www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
________________________________________ THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT
October 13, 2003 Vol. 3, No. 38
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Covering education news in Vermont and beyond...
Informative, provocative, unique...
Published by Vermonters for Better Education
VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: LSternberg@aol.com
NEWS & ANALYSIS...NSRE SCORES UPDATED
Vermont released updated assessment data for 2003 last week and the new numbers show no significant improvement in results on the state's New Standards Reference Exam (NSRE). However, the percentage of students "achieving the standard" or "achieving the standard with honors" remains high in some categories. For example, 81 percent of fourth graders achieved the standard or achieved it with honors in "Reading: Basic Understanding." But only 40 percent of fourth-graders achieved the standard or achieved it with honors in "Math Problem Solving."
The full report is available at: http://data.ed.state.vt.us/performance/03/STATE_03.pdf
According to an Associated Press story last week, Governor James Douglas believes improvement is needed. "Vermont spends a billion dollars a year on education. It ranks second among the states for education spending per capita. We have the lowest pupil-teacher or pupil-staff ratios in the country.... In the last five years, education spending has increased 40 percent. In an ideal world, our test scores would increase proportionately, but they have not," Douglas said.
Of particular interest in the new report are disparities between children on free and reduced lunch programs and those who are not on such programs. Children who use free and reduced lunch programs come from families who have to meet low-income criteria. The assessment results show free and reduced lunch children scoring from 15 to 30 percentage points lower than children who are not in that category. That means low-income children are not doing as well as their peers.
In addition, NSRE scores are at odds with scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a nationwide test of samples of students in each state. For example, in 2002, only 39 percent of Vermont fourth-graders and 40 percent of the state's eighth-graders were proficient in reading on the NAEP. That same year, only 32 percent of Vermont fourth-graders and 41 percent of the state's eighth graders were proficient in writing.
VERMONT TEACHER TUNES OUT
Last month, Vermont NEA President Angelo Dorta used the pages of Vermont-NEA Today, the union's state newspaper, to blast the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermonters for Better Education, several national think tanks and various news organizations as being part of a vast anti-public school network.
In this month's Vermont-NEA Today, a couple of teachers wrote in to congratulate Dorta on his expose. In one letter, an educator bragged of her decision to tune out virtually all news.
"I have cancelled my subscription to the Burlington Free Press as a result of the sensationalism and negativism that continually accompanies educational issues reported in this 'newspaper.'" wrote Linda Owen of Randolph.
Owen went on to say that when she cancelled her subscription she explained that she thought the BFP had been "offensive" in reporting on the "unwise professional choices" of her colleagues. (One assumes she is talking about the teachers whose licenses had been suspended or revoked.) When it was explained to her by the BFP circulation desk that those stories had also aired on radio and TV, Owen said "I turn them off and now I'm turning the Free Press off." Owen then urged her fellow 9,998 licensed Vermont teachers to join her by cutting their subscriptions to the Free Press.
COMMENTARYALL CHILDREN DESERVE EQUALITY IN EDUCATION
by David Kelley(This commentary originally appeared in the Burlington Free Press)
For the last few years I have served on the Vermont legal review panel of the American Civil Liberties Union and from time to time I have acted as a cooperating attorney. Through that experience I've learned some things about public schools I still have a hard time believing.
I have worked with Hispanic and African-American families whose children have been subjected to a barrage of behavior I would never have believed occurred in Vermont, much less in our public schools.
Some of our public schools in Vermont do a terrific job of integrating minority students; but the ugly truth is that others don't. The Vermont Advisory Committee to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission recently wrote: "Racial harassment appears pervasive in and around the State's public schools." This is despite the fact that we have all kinds of anti-harassment laws on our books and all kinds of anti-harassment policies in our schools.
The parents of a young student facing any kind of harassment today frequently have no choice but to dig into their pockets and find enough money to tuition their child to another school. They are frequently less able to afford that expense than almost any other family in the community.
In my private law practice I have had other experiences that have, likewise, convinced me that our public schools need significant reforms. For example, one case involved a Northeast Kingdom high school. The school didn't offer drafting and the student wanted to take drafting courses that were offered at a neighboring high school. The local school board wouldn't let the boy switch schools unless he brought a student from the neighboring high school to their school in exchange for his leaving. The student who wanted to take drafting never got the chance.
Almost 20 years ago two friends and I began a student/teacher exchange program we called "Project Harmony." We organized youth exchanges with the former Soviet republics and other East European countries because we believed that Vermont students needed more opportunities to learn about the rest of the world.
Students from less affluent homes almost never had access to those opportunities. It didn't matter how much passion a young person might have to explore and understand other cultures. Rich kids could go to schools in other countries. Poor kids stayed home.
Why should a young mixed-race girl have to listen to a barrage of sexual or racial epithets? Why should her parents have to pay tuition at another school so that she can escape those epithets? Why shouldn't working-class children have the opportunity to participate in exchange programs? We should be doing all we can to ensure that all students have equal rights and equal opportunities.
I had dinner with the headmaster of the Putney School a few years ago. He and his wife were adamantly opposed to school choice. I was stunned that people running a so-called "progressive" private school, where virtually every student attending the school was wealthy enough to have dozens of choices, could, nonetheless, argue that less advantaged children shouldn't have choices.
There are 91 towns in Vermont that use vouchers to tuition students to the school of their choice, and contrary to the claims of some of our most "progressive" educators and politicians the sky is not falling in those communities.
If we are serious about ending racism in our schools or about educating students for the 21st century we need to find ways to give those students who aren't blessed with white skin or rich parents more freedom and more choices.
A generation ago Bob Dylan said that politicians need to get out of the doorway and stop blocking the hall, because the times they were achangin'. The issue is still freedom. And the same people still need to get out of the doorway.
David Kelley, a Montpelier resident, is an attorney.
NCLB: IT'S NOT ALL NEGATIVE
The Center on Education Policy has compiled a useful and interesting report on "Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act" that critics and supporters alike should peruse. The report looks at how 15 school districts fared under the new law in 2002. The report does not paint an entirely rosy scenario, but neither does it show that NCLB is an evil force foisted upon states by an over-reaching federal government, as some critics would have people believe.
Key findings from the case study include:
1. Officials in the districts studied were supportive of the intent of NCLB and hopeful their districts will achieve its goals.For a summary of the report, or the entire report itself, go to: http://www.cep-dc.org2. Many case study districts have implemented programs to strengthen reading instruction, expand preschool education, or provide structured professional development for teachers.
3. Relatively few parents took advantage of the choice component of NCLB because of various factors, including parents' reluctance to go to another school, parents' support of reforms at their children's school, and limited time for parents to make decisions between the time they were notified about the choice component and the start of the school year.
4. Districts that were best prepared to carry out the choice component were ones in states that already have public school choice programs.
LAST CHANCE FOR LUNCHEON TICKETS
Those who want tickets to the luncheon talk on alternative teacher certification should make their reservations now. The room is filling up, according to organizer Laurie Morrow. Here are the details: on Tuesday, October 21, Vermonters for Better Education will co-sponsor a luncheon in Montpelier at which Lisa Graham Keegan and Kathleen Madigan will discuss "The Road Less Taken: American Board Teacher Certification." Other sponsors include the Ethan Allen Institute, the Associated Industries of Vermont, the Education Leaders Council, the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence, and the Vermont Association of Scholars.
Keegan is CEO of the Education Leaders Council, a DC-based education reform organization made up of education leaders from around the country. Keegan herself is former Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Madigan is the president of the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence. ABCTE is an approved provider of teacher certification and has developed a rigorous series of examinations that will allow talented, motivated people who already hold bachelor's degrees to enter the teaching profession without taking courses in colleges of education.
The luncheon will take place at the Capital Plaza Hotel in Montpelier and the cost is $50 per person. To receive a ticket order form or to reserve tickets, call 802-229-9208. Or send a check for the appropriate number of tickets to: Laurie Morrow, 15 Deerfireld Drive, Montpelier, VT 05602.
* * *
WHO COVERS EDUCATION IN VERMONT? WE DO!
Maybe you noticed that this is the third "volume" of the Vermont Education Report. That means we're in our third year of covering education stories in the state that you WON'T FIND ELSEWHERE. Education is a complicated and important topic. In Vermont, it's a nearly one-billion-dollar industry. Yet scant notice is given to it in the major newspapers and broadcast media in the state. Only in the VER will you find regular coverage of education issues - stories on what the department of education is doing, what is happening in the education committees in the legislature, and how the state really compares nationwide, as well as tidbits from around the country.
Help us keep going - send a contribution today to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701.
* * *
ELSEWHEREFROM PPI ONLINE, the electronic Bulletin of the Progressive Policy Institute, the New Democrats' think tank.
NCLB IMPLEMENTATION
The previous Bulletin noted liberal Sen. Edward Kennedy's (D-MA) vigorous defense of No Child Left Behind during Senate debate over an (ultimately defeated) amendment to block further implementation of the law until it is "fully funded." The following week, Education and the Workforce Committee Ranking Member Rep. George Miller (D-CA) also defended the legislation in a letter to the editor of the Washington Post and a Dear Colleague Letter to fellow House members. Similarly, in a speech to the Committee on Education Funding (an umbrella group of education advocacy groups), House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (MD) called on them not to abandon or attack NCLB, saying, "Accountability for the achievement of low-income children and minorities must not be subject to Washington budget games. And the credibility of each organization in this room -- and of Congressional Democrats -- rests on the values outlined in this legislation."
This is a bold statement, particularly when many of those listening to Hoyer represent the very groups attacking and advocating rollback of NCLB in the courts of law and public opinion. No one could seriously argue that Hoyer is anything but a tireless advocate for federal education funding, and he is unsparing in his criticism of the administration and Republican leaders in congress for underfunding NCLB. Hoyer argued, though, that given the magnitude of the achievement gaps for poor and minority students, those who advocate for greater investment have both a moral and a political imperative to also support accountability and reforms to improve public education...
Recent press coverage of NCLB implementation around the country evokes Goldilocks: depending on the day and who you are reading, the law is, too tough, not tough enough, too riddled with loopholes, too inflexible, too much choice, not enough choice, etc.... In New York City, The New York Times' Michael Winerip thinks NCLB's public school choice provisions are working too well and causing chaos as a result. In contrast, The New York Sun's Andrew Wolf thinks that they aren't working well enough...
Further Reading:
Representative Hoyer Addresses the Committee for Education Funding, Text of Speech (09/25/03): http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=106&subid=122&contentid=252063
Rep. George Miller (D-CA) letter to the editor on NCLB (09/24/03): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61389-2003Sep24.html
"Democrats Defend Bush School Reform," George Archibald, Washington Times (09/23/03): http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030922-105420-1626r.htm
From the U.S. Freedom Foundation
http://www.freedomfoundation.usA CHOICE DIALOGUE
by David W. Kirkpatrick Senior Education FellowThis commentary presents excerpts from a recent friendly email exchange with comments from another former public school teacher, with 28 years experience.
Comment: Are you suggesting that every child in a private school is happy to be there?
Response: Of course not. With 5 million students there are bound to be unhappy ones. But they are there by choice and a higher percentage of them graduate than in the public schools. John Chubb and Terry Moe report that black and Hispanic private school graduates are more likely to finish college than white graduates of public schools, 26 percent to 19 percent. Chubb has also said poor parents participate more in private schools than rich parents do in public ones.
Comment: As far as bullying goes, my two nephews both attend parochial schools, and I know for a fact that both have been the object of bullying and that they have also participated in bullying.
Response: Again, with 5 million students, this will happen. No one claims nonpublic schools are perfect.
Comment: My guess is that children in private AND public schools bully those they can when they can get away with it.
Response: That is probably true. But it occurs less in schools of choice, including public magnet and charter schools.
Comment: May I ask--Why didn't you teach in private schools when you were an active classroom teacher?
Response: It's said that Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks and he replied, "Because that's where the money is." Similarly public schools are where 90 percent of the students are. My involvement in K-12 education -- student, parent, teacher, union activist, -- has always been with public schools. Besides, the basic reason to support school choice is not to persuade public school students to go to nonpublic schools or, indeed, persuade any student to go to any particular school. The purpose is to support everyone's ability to exercise their constitutional right (U.S. Supreme Court Pierce decision, 1925) to make education decisions for themselves.
Rather than threaten public schools, individual school choice will give them more autonomy, as in higher education, private education and public charter schools where choice exists. Public schools can then be more responsive to those they serve, more effective and win enhanced respect and support. Most of all, it will make teaching a profession. Coercion and refusal to change doesn't, won't, and can't do it.
Comment: let's say every child in America could gain a voucher to attend a private school. Would every child stay in school and not drop out?
Response: Every? Not likely. But the great majority? Definitely. They already do. About 70% graduate from assigned public schools while 95 percent or more typically graduate from schools of choice.
Comment: Would every child get to choose which private school he would attend?
Response: Yes, just as students choose the college they attend, although not necessarily their first choice. And this overemphasizes private schools. That vouchers are only to enable transfers from public to nonpublic schools is erroneous. With full school choice, that's not what happens. In St. Louis, for example, reportedly 40% of public charter school students come from parochial schools. Even at the college level, where everyone exercises choice, 80 percent attend public institutions.
Comment: Would that eliminate most behavior problems?
Response: Most? Yes. All? No. With school choice there is less need for students to misbehave because they are in a school voluntarily and should they for any reason change their minds they can transfer to another school. At the college level, a full choice system, it's reported that half the students graduate from an institution other than the one where they started. To be fair, much of this is because many start at the less expensive two-year community colleges. But even those at full four-year institutions often transfer to one more to their liking.
Comment: Just as I believe that public schools need private schools, I also believe that private schools need public schools.
Response: No problem here; neither system is going away. But everyone should be able to exercise their constitutional right to decide which they will utilize. Those who can afford it already do so. A national survey of public school parents a few years ago found 53 percent said they live where they do so their children can be in the school they are attending. Being where they want to be they are not going anywhere. That's some 25 million students. Another five million are in nonpublic schools. As many as two million are homeschooled. So most students already exercise choice. Only low-income families are denied this option which makes this a civil rights issue and, to many, a moral issue.
To speak of schools treats this as an institutional priority. Schools of whatever type are only means to an end. They are not the end itself, although millions, perhaps most, people seem to regard them as such.
The end is an educated citizenry. Whatever produces that should be supported and whatever does not should be corrected or terminated.
* * *
The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact LSternberg@aol.com for more information.
SubscribeRemove
..
..
..
..