Category Archives: Gimme Some Truth

by | February 21, 2010 · 1:52 pm

The Fix Is In

Bob Herbert of the New York Times has been doing an admirable job of outlining the human costs of our neglected infrastructure in his weekly columns. On Saturday he highlighted the conditions in schools throughout the country. And while he noted that getting the nation’s schools up to date is a huge undertaking, it represents only a small part of the overall infrastructure challenge we face as a nation. While highlighting a school in Pennsylvania built in 1861, with asbestos encrusted walls and dodgy electrical wiring, he noted the difficulty in getting good data on the physical condition of the country’s schools.

Lawrence Summers, President Obama’s chief economic adviser, has said that 75 percent of the public schools have structural deficiencies and 25 percent have problems with their ventilation systems.

But how to pay for this? Herbert made the point that:

right now there are not enough people at the higher echelons of government trying to figure out the best ways to raise the enormous amounts of money that will be required, and the most responsible ways of spending that money. And there are not enough leaders explaining to the public how heavy this lift will be, and why it is so necessary, and what sacrifices will be required to get the job properly done.

Suggestions have included such institutions as a national infrastructure or regional infrastructure banks that “would allocate public funds and also leverage private capital for the most important projects.” His larger point was that top governmental leaders should be seeking all kinds of solutions that are both solid and creative, while quickly implementing the best of them.

Which brings us to this next item, one with twist and turns not completely understandable at this point, but certainly not held up by people like myself as a model of how to “get the job properly done” — to use Herbert’s words.

Diane Ravitch, an intellectual on education policy, difficult to pigeonhole politically (appointed to public office by both G.H.W. Bush and Clinton), but best described as an independent, co-writes a blog with Deborah Meier that some of our readers may be familiar with called “Bridging Differences.” This past week she highlighted a possibly disturbing development in the Race to the Top  competition program of the Department of Education, that dangles $4.3 billion to the states with a possible $1.3 billion to follow. Ravitch’s critique suggests that this competition is not run by pragmatists, but rather by ideologues who are led by the Bill Gates Foundation.

If this election had been held five years ago, the department would be insisting on small schools, but because Gates has already tried and discarded that approach, the department is promoting the new Gates remedies: charter schools, privatization, and evaluating teachers by student test scores.

Two of the top lieutenants of the Gates Foundation were placed in charge of the competition by Secretary Arne Duncan. Both have backgrounds as leaders in organisations dedicated to creating privately managed schools that operate with public money.

So, why should it be surprising that the Race to the Top reflects the priorities of the NewSchools Venture Fund (charter schools) and of the Gates Foundation (teacher evaluations by test scores)?

But here’s where the weirdness of this story enters.

Marc Dean Millot, a writer on education policy and someone who has not been overly critical of charter schools and their “education entrepreneurs” in the past, was contracted for 6 months to write on the Scholastic blog, “This Week in Education.” Millot had the temerity to pose some questions about those conflicts of interest at the Department of Education and had asked Sec. Duncan to nick this issue in the bud quickly.

I have now heard the same thing from three independent credible sources — the fix is in on the U.S. Department of Education’s competitive grants, in particular Race to the Top (RTTT) and Investing in Innovation (I3). Secretary Duncan needs to head this off now, by admitting that he and his team have potential conflicts of interests with regard to their roles in grant making, recognizing that those conflicts are widely perceived by potential grantees, and explaining how grant decisions will be insulated from interference by the department’s political appointees.

For his troubles, he was immediately sacked and the offending post removed. Fortunately, nothing is completely lost on the internet and you can read a cached version of his “Connect the Dots” piece here.

Even more chilling is Diane Ravitch’s predictions for the future, regardless of whether Secretary Duncan cleans up this apparent conflict of interest.

As hundreds and possibly thousands more charter schools open, we will see many financial and political scandals. We will see corrupt politicians and investors putting their hands into the cashbox. We will see corrupt deals where public school space is handed over to entrepreneurs who have made contributions to the politicians making the decisions. We will see many more charter operators pulling in $400,000-500,000 a year for their role, not as principals, but as “rainmakers” who build warm relationships with politicians and investors.

When someday we trace back how large segments of our public school system were privatized and how so many millions of public dollars ended up in the pockets of high-flying speculators instead of being used to reduce class size, repair buildings, and improve teacher quality, we will look to the origins of the Race to the Top and to the interlocking group of foundations, politicians, and entrepreneurs who created it.

We indeed are entering another chapter in the deepening decline in support for public education. Our looming deficit in Madison is just one example of many across the country. What we shouldn’t have to battle so vigourously is our elected and unelected “advocates.” Sadly, this also includes some of our own friends in the state capital.

Robert Godfrey

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, AMPS, Arne Duncan, Best Practices, Gimme Some Truth, National News, nclb, We Are Not Alone

by | February 19, 2010 · 3:57 pm

WISC EDITORIAL — THE PUBLIC’S SCHOOLS/ UNSUSTAINABLE BUDGETS

I need to add the The Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools “stepped up” a long time ago and and is urging a step a Penny for Kids.  State officials talk the talk, but they need to walk the walk.  Sign on with WAES and Penny for Kids to remind them.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, Budget, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | February 8, 2010 · 6:38 pm

A Starving Impulse

Sam Dillon of the New York Times has been doing some good reporting on the carrot/stick financing strategies of the Dept. of Educaction in the vortex of shrunken state budgets, stimulus money about to dry up in 2010 and Arne Duncan’s Race to the Top (RttT) funding proposal.

In a piece from January 18th, Dillon quoted Nevada’s school superintendent Keith W. Rheault, who noted that Nevada educators had initially grumbled about the RttT program but quieted their criticisms once their state’s tax revenues plummeted last year.

“When you’re starving and somebody puts food in your mouth, it’s amazing what states will do,” Mr. Rheault said.

It was obvious that any opposition was not going to derail efforts by about 40 states to compete in the first part of a two-stage competition (7 will also file for second stage applications later). This, despite the fact that many of those states had to perform last-minute legislative changes to make their proposals more in line with Dept. of Education guidelines. A big effort, for example, was made in many states to accomodate the mandate that raised the number of chartered schools or expanded the pool of students who are eligible to attend them. As well, both California and Wisconsin repealed their laws that banned the linking of student achievement data to teachers; one day, in Wisconsin’s case, after Mr. Obama’s visit to Madison.

But in their efforts to jockey for desperately needed cash, ostensibly to become a leader in education “reform,” critics have suggested that the various state’s inabilities to pay current bills should make everyone skeptical of their capacity to take on any such new initiatives. As a report noted , in the case of Illinois, if the state were to succeed in receiving RttT funding, “it might not have the ability to finance the long-term costs of any new programs once the federal money has been spent.”

“Not too long ago,” Ms. Slowik said, “everyone was encouraged to get early-childhood programs going,  but then the funding wasn’t there.”

“Then you come along and have Race to The Top, and say you’re going to give your all and put extra things on,” she added. “There’s a feeling in the education community that these are expectations some know they can’t meet.”

With Illinois, for example, already coping with $1 billion in arrears to schools, and having already used $1 billion in federal stimulus money to plug a major hole in the state’s education budget, this represents a precarious tightrope to be walking on indeed.

Some educators are skeptical that the state can meet even its current obligations for education financing, let alone support new Race to the Top initiatives.

“Not in the current financial situation — absolutely not,” said Kenneth Cull, superintendent of District 69 in Skokie and Morton Grove. “They put too much borrowing and Band-Aids on basic education. They can’t do that forever. That’s why there is really a crisis right upon us.”

Sam Dillon’s piece today explored the “funding cliff” faced by many of the nation’s schools as they begin to use up the  $100 billion that Congress included in the stimulus law last year to help schools cushion the impact of the recession.

New studies show that many states will spend all or nearly all that is left between now and the end of this school term.

With state and local tax revenues still in decline, the end of the federal money will leave big holes in education budgets from Massachusetts and Florida to California and Washington, experts said.

“States are going to face a huge problem because they’ll have to find some way to replace these billions, either with cuts to their K-12 systems or by finding alternative revenues,” said Bruce Baker, an education professor at Rutgers University.

The stimulus program “was the largest one-time infusion of federal education dollars to states and districts in the nation’s history.”

While states were warned by Sec. Duncan and others to not spend the money in ways that could lead to damaging budget holes once the federal money ended, most took to heart the other message, to stimulate the economy by saving, or creating, some 250,000 education jobs. In short, many states used the balance of their money for 2009-10 school year leaving little or no money available for 2010-11. Wisconsin was one of 20 states that said when applying for their stabilization funds that they would spend the entirety of the endowment through the 2008-10 school years. Many states ended up spending a considerable amount of their Title 1 funds to save jobs that previously would have been paid through state and local funding that were about to be dissolved due to cuts in that funding.

Yet another train wreck hurtling down the tracks for education. Who is left to turn to for answers of how the bleeding of public education will be staunched?

Robert Godfrey

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, AMPS, Arne Duncan, Budget, finance, Gimme Some Truth, School Finance, We Are Not Alone

by | February 4, 2010 · 4:52 pm

Starve them into submission (with some corrections and an update)

[corrected material crossed out; new material in italics, update at bottom]

Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction has officially embraced a policy of starving Milwaukee Public Schools into submission by exercising his power to withhold Federal funds from the district.

Here is the Press Release in it’s entirety (official notice here).

Evers issues notice to Milwaukee Public Schools

MADISON — State Superintendent Tony Evers issued a statement regarding the notice he signed today that will allow him to use his authority to withhold or direct federal funds allocated to Milwaukee Public Schools.

“As the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, I have a legal responsibility to the children of Milwaukee. Today, I issued a notice that will allow me to speed up change in the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) through the use of my authority regarding federal funds. Using the only tool allowed under state law, I am acting to ensure federal funds are used effectively to improve MPS.

“No one can or should be satisfied with the current progress in MPS to improve. I look forward to full cooperation to implement all required changes, with an increased sense of urgency, as I continue to work with MPS leaders.”

Evers had previously sought the power to  — unilaterally and  with no defined criteria —  declare any district “in need of improvement,” issue directives on almost all aspects governance and education and “withhold state aid from any school district that fails to comply to the state superintendent’s satisfaction with any of the above directives.”  That effort, Assembly Bill 534, failed.

Bribing Milwaukee into submission with uncertain Race to the Top funding also failed.  The carrot is gone now, what is left is starvation and the stick.

The last thing Milwaukee needs is more program cuts.  Just this week, the lack of resources led the distinct to discontinue SAGE class size reduction in 11 schools.  Federal dollars total about 18% of the MPS budget, Title I  — the funds targeted for poor children in play here — probably about 2/3 or more of that, call it over 12% (I’m not sure if Evers can also withhold the ARRA flow-through “state stabilization funds that his buddy Jim Doyle and others dishonestly tried to spin as “state aid”).  It isn’t clear what Evers is going to do and how he is going to do that with by cutting 18% a significant portion of the budget.

At this time there are no details, no plan, just the starvation.

Although not referenced in either the notice or the Press Release, there is a “Corrective Action Plan” that was issued in 2008 and a draft and  update from 2009.  Here is the report on the response by the Milwaukee Public Schools (I will post more relevant documents as I find them).

The lack of plan is foolish anyway you look at it.  From a policy point of view, there is no policy to look at.  From a political point of view, no positive case for the action is being made, no “this has to happen,” only “this can”t go on.”  That’s not the way to win over the undecided or convince anyone that this isn’t a political stunt.

There may be a good case to make that this is a reasonable and justified action, but the case has not been made.  That case would require more than the “No one can or should be satisfied with the current progress in MPS” in the Press Release, it would entail a detailed documentation of how MPS has failed in the Corrective Actions and why Evers thinks that withholding this money will produce better results.  My guess is that we will see some of this in the coming weeks.

Without a governance or educational case being made, this looks like a political stunt.

Since Evers has been linked at the hip to Doyle and Mayor/Gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett on MPS issues, one calculation may be that Barrett will win votes outside of Milwaukee based on this.  I wouldn’t count on that off-setting the votes lost in Milwaukee or those lost around the state from people who actually know a thing or two about education.  My first reaction is that Barrett just lost the election.  Probably an over-reaction (really too early to tell), but not an outrageous conclusion.

The timing is bad too.  Unless this is direct reaction to the Superintendent hire, it makes no sense to not give Gregory Thornton a chance to at least get settled.  It certainly makes his job more difficult, if not impossible

It is ironic that the standards invoked (and required by statute ) are the NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress standards that Superintendent Evers has never been a fan of.   When power overcomes sense, any tool at hand looks good.

This kind of  bullying  was (mostly)  not part of what candidate Tony Evers promised.  Many of us thought better of him, or at very least that he understood that a lack of adequate resources was part of the problem, not the way to a solution.  Time for second thoughts.

Update:

Wisconsin Radio Network had a story linking this to the Mayoral Control fight that brought a reaction from Tony Evers:

Update: Evers says the statement to MPS is about the district’s failure to improve in specific areas which are spelled out in the notice, and NOT about mayoral control, and that my attempt to connect the two in this post was “reprehensible.”

Good to have that information, but if you haven’t made the case on education and governance — and they haven’t —  then it seems reasonable for people to speculate about political reasons (I did, not Mayoral Control directly, but politics).

Under the circumstances “reprehensible” seems much too strong.

Whatever the combination of motives, for good and ill, politics will be part of this.

Responses from the MPS Board and Supt. William Andrekopoulos are linked here.

Update #2

Just some links.

Bob Hague at Wisconsin Radio Network has his full interviews with Evers and Andrekopoulos up here.  Worth a listen.

The main Journal Sentinel story is here.

Michael Mathias at Pundit Nation has a long and interesting post.

Gretchen Schuldt at Blogging MPS has a nice roundup (better than this one and she will no doubt be following developments more closely then AMPS, put her on the must-read list).

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, Best Practices, Budget, education, Elections, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, National News, nclb, No Child Left Behind, Uncategorized

by | January 31, 2010 · 5:31 pm

On the Agenda — MMSD Board of Education, February 1, 2010

Taking my cue from Brenda Konkel, I’m going to try an experiment in posting the Madison Metropolitan School District meeting agenda items, with some comments, observations and questions.   I can’t promise to do this every week, but will try.

The Weekly Notice of Meetings is here and occasions my first comment.  I’m really glad to see the La Follette Area Long Range Planning Group (LFALRPG) and the Superintendent’s Human Relations Advisory Committee noticed for a change.  The first has been meeting since November 2009 (according to this from elsewhere on the agendas) and the second has been in existence for close to a decade (maybe longer).  This is the first time that I know of that they have been noticed.   It is my semi-informed opinion that because the Board has been only indirectly involved with them, they fall into a legal gray area with open meetings statutes (see the note at the bottom of this post for more).  I’m glad the district has moved to respect the spirit of the law.  Still some room to go though, there are no linked materials for either and the materials for the LFALRPG posted elsewhere are woefully incomplete (more on that below).

The post-Superintendent Dan Nerad changes in governance have the Board meeting as committees one week and the as the Board the next week.  In theory the discussions from the first week inform revisions and votes on action items the next week.  Things that don’t require action seem to get fit in here and there with little rhyme or reason.  The good thing about this is that action items are introduced and available to the public at least a week before the final vote.  The bad things include  long meetings and exhausted Board members because of the expectation that all Board be part of all steps of all items.  Items late in the agendas often receive little or no scrutiny.  For example, I don’t think there was any substantive discussion of the Strategic Plan Core Measures at either the last committee meeting or the last Board meeting where they were on agendas.

This is a Committee Meeting week.  The will begin meeting at 5:00 Pm, Monday February 1, 2010, Doyle Administration Bldg. 545 W. Dayton Street Madison, WI 53703 Room 103.  There will be public appearances at the beginning of the first Committee meeting.   Like almost all Board meetings, these will be carried by MMSD-TV.

Student Achievement and Performance Monitoring Committee is first up.  The format for this experiment is agenda items in bold, linked to materials, followed by comments (where I have comments).  Those that I think are most important are in italics.

Student Achievement Data: Value Added Analysis (Report Only).

This is a big waste.  A waste of time and effort by the people who did the work, a waste of money for the people who paid for it (you and me), a waste of the Board’s time to listen to the presentation and a waste of my time in having gone through the report.

I’ve written about the problems and limits of Value Added Analysis (VAA) before and nothing here improves my assessment of the utility of this tool, especially in Madison where differences among schools are small and the whole approach obscures the achievement gaps we all know should be given attention.  To change my mind about VAA, I would need evidence that it is making reasonable and effective contributions to policy and resource decisions; the only reasonable and effective decisions this supports is dumping Value Added and reallocating the resources.

This isn’t the time or place for a full treatment of the issues, so just an introduction.  First some general things.

The first general thing is the old “garbage in, garbage out.”  This analysis is based on the WKCE and no matter how you tart the test results up with fancy number crunching, they are still (close to) rotten at the core.

The second is that a claimed “strength” of the version of Value Added MMSD  uses is the  renorming of expected achievement gains based on demographics in order to better compare how the schools are doing with children from very different backgrounds.  These are good numbers to have, but this approach also serves to hide achievement gaps and to some degree institutionalizes low expectations.  For example, if you dig down into the report for the coefficients used to renorm (page 19 for example), you can see that for purposes of the analysis an African American 4th grade student, receiving free lunch is expected to gain 10.22 fewer points  per year on the WKCE than a non African American, non free lunch student.  Two points: 1.  The gaps should be highlighted, not obscured; 2. It might be useful to know if these disparities are similar at all of our schools, a matter that the report is silent on (although in schools with small numbers of a particular demographic the confidence intervals would be so large that the analysis would likely be of little use).

This second is of particular interest because the big take away from the report is that Madison’s schools are all doing about the same according to the average renormed student gains.  In the 2006-8 reading analysis on 7 elementary schools have 95% confidence intervals where any portion falls outside of a narrow +/- 5 point range; the middle schools’ confidence intervals are all comfortably within that range.   If I read correctly these are WKCE scale score points and looking over the DPI material on that topic (and here), this range is narrow.  To confuse matters more, there are no clear trends that I can see from the 2005-7 to the 2006-8.  This means that it is hard to say that one school is (according to these measures) doing consistently better than others.

Let’s pretend that there were significant differences (which there aren’t) and that these differences persisted over time (which they don’t appear to have).  For this observation to be of use in formulating policy, you would need to be able to make a confident assertion of causality.  With the multitude of variables at play in each and every classroom and school, this is almost impossible.  School X got a new principal and a grant for Cultural Relevance — the VAA scores went down — is it the principal or the grant programs? or something else? School Y has an active PTO and a four new teachers — the VAA scores went up — thanks to the PTO?, the new teachers?, or something else?  You get the idea.

I’m glad to know that by these VAA measures our schools are relatively consistent but am highly skeptical that this “insight” is worth the time, effort and money it took to gain it.  Last word is that sadly, President Obabma, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and State Superintendent Tony Evers do not publicly share my skepticism and have enshrined Value Added type things at the center of the Race to the Top, especially for teacher compensation (where the teacher contact numbers are smaller and the confidence interval larger).

Update on Fine Arts Task Force Recommendations (Report Only)

(See below for the finances) Not much here, some incremental progress on items identified for incremental progress.  The two big things that were part of this Task Force’s ask were better and more remunerative  community partnerships and a long range commitment for district funding.  A little on the partnerships here, nothing  much on h0w remunerative they are and the long term local district funding commitment ain’t gonna happen as long as state aid keeps getting slashed and Wisconsin’s broken school finance system isn’t fixed.  Insert obligatory Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools and Penny for Kids links.

Summer School Report and Recommendations.

Looks like some good work done in the past will continue with some tweaking.  The minority and low income percentages are astounding.  There is certainly a need there, but it should be recognized that recommendations to participate in the remediation programs come very late in the year when many non-low income families have already placed deposits for other activities.  One interesting note is that last Summer’s 8th to 9th grade transition program did not happen due to lack of enrollment.

Usage of the Infinite Campus Electronic Student Information System.

My take away is that use of this potentially valuable communication tool varies widely from teacher to teacher and by school, isn’t anywhere near as high as it could be and declined with the Middle School shift to Standards Based reporting.  Parent use is also relatively small and there are big racial and income related disparities in use.  Same is true (if less so) with student users.

Evaluation of District Reading Programs.

This is in response to the discussion that occurred with the Reading Recovery Report.   Looks generally fine, but I question hiring the Hanover Research Council to do a preliminary glorified literature/research  review (unless we are already a member in which case we’ve already paid for it, there is no cost listed) and would like to see a target price range for the actual evaluation at this point, rather than when the RFP is being drafted.

I also think it is again appropriate to post these 1949  words from the Madison Superintendent Phillip Falk

There is no one “best” method of teaching children to read. Almost every known method, technique, or device is utilized as needed – experience, phonetic, word, sentence, story, meaningful drill or practice – not in isolation, but in an approach to a particular problem of a particular group or of a particular child.

Five-Year Education for Employment Report.

This plan affirms the commitment to and the actions of school communities to: prepare elementary and secondary students for future employment; ensure technological literacy; promote lifelong learning; encourage good citizenship; advance collaboration among business, industry, labor, post-secondary schools, and school districts; and establish a role for public schools in the workforce and economic development of Wisconsin.

This is required by the state every 5 years.

Consent Items.

The only thing of interest here is the Evaluation of Learning Materials Committee purchasing adoptions.  One of these days I have to figure out the allocations and cycle on this because every time I review one of these it seems like one school is getting huge amounts and the others very little.  There may be equity related issues with these purchase patterns.  This week’s big buyer is Hawthorne.  It is also interesting to see what is being purchased.  The highlight this time is 2 “Feels Real Baby Dolls” for Falk.

On to the Planning and Development Committee.

MMSD Strategic Plan Mid-Year Report.

Some progress.  I like the Core Measures, especially the attention given to the demographics of students in advanced programs.  I also worry that the community appears to no longer be involved and all the work is being done by staff.  This leads directly to my continuing dissatisfaction with the Community Engagement measures (I have been told by an administrator that they see a need to improve these also).  It doesn’t look there will be much budget guidance this year from the Strategic Plan process, except in the most abstract ways.

La Follette Area Schools Long Range Planning Recommendations to address the Facility/Enrollment and Programmatic Needs of these Schools.

With previous similar work there have been open, public processes with multiple options laid out for all to consider.  This group has been meeting since November and this is the first time I’ve seen anything; what I’ve seeing isn’t much.  Combined with the disappearance of the community from the Strategic Planning work  it makes me wonder how much of Superintendent Dan Nerad’s talk of transparency and community involvement is just lip service.  Some recent things (like the meeting notices mentioned at the top) are a good sign, but the record in whole isn’t very good.

I should note that “Community Meetings” are mentioned in the document, but when they happened (before or after the appointment of the group) isn’t clear.

There is only minimal information about enrollment projections (more can be found here) next to nothing about transport costs and it appears that only one plan involving changing attendance areas is being considered at this point.  It is labeled “Plan 15,” so I assume there were others at some point.  You could say that it is early in the process (I think it is, but am not sure), but to me that means there should more information and more options, not less and fewer.

“Income Disparity Among the Schools” is one of the three “Issues to Address” in the charge, but neither Plan 15 nor anything else in this document seems to address this issue.  Here is the analysis of Plan 15 (there are no analyses for the other “options”:

Note that under this option income disparity is in some ways worse.  Not responsive to the charge at all.

For earlier posts on the need for proactive policies on socio-economic diversity see here, here,  and here and this not on AMPS, but linked in an post here.  A brief summation of my position is that overwhelming research shows that poor children do better in schools where the percentage in poverty is neither too high nor too low and that an essential part of the mission of public education is bringing people together.

Proposal for Naming Book Room at Stephens Elementary School under Board Policy 6701.

It sounds like Angie Zimmerman was well deserving of this honor.

Attachment of Three Parcels of Property located off of Sugar Maple Lane to the MMSD under Wis. Stat. §117.13.

From Middleton-Cross Plains, near Olsen School.

Two Committees down, one to go.  Much done, much left to do.  Put yourself in the place of a Board Member and think about how productive you would be for the remaining work.

Time for the Operational Support Committee.

2010-11 Projected Budget Gap, Tax Impact, and Efficiencies to Address the Gap and a later agenda item 2010-2011 MMSD Budget Development Timeline and Process (these are separated on the agenda because the latter is an “action item” and the former is not).

The big change with the Timeline is that the Preliminary Budget and statutorily required Public Hearing are pushed to July.  I can certainly see some advantages with this, give all the state uncertainties and the fact that the old timeline put new Board members right into their most difficult tasks.  I do worry that July is not a good time for public attention or involvement.  Perhaps countering that is another good sign that the administration is getting more real about public engagement, throughout March and April there are Public Hearings scheduled.

The Projections document is confusing.  It references a financial forecast prepared with PMA, but no copy of that is included.  It promises departmentally identified efficiencies, but most are listed as TBA.  In the title the “Tax Impact” is metioned, but there is no real information about the tax impact, only a promise to provide information about the “tax impact” of the “budget gap….no later than Monday’s Board of Education Committee Meeting.”

The problem with this is that most of the tax impact is not due to the “budget gap” but the lack of state support.   To put it another way, the budget gap is one symptom of a broken state finance system that requires most districts to find some combination of cuts and efficiencies each and every year; the tax impact is another symptom of this broken system that has been aggravated by the cuts in state support.

Insert obligatory Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools and Penny for Kids links along with discretionary School Finance Network link.

What is here is the first estimate of the size of cuts and efficiencies needed:  $2,825,693.  Not chicken change, but it could be worse.  On the tax impact, I’m hearing that if MMSD taxes to the max it could mean over $300 and perhaps as much as $400 more  for the average home owner.  That’s what happens when state aid is cut by 15%.

Here are those links again: Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, Penny for Kids, School Finance Network and the AMPS “Take Action” page.

I also don’t see any real discussion of how the Fund Balances might be used in this budgeting.  Back in October, the discussion and development of a Fund Balance Policy was promised for January 2010 and it has not happened (more on this here).  This leads directly to the next items.

Structuring the borrowing of funds in connection with the refinancing of the district’s WRS unfunded pension liability and, potentially, to assist with funding the implementation of Four-Year-Old Kindergarten and Authorizing the Assistant Superintendent of Business Services, on behalf of the Board, to grant written permission to allow Robert W. Baird & Co. to both: (1) serve as financial advisor to the District in connection with district borrowing via notes, bonds, or other obligations; and (2) submit competitive bids seeking to purchase such notes, bonds, or other obligations, with said authority to expire on the earlier of the date of future Board action or June 30, 2011.

I’ll readily admit that I don’t understand the 4 year Old Kindergarten financing as well as a I’d like to.  I’ve also missed some of the presentations and discussions, so some of my questions and concerns may have already been raised and addressed.

Here is how I think it is supposed to work.  Because of the three year rolling average of student numbers that is used to determine the revenue limits, the first two years require substantial support from outside the regular revenue sources (or cuts elsewhere).  In Madison, the combination of the Community Plan and the high per pupil revenue limit lead to a projected future where 4K generates more in the way of revenue potential than it uses (lots of assumptions about state revenue limit growth there and ultimate costs and the escalation of those costs, but that’s what they are saying).

Based on this the administration is recommending that the district use the WRS liability refinance to in effect borrow the start up costs and then pay them back from projected excess future revenue authority.  I want to start by saying  yes , in general the refinance of the WRS liability is a good idea but how the savings of that refinance should be used I am less clear on.  If the only choices are those in the document, the “Fully Combined” option seems best, but I’m not satisfied that these should be the only options.

The whole borrowing bothers me because borrowed money has to be paid back  (it may not technically be borrowing because it is being done as a refinance, but the reality is that using this for 4K means that debt payments in the future will be higher — unless I’ve read this all wrong).  For the 2009-10 budget, MMSD shifted almost $6 million in debt to future budgets.  This is a pattern I don’t like, especially at a time when the district Fund Balances are higher than they have been in years.  I would like to see the a full discussion of the costs and benefits of using the Fund Balances vs borrowing before this plan is approved.  That was supposed to happen, but it doesn’t look like it will.

I’m also not clear why — when we have a state system that does not provide resources for cost to continue budgets in most areas — we are not talking about using the projected 4K excess to limit future cuts in other programs.   If the Fund Balance were used, this would be possible.

I want to repeat that I’m not clear on much of this and acknowledge that my ideas about using the Fund Balances might not make financial sense, but it seems to me that those options should be on the table.

Proposal for a Welcome Center and Educational Credit Union Branch at La Follette High School.

I can see good things about this, but have three worries: 1)Doing this in one or two high schools doesn’t seem right — all or none; 2)We are giving a business access to our students; 3)It looks like it will cost the district about $100,000.  I would like to hear these issues raised.

It is recommended that the Board approve all three applications pursuant to the terms of the Administrators’ Retirement Plan.

Principals Howard Fried (Crestwood), Maty Hyde (Lindbergh) and Linda Kailin (Muir) along with a reminder that Asst. Sup Steve Hartley is also retiring.  I don’t know  the others but will miss Steve’s professionalism and friendliness.   I also worry about the district’s ability to fill senior positions, last I checked too many were still “interim.”

Consideration of approval of a one-year extension of Daniel Nerad’s employment contract as Superintendent of Schools as contemplated under Section 2.02 of the Contract, said extension to result in a new two-year contract commencing on July 1, 2010 and expiring on June 30, 2012.

In Wisconsin, administrators are limited to two-year contracts, which means rolling renewals.  After 18 months, I think Supt Nerad has more than earned a renewal; I’m not so sure about a raise at this time, the symbolism of  a freeze would send a good message at a time when family and district budgets are tight.

Approval of Bills.

Purchases and Contracts.

Playground sign, Cooperative Gymnastics and Hockey Teams, Server Upgrade and some items that deserve a little attention.

The allocations for the Desktop Instructional Technology Purchases (about $200,000) are not detailed in the posted materials.  Like all resource allocations there are equity implications and I would like to see these made part of the proposal and the discussion.

With the Scholastic System 44 Pilot Project we appear to be doing a new reading remediation in advance of  the study discussed above which is intended to guide future initiatives.  With the study pending, it seems wrong to commit to a new initiative.

Fine Arts Task Force budget amendment.

(See above for the Report) Some changes  from the original plans for the $100,000.  I do like the “Arts Equity Purchase” aspect (just two week’s ago I enjoyed a concert at my son’s school featuring instruments purchased by the PTO, other PTOs cannot afford things like that).  I’m not sure how this will sit with the Task Force members and would like to hear their thoughts (not that I’d necassirly agree with them, but good to hear).

Other Financial Transactions

Grants and donations and more evidence that grants and donations create inequities.  With that observation, a few words of praise for the Foundation for Madison Public Schools are in order.  That organization seeks to structure their work in a way that minimizes inequities.

Human Resource Transactions

New hires and shifts.

Whew, that was exhausting.  Again, think about the Board Members and the prep time they put in and the need to balance all these issues in one lengthy meeting.

For those who found something worth paying attention to here, attend or watch the meeting, drop the Board a note (board@madison.k12.wi.us) and remember that votes on “action items” will not occur until February 8.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, Best Practices, Budget, education, Equity, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | January 27, 2010 · 10:01 pm

Howard Zinn in the Car

Click image for Googel Books page.

Click image for Google Books page.

[I just got word that Howard Zinn died and am reposting this — TJM]

The Clash, “Know Your Rights” (click to listen or download)

Tom Robinson Band, “Better Decide Which Side You’re On” (click to listen or download)

A little side trip from the usual.

This evening I was at my local gas station.  I’ve had some interactions with the guy behind the counter before.  He’s probably in his late 20s, a white guy into “Positive Hip Hop” (we’ve talked about that before).  He wears some bling, has what looks like a prison tear tattoo by his eye, I think he said takes some classes at MATC.  I’m always glad to see him.

Tonight I walked in and saw — off to the side, behind the counter —  Naomi Wolf’s Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries.

I said, ” You are reading Noami Wolf?” and smiled.

He responded “I got Howard Zinn in the car,” smiling also.

We talked a bit about Zinn and the People’s History (purchase from Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative).  I told him I taught history.

You’d be amazed at how many peple bring up Zinn when I tell them I am a historian.  I can do the “critical reading” thing with Zinn and find things that should be better, but he has done so much good for so many peoples’ understanding of our nations history and present;  in turn most of those people have become better citizens because of what they learned.  Zinn is good, the People’s History is good.

This would be a better country if more people had Howard Zinn in the car.

We talked some more;  he told me about reading the Constitution with his 11 year old daughter who wants to be  a Constitutional lawyer.  He told me that the price he extracted from his daughter for recreational computer access this Summer was a five page paper on the Federal Reserve.

We talked more about the Constitution.  As I was walking out, I quoted “Know your rights.”

He answered “They are under attack.”

With the door closing I said “Always” and he flashed me a hand sign and a smile.

These days it is easy to get discouraged about politics, activism, education and so much else.  It happens to me all the time.  I wasn’t discouraged on my way home and haven’t been since.

I’m energized.  I know that my friend at the gas station is going to keep doing what he is doing and the world is a better place for it.  I’m energized to make sure that people like him and me have opportunities to come together to work for that better future.  Mostly I’m energized to keep trying make public education live up to all of its promises, for his daughter, my sons and all the rest.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under Best Practices, education, Equity, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Take Action, We Are Not Alone

by | January 24, 2010 · 11:15 pm

Honesty from a Department of Education Official — Policies Are “Harming the Education of Students”

Diogenes searching with his lamp.

From Caroline Grannan, Examiner.com a report on a radio appearance by Peter Cunningham, (assistant secretary of communications for the U.S. Department of Education), where he “readily agreed with the views of another program guest that overreliance on standardized testing is detrimental to students, and that “many” charter schools, a model being promoted as a solution for troubled schools, are not successful” (listen here).

Also on the program was Richard Rothstein of the Economic Policy Institute.  As Grannan reports:

Race to the Top, Rothstein charged, is “accentuating the harm that NCLB did.” NCLB’s emphasis on testing only for math and reading is unchanged in RTTT.

“A major consequence of No Child Left Behind that’s done major harm to American education is the narrowing of the curriculum,” Rothstein said. Sciences, history, social studies, music, the arts and physical education are neglected or abandoned as educators struggle to adhere to NCLB’s emphasis on math and reading, Rothstein explained, and “Race to the Top doesn’t change that.” Abandoning other subjects “does the most harm to disadvantaged students,” Rothstein added.

Moderator Warren Olney followed up Rothstein’s comments with the question to Cunningham: “Are standardized tests a good measure of teacher performance and ultimately of school performance?”

“No, they’re not,” Cunningham admitted bluntly. “Education has been corrupted. In addition to narrowing the curriculum by abandoning other topics, what this kind of system does is create incentives to game the system. We’re actually harming the education of students in this country.” He mentioned, without more specifics, the “hope” of reauthorizing NCLB to include testing in more subjects. The prospect of increasing testing is likely to raise more concerns, but the discussion didn’t pursue that issue.

On the subject of charter schools, Rothstein disputed the view promoted by both the Bush and Obama administrations that charters are a solution for troubled schools. “The research is pretty consistent,” he said. “Charter schools on average don’t have better student performance than regular schools.”

Rothstein got no argument from Cunningham, who responded, “We 100 percent agree with Mr. Rothstein that many of them are not good” and called for more accountability for charter schools. [emphases added].

These flashes of honesty are nice, but it is sad that administration official simply acknowledging what both informed  common sense and the weight of research say is cause for hope or cheer.

There really is no excuse for the misrepresentations we have come to see as the norm and the knowing pursuit of harmful policies should be criminal.

Wisconsin, like 40 other states is so desperate for money that it has thrown away common sense and hard won research-based knowledge to twist our laws in a manner that buys us a ticket to a lottery where the prize is money that must  be spent to a great degree on testing policies that do more harm than good.  What is wrong with these people?  What is wrong with us?

Thomas J. Mertz

2 Comments

Filed under "education finance", Arne Duncan, Best Practices, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, National News, No Child Left Behind, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | January 13, 2010 · 4:52 pm

(Essentially Nothing) Is This the Best They Can Do?

Billy Preston, “Nothing from Nothing” (click to listen or Download

I just read State Representative Kim Hixson’s press release on the passage by the Assembly Education Committee of Assembly Bill 150, creating a state level tax deduction of up to $500.00 for educators who purchase supplies for their students.  This is a fine idea, but really nothing to brag about.

The logic as I see it is,  A)Public support of education is on the decline (they know this because they passed the budgets and left the “formula” and these are the sources of the decline); B)To make up for the decline educators are reaching in their own pockets to buy supplies (at an average annual rate of $1,752 according to this); C) Therefore we will change the tax code to slightly ease the burden on teachers.

It get’s worse.  The legislation only applies if there isn’t a concurrent Federal deduction in place, like there has been in recent years and is expected to be in future years.  Thanks for nothing.

I find it disgusting that this is the best they have done to adequately fund education in Wisconsin.  Nothing.

Please, remind them they can do something.  The Penny for Kids campaign is the best thing going in this area.  Sign the petition, drop the legislators a note, write letter to your local paper.  Don’t do nothing.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | January 13, 2010 · 8:58 am

Our Children and Over $400 Million

Whoever wins the Madison Metropolitan School Board seat that James Howard and Tom Farley are contesting will be one of seven people who are responsible for our children and over $400 million of our tax money.   I believe that as of this writing AMPS is the only place (newspaper, website, television station, radio station…) that has reported Howard’s challenge to Farley’s nomination papers and Farley winning that challenge and a spot on the ballot.

I think that the position of School Board member is important and that developments like these are “news.”  I find it distressing that none of the professional media outlets seem to agree.

To give a fuller picture of local coverage it should be noted that Susan Troller covered earlier portions of this story in the Cap Times (here,  here and elsewhere); that Joe Tarr picked up on AMPS coverage for the Isthmus/Daily Page; and that the last story to appear in the Wisconsin State Journal declared uncontested races (this week, Gayle Worland of the WSJ has filed worthwhile pieces on 4K and the Badger Rock Charter School effort).

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under education, Elections, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, Uncategorized

by | December 7, 2009 · 4:55 pm

4K “Surplus” and other Board of Education Agenda Items (With Live Blogging)


Note: Because I was writing this as the meeting was going on, I did some live blogging.  I’ve taken out those portions of the post and linked them here.  They are mostly on the Reading Recovery report and proposal.  Some interesting things.  Worth reading or watching the video when it is up. — TJM

Please also note a correction/expansion in the Reading recovery section (12/08/200. 10:45 AM).

Monday, December 7 will be a very busy evening for the Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education.  Tonight, among other things they will consider 4 year old kindergarten implementation plans and costs; Reading Recovery matters; a 3% total package increase for District Administrators; and Strategic Plan Performance Objectives and Measures, Core Performance Measures and First Priority Action Steps (with costs).  Unless I am mistaken, these will be discussed in Committees tonight and then come back to the Board for action next Monday and some, like 4k even later.  That’s the new system.

4 year Old Kindergarten

Since the Wisconsin State Journal article is misleading, I’ll start with that one. The headline calls 4K a “Junior Mint” (bad pun) and the article includes this passage:

Under state funding rules, the Madison School District would not be fully reimbursed for its 4K expenses until the third year of the program, when the district would actually reap a surplus from the state.

So during its first year in Madison public schools, 4K would run an estimated deficit between $2.64 million and $3.87 million. By year three, however, the program would show a surplus of close to $4 million. (emphasis added)

The big problem with this framing is that the projected surplus is not in state funding but in revenue limit authority and last I checked well over 80% of MMSD’s revenue limit authority is collected via local property taxes.

It makes a big difference which stack the coins come from, such a big difference that cuts in the state share induced the Madison Board and many others to not use all of their authority this year.  They thought that property taxpayers couldn’t or wouldn’t stand for it.  As a result, MMSD will not be doing maintenance projects that had been previously funded via a voter approved referendum.

I don’t see any discussion of where the start up costs  will come from (maybe I missed it), but my guess is the district’s growing Fund Balance.

One thing I will say for the MMSD is that they used a conservative (and depressing) $200 per pupil annual revenue limit increase for their projections.

I don’t know enough about costs to judge those projections.  I’m a little skeptical of the surplus in general because almost across the board, across the state revenue limits do not keep up with cost-to-continue.  I do know that we should try to move 4k forward if we can afford it and these look like viable options.

Reading Recovery

There is a long and controversial history with the Reading Recovery remediation in Madison.  I’ve always been supportive of the program, but a bit skeptical of the claimed local “success” rate (if the reality was anywhere near what was being reported, then much good and even “bang for the buck” was happening).  The report linked above gives some better data, a lower “success” rate and some options for the future.  I’m very glad to see this level of analysis.  I haven’t had the time to do more than skim, but I’m more confident of the conclusions than I was previously.

With that in mind, I would tentatively support the third of the three options offered (the administration recommends the second).

I especially like the pre-K to 5 continuity and the inclusion aspects.

Correction/Expansion:  I confess to having only skimmed when I posted earlier.  Having looked closer I see I misunderstood option 3.  Now that I am clearer, I support option 2. This is the one that takes the Reading Recovery that is working — full implementation with wrap around supports and followup —  and puts it in the neediest schools and eliminates the partial and unsupported implementations.  I would prefer to expand the version that is working, but that is not an option before the Board (I misunderstood #3 to be that option).

Administrative Pay and Benefits

The proposal is for 1.48% pay increase and a 3% total package increase to cover (1.52%) increased benefit costs.  There is something unseemly about administrators getting a pay increase at a time when we aren’t taxing to the max, aren’t doing maintenance and will be looking at program cuts in the Spring.  I know most work hard and most do a good job…but…. times is tough all over and most of these people earn in the six figure range.

No cost estimate is included.  There should be.

My gut reaction is give them the benefit costs increase and not the salary.  Times is tough.

Strategic Plan

When I first read these I had some concerns about the possible lack of  disaggregated reporting called for.  The “Core Performance Measures” draft says “All measures related to students will be disaggregated…” but there is no similar statement for the non-performance (ie participation) measures in the big “Strategic Objectives Performance Measures” and in places specific disaggregations are identified (Special Ed for one).   I was given assurance that the intent is to have all of these disaggregated and that in some manner that will be made part of the public record at the meeting.

I’ve posted requests and discussed the issue on this blog, asked in public and private, as an individual and as an Equity Task Force member for disaggregated data on participation in advanced and other programs.  We can’t know how we are doing on removing barriers to educational opportunities without this information.  I do hope that after all these years we get it and on a regular basis.  Let’s see how bad the disproportionalities are and then see how the efforts to address these are working.

On a related note, I’ve been told that the required Equity Report information will be included in a broader January report.  I’m glad something is happening and appreciate those on and off the Board who have pushed.

This is very late for an annual report (it will be 21 months since the policy was enacted) and not ideal.  If the intent was to have at least one meeting  a year where the focus was on equity measures, placing this in a larger report will not achieve this goal.

I have some similar concerns with the “Core Performance Measures” and the lager (200 item) “Strategic Objectives Performance Measures.”  Ideally the Core items will give the “forest” and the larger ones will be for those of us who like to get lost in the trees.  There is no doubt in my mind that the items on that larger list will get very little attention from the Board…information overload.  This makes it crucial that the Core list include the right things.

I don’t think it does that.  Here is the list:

I see a lot of use of the WKCE, probably too much.  I also don’t see anything about how well we are doing changing district culture and school climate, increasing participation in anything but the ACT, direct evaluation of any Strategic Plan associated initiatives…This isn’t a whole lot different than what NCLB requires.  In fact some of these have the NCLB fiction of 100% proficiency as the goal.   Not good.

Take a look at some different things in the big list and think about what you’d like to see included.  Post in comments if you want.  I’d especially like to hear what members of the Strategic Plan Team.  I plan to try in the next week or so…time is tight so I might not get a chance to do much.  One idea is to look at the effects of the Individual Leaning Plans that will be piloted.

One more thought on the big list for now and then a a little more.

This one is personal.  On page 11 there are three items about Community Engagement.  All simply ask for number counts of community members at engagement sessions, on advisory groups…  There needs to be something about the quality of the experience.  Having attended too many engagement sessions and served on Task Force, I can tell you that these experiences can and do produce disengagement.  This needs to be addressed, the quality needs to be improved and counting numbers of participants won’t even put the problem on the radar.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Best Practices, Budget, Contracts, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized