The Purpose of State School Takeover

Several newspaper stories have been written in recent days about the Red Tape Reduction Act for public schools. Click here to see the latest one. All of the news stories miss the real point of the legislation. The full title of this legislation was The Red Tape Reduction and Local Empowerment Waiver Program. This title was intentionally misleading. The law does not reduce red tape for local school systems. Instead it requires local schools that apply for the waiver to follow a complex set of directives and rules issued by the State Department of Education. A review of the details of the new law reveals that it only empowers the State Department of Education, not local school systems!

This law was intended primarily as a way of allowing local school systems to avoid state takeover of low performing schools. It turns out that the highly paid staff of the State Department of Education have no clue about what to do with low performing schools. Of the nine schools taken over and converted into charter schools in the Baton Rouge area in recent years, all now have lower average LEAP high stakes test scores than before takeover. Some have seen drastic declines in test scores. (Click here to see the Advocate story on this issue) I believe the State Superintendent does not want to take over more schools but he still wants to be able to dictate all sorts of “reforms” to local school systems. His reputation as a reform superintendent depends on constantly shifting the blame for low performance to local school officials.

It is obvious that the only purpose of the threat of state takeover of schools is to embarrass local school superintendents and school boards that happen to have schools serving high poverty communities. The theory is that the fear of public exposure of low performance will embarrass local school officials and light a fire under lazy teachers and administrators who have allowed this low performance.

How has this system worked for Louisiana? Overall there has been some improvement of test scores in many takeover schools. But since almost all public schools started implementing intense test preparation programs, scores on the LEAP have gone up in most schools, traditional and takeover. Does the improvement in LEAP scores mean that our students are better educated? Not according to Education Week Magazine which recently awarded Louisiana an “F” for student achievement as measured by the NAEP test. Some might say, "that's not fair, our students are being prepared for the LEAP not the NAEP!" Others would say that the NAEP measures the same learning. The point is the NAEP is the only way we have of comparing our students' achievement with that of other states. It also shows the pitfalls of teaching to the test.

Personally, I don't think that the editors of Education Week Magazine are such experts at grading the educational systems of the different states. A couple of years ago one of their statements on the issue of state ratings proposed that the optimum state graduation standards would require that all students be prepared for college as a requirement for graduation. That's what Louisiana has done. As a result Louisiana got high marks from Education Week for accountability and standards. Unfortunately there seemed to be no plan for the students who fail the college prep standards and usually end up dropping out.

The main thrust of accountability in Louisiana has been to increase the pressure on the teachers and administrators of low performing schools. At the end of this school year the State Superintendent and BESE will ratchet up the pressure on educators by implementation of the letter grade system for all schools. Any school with a school performance score of less than 65 will get an "F". BESE member and charter school advocate Chas Roemer who proposed this plan may not have realized that his grading system would result in most state takeover charter schools receiving a "D" or an "F".

The only important question is: Are our students better off after all this emphasis on LEAP testing? A quick look at the NAEP scores from 2003 to 2009 reveal almost no progress on the same subject matter tested by the LEAP. ACT scores are also stagnant. The dropout rate at our colleges is one of the worst in the nation. It does not look like college prep for all is doing the trick.

Its ironic that just as China is revamping its elementary-secondary school system to emulate the creativity and problem solving approach once used by U.S. schools, we are now changing schools to emulate their outdated system of testing and rote learning. That's the conclusion by Jonathan Plucker, an educational psychologist who recently returned from studying the educational system in Shanghai. Dr. Plucker is concerned that the current reforms of U.S. education are stifling the very creativity in teaching and learning that has made our educational system great.

CNN Charter School Advocate Blames Schools

CNN's Education contributor, Steve Perry was interviewed recently by a CNN reporter about the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students. Perry was asked to comment on a recent study by the Council of Great City Schools which shows a continuation of this achievement gap for the years since No Child Left Behind was implemented. (Click on the above highlighted link to access the full study) His conclusions about student achievement and the causes of low student achievement are outrageous at best and slanderous of public schools at worst. Here are the two incredible conclusions made by Perry in the interview:

• When asked by the reporter about the affect of environment on the low achievement of some students, Perry stated flatly that the students' poor performance had nothing to do with the students' backgrounds. The main problem he said is that many underprivledged students are usually assigned to “some of the worst schools”.  The Great City Schools study which was conducted by highly qualified researchers in no way supports Perry's charge. The study instead cites several socioeconomic factors affecting minority students' readiness for learning. Perry went on to say that we need to consider vouchers or regional zoning of schools as a way of getting these kids into better schools. Apparently Perry is not aware that such an approach was tried by Arne Duncan when he served as Superintendent of Chicago schools. Duncan closed many schools with low student test scores and sent the students to schools that were considered better. Studies of the performance of those students after their transfers showed that they continued to perform exactly as they had at their previous school. To state that the student's environment or poverty level has nothing to do with performance is to contradict all recent credible studies of this issue including the most recent Council of Great City Schools study.
•   Perry then went on to conclude that the performance of 38% proficient or above for the non-minority students was also unacceptable. He proceeded to give an interpretation of the NEAP test results which is in total contradiction to the design and meaning of NEAP scores. He said 38% proficient shows that our schools are failing all students. He seems to assume that proficient or above is the only acceptable performance. Diane Ravitch who served for 7 years on the governing board for NEAP has described the proficient rating as an above average score or approximately the same as a “B” rating. There is a lower rating of “basic” that translates into a “C” grade according to Ravitch. This would mean that many more of these students would be considered as having achieved at least a satisfactory or grade level score. This interpretation is also backed up by the achievement ranking of these students as measured by the PISA international assessment. Ravitch has pointed out that the same misinterpretation of grade level or acceptable performance was made in the film Waiting For Superman.

Unfortunatly Perry, who is a charter school advocate, contributes a weekly segment on education for CNN called Perry's Principles. His contribution usually consists of  criticisims of public schools and a recommendation of charter schools as the most viable alternative to traditional schools.
By allowing Perry to make these false interpretations of critical educational data, CNN is doing a severe disservice to the cause of improving our educational system.

School Takeover Efforts Continue
The latest scheme to take over public schools and convert them to privately managed charters was announced by Governor Jindal to a meeting of the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI). Jindal said his administration plans to introduce legislation that would allow the formation of new charter schools sponsored by individual businesses. These private companies would hold major positions on the board of directors of the charter and their employees would have preferential treatment in enrolling their children to attend these new charters. There is no indication yet whether these new schools would be state authorized charters or locally authorized. Jindal claims the legislation will be patterned after similar plans already in operation in several other states.

This new charter scheme could be more destructive of our public education system because unlike some of the Recovery District charters, such schools may be in a better position to “cream” the best and most motivated students from local school systems. As we have seen in New Orleans and other places, the most effective way to create a better performing school is to recruit better performing students. Once such higher performing students are attracted away from a local school system, it becomes that much harder for the local public school system to thrive. The remaining public schools will have difficulty raising their performance scores and will have trouble retaining voter support for the school system's tax base. This is just one more step in the destruction of our public school system which has traditionally been run by democratically elected representatives of the people. I believe we are headed toward a much less democratic system where opportunities for the poor to receive a good education will be severely limited. This will be very bad for the entire nation, because it will result in less opportunity, more poverty, more crime, more welfare, and more class warfare.

Red Tape Reduction Act is A Red Herring!
The Jindal and Pastorek controlled BESE is agonizing over why no school systems have grabbed at the opportunity to utilize the Red Tape Reduction Act as a way to retain and improve local schools. If you want to know what is really in the law and why it is objectionable to those who believe in local elected control of local schools, just click on this link to our May 18 post to review our analysis of the law.

Lessons From A Chinese Mother

A Chinese-American author and Yale law professor, Amy Chua has written a thought provoking article about parenting in this week's Wall Street Journal. This article has received a huge number of hits as the word has spread that maybe, just maybe, American parents have something important to learn from the Chinese about rearing children to be responsible students and successful adults. I strongly recommend this article to all education leaders and to all parents of school age children.

My impression upon reflecting on the article was that we in the U.S. have lost our way about the essential components of parenting in a competitive world and maybe we should take a few lessons from a people who have a very old and successful culture. I am not talking about Communism which is a relatively new phenomenon, but about the art of raising healthy well motivated kids which philosophers would say is the most important job of our lives. I am convinced that some American parents have no clue about how to prepare children for a successful life because they themselves have had little training in proper work ethics and the value of education. In fact it seems that rearing children is the one important job in life for which we have no instruction manual, no degree, and no operator's license. I believe it is an absolute shame what often passes for parenting in this country.

I just completed a great interview with Illinois educational psychologist, Johnathan Plucker who had spent quite a bit of time visiting and studying the educational system in Shanghai China. When I asked him about the parent's attitudes and values relative to education, he pretty much expressed the same ideas as Amy Chua in her Wall Street Journal article. Plucker told me that he does not see much difference in the quality of teachers in the U.S. Compared to Shanghai. He said the big differences are in the supportive attitudes of parents, in the actual length of the school year and the length of the school day and the extra time spent on studying outside the classroom. All of these efforts are much greater in Shanghai than they are in the U.S. According to Dr. Plucker.

Also while poverty is a major problem affecting student achievement in this country, it can be overcome by more positive attitudes toward education in the home and in the community. I refer readers to our blog post of Dec 29  which includes an account of education performance of the Vietnamese immigrants who settled in Baton Rouge after the end of the Vietnam war.

A careful reading of Amy Chua's Wall Street Journal article should be the first in a series of lessons about parenting that should be recommended to all parents of school age children.

Virtual Schools Should be Considered

Virtual schools and computer assisted distance learning are here and growing and should be considered for adoption by local public Louisiana school systems. BESE has now approved the first virtual charter school that will be allowed to draw students and per pupil funding starting in the 2011-2012 school year from any Louisiana public school system. With recent advances in computer technology and assets such as video conferencing and other interactive applications this education option is sure to attract some students away from traditional schools. But these developments may not necessarily be bad news for our public school systems. The question is are public school leaders willing to utilize this new technology and the service companies that are offering virtual educational programs to enhance local public education?

It should be more efficient to provide public schooling using virtual schools. Virtual schools do not require student busing, there is no need for classrooms along with janitorial services and utilities and no need to provide food services.

BESE has set the per pupil funding for the first virtual charter schools at 90% of the state and local per pupil funding. Those parents who enroll their child in a virtual school are only too happy to forgo traditional classroom services in exchange for a free public education for their child in their own home. There is every reason to believe that with recent advances in technology, such schools can provide all state required content in a manner that is appropriate for many students. The delivery of education through this system can only improve in the coming years.

Follow-up report on Connections Academy
The type 2 charter school recently approved by BESE is a non-profit, however the Connections Academy company which will provide all services to the charter is a “for profit" company. (See our post dated 12/16/2010 ). My major concern here is that students receive good services for the public money spent and that the profit motive not take precedence over the welfare of children. I emailed several questions to the LA Dept. of Ed. to explore what I believe to be important factors in delivering quality education.  According to Erin Bendily, State Dept. administrator for charter schools, the application for Connections Academy indicates that they plan an approximate pupil-teacher ratio of 50:1 for elementary students and 35:1 for middle and high school students. Charter schools are exempted from state maximum pupil-teacher ratios. Student contact time with certified teachers may vary greatly depending on need. The theory here is that non-traditional charter schools are exempted from state requirements such as pupil-teacher ratios with the understanding that such students will still get a good education as measured by the accountability program. On the question of students to be recruited, Ms Bendily responded that the Connections Academy is expected to enroll a similar proportion of at risk students as the parishes from which its students are drawn as required by state law.


An additional issue is the requirement that every student attracted to this state authorized charter takes with him/her 90% of all state and local per pupil funding. This is a major hit to the budget of any local school system from which the student is transferred. Also that 90% per pupil funding is much more than the $5779 charged by Connections Academy to its students that enroll in the private school version of the Connections Academy. A remaining question is why is the cost so much more for the publicly funded students at Connections?

While taking into account the above concerns, I suggest that local school leaders investigate to see if virtual schools may be utilized to strengthen their local system and to build critical public support. I believe that local school board authorized charters for virtual schools are greatly preferable to state authorized charters because the ultimate oversight of such schools remains with locally elected representatives. As we have seen, the rules approved by BESE for state approved charters (type 2 charters) and Recovery District schools make it very difficult for local school systems to reclaim these schools or their students. The key for local school leaders is to take the initiative to offer such schools in a way that enhances their public school system. A local school system may effectively use a virtual school to attract students who may now be in home schooling or enrolled in private or parochial schools. Every student attracted back or prevented from leaving the public schools ensures greater voter support for our public schools.

Virtual schools will certainly not be appropriate for all students. Chances are that only a relatively small but significant percentage of students will have the self discipline, the motivation and the parental support necessary to be successful in a virtual school. Virtual schools require a major time commitment on the part of the parent or home coach. I seriously doubt that students who are now struggling with high stakes testing and who are in danger of dropping out of the traditional school will be able to succeed any better in a virtual school. There will always be a need for a traditional classroom for the majority of our public school students. But some parents will want the virtual school option. Such parents may want better control over the peers their children associate with, and they may feel rightly or wrongly that the public school where their child has been assigned will not have the safe, positive environment they want for their child. Just consider the erosion of middle class enrollment, both white and minority (now called class flight) from our inner city schools. The virtual school could counteract this trend. This may finally be an opportunity for public school advocates to go on the offensive in strengthening our public schools.

I strongly urge all superintendents, school board members and other education leaders to do some research on the virtual school services available. Two of them can be found at http://www.k12.com/ and http://www.nationalconnectionsacademy.com/. I am in no way connected with these companies and am not endorsing their programs. I am simply suggesting that since they are two of the largest players providing various options to school boards for virtual education, they should be carefully investigated and considered.