Delaware Blogosphere Education Round-Up
First, let me say how proud I am of our Delaware Bloggers and the work they’ve been doing covering education. It’s been a while since an issue has fired up so many. And if you want to understand what’s going on with education be sure to read every blogger I link to below.
I’m going to start with Mike Matthews. Please watch this video. Go on. I’ll wait.
There’s so much in this video, and Mike’s decision to accept the “unsatisfactory” rating is a very bold move. He’s placed his job on the line.
But it was where Mike explained part B of the evaluation process that jumped out to me. Part B was the assessment that his team of teachers chose to give. They chose the Star Reading/Accelerated Reading Program to show growth. They didn’t meet that goal. Mike says, “Perhaps because we set too lofty of a goal.”
Damn it! I want teachers setting lofty goals! Even if they don’t reach them, I want every teacher comfortable with setting the bar high. I want teachers like Mike Matthews challenging children! But given these teacher evaluations, why would they? Why would they set lofty goals and then be rated unsatisfactory? Was this evaluation created with the purpose of dumbing down our children? Of course not, but that’s what will happen. The evaluation is designed to make it happen. Powerful video, Mike.
Heading over to Kavips we find a detailed breakdown of HB 165 here. I’ll highlight a few of his points, but you should read the entire post. (The bill’s wording is in blue. Kavips’ response in black)
(I) (f) If a child is unable to attend a charter school because the charter school does not provide lunch, and the child would otherwise qualify for a free or low-cost lunch under the federal National School Lunch Program, the charter school shall provide lunch to the child at no cost to the child’s family. Charter schools may not consider whether a child would qualify for no-cost lunches pursuant to this subsection when making enrollment decisions.
(I) Children who qualify for national reduced breakfast and lunch, must be fed lunch on the school. They must give up breakfast if they wish to attend a charter. For low income families, giving up breakfast is something they won’t do. By not allowing breakfast, this bill prohibits low income people from choosing to attend a charter….. Secondly, Newark Charter School does not have a cafeteria. When they gave lunch in the past, the two choices were McDonalds and a pizza joint. So not only are low income students skipping breakfast, they are being forced onto the fast track towards diabetes….
(II) Minor capital improvements shall be funded in the same manner as the Vocational Technical School Districts.
(II) Also changing, instead of minor improvements being the role of the charter, the private for profit enterprise conducting the school, they want to be able to charge off all improvements to the state. It was as if you could get a new roof, and send the state the bill, without costing you a thing… All the money you were making hand over fist, you got to keep and spend on something else… Money for these improvements would be deducted from minor improvements originally slated for public schools. The public schools fall apart, and the charters get repaired… We use our own money; they should too.
Kavips’ point about lunch is a big one. How exactly would that work? Newark Charter School doesn’t have a cafeteria; the kids eat lunch at their desks. So at lunch time the kids take out their packed lunch and then… the teacher would hand out the free lunches to the high poverty kids? To me, that’s unacceptable. It’s nobody’s business who qualifies for Free/Reduced lunch.
His point about Capital Funding is spot on, and in a later post he spells it out. HB 165 is all about Capital Funding.
These bills are up only because of these two lines….
(II) Minor capital improvements shall be funded in the same manner as the Vocational Technical School Districts.
(l) Charter schools shall have the same access to conduit bond financing as any other non-profit organization, and no State or local government unit may impose any condition or restriction on a charter school’s approval solely because the applicant is a public charter school. It is the further intent that a charter school shall apply for conduit funding to issuers within the State of Delaware unless more favorable terms may be found elsewhere.
(m) The Department of Education shall administer a performance fund for charter schools, to be known as the “Charter School Performance Fund”. The Department of Education shall establish threshold eligibility requirements for applicants desiring to apply for funding, which shall include but not be limited to a proven track record of success, as measured by a Performance Framework established by the charter school’s authorizer or comparable measures as defined by the Department. The Department of Education shall also establish criteria to evaluate applications for funding, which shall include but not be limited to the availability of supplemental funding from non-State sources at a ratio to be determined by the Department. The Department of Education shall prioritize those applications from applicants that have (a) developed high-quality plans for start-up or expansion or (b) serve high-need students, as defined by the Department. The fund shall be subject to appropriation and shall not exceed $5 million annually.
This is why the bill is up for a vote. Charter Schools want to be able to get state financing…
That is not what a charter school is! A charter school is a private school, not a public one. Most charter schools are owned by corporations, many of them huge, with multiple units in multiple states. The money they make is astronomical… A charter school is a business that gets its money by educating public school children, and the state sends the money it would normally send to a public school, to the charter instead.
Now, Charters want the state to build their schools, do all the repairs, trim the shrubberies, pay for school lunches, just as they do for public schools. But public schools are not a private business. Public schools are assets owned by the people of that school district. Public schools are the property of We, the People…. For private schools to take our money, our resources, our taxes, and teach at the barest minimum, possibly a 1000 students to a room in order to make as much money as they can…. is immoral.
Especially considering that money comes not out a the General Fund. That money comes from all the public schools surrounding that Charter…
HB 165 is about Charters accessing Capital Funding, and the blogs have been pointing out the capital funding for charters long before HB 165 came onto the scene. Now we have the bill that proves it. Excellent blogging, Kavips.
Over at Mike O’s blog, The Seventh Type, we find Mike trying to find the missing charter school aggregate data. What Mike is looking for is a spreadsheet that shows overall charter school performance – you know, data that every public school district provides.
It doesn’t exist, so Mike and Co. use the data available on individual charter schools and begin to compile it. I’ll show you one chart as a teaser, but you need to hop on over there! (Mike is quite clear that this spreadsheet is a starting point and an ongoing community project, so if you can lend a hand I’m sure he’ll appreciate it.)
Math chart
(click to embiggen)
Interesting, no? Although if this data is correct I can see why the charter community wouldn’t want it on its charter school DDOE page. Also, a commenter over at Kilroy’s (and we’ll get to him shortly!) links to this report. Go ahead. Click the link and check out the section on Charter School Academic Performance.
Now, this doesn’t mean there aren’t good charter schools, but it does put to rest the myth that any charter school is superior to any public school. Charter advocates will call foul on this, saying that each charter school is an individual school – it’s own district, if you will. But if that’s true then why does the Charter School Network Exist? Red Clay has to include all its school on its DDOE homepage. Charters should have to do the same.
And, if we really believe in parent “choice” (I’ve lost faith in that, btw) then why aren’t we providing the necessary information to make an informed choice? I know parents who applied to the Charter School of Wilmington as their first choice and Pencader as their second. Seriously? Those schools couldn’t be more educationally different. They simply aren’t comparable… other than they’re both charter schools.
Onto the Big Bopper of education – Kilroy. Just go read his blog. Read the comments, too. Kilroy has built quite a savvy commenter base. His big issue is transparency, and how school board meetings (public and charter) should be recorded. He makes excellent points on this issue. However, yesterday he focused on Senator Dave Sokola and the proposed Pike Creek (Health and Fitness) Charter School. (I swear, I’m going to open the Charter School of Knitting.)
It appears that Senator Sokola wrote a letter advocating for the approval of Pike Creek Charter School. Kilroy has a problem with that. He writes:
Pike Creek is within Senator Sokola’s Senate District and sure he has an obligation to his constituents. However, injecting his role as Chair of the Senate Education Committee sends a poor message to parents of traditional school students. Sokola’s letter goes on to brag how he was involved in the creation of Newark Charter School leaving out he was a former board member of Newark Charter School while serving as state senator. Our state representatives should have a non-bias position when it comes to public education in relationship to charter vs tradtional. Senator Sokola is clearly bias towards charter schools. At best his letter of support should have come as a citizen not the a state senator and the Chair of the Senate Education Committee.
It was Senator Sokola who lead the charge to repeal Title 14, Chapter 2, Subchapter I Section 207 which called for a “written” educational impact study prior to a vote on any legislation regarding public education.
Wow. I didn’t know that. The things you find out on blogs. If only we had a newspaper in this state. 🙂
Over at Transparent Christina, John Young puts together blog comments to highlight the proposed Charter slush fund:
$5,000,000 available to charter schools “only” (10,438 total students of which a whopping 854 are special ed {8.1%} an additional $479 per charter school pupil.
To equal that in traditional public schools (120,591 students–17,186 special ed {14.2%}) would require $57,763,089. That’s simple math everyone and simply, unacceptably a betrayal of traditional public school students, teachers and support staff (eg. paras) by all parties supporting this slush fund inclusion in the woefully inadequate HB 165
John KowalkoAlso note the disparity in special ed numbers and the very real fact that the costs for special ed students (especially severe needs) is much higher than regular students and the ratio demand for teacher/paraprofessional inclusion in the classrooms requires more assistance (ask any real special-ed teacher like Mike Mathews). But since it is likely that one of the apologists/stakeholders/special interests supporters of this bill will say that there has only been $2million allocated for the slush fund I’ve done the math for them and that number would shrink the required match for traditional schools (to compete with level conditions) to $23,105,235 ( while still ignoring the true needs of the special ed population).
Good luck to all the special interests groups (you know who you are) in justifying that to your clients/taxpayers and members as fair and equitable.
John KowalkoOh by the way feel free to share anywhere since those numbers are dead solid accurate and do not even pretend to calculate how huge the real number will be when distributed to only a handful of high-performing/well-connected charters.Shameful and unacceptable comes to mind for those that would defend this type of policy.
John Kowalko
John Young concludes:
WOW, look at that number!!!! The $5MM Special Interest Charter School Slush Fund being driven by Jaques, Scott, Sokola and Taber would be like giving a performance fund of $57.7 MILLION to DE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
And they can only find $$ like that for charter students?
It really is disheartening. Public schools could sure use more political advocates – or even people in power who considered the impact charter schools have on public schools and attempted to make a level playing field – by considering all children.
In case you’ve forgotten about HB 165… remember that part of the bill that would take into account how a charter school would impact public schools? Remember how, in the bill, it’s not flippin’ mandated, unlike, say, the capital funding for charters? It’s things like this that have people upset.
Money for Charters? Carved in stone. Impact study on how a charter school would affect surrounding public schools? Sure, but that’s not mandated – so not really. Lunch for low income kids? Okay, but charters don’t appear to have to offer breakfast.
I’ll close with Steve Newton’s post from last week. Please make time to read this. Here’s where he ends up:
So extreme charter advocates want more than a chance to try out educationally innovative strategies as they were given in the original law. Instead, they now want:
1. Capital financing.
2. Preferential transportation budgets that they can use as a slush fund if they don’t spend them.
3. Exemption from accountability for a full decade.
4. Different rules for the appeal of their pupil decisions to DOE than the school districts have.
5. Continued exemption from any transparency of operation because, you see, they are state-funded corporations and therefore not accountable (hello Fannie Mae. Sallie Mae, Federal Reserve).
6. Continued ability to simply boot out (ok, counsel out) students back to their old districts.
7. Bail-outs from the state when their finances go belly up.This is not a free market innovation: this is educational welfare for a particular social class.
Please go visit the blogs I’ve linked to because if your source of education information is The News Journal you’re not even getting half of the story. For some reason, whenever The News Journal writes a news article about education they can only seem to find charter supporters to interview. Lazy.
UPDATE: I did pop over to Children and Educators First blog this morning, but Elizabeth hadn’t posted this yet. Check it out. Am I the only one who thinks Rep. Jaques needs to work on his tone?
Elizabeth points out her concerns in an email (click on the link because I’m not including the entire email) and Rep. Jaques answers:
Elizabeth,
First the fund you are referring to is not a “slush” fund. If you attended yesterday’s public meeting you would know that it is not used for capital projects. It is connected to the Charter Performance framework, which will ensure that is used for education issues for either high-performing or high-need students. The money allocated came from the last budget numbers – NOT from the Department of Education. So this isn’t a case of taking money away from our public schools. In fact, the number one priority, according to the testimony from the School Superintendents to the Joint Finance Committee was money for technology. That money is in the budget! The Charter’s number one priority was money for this Strategic Performance Fund, which again the Joint Finance Committee granted and is in the budget based on whether the legislation passes. Since it doesn’t apply, I shouldn’t comment. However, the points you make in the first few paragraphs are done each and every year for our Colleges and Universities. We give them capital money and we don’t own the buildings. If you took the time to read House Bill 165 you would see loads of transparency and accountability throughout. I hope you are not listen to the nay sayers who just like to yell at the top of their voice, but most of the time don’t know what they are talking about!HB 165 has been properly vetted and has loads of support throughout the education community.
Earl
Elizabeth points out in her concerns in her return email (Again, this is only part of the email):
Specifically to HB 165, the well-vetted bill, the following clause concerns me greatly:
The Department of Education shall administer a performance fund for charter schools, to be known as the “Charter School Performance Fund”.The Department of Education shall establish threshold eligibility requirements for applicants desiring to apply for funding, which shall include but not be limited to a proven track record of success, as measured by a Performance Framework established by the charter school’s authorizer or comparable measures as defined by the Department. The Department of Education shall also establish criteria to evaluate applications for funding, which shall include but not be limited to the availability of supplemental funding from non-State sources at a ratio to be determined by the Department. The Department of Education shall prioritize those applications from applicants that have (a) developed high-quality plans for start-up or expansion or (b) serve high-need students, as defined by the Department. The fund shall be subject to appropriation and shall not exceed $5 million annually.
The statement is a generality at best. It does not provide clarity around what can or cannot be funded, nor offer any precision of the eligibility of schools. If applicants must have a proven track record of success, then the bill precludes any new or young schools from eligibility. “Measures as defined by the Department” is very obscure, as is the “availability of supplemental funding from non-State sources.” Nor does this bill define a “high quality plan for start-up or expansion.”
I don’t see the accountability or transparency pertaining to these funds. The fact is that plans are wonderful things, they provide direction. But, if the leadership is incompetent, and we often don’t know that until the plans begin to fall apart, then the plan is just a piece a paper.
For me, this portion of the bill is simply too weak, too easy to take advantage of, and too susceptible to political persuasion.
She’s waiting for Rep. Jaques response. I’ll update when that comes in.
Tags: Charter Schools, Education, Featured, HB 165
pandora: Great round up: consider adding Elizabeth’s e-mail thread with Rep. Jaques (D-Rodel) over a Children and Educators First, it just dropped this morning.
http://elizabethscheinberg.blogspot.com/2013/06/hb-165-its-found-money-just-as-earl.html
Post updated! Shoot! I was over there this morning, but it wasn’t up yet. Sorry, Elizabeth.
Thanks, Pandora. You and all the bloggers you point out are absolutely right about HB 165, but the details aren’t what the bill is about.
At a high level, the bill is a referendum on whether we want to embark on an uncontrolled and unaccountable expansion of charters that will disrupt and diminish our public school system. This expansion has never been brought to a vote and has not passed the usual vetting channels that determine where and whether we need a new school.
HB 165 is the enabling mechanism that will launch this expansion. The amount of money is not great, but it puts the camel’s nose under the tent. It’s what the charter movement has been waiting for.
The accountabililty supposedly provided by the bill is a deception. The bill is not a “compromise” and charters give nothing back of value. The bill actually reduces accountability, by limiting valid disqualifications that might derail a charter approval or renewal. And by extending renewals from five to ten years, charters have to face official accountability even more infrequently.
The bill makes a head fake toward taking impact on existing public schools into account, but removes the teeth by removing impact as a disqualifying issue (unless there are other issues as well. This is what public school advovates fear – charters can be plunked down willy-nilly, decimating the capacity and program planning of the districts they are plunked in.
The bill hangs all accountability on the Performance Framework which is designed specifically NOT to include all aspects of accountability. There is no accountability for impact, no accountability for diversity, no accountability for local control, no accountability for transparency. All the Framework asks of charters is that they be wonderful all by themselves within their four walls, never mind what resources they have to displace to do it, and with no larger responsibility to the system.
And then there is the arrogant way the committee deliberations were hidden from stakeholders, with no traditional public school advocates having a seat at the table, and then defending the process as somehow normal. That is the shabbiest treatment of voters I have seen in a long time, and those responsible have work to do to regain our trust on education issues. The way charter forces (including elected officials) tried to wire this bill and rush it through under the radar has left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.
So am I reading all of this correctly? Charter Schools are not out performing traditional public schools?
You are reading correctly. Yes, there are charter schools that out-perform public schools, but that’s not the norm.
The light bulb blinks on. Not your fault it was dark for so long.
Then why do we keep flushing tax money that could be used to improve traditional public schools down the charter school toilet?
Does Delaware want to just destroy ALL education? WTF?
I thought I was sufficiently angry when I learned that as a parent who choiced their kid to another school within the same district that I had to provide transportation, racking up over 100,000 miles on my car and thousands of dollars out of my pocket for gas, while charter school parents get state sponsored busses, but this is just beyond me.
Close down the publicly funded private schools and let’s concentrate on making our public school system better.
Am I right that Kowalko is the only one in Dover who thinks charter schools are a scam? If so, he needs to be our next governor.
W. T. F.
Then why do we keep flushing tax money that could be used to improve traditional public schools down the charter school toilet?
The charter movement is a political lobbying outfit that has achieved a strong constituency in the General Assembly and the Governor’s office, and to the extent it enjoys public support, does so through taking advantage of misinformation.
And also by taking full advantage of weakness in DSEA. The Charter Network, to charters, is everything DSEA should be to TPS and isn’t.
To be fair, the best argument of the charters is that the TPS schools have failed. With certain exceptions they do have a point. The Districts are their own worst enemies.
So the answer to failing public schools is stripping their funding and funneling it into what amounts to a private school that doesn’t perform better funded with public money?
F*ck that.
anon, very laconic reply. Love.
ALERT! HB 165 is on tomorrow’s House Agenda. The elites are trying to get ahead of the public outcry. Don’t let them do it. Call your representatives NOW!
Yes, El Som!!!
Also beware a fast track Senate committee hearing the NEXT day IF it passes.
Thanks for the heads up, El Som!
What always amazes me is how you never hear proposals for a high poverty school slush fund.
And pay attention to what Mike O. said: “HB 165 is the enabling mechanism that will launch this expansion. The amount of money is not great, but it puts the camel’s nose under the tent. It’s what the charter movement has been waiting for.”
For those of us going back and forth with charter supporters on the blogs (for years) we knew the main agenda of charter supporters was capital funding. They said so. Quite clearly.
Anon, I feel your frustration. I know I’ve always used the word “propaganda” when discussing charter schools… I should have been more specific.
And hats off to Mike O. for the aggregate charter school data.
And, and… if you haven’t clicked on this LINK from the post above, you really need to.
Kowalko is not our legislature’s only friend of TPS schools & their students. Those kids have a couple of other genuine friends, notably Paul Baumbach and Kim Williams. They could use a good 18 more, for voting purposes. If you are represented by someone else, call and email them TODAY and make it clear that you expect them to represent all public schoolchildren, not just the 10% in charters. The bill is up tomorrow, Tuesday June 11, in the House.
If you are represented by JK, PB or KW, give them a hug (virtual or actual). It is not easy to stand up to wayward colleagues and take serious pressure from your own party.
As an addendum to pandora’s great round-up, I am reposting the ludicrous language currently in HB 165 about meals (their response to the free or subsidized breakfast and lunch made available to low-income children, as part of their federal welfare package, in ALL district public schools). This is not the way you draft the law if you actually want charters to participate in the federal School Lunch Program and the Breakfast Program (two separate but inter-dependent bureaucracies): HB 165 line 24
“If a child is unable to attend a charter school because the charter school does not provide lunch, and the child would otherwise qualify for a free or low-cost lunch under the federal National School Lunch Program, the charter school shall provide lunch to the child at no cost to the child’s family.”
Please remember that these are closed-enrollment public schools. Any child whose family brings this up is, at that point, trying to enter a school that is full, and that they could not enter b/c it did not provide meals. Any child who does squeak into the school despite this obstacle is, by definition, “able to attend a charter school,” however much hardship is causes them. So no one gets lunch at charters under this legislation (e.g. NCS will be able to drop the lunch program it instituted under pressure for the first time this past school year), and the law doesn’t even bother to mention breakfast (which NCS does not offer, for example). It is a sham and will keep low-income children out of the state’s highest-performing charters, leaving those as enclaves for the (heavily white/Asian) middle class and increasing the challenges faced by district schools.
District schools are the only public schools guaranteed to everyone who lives in a community. Who is going to move in, accept a job, buy your house if that is what we’re offering for their children (plus a bunch of lottery tickets)?
The House Dems wanted to put HB 165 up for a vote last Thursday. Kowalko and others got it pushed “back” to tomorrow through serious negotiating (notice how you haven’t heard much from him publicly on this? that was the deal–undoubtedly the best he could do, given the pressure). So much for the democratic process.
Call you House reps. now and voice your opposition to HB 165. If this passes, we may not be able to get another charter reform bill on the floor for years, b/c we’ll be told that it has already been discussed and legislated. This could be our state charter law for the next 18 yrs., God help us. Plenty of better-governed states for families with kids to move to, in that case.
By the way (and then I’ll stop), notice the NewsJrnl’s silence since their article on Thurs. about the HB 165 committee hearing. Connie Merlet, former CSD board member and ongoing early childhood ed. professional & advocate, sent them a DE Voices column on Thurs. I sent them a letter then, too, based on what I learned from reading HB 165 carefully & attending the hearing. I know of at least two other letters that went in from parents of district students concerned about the ongoing marginalization of their schools in favor of charters. David Stockman, economist who conducted a careful analysis of Newark Charter demographics as an example of what’s wrong with state charter law called and offered a Voices column–was told maybe later this week (Thurs or Friday at the earliest).
So much for professional journalism. I plan to cancel my worthless NJ subscription after tomorrow, unless they miraculously step up to the plate between now & then (?). I suggest that other readers do, too. The blogs are DE’s only reliable reporting.
Citizen, don’t stop commenting! Comments are a blog’s lifeblood. Keep ’em coming!
Just emailed my rep, and will call after I get back from taking my daughter to the dentist. Come on, people! Contact your rep!
The News Journal should be ashamed of themselves. This is a story, and to (deliberately?) not publish opinions (and facts) from both sides is moves them out of the news industry and into lobbyists.
And if they publish the letters tomorrow it’s really too late.
Don’t let them call HB 165 “charter reform.” If it passes, charter reform still lies before us on the issues of impact, transparency, local control, and diversity.
Thanks for the shout-out, p. I’ve received some great feedback.
On HB 165, I will be in Dover tomorrow and will secure a seat on the floor. I’m bringing my iPad and thanks to the newly-installed WiFi, I hope to tweet during the amendments and floor vote of the whole deal. Stay tuned!
and …. listening to anon bring up his point, it should be mentioned here, in case there are those coming to this argument for the first time, that the data compiled by the Department of Education itself, which was public for all to see until a couple of weeks ago, when their page suddenly went blank, …. was reformulated into the charts that Pandora mentions above.
The charts show one thing astonishingly clear. Charter schools in high poverty areas, do as well as public schools in high poverty areas. Charter schools in affluent areas, do as well as public schools in affluent areas. What the News Journal does, and it has on 5 occasions this year in either its own op-ed piece or those by the charter school lobbyists, is compare the highly affluent charter schools to the high poverty public schools, and say… see, look how great Charters are doing…
They aren’t. In the same economic strata, they are out performed every time by traditional public schools….
Just wanted the wider audience to question when they hear good charter data, to respond with questions about the economics of those students attending… If not lied to, we’ve been …. selectively mislead.
Nice summary. Dibs on a teaching job at your knitting charter.
It would be great if everyone reading this post – and the others I’ve linked to – sent out an email linking to these blog posts to their friends and family. Ask them to call/email their congressmen/women. You know the charter group is organizing.
Just an interesting aside…..After hearing the description of how John Kowalko knocked heads with Brian Bushweller (in an extremely rude exchange on Bushweller’s part) over the JFC confrontation on Charter’s stealing transportation money, I got a little more curious about the Senator.
Someone mentioned that Bushweller is a Carper guy. So I googled (wiki) and not only is the good Senator a Carper guy….he is a former teacher and labor leader who ended up in DE to work for the DSEA, of all things, from which then Gov. Carper drew him in as Government Liaison twenty years ago. Bushweller has never looked back, as far as I can tell.
Here is a description of how the funny voting went down in the JFC over charters’ transportation slush fund:
When John Kowalko went down to ask that the extra transportation money for Charters be taken out of the epilogue language, the initial vote was 6-5-1abst, to pass.
Senator Melanie George Smith took the vote 3 times.
Then the Joint Finance Committee went out for lunch.
When they came back from lunch they voted again, changing the language to – the extra money must be used for education. Whatever that means- like isn’t it all used for education??? The arguments used for the changes in decision were ridiculous, especially from Brian Bushwaller (but he was Carper’s policy person when Carper initiated Charters in Delaware).
http://legis.delaware.gov/LEGISLATURE.NSF/Lookup/CGO_JFCDescription?open&nav=JC
Rep. Melanie George Smith (Chair)
Rep. William J. Carson, Jr.
Rep. Debra J. Heffernan
Rep. James (JJ) Johnson
Rep. Harvey R. Kenton
Rep. Joseph E. Miro Sen. Harris B. McDowell, III (Co-Chair)
Sen. Brian J. Bushweller
Sen. Bruce C. Ennis
Sen. Karen E. Peterson
Sen. Catherine L. Cloutier
Sen. David G. Lawson
WHAT THE FUCK? I hate how many people in our state and local politics – elected or bureaucrats – who are still Carper loyalists. yuck.
KaBOOM! : http://transparentchristina.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/hb-165-foia-bomb-rep-williams-gets-her-foia-answer-rep-jaques-d-rodel-are-you-paying-attention-rep-darryl-scott-d-rodel-what-do-you-think-of-them-apples-netde/
LOL! I just posted on this! Looks like everyone’s email was humming tonight!
Don’t forget: Paul Baumbach was elected on his promise to bear any burden, pay any price, for the charter schools.
Paul was not elected on those grounds, whatsoever.
Paul B & John K have been the most active opponents of this draft bill so far, along with Kim Wms (and several coming in close behind those three). So it doesn’t sound like you’re right on this one.
Delaware Liberal Bloggers… How can we as taxpayers prevent the dismantling of the public school system in favor of private charter schools? This is happening in the poor communities of Chicago (closing of 50 schools) and Philadelphia (closing of 14 schools.). Let’s not forget Neoliberal Chicago Mayor, Ron Emanual, is a “Democrat.”
Delaware Liberal Bloggers-Thank You!!
Norinda…
there is something you can do, and only you… It could just be that extra push needed to get over the hill.
This is so important. Call your rep tomorrow as a matter of course. Say no to HB 165. That’s a given. Now here is what only you can do… Call up all your friends who are concerned about education, and guide them through how to call or email their rep, telling them to vote NO tomorrow….
Tomorrow ,that is the one thing you can do that will make a difference and it could one day spread to Chicago and Philly… But nothing will change there unless we can change here.. 165 is it. … You have to give it everything you got if you want to make a difference…. I know you got a phone list; you need to get calling. Calls should all be in by 1 pm so the totals get passed on before they attempt a voice vote….
John Kowalko is listed as a prime co-sponsor of HB 165. Didn’t he read it before he signed on?
John posted something on Kilroy about this. He was prime co-sponsor when the bill looked completely different and was good for all public schl kids (a genuine reform to charter law loopholes). That bill was brief, less than 3 pages. Then Earl got & accepted the rewrite that is in front of us–a bait and switch for Jn. John decided to remain prime co-sponsor b/c this gives him more clout to amend things; but he has publicly disowned this new version of the bill.
I can tell you that Kowalko stayed on as a prime co-sponsor to try to have more of an influence and control of the bill going through the House. Was his strategy successful? Not so far.
At the May PDD meeting, Jaques told everyone that the Governor already was putting a bill forward and that he and Kowalko were working together to put a competing bill out before Markell could get his out, believing that the first one out would have an edge.
Funny how now, weeks later, there is only one bill filed and that ones matches head to toe with the recommendations of the Gov. Working Group and Jaques stated in the House Ed Cmte hearing that he and only he wrote this bill with some help from Darryl Scott.
Meanwhile – Allan Loudell has a post up on Markell defending Common Core in WaPo
http://www.wdel.com/blog/post.php?postid=3555
The headline: “The Tea party is wrong on the Common Core curriculum”.
One problem, at least from my perspective: Governor Markell basically argues against the Tea Party movement – which may provide a convenient straw man – given the Tea Party’s relatively unpopularity in northern Delaware and presumably among the bulk of The WASHINGTON POST’s readership.
The governor conveniently ignores that some liberals/progressives ALSO oppose Common Core, albeit for somewhat different reasons. Common Core also creates a rather unusual alliance between some non-establishment conservatives and unionized teachers – both opposed to standardized test mandates – again for somewhat different reasons.
You have the old arguments over the merits of teaching for tests; whether such rigorous standardization might actually undermine the learning experience, and might even turn gifted students against the academic experience; whether individual states should not be “laboratories” for different approaches; etc.
~~
comment
The state has been trying to impose standards on Delaware students since the administration of Dr. Pat Forgione in the 1990s. This is the same old effort, just called by a different name, Common Core.
What does it take to demand a roll call instead of a voice vote?
The prime sponsor of the amendment or bill can ask for roll call I believe, Mike.
Please, Citizen. He has no more clout when it comes to running an amendment whether he is a sponsor on the bill or not.
I like John a lot, but you don’t sign on as a sponsor until the bill is circulated for signatures…the actual bill, not some draft from weeks ago.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bill quite like this. The people claiming to have written it didn’t write it, and the people who wrote it are trying to stay in the shadows.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bill quite like this. The people claiming to have written it didn’t write it, and the people who wrote it are trying to stay in the shadows.
Damn, el som. Perfect encapsulation of just exactly what happened here.
Mike: I’d LOVE to have one of the ‘grownups’, you, Kavips, Pandora, for example, call the Al Show and place this bill in context today. None of the usual self-serving from some serial callers, but a clear explanation. I’m on from 10-12, and the issue will come up.
Speaking of grown ups, I was stunned by Rebecca Taber’s youth & evident inexperience at Wed’s Ed committee hearing. I had heard her name but had never seen her, and was assuming the gov’s education “advisor” was a reasonably seasoned professional.
For those like me who didn’t already know, this state’s advisor to the gov on Ed. issues graduated college in 2008, where she was student council president. That’s her prior political leadership experience. She worked one yr for McKinsey consulting, where she was placed on a team that Markell hired to help draft our RTTT app, and she’s been his Ed mouthpiece since then. God forbid he hire an Ed advisor who has ever been a schoolteacher or parent–they might have their own ideas.
A B.A. in Poli Sci, even from Yale, is woefully insufficient qualification to devise state education policy. Combine that with coach Murphy’s inadequate résumé, and you can see why we’re in a pickle. Gov., pls hire teaching professionals to guide our schools!!
Rebecca is one of those very smart high-energy people, a “best-and-brightest” type. Unfortunately she chose the Dark Force on charters.
All of the people connected with the Charter Workgroup were smart enough to know they were violating FOIA and should have known better. My theory is some lawyer told them it was OK, and then they didn’t think about it anymore.
Will Markell have young Ms. Taber’s back if the legal issues get ugly? Somehow I doubt it.
I don’t think there will be serious legal consequences. We’ll be lucky if we can even get political consequences. I think everyone will get off scot-free, even the unknown lawyer at the bottom of the dungheap. Ooops! Mistakes were made! Oh well, tough luck.