Surprise! Charters underfunded.

While it's a national study that did not include Utah statistics, the big picture is consistent with what we see in Utah. Charter school students receive less funding than students that attend establishment schools.

Do we value their education any less? Do we think it's okay to say to charter students, "Your family thinks you'll get a better education at a charter school, but we think that your education is worth less in that school than the one you were assigned to, so we're going to pay less for you"?

"That's just flat out unacceptable," said Kim Frank, director of policy and advocacy for the Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. "These kids are not second-class kids, and they shouldn't be treated as such."

Ousted school board member blames charter schools

Denis Morrill, a current member of the State Board of Education, was not able to get majority support from the board's candidate nominating committee, so he will not stand for reelection. He thinks that charter schools are to blame for his lack of majority support.

"Those are basically charter school people on that committee, and they don't like me," Morrill said, explaining that he has been critical of charter schools in the past because he doesn't believe the state can "afford two school systems." "Experience isn't what they want. What they want is someone they can control."

There is one representative of charter schools on the committee, five members from traditional education (including PTA and UEA members), and six members representing other industries, including transportation, mining, and technology. Uh, huh. It was the charter schools' fault. One vote on a twelve-member committee.

The process of having a committee select who the voters get to vote on is a joke, but not because an incumbent didn't make it through. He was selected by a flawed committee once before. If the committee process is flawed, and it is, then why should we feel any tie to the incumbents that the flawed system produced in the past?

Other big news: Kim Burningham, certainly the most visible and controversial (and politically problematic) member of the State Board barely got enough committee support to make the cut. The committee sends three names to the governor, and Burningham was tied for third in his district, falling behind the support of two other candidates in his district.

Now the names go to the governor, and he will select two candidates that can face the voters in November.

**Update**

He makes the same argument in a DNews piece.

Final word on Race to the Top

Last week, USOE sent an email with an outline of the state’s plan, a scope of work, and a memorandum of understanding for schools to submit to the state agreeing to receive funding and implement programs and work if the state’s application is funded. The email listed a “due date” of Wednesday, May 19. This email will attempt to explain the state’s goals in its application, what will be required of schools, and what funding and restrictions your school would receive through participation. I will explain why I recommend that you support the application and submit the MOU by the stated deadline.

HISTORY

As part of the federal stimulus package, the federal government appropriated over $4 billion for the Race to the Top program to incentivize and provide funding for targeted school improvement. The program was designed as a competition. States need to apply for funds, meet the programs criteria (much of which are very good) and then have their application approved by the US Department of Education. Utah applied in the first round but was eliminated. This application is for the second round.

After being denied, Utah decided to reapply. A few weeks ago, the state held meetings (to which schools were invited) about how, if at all, to revise the application. The results of those meetings are reflected in the attached documents and are explained below.

TIMELINE

The signed MOU is due back to Brenda Hales at USOE by Wednesday, March 19. “Due” is kind of an awkward word here, since there is not a requirement that your school sign and return the form at all. You can choose not to participate, at least officially. (Since this is a state plan, it is likely that all schools will be required to implement the reforms as they are adopted by the State Board or the Legislature, whether or not you “participate” in the program and receive the additional funding. State laws and rules will always bind public schools’ operations.)

After schools have submitted their agreements to participate, the state will submit its application to the US Dept of Education, which will review it along with all the other state applications. (In round one, only two applications were funded.) That process will take several months. If approved, funding under the program will flow to the state and to your school sometime during the 2011 school year. The funding is one-time, but is intended to fund the four-year implementation of the program.

REQUIREMENTS

According to the “What does it mean?” document, the requirements for schools will be:

1. Implement the LEA plan as identified in Exhibits I and II of this agreement;
2. Actively participate in all relevant convenings, communities of practice, or other practice-sharing events that are organized or sponsored by the State or by the U.S. Department of Education (“ED”);
3. Post to any website specified by the State or ED, in a timely manner, all non-proprietary products and lessons learned developed using funds associated with the Race to the Top grant;
4. Participate, as requested, in any evaluations of this grant conducted by the State or ED;
5. Be responsive to State or ED requests for information including on the status of the project, project implementation, outcomes, and any problems anticipated or encountered;
6. Participate in meetings and telephone conferences with the State to discuss (a) progress of the project, (b) potential dissemination of resulting non-proprietary products and lessons learned, (c) plans for subsequent years of the Race to the Top grant period, and (d) other matters related to the Race to the Top grant and associated plans.

The details of this are unknown to me—and they are unknown to the state at this point as well. Part of the application is that the specific details will be developed after the award is made by the state and participating LEAs. While the state is quite clear on its goals for the plan, the it doesn’t define all that schools will be required to do. For example, “actively participate in all relevant convenings” is a little vague. No one knows how many convenings there will be. No one yet knows how much of your developed lesson plans will need to be posted to a website, or how much information schools will need to send to the state. However, participating means that schools will have at least some voice in what those requirements are.

Given that, one would think that the requirements for such things would be reasonable based on the state’s application outline. Schools will be implementing and assisting in the development of new core curriculum standards, new teacher monitoring and measurement tools, and new data tracking systems. All of those things will be good to have and will help your school in achieving its mission according to its charter. I hope and believe that the requirements of participation in these programs will be beneficial, particularly if charters participate at a high level, since we have been in the business of creating and using such systems as long as we have existed.

I always worry that centralized direction of such things will serve to lessen the innovation and independence that benefit charters and are a necessary part of our success. Yet that is not a reason to avoid participating in improving the overall system. We should always be moving in the right direction, and while we do, argue and resist attempts or activities during that process that stifle innovation or independence. Charter school participation will help protect charter autonomy much more than if schools stay on the outside and cannot influence the process.

FUNDING

In the state’s first application charter schools were funded inequitably, such that a charter school’s base of funding was only 5% of a school district, even if the charter school had more students. That inequity has been addressed, and the funding provisions (which was the source of my heartburn in the first round) are fair. You can see preliminary allocations (which will adjust based on actual enrollment and other factors when the funding is distributed) on page 70 of the Outline document, first districts and then charters. The funding number listed is one-time money that will fund the four years of the program.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on what I know, and the change in funding allocations to treat charter schools more equitably, I recommend that charter schools support the state’s application. The goals of the program are laudable, and if implemented successfully, will improve the quality of student data, make such data more applicable to measure school and teacher success in relation to charters, and put public education policy more focused on out comes than processes. These would all be wonderful outcomes. If charters participate, we can help steer the processes, protect our ability to innovate, and use additional dollars to fund the parts of your charter that meet the goals of this Race to the Top program.

Clinton calls on New York to lift charter cap

From the New York Post:

Ratcheting up the pressure on Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, former President Bill Clinton yesterday urged the state Assembly to pass legislation to lift the cap on charter schools.

"Absolutely, I do," Clinton said when he asked whether he backed a charter-school expansion -- taking a rare position on a controversial state issue.

"And I don't think they should do it just because of the federal funding," Clinton said, referring to New York's plan to apply for up to $700 million in Race to the Top grants.

"I think it's the right thing to do," he said during a promotional soccer event in Harlem at which the former president announced he would serve as honorary chairman of the United States' bid to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup. "The [Assembly] should follow the Senate and lift the lid," Clinton said.

Board of Education vetting committee gets to work

Every election year Utah's faux-democratic process for "electing" members to the State Board of Education is on display.

Candidates file in March, not for a chance to face voters, but for a chance to face a committee of 12 governor-appointed individuals. That happened yesterday.\

The committee has the ability to simply decide that people can't face voters. They forward their recommendations on to the governor, who will choose two candidates that voters can decide between in November.

I'll have more to say on this when the committee's recommendations are out later in the week. In the meantime, I'll just say that the process stinks, but that critics of the process who cite the lack of incumbent "renewal" by the committee have exactly the wrong ideas about why.

UCAS student is UVU valedictorian

And that's not a former UCAS student.

The valedictorian of the Associate's degree program at UVU is a UCAS senior. Her 12th grade experience at UCAS has included taking advanced calculus "for fun" and put her in line as the top student among all University students graduating with an Associate's degree.

Congratulation to UCAS.

Mountainville student a finalist in Google contest

A 12-year-old student at Mountainville Academy in Alpine, as part of a Digital Arts class project, entered the Doodle 4 Google competition, and is now one of 40 national finalists. If he wins, he will win a $15,000 scholarship and the school will win a new computer lab. Wahoo!

We can help a local charter school make good by voting for this student's entry. Voting opens on May 18 at the above link.

Here is his entry:

Get on and vote for Utah and charter schools.

Where in the world did this come from?

In an otherwise fine piece about Canyons Superintendent David Doty, DNews reporter Amy Choate-Nielsen sneaks is this gem: "the whole idea of public ed is under attack by private schools, charter schools and politicians from all sides."

Huh? Is that Doty's point of view? The article implies so. If so, that's disappointing--that a public school superintendent is accusing charter schools of attacking "the whole idea of public ed." Does he (or the reporter) not understand that charters are public schools that operate as part of the public education system?

And who are these "politicians from all sides"? Can anyone reading this name any Utah politician who is attacking "the whole idea of public ed"?

I had always understood that Doty was an innovative super who supported the ideas that charters stand for in public education. I hope this one line isn't representative of his view of charters.

Subtly reminded

Oh, how I love it when my readers let me know that my tone in posts about USOE implies more than I mean. So, thanks.

My earlier post about the Race to the Top email that was sent yesterday was hard on USOE for not giving schools adequate time to rightfully consider whether or not they wanted to commit to four years of living under the strings that will come with RTTT money. (That tone is much nicer than I wrote earlier, when my excuse is that I was tired and late to a budget meeting.) Schools have only four school days to consider the impact of four years' worth of commitments and requirements before the acceptance back to the state is due.

My position is one of yearning for USOE to take on the task of selling its plan to the skeptical schools who didn't sign on last time. What changes were made in this draft that weren't in the first one? There were meetings held earlier this month while I was sunning (but not tanning, as I've heard plenty) in Mexico. Yet, most schools didn't attend those meetings and remain ignorant of what the changes are and what the impact of the program will be on a charter school. If the state wants schools' support, it should explain what the changes and impact are.

The state did in fact fix the unfair funding distribution formula that was my major problem with the earlier application. The ratio of funding charters to districts has nearly doubled in charters' favor in the new draft, yet that isn't mentioned in the USOE communication to schools. That's a selling point!

My simple message is that the state office is more likely to get the result it wants if it engages the schools in an effort to help them understand the benefits they receive and the commitments they make under the state's plan. I'm confident that if schools understand it, they'll sign onto it.

And now, I am ready to assist. USOE, let me know how I can help you get support from charters for a plan that will provide funding and improve data for students and educators?

Park City misleads about charters, gets corrected

The Park City School District has continued its misleading campaign against charter schools, in response to the introduction of a charter school option for families previously held captive to the district monopoly in Summit County.

On the district's home page they post a horrible FAQ about charter schools, in which they accuse charters of lacking accountability, wasting money, and that they "discriminate against certain students...particularly low income children."

After two weeks of not publishing a submitted response from UAPCS, the Park Record, which has also written against charters, finally allowed the truth about charters to reach their readers in Park City.

Signing off on Race to the Top

Charter schools and districts received a set of paperwork from the State this week, including a MOU stating support for the Race to the Top application. Brenda Hales's email says that proper signatures are "due" on May 19, giving schools insufficient time to consider whether they would like to participate or not.

What are the changes from the last (and rejected) application and this one? As the email came out only yesterday, I don't know yet. (Good news, though, the funding for charters and districts is much more equitable.)

Several schools didn't sign their support last time, and the state has done almost nothing that I can see to sell or explain why this application is deserving of support.

Schools are not obligated to sign the MOU, and the state needs to do a better job of explaining the benefits if they expect regulation-wary charters to lend their support and participate.

Sending out paperwork implying that there's no choice but to sign within four working days implies that the state is hiding the details and hopes schools will blindly follow it to the federal trough.

DIA Director and Business Manager resign

I'm sure the board members of Dual Immersion Academy aren't getting much sleep or time with their families. After first rejecting it, the board has now accepted their former Director's resignation, along with the business manager as upset parents accuse them of financial mismanagement and lack of communication.

"A management consulting team" is now in charge of day-to-day operations.

Good luck, DIA.

DNews reports on charter student funding gap

"I'm very excited to be working with something that recognizes that poor students shouldn't be funded less than students from wealthier districts," said Kim Frank, director of policy and advocacy for the Utah Association of Charter Schools. "A charter student shouldn't be funded less than a traditional student. … All students ought to be treated equally and have the opportunity to have a free education."

So begins an article in the DNews about the state's efforts to use charter schools to drive reform. Charters are the best way to try innovative new programs, like computer adaptive testing, driven from the state level, or to let educators and parents demonstrate the success of smaller-scale programs and approaches to education.

Racing to the Top--again

Utah has announced that it will submit an application for round two of the Race to the Top in an effort to get some of the billions of federal dollars available to schools.

For Utah's sake, I hope this time that they treat charters fairly. (Remember, last time the state snubbed charters by awarding a base of only five percent what districts of similar size were awarded for doing the same amount of work.)

For a catalog of previous RTTT posts, click here.

Protests at DIA

When I saw the headline, "Parents protest at Salt Lake charter school" I assumed that the protest was at Beehive, with parents picketing to keep their school open.

Nope, the protest was at Dual Immersion Academy, where there have been financial, er, irregularities, I guess. I don't know all the details, though the article does state that an internal audit will be complete next (now this) week.

My comments:

Brian Allen is right that a school lives or dies based on how it treats parents and students. While the board and the director of a school are agents of taxpayers through their authorizer, and not parents, if parents feel uninformed, underserved, or don't have their expectations met by the school, they will leave.

Effective school leadership therefore will spend its time carrying out the vision and program outlined in the charter consistent with laws and regulations, with an eye towards customer service, and will sell the parents on that vision. School leaders must set expectations for parents and students, and then deliver on what they said.

Disconnect between expectations and reality always lead to headaches. It is a hallmark of effective leadership to marry the two in the minds of those you lead.

Full of fish tacos

I spent a relaxing five days in Puerto Peñasco, Mexico and am just back.

It was lucky for a workaholic like me that the neighbor to our borrowed beach house had open WiFi, so I was able to stay up on the news. The Jazz swept by the Lakers. Dallas Braden (who is on my fantasy team!) pitches a perfect game. Protests at DIA. No majority winner in the UK elections.

Unfortunately, the connection was more of a warm than a hotspot, and I couldn't stay connected reliably enough to make any posts. But, back to the grind today.

How many inches is 6'10"?

Math students at Lincoln Academy can figure that out.

DNews highlights the Lincoln and their math teacher, former BYU basketball star and NBA player Fred Roberts.