Grading Texas

The jury may still be out on the overall effectiveness of charter schools, as a major, recent study concluded, but a large chunk of the public still has a pieinthesky attitude about them.

According to a poll released today, public support of President Obama’s education agenda has slipped during the past year – only 34 percent of Americans would give the president an A or B on education performance now, compared to 45 percent last year – but support for charter schools continues to grow.

Some 65 percent of the respondents to the survey by Phi Delta Kappa International and Gallup said they would welcome new charter schools in their communities, and 60 percent said they would favor a “large increase” in the number of charters in the United States. There are about 5,000 charter schools across the country, and Obama wants to create more, copying the efforts of those that have improved achievement among lowincome students.

But a federally commissioned study released about two months ago found that students who won lotteries to attend charter middle schools didn’t perform any better, on average, in math and reading than students from the same communities who lost the lotteries and attended nearly regular public schools. The study involved 2,330 students who applied to 36 charter schools in 15 states. The charter schools in the sample conducted random admission lotteries, meaning that only chance – not some type of screening – determined who attended.

The study, conducted by Mathematica Policy Research of Princeton, N.J. and reported by Education Week, also concluded that the charter school lottery winners did no better, on average, than the lottery losers on such factors as behavior and attendance.

The study seemed to reinforce findings by researchers at Stanford University, who concluded in an earlier study last year that most charters generally were producing similar or worse achievement results than traditional public schools.

The Mathematica study did find, however, that the charter middle schools that served the most economically disadvantaged students – especially in urban areas – were more successful than charters serving higherachieving, more affluent students in producing gains in math.

In short, charters, as Texas’ experience with them has demonstrated, are still a mixed bag. Some are good, and others are a waste of the tax dollars spent on them.

Here is a link to the Mathematica study:

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20104029/pdf/20104029.pdf

Under a 2007 law from which Gov. Rick Perry milked a lot of favorable publicity, this school year was the deadline for school districts in Texas to comply with a requirement that all new school buses have passenger seatbelts.

But guess what?

Some districts are complying, but many, including Houston ISD, the state’s largest, aren’t. It seems the seatbelt law has become a victim of the budgetary crunch – and maybe some political indifference in Austin as well.

The state initially set aside $10 million to reimburse districts for seatbelt costs. But according to a story aired by KPRCTV, Channel 2 in Houston, the Texas Education Agency cut all but $3.6 million of that to comply with Perry’s directive for state agencies to reduce spending.

Some districts, including Dallas ISD and Beaumont ISD, already have spent local funds to purchase new buses with seatbelts anyway. But many other districts, including HISD, haven’t because most districts are grappling with money troubles of their own.

The 2007 law was prompted, in large part, by the deaths of two girls and injuries to many others in the 2006 crash of a charter bus carrying a Beaumont High School soccer team. Perry signed the law in Beaumont at the school the victims attended.

Now, the Texas Education Agency, headed by Perry appointee Robert Scott, is recommending that the seatbelt law become voluntary. It is advising districts that want to buy seatbeltequipped buses anyway to apply for grants for reimbursement.

Here is a link to the KPRC story:

http://www.click2houston.com/news/24704010/detail.html

As Texas schools reopen next week, some with fewer educators than they employed last spring and most struggling with budgetary problems, it is a good time to remember that the federal government is ready to help ease the pain. The emergency jobs bill that President Obama signed last week includes $830 million for educators’ jobs in Texas.

All Gov. Perry has to do is quit conjuring up politically inspired reasons for opposing the money and apply for it. Maybe he will, particularly if school board members, superintendents, teachers and parents start bombarding his office with phone calls and emails demanding that he do so.

And, if you want some extra incentive for making a call, click on the link at the end of this post. It provides an estimated breakdown of how much each district can expect to receive from the emergency pot. The list, prepared by Moak, Casey & Associates, has been making the rounds and already is posted on TSTA’s Facebook page. If you haven’t already seen it, it is worth a look.

Houston ISD stands to gain an estimated $66.7 million; Dallas ISD, $52.2 million; San Antonio ISD, $21.1 million; and Austin ISD, almost $17.5 million. Even a smaller district, such as San Angelo ISD, would receive an estimated $2.6 million.

The money won’t solve the state’s basic school finance problems. Only the Legislature, the governor and (most likely) some sensible judges can do that. But the money will help school districts pay for educators’ jobs at a particularly crucial time.

The money is fully funded by offsets in other parts of the federal budget. So, it doesn’t add to the federal deficit.

There are a couple of things, however, that the money is not.

First, it is not intended to allow a school district to hire an assistant gofer for the superintendent or a new Director of Innovative Innovation. It is not for the central office. It is for educators’ jobs at the campus level.

And, second, it is not designed to enrich teachers’ unions, despite the ranting of a rightwing columnist I read this week. The money is designed to save educators’ jobs, and it is coming (to Texas, we hope) just in time for a new school year.

http://www.moakcasey.com/articles/viewarticledoc.aspx?EID=e71cb423cb294a51b01eb9059f86ae1c&AID=1683&DID=1828

I am not a historian, but, as you may have noticed by now, I do have opinions. And, in my view, the last giant to occupy the White House was a former school teacher from Texas.

No, I haven’t forgotten Ronald Reagan. He had his moments (including a role in the breakup of the Evil Empire), but Lyndon B. Johnson’s legacy still towers above those of any of his successors. It is a legacy, interestingly enough, that some of his successors have spent a lot of time trying to dismantle.

Bob Ray Sanders, in a fine column in today’s Fort Worth StarTelegram (linked below), reminds us that next week (Aug. 27) would have been LBJ’s 102nd birthday. Time does fly, especially for a former, thenyoung reporter (not Bob Ray) who covered one of LBJ’s last speeches as president many years ago in San Antonio.

Johnson’s legacy may stem as much from the period during which he was on center stage as from his own strong personality and ability. Except for the Vietnam War, he was the right president at the right time. Vietnam was a horrible mistake that needlessly killed and maimed thousands of my generation, but untold millions of Americans have benefited from the historic legislation that LBJ championed in civil rights, welfare and education.

Joined for the ceremony by his first school teacher, Johnson signed the first federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act on April 11, 1965, in a ceremony on the front lawn of an old schoolhouse in the Texas Hill Country. It was the first federal law to provide general aid to education and focused mainly on disadvantaged children. Unlike its more recent successors, Johnson’s ESEA attempted to create a level education field for all school children, not a competitive, highstakes environment in which only the fittest are supposed to survive.

That same year, he signed a landmark Higher Education Act, which provided financial assistance for lowerincome students.

I’m not sure if Johnson, the school teacher, was ever a member of TSTA. Many of his classroom peers were, even then.

http://www.startelegram.com/2010/08/17/2409739/revisionistsattempttotarnish.html