The debate rages on about the effectiveness of charter schools over public schools...are the former the silver bullet in education reform to everything from closing the achievement gap to decreasing the drop out rate.  According to Dr. Wayne Au, Assistant Professor in the Education Program at the University of Washington in Bothell, the answer depends on which reports you read, funded by which organizations/think tanks, advocating for which results.  All this matters to the answers you get.  If you want the truth, you need to look at the sources, at the schools and the children being pushed out, left behind or not admitted in the charter schools that admit only 4% of our nation's learners.  Prime example of educational inequality as an education policy and biased educational research used to support this inequality.

Here's what Dr. Au found:

...Gates, Broad, and Walton only support research that is pro-charters. These billionaires aren’t interested in honestly researching effective ways to close achievement gaps. In the case of charter schools, rather, they only fund research that tries to prove charter schools are effective. Apparently Gates, Broad, and Walton care about political advocacy, not actual research or real grassroots support.

...not only do they [billionaires] exclusively support charters, they also use their vast wealth exclusively to support efforts to implement top-down, undemocratic business-like structures of school governance, to attack teachers’ rights to collective bargaining and due process, and to increase the improper use of high-stakes standardized tests to evaluate students and teachers. All of which are part and parcel of the free-market, corporate model of education reform.

And I wondered to myself, “Why, when their stated intent is to help kids, would charter advocates rely on a free-market model of reform when it has been clear, especially in these economic times, that recent rounds of deregulation and privatization have contributed to so much inequality?”

Massachusetts Stand for Children started out as a grassroots citizen advocacy organization, advocating for full funding of quality public education for all children.  The state legislative platform was membership led.  That is no longer the case, which is very unfortunate for all the children in MA. [Worcester Telegram & Gazette]

Parents who have been involved with the group locally say Stand for Children is actually a “bait and switch” operation that works to win the confidence of a local community, only to eventually resort to its own agenda, which most often is one that promotes privatization of public education and the neutering of teacher unions.

[Deborah Steigman, former chairman of the Citywide Parent Planning Advisory Council and former Stand for Children member] noted that Stand for Children at the national level has received millions in grants and other financial funding from organizations that support charter schools and other privatization efforts in public education.

“They made it pretty clear that this was not an organization that was answering to us,” Ms. O’Connell Novick said.

So, Stand for Children no longer stands for ALL children and hasn't for quite a while....

Here's another budget article! [Itemlive.com]

We've just begun the calendar year 2012 and yet our state government is already gearing up for the fiscal year 2013 budget debate.  This still isn't a growth budget in the sense that programs and services cut over the past 4-5 years will not be restored and that more cuts should be expected.  Austerity wasn't a good economic and fiscal plan for growing the economy in Europe.  Why do our political leaders think the same failed economic and fiscal policies will succeed in MA?  That's a head-scratcher, for sure.

... Secretary of Administration and Finance Jay Gonzalez warns that more spending cuts will be needed to balance the [FY2013] budget.  “At the end of the day there are going to be lots of areas that are going to have to live with level funding or reduced funding or eliminated funding.”

“Most of the people coming in to meet with me are coming in saying, ‘Hey, the economy is coming back, the tax revenues are coming back, so can you put my money back,’” Gonzalez said. “What I tell all those people are that those expectations are out of whack with reality.”

The debate about the transparency of the legislative process on Beacon Hill continues.  Lack of transparency was noted during this past year while the budget was being debated behind closed doors.  Our legislators said this process was necessary for the Senate and House to decide on a compromise bill.  Did the public really have a choice?  What about other major decisions?  What about public hearings, when the public testifies on the issues before the committee members...who aren't present (many times waiting 3-5 hours to speak in front of 2-3 committee members of perhaps a total of 14-17)? 

A survey by the Boston University State House program of 19 major legislative committees that shape and move legislation found this process increasingly takes place outside the public view.  [The Milford Daily News]

Among the findings:

• The staff for 15 of the committees polled said some voting is done through emails rather than in open executive sessions. The staff of 10 committees said the votes were not available to the public. State law requires that roll-call votes in executive sessions be recorded and made public. But committee rules do not address email voting.

• Minutes and other details of committee meetings were not available from 18 of the committees, according to their staff. State law does not require such documentation of legislative committees, although it is required by other Massachusetts commissions and boards.

• Among the lack of documentation are records of attendance by committee members. Observers say fewer committee members now show up for public hearings as the work of the committees takes place through phone discussion or email polls.

And here's more about legislative debate, in general: ...neutral observers such as [Michael] Widmer note a trend toward more control emanating from the offices of the House speaker and Senate president.

“I wouldn’t say that this session has had less debate than recent years, but part of the trend towards more power in the leadership has been less floor debate, particularly in the House,” said Widmer. “A lot of the debates are taking place in the legislative caucuses behind closed doors.”

The Commonwealth may perhaps do legislation better than some states, but we can clearly be more transparent and accountable to the public than we are currently.

It's an interesting exercise to go into the mainstream and ask people to name a Supreme Court Justice, inquire about the components of our Constitution, and name the three branches of government.  The (incorrect) answers would be amusing if not for the fact that the government is us, the people of the USA.  We elect the people who set our laws and the budgets by which we must live.  What's the saying...we get the government we deserve.  That's why the iCivics program to educate young children about how our government works is fantastic! [Los Angeles Times]

This slim knowledge of civics — and the potential risk it poses to American democracy — captured the attention of retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.  "It's very disturbing," said O'Connor, 81, the first woman to serve on the nation's highest court. "I want to educate several generations of young people so we won't have the lack of public knowledge we have today."

Civics education involves explaining the structure of U.S. government, including the meaning and influence of the Constitution and its evolution over time. Advocates also emphasize the importance of getting students to engage in the democratic process, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Philadelphia-based Annenberg Public Policy Center.

One problem may be a consequence of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which emphasized reading and math instruction with required testing.

Income inequality and economic injustice has a adverse affect on the economic development and financial stability of the US.  Even more disconcerting is that many Americans believe that the income/wealth disparity is shrinking in the US.  This attitude does not bode well for the advocates who organize for change.  The challenge is combat the pervasive cognitive dissonance.

A Gallup poll released on Thursday found that, after rising rather steadily for the past two decades, the percentage of Americans who said that the country is divided into “haves” and “have-nots” took the largest drop since the question was asked....Nearly 6 in 10 Americans still see themselves as the haves, while only about a third see themselves as the have-nots. The numbers have been in that range for a decade.

As Charles M. Blow laments in his Op-Ed, This is the new American delusion. The facts point to a very different reality...Our growing income inequality is a fact. So is the possibility that it could prove economically disastrous.

Massachusetts is in line to get $50 million dollars from the federal government for specific early education initiatives.  That's a good thing.  The more we provide quality early education and care to our youngest children, addressing their social, emotional, cognitive and language development in the early years, the more ready our children are to embrace their future as life-long learners. [Governor's press release]

“This award will enable Massachusetts to accelerate the implementation of our plan that is designed to yield improvements in our early childhood system that significantly raises the level of quality opportunities and experiences for children and families,” said Department of Early Education and Care Commissioner Sherri Killins. “The Early Learning Challenge recognizes the importance of early learning in providing the foundation for children’s healthy growth and brain development and ensuring the collective future prosperity of our Commonwealth and our nation. Both educators and families alike will benefit from this award.”

The New York Times conducted research on virtual schools, focusing on K12, Inc.  What they found is not encouraging for us who care about quality education for our children and who are also concerned about the dwindling funds available for public education.

Here's some startling quotes about the funding:

“What we’re talking about here is the financialization of public education,” said Alex Molnar, a research professor at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education who is affiliated with the education policy center. “These folks are fundamentally trying to do to public education what the banks did with home mortgages.”

Here's less encouraging information about the performance of these virtual schools:

A Stanford University group, the Center for Research on Education Outcomes, tracked students in eight virtual schools in Pennsylvania, including Agora, comparing them with similar students in regular schools. The study found that “in every subgroup, with significant effects, cyber charter performance is lower.”

Devora Davis, the center’s research manager, said the group’s analysis of Pennsylvania online schools showed that students were slipping. “If they were paired with a traditional public schools student, the public school student kept their place in line, and the cyberstudent moved back five spots,” she said.

School choice and privatization are hot political issues.  But educational rights, equitable and quality education for all our children, is the 1964 civil rights movement of the 21st century.  We need to provide better education for all our children.  It's certainly not about profits for the corporations.

The economic prognosticators were out in force at a hearing on Beacon Hill, predicting how high/low fiscal year 2013 revenues might be.  Predictions ranged from $21.7 billion, an increase of 3.2 percent (Amy Pitter, commissioner of the state Department of Revenue), to $22.28 billion, an increase of 4.1 percent ( David G. Tuerck, executive director of the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University in Boston), with other predictions in between.  These predictions still leave the Commonwealth with a budget shortfall. [Full Article: Mass live.com]

Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, a Barre Democrat and chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, said that tax revenue growth for fiscal 2013 is unlikely to be enough to compensate for cuts in federal grants and reimbursements or growth in items such as the state's $10.4 billion Medicaid program. Brewer said it will be difficult to avoid some spending cuts in the state budget for the next fiscal year.

"It appears like it's going to be a very sobering year," Brewer said after the hearing. "There may be in excess of $1 billion (gap) between expected revenues and needs. The revenues are growing but not to the needs of the line items. We have a lot of tough choices to make."

Jay Gonzalez, state secretary for administration and finance, said he could not make any commitments to any spending levels in the budget including state aid to communities. He said nothing is sacrosanct at this point...."Everything is on the table again this year," Gonzalez said after the hearing. "It's another challenging year."
 

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation issued its latest report on the state of municipal budgets [Full Article: The Boston Globe].  There are no real surprises...that is if you have been paying attention to the economy, discussions in the State House regarding revenues and budget cuts, and watching your own city or town lose employees.  The surprises may be the magnitude of the unfunded pension and health funds that were measurable and promised as part of employment...that's unconscionable.

Our families and our communities need investments in the services, schools, and infrastructure that make Massachusetts a great place to live and work.  How will this happen?  In order to make the necessary investments, we need to raise significant revenues.  Governor Cuomo in New York has taken the lead, as has Governor Brown in California...That revenue should come primarily from the highest income earners.

“The numbers demonstrate just how difficult this recession and fiscal crisis have been for cities and towns,’’ said Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. “Their revenues have been virtually flat, while their costs have grown, which has meant cuts in schools, public safety, and other basic services for most cities and towns.’’

“These are challenging times,’’ said Michael V. O’Brien, the Worcester city manager. “The global economy, the national economy, and the regional economy have all suffered in the downturn, so the revenues aren’t there for the state to distribute.’’