Comments on: Fact-checking Poizner and Whitman http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/ Analysis, opinion and ruminations on California education policy Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:57:59 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11766 CarolineSF Tue, 04 May 2010 19:21:10 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11766 Thank you for the dose of reality, Rob Manwaring -- and that's based on the sanitized version of the Education Sector report. Lead author (and Education Sector co-founder) Thomas Toch so objected to the alterations made against his will to his original version -- to make it less negative about the prospects for scaling up successful charter schools -- that he removed his name from the watered-down report. ... Debra Viadero's Education Week blog: "As hard-hitting as the findings seem to be, the report is at the center of a controversy over whether the final text—released by the Washington think tank on Nov. 24—was watered down. "The main author, Education Sector co-founder Thomas Toch, asked to have his name removed from the final product. It “didn’t fully reflect my sense of the current conditions or future prospects for CMOs,” he said in an interview. “Charter schools are an important addition to the public education landscape and the best CMOs have produced great results. ... But the CMO movement has created only a few hundred schools in a decade, and even with more funding it would be difficult for CMOs to expand much faster without compromising the quality of their schools.” " http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/12/03/14charter.h29.html Thank you for the dose of reality, Rob Manwaring — and that’s based on the sanitized version of the Education Sector report. Lead author (and Education Sector co-founder) Thomas Toch so objected to the alterations made against his will to his original version — to make it less negative about the prospects for scaling up successful charter schools — that he removed his name from the watered-down report. … Debra Viadero’s Education Week blog:

“As hard-hitting as the findings seem to be, the report is at the center of a controversy over whether the final text—released by the Washington think tank on Nov. 24—was watered down.

“The main author, Education Sector co-founder Thomas Toch, asked to have his name removed from the final product. It “didn’t fully reflect my sense of the current conditions or future prospects for CMOs,” he said in an interview. “Charter schools are an important addition to the public education landscape and the best CMOs have produced great results. … But the CMO movement has created only a few hundred schools in a decade, and even with more funding it would be difficult for CMOs to expand much faster without compromising the quality of their schools.” ”
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/12/03/14charter.h29.html

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Rob Manwaring http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11765 Rob Manwaring Tue, 04 May 2010 19:06:15 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11765 Like John, I am a fan of charter schools especially if there is effective oversight of them to ensure that less effective charter schools are either closed or overhauled. And, in California, charter schools have been able to achieve about the same results with less state funding. But, one of the biggest barriers to charter school growth in California is the extremely low funding levels that the state provides. Education Sector recently released a report on the scaling up the most effective charter schools in the country. http://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=1090702 The report documents the large private contributions that allow the rock stars of the charter world like Green Dot, KIPP, and Aspire to implement their programs. A quote from KIPP in the report - "There are staggering differences in funding in the places we work. It’s not possible to [run the KIPP program on public funding] everywhere we want to be." Unfortunately for the potential promise of charter schools, California is one of those places where state funding alone without huge private donations would allow the most successful charter schools to operate. Like John, I am a fan of charter schools especially if there is effective oversight of them to ensure that less effective charter schools are either closed or overhauled. And, in California, charter schools have been able to achieve about the same results with less state funding. But, one of the biggest barriers to charter school growth in California is the extremely low funding levels that the state provides. Education Sector recently released a report on the scaling up the most effective charter schools in the country.
http://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=1090702
The report documents the large private contributions that allow the rock stars of the charter world like Green Dot, KIPP, and Aspire to implement their programs. A quote from KIPP in the report –
“There are staggering differences in funding in the places we work. It’s not possible to [run the KIPP program on public funding] everywhere we want to be.” Unfortunately for the potential promise of charter schools, California is one of those places where state funding alone without huge private donations would allow the most successful charter schools to operate.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: David B. Cohen http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11763 David B. Cohen Tue, 04 May 2010 18:22:04 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11763 If the state report card system is one that requires the lowest performers (by any measure) to be the D/F schools, it's a terrible idea. If I give my students a test, should the lowest scoring students automatically earn a D or F? Furthermore, an EdSector report earlier this year found an example of two Florida high schools, one with an "A" and one with a "D" on the state report card, and the graduates of the D school were outperforming the graduates of the A school when the measure was college GPA and staying in college beyond freshman year. So, which is the better school? Business-minded reformers usually seem to propose ideas that will screw up schools, because we don't operate according the same market forces and principles as businesses. And yet, when I read business/management blogs (like Bob Sutton from Stanford, or a recent post from the WSJ), they talk about how to empower workers, provide autonomy, choices, flexibility, foster innovation, discard outmoded evaluation practices - all sorts of things that would help teachers. If we could have a little more support and encouragement and less in the way of teacher-bashing and schemes designed to punish schools and teachers, we might see better results. If the state report card system is one that requires the lowest performers (by any measure) to be the D/F schools, it’s a terrible idea. If I give my students a test, should the lowest scoring students automatically earn a D or F? Furthermore, an EdSector report earlier this year found an example of two Florida high schools, one with an “A” and one with a “D” on the state report card, and the graduates of the D school were outperforming the graduates of the A school when the measure was college GPA and staying in college beyond freshman year. So, which is the better school? Business-minded reformers usually seem to propose ideas that will screw up schools, because we don’t operate according the same market forces and principles as businesses. And yet, when I read business/management blogs (like Bob Sutton from Stanford, or a recent post from the WSJ), they talk about how to empower workers, provide autonomy, choices, flexibility, foster innovation, discard outmoded evaluation practices – all sorts of things that would help teachers. If we could have a little more support and encouragement and less in the way of teacher-bashing and schemes designed to punish schools and teachers, we might see better results.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: Paul Muench http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11751 Paul Muench Tue, 04 May 2010 16:23:57 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11751 Thank you for asking the Whitman campaign about the classroom spending claim. I asked them for a reference about a month or so ago and I also never got an answer. So they seem pretty consistent about not backing up that claim. Thank you for asking the Whitman campaign about the classroom spending claim. I asked them for a reference about a month or so ago and I also never got an answer. So they seem pretty consistent about not backing up that claim.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11744 CarolineSF Tue, 04 May 2010 15:12:57 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11744 Sorry -- artists-in-RESIDENCE. Sorry — artists-in-RESIDENCE.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: CarolineSF http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/05/04/fact-checking-poizner-and-whitman/comment-page-1/#comment-11743 CarolineSF Tue, 04 May 2010 15:01:38 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1980#comment-11743 I noted that a Chronicle story in the last couple of days (probably the one on the debate) said that Poizner had taught in a charter school, clearly referring to Mount Pleasant HS, which isn't a charter school. Unless an editor messed up the copy, even Carla Marinucci is confused. ... Whitman's claims about the % spent by districts on administrative costs seem oversimplified and ill-informed, aside from the questionable numbers she tossed out. For example, here in San Francisco Unified, these costs are counted as central office expenses in the budget: custodial/maintenance at all schools; security workers at all schools; encroachment of the school meal program on the General Fund, aka feeding kids; special education; and a huge number of arts programs taught by artists-in-residents (technically "consultants") and funded by the city based on a voter-approved initiative. I noted that a Chronicle story in the last couple of days (probably the one on the debate) said that Poizner had taught in a charter school, clearly referring to Mount Pleasant HS, which isn’t a charter school. Unless an editor messed up the copy, even Carla Marinucci is confused. … Whitman’s claims about the % spent by districts on administrative costs seem oversimplified and ill-informed, aside from the questionable numbers she tossed out. For example, here in San Francisco Unified, these costs are counted as central office expenses in the budget: custodial/maintenance at all schools; security workers at all schools; encroachment of the school meal program on the General Fund, aka feeding kids; special education; and a huge number of arts programs taught by artists-in-residents (technically “consultants”) and funded by the city based on a voter-approved initiative.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]>