011-07-20T21:54:00.000-07:00

It’s not just a line in an Alice Cooper song anymore. This August, Memphis, TN students will not return to classrooms, at least not until a funding dispute between Memphis City Schools (MCS) and the city council. The MCS school board voted last Tuesday to delay the start of the school year until the city of Memphis pays the $78 million it owes to fund the upcoming school year.

President Obama attends graduation ceremonies at Memphis' historically black Booker T. Washington H.S. in May. The high performing school will not be opening in August unless a city-wide funding dispute is resolved. Source: AFP/Getty Images

Playing Games With Education

The day following the vote, the city scrounged up $3 million of the $8 million it owes the school district from last school year (2010-2011). However, all signs from the city council indicate that the MCS will not receive an upfront payment for coming school year anytime soon. The mayor and council members have insisted that Memphis simply doesn’t have the cash on hand and will pay up after September 1^st when tax revenues are due.

The dispute comes as a result of the city of Memphis consistently failing to meet its financial obligations to its schools over the past three years. School board members have justified their decision, citing that the city has delayed its payment of legally required funds each year since 2008. Furthermore, the city came up short when it did pay, accumulating over $150 million in IOU’s over the years.

Attacking Public Schools

City officials are calling out the school board’s move as unnecessarily dramatic, but consider the debt the city owes its school system. Also consider the fact that school board members have been quietly telling reporters that they fear a pending court decision to merge the city of Memphis with Shelby County would essentially cancel the city’s obligation to pay its debts to the school system.

So we have a city that might be trying to wait out its financial obligations to public education after having cut property taxes in 2008, depriving schools of $57 million in funding. Exactly how is this not a concerted effort to defund and kill a public school system? What’s more criminal about these fiscals games is that these delays will be hurting an extremely successful school system serving a Black community that makes up two-thirds of the city’s population.

Students Protest Chicago's Police Approach to Education

2011-07-15T20:22:00.000-07:00

"What is wrong with Chicago’s public school system?"
It’s a question that perplexes policy commentators and school administrators alike. Yet, students and parents know the answer. Yesterday, they made their voices heard at Chicago Public Schools (CPS) headquarters in a protest headed by Voices of Youth in Chicago Education (VOYCE). Their message: Stop suspending and arresting students for minor offenses and invest more heavily in college and career preparation rather than in security and police forces. They’re policy failures in school districts across the country, but the problem is particularly acute in Chicago.

Money for Career-Training, Not Policing
CPS currently spends a whopping fifteen times as much on campus security guards than on college and career coaches ($51 million vs. $3.5 million). VOYCE reports that students have arrested for relatively innocuous offenses such as scribbling graffiti on school desks and suspended for crimes like carrying cell phones or wearing jeans. Parents and students rightly argue that such a heavy-handed approach to discipline matters is both counterproductive and expensive.

Not only do such practices derail the educational progress of already struggling students, they also divert vast resources from teaching and learning toward policing. And that’s just it – Chicago runs its school system the same way it polices its streets. CPS maintains an archaic school bureaucracy that’s essentially managed out of the mayor’s office and not directly by the communities it serves.

A Community-Led Solution
Simply consider the fact that the former CEO of the CPS was a career police officer appointed to the position by Mayor Daley. Chicago’s new mayor, Rahm Emanuel, was been quick to put a career educator in the role of CEO, but Chicago shouldn’t have to rely on the off chance of good mayoral judgment to ensure that its school system is focused on educating and not policing its students. Beyond failed draconian policies, the system itself is the cause of many of Chicago’s woes.

Poverty is inevitably a problem and tensions within the community itself certainly aggravate the situation, but – to borrow a phrase – there’s nothing wrong with Chicago that can’t be fixed by what’s right with Chicago. Parents and students are making their voices heard, now CPS needs to get out of the way and give the communities served by the school system the greater role they deserve in shaping effective policies.

Students and parents already have the right answers and only they can reverse the policies, practices, and attitudes that have kept too many of Chicago’s students of color from thriving.

Justice Matters Receives $500K Grant for Racial Justice

2011-04-19T10:01:00.000-07:00

Justice Matters, has received a $500,000 grant from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation to fund their work over the next two years in building a national racial justice movement to transform education for students of color.

This funding will enable Justice Matters to define and set the movement-level building blocks for developing and advancing a racial justice agenda to transform public school education locally in Richmond, CA through parent-led organizing; in Oakland, CA, by supporting teacher training in developing parent leadership and engagement capacities; and, nationally through cutting edge policy analysis and a network of racial and social justice schools serving communities of color.

“It is great news that the Kellogg Foundation is committed to our work during this critical time for education policy in the U.S. We believe that the key to racially just schools begins with engaging parents and communities of color as active participants in school decision-making, offering their cultural knowledge and experience as an integrated part of their children’s education, “says Olivia E. Araiza, Executive Director of Justice Matters.

With a parent leadership academy, teacher trainings, campaigns and community arts programs, Justice Matters works locally to develop a people of color-led perspective to bring about systemic change and impact the learning experiences of students and families. This grassroots local organizing works hand-in-hand to develop the voice and analysis for racial justice policy on the national level.

Justice Matters works nationally to develop a network of schools committed to racial and social justice, and promote a visionary values-driven racial justice agenda related to the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its impacts on communities of color. With commentary, analysis and interviews on education policy, Justice Matters provides a unique and cutting-edge voice in the national debate.

With this grant, Justice Matters will focus on two major projects:
Next Generation Leadership:
o Partner with local East Bay organizations to develop leadership programs, support mechanisms and teacher effectiveness tools for teachers in the classroom around parent leadership.
o Outreach and present case studies, tools and outcomes at community organizing and education conferences.
o Provide policy analysis and commentary through opinion pieces, publications and online, to help shape future policy. Participate in convenings, interviews and speaking engagements to further advocate for transformation of schools for communities of color.
Real Schools Now Campaign:
o Identify key issues and create an active campaign for policy change in the West Contra Costa Unified School District of California.
o Recruit a membership base, create community workshops, parent leadership, trainings and arts workshops.

About Justice Matters: Based in Oakland CA, Richmond, CA and Washington D.C., Justice Matters is a national people of color-led racial justice education policy movement building organization. Justice Matters’ research, policy agendas and organizing efforts are rooted in the values and vision communities of color hold for our children. For more information, visit http://www.justicematters.org

About the Foundation: The W.K. Kellogg Foundation, established in 1930, supports children, families and communities as they strengthen and create conditions that propel vulnerable children to achieve success asindividuals and as contributors to the larger community and society. Grants are concentrated in the United States, Latin America and the Caribbean, and southern Africa. For further information on the foundation, please visit http://www.wkkf.org

Hammond Speaks!

2011-03-23T21:21:00.000-07:00

This is a short but must read Washington Post piece

by Stanford's Linda Darling Hammond . Her insightful take on the International Summit on Teaching calls America to task. She exposes how America’s teaching system is light years apart from those of the highest performing nations. Where we talk about firing teachers, Singapore pays a salary to teaching students during their training.

Why not in the US? Why can’t we find the political will to make vast changes and transform our education? President Obama can’t speak about education without mentioning America’s receding place internationally in educational outcomes. Yet, amazingly, our policies in no way emulate what’s working abroad. It calls into question his, and the country’s real intentions and commitment to educating us all. But really that may be the elephant in the room. Educating us all. What’s the big difference between the United States and the rest of these high performing countries? Well, they actually care about the outcomes of ALL their children.

We’re so busy Racing to the Top, we haven’t taken a moment to question the very fundamentals of our educational system. Why don’t we have a federal funding system for education (as the highest performing countries do)? Why don’t we have a national system to train teachers and equitably distribute them around the nation?

For years America’s latent social, economic and institutional racism have survived in the realm of education. It’s been perfectly OK for full swaths of Black and Brown children to go underserved. We could throw them away and still outperform other countries. Well, now the chicken has come home to roost. If only for selfish economic reasons we can no longer tolerate the status quo. Yet, even with that reality shinning before us, old habits die hard. We still have no political will (or heart) to start caring for children we once deemed insignificant.

As a nation we often define the Civil War as America’s great race test. African slavery was ultimately determined to be incompatible with American ideals. Well, sadly, and perhaps more subtly education may be our true watershed issue on racism in America. To successfully solve our educational inequities may be our national savior. And conversely, our heartlessness and underlying racism in educating our children may well be the undoing of the nation.

What you Need to Know

2011-03-21T13:39:00.000-07:00

Check-out this provocative episode of PBS’s Need to Know (Ahead of the Class)

. The episode discusses successful strategies developed by high schools to improve learning. There’s Brockton High in Massachusetts where they’ve implemented a school wide literacy program that’s greatly improved student writing. The program’s focus is a little too testing focused for my taste, however, their work to turnaround a low performing school using teacher collaboration may be an important model in this “fire teachers” climate. There’s the University of Maryland at Baltimore efforts to increase students of color graduating with degrees in science. A really great effort! Then there’s using a fitness curriculum to improve student outcomes. As it turns out exercise can make you think better. It’s working in Naperville, IL.

Informative Webinar on National Education Efforts

2011-03-21T13:20:00.000-07:00

An informative webinar Building a Grad Nation

from the Alliance for Excellent Education. Learn about the latest federal budget cut proposals in education. Also hear about upcoming events: Grad Nation by the America’s Promise Alliance and the United Way. It’s not from the signature Justice Matters racial justice perspective. But if you want to keep up the work being done by major education org, this will get you up to speed.

Will the stars align for ESEA?

2011-03-14T20:50:00.000-07:00

Obama’s speech before students at a Virginia middle school heartened all those hoping for movement on ESEA. Alyson Klein of Education Week reported on Obama’s call to have ESEA finished in time for the next school year. He says this as NCLB guidelines promise to label the majority of the nation’s schools failing; in accordance with the 2014 AYP deadline for achievement. He’s seizing this political moment to highlight the shortcomings of the current law and emphasize the need for a comprehensive replacement.

The president also showed a commitment to protect education from slashes now threatening a host of social services and other federal government programs. He seal this commitment with a promise of vetoing anything to the contrary.

It’s good to see that the president is steadfast in his commitment to education. That commitment to ESEA, mixed an with interest from key lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and an Obama education proposal replete conservative hallmarks may make ESEA the best (and only) hope for major legislative passage this session. Yet, the president may be throwing all of his eggs into a hole ridden basket. He's going to the mat for an agenda that may rearrange deck chairs while never opening a debate that questions fundamental inequities in education. In the end he may get his legislation yet it may not be political energy well spent.

More Budget Woes

2011-03-04T14:16:00.000-08:00

Education fell victim to cuts as Congress works to pass a stop gap budget and avert a government shut down. Teach for America, The Writing Project, and others took a serious hit. Sadly, students of color in low income areas are most likely to feel the pain. Teach for America will now be able to serve 25,000 fewer students, a program to train principals for America's most underserved schools has been eliminated. True to past cuts, those most vulnerable suffer the greatest. Prospects don't look great for the next budget. Read more…

NEW: Latest Installment in Community Briefing Series

2011-02-27T20:46:00.000-08:00

JM Community Briefing TWO

View more presentations from Justice Matters

Detroit Schools: A Reflection of Racial Inequity and Injustice

2011-02-24T20:50:00.000-08:00

Amina writes about cuts to Detroit Public Schools

Detroit’s Spiral

This week Detroit Public Schools announced that it would make major cuts to eliminate its enormous $327 million budget deficit. The proposal will close half of its schools, leaving marked overcrowding in the surviving half. The shortfall is in part because of the declining public school population. Over the last 10 years the public school population has declined by 50%. The students have gone and taken their government funding with them. There is no upside to this story. No hopeful conclusion. Schools for closure are now being selected.

A Reservoir of Racial Inequity

If you want to see the health of a community look at its schools. They are the reservoirs of our racial injustice and inequity. The two are inextricably connected. Understand this reality and what’s happening in Detroit Public Schools is awful, but not shocking. Let’s be clear. Detroit Public Schools serve a Black population (upwards of 95%!). If you want clarity about racial inequity in public schools, Detroit is a newly cleaned window. Peer through that window and Detroit gives an unobstructed view of how America treats Black children. It shows how little we value them, how expendable they are.

Super Flight

Let’s start with some of the broader forces of racial inequity at work in Detroit. Detroit is a lesson in extremes. Sure things happen everywhere, but they really explode in Detroit. White flight happened all over the nation. But in the case of Detroit, its white super flight. Since it’s peak number in 1950, Detroit has lost 50% of its population. In the 1950s the population of whites in Detroit hovered around 1.5 million, by 2000 it had declined to below 200,000. Ironically in that same time period the population of African Americans grew. That fleeing white population took their resources with them and the schools tell the tale.

The Plummet

More extremes. With the decline of the auto industry and movement of jobs overseas, the country’s old steel and motor towns have gone through an economic downturn. Well in Detroit it was a plummet, or more like a mammoth explosion. Detroit has an unemployment rate of 15.1, the highest rate among America’s 50 largest metropolitan cities. For Blacks in Detroit the unemployment rate hovers around 20.9% versus 13.8 % for whites!

Detroit’s Schools Tell The Tale

And these broader racial inequities are revealed in the schools. Yes, foremost we see this in the absolute disarray of the Detroit Public School system. The cavalier way they announce the plan to close half the schools. The way it’s accepted by the mainstream American audience. The story made national news, so we could show our shallow dismayed, and now it’s quietly gone away.

But we also see it in the schools themselves. In the 2009-10 school year Detroit Public Schools recommended 29,000 suspensions and expulsions, with over 700 of those being expulsions! This is in a district of 90,000 students! The dropout rate for black males is some 80%! You’ve gotta call that a push-out rate. Detroit Public Schools may be the definition the school-to-prison pipeline.

Sure we may be able to escape the ugliness of racial inequity in much of our daily lives; with our highway commutes, our gated communities and our Facebook pages. This may be partly why education has suffered from inattention. Because to look at these schools we are reminded that with all our “progress” our past is still very much our present when it comes to racial injustice.

Republican Budget Butcher

2011-02-18T14:53:00.000-08:00

Amina writes on the Republican education budget proposal.

Education Slashed

I can only imagine the cognitive dissonance needed to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans then turn around and recommend some $5 billion in cuts to education programs for some of our most underserved. Little was spared in this budget bloodbath. Headstart--cut by 1 billion, Even Start Family Literacy Program and a host of other literacy programs--eliminated, the Pell Grant slashed by $845 per-student grant, $180 million for math and science partnerships—eliminated. Those are just a few highlights.

…and climate change is real

Republicans argue that they’ve looked at these programs carefully and made hard choices. Programs of little to questionable value were the worst hit. It’s amazing what they still consider questionable! Study after study show benefits to children from Head Start…oh but these guys are still arguing that climate change isn't real. Literacy programs (which took a wholesale hit) have proven benefits. For families, these programs exponentially increase the chances a child is read to, they reduce recidivism rates for the incarcerated, they increase productivity in the workplace. Cuts to an already inadequate Pell Grant (particularly in light of rising tuition costs) are hard to swallow. It’s already difficult to be poor in higher education, this guarantees it will get harder.

Relative to President Obama

If Obama planned his budget in hopes of appearing reasonable next to the craziness of the Republican proposal, it almost works. Their complete disregard for students of color in low income communities place a nice red bow on the Obama proposal. But let’s not allow the absurd to make what’s less than adequate into good budget policy.

State Boards of Education Prove They Don't Know Much About History

2011-02-16T23:19:00.000-08:00

Jack writes on Fordham's findings that State Boards of Education have lost touch with the past... and reality:

While teachers, parents, and even students often find themselves taking the blame for the nation's failings on the education front, the Fordham Institute released the findings today of a review that scolds state boards of education for their shortcomings.

Targeted at evaluating History education standards in all fifty states, the Fordham analysis conducted by professional historians concluded that 28 states deserve a grade of 'D' or 'F' in the content of their K-12 history curricula. Only one state, South Carolina – with its critical analysis of its controversial past and its staunch emphasis on the histories of communities of color – received an 'A'. Notably, Illinois and Texas' history standards mustered 'D's', with the evaluators noting the bland disjointedness of the former and the politicized inaccuracies of the latter. Who knew Abe Lincoln fought at the Alamo?!

These standards, set by state boards of education, are the bread and butter of history instruction in K-12 education. While much attention has been given to student performance on standardized examinations and the quality of teaching that such results ostensibly demonstrate, Fordham's findings seriously call into question the design and accuracy of the very material being taught in schools.

With the help of a board of scientists, Fordham has also conducted an evaluation of Science standards in all fifty states with similarly disconcerting results. History and Science are particularly important for the critical thinking skills that they can cultivate and the objective knowledge about our society that they can cultivate. It seems that with the discussion heating up over the common core standards initiative, it's also essential to take a serious look a what those standards are and how they can be brought into step with reality.

A Budget Valentine: More Bitter Than Sweet

2011-02-15T08:11:00.000-08:00

Amina writes on President Obama’s budget proposal and what it means for students of color.

February 14, 2011

Well, President Obama’s Valentine budget seems pretty faithful to his program for K-12. If you were hoping for some transformation in education for students of color via this proposal, well, you got a clear V-Day message that he’s just not that into you.

More Racing
More Racing to the Top. Now we’re competing between districts, one district competing against its neighbor. Great. If you thought there were local rivalries in the past, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Forget football and basketball throwdowns, now we’ve got real dollars at stake; well resourced districts against poor ones. Meanwhile, the jury is still out on whether the state-based Race to the Top competition will create great outcomes for students. Yes, Duncan and Obama have already taken victory laps. Yet, we don’t know if the winning states can fulfill the promises they’ve made to get the dollars. And for the losers (the cash strapped and dumped), their grant writing promises may be forgotten, undone, ignored or tossed away like Valentines from an ex.

Bittersweet for Teachers
There is a touch of sweet in this budget. Money to recruit and train teachers. But there may be an icky cherry at the center of this sweet treat. A great deal is being accomplished through consolidating existing programs, not necessarily new money. Also, some proposals may be working in opposition to others; like recruiting and training new teachers versus turnaround schools. Under the turnaround model teaching in the most underserved and underperforming schools could be a hazard to your professional health. A new climate is being instituted. Show some results and fast, or you could find yourself a casualty of a turnaround firing. So with the new incentives we may get more teachers, yet its not clear that they will offer the longterm teaching commitment we need in our most underserved schools.

Parents Still Scorned
And for parents awaiting a budget Valentine to seriously fund their engagement in schools; well, call it a night, it’s a no show. Though we can find community on the fringes of this budget; adult literacy, charter school choice, etc. It’s not going to get parents trained, informed and empowered as full partners in determining how their schools are run.

A Shift
What’s unfortunate is how our expectations have shifted. We are in a warped world; where tax cuts for the rich have been extended while extensive budget cuts are on the table. In this twisted environment, you just want to breathe a sigh of relief that education for K-12 didn’t get placed on the chopping block. (The same can’t be said for higher ed). Meanwhile, this shift right may dull the sharp eye we need to understand and improve what actually is being funded. In this game the new radical right has won because real transformative conversations will never take place. We’ll have to save that Valentine wish for another year.

On Your Marks, Get Set, Reauthorize!

2011-02-11T19:29:00.000-08:00

Jack writes on the first rumblings on Capitol Hill of a move toward ESEA reauthorization in 2011:

The House Education and Workforce Committee held its first hearing of the new year on ESEA reauthorization yesterday. Entitled "Education in the Nation: Examining the Challenges and Opportunities Facing America's Classrooms," the hearing featured expert testimony from former Arizona Superintendent and GOP policy consultant Lisa Graham Keegan, Indiana's Superintendent of Public Instruction Dr. Tony Bennett, Andrew Coulson of the Cato Institute, and Dr.Ted Mitchell of the New Schools Venture Fund.

"Government is the Problem"

As noted in the Washington Post's Answer Sheet, these experts have a whopping nine years of teaching experience between them and generally pushed for a conservative approach to education reform. In particular, Mr. Coulson’s testimony centered on an argument that Federal spending on education has done virtually nothing to improve math and science test scores or close the achievement gap over the past fifty years. His data is interesting, but the conclusion that the Federal role in education should be axed comes off as quaint.

Ms. Keegan and Dr. Mitchell forwarded a similar approach of just “getting out of the way” of local and state authorities. They both argued for more charter schools and greater local control. They also applauded the Obama Administration’s Race to the Top scramble for cash, as well as parent trigger laws. Finally, Dr. Bennett laid out a strategy for reform based on three ideas: 1) Identify and reward excellent teachers and principals, 2) Enforce school accountability but allow flexibility for low-performing schools, 3) Give families a “voice” in education through school choice and trigger laws.

No Silver Bullet

At the end of the day, that’s the picture of education reform under the new Republican House: less Federal “meddling” and more innovation through school choice and local control. Again, these things don’t sound particularly nefarious at first, but they conceal a deeper thesis that we can solve the problems of the public education system in this country by gradually dismantling it.

I admit it, I’m skeptical of the push for more charter schools. I know it's not the cool thing to say right now, but I’m just not sure we have enough information yet to determine that a charterization of the American public education system is the silver bullet it's marketed to be. I also think that government, when operating transparently and concertedly, can do and has done some very important things in education. Red flags go up for me when I hear folks say, “Let’s just get government out of our way.” That usually means we’re going to deregulate and defund and let the market decide who gets shiny new schools and who gets the dregs.

Curious Tensions

On that note, this was just the first of many hearings that will be taking place over the next few months. Steam does seem to be gathering for a 2011 reauthorization of ESEA, but it’s clear this will be the kind of “dialogue” we’ll be hearing on Capitol Hill. It’s also clear there’s some definite tension between the Republican and Democratic wings of the committee that might hamper the process.

Finally, it’s worth noting that as in 1994, the Republicans have renamed the committee from “Education and Labor” to “Education and Workforce.” The L-word never sat well with the GOP for some reason. Also, check out the revamped committee website complete with an anti-Obama news feed (the Dems have kept their own separate website). It’s good for a chuckle if you’re into the whole partisan thing.

Integration, ending with a national whimper.

2011-02-08T21:49:00.000-08:00

Amina writes on the re-segregation vote in Wake County, NC public schools:

Wake County, NC’s school board voted to end their integration scheme. Their income -based approach was targeted to keep students from low income households to below 40% in a school. Students were bused to achieve greater diversity. Though the 40% mark was not always met, it’s been viewed as a success in increasing racial and income diversity.

It Spreads

Backtracking on integration is a trending upward. Raleigh, NC, Charlotte, NC, have also turned and the efforts continue. The funny thing is that proponents aren’t really arguing that Black and Brown children will fare better with re-segregation. Given outcomes for students of color in high poverty school – not even Republicans (who’ve tended to vote for re-segregation) can argue that with a straight face. In Raleigh, NC, where integration efforts were put to an end by a Republican school board, the chair said, “we’ve diluted the problem so we can ignore it.” Re-segregation was the solution. Yes, let’s isolate the most underserved. It’ll make us serve them better. Sure thing.

The basic message is we just don’t want to be bothered anymore. It’s unnecessary. It costs too much and we’re tired of it. The results will soon follow. In Charlotte, NC, after reversal of its integration efforts in 2002, has found concentrations of poor black students mounting.

So Old School

Integration. It sounds so old school. Like afro puffs and roller skates. As districts end concerted efforts for diversity, we see that old terms have present day value. In our post-race, post-racist, post-reality era, we’ve left the integration hen house unattended. With protests, sit-ins, boycotts, Supreme Court cases, and historic legislation; integration came in with a national bang. Well, it’s going out with a whimper. With residents protesting at school board meetings, and local NAACP chapters trying to get traction in the courts--but without national debate.

Education cuts in Texas would hurt special needs students, prompt legal action

2011-02-07T23:39:00.000-08:00

Jack writes on the coming battle in Texas over the state education budget and considers the communities these cuts will most affect:

Over the past few days there’s been much rumbling in Texas about the prospect of extensive cuts to the Lone Star State’s education budget, adding some irony to Gov. Rick Perry's slogan, "Texas is Open for Business." Quintessentially conservative, the Texan approach of slashing public services by 10 percent to address a $27 billion budget shortfall is being viewed as a model for other states similarly afraid to broach the issue of tax hikes. The true extent of these cuts and their consequences is now being seen in their effects on special needs students.

Courtesy: theatlanticwire.com

A (Much Needed) Lawsuit in the Making

Currently, the Texas Senate is considering legislation that would effectively freeze new enrollment at the state’s School for the Deaf and School for the Blind and Visually Impaired. What’s more is that legislation would also reduce the full-time staff on-call at both schools, which serve hundreds of students who were unable to receive adequate care in the wider public school system.

However, on Monday the senate’s education committee members were warned by special needs education experts that this tactic could cost the state millions more in the long-run through lawsuits. Thankfully, it seems that the Federal government’s Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is likely to prompt a flurry of lawsuits from rightly outraged parents of the special needs students Texas would hurt if these cuts are implemented.

Getting Organized Around the Law

It’s sad that states legislatures across the country find it more convenient to hack away at already meager education funding before having a heated but needed conversation about raising taxes to realistic levels (Texas famously doesn’t have a state income tax). However, it’s reassuring to know that parents are getting organized and willing to take action against cuts to essential educational services.

It’s also good to know that even if state legislators might loathe it, the Federal government can serve an effective and active role in making sure these budget cuts don’t hurt the communities that need stable resources. An organized national effort could counter this wave of budget cuts and there’s also plenty of good legal arguments to be made against any further cuts to resources for low-income students and students of color. We just need to get organized.

While existing Federal law could help stem the austerity tide, this sort of action also brings attention back to a discussion started last summer over making quality education a Constitutional right.

Trigger World: California's Trigger Law in Action

2011-02-04T15:49:00.000-08:00

As I read Watanabe’s LA Times piece on Compton’s McKinley elementary trigger law saga, I felt like I was in some altered universe. The right pieces seem to be in place, but it all feels so wrong. We’ve got parents engaged in the process—great! A call for full fledged reform in a severely underserved school—awesome! But all is not right in Trigger World.

With the California trigger law we’ve gone from utterly ignoring parent voice (parents of color in particular) in public education to making each PTA a mini-state legislature. With 51% of the parent vote a failing school can be converted into a charter, shutdown, or 50% of staff fired. Now that’s power! …But is it the right power and to whom has it really been granted?

Parent Revolution, the organizing body behind the Trigger Law and McKinley Elementary parents, is closely tied to the charter organization Green Dot. They receive some 80% of their funding from Green Dot. So, the parent revolution may be more like a charter invasion. Hmmm, with all this charter money behind them, I wonder which of the three trigger options parents will endorse? In Trigger World it looks like charter school companies may be the ones really holding the gun.

Which leads to the other issue. If we really believe in parent engagement and giving parents power; it seems hypocritical to give parents only three choices for reform. Who wants to see their neighborhood school closed, or to fire staff? Beginning a charter, the shiny new penny in everyone’s reform toolkits from Obama to the states; is the only halfway palatable option. It’s a Hobson’s choice, given to parents with the fewest resources and tools for making demands on the system.

The irony is that everyone may be right in this dysfunctional debate. If the McKinley trigger is successful and they get their charter, it may well be a better school than the status quo. After all, there are good charter schools. And people are watching this case. And districts are right that the trigger law is flawed. McKinley’s possible success doesn’t address the certain failure of charters in serving all children. Let’s also remember studies show charters to be little better than their traditional public school counterparts on average.

In the end, it’s a little insulting. Parents of color rarely get the limelight in public education. They deserve it! Their children are the least served. To finally “include” them—yet use their real distress to chase charter dreams instead of true education transformation is…unsettling. To pit their desperation to improve education for their own children against a broader need to insure thousands of other children aren’t lost in the charter fray is unconscionable.

The Williams-Bolar Moment

2011-02-02T21:28:00.000-08:00

Jack writes on what Kelley Williams-Bolar's experience says about education, place, and race in 2011:

Last week’s buzz over a mother who was jailed for sending her children to a safer, better school appears to have lost some steam in the media. In fact, yesterday’s piece in the Washington Post, attempted to deflate the story a little further by pointing out that this was no “Rosa Parks moment” for education. However, what happened to Kelley Williams-Bolar should continue to speak directly to an education reform movement that is increasingly supportive of privatizing schools and turning the funding process for low-income schools into a cut-throat, winner-take-all competition.

An Ohio court convicted Williams-Bolar of a double felony for falsifying her residency records so that her two daughters could attend school in the Copley-Fairlawn public school district between 2006 and 2008. The district demanded that Williams-Bolar pay over $30,000 in back tuition and ultimately prosecuted her after a district-hired private detective followed and filmed her picking up her children after school and driving them to her real residence in Akron.

Courtesy newsrealblog.com

Making Her an Example for Other Parents
Williams-Bolar served ten days in jail (reduced from a sentence of five years) and will be on probation for the next two years. Prosecutors in the case refused to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor and the judge in the case indicated that she hoped the sentence would make an example of Williams-Bolar and serve as a deterrent to other parents.

Lawyers for the Copley-Fairlawn school district earlier argued that because school quality is a function of adequate funding and, as funding is determined by local property taxes, Williams-Bolar had committed grand theft. This charge was ultimately dropped, but it demonstrates the intractable madness of a public school system funded by property tax dollars.

Further, one of the prosecutors in the case predictably argued that: “There are many single mothers and families in similar situations who want the best for their children who are not breaking the law." Translation: “The law’s the law because it’s the law.” Glad we cleared that up.

An Unjust Law in an Unjust System
Yes, Kelley Williams-Bolar broke the law, but this is an unjust law that upholds an unjust situation. Kelley Williams-Bolar broke the law in a state of a nation that tacitly accepts that even a basic quality education is a privilege that can be enjoyed by some and denied to others on the basis of their zip code or income or race. If you live in a nice, affluent suburb, the sky’s the limit for your kids’ education and we’ll prosecute anyone who tries to steal it from them. If you live elsewhere, well… let’s hope your district gets its act together in that next round of Race to the Top.

Kelley Williams-Bolar broke an unjust law to overcome an unjust situation and, in doing so, she did exactly the right thing. It’s sadly ironic that Williams-Bolar is herself en route to certification as a teacher. While this unjust and excessive conviction now jeopardizes that career for her, we can’t let her story become just another banal “teachable moment” that shakes heads and peppers Twitter feeds, only to be forgotten by the national media by week's end.

Instead, we must remember that any system that imprisons a mother for simply enrolling her child in a public school, whatever the circumstances, is fundamentally unjust. We must also remember what Henry David Thoreau wrote about institutionalized injustice in America over 150 years ago: “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.”

Duncan calls for more Black male teachers through TEACH campaign

2011-01-31T16:26:00.000-08:00

Amina posts on Arne Duncan's recent show of flare in the TEACH campaign:

Hats off to Secretary Duncan! We do need more Black male teachers. They’re 2% of the total teacher population. The goal is to recruit 80,000 new African American male teachers by 2015. The initiative is part of the TEACH campaign to recruit new teachers in the wake of a retiring workforce.

And Black Male Teachers Are Important Because?

Yet, this all begs the question: Why is this initiative important? “Teachers should look like the people they serve” Duncan proclaims. But why? What forces at work in our schools--in society, make it critical to have that representation? But that’s a kind of Pandora’s Box for an administration careful to avoid conversations about persistent and institutionalized racism and inequity in our schools.

A Teacher Campaign with Flare

Check out the TEACH campaign website. It’s textually sparse. As if reading too much might scare off a potential teacher. It’s a light and wistful discussion on teaching—little thoughtful analysis. However, what the TEACH campaign may lack in critical analysis, it makes up for in flare. It’s heavy on 45 second long testimonials—they’ve even got Oprah doing a testimonial. Yesterday, Spike Lee appeared at the last TEACH event touting the new initiative. It’s all very attractive. Just check out the Department of Education's complete media advisory.

Reality Check

Yet, talking about the reality of teaching in an underserved school again leads to the touchy subject of the Obama Administration’s approach to these schools. In the case of turnaround schools; where teachers are most in need, there’s the threat of mass teacher firings and frequent principal changes. There’s increasing pressure placed on those teachers to “show results”. How quickly the conversation shifts from, be a leader, be a role model, change a life to let’s get those test scores up, NOW!

President Obama’s SOTU Missed the Mark on Education

2011-01-26T10:43:00.000-08:00

Following last night's State of the Union Addressed, which highlighted education reform's role in ensuring economic competitiveness, Amina comments on the Obama Administration's vision for the future:

Courtesy news.com.au

The tone was not urgent, nor the solutions thoughtful. President Obama’s State of the Union address missed the mark on education. More racing, more pay for performance, more personal responsibility. Even less attention to the sad reality of public education for students of color in low income communities.

The reports are in, the studies are clear: education is in crisis. Only 47% of black males graduate from high school! The Latino high school graduation rate in Obama’s own state of Illinois hovers at a lowly 55%! Yet, the problem didn’t translate in the administration’s solutions.

Parents Matter…Or do they?

Obama opened his discussion of education with a familiar refrain on personal responsibility. He preached, “[R]esponsibility begins not in our classroom, but in our homes and communities… Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done.” True words, but substantively hollow. Are parents valuable or aren’t they? Obama’s rhetoric says yes, but his policies say no. His own Blueprint for Reform largely ignores parental engagement in schools. There is little indication the administration is willing to offer the respect, support and resources to empower parents to be full partners in their child’s education.

Show Teachers the Money!

He continues to try and show good teachers the money. “In South Korea, teachers are known as nation builders. Here in America, it’s time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. ” Overlaying bonus checks on a fundamentally flawed system for developing and supporting teachers hardly sounds respectful. Too often a good teacher is primarily defined by student test score performance. Moreover, the scheme has shown its flaws most recently in Washington DC’s IMPACT Performance Assessment. “Highly effective” teachers could accept their bonuses, but find themselves more vulnerable to layoffs. 40% of the eligible teachers declined the money. Is this what President Obama envisions?

Fire teachers, fire principals, close traditional schools, open charters, change standards; it’s an alphabet soup of policies that doesn’t get to the complex heart of the problem and lacks the extraordinary vision, resources, and effort needed for real change. We can do better.

What Michelle Rhee still means to education reform

2010-10-23T08:57:00.000-07:00

Photo courtesy of TIME Magazine

With Michelle Rhee's resignation, Jack reflects from Washington on her methods and style of leadership:

Last week, Michelle Rhee, the controversial figure at the helm of the Washington, D.C. public school system since 2007 resigned. Effective as the end of this month, Rhee's resignation comes in step with the primary loss of Mayor Adrian Fenty, her political patron, to Vincent Gray.While frequently lauded by the media and prominent figures in the education reform debate, Rhee's methods in Washington frequently drew the ire of parents and teachers alike. Owing to excess capacity, she closed schools, promoted merit pay, and popularized a model of dismissing low performing teachers.

For those in the education reform community, including many in the Obama Administration, Rhee's style appeared a model of decisive action in addressing the root causes of all that ails our public school. She, as Arne Duncan has often noted, delivered the kind of results that the education reform movement would like to see accomplished across the country.

Results aside (and there are big questions over whether Rhee accomplished half of what has been claimed in terms of student achievement and infrastructural improvements), let's focus on her methods and the question of leadership. The sort of leadership that is needed in our public schools is the kind that makes tough decisions and holds educators accountable without alienating an entire profession in the process. Many praised Rhee's tenure as D.C. schools chancellor as groundbreaking and exemplary, but the fact that so many teachers and administrators stridently resisted her efforts seems to imply that the combative approach to reform has very clear limitations.

Rather than celebrating ruthlessness on magazine covers and on daytime talk shows, a premium should be placed on collaboration and cooperation. After all, convincing a wide variety of individuals and interests to work together toward positive results is truly difficult work. Dramatizing confrontational tactics such as mass firings promotes the easy way out of our biggest educational challenges.A figure can make a name for herself as a maverick taking tough stands and going it alone, then simply resign as a martyr of reform when the going gets tough and the public demands real compromise and real results.Surely it's not that simple.

It seems instead that real, lasting improvements to public education – the kind that most benefit and empower low income students and communities of color – are the kind that cannot be made by one-liners and enough media exposure. They are the kind that are accomplished through on-going conversation, collaborative problem solving, and seriously rethinking some of the basic assumptions that steer the existing public education system. Real leadership in this important national discussion must be humble, democratic, and rooted in the very communities that are most affected by these decisions.

San Francisco punishes parents to lower truancy rate

2010-10-12T11:33:00.000-07:00

Director of Community Action Malaika Parker is quoted by El Tecolote in their piece on the San Francisco Unified School District's (SFUSD) new anti-truancy program being piloted in the Mission District. The initiative would use "carrot and stick" methods, including $2,500 fines and jail time for parents of chronically truant students.

Malaika challenges the program, as it criminalizes parents: "Too much of the school reform discussion is focused on what parents need to do differently instead of looking at the root causes of students’ disengagement from the schools.”

Check out the full article on eltecolote.org:
http://eltecolote.org/content/2010/10/new-program-aims-to-lower-san-francisco-truancy-rate/

It's back to school, but not necessarily back to reality for Obama Administration

2010-09-14T14:51:00.000-07:00

From Washington, Amina reflects on President Obama's back-to-school messaging:

There was lots of pep and encouragement for students in Obama’s address to the nation’s students. His “you can do it!” message is an odd overlay to the reality of education today, particularly for students of color. “This is a country that gives all its daughters and all its sons a fair chance. A chance to make the most of their lives. A chance to fulfill their God-given potential”, remarked the President. As the graduation rate for Black and Latino youth hovers around 50% (or lower!) the words sound hollow at best. The words are a direct contradiction to the schools many students will meet this fall. Yet, I guess there’s nothing peppy about telling students that we’ve simply failed many of them. There's no positive note to telling children that they’re entering schools with almost unbearable budget shortages. California school districts are shortening their school calendar year to save money. In Obama’s own Chicago schools they cut 200 school buses, giving students longer journeys to school. Although the President's address may not recognize it, many students returning to school can’t help but see the contradiction in his encouragement and their reality.

Justice Matters & Los Cenzontles Host Cultural Event: Home–Grown Solutions for National Education Reform

2010-09-08T07:46:00.000-07:00

Justice Matters and Los Cenzontles will host a cultural event and community advocacy forum on Wednesday, September 8 at 4 PM at Los Cenzontles Mexican Art Center, 13108 San Pablo Avenue, San Pablo, CA 94805.

East Bay families and neighbors are invited watch a four-year-old dance troupe, get their hands dirty with arts projects and enjoy traditional food, all while sharing their vision for change in public schools. This unique forum celebrates art, while asking parents and the community to collaborate on priorities for education reform and share their experiences and opinions with policymakers.

This authentic gathering is part of a state-wide effort to build support for arts education and arts-integrated education as a solution to many of the challenges facing schools today. The effort is led by a state-wide coalition of advocacy groups which includes Alameda County Office of Education’s Alliance for Arts Learning Leadership, Justice Matters and Los Cenzontles. Aligning with a national effort led by the Americans for the Arts Action Fund’s 50 State in 50 Days initiative the coalition seeks to build awareness of the important role of the arts in our communities.

"Community arts are a priority in our work towards racial justice in local schools and on a national level. Our art and story-telling projects are a relevant and tangible way to raise consciousness and empower students, families and teachers,” said Olivia Araiza, executive director of Justice Matters.

As part of The Time Is Now initiative, state-wide coalition partners are urging the U.S. Congress and State Legislature to support the following policies and priorities for education reform:

Strengthen schools through arts learning and arts-integrated education.
Develop balanced assessments that value individual student growth and account for the overall quality of the learning environment provided for each student.
Provide equitable funding and school improvement models that value innovation and quality.
Provide authentic, accessible opportunities for parent, student, and community engagement and input.
Support educator professional learning communities that continually strengthen teaching and learning.

Los Cenzontles is a grassroots artist-driven organization committed to amplifying the roots of Mexican culture through classes, events, media and performances. Founded in San Pablo, CA in 1994 by musician and educator Eugene Rodriguez, Los Cenzontles provides the local community with a family-friendly setting for traditional arts education and cultural events.

New Schott Foundation study reveals national failure to educate black males

2010-08-20T15:38:00.000-07:00

"The 2010 Schott 50 State Report on Black Males in Public Education indicates that the overall 2007-2008 graduation rate for black males in the U.S. was 47 percent, with half of states having rates below this. The report highlights New Jersey's Abbott plan, whose targeted resources yielded significant results: New Jersey is now the only state with a high black population and a greater-than-65-percent graduation rate for black males. Currently, the five worst-performing districts with large black male student enrollment are New York City (28 percent); Philadelphia (28 percent); Broward County, Fla. (39 percent); Chicago (44 percent); and Nashville, Tenn. (47 percent)."

Stop SB1317: Proposed truancy law fines, jails California parents

2010-08-16T12:55:00.000-07:00

Malaika Parker, Director of Community Action, uses her experience organizing parents through the R.E.A.L. Schools Now! Campaign in Richmond, CA to offer an analysis of the California Senate's chronic truancy legislation, SB1317:

Eighteen days and your parent can land in jail – what a message to send to the students in California elementary and middle schools. First we blamed students for the failings of public education and now, instead of California doing everything possible to make responsive, inclusive schools, SB1317 threatens to blame parents. Under this proposed legislation parents with children labeled chronically truant (18 or more unexcused days per school year) would either receive a fine, be remanded to jail or parenting classes for which the state has no money.

Consistently the response to the failures the public school system has been rooted in a desire to find the quick fix, instead of taking a deep look at what is happening in our schools. Our children are being warehoused, underserved, and over-tested. Children of color are being denied education that prepares them for their futures.

Families are told over and over again that they are not welcome as engaged, critical members of the school community. Instead of looking at the root of why our communities, families, and young people feel disengaged by schools SB1317 and much of the school reform discussion is focused on what parents need to do differently. This bill is a slippery slope toward teaching children that their parents are the barrier to success, education, and prosperity.

SB1317 is the personification of what many parents fear; that schools and the prison industrial complex are one in the same. Districts such as San Francisco boast that this method is the path toward improved student attendance, but at what cost? The price for these strategies is creating an environment of intimidation and disconnection.

Families have fought, demanded, and pleaded with California to do a better job at supporting students. They have been encouraged to wait, to be patient, and to allow their children’s education to be put at the bottom of the totem pole. I wonder what would happen if we moved towards engaging schools where parents are considered leaders, where students – all students – are considered scholars, and our communities are treated as assets to the learning process.

Privatization leads to money-chase, hurts students of color

2010-08-10T14:28:00.000-07:00

In response to Sam Dillon's article published yesterday in the New York Times, Amina writes:

In spite of all stimulus money and all new policy plans, here we are, right back where we started; with the most underserved children receiving the very least. These children receive the least experienced teachers and administrators, now lets add the least experienced school turnaround advisors and managers to the mix.

Yet, we shouldn’t be so surprised by this outcome. Given the overly simplistic turnaround policies and strategies being employed by this administration for bettering our most underserved schools, its no wonder every Tom, Dick and Harry organization has stepped up to give it the ole college try.

The idea is to learn the right lessons from the information we have at hand. The shortsighted response is to call for greater oversight in the selection and vetting of these turnaround advisor companies. That addresses the symptom. There arguably aren’t enough successful turnaround strategists to go around. The underlying problem is the less than thoughtful and holistic policy strategy for a series of deeply complex problems with poor students of color at the center.

Communities for Excellent Public Schools reports that students of color represent from low-income communities represent 81% of these turnaround school students. Yet, the strategies we’ve devised to “help” them devalues that cultural and historical experience. In fact, quickie policies approaches may leave them prey to individuals and organizations seeking profit more than education transformation. We can do better.

Washington DC: Response to President Obama’s Address to the National Urban League

2010-08-03T12:59:00.000-07:00

Reflecting on the Obama Administration's track record on race, Amina writes from Washington:

As President Obama addressed the National Urban League there was a feeling of disconnect on both sides. On one side a president who circumvents the importance of race. On the other side an audience whose organization is dedicated to “enabling African Americans to secure economic self-reliance, parity, power and civil rights.” You could almost feel the audience’s dilemma.

Torn. Feeling proud of the first Black president, yet skeptical at what that will mean for improving the lives of people of color; for our children in schools in particular.

Success in times of failure

“In a single generation America went from #1 to #12 in college completion rates,” said President Obama. Secretary Duncan also reflects with nostalgia on this time of American supremacy.

During that ‘good’ time, students of color were floundering in college entrance and graduation rates. In 1990 black men and black women had graduation rates of 28% and 34% respectively. For those of us seeking to improve the lives of students of color, the administration’s goal to return America to its #1 position sounds hollow.

Over and over we’ve declared national success while students of color continue in utter distress. As the numbers of students of color grow you can see why we’d be skeptical about policies that promise ‘success’ without lending a critical eye to the needs and experiences of these students.

Civil what?

“This is the civil right issue of our time,” President Obama and Secretary Duncan are quick to declare, yet equally quick to dismiss in crafting public policy. Civil rights issues warrant civil right responses.

A competitive process for education funding through Race to the Top is hardly appropriate. If, in fact, the civil rights of some students are being persistently and systematically infringed upon, then we can’t craft policy proposals that designate certain ‘winning’ students as deserving and others as not.

As it stands at least 17 states (and the children they serve) will not win funding for their grant submissions proposals. Not to mention the states that didn’t bother applying. Ironically, President Obama may have said it best, “Words are easy, deeds are hard.”

To declare public education a civil rights issue is the right thing to do. Kudos to you, Mr. President. However, it’s much easier to say it, than to accept the full responsibility for what it means. It means that there are students in the system for whom vast systemic remedies are required, not won.

Is this public policy or public counseling?

Finally, the President’s speech included his usual refrain about parental responsibility. It’s the turn off the television, read to your kids, value teachers over sports stars refrain. All good points. But the persistent emphasis and spotlight on these points by President Obama lead me to question if the message matches the messenger.

What does it mean to have the President, the nation’s chief public policy officer over emphasize the private actions of parents in solving public policy problems? Sure, parents can and should do right by their children. But this personal responsibility refrain must follow a clear responsibility for what hasn’t, yet should, be done through public policy. Mr. Obama should be equally consistent in forcing the issues of zero tolerance policies, inequitable education funding structures, lacking services for English Language Learners. The list goes on and on.

California reeling from Race to the Top's unintended consequences

2010-07-21T09:48:00.000-07:00

Reflecting on John Fensterwald's spot-on analysis of California's on-going open enrollment mess, Jack writes:

As if parents didn’t have enough to look forward to in the coming school year, they now have another convoluted policy to contend with, sent from Sacramento with a shrug. Yet it’s unsurprising the state’s lawmakers failed to foresee the open enrollment mess as they scrambled in vain to secure Race to the Top funds in January. In the eleventh hour, with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, our legislators would have supported almost any bill with the words “accountability” and “choice” scattered through it. Therein lies the problem.

As sloppy as Sen. Gloria Romero’s SBX5-4 has turned out to be, the true catalyst behind the resulting mess is not our state legislators, but really the Race to the Top initiative itself. As schools with above average APIs of 800 are being classified as being among the state’s worst and high-performing principals and teachers are fired, we enter a strange, Ducanesque world of contradiction and paradox. Left is right, good is bad, and, most distressingly, success is failure.

There’s no other way of putting it: Race to the Top has hurt our schools. This high profile, high-stakes competition for cash left behind a legacy of incomplete state legislation across the country. It’s striking to think that with only 10% of the lowest performing schools being eligible for open enrollment, the remaining 90% will continue to struggle without a structural reform or funding increase in sight. Those hurt most will almost certain be those hurting now: low-income families of color.

Arne Duncan and the President have said time and again that this would be the true legacy of the initiative – convincing states to implement “groundbreaking reforms” through competition alone. The Federal government could turn around our nation’s struggling schools and improve student performance without articulating a clear policy vision, without bothering to really understand “what works,” and without spending more than a few billion dollars, nationwide.

That was the Race to the Top gimmick; California’s open enrollment debacle is the unacceptable result.

Justice Matters' First Washington DC Convening is a Great Success!

2010-06-29T14:53:00.001-07:00

Washington DC: Stella reports on convening that engaged parents and educational professionals from around the country

On June 15^th, Justice Matters' “Voices on the Ground: Connecting parents, students and activists to national education policy” brought together parents of color, community organizers and policy analysts to critically discuss the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) also known as No Child Left Behind. The event was hosted at the National Education Association offices.

From the morning panel, to the work group meeting and finally at our Justice Matters’ Happy Hour at the local DC Busboys & Poets Café, community activists, policy professionals, parents and other education professionals met, networked, formed new relationships and strengthened old ones.

Community organizers, parents, policy analysts, and teachers came from around the country to participate: Chicago, Illinois; Jackson, Mississippi; New York, NY; West Contra Costa County, CA; Washington DC; and Cambridge, MA.

One distinct message came through loud and clear: in order for public schools to become healthy, strong centers for all students we must connect community voice and racial justice to education policy and politics.

The DC convening was a first step in filling a huge void – the need for parents of color, policy analysts, and community organizers to come together and build a consensus on what our students need.

So stay tuned for more opportunities to work together in making racial justice and community engagement a reality in education policy.

And be sure to download a copy of our latest policy brief, Racial Justice and the Obama Administration’s Education Agenda on our blog that was presented at the DC convening. We welcome comments, ideas and thoughts on all our posts.

Download Our New Working Paper: "Racial Justice and the Obama Administration's Education Agenda"

2010-06-23T07:49:00.000-07:00

With federal reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) approaching, Justice Matters employs a racial justice lens to evaluate the Obama Administration's public education agenda. The administration's plans, as demonstrated in A Blueprint for Reform, the 2011 fiscal year budget, and the Race to the Top initiative, maintain and even bolster some of the problematic elements in the current legislation, widely known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). In Racial Justice and the Obama Administration's Education Agenda, Justice Matters examines how students of color will fare under the values and principles guiding the plans for reform. We take an in-depth look at approaches to parent and community engagement proposed by the administration and conclude with an outline for an alternative racial justice strategy.

Download the full paper at http://justicematters.org/jmi_sec/jmi_spub/publications.html

Justice Matters Washington DC Convening: Voices on the Ground: Connecting parents, students and activists to national education policy

2010-06-07T18:07:00.000-07:00

JOIN US!
June 15th 10:00 am - 4:00 pm (ET)
National Education Association (NEA) Offices
1201 16th Street NW, Washington DC
To register visit: http://voicesontheground.eventbrite.com/

We've been writing a lot about the reauthorization of the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) on this blog.
Now Justice Matters is hosting an exciting event on Tuesday, June 15th at the offices of the National Education Association in Washington DC. The convening is part of a Justice Matter effort to insert a racial justice analysis into the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
The Voices on the Ground event brings together community organizers and leading policy analysts from around the nation who will critically discuss ESEA. Panelists include:

Dr. John Jackson, President & CEO, The Schott Foundation
Veronica Rivera, Legislative Staff Attorney, Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund (MALDEF)
Robert Kim, Senior Policy Analyst, National Education Association (NEA)
Pamela Bachilla, Legislative Advocate, Alameda Alliance for Arts Learning Leadership
Arnol Amigo, Youth Leader and Henry Cervantes, Community Organizer, Telpochalli Community Education Project (Chicago, IL)
Betty Petty, Senior Organizer, Southern Echo, Inc. (Jackson, MS)
Carol Boyd, Parent Leader, NY Coalition for Educational Justice (New York,NY)
Bernadine Hammond, Parent Leader, REAL Schools Now! (Richmond, CA)

To learn more about the convening visit:
http://voicesontheground.eventbrite.com/

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Senate Hearing Spotlights Homeless, Migrant, Foster and ESL students

2010-04-29T14:37:00.000-07:00

Amina reports from Washington on today’s Senate Health Education Labor and Pension Hearing --homeless, migrant, foster and English as a Second Language students are the focus

Homeless Students: Good Law, Little Funding

Nationwide there are approximately 800,000 homeless children in public schools. Ms. Denise Ross of the Homeless Education Office of Prince George County Public Schools, MD is a fervent champion of the McKinney-Vento Act. The law has great aspects. It provides services and support to meet the needs of homeless children. Yet it remains underfunded. Only 9% of school districts receive McKinney-Vento funds! A well-to-do county like Prince George is able to step in where the federal government falls short, but what about the other school districts?

A System That Can’t See Immigrant Student Success

Mr. Michael Hinojosa, the Superintendent of Dallas Independent School District is an eye-opener on policies that miss the point in the real world. Many immigrant students are under-credited and over-aged. Language differences and other issues make them less likely to graduate in four years. Currently schools are judged on their four year graduation rates. As a result many immigrant graduates go unrecognized by the system. The system actually creates a disincentive to educate youth who need more than four years to graduate. It’s a classic case of a well-intended policy with unintended and negative real world implications.

The Amazing Ms. VanDyke

There was a ring of heart wrenching thoughtfulness in the air as Kayla Van Dyke addressed the senators. She’s a Minneapolis student with a lifetime of experience in homelessness and foster care and is now on her way to a four year college. The graduation rate for foster students hovers somewhere around 50%. Senators and the audience sat a little awestruck by this spectacularly thoughtful and confident senior. She explained how it was more than luck and talent that accounted for her ability to beat the odds. After a life in flux she found stability. A counselor to inform her of available services and to offer support during the difficult moves. A therapist to ensure that she dealt with emotional issues. Good foster parents who provided three years of stability and assisted her in catching up with her studies. These are real programs and they reap real benefits.

A Straight Shooter Senator

Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) a former social worker pulled no punches. She stated at the outset “the foster care system is broken”, “we track terrorists, but have no way of keeping track of the well being of these children”. Whammo! “How do we attract teachers to a high needs school for special education facing all sorts of sanctions and mandates when they could just as easily go to highly resourced equally paid suburban school?” Whammo, again! She gets it-- the system makes no sense.

All in all, a good hearing on Capitol Hill today.

"Don't Take My Teacher" - Thousands of Students Stand up and Walk Out

2010-04-28T17:31:00.001-07:00

Justice Matter’s executive director, Olivia Araiza, comments on New Jersey student walkout on Tuesday

On Tuesday, some 18,000 students in New Jersey walked out of classrooms protesting state-budget cuts in public schools with hand drawn signs reading “Don’t Take My Teacher” and “Dream Killers,” according to the New York Times.

In Newark, where 70% of the public school students are students of color, they marched to City Hall protesting Republican Governor Christopher J. Christie’s budget cutbacks. The governor’s actions have pushed many districts to lay-off staff, increase classroom size, and cut after-school activities – unfortunately, nothing new for many school districts in this country. The National Education Association(NEA) already predicts that up to 200,000 teachers may lose their jobs this year.

What makes this statewide student walkout different is that it was organized on Facebook, by a student, in just a month – with a simple message and a call to action. Students listened, organized, and walked out - Native Americans, Blacks, and Latinos from low-income school districts, the districts being hardest hit by the cutbacks.

Students of color are on the move and organizing. It’s about their futures, dreams, and hopes and they want to make sure their voice is heard. So the question is, are President Obama, Congress, and D.C. policy makers listening? We'll soon find out through the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary School Act (ESEA).

Through Justice Matters' Rethink Reclaim Rewrite Project, the Racial Justice Alternative to ESEA, we're measuring the policy agendas and politics surrounding the reauthorization of the law formerly known as No Child Left Behind. We are measuring the D.C. policies against racial justice and community values. The student walk out on Tuesday helps ensure we're on the right track - and should help ensure the country is on the right track, too.

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Too Big to Fail - Keep our Educators in the Classroom

2010-04-26T19:02:00.000-07:00

Amina from the Capitol on Sen. Harkin's new bill

Three cheers for Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chair of the Senate Education Committee! As states stimulus monies dry up and states are heading toward a funding cliff, a life preserver is tossed to educators. Sen. Harkins’ Keep Our Educators Working Act would extend stimulus funds by $23 billion for one year. Yes, this preserver is only temporary. But for tens of thousands of teachers awaiting pink slips—something is a whole lot better than nothing at all.

The National Education Association (NEA) is projecting over 150,000 educator layoffs in the next three months! The prospects are frightening. So, Sen. Harkin’s bill is a great start.

Let’s now push for some Wall Street bailout fortitude. A federal commitment to being there for public education. Why? Because it’s too big to fail. Because on the other end of those teacher lay-offs, school closures, stripped down school budgets are some of the nation’s most vulnerable children.

As nicely pointed out by the NEA, this approach is a far cry from the competitive roller coaster ride for Race to the Top Funds. Already the Department of Education is saying that only about 10 to 15 states may share in the remaining $3.4 billion that is estimated to be available. What happens to the rest of the states and the nation’s schools?

Unlike the Race to the Top game, Sen. Harkin’s bill would free already economically traumatized states from having to prove their worthiness for funding. They do not have to devise speedy plans and make unreasonable promises for cash. Instead, in these times of economic recession their worthiness is implied and understood. They are in crisis and their failure is inextricably linked to the well-being of the children they serve—many of whom are children of color; children whose futures are too important for them to fail.

Public Education as a Civil Right: Reauthorization Must Reflect ESEA's Original Purpose

2010-04-13T16:08:00.000-07:00

Jack’s op-ed carried by the California Progress Report uncovers the original intent of ESEA/NCLB as enacted in 1965 at the height of the Civil Rights Movement and suggests that legacy be lived up to during the reauthorization process:

With the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) getting underway on Capitol Hill, a meaningful anniversary will pass unobserved in Washington. Forty-five years ago this Sunday, President Lyndon Johnson signed the act, rebranded by the Bush Administration as No Child Left Behind, into law. With the stroke of a pen, the federal government’s role in public education was revolutionized, placing emphasis on ensuring educational opportunity in low-income communities.

A Revolution in Education

The law came as a critical step in the Great Society legislation package designed to fight poverty and racism. For Johnson, who was trained as a schoolteacher and had taught in a poor Latino community in Texas, ESEA held as much potential for fighting racial injustice as the Civil Rights Act passed the previous year. With the federal government mandating desegregation, education commissioner Francis Keppel designed ESEA to ensure students of color were not just seated in classrooms, but that they also received a high quality education and had the real opportunity to continue to college.

In the decade following its inception, ESEA played an instrumental role in the desegregation process. Through Title I, the portion of the law providing funding for schools with large populations of low-income students, the Department of Education gave districts a strong incentive to follow through with desegregation promises. If they didn’t, they would miss out on federal dollars. At the same time, the policy also guaranteed resources for struggling schools when states and districts failed them, providing an essential boost for schools serving communities of color that had been neglected for years.

Legacy Lost?

Since becoming law, ESEA has been reauthorized by Congress about every five years. This process allows for policy modifications and improvements, as seen by the addition of funding provisions for English language learners and massive investments in educational innovation.

However, promises made during the reauthorization process have often fallen flat. For instance, in 2002 George W. Bush promised substantial increases in Title I funding for low-income schools. The money never materialized and to date the fund remains discretionary and not mandatory, leaving it susceptible to political horse-trading in the budget process.

With reauthorization three years overdue, the Obama Administration released its blueprint for education reform last month, outlining a model of improvement through increased competition and accountability. Federal spending on competitive grants is to be increased by $3 billion while the amount for formula grants, that is guaranteed money for struggling schools in poor communities, will be slightly reduced.

Title I funds, the federal government’s main tool for achieving equality in educational opportunity, will remain stagnant. With the four intervention models mandated for the nation’s lowest performing schools highly punitive, Title I schools should be given as many resources as possible to avoid becoming worst case scenarios.

Pitfalls and Potentials

In the race to win federal funding, the strongest competitors among states and school districts are those who can best demonstrate their proposed reforms will yield real results for their students. It stands to reason that those who can invest the most money and manpower into their proposals will have the best shot.

If states or districts are strapped for such resources or even if they are simply administered poorly, it seems logical that they will struggle to be competitive. In this way, schools that serve poor communities of color may end up at an automatic disadvantage when vying for federal money. The Department of Education must take this fact into account when it is evaluating funding applications or the strategy will simply intensify inequalities.

Over the year, Congress will set to work reauthorizing ESEA. Reauthorization necessarily involves the classic dance of interest politics – unleashing lobbyists and activists armed with slogans and statistics. In the midst of the clamor, it’s possible to be sidetrack and lose touch with what the legislation was actually intended to do: guarantee quality public education for poor students and students of color. Given its civil rights legacy, that goal is the heart and soul of this law and it must be boldly reaffirmed.

Guest Blogger: Susan Sandler writes about the mission of our nation's schools

2010-04-12T13:50:00.000-07:00

What Starts with a “C” and Stands for Building A Healthy, Just, and Caring World?

by Susan Sandler

OK, it doesn’t really have to start with a C. But we do need another word to go along with “college” and “career” in the goals for schools set out in the Obama administration’s Blueprint for Reform (http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/publicationtoc.html).

By stating that schools should prepare students to be college and career ready, the administration is “engaged in a historic effort” to change the country’s paradigm for schools (http://www.ed.gov/blog/2010/03/president-discusses-proposal-for-esea/). The Obama administration is saying that we have to dramatically raise our expectations for what schools should be doing.

If we’re going to change our paradigm for schools, let’s really change it. Let’s put out a full vision for what our schools should be and do. While college and careers definitely have a place in a vision for schooling (and perhaps another posting could unpack these ideas from a racial justice perspective), they do not cover the full picture of what education should do.

Socially Responsible Public Schools

Yes, our schools should prepare individual students for college and fulfilling work that allows them to care for their families. Yes, they should enable a thriving economy. But we also need our schools to be places where students learn to build a healthy, just, and caring world. As Justice Matters’ Executive Director Olivia Araiza says, our schools should be creating “leaders, solution-builders, peace-fighters, and lifelong learners.”

If our schools were fully accomplishing this part of their mission today, maybe the financial sector would be run on a different model that would not have led us into economic crisis. And maybe each neighborhood would have more community leaders and solutions to survive this crisis as it hit us on the local level. And if students learned in school that they are citizens of the world; not just the U.S., and that this includes learning about the histories and cultures of ALL nations and not just European ones, perhaps our foreign policy could begin to reflect a more intelligent policy built on human rights and knowledge.

Racial Justice and Public Education

How is expanding the paradigm for schools in this way a racial justice issue? Of course, building a healthy, just, and caring world is something we need based on many perspectives and values. But we need it from a racial justice perspective for a couple of reasons:

Communities of color, as a group that faces systemic oppression, have an urgent need for a more healthy, just, and caring world. As studies have shown, people of color bear disproportionate harm from societal practices that are unhealthy, unjust, and uncaring. Whether the problem is an out-of-control criminal justice system (http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=122), predatory and unfair lending practices (http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/Racial%20Gap%20in%20Debt%20and%20Credit%20June%202009.pdf), access to healthy food (http://ecolocalizer.com/2009/02/07/beyond-food-deserts-mapping-racial-disparities-in-access-to-healthy-food/ ), or almost any other problem affecting our society as a whole, communities of color are disproportionately impacted.

Many students of color come to school with personal experiences of an unhealthy, unjust, and uncaring world: too often, they have been on the front lines of unequal access to health care; they know what neglected, crumbling neighborhood looks like; they have seen the effects of toxic dumping; they have been in the offices of unresponsive institutions that have treated family members disrespectfully. When schools take on the mission of changing that, their relevance and connection increases dramatically for these students.

So, please let me know if you think of a third word for the mission of our country’s schools!

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Zero Tolerance Policies Hurt Students of Color

2010-04-08T13:28:00.000-07:00

Amina from the Capitol on NYU's Pedro Noguera, the school to prison pipeline, and the future of discipline policies in the nation's public schools:

They Came to Capitol Hill

On Capitol Hill New York University’s Pedro Noguera implores lawmakers to recognize that zero tolerance policies disproportionately punish the kids that have the highest needs. Noguera, Monty Neill from Fair Test, Jim Freeman from the Advancement Project and Eric Yates student organizer from the Philadelphia Student Union issued a clarion call to address the issue. The school to prison pipeline is not a policy footnote. In fact, for students of color in particular it may be the golden key to help unlock the mysteries of the drop out plague.

Duncan Disses Discipline

Did you know that in Chicago Public Schools, under the leadership of then Chief Executive Officer Arne Duncan, the number of out-of-school suspensions district wide nearly quadrupled over six years? I guess its no surprise zero tolerance policies aren’t at the top of Duncan’s “things to do” list. The Advancement Project’s 2010 release of Test, Punish, and Push Out reports this and other stunning results from zero tolerance policies now employed in schools across the nation. The report screams that we can’t afford to overlook this issue.

Race Doesn’t What?!

Did you know that since NCLB’s passage nationwide expulsion numbers have gone up some 15%? More tellingly, the numbers of expulsions for Black students has risen 33% and 6% for Latino students, yet FALLEN 2% for white students! Does race still matter? Clearly, in the world of school discipline it does. This inconvenient truth flies in the face of a country wishing for a post-racial gold star—but we simply aren’t there yet.

Connect the Dots

Discipline is a line that connects many education outcome dots. Suspended, expelled and needlessly arrested kids are kids that aren’t learning. Kids that fall behind academically tend to be kids that don’t feel welcome in schools. Kids that don’t feel welcome in school tend to drop out and are at an increased risk to be placed in the criminal justice system. No matter how convenient separating these issues may be for policy expedience, it doesn’t erase the reality. Let’s connect some dots folks and learn from what we see.

Meaningful Parent Involvement Measures Missing from Obama's Blueprint

2010-04-07T15:34:00.000-07:00

Jack's op-ed carried by New America Media responds to the Administration's plans (or lack thereof) to reform the school-parent relationship in K-12 education:

When then-Sen. Barack Obama was campaigning in Chicago in June 2008, he chided black fathers for not taking an active interest in their children’s lives. “Yes, we need more money for our schools, and more outstanding teachers in the classroom, and more afterschool programs for our children,” he told a church congregation. “But we also need families to raise our children.”

Whether he was speaking the truth or talking down to families of color, it seemed clear that candidate Obama passionately believed that parents should play a critical role in a child’s success. On this at least, he was right. Study after study has confirmed that parent involvement—from helping with homework to volunteering–helps students succeed in school.

Rhetoric vs. Reality

Yet Obama’s fiery campaign rhetoric is vastly different from the president’s new plans for public education reform when it comes to parent engagement. Last month, the federal Department of Education released its proposal for renewing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, better known as No Child Left Behind. It proposes changes to teacher accountability, student evaluation and school administration, but says virtually nothing about engaging parents.

In fact, the president’s 2011 fiscal year budget actually eliminates funding for the 62 Parent Information and Resources Centers that have coordinated parent involvement programs across the country for the past eight years. Instead, the proposal would expand two initiatives—Promise Neighborhoods and 21st Century Learning Centers—with $1.4 billion.

But those initiatives do not specifically focus on parent involvement. The bulk of that money will go to competitive grants that can be won by states, school districts, and community-based organizations that establish a wide variety of programming to improve student achievement and expand the school day. Engaging parents in such programs is suggested, but not explicitly required.

No Guaranteed Support

More money for community-oriented programs might be good thing. However, with such funding taking the form of competitive grants, there’s no guarantee that schools serving poor students and communities of color will get the special resources they need to implement effective parent involvement strategies.

For example, some parents feel intimated by the background checks and fingerprinting process required by many volunteering programs. Other parents have difficulty communicating with teachers and counselors when no interpreters are available. But there’s no proposal on the table to require states and school districts to knock down such bureaucratic barriers or to encourage parent participation in school decision-making processes.

Perhaps education officials think that federal involvement in matters of parental engagement has been so ineffective in the past that it’s not worth trying again. To some extent, they’re right. Parent involvement policies have been both poorly funded and inconsistently implemented. The administration’s proposals don’t address these shortcomings. Instead, they would introduce third party organizations into the relationship between schools and parents, complicating not simplifying it.

Parents as a Solution

Robust parental involvement also aids in the other issues of concern for education reform. It could help hold teachers and administrators accountable, improving the effectiveness of their work and student outcomes. If parents are well informed and involved, they could tell when a school is struggling and help to turn it around before worst-case scenarios unfold. Greater parent involvement means more hands to help when faculties are overwhelmed. As Howard Blume reports in The Los Angeles Times, the faculty-run Jefferson High School in South L.A. recently established policies that involve parents in discipline matters and allow them to sit-in on classes. The school is still struggling, but it’s beginning to see results.

Active parents are the missing factors in the public education equation. Their involvement should be an active right and not a passive privilege. Parents and families can reinforce what’s learned in the classroom and bring a wealth of knowledge into the school community.

With the administration making federal funding competitive to foster innovation, why not reward states and districts that make groundbreaking efforts to engage and include parents? After all, if parents want to do their part to ensure their children’s success then, as candidate Obama said in Chicago almost two years ago, “our government should meet them halfway.”

Washington D.C.: JM's Recommendations to the House Committee on Education & Labor

2010-03-29T15:31:00.000-07:00

Dear Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline and Members of the Committee on Education and Labor:

Justice Matters appreciates the opportunity to respond to the committee’s request for comments on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The reauthorization process and outcome offer an historic opportunity to rethink the nation’s approach to public education, reclaim the purpose of the ESEA as a tool to ensure the rights of students persistently disserved by our nation’s public education system and rewrite the legislation to best meets those ends.

Justice Matters is a non-profit organization dedicated to the development, promotion and support of education policy rooted in community vision. We firmly believe that a transformed public education system must include racial justice for students of color; a growing yet consistently disenfranchised group in public education. Our analysis and recommendations will focus on identifying substantive means to meet these ends.

As the reauthorization of ESEA moves forward Justice Matters will judge and recommend policies based on the following core set of values:

Commitment to the development of the full human and communal potential of all students, with a distinct commitment to students of color.
Embracing what low-income students of color specifically bring to school – their culture, language, families and ways of being and knowing in the world.
Commitment to preparing low-income students of color for meaningful work, to care for their families emotionally and financially to participate in building a more just society.

A New Path

In the past the power of federal education policy has been neutralized in the face of entrenched disparities in resources and achievement between students of color and their white counterparts. We need a completely new approach.

Parent and Community Engagement

Bridging the divide between the schools serving students of color and the communities in which these students reside is crucial for the development and implementation of effective school, district and state policy. Parents, caregivers, community activists, and the like provide invaluable perspective and information on the unique issues their community’s children face and on more effective strategies to value their children’s experiences and promote their children’s potential. Normally, federal policy considers provision of services to parents; including literacy, child development, etc. We encourage the expansion of these important efforts. However, these policies must be partnered with meaningful ways to empower parents and community members and include them in the governance of their local schools. Too often such attempts lack funding, specificity and rigor, resulting in ineffective programs. We can do better.

Neither the Obama Administration’s budget proposal nor its blueprint indicate a specific requirement for parent and community engagement in school governance. Moreover, all signs point to a rollback on current requirements for Parent Information and Resource Centers (PIRCs) , parental sign-off on district budget proposals and provisions of programming to build parent capacity for school involvement. These policies were never fully funded and lacked clarity in their mandate.

We recommend:

Explicitly outline a plan for parental and community engagement that results in a mandated infrastructure at the school, district and state level. The efforts should work to engage communities and parents with thought toward language and culture, disability and socio-economic status. This program could begin anew or work to expand, fully fund, strengthen and provide clarity to the existing PIRCs. We understand the current system is flawed, however, the need for meaningful parental and community engagement persists.
Retain requirements for parents to sign-off on district budgets.
Ensure parental and community involvement programs are fully funded. For example, PIRCs have not been fully funded.
Provide incentives for schools and districts to partner with community-based organizations to develop and implement plans to empower parents and fully them and community members in school governance and school daily practices.
Fully implement an accountability system to ensure that schools, districts and states comply with parent and community engagement funding requirements and participation guidelines.

The Blueprint

As the Obama Administration’s Blueprint for Reform promises to guide subsequent discussions on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act we recommend that the following be taken into account in legislative discussions and policy development:

Provide greater flexibility in the means for school turnaround. Schools at the bottom 5% often face a cross cutting set of complex issues. The solution for turning around such a school likely require strategies that reach beyond the four prescribed by the blueprint. Turnaround strategies should promote flexibility and encourage techniques that make student, teacher, parent and other community voices central in devising non-traditional and locally based strategies.

Explicit and substantive inclusion of parents in turnaround school decisions. Too often parents are the last to learn about plans for school closure, charter conversion, or major restructuring. The blueprint indicates that the selected strategy should be locally decided, however, it is silent on which local voices must be included in the decision making process.

Rethink our approach to our most difficult schools. The blueprint promotes a model that advantages schools with greater means while disadvantaging schools with the greatest struggles, where many students of color are located. Although the more successful schools will find relief from punitive No Child Left Behind (NCLB) practices, and win the right to innovate. While for the lowest rung schools, the NCLB world will persist. Although the requirement will have changed from Adequate Yearly Progress to Career and College Readiness, and from achievement to growth, the pressure will persist to teach to the test.

Explicitly Address Push-out Forces in Schools. The startlingly high drop-out rate among students of color demonstrates a need for extraordinary effort in determining its cause and developing solutions. Current proposals, the blueprint and discussion have ignored the devastating contribution zero tolerance and other harsh disciplinary policies have made toward low graduation rates and conversely high incarceration rates among students of color. Study after study shows stunning racial disparities in how these policies are enforced. Collection of data indicated in the blueprint is a start. However, schools and districts should be forced to review their discipline policies and draw on healthier and more effective approaches to improve school climate.

Promote racial and ethnic diversity among teachers. The administration recognizes the importance of teachers in creating healthy learning environments. However, it has failed to recognize the importance of greater racial and ethnic diversity among them. Beyond racial and ethnic diversity, we must promote teachers recruited from the communities they will serve.

Greater requirements for equity. As written, the blueprint offers strong ideas on the need for greater resource yet the language is soft. ‘Over time’, districts will be required to ensure their high poverty schools receive equitable state and local funding. States will be ‘asked’ to develop a plan to tackle resource disparities. Resource equity is a central problem in public education. States and districts will require mandates and timetables to ensure success.

It may all come down to values.

What may be most troubling and most difficult to pinpoint and illustrate is the lack of core values in the blueprint and in education reform discussions thus far. We have lacked a national discussion of the core values upon which a transformed educational system should be based. In its place we’ve based reform almost entirely on economic necessity and dropped the civil rights legacy upon which the ESEA is based. We’ve infused competition into government funding ensuring that some students will end up losing the competitive grant game. Through No Child Left Behind we’ve learned of the glaring disparity between students of color and their white counterparts, yet we continue to explicitly recognize this reality and create public policy accordingly. We continue to place race neutral policy solutions on problems steeped in race. Until we can have these frank and open discussions we may be faced with revisiting these same issues on the next round of ESEA reauthorization.

Sincerely,

Justice Matters

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Ravitch on her NCLB change of heart, but where's the race analysis in the discussion?

2010-03-18T10:45:00.000-07:00

Amina's on the ground take on Diane Ravitch, Carmel Martin, and others discussing the Education Secondary Elementary Act (ESEA) (but avoiding race) at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington DC:

Diane Ravitch, toast of the town among progressives, today presented her latest book The Death and Life of the Great American School System, to a capacity crowd at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) in Washington D.C. What brought the people? Likely her scathing critique of No Child Left Behind, this made all the more interesting and oddly legitimate since she was a former member of the Bush administration and vocal proponent of the legislation. Today Ravitch outright denounces the sanctions of NCLB and high stakes testing. She’s also taken on some popular Obama administration ideas particularly charter schools and privatization of public education.

The New Blueprint

In contrast to Ravitch, the EPI panel also included Carmel Martin. Martin, of the Department of Education, was described as a principal author of the administration’s newly minted ESEA blueprint. It’s interesting as she spoke about the blueprint I got a striking feeling that we were hearing a kitchen sink approach to education policy making; they’re really throwing a bit of everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. For progressives there are some pretty nasty ingredients in the mix, but they’re laced with something sweet to make them go down a little easier. Although they may have covered all their bases, and are doing a lot of “things”, the finished product misses the mark on creating a grand idea for truly transformative change.

Standardized testing will remain, but it’s based on student progress; an improvement maybe; yet it still doesn’t answer the problem of teaching to the test. For turnaround schools they offer some unproven and harsh methods; close them, convert them to charters, fire teachers and principals; but before you want to rip your hair out in frustration; they add a fourth option of intensive planning and professional development. How many districts will really use the fourth option? They’re strong arming states to remove charter school caps; we’d say that opens the floodgates to charter school creation and mass privatization of public schools; they say they haven’t mandated the creation of these schools, they just want to make sure they’re an option for districts.

A Sad Reality

Overall the event was great but tempered by a sad reality. Where’s the racial and ethnic diversity in the voices speaking on this issue? Where are the voices of the people on the ground? But this (from what I’ve seen thus far in the DC policy world), is nothing new. The problems in the schools persists despite all this highbrow conversation; maybe they’re missing something. In fact, an actual District of Columbia Schools social worker and parent addressed the crowd bringing all the high minded dialogue to eye level. We are teaching to the test, we have extreme needs that aren’t being met, the schools are in crisis, she lamented. In response, a panel member, offering all due respect of course, proceeded to dispel and temper her reality by pointing out that test scores in DC public schools have actually been improving and perhaps, things weren’t quite as bad as she’d perceived them. Perhaps this goes a long way in telling progressives what’s sadly lacking in the present day policy making mix in Washington DC.

Death threats and gay bashing have no place in our schools

2010-03-17T16:20:00.000-07:00

Stella comments on The Los Angeles Times story about gay bashing and death threats at a Southern California high school:

This incident reflects the need for education in public and private schools about the history and culture of LGBTQ youth, including students of color. Postings that say "wanted dead or alive" should never be tolerated.
As more and more youth are coming out earlier they should be able to feel as safe and supported as any other student. The family uprooting and move to northern California only reflects the danger the entire family felt. It also reflects the need for school districts, teachers, and parents to engage in creating curriculum that reflects the history and culture of LGBTQ students.

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Amina reports on Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee Hearing, Washington, D.C.

2010-03-17T13:05:00.000-07:00

Witness: Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education

The Shell Game

It feels a little like a shell game in today’s House Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on the reauthorization of ESEA. Duncan’s testimony on the administration’s blueprint presents lots of attractive shells. However, when pressed it’s unclear that anything good lies under them for students of color, their families and communities.

Let’s start with equity. Finally, a proposal that says it will hold states and districts accountable for equitable distribution of resources. However, the blueprint wording is soft. And Secretary Duncan’s explanation even softer when pressed for details by Senator Harkin. He describes the problem of funding inequity at length, but nothing more. There’s no timeline, no enforcement strategy, no real plan. The shell looks good but there may be nothing under it.

Community what?

Community engagement and parental involvement seem to be under every shell, but so dispersed and lacking in clarity it may not be worth the effort of looking. Senator Dodd asks, Where is it in the blueprint? Yes, yes, yes, this may be the single most important factor in improving schools, Duncan agrees. But clearly the blueprint is out of step with all this importance. The blueprint mentions the word ‘parents’ a total of five times!

More tellingly, community engagement has no dedicated program. It’s mixed in with a potpourri of other good policy ideas with nowhere to go and presumably no real time to dedicate to them. Nutrition, school safety, physical education, mental health, substance abuse, bullying and finally community engagement efforts are all wrapped together with the competitive grant ribbon.

Community, well specifically community-based organizations are mentioned at length in the Promise Neighborhoods and 21^st Century Community Learning Centers programs. The programs beg a distinction that Duncan tends to blur; community-based organizations and actual community engagement are different. One is a thing, the other a process. One can be relied on to provide services, as the blueprint aptly does in the Promise Neighborhoods program and others. The other requires a plan, and an underlying premise and belief that community members must be drawn into discussions of how we talk about schools, teaching and learning. Community engagement--a sprinkle here and there, but really not much anywhere.

Tango with turnarounds

Finally, and perhaps most troubling is the blueprint’s treatment of turnaround schools: schools in which students of color are overrepresented. The blueprint’s approach reminds me of my own childhood in school. There was always that kid in your classroom or grade; the hard one. The one who failed almost every test, disrupted the class at every turn, was constantly in the principal’s office, was warned, sanctioned, and finally expelled. The system just didn’t know what to do with him or her. These students are moved around but are inconsistently engaged. They need the most, but in an overburdened system can get the least. That student seems much akin to how the blueprint treats turnaround schools. Let’s close them, punish the staff and principals, convert them into charters, but not really engage them. To do that we’d have to face what these schools really are: Extreme manifestations of systemic problems. To fix them we may need to revolutionize the whole system, and it takes more than a shell game to accomplish that feat.

Don't worry, California – A Race to the Top win wouldn't have meant much anyway

2010-03-16T23:23:00.000-07:00

In response to Sharon Noguchi's Oakland Tribune story published on March 4 "California Misses out on Race to the Top funding for schools," Jack's letter to the editor was published on March 15:

It’s official – California’s a loser. But before we lament missing out on the first round of Race to the Top funds, we should remember the kind of race we were running in the first place.

This $4.35 billion Federal initiative to turn around the nation’s lowest-performing schools springs from the notion that competition invariably fosters improved school performance. From staging a battle between states for scarce dollars to lowering barriers to charter schools, the program’s only innovation seems to be its prideful insertion of an oversimplified market model into the failed public education equation.

For the students of color served by those lowest-performing schools, a win would have been meaningless. Race to the Top fails to challenge the assumptions that have driven education policy for the last eight years – that teaching is testing, that the arts are peripheral, and that parent engagement is inessential.

We can’t send new money after bad ideas and hope real improvements materialize. With the reauthorization process of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) beginning this year, we have the chance to reshape the principles behind public education. Californians must make it clear to Congress that superficial policy change is not change at all.

Washington D.C. Dispatch: Obama's Reauthorization blueprint ignores Civil Rights legacy of ESEA

2010-03-15T16:15:00.000-07:00

Amina writes from Washington on the Dept. of Education's recent release of its blueprint for ESEA reauthorization:

A seismic shift is taking place in public education with the Obama administration’s blueprint for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act at the helm. Despite the shortcomings and utter failure we’ve seen from Wall Street’s values of competition, self-interest, short-term gains at long term sacrifice, we still seem sold on incorporating these ideals into education policy. The ultimate losers in this “edu-business” world may be those most in need; students of color.

What happened to the Civil Rights Movement?

This is an ironic outcome for legislation steeped in the civil rights movement. ESEA was intended to right racial injustice and support the provision of education to those children formerly disenfranchised. Obama’s blueprint has ignored the very essence of the law they seek to reauthorize, replacing these ideals with competitive grants and competitive choice in schools. Children with civil rights become states and districts with the right to compete for funding.

Though always paltry in amount, federal funding by formula has at least been a promise of support for all children in need. As with the competitive grant process started with Race to the Top, Obama’s blueprint, converting a portion of this funding into competitive grants starts a trend to revoke that promise and once again leave some children behind. Moreover, for already cash-strapped states it creates a perverse incentive to game the system: to say and at least appear to do what’s necessary to receive funding.

Despite studies demonstrating that teachers are not primarily motivated by salary, the Obama administration introduced the unproven and self-interested business model of pay for performance into a system over-reliant on test scores. Although they’ve tempered the language in the blueprint, allowing other factors to be considered and the use of student progress to be included, the system as it stands does not support these changes. For the foreseeable future testing remains supreme.

Turnaround Schools

To its credit the Obama administration is concentrating time, funds and effort toward turnaround schools; those at the lowest rung of achievement. However, promoting that schools be closed, or principals, teachers or other staff fired, may be short sighted at best. Although in the short run these strategies provide a short-term prize; removing the most egregious numbers. It does little to reshape the system in the long-term to ensure that the same problems don’t resurface. Turnaround strategies may also mean reopening as a charter school, a strategy that has shown mixed results. Closing schools altogether may also mean re-distributing students to schools well outside their neighborhoods that may be similarly under performing and under-resourced. Moreover, none of these strategies requires meaningful community participation in their selection and implementation, creating a fatal disconnect between the policies and students they profess to serve. We can do better.

Though the administration, policymakers and the general public may have tired of the civil rights and racial justice argument for education change, it doesn’t make it any less applicable. Civil rights doesn’t go out of style, and the persistent presence of vast racial disparities in resources and outcomes evidences its necessary inclusion in policy discussions. Let’s not let a fascination with business models and numbers out-weight the lives of the children behind them.

Washington D.C. Dispatch: The 1st Senate hearing on ESEA Reauthorization

2010-03-09T21:38:00.000-08:00

Amina's perspective from Capitol Hill:

Economics vs. Civil Rights

The first Senate hearing on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act gives a clear indication that the civil rights imperative of educational opportunity has been discarded for arguments of economic necessity and America's standing in the global marketplace.

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), the committee’s chair, defined the hearing as an introduction to reauthorization, protecting the goals of the existing law while changing what hasn’t worked. For him the importance of education reform is predicated on the competitiveness of the United States in the global economy. To his credit Harkin noted serious concerns about the achievement gap. Minorities, he described, as failing in the system. Yet, most tellingly is how Harkin funneled this sad reality through an economic lens. He cited a study by the Alliance for Excellent Education (AEE) saying that if the nation’s high schools and colleges were to raise the graduation rates of Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans students to levels of white students by 2020, the increase in personal income across the nation would add more than $310 billion to the US economy. He noted that in the past the achievement gap has been couched as a civil rights issue and moral imperative yet that idea was quickly cast aside for the supremacy of the nation's economic concerns.

The panel’s witnesses were selected with this idea in mind, two were directly from the business community, with the third gentleman being from the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) in Paris. The panel members were Andreas Schleicher of the (OCED) in Paris, France, Dennis Van Roekel, President the National Education Association (NEA), Charles Butt, Chairman and CEO of H-E-B, and John Castellani, president of the Business Roundtable. (To watch and read their testimonies go to: http://help.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/?id=201fe113-5056-9502-5d36-207b90e58b96.)

Congressional Concerns

The discussion and questions from the Senate members seemed less than informed and thoughtful. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) surmised the problem as a need to improve parental participation and the need for businesses to support that participation. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), touted his teacher pay for performance scheme in Tennessee, the first state to have such a program, and wanted to see similar schemes supported at the federal level. Senator Jack Reed (R-I) emphasized the need for better principals. The more “progressive” points of view came from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) with his emphasis on how college is government funded in Europe, as is other services that assist in insuring equitable access to education for all students. Also Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) who questioned over emphasis on testing and teaching to the “bubble” (teaching to those students whose test scores can easily be raised). Senator Al Franken (D-MN) who touted his proposed legislation to recruit and train principals, interestingly expressed a belief that testing was being inappropriately used. Testing results were being released too late for teachers to use them to modify and improve curriculum. His solution: test more often and have it be progress based.

Regardless of these concerns, the responses with the exception of VanRoekel of National Education Association (NEA), were based on an economic and business perspective. A move away from the moral imperative and toward an economic one in education reform is unsettling at best. First, it indicates a belief on the Hill that there is an overall malaise and weariness in America toward civil rights and racial justice. The message is “we’ve been there and done that with civil rights, it didn’t work, let’s use something more effective”. More importantly, when lives and injustice are defined solely in economic terms, it narrows and warps the solutions we identify. When the benefits and costs are defined in dollars, of course the value of teaching can be reduced to test scores; improving teachers becomes a discussion on pay for performance and failing schools can be cured by school choice. Without a moral compass it’s easy to slip out of language of how the system is failing students of color and into language of how students of color are failing the nation, and are responsible for our decline in the world economy.

More to come.

Bipartisanship in education policy is a process, not a prize

2010-02-26T15:43:00.000-08:00

In response to Nick Anderson's February 18 Washington Post story "Lawmakers to launch a bipartisan effort to redo No Child Left Behind" Amina wrote a letter to the editor published on Friday, February 26:

Bipartisanship in education reform? Not so fast. Given languishing health-care reform, jobs-bill wrangling and the filibuster shadow cast on Congress, it's easy to mistakenly consider bipartisanship the prize instead of the process.

Public education has be susceptible to this kind of thinking. No Child Left Behind (NCLB), with its testing mandates and punitive policies bemoaned today, was passed with healthy bipartisan support in 2002. Public education is trick and deceptively hard. Man policy ideas sound good: more pay for good teachers, more school choice, more money. With Republicans not wanting to be labeled "obstructionists" and Democrats wanting to get something done, it's easy to imagine public education becoming a political olive branch.

Lawmakers must resist this temptation in the NCLB rewrite. Let's use the reauthorization of NCLB to transform a profoundly dysfunctional system and to look at bipartisanship as a process and not just prize. Our children deserve more.

Linking test scores and teacher pay hurts students of color

2010-02-17T13:30:00.000-08:00

Amina responds to Lisa Guisbond's commentary in The Washington Post:

A hearty thanks to Ms. Guisbond of FairTest for your astute analysis of the Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s plan and the fundamental shortcomings of connecting high stakes testing to teacher pay. To it I would add that these schemes tend to most negatively affect the very students we purport to want to help. A 2009 study by the Government Accountability Office on the effects of No Child Left Behind’s high stakes testing mandates showed that schools with high poverty and high concentrations of students of color are most likely to adopt strategies such as narrowing curriculum and teaching to the test. While the whole system is warped by standardized testing policies, these students receive the brunt of them.

We appreciate the Obama Administration’s promise to revamp No Child Left Behind, however, throwing away elements such as the Adequate Yearly Progress provision does not remove the single most corruptive issue of over reliance on standardized testing, in fact, connecting it to teacher pay may ultimately exacerbate the problem. With drop-out rates vastly outpacing that of their white counterparts, poor Latino and African American students are floundering in the public education system. This trend threatens to continue as long as we refuse to look for more thoughtful reform strategies, recognize these students’ experiences, and meaningfully connect with their communities.

Community Vision: Meaningful family engagement in West Contra Costa

2009-10-14T12:43:00.000-07:00

Malaika Parker, Director of Community Action, wrote to The Contra Costa Times on Oct. 14, 2009 highlighting a success of the REAL Schools Now campaign, but still pushing for more improvements in West Contra Costa:

In August, the West Contra Costa school board passed a revolutionary resolution that was the product of collaboration between the REAL Schools Now campaign (RSN) and the school district.

The resolution, highlighting the district's Equity Initiative, was the first step toward creating schools that nurture the next generation of dynamic leaders in our communities. The passage of this resolution sets the stage for the school district to become a model of innovative approaches towards racial justice.

At the Sept. 16 board meeting in honor of Mexican Independence Day, students, families, and teachers collaborated to create a beautiful performance of traditional Mexican dance.

Following the performance, encouraging words came from board members, highlighting that family engagement, volunteerism and artistic expression are vital to academic rigor and achievement.

While encouraged by this touching display of progress, families in the district are committed to ensuring these moments are not limited to occasional expressions of diversity but are integrated across district policies and practices.

RSN is working toward a school district that honors traditional dance, costumes and foods, as well as political analysis of oppression, leadership development, and views families and parents as valuable educators.