Edu Commentary

Interesting article from the LAT about high school completion. Interesting NYT look at charter schools in Dayton, OH. And, in today’s Washington Post, Valerie Strauss takes a look at the 4th-grade as part of an ongoing series.

New data (pdf) from the Council of Great City Schools on urban schools. A lot of data in here, particularly performance and finance.

The Achievement Alliance, a pro-NCLB organization founded by the Ed Trust, National Council of La Raza, Just for the Kids/NCEA, and the Business Roundtable has a new newsletter you can sign up for. First one here, some interesting stuff, good unpacking of “adequate yearly progress”.

California school bans the Declaration of Independence! Those were the inflammatory headlines that sent the self-appointed defenders of America’s values and culture into high gear. Allegedly a teacher at Stevens Creek Elementary School had been restricted from teaching about the Declaration of Independence because of its religious content. As it turns out, and as Naomi Schaefer Riley relays in a must-read WSJ op-ed, the story is actually a lot more complicated. For starters the teacher in question apparently does have some problems with the boundaries of personal faith and the classroom and more importantly, no one was banned from teaching about the Declaration in the first place.

Parents at the school have set up a website to try to counter the feeding frenzy.

Thanks to reader MT.

No posting today, Edu Commentary has one of these and is chasing some of these rather than thinking about policy. But, on a related note, considering Republican environmental policies, why are Democrats having so much trouble getting the support of the hook and bullet crowd?

Back Monday.

Dana Scully, where are you when Edu Commentary needs you?* There is a massive conspiracy afoot in public education! Read about it if you dare!

Incidentally, what on earth was David Steiner talking about?

*Speaking strictly in a policy sense, of course.

New CEP report on NCLB implementation, they’ve been tracking some indicators since the law’s passage. Some spin but worth reading, interesting data throughout and no one else is taking this cut at it.

NYT here. Nutshell: Some achievement gap closing (which is of course the aim of the law) mentioned in passing…but then…enough about that! Let’s get back to all the carping, complaints and problems! This graf is a standout beauty:

Indeed, federal money for educating poor students has increased by several billion dollars in the last five years, the department’s records show. But while those dollars have grown, Mr. Jennings said, they have been increasingly focused on urban districts with high concentrations of poverty, leaving many others with dwindling shares of money.

Oh brother, where do you start? The Department’s records? Edu Commentary doesn’t trust the department’s “records” nor would most NYT readers….but wait, we can look in the annual congressional appropriations bills…this is not a dispute about differing records or accounts, it’s public record! And, for the record, funding for NCLB has increased by $8.9 billion since 2001 (that’s billion with a b) isn’t that more than “several”? Must be that inflation we’re hearing about, it’s impacting language, too. And, yes, federal education dollars are more targeted to urban and high poverty communities because of NCLB. But hello? Shouldn’t the money be targeted toward poor kids? The federal treasury is not a bottomless pit after all and overall it’s poor communities that have the most trouble raising state and local funds anyway. Shouldn’t liberals/progressives and Democrats be for such targeting? Oh wait, right, Bush is in office, gotta burn the village to save it…

Targeting Overkill (now with free bonus variables!):

Possible outcomes of the complaints about targeting: (a) More funding overall. Would be nice, probably not going to happen. (b) Loosening of targeting to spread the money around a little more and assuage the political angst. More likely if the yelping gets loud enough.

But, since option (b) is (1) a lot more likely with Bush in office and Republicans controlling the Hill and (2) not really good for poor kids, what’s the upside of constantly carping on it? With Democrats raising issues like this, who needs Republicans?

Jenny D. is hosting a carnival of edublogs at her site. A lot of interesting stuff.

It’s basically the kids’ fault, they’re poor so don’t expect too much…one in four reading okay…good enough! Of course no mention of other similar schools in the city that are doing much better. Ruins the narrative huh?

Or, just perhaps, something is wrong with much of the system that’s supposed to work on their behalf…

Edu Commentary goes sleuthing…

Has House Ed and Workforce Committee Chairman John Boehner lifted even a finger to investigate the Armstrong Williams incident? Didn’t he say at the time that he would?

Also, reliable tipsters say the Department of Education’s IG office is investigating the Follow The Leaders Project…could be nothing but stay tuned…apparently they’re examining how subcontractors were chosen…

The local teachers’ union in Buffalo has been fighting tooth and nail against public charter schools there. But at last they’ve found a choice they like…school uniforms. A principal there wants to institute a uniform policy; the head of the Buffalo teachers’ union is opposed.

Philip Rumore, president of the Buffalo Teachers Federation, said a mandatory uniform policy could be unfair to nearby residents who want to send their children to Highgate Heights but don’t agree with the dress code.

“I find that troubling,” he said. “I think people should have a choice.”

Supporters of public charter schools surely agree…