On Gov. Snyder's Watch

For a number of reasons, I believe that Governor Snyder, while captivating the electorate in the 2010 race for governor, is an exceptionally weak leader and uses any means necessary (including skunkworks) to distract the electorate from the damage he's really doing to this state.

On his watch, almost 1 in 4 children in Michigan now lives in poverty. Child poverty rose to 24.4 percent in 2011, up from 23.1 percent in 2010 and 14.2 percent level in 2001. Michigan is in the worst third of the nation for child poverty. While he obviously wasn't in the statehouse when the decline began, he can point to none of his policies in lessening this burden. In fact, his only "anti-poverty" theme is to blame it on what he perceives (for political benefit) is a weak public education system. This not only indicates his lack of a moral platform for his leadership style but the very fact that he's lived such a shielded life from reality on the streets that he doesn't even know how to account for poverty.

I voted for Governor Snyder in 2010 because I like thousands in Michigan thought he could turn the state around. Well, he's accomplishing just that although primarily for the benefit of his corporate buddies.

In fact, he's so disconnected from the realities of poverty that he's content sitting at home, satisfied that someone else is working on "potential solutions" to the Buena Vista Schools disaster. Unfortunately, the kids are sitting at home, too. 

Incredibly weak leadership.

And for the record, he's lost my vote.

Michigan may withhold funding from schools that educate undocumented immigrants

The Michigan House of Representatives, under the leadership of Speaker Jase Bolger, has decided through its recently passed school aid budget that public schools will now be required to "police" whether or not an immigrant is here legally.

House Bill 4228 (H-1) includes Section 41 (see page 136) stating:

[SEC. 41. (1) FROM THE APPROPRIATION IN SECTION 11, THERE IS ALLOCATED AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,300,000.00 FOR 2013-2014 TO APPLICANT DISTRICTS AND INTERMEDIATE DISTRICTS OFFERING PROGRAMS OF INSTRUCTION FOR PUPILS OF LIMITED ENGLISH-SPEAKING ABILITY UNDER SECTION 1153 OF THE REVISED SCHOOL CODE, MCL 380.1153. SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (2), REIMBURSEMENT SHALL BE ON A PER-PUPIL BASIS AND SHALL BE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PUPILS OF LIMITED ENGLISH-SPEAKING ABILITY IN MEMBERSHIP ON THE PUPIL MEMBERSHIP COUNT DAY. FUNDS ALLOCATED UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE USED SOLELY FOR INSTRUCTION IN SPEAKING, READING, WRITING, OR COMPREHENSION OF ENGLISH. A PUPIL SHALL NOT BE COUNTED UNDER THIS SECTION OR INSTRUCTED IN A PROGRAM UNDER THIS SECTION FOR MORE THAN 3 YEARS. (2) A DISTRICT OR INTERMEDIATE DISTRICT SHALL NOT RECEIVE FUNDS UNDER THIS SECTION IF IT ALLOWS PUPILS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION WHO ARE NOT RESIDING IN THE UNITED STATES LEGALLY.] (emphasis added)

This in effect places local public school officials in the position of acting as INS agents to determine whether an immigrant is documented as a legal resident. To not do so would jeopardize funding. Interestingly, none of the other funds received by a school district would be effected by this new statute so what is the real purpose here and who actually is behind this? Should public school officials be acting as federal agents?

Lincoln on Reform

While President Lincoln was addressing another crisis of conscience when he wrote his message to Congress, his choice of words could certainly apply to the debate over education reform and equity of opportunity for children today:

"Will not the good people respond to a united, and earnest appeal from us? Can we, can they, by any other means, so certainly, or so speedily, assure these vital objects? We can succeed only by concert. It is not "can any of us imagine better?" but, "can we all do better?" The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise -- with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country."

Baker: The Perils of Economic Thinking about Human Behavior

There's a very high risk to taking the typical economist seriously when they advocate in favor of education reform policy, especially when it comes to the attempt to use economic carrots and sticks to motivate higher test scores.

Bruce D. Baker points out the fallacy fairly eloquently (in his typical style):

"...many...economists operate in a world where they can influence/control public policy and they too have an incentive in how they behave in this system. They are not impartial observers by any stretch of the imagination. Their goal is to use their economic research to shape public policy to their own advantage.

"Put simply, just because the average morally bankrupt economist might do pretty much anything for an extra buck (or a billion), doesn’t mean the average teacher, doctor, nurse, fireman or police officer would!"


The Perils of Economic Thinking about Human Behavior | School Finance 101

And the REAL magic formula is...

USA Today recently published it’s opinion on the “charter school debate” that would lead one to believe the solution to public education is more KIPP schools, or at least more charter schools like KIPP. The editors base their opinion not on any real causal data but on the disputed results of a “rigorous new study of KIPP.” (Charter school debate nears a promising new phase. April 9, 2013, p. 6A)

An opposing view penned by Kevin G. Welner, professor at the University of Colorado-Boulder and director of the National Education Policy Center, calls the KIPP study into question (Charters possess no magic formula, same edition), not because they haven’t experienced better test-based results (they have in most cases) but why they are getting those results. This was something conveniently left out of the USA Today opinion. What the editors did conclude was:

“There’s little doubt left that top-performing charters have introduced new educational models that have already achieved startling results in even the most difficult circumstances.” ~ USA Today

Welner contends the key ingredient lending itself to KIPP’s successful formula is “opportunities to learn.”  He disputes any conclusions pointing merely to better teaching methods or other “magic charter formula.” Instead, what KIPP and other successful charter schools have that financially struggling traditional public schools do not have is “more money.” Not money from the state legislature, since charter schools are usually funded through appropriations about the same as traditional public schools, but significant private funding from organizations often bent on destroying the public school system more than helping low-income and minority kids.

Welner points out that as recently as 2007, KIPP schools in eleven districts received an average of $5,760 more per pupil than the local districts, all from private funding. Another charter school in Houston brought in 25% more in per-pupil funding compared to other middle schools. As Welner so concisely puts it, “Whether a school is a charter or a neighborhood school, resources matter.”

Here’s what those additional funds provide for KIPP and other charters: “more time in schools while placing a reasonable limit on class size.” According to Welner:

• ·       KIPP schools provided 192 days of school each year
• ·       Students in KIPP schools attend school nine hours per day
• ·       In total, KIPP schools are able to provide 45% more learning time than conventional schools (equivalent to 4 additional months) 

“We should not be surprised when four extra months results in several additional months of test-score growth.” ~ Welner

The USA Today editors claim public schools can learn valuable lessons from KIPP and other successful charters. That’s very true. What we can learn is that students attending high-poverty, high-minority, high limited-English-speaking schools could benefit from the additional funding to provide more time for learning. As Welner concludes, “we see positive results when we make concentrated and sustained investments in our children.”

So when will Michigan’s political leaders finally see the real replicable lesson? According to the current House School Aid Appropriations Bill and Governor Snyder’s budget request, not anytime soon. Both perpetuate the $470 per-pupil cut in the foundation grant begun by Snyder in 2011-12, and the House bill adds to it by cutting the $52 per pupil “best practices” grant.

Michigan is one of the least fair and equitable states in the country when it comes to funding public education. For the time being, I don’t see that changing. After all, that doesn’t further profits for corporate-run schools nor does it satisfy the anti-public education crowd.