FOCUS DC News Wire 11/1/11

Friends of Choice in Urban Schools (FOCUS) is now the DC Charter School Alliance!

Please visit www.dccharters.org to learn about our new organization and to see the latest news and information related to DC charter schools.

The FOCUS DC website is online to see historic information, but is not actively updated.

 

  • D.C. Math Scores Up, Reading Flat, on 2011 NAEP Report
  • ‘Voucher’ a Red-Flag Word for School-Choice Advocates
  • IB Critic Versus Me

 



D.C. Math Scores Up, Reading Flat, on 2011 NAEP Report

The Washington Post
By Bill Turque
November 1, 2011

The District’s fourth- and eighth-graders—public school and public charter students combined—achieved “significant increases ” in math scores this year on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), school system officials said this morning.

Reading scores, however, remain flat compared to 2009, the last time the test was administered. The federally-administered test, known as the “Nation’s Report Card,” is considered the gold standard of standardized exams.

Actual scores are due to be released at 11 a.m. In a statement, State Superintendent Hosanna Mahaley said results show that the District was one of only nine states to show improvement in fourth grade math scores and one of only 13 states with gains in eighth grade math.

D.C. is one of only four states that showed gains in math in both grades.

 


‘Voucher’ a Red-Flag Word for School-Choice Advocates

The Washington Times
By Ben Wolfgang
October 31, 2011

For both supporters and opponents of school vouchers, the very mention of the term stirs emotions and generates heated debate in the public education arena.

But that’s not stopping lawmakers in Ohio, Pennsylvania and elsewhere from proposing expanded voucher programs. They’re just calling them something else.

In Ohio, vouchers are being repackaged as “educational choice scholarships.” The Pennsylvania state Senate last week cleared legislation pushing “opportunity scholarships” as part of Gov. Tom Corbett’s education reform plan.

The rebranding of vouchers, specialists say, is intentional and designed to keep the public’s mind open.

“In some ways, it’s become a dirty word,” said Whitney Duff, director of legislative affairs at the National Association of Independent Schools. “It’s been used with a lot of negative connotations. A lot of folks have been trying to change the language.”

Voucher programs are operating in at least seven states, including Ohio, and several citywide systems such as Cleveland, Milwaukee, New Orleans and the District, according to the National School Boards Association.

Most focus only on low-income families or those with disabled children. Some limit vouchers to families in the worst-performing districts.

Legislators in Ohio are pushing a bill that would expand eligibility across the entire state, but would maintain income cutoff points.

Another bill in the Buckeye State would provide families with tax credits to send their children to private schools.

In the Keystone State, Mr. Corbett’s proposal would be phased in over time. It initially would affect only the poorest students in the worst 5 percent of school systems.

Within six years, the governor’s plan would apply to all low-income students in schools where at least 50 percent of students scored below average on standardized reading and math tests. The bill is awaiting a vote in the state House.

Voucher critics, such as federal Education Secretary Arne Duncan, have long painted such programs as the enemy of public education, an unfair scheme that diverts money from struggling districts and gives it to religious schools or other private institutions.

Mr. Duncan said recently that he “will never support school vouchers.” He said states and the nation as a whole already “underinvest” in public education, and vouchers would only compound that problem.

Supporters say a voucher program is a necessary component of school choice and the only way low- and middle-class families can get their children out of underperforming or dangerous public systems, particularly those in inner cities.

Beyond the philosophical debate is a public relations battle, and voucher backers say teachers unions and other groups have waged effective attacks.

Any proposal containing the V-word, they think, will face an uphill battle and may turn off parents, education leaders and legislators.

“The polling data suggests that people don’t respond as well” to the word “vouchers,” said Sarah Pechan, director of community programs for School Choice Ohio, a nonprofit school choice advocacy group.

“Families will equate the word ‘voucher’ with a stigma,” she said.

That stigma, Ms. Pechan said, often stops a voucher debate in its tracks, even before the public has had the opportunity to grasp the pros and cons of a specific proposal.

Opponents aren’t fooled by the name change. Thomas J. Gentzel, executive director of the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, said it’s clear to him and many others that Mr. Corbett’s plan is the same old voucher idea dressed up with a fancy new title.

“I don’t think the effort to rename it is having very much effect,” he told The Washington Times last week. “It’s an intentional effort to change the name to something … a bit softer. That’s part of [Mr. Corbett‘s] marketing. But the legislators understand that it’s a voucher program. The public is recognizing what vouchers are,” regardless of what they’re called.

IB Critic Versus Me
The Washington Post
By Jay Mathews
October 31, 2011

John Eppolito, father of four and former teacher, was active in a successful effort to keep the International Baccalaureate (IB) program out of the public schools of Incline Village, Nev. He asked to share what he learned from that battle. I said fine, as long as someone who knows IB at least as well as he does (me) critiqued his points.

By John Eppolito (with my comments in italics.)

An IB Diploma from any school is a great accomplishment, but at what cost? The problem with most school districts is that they do not share all aspects of IB.

1. IB will increase college costs for most graduates compared to their fellow AP students because AP is much more accepted for college credit than IB. Most colleges that do give credit for IB only give credit for the IB Higher Level classes (two-year courses).

Eppolito is right about the problem but wrong about its effect. Colleges are changing their policies toward IB, and those that still wrongly deny credit for some IB courses will often allow students to take higher tier courses at their campuses and rarely inflict greater costs.

2. For the IB Diploma over the course of two years students must take: three SL (Standard Level) classes, three HL two-year classes, the Theory of Knowledge (TOK) class, write the extended essay, complete 150 hours of community service, then obtain a minimum score on the final exams. Most colleges do not give credit for IB SL classes, the TOK class, or the extended essay.

So what? Are you in high school to collect college credit or learn? The extended essay is considered by students who have done it to be one of the most valuable exercises they did in high school. TOK is similarly praised as full of challenging discussions that prepare students for college.

3. When attempting to sell IB most districts distort the benefits of the program. The IB does not claim IB will improve student performance. The research (including one dissertation) shows IB will not improve student performance.

Several studies show correlation between taking IB and improved performance, including a 2011 study of the Chicago schools by Anna Rosefsky Saavedra.

4. The reasons most schools state for dropping IB are: 1) cost, 2) lack of student improvement with IB, 3) less flexible than AP, 4) lack of participation in IB classes, 5) lack of college credit for IB.

Very few schools drop IB, but Eppolito’s summary of the reasons why they do is accurate.

5) Some parents object to IB on religious grounds.

That is true, but for reasons that make little sense and which have never been upheld by any court as legitimate grounds for keeping IB out of public schools.

6) IB is a non-governmental organization (NGO) of United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) the United Nations (UN). IB and UNESCO work out of the same building in Switzerland. If you do not agree the UN’s ideology, it is probably best to avoid IB.

Eppolito weakens his case severely with this argument. The United States is a member of the UN. Yet Eppolito thinks IB association with the UN is some kind of taint. The one ideological point that all UN members seem to share is a belief in trying to work together for world peace. Even if you don’t agree with that, your children can probably benefit from IB courses. How about writing an extended essay on why the UN is wrong?

For the unedited 14-point version of this article with more information and active links please visit,

www.MyInclineVillage.com

John Eppolito

john@Jtahoe.com
 

Mailing Archive: