Education: February 2010 Archives

The administration says three new bills will improve our chances of winning Race to the Top funding. We politely disagree. Our press release:

Think Tank Critical of Proposed Race to the Top Legislation

 Administration's School Reform Bills Fail to Innovate Maine Schools

 

PORTLAND - A Portland-based think tank said today that school reform legislation proposed by the Baldacci administration isn't even close to the kind of bold innovation demanded by the U.S. Department of Education's multibillion-dollar Race to the Top grant program.

 

"There are few words to describe how disappointing these proposals are," said Stephen Bowen, who directs the Center for Education Excellence at The Maine Heritage Policy Center. "Other states have taken bold steps in response to President Obama's call for real education reform.  What the Baldacci administration has proposed is embarrassingly weak."

 

Under the guidelines of the Race to the Top grant, Maine could receive up to $70 million in federal funding to help foster educational innovation and reform. The grant program is competitive, however. "We have to show Washington that Maine is a prudent place to invest school reform dollars if we have any hope of winning a grant," said Bowen. "That means we need to be more ambitious, more creative, and more innovative than the states we're up against. The governor's proposals achieve none of these things."

 

The Baldacci administration has proposed three separate bills which it claims will make Maine more competitive for Race to the Top funding:

 

·         LD 1799 allows the use of student assessment data in teacher evaluations.  Rather than let local school districts develop new teacher evaluation systems of their own, the bill requires use of evaluation models developed by the state Department of Education. "This is yet another example of the administration's top-down approach to reform," said Bowen. "It is designed to put the bureaucrats in Augusta and their allies in the education establishment in the driver's seat."

 

·         LD 1800 allows Maine to adopt academic standards common with those of other states, a change designed to answer the Obama administration's call for national standards for academic achievement. "The bill changes only one line of state law and even that one line says the state 'may' adopt common standards, but does not require it," said Bowen. "This sends Washington a message that Maine lacks commitment to reform."

 

·         LD 1801 establishes what the administration calls "innovative schools."  The one page bill allows existing school districts to create "an innovative autonomous public school," but not a public charter school. "These supposedly autonomous schools will be run by the very same people who run our schools today and must abide by virtually all existing state law governing public schools.  This bill fails to create autonomous schools in any way," Bowen said.

 

According to the Baldacci administration, "innovative" schools must have "a system for accountability for student achievement that exceeds but is not in conflict with" the state's existing accountability system.  This means such schools must operate two assessment systems - one of their own and the state's testing program.  "It is also important to note that only those assessment systems related to student achievement get special consideration under the law. Teachers and administrators in such schools are no more accountable under this bill than they were before, and not nearly as accountable as they would be under a charter school model," Bowen explained.

 

While the so-called autonomous schools proposed in LD 1801 may have discretion with regard to things like staffing and school calendars, such changes must not conflict with state law.  "That means all the teachers in these schools must be certified just as they are today, despite a lack of evidence that teacher certification correlates with student achievement, and the same rules and regulations burdening schools today remain in place," said Bowen. "How can anyone look at this bill and say with a straight face that these schools will be autonomous or innovative?"

 

"Compared to other states' reforms, this package of legislation is unimaginably inadequate," said Bowen. "Michigan changed state law to increase the number of charter schools and strengthen accountability measures for persistently failing schools. California law was changed to provide school choice rights to parents with children in underperforming schools. Massachusetts adopted statutory changes that make it easier for school administrators to remove ineffective teachers. 39 states now have charter schools, yet the Baldacci administration thinks a one page bill allowing 'innovative schools' will win us a Race to the Top grant."

 

"The research Steve has done makes clear that the Obama administration set the school reform bar very high," said Tarren Bragdon, chief executive officer of the Maine Heritage Policy Center. "We were hopeful the governor would rise to the challenge, follow the lead of those states that have adopted meaningful reforms and advance a bold agenda to dramatically improve Maine's schools. Instead, he took orders from the education establishment and proposed one of the weakest school reform packages proposed in the country. This is a huge disappointment for Maine students, and a national embarrassment."
 
To read Bowen's recent paper on Maine's chances of winning a Race to the Top grant, CLICK HERE.

It won't be out officially until tomorrow, but readers of the blog can see our new education website today at www.greatschoolsforME.org.

As you'll see, tons of data and information on the site, access to data from greatschools.org, an interactive school choice map, new tools to study state and local education spending, and facts and information on school choice, charter schools, homeschooling and more.

Lots of work went into the site and we hope it becomes the go-to resource for Mainers interested in learning more about the state's schools. 

Enjoy this sneak peek!

This just in...the Education Committee has voted unanimously that they will NOT include a repeal of the budget validation process in LD 570, the bill the committee is working on.  Thanks to a tidal wave of calls and emails from all over the state, the committee decided to make a very public pronouncement this afternoon that they will NOT take away the right to a referendum vote on school budgets. They may tweak the process, so voters should remain vigilant, but, to their credit, the committee has said with one voice that budget validation will not be repealed in their omnibus bill.

Thanks to all of you who spoke out and let them hear your voice! You did it!

The two gentlemen who came before the committee earlier this morning to demand that school choice be put to a vote in Alna got a couple of things wrong...

Myth - Voters in Alna never got to vote on choice.
Fact - The plan that created the RSU of which Alna is a part specifically stipulates that families in that town are to retain choice. That plan was negotiated by school and municipal leaders from all of the towns in the RSU and was approved by voters there as well. They voted on school choice, alright, they voted to keep it.

Myth - That Alna has school choice creates added costs for the rest of the RSU.
Fact - Tuition to private schools is capped at the RSU rate, so whether a students goes to an RSU school or not, the rate is the same. There are no added costs other than what the RSU would spend on the student anyway.

Myth - The issue here is added costs for taxpayers in the RSU.
Fact - The issue here is that some folks who live in the RSU of which Alna is a part wish that Alna parents liked RSU schools more than they do. Rather than work to make their school better and win these students back, though, these folks want to solve the problem by simply creating a monopoly and taking choice away from parents in Alna.

For what it is worth, it does not appear that the Alna folks made much of an impression on the committee. Strong words in support of school choice from Sen. Schneider suggests that nothing very meaningful will be done by the committee with regard to school choice, which means, one can hope, that school choice, for a little while at least, is safe.

10:50 am: As I mentioned in an earlier post, folks opposed to school choice in Alna are working to put school choice to a vote there. Today, without any prior notice, the Education Committee is talking about school choice issues as part of their work session on LD 570, the omnibus bill the committee is developing to fix the school district consolidation law.

The gentleman who authored the letter I described in an earlier post is testifying RIGHT NOW in front of the committee, trying to convince them to allow a public vote on school choice in Alna.

Will the committee go against current state law, which preserves school choice in those towns that had it prior to consolidation, or give school choice opponents a tool to eliminate choicein Alna.

Stay tuned...

At 1pm today, the Education Committee will hold a work session on LD 570,the omnibus bill the committee is developing to "fix" the school district consolidation law:

Work Sessions

1:00 p.m. -

L.D. 570: An Act To Improve the Laws Governing the Consolidation of School Administrative Units

School District Reorganization Topics:

-         Withdraw from a Regional School Unit or an Alternative Organizational Structure

-         Dissolving a Regional School Unit or an Alternative Organizational Structure

-         Budget Adoption Procedures

That last agenda item, "budget adoption procedures," is where the committee will decide whether or not to include in LD 570 an elimination of the budget validation process, something committee chair Sen. Justin Alfond hinted at last week.

Word on the street is that most of the committee is content to leave budget validation alone, given that voters in most districts will be able to decide for themselves later this year whether to keep the controversial budget approval process or not. Under current law, the budget validation process itself is to go before voters every three years. This is the third year the process has been used in most districts.

SO, we will see later today what the committee has planned.  If budget validation is important to you, letting the committee know that today might not be a bad idea.