The Sacramento Bee Misinforms About School Budgets

 Marcos Bretón today in the BEE,  describes what he thinks are the facts of   the SCUSD budget. Most of the data  are cut and paste from prior articles he wrote. , The title is deceptive.  It is not factual.

SCUSD is not going broke,  SCUSD  has  a $93 million surplus at the end of this year,

And, they claim they will spend $100 million on books and supplies.

They  usually spend  $ 10 million.  

I don’t 

I don't know if he wrote the headline.

This is irresponsible reporting.   The Bee supports the School Board incumbents. But, at least they  should accurately report on  the budget. 

 

California itself has a major  problem of underfunding of schools. They have been doing so since 1988.  This is on the ballot as Prop. 15.  See the Prop 15 video below. http://choosingdemocracy.blogspot.com/2020/10/what-is-prop-15-explained.html

The Sacramento  funding crisis is not in teachers’ salaries, or health benefits.

California under funds its schools  and that produces large classes- the largest in the nation. We have few counselors and  almost no school nurses. Lets talk about the real issue of California school funding,   

New Sacramento Bee Reporter Accepts and Uses Deceptive Claims of Data on"Personalized Learning " in Response to Covid School Closings

Sac Bee Reporter accepts and uses deceptive data on “  Pesonalized  Learning” schools response to Covid.  
Welcome to Sacramento. 

In the Bee Article  “ Lawmakers, advocates say budget hurts top schools, “   published in the Bee on July 5,  new  Bee reporter Mackenzie Hawkins makes a series of claims   based upon a fundamental, and highly partisan claims.  Hawkins has been at the Bee for 2 months. Prior to this position she wrote for the Yale News, which may have been a student intern position.   Note, recognize that reporters often do not write the titles of pieces. 

Hawkins  says, 

“But under this year’s education budget, lawmakers and education advocates warn, the state will abandon its traditional allocation formula in favor of a system that harms the very schools — disproportionately, charter schools and personalized education programs — that have performed best under pandemic pressures.” [ no evidence  provided of the last phrase… that have performed best under pandemic pressures]

“California’s public schools usually receive money based on a combination of the prior year’s funding and the current year’s average daily attendance — a metric that reflects not the number of students enrolled, but rather how many students show up each day. 

Historically, this has meant that if a student switches schools from one year to the next, the money to fund their education moves with them. That will change under budget trailer bills AB 77 and SB 98, which allocate next year’s funding based on attendance through February 29 of this year.”
here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article243822982.html#storylink=cpy

This statement is inaccurate.  State funding of schools in California is based upon the Local Control Funding system, LCFF.    

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) was enacted in 2013. The LCFF was designed to be a more equitable system of funding, with the goal of providing additional funding for the highest needs students. These subgroups of students include English learners, low-income students, and foster children. If the student groups targeted for assistance make larger than a majority of enrollment, districts receive additional concentration money.

          Schools do not receive money sole  based upon Average Daily Attendance, as the reporter asserts.  They receive money based upon ADA and  the state also gives additional state funds to districts based on the number of low-income students, English learners, foster children and homeless youth they serve.

There is a significant difference between these two

Reporter Hawkins goes  on to say, 

“Proponents say the legislation preserves educational equity and ensures adequate funding in the most disadvantaged areas. But according to charter school advocates and a bipartisan group of lawmakers, turning an emergency measure into a permanent policy undermines school choice and forces top-performing schools to turn away students — often, those served poorly in traditional schools — looking for another option. “[There is no evidence for the  claimthat the funding would force top performing schools to turn away students because we do not know which are the top performing schools.]

“What the state is essentially proposing is we’re going to protect and essentially reward failing schools, and we’re going to punish schools that have proven that they’re performing well and successful in this COVID crisis,” Association of Personalized Learning Schools & Services (APLUS+) Director Jeff Rice, who represents 75 personalized education programs in California, told The Sacramento Bee. “While so many other public schools had to completely shut down their educational services, we kept them going without missing a heartbeat.”
 here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article243822982.html

Yes, that is their assertion.  They are correct that the schools stayed open.  But, there is no evidence that these were top performing schools, only that the schools were kept open.   The reporter stated this without analyzing the factual claim.   Yes, they kept the personalized learning schools going, but with no evaluation of their effectiveness.  No one knows if these on line connections were significant learning experiences,  or were they just on line efforts to cover up and/ or avoid social education?  We just do not know.  And,  no evidence that the "schools" are top performing.  The Personalized learning and Charter School folks  propose to change the allocation of funds and to stop the distribution based upon the current equity provisions of  LCFF.   That is, they would move money from current schools to their on line “ personalized” instruction.. what ever that is. 

The  writer makes the statement because advocates for charter schools, and the Charter School Development Center want readers to consider changes in  funding by ADA.  It is  more than unfortunate that  a Bee reporter  made this report without providing accurate, complete, and balanced coverage.   For coverage of LCFF  I recommend the news source EdSource.

The charter school advocates want to focus the discussion on shifting demographics caused by the Covid crisis and the closing of schools.  They want to only consider the changing enrollments.  However, that is intellectually dishonest.  The budget trailer bills were not drawn up based upon their assertion, they were drawn up based upon the agreed upon criteria of the LCFF that promote equity in funding.  

In the two months since the  California schools closed, a number of families have indeed moved their children out of public schools and into a network of charters.  They needed to “do something” with their children.  Many of these charters  had pre existing on line education programs.   These programs are substantially not evaluated.  The only measure being used is that parents moved their children. Moving children in a crisis does not prove that the schools are failing nor that on line personalized programs are “top schools”.    Now the corporate sector – with the Bee’s assistance- is seeking to gain funds by urging the legislature to  take  funds from public schools to fund these on line  coaching events.  

Here is a June research report on how the response to the virus is effecting K-12 schools.

https://www.shankerinstitute.org/event/coronavirus-education-spending

There isn’t much research on the effectiveness of on line education.  What research exists concentrates on Moocs type courses that are substantially different than the individualized on line connections promoted  by this effort to reallocate funds by the charter developers. 

Here is an example of research on on-line learning
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2017.00059/full

If any reader has evidence or research on the actual performance in this “personalized learning” in k-12 please share it.

Sacramento Bee Editorial Endorsement -Sleazy or Inept?

Sleazy or inept?

The Bee editorial today endorses Hillary Clinton OK . But, it uses out of context, edited  sound bites as if they were evidence which leads to bad history. That is too bad.

Yes, Sanders said positive things about the Sandinistas in Nicaragua in their first period when they  overthrew the U.S. backed Somoza dictatorship. They then established a mixed economy (not socialist) and  U.S. citizens joined them to teach  poor children to read and to write. 

So did I.

Later the Sandinistas were defeated after a brutal war with the U.S. financed Contra rebels with arms and training acquired illegally from Iran.  They lost an election and left power.

To use the out of context phrases selected to imply a conspiracy is the  kind of phony reporting found in the Republican media machine,  or the National Enquirer, not in responsible news papers.

The Bee editorial uses a similar out of context about Sanders support for Cuba.

Here is what he actually said,

“What that was about was saying that the United States was wrong to try to invade Cuba, that the United States was wrong trying to support people to overthrow the Nicaraguan government, that the United States was wrong trying to overthrow in 1954 the democratically elected government of Guatemala," Sanders said. There is video of him speaking highly of both Castro and Daniel Ortega's Sandinista movement in Nicaragua, where Sanders traveled in 1985.

BuzzFeed News posted the video, which originally aired on Channel 17/Town Meeting Television, in June 2015. Sanders remarked that people "forgot that [Castro] educated their kids, gave their kids healthcare, totally transformed the society.”

Sac City Unified to Reduce Class Sizes k-3

By Duane Campbell

The Sac City Unified district has decided to reduce class sizes in k-3 classes down to a maximum of 24 students for the fall of 2016,  a good decision and a long overdue decision according to an article by Loretta Kalb in the Tuesday Sacramento Bee .

Community groups such as the Communities Priorities Coalition, parents groups, and the teachers union (SCTA) have been pressuring the district to make this decision for over two years.

The district has received over $67 million in additional funding since 2013 as a result of the economy recovering from the Great Recession  and Prop. 30 ballot measure.   The district  receives some $237 million in revenues from the change in state policy known as the Local Control Funding ( LCFF) that requires that this revenue be spent on specific populations,  low income, English Learners, foster children, and Special Education.    This year the  funds have already been allocated to purposes other than class size reduction by the administration and the School Board  in spite of the community demands  to spend the funds on class size reduction.

Watching the Board, it is often difficult to tell who or what body is making decisions on this significant new  LCFF funding .

Class sizes in Sacramento grew significantly during the Great Recession and teachers were dismissed while  new teachers not hired. 

The welcome  decision to reduce k-12 class size back toward the national average  will require the hiring of some 100 new teachers.  SCUSD and other local districts will have difficulty recruiting credentialed teachers as the number of students studying to become teachers has fallen during the economic crisis.

Donald Trump is Dangerous to Democracy

Donald J. Trump called on Monday for the United States to bar all Muslims from entering the country until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on” after the terrorist attacks in San Bernardino, Calif., an extraordinary escalation of rhetoric aimed at voters’ fears about members of the Islamic faith.

A ban on Muslims – an unprecedented proposal by a leading American presidential candidate, and an idea more typically associated with hate groups – reflects a progression of mistrust that is rooted in ideology as much as politics.

Sacramento Bee Editorial Board.  Dec. 6, 2015.

It is supreme irony that Donald Trump’s campaign slogan is “Make America Great Again!” because his candidacy is surely making our nation worse, much worse. 

Nearly every week, he commits some new outrage against truth and decency. This travesty has gone on long enough. Voters have to put a stop to it, and that starts by acknowledging the uncomfortable truth: 

Trump is an accomplished demagogue and a clear and present danger to American democracy.

He kicked off his campaign in June by spouting hate against Mexican Americans, and has since moved on to denigrate or stereotype women, Muslims, the disabled and Jewish Americans. He cares not a whit if he’s found out in a lie – like his pernicious claim that “thousands” of Arabs in New Jersey cheered as the twin towers crumbled on Sept. 11. He’ll keep telling it, if he thinks it will win him support. 

The great uninformed- When policy wonks and editorial boards listen mostly to themselves

Headlines and articles in recent press reports raise an alarm about low voter turnout while ignoring some of the most obvious causes.

On Sunday, the Sacramento Bee editorial noted low voter turn out and insisted  on a need for change.  But, these establishment sources seek minor technical changes restricted by their own narrow views of the problem  rather than looking at more  substantive issues.

Young people, particularly students of color, have low levels of attachment to California and U.S.  civil society  messages to vote  in significant part because the government institution they encounter the most- the schools- ignore the students own history, cultures and experiences. Children and young adults need to see themselves in the curriculum. 

Policy wonks and the Bee Editorial Board   urge changing registration and voting systems because  I guess in their segregated white world, students of color are not seen, they are not important. This is, I grant, a little better than the civics curriculum promoted by the Koch brothers in the post below. 

When the 51 % of the California students who are Latino , and the 9 % who are Asian do not see themselves as part of  official history,  for many their sense of self is marginalized.   Marginalization negatively impacts their connections with school their success at school and the likelihood that they will vote as adults.   Marginalization  contributes to an up to  50% drop out rate for Latinos and some Asian students. 

The Story on SCUSD Superintendent that the Bee will not tell you.

Thank you Cosmo Garvin for writing what the Bee will not report on.

Cosmo Garvin. Sacramento News and Review. 9/11/2014. Page 15.

The Bee is clearly still sore about the loss of the previous superintendent, Jonathan Raymond. Raymond seemed to enjoy sticking it to teachers (and the occasional principal) and generally followed the playbook for corporate-ed reform.

He left quite suddenly during the last school year. The public reason was that he wanted his kids to be closer to their grandparents back in Boston. Surely a tough decision, to leave what he described as his “dream job.” But family comes first.

This summer, Raymond took a job as president of an education nonprofit called the Stuart Foundation—in San Francisco.

The Stuart Foundation is a major funder of something called the California Office to Reform Education. You may recall that Raymond committed Sac City schools to participate in the CORE, to help fund it, and to tie teacher evaluations to student test scores as part of the deal.

This was intensely controversial—and done without public input or any vote of the Sac City school board. The board only reversed Raymond’s decision after he had bailed, and after protests from teachers, parents and community groups.

It’s not so surprising that a plum job for Raymond was waiting on the other side of the revolving door. But what about the family thing?

Carol Ting, the Stuart Foundation’s chief operating officer, told Bites, “That was his plan. But then the recruiter came along and offered him his dream job.”

Dream job, huh? Anyway, Raymond slipped out the back door in a hurry, to take a dreamier job, or to escape whatever nightmares had cropped up here in Sacramento. Either way, even in his absence he was an important presence at the school-board-candidates forum held in Oak Park last Sunday.

Bee Editorial Board throws more bricks at Banda

The Bee Editorial Board on Sunday continued its impolite, nasty, commentary on the new Superintendent of  Schools in Sacramento- Jose Banda. http://www.sacbee.com/2014/08/31/6665241/editorial-banda-needs-to-hit-ground.html

First, they continue with their whining that when asked why he was returning to California he mentioned the pension advantages.  He said much more, but the Bee editors are fixated on this.  They can’t keep themselves from throwing stones.

Then we learn that the Bee’s editorial board “ sat down with Banda last week to give him an opportunity to disabuse us of the notion.” Well, isn’t that nice . The royalty offered the commoner a chance to talk.

Next they offer their own suggestions.

1.     “Meet with the mayor right away.”  They go on to discuss Johnson’s role and that of his wife- Michelle Rhee from the perspective of the Editorial Board – none of whom work in schools.

Why should he start here?  Banda has met with the Bee, one of the Johnson’s chief cheerleaders.

It is far more important that he meet with teachers, students and administrators, which he is doing.

Yes, he needs a strong start. 

And the Bee editorial board keeps throwing bricks.  I wonder what their motives are?

Welcome to Sacramento Superintendent José Banda

Welcome to Sacramento.  We hope that you can establish a positive working relationship with the Board, the community, and the teachers.  Developing a positive relationship and sustained, consistent leadership is required for school improvement.

We regret the prompt attacks on your character and your contract by the Sacramento Bee editorial board.  You see they were staunch advocates for the prior Superintendent Jonathan Raymond, a Broad Foundation assisted superintendent.  He left promptly without an explanation. It is unusual for the Bee to attack a new superintendent before he has an opportunity to make some decisions. 

Duane Campbell, Director.

Democracy and Education Institute

What the media avoids about the Vergara decision

Diane Ravitch.
http://dianeravitch.net/2014/06/11/were-the-vergara-trial-teachers-grossly-ineffective-no/

A victory for the corporate "reformers" in the Vergara v California case

California judge Rolf Treu ruled Tuesday  in the Vergara  v.California case that California teacher tenure laws deprive students of their right to an education that is guaranteed  under the state Constitution and violates their civil rights. The decision is a major defeat for teachers’ unions and will presumably lead to challenges of tenure laws in other states.  The ruling overturned five state statutes giving California teachers firing protections and rights to tenure and seniority.

The implementation of the ruling has been stayed while under appeal.

The Sacramento Bee editorial board and Bee columnists Marcos Breton and Dan Walters, along with their candidate Marc Tucker each applaud the court ruling. Note what they say in their columns. They applaud this defeat of the teachers unions, they do not deal with the critical issue of adequate school funding.

What do the  sides  agree upon?

It is clear that many students in California receive a substandard education and that failing schools are concentrated in poor and minority neighborhoods.   The judge cites the long history of  successful law suites Serrano V. Priest I, II. III, and more that mandated changes in state funding to provide equal funding.  There is also general agreement that teacher quality is a significant factor in improving education.

The problem is that the remedy of the corporate “reformers”  and of  the court does not resolve the basic issues.  It deals with teacher placement, tenure, and freedom of speech, not the adequate funding of schools.   It may at most respond to the 1-3 % of  poor teachers in the classrooms.

California is one of a number of states that require  in their state constitution  that the state provide  adequate public education.  This has been reaffirmed numerous times in Serrano v. Priest 1,2,, 3 and cited again in this court ruling.  

Resistance to the Common Core Mounts

While the Sacramento Bee editorial board and several corporate education "reformers" castigate local teachers for opposing the imposed Core Waiver ( see below)..

The editorial board and the partisan advocates presenting themselves as leaders ignore the fact that Common Core is encountering more resistance around the country.  It is not a local, personal agenda. Nor is it just a union campaign.  There are substantive reasons why teachers oppose the imposed Core Waiver, and many oppose Common Core until weaknesses are remedied.

From Education Week.

Resistance to the Common Core Mounts

Critics span the political spectrum, from tea partyers to union leaders

By Andrew Ujifusa

After more than a year of high-profile and contentious debate over the Common Core State Standards in Indiana, Gov. Mike Pence signed legislation last month to formally reverse the state's adoption of the standards. The legislation set the state on course to replace those standards with ones "written by Hoosiers, for Hoosiers," the Republican governor proclaimed.

The same month, the Democratic-controlled New York Assembly approved a measure that would require a two-year delay in using assessments aligned with the common core for teacher and principal evaluations.

In some sense, the measures in Indiana and New York represent two dominant poles of the growing—and evolving—resistance to the standards. The common core has drawn criticism from both the political left and right, though much of it seems aimed not so much at what the standards say, but rather who drove their adoption or the tests and accountability policies connected with them.

Sacramento : end of the imposed Core Waiver

Don't believe what the Sacramento Bee Editorial Board says, 

SCTA, along with many community groups, has been consistently opposed to the NCLB waiver as submitted by our former Superintendent and the California Office to Reform Education with no true input from stakeholders.  While the waiver did bring some flexibility in how the district could spend supplemental education service funds, the cost of the waiver and some of the requirements established within the application were detrimental to our schools and the students they serve. The way the application process was handled by those involved was unacceptable to our members and the community, which is one of the reasons why we have steadfastly opposed the waiver and those behind it. We would like to thank the Black Parallel School Board, Hmong Innovating Politics, the Sacramento Coalition to Save Public Education, SEIU 1021 and the countless parents, community members and student advocates who have helped bring the waiver to light.  We believe that in working collaboratively with the district and the community, we can make many of the more positive initiatives contained within the application a reality without the loss of local control to the unelected California Office to Reform Education.

The Computer Canard and Testing in California Schools

Many California school districts are rushing to spend money to add computers and internet access to schools in order to prepare students to take on-line computer assessments next year.

According to Diane Lambert in the Sacramento Bee, of Feb.19,  “Sacramento-area school districts have spent millions of dollars in the past two years upgrading their broadband connections and buying computers and other technology so thousands of students can simultaneously take the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress, which will replace the former pencil-and-paper STAR test.

The computerized tests will measure how well students grasp the new Common Core standards, a set of national guidelines that California and 44 other states have embraced as the next big shift in teaching. “ Common Core  claims to stress  critical thinking, problem solving and the use of technology.”

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/19/6169465/new-computer-testing-boosts-technology.html
See update: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/22/6181489/public-eye-whats-the-best-equipment.html

Lets get real. Computers can and should be an important part of student learning, particularly above about grade 3.  But, buying massive amounts of technology in order to facilitate test taking- well that is another matter. The K-12 education software market in the U.S. reached 7.97 billion in 2011/2012.

The Paucity of Dan Walters' Commentary on School Issues

The column by Dan Walters in the Sacramento Bee entitled “California’s School Wars Heat Up” in the print edition for Dec.20, and “Powerful Factions Go to War Over Direction of California Schools,” http://www.sacbee.com/2013/12/20/6015661/dan-walters-powerful-factions.html in the on line version  seriously and deliberatively misinforms .  He frames the conflict between the School Establishment ( school administrators, elected officials, CTA]  vs. the “School Reformers”.   These are indeed two of the powerful factions, but not at all the complete story.

To understand the distortion lets see who these “reformers “  See the Democracy and Education Institute  https://sites.google.com/site/democracyandeducationorg

The cadre Walters’ calls reformers  are not reformers. These are a corporate financed  advocates and  some well financed opportunists. In most cases they do not work in schools, rather they work in lobbyist offices financed by the Waltons, the Gates, and others.   See here https://sites.google.com/site/democracyandeducationorg/Home/corporate-funded-reform

There is at least one additional group who Walters ignores- the social justice equity oriented based school reformers who have been working in schools for decades to  improve school opportunities for low income and minority children.

Why We March - Trayvon Martin

 In response to the Ginger Rutland’s article regarding the national call for “Justice For Trayvon Martin” vigil-- a few concerned community members did submit the following Op-Ed to the Bee. While the Sacramento Bee chose not to publish our Op-Ed letter we submitted July 29, 2013. Here’s our Op-Ed letter:

Why We March: Another View

On Saturday, July 20, 2013, hundreds of people met at the Robert Matsui Federal Court House in downtown Sacramento to protest the Zimmerman verdict. The participants reflected the diversity of the region; they were ethnically and culturally varied, young and old, and passionate about the issue bringing them together. They were also determined to keep the protest peaceful, and they succeeded.

Yet Ginger Rutland’s article of Tuesday, July 23, 2013, called for the public to stop protesting the Zimmerman verdict and channel that energy into mentoring a child. Yes, we should indeed continue mentoring and supporting our young people, and yes, we should acknowledge the myriad number of grassroots organizations and individuals in our region dedicated to working with youth. But end protests? Not yet.

Hoy Marchamos. Mañana Votamos

Challenging the Criminalization of

Immigrants in the Comprehensive

Immigration Reform Proposals:

A Human Rights Perspective.

Tues. April 16, 2013

11:00 Am. – 2 PM.

Redwood Room. University Union

CSU-Sacramento.

Free.

Sponsored by the Serna Center, DSA, The Progressive Alliance, LACLAA, Union Civica Primero de Mayo, Chican@Latin@ Faculty and Staff,  and others.

I do not know why this announcement has been showing up as blocked.

Information.  http://progressiveforum07.blogspot.com

This is a story the Sacramento Bee did not cover Thursday.  - The local connection.

Tens of thousands of immigrants and their allies marched Wednesday in a coordinated series of protest demanding that Congress approve new, comprehensive immigration reform for the 11 million immigrants currently living in the U.S.

Support rallies were held in cities and towns across the nation- including Sacramento.  In Sacramento Yvonne Walker, head of the California SEIU (see photo) , and Bill Camp of the Sacramento Central Labor Council , Phil Serna Sacramento County Supervisor  and local leaders held a rally at the Federal Building to insist on political action from Congress.

Note: the Bee does not cover items because they have laid off many of their reporters.