The outrageous nonsense in this Forbes article: Gapology 101

That Forbes would publish such outrageously false, borderline-racist nonsense is truly stunning.  The "reporting" here is so shoddy that I scarcely know where to begin, but here goes:

 

1) The article in many places fails to differentiate between closing the achievement gap and eliminating it ("the prime objective of educational policy is to eliminate the "achievement gap""; and "It is not possible to close the achievement gap.").  WHAT?!  The author of this article is making the leap that because it's impossible to ELIMINATE the gap in achievement between disadvantaged kids and better-off ones (which -- let's be realistic -- is, unfortunately, probably true, at least on a broad scale), that it's therefore impossible to CLOSE the gap!  On its face, that's a ludicrous logical leap, and in fact there's TONS of evidence that the achievement gap CAN be closed if poor kids get good teachers. 

 

Of course there's plenty of rhetoric surrounding NCLB, at teacher colleges, etc. about eliminating the achivement gap, but that's just setting an ambitious goal.  Everyone knows that the real goal is to CLOSE the gap materially.

 

2) The author confuses efforts to close the achivement gap with efforts to get more money spent on schools serving disadvantaged kids.  While one might think that these two efforts go hand in hand -- and, in fact, many organizations such as those mentioned in the article pursue both of these strategies -- they are NOT the same thing.  Simply because big increases in spending in certain cities (such as Kansas City) haven't resulted in higher student achievement or a closing of the achievement gap does NOT mean that one can conclude that it's impossible to close the gap.  The only thing I conclude is that pouring more money into a horribly broken system isn't likely to yield favorable results -- duh! -- BUT, fixing the broken system WILL likely yield favorable results and -- here's the key -- spending more money COMBINED with fixing the system is likely to produce the best results.

 

3) This is a bald-faced lie:

Absolutely nothing has happened to suggest that the federal government will succeed in this effort, and a few brave educators are beginning to say out loud that the cause is hopeless. William J. Mathis, writing in a recent issue of the Phi Delta Kappan, compares current plans for closing the gap between poor and middle-class kids to "an exercise in ritualistic magic."

In fact, while it's WAY too early to see much of an impact, the achievement gap IS closing (albeit very slightly) and I think there's a good argument that NCLB deserves much of the credit.  And quoting some random guy in some random publication (what is Phi Delta Kappan?!) to the contrary doesn't make the lie any less of a lie!

 

4) Without carefully defining what he means by "intelligence" and "cognitive ability", this paragraph is meaningless at best, racist at worst:

The reason that the gap will never be eliminated is that intelligence rises with socioeconomic status. Estimated correlations between social class and IQ range from 0.3 to 0.7 (on a scale where 0 means no connection and 1 describes two variables marching in lockstep). Those figures tell us that the poor and disadvantaged have less cognitive ability than those from higher-status families. Cognitive ability predicts scores on achievement tests.

Here's more of the same, making the same mistake:

learning is a joint venture. It also depends on what students are capable of assimilating. Everyone hits a brick wall at some point. With some students it may not happen until they are exposed to quantum mechanics. With others it happens with long division. Most students are well inside those two extremes, but the fact remains that disadvantaged students hit the wall earlier and learn less.

Of course rich kids have higher test scores than poor kids -- is that what the author is saying when he blithely talks about "intelligence" and "cognitive ability"?  Or is he saying that, at birth, kids born into wealth have more brain power/intellectual potential than kids born into poverty?  This is a much trickier assertion.  Yes, there's evidence for this as well, but it's actually quite remarkable how nature spreads out innate intelligence.  I can't tell you how many people I've met who were born into privilege and who've had every educational advantage, yet are complete dopes; and, conversely, how many people I've met who come from modest beginnings but are brilliant. 

 

But being brilliant and actually developing one's brain and achieving in life are, sadly, very different things.  This is the real tragedy of our current K-12 public school system -- overwhelming evidence shows that if you're poor or minority, you're likely to go to a dysfunctional school and -- here's the key -- be taught by mediocre or lousy teachers.  YET -- this is what really destroys the core underlying assertion in this article -- many studies show that if you give disadvantaged kids equally good teachers, who set equally high expectations, THEY ACHIEVE AT VIRTUALLY THE SAME LEVEL!!!!

 

Thus, rather than throwing up our hands and reaching the tragically wrong conclusion that "It is not possible to close the achievement gap," we should instead be asking, "How can we fix the current system so that EVERY child -- not just the privileged ones -- attends a consistently excellent school and is taught by consistently excellent teachers?"

 

(Here endeth this evening's rant! ;-)

-------------------

Gapology 101
Dan Seligman, 12.12.05

http://www.forbes.com/business/forbes/2005/1212/120.html

The latest preposterous idea in educationland is "closing the achievement gap." Educators everywhere are enlisting in the campaign and somehow not noticing that it can't possibly succeed.

Easily the strangest meeting I've attended this year was a symposium at Columbia University's Teachers College that took place on Oct. 24 and 25 before an audience of maybe 550 academics, foundation bureaucrats, toilers in think tanks, government officials and others who make a living off the education sector. The symposium was the kickoff event of an activist organization within the college called the Campaign for Educational Equity. (It calls itself the "action arm of the college.")

The equity theme here has two components. One is that the prime objective of educational policy is to eliminate the "achievement gap"--the gap between what's learned in school by disadvantaged kids and what's learned by middle- and upper-class kids. The other element is the notion that the U.S. would be much better off if only we devoted more resources to the education sector.

Pursuing the latter, Henry M. Levin, a professor of economics and education at Teachers College, argued in an op-ed piece in the New York Times appearing shortly after the symposium that immense gains are to be had from keeping underachievers in school. High school dropouts, he noted, earn $260,000 less over the course of their lives than do high school graduates. But it is wildly unrealistic to assume that the students who drop out would earn as much as those who graduate if only they had hung around for four years--an assumption ignoring tons of evidence that the dropouts are a population with trouble hanging on to jobs and have lower ability levels. The data tell us that the average dropout has an IQ that puts him at around the fifteenth percentile of those who graduate. Not exactly what employers are looking for.

The achievement-gap angle has been incorporated in the "mission statement" of the college, which now includes this declaration: "Teachers College is dedicated to promoting equity and excellence in education and overcoming the gap in … achievement between the most and least advantaged groups in this country." In his opening remarks at the symposium, TC President Arthur Levine proclaimed that he and his colleagues were now focusing all their resources on this one issue. Other speakers repeatedly referred to the gap as both a moral outrage and an economic disaster. It would have been hard to find a member of the audience not in total agreement with these preachings.

What's so strange about all this? Just one little thing: It is not possible to close the achievement gap. The mission statement is a summons to a fool's errand. The reason that the gap will never be eliminated is that intelligence rises with socioeconomic status. Estimated correlations between social class and IQ range from 0.3 to 0.7 (on a scale where 0 means no connection and 1 describes two variables marching in lockstep). Those figures tell us that the poor and disadvantaged have less cognitive ability than those from higher-status families. Cognitive ability predicts scores on achievement tests.

In partial defense of the 550 educrats murmuring approval of TC's mission statement, it must be said that they are not alone in failing to understand that the gap cannot be closed. Harvard, too, has an Achievement Gap Initiative, run by Ronald F. Ferguson of the Kennedy School of Government. (Ferguson was a speaker at the symposium.) Brown University's Annenberg Institute for School Reform is also committed to fighting the gap. And, of course, the federal No Child Left Behind program, which became law in 2001, claims to be doing likewise and on a much larger scale. The objective of the federal law, wildly unrealistic but carved in legislative stone, is to get all American children up to a "proficient" level in reading and math by 2014.

Absolutely nothing has happened to suggest that the federal government will succeed in this effort, and a few brave educators are beginning to say out loud that the cause is hopeless. William J. Mathis, writing in a recent issue of the Phi Delta Kappan, compares current plans for closing the gap between poor and middle-class kids to "an exercise in ritualistic magic."

It is perhaps natural for professional educators contemplating the gap to concentrate on teaching ability--on what schools can deliver--but learning is a joint venture. It also depends on what students are capable of assimilating. Everyone hits a brick wall at some point. With some students it may not happen until they are exposed to quantum mechanics. With others it happens with long division. Most students are well inside those two extremes, but the fact remains that disadvantaged students hit the wall earlier and learn less.

Which brings us to the ultimate mystery about the educational equity campaign. How could the leaders of Teachers College commit themselves to an enterprise guaranteed to fail? It turns out (surprise!) that they don't think it will fail. I asked President Levine how the achievement gap could be closed, given the evident gap in learning ability, and received a spirited reply that boiled down to the argument that IQ doesn't matter in achievement. He said in a telephone interview: "Your assumption that one group has higher learning ability than the other--there's no evidence that that's the case."

I also spoke with Michael Rebell, executive director of the Campaign for Educational Equity. He was recruited by Teachers College after mounting a monumental lawsuit that, after 12 years in the courts, has won a verdict (still being appealed by the state) providing for additional outlays of $5.6 billion for public education in New York City. Asked about the IQ dimension of the problem, Rebell was also dismissive: "I'm skeptical of all the attention going to that area."

Another TC symposium is scheduled for next fall.

Few Minorities Get Best High School Diplomas

These statistics are dreadful, any way you look at them:

According to city figures, even as overall graduation rates have risen, the 18 percent of students who received Regents diplomas in 2004 was down slightly from 18.2 percent in 2003.

 

Black and Hispanic students, Ms. Cahill acknowledged, not only graduated at lower rates but also, if they graduated, were less likely to earn Regents diplomas than their white counterparts. Of the 23,541 black students who should have graduated in 2004, 48.9 percent graduated on time, but only 9.4 percent earned Regents diplomas, while 36 percent of white students did.

Eva Moskowitz is absolutely right that "this is a monumental civil rights crisis"

----------------------

New York Times

November 30, 2005

Few Minorities Get Best High School Diplomas

By ELISSA GOOTMAN

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/30/education/30graduates.html?pagewanted=print

 

Also reported in:

New York Sun

http://www.nysun.com/article/23707

 

Fewer than one in 10 black or Hispanic students who enter New York City high schools graduate four years later with a coveted Regents diploma, education officials testified yesterday.

 

Speaking before the City Council Education Committee, Michele Cahill, Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein's senior counselor for education policy, acknowledged that the statistic was dismal, calling the city's graduation rate "perhaps the most urgent problem that the school system faces."

 

According to city figures, 54.3 percent of students graduated on time in 2004, the most recent year for which figures are available. But only 18 percent of the class of 2004 received Regents diplomas....

How To Fire an Inept Teacher

I found a clean copy of the brilliant chart that Common Good put together, How To Fire an Inept Teacher (http://cgood.org/burdenquestion-6.html), which documents how it is virtually impossible for fire ANY teacher (at least those governed under union contracts in most big cities anyway), regardless of whether he/she is burned out, incompetent, etc. (I've seen estimates from knowledgeable people that up to 30% of teachers in inner-city schools fall into this category).

Holy cow!  An editorial in the New York Times that (I hope you're sitting down) gives the teachers' union a well-deserved SMACK!  Hear, hear!

The No Child Left Behind program is the first in American history to require that states improve students' performance, and shrink the achievement gap between rich and poor students, in exchange for the billions of dollars they receive in federal aid.

The teachers' union tipped its hand when it argued in the lawsuit that its members were being stigmatized when the schools where they worked were found to be performing poorly under federal law. Why does it put so much emphasis on the teachers? What about the children whose lives are cast into permanent shadow when they have to attend dismal, nonperforming schools?

----------------------

November 29, 2005

A Victory for Education

A federal judge in Michigan took exactly the right action last week when he dismissed a transparent attempt by the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union, to sabotage the No Child Left Behind education act. The ruling validates Congress's right to require the states to administer tests and improve students' performance in exchange for federal education aid. Unfortunately, it will not put an end to the ongoing campaign to undermine the law, which seeks to hold teachers and administrators more closely accountable for how their schools perform.

Another lawsuit, by Connecticut, is still pending. Moreover, the N.E.A. is likely to appeal the decision in its own suit in an effort to continue its campaign of vilification against the law. The No Child Left Behind program is the first in American history to require that states improve students' performance, and shrink the achievement gap between rich and poor students, in exchange for the billions of dollars they receive in federal aid.

The teachers' union tipped its hand when it argued in the lawsuit that its members were being stigmatized when the schools where they worked were found to be performing poorly under federal law. Why does it put so much emphasis on the teachers? What about the children whose lives are cast into permanent shadow when they have to attend dismal, nonperforming schools?

The N.E.A. and the local school districts that joined the suit claimed that the federal government had illegally required the states and localities to spend their own money on testing. While it seems clear that test development is one of the better-financed parts of the law, improving school systems nationwide will certainly require more time, effort and money than the country has yet invested. But that should not be an excuse for doing nothing.

Texas School Lesson

I never thought I'd write these words, but good for this Texas court!

Most remarkable of all was the court's declaration that "more money does not guarantee better schools or more educated students."

Think about that one for a second. To our knowledge, this is the first time anywhere in the country that the judiciary has flatly rejected the core doctrine of the education establishment that more dollars equal better classroom performance. And it is potentially very good news for students, especially those from the poorest neighborhoods, because it shifts the policy emphasis from money to achievement. Better send the paramedics to check for heart failure at National Education Association headquarters.

Even more encouraging, the court endorsed more choices for parents and the state's 4.3 million school kids. It said flatly: "Public education could benefit from more competition."

This is so true.  More money is only part of the solution; genuine reform is needed as well.  Without it, the money is wasted:

Over the past two decades, courts in more than 30 states have intervened in education policy and ordered billions of dollars spent on schools in the name of boosting student performance and ensuring equitable financing. The result has been an avalanche of new spending on inner-city and rural schools, but, alas, not much measurable achievement by the kids who were supposed to be helped.

In one of the most notorious cases, in Kansas City, Missouri in the 1980s, a judge issued an edict requiring a $1 billion tax hike to help the failing inner-city schools. This raised expenditures to about $14,000 per student, or double the national average, but test scores continued to decline. Even the judge later admitted that he had blundered.

---------------------

Texas School Lesson
WSJ editorial, November 29, 2005; Page A18

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113323153685208752.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

The Texas Supreme Court did the expected last week and struck down the statewide property tax for funding public schools. But what was surprising and welcome was the Court's unanimous ruling that the Texas school system, which spends nearly $10,000 per student, satisfies the funding "adequacy" requirements of the state constitution. Most remarkable of all was the court's declaration that "more money does not guarantee better schools or more educated students."

Think about that one for a second. To our knowledge, this is the first time anywhere in the country that the judiciary has flatly rejected the core doctrine of the education establishment that more dollars equal better classroom performance. And it is potentially very good news for students, especially those from the poorest neighborhoods, because it shifts the policy emphasis from money to achievement. Better send the paramedics to check for heart failure at National Education Association headquarters.

Even more encouraging, the court endorsed more choices for parents and the state's 4.3 million school kids. It said flatly: "Public education could benefit from more competition." The Texas Public Policy Foundation, which provided much of the academic research for the court, looked at the Edgewood school district in San Antonio, where donors started a privately financed voucher program. The results indicate that not only have the kids with the vouchers benefited, but so have kids in the public schools that are now forced to compete for students.

We hope that courts and school boards across the country study the Texas decision -- including its comments on school financing...

 

The Day the Sea Came; UFT's Saddam Plan; UFT's response

1) A very compelling story in the New York Times Magazine on Sunday about the tsunami: http://www.nytimes.com/pages/magazine/index.html.  It traces in detail what happened to a half dozen survivors -- riveting stories and overall just a great piece of journalism.

 

2) Quite the pissing contest between the NY Post editorial page and the teacher's union.  Here's the Post:

the UFT's plan would force teachers to declare their preference in public. That would let pro-union teachers lean on their anti-union peers, creating just the kind of "intimidation" of which the union is always accusing management.

Then, unions will have a better shot at taking over more charter schools - even if many of the teachers oppose them.

This is not democracy. It's thuggery.

3) And here's the union's response on its blog at http://edwize.org/the-ny-posts-theatre-of-the-absurd:

The charge that ‘card check’ organizing is a “public election” is thus nonsensical. What the Post really objects to in ‘card check’ recognition is the opposite of what it claims: far from being ‘public,’ the identities of card-signing union supporters are not known to anti-union employers until the union is certified, when it is much harder to fire or intimidate them. How interesting that the Post would decry as “thuggery” procedures that provide the protection of secrecy to union supporters. The psychoanalysts will find a rich lode of material in that formulation.

-------------

UFT's Saddam Plan

NY Post Editorial

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/58049.htm

November 22, 2005 -- New York City's teachers union is launching a war on teachers.

No, not on its own members - on charter-school teachers who have escaped the union's clutches.

The United Federation of Teachers can't stand charter schools, which are publicly funded but privately run - and, by the way, seldom unionized.

So it's gunning to get even.

As the state nears the 100-school cap on charters (imposed at the union's behest), the UFT is offering a deal: It will support extra schools in the city if charter-school teachers are stripped of their right to a secret-ballot vote on unionizing.

The UFT would prefer the teachers' votes be counted in public - you know, Saddam Hussein-style - so that it'll know who its enemies are.

Pressure can then be brought to bear on those who don't want to . . . fall into line.

The union claims it's not attacking charter-school teachers, it's protecting them - because they're being prevented from unionizing.

Nonsense. True, teachers at charter schools aren't automatically represented by the UFT by law, as are teachers in traditional public schools. But charter-school principals aren't allowed to bar union organizers - or to retaliate against teachers trying to form a union.

If 51 percent of teachers call for a vote to unionize, the school's administration gets a chance to respond, then comes the secret ballot vote. And everyone lives with the outcome.

It's as easy as that.

What seems to irk the UFT is that so few charter-school teachers have chosen to organize under this system. Of 79 charters, the teachers at only five have chosen to unionize.

Why? Because charter-school teachers, by and large, chose to work at these innovative schools specifically to escape the poisonous, bureaucratic culture at union-driven traditional schools.

Indeed, they've given up job security, immunity from firing and cushy union-shaped schedules to work as pioneers at these startups. Their schools demand much of them, but also give much back in terms of turning kids' lives around.

But the UFT's plan would force teachers to declare their preference in public. That would let pro-union teachers lean on their anti-union peers, creating just the kind of "intimidation" of which the union is always accusing management.

Then, unions will have a better shot at taking over more charter schools - even if many of the teachers oppose them.

This is not democracy. It's thuggery.

The UFT's idea should be treated accordingly - that is, squelched.

--------------------

The NY Post’s Theatre of the absurd

Filed under: General — Leo Casey @ 6:20 pm

Only the editorial writers of the New York Post could stumble unintentionally into a script for the theatre of the absurd, as it did last week with this editorial, “UFT’s Saddam Plan.” According to the brilliant political minds who pen their editorial page prose, the UFT’s proposal for ‘card check’ union organizing in charter schools is tantamount to the authoritarian rule Saddam Hussein inflicted on Iraq for decades. That will certainly come as news to the states of Illinois and California, which have ‘card check’ organizing for all public employees, as well as the states of New York and New Jersey, which have ‘card check’ organizing for not-for-profit and private sector employees not covered by the NLRB. But it does not surprise us that the adolescent editorial staff of the Post finds the law of Iraq under Baathist rule indistinguishable from the law of California and New York under Republican governors.
 
Let us dispose of the issue of ‘card check’ union organizing, which we discussed recently at some length. The long and short of it is that the Post’s claim, “the UFT would prefer the teachers’ votes be counted in public — you know, Saddam Hussein-style — so that it’ll know who its enemies are,” is such a gross misrepresentation of what ‘card check’ recognition involves that it is simply impossible to believe that it is an error made in good faith.
 
All organizing, both traditional ballot and ‘card check’ certification, requires the union to demonstrate it has the support of teachers in the school by having them sign ‘authorization cards’ declaring their support. In traditional ballot organizing, the union must sign up a minimum of 30% of the teachers; after validating those cards, the labor board sets dates for a certification campaign and election. At the end of the campaign, the union must secure a majority of the ballots, and withstand legal challenges from the employer, in order to be certified as the collective bargaining representative. In card check organizing, the union must sign up a majority of the teachers outright, whereupon it is automatically certified as the collective bargaining representative.
 
With the growth of professional union-busting outfits, such as the infamous Jackson Lewis law firm which recently entered the New York Charter School arena, American unions have found that the traditional ballot certification provided antagonistic employers with many opportunities for thwarting the democratic will of employees to organize – from firing and otherwise intimidating the publicly identified union supporters who had signed cards to holding up the certification of a positive ballot in years of legal appeals. By contrast, ‘card check’ recognition allows the union to keep the identity of its supporters secret and protected, until their cards are actually counted and the union is certified – at which time the union is in a much better position to protect them. Moreover, since the ‘card check’ procedure is much simpler and more straightforward, it is considerably harder to tie up a positive union vote in the courts. For these reasons, unions are increasingly turning to ‘card check’ recognition in their organizing.
 
The charge that ‘card check’ organizing is a “public election” is thus nonsensical. What the Post really objects to in ‘card check’ recognition is the opposite of what it claims: far from being ‘public,’ the identities of card-signing union supporters are not known to anti-union employers until the union is certified, when it is much harder to fire or intimidate them. How interesting that the Post would decry as “thuggery” procedures that provide the protection of secrecy to union supporters. The psychoanalysts will find a rich lode of material in that formulation.
 
A few words must be dedicated to a Post rhetoric which compares the UFT to Saddam Hussein, and union organizing to bloody, totalitarian rule. Its very appearance is an inevitable by-product of the degeneration of the Post, a once great newspaper that has turned over its editorial page to historical and political illiterates. James Wechsler and Murray Kempton, two great warriors against totalitarianism who graced the editorial pages of the Post in its glory days, would have used their columns to condemn unequivocally the diminution of the struggle against authoritarian dictatorships with such juvenile antics.  One looks in vain for a similar voice of integrity today.
 
The real Saddam Hussein and the real Iraqi Baathists jailed, tortured and murdered Iraqi teacher unionists. Teacher unions have always thrived in democracies, and always been targeted as ‘enemies of the state’ by authoritarian regimes on the left and on the right, from Castro’s Cuba and Maoist China to Pinochet’s Chile and apartheid South Africa.
 
The real UFT and the real AFT have been the strongest supporters of democratic Iraqi and Kurdish teacher unions, and the most steadfast opponents of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime. Would that the US government had always been equally steadfast.
 
The real UFT and the real AFT have a long and proud history of opposition to Fascism and Communism, and have provided critical material aid to democratic unions, such as Poland’s Solidarnösc, struggling for the freedom of their peoples.
 
Only a newspaper with cavalier disregard for such matters of great democratic principle could publish “UFT’s Saddam Plan” on its editorial page.

Judge Tosses Out Education Lawsuit; Students Ace State Tests, but Earn D's From U.S.

1) Three cheers for this sensible decision!  Regardless of one's opinion on NCLB, this lawsuit was total crap from the very beginning.  Of course Congress has the right to attach some strings to the money it gives states -- it does this all the time in many areas.  This situation is dripping with irony, as it's usually Democrats who like broad Congressional mandates in areas like environmental protections, worker health and safety, anti-discrimination laws, etc., and Republicans who scream about Congressional overreaching and unfunded mandates...

 

In this case, NCLB's broad reach is an especially good thing, as our haphazard, decentralized education system is becoming an increasing liability.

 

What a load of complete nonsense this is:

Reg Weaver, president of the NEA, said his group would appeal.

''Parents in communities where school districts are financially strained were promised that this law would close the achievement gaps,'' he said. ''Instead, their tax dollars are being used to cover unpaid bills sent from Washington for costly regulations that do not help improve education.''

2) The idea that South Carolina feels pressure to dumb down its state tests is a disgrace.  When are we going to come to our senses and set national standards?!

G. Gage Kingsbury, director of research at the Northwest Evaluation Association, a nonprofit group that administers tests in 1,500 districts nationwide, said states that set their proficiency standards before No Child Left Behind became law had tended to set them high.

"The idea back then was that we needed to be competitive with nations like Hong Kong and Singapore," he said. "But our research shows that since N.C.L.B. took effect, states have set lower standards."

Not all have a low bar. In South Carolina, Missouri, Wyoming and Maine, state results tracked closely with the federal exam.

South Carolina is a state that set world-class standards, Mr. Kingsbury said. The math tests there are so difficult that only 23 percent of eighth graders scored at or above the proficiency level this year, compared with 30 percent on the federal math test. South Carolina officials now fear that such rigor is coming back to haunt them.

"We set very high standards for our tests, and unfortunately it's put us at a great disadvantage," said Inez M. Tenenbaum, the state superintendent of education. "We thought other states would be high-minded too, but we were mistaken."

South Carolina's tough exams make it harder for schools there to show the annual testing gains demanded by the federal law.

This year less than half of the state's 1,109 schools met the federal law's benchmark for the percentage of students showing proficiency, a challenge that will get tougher each year. As a result, legislators are pushing to lower the state's proficiency standard, Ms. Tenenbaum said, an idea she opposes.

Because of the discrepancies, several prominent educators are now calling for a system of national testing that counts, like those at the heart of educational systems in England, France and Japan.

-----------------

Judge Tosses Out Education Lawsuit

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: November 23, 2005

Filed at 7:06 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A judge threw out a lawsuit Wednesday that sought to block the No Child Left Behind law, President Bush's signature education policy. The National Education Association said it would appeal.

The NEA and school districts in three states had argued that schools should not have to comply with requirements that were not paid for by the federal government.

Chief U.S. District Judge Bernard A. Friedman, based in eastern Michigan, said, ''Congress has appropriated significant funding'' and has the power to require states to set educational standards in exchange for federal money.

The NEA, a union of 2.7 million members and often a political adversary of the administration, had filed the suit along with districts in Michigan, Vermont and Bush's home state of Texas, plus 10 NEA chapters in those states and Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah.

The school districts had argued that the law is costing them more than they are receiving in federal funding.

The law requires states to revise academic standards and develop tests to measure students' progress annually. If students fail to make progress, the law requires states to take action against school districts.

Reg Weaver, president of the NEA, said his group would appeal.

''Parents in communities where school districts are financially strained were promised that this law would close the achievement gaps,'' he said. ''Instead, their tax dollars are being used to cover unpaid bills sent from Washington for costly regulations that do not help improve education.''

The lawsuit alleged that there was a gap between federal funding and the cost of complying with the law. Illinois, for example, will spend $15.4 million annually to meet the law's requirements on curriculum and testing but will receive $13 million a year, the lawsuit said.

Friedman said that the law ''cannot reasonably be interpreted to prohibit Congress itself from offering federal funds on the condition that states and school districts comply with the many statutory requirements, such as devising and administering tests, improving test scores and training teachers.''

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said, ''This is a victory for children and parents all across the country. Chief Judge Friedman's decision validates our partnership with states to close the achievement gap, hold schools accountable and to ensure all students are reading and doing math at grade-level by 2014.''

------------------

Students Ace State Tests, but Earn D's From U.S.

By SAM DILLON

Published: November 26, 2005

New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/26/education/26tests.html?hp&ex=1133067600&en=0aeb43a99bc04144&ei=5094&partner=homepage

After Tennessee tested its eighth-grade students in math this year, state officials at a jubilant news conference called the results a "cause for celebration." Eighty-seven percent of students performed at or above the proficiency level.

But when the federal government made public the findings of its own tests last month, the results were startlingly different: only 21 percent of Tennessee's eighth graders were considered proficient in math.

Such discrepancies have intensified the national debate over testing and accountability, with some educators saying that numerous states have created easy exams to avoid the sanctions that President Bush's centerpiece education law, No Child Left Behind, imposes on consistently low-scoring schools.

A comparison of state test results against the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress, a federal test mandated by the No Child Left Behind law, shows that wide discrepancies between the state and federal findings were commonplace...

School's founder applauded; Largest Unrestricted K-12 Teaching Award Created by Kinders, KIPP

1) Kudos to Scott Shirey, head of KIPP Delta College Prep in Arkansas!

Shirey was the surprised recipient of a $25,000 Milken Family Foundation National Educator Award given annually to those who further excellence in education.

2) Kudos also to the Kinders for creating this award.

Houston philanthropists Rich and Nancy Kinder announced in September they have partnered with the Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) to create the Kinder Excellence in Teaching Award. The $100,000 unrestricted award is the largest ever to honor a teacher in the United States.

--------------------

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock, AR)

“School's founder applauded”

By Cynthia Howell

November 5, 2005

www.ardemgaz.com

Scott Shirey, the founding director of the acclaimed Knowledge Is Power Program: Delta College Preparatory Charter School in downtown Helena, does not take kindly to interruptions to the instructional time for the school's 230 pupils in grades five through eight.

On Friday, such an interruption caused him to turn red in the face and even blink back a tear or two, a staff member said, but it wasn't because of frustration or anger. Instead, Shirey was the surprised recipient of a $25,000 Milken Family Foundation National Educator Award given annually to those who further excellence in education.

"It's pretty humbling," Shirey said after the student assembly that was attended by Arkansas Commissioner of Education Ken James and first lady Janet Huckabee. "I think it will make me want to work harder. There's a lot of work still to be done." James called the award the Oscar of the teaching profession.

"The Milken National Educator Awards have become the largest national teacher recognition program in the United States," James said.

Shirey, the f irst charter school educator in Arkansas to receive the award, is one of about 100 teachers and school administrators in 48 states, and one of two in Arkansas, to be honored this year by the California-based Milken foundation. In all, 59 Arkansas educators have won awards totaling $1.47 million since 1991.

Lowell Milken created the awards program in 1985 to recognize the contributions that educators make to the nation's well-being. Recipients, who can't be nominated or apply for the honor, are announced in the fall and then given the awards in the spring at an Academy Awards-type gala in Los Angeles. Departments of education appoint an independent committee to recommend recipients who must work in grades kindergarten through 12. While private school teachers are eligible, the preponderance of the awards have gone to public school educators, a foundation spokesman said Friday.

The Milken awards carry no restrictions on how they can be spent.

Shirey said Friday that the money he receives will be reinvested in the school that serves pupils who are largely from low-income families in the Arkansas Delta.

"I have some promises to fulfill," he said. "I promised the kids a gym, a high school and some trips. It will go right back to the students." Shirey was 25 in 2002 when he completed training to start the Arkansas school through what was then the fledgling national Knowledge Is Power Program charter school system.

A charter school is a taxpayer-funded school that is exempted from some of the laws and rules that dictate the operation of traditional schools. As a result the schools can be experimental in their design. The Knowledge Is Power system with its emphasis on longer school days and strong discipline, started with a single school in Houston and has grown to 47 schools in low-income communities in 15 states and the District of Columbia.

Not only did Shirey, now 29, shepherd a charter school agreement with the Arkansas Board of Education, oversee the renovation of the Helena train depot into classrooms and select staff for the new school, he personally knocked on doors in the Helena area to recruit fifth-graders and then he taught them social studies while also conducting administrative duties.

Knowledge Is Power Program: Delta College Preparatory, which started with about 60 fifth-graders, has now expanded through the eighth grade. A ninth grade is planned for 2006. A capital campaign is starting to finance a separate high school building.

The students attend classes from 7:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. during the week and on two Saturdays a month and for a month in the summer. They adhere to a strict code of discipline, but they also are given 24-houra day phone access to their teachers and an annual outof-state field trip to places as far away as Washington, D.C., and Utah. The students wear uniform shirts that say "Work Hard," "Be Nice" and "There are no shortcuts." Average scores on standardized tests have improved as the Delta College Preparatory students moved through the grades at the school. Last year's seventh-graders scored at or above the state and national averages on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and above the state averages on the Arkansas Benchmark Exam. That same class had scored at only the 18th percentile on the Stanford Achievement Test as fifth-graders in 2002-03, meaning that 82 percent of their peers nationwide scored better on the test.

Arkansas lawmakers endorsed the Knowledge Is Power initiative earlier this year when they capped the number of charter schools in the state at 24 and said there can be only one campus per charter unless a proposed school is sponsored by the Knowledge Is Power Program. If that is the case, the applicant for a charter can petition for additional licenses to establish charter schools throughout the state.

The Delta College Preparatory charter school's parent organization applauded Shirey's Milken award.

"We at KIPP are thrilled for Scott, but not surprised," said Steve Mancini, a spokesman for the program's national organization. "This award is a tribute to the success Scott and his team of KIPP teachers have had in changing the trajectory of kids' lives in Helena." Shirey, a Massachusetts native, earned a bachelor's degree in history from Colby College in Waterville, Maine. He taught middle school in Baton Rouge as part of the national Teach for America program before going through training to start the charter school.

On Friday, Shirey said he wanted to deflect the attention from himself to his students.

"I just want everything to be focused on the kids," he said. "A lot of our initial students have been through a lot with other kids trying to pull them back to the regular schools and community members saying all the hard work is not worth it. We've got another four years before we get our first kids into college. We are going to need lots of support for the students and to keep this ball rolling. We're still young." Earlier this week, Amanda Linn, a visual arts teacher at Little Rock's Parkview Magnet High School, also was presented the Milken National Educator Award.

------------------

School Reform News

“Largest Unrestricted K-12 Teaching Award Created by Kinders, KIPP”

By Kate McGreevy

November 1, 2005

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17937

 

Houston philanthropists Rich and Nancy Kinder announced in September they have partnered with the Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) to create the Kinder Excellence in Teaching Award. The $100,000 unrestricted award is the largest ever to honor a teacher in the United States.

 

"Rich and Nancy Kinder's philanthropy and vision made this possible," said Steve Mancini, KIPP's director of public affairs. "Rich's mother, Edna, was a beloved teacher devoted to the profession. This award honors her commitment."

Honoring Demonstrated Results

The Kinder Award will be made in the summer of 2006, presented to a teacher who has demonstrated strong results with students--at least 50 percent of whom must qualify for the federal free- and reduced-price lunch program. Both public and private school teachers are eligible. The deadline for nominations is December 31.

Mancini emphasized nominees must have a proven track record in the classroom and "measurable results [in] improving student achievement."

 

KIPP is nationally regarded for its academic successes with previously underserved students. Its network of 45 public schools serves a population that is 90 percent minority, with roughly 75 percent qualifying for the free- and reduced-price lunch program.

 

KIPP spokeswoman Debbie Fine said the organization's partnership with the Kinders is not new, noting the couple has commended more than 30 KIPP teachers with $10,000 awards over the past four years.

 

"As an administrative partner in this award process, no KIPP teacher will be eligible this year," Fine clarified. "We believe that our role is indicative of our commitment to the larger debate surrounding teachers and the teaching profession."

Stoking Debate Over Salaries

Mancini said the award was created not simply to reward one teacher but also to bring attention to the connection between talented teachers, academic gains for students, and the value of teacher compensation.

 

"Teachers are the heart and soul of education in America," Mancini said. "We hope to send a message: If successful businessmen, lawyers, and doctors earn six-figure salaries, so should exemplary teachers. To close the achievement gap, we need great teachers."

 

Mancini explained KIPP co-founder Mike Feinberg has long hoped an award like this might help stimulate respect for the teaching profession. Ultimately, Mancini said, both the Kinders and KIPP envision a teaching profession where six-figure salaries are the norm, rather than the exception.

Expecting Thousands of Nominations

Hundreds of nominations already have been submitted, Mancini said, and he believes thousands more will come in before the deadline.

 

After that, a screening committee will select 20 finalists to be reviewed by a panel that includes the Kinders, Feinberg, two former KIPP teachers, and a handful of other education experts. The panel will then choose the award recipient.

John Kirtley's response

Good for John Kirtley!

------------------------

Dear Mr. Schultz,

In its November 19^th editorial “Voucher thief exploited loopholes that still exist”, the Palm Beach Post displayed a reckless disregard for facts. In the editorial (attached below), you state that  "Kirtley.....has opposed meaningful oversight" of the state’s scholarship programs. The Post has received numerous written correspondence, and has attended various recorded legislative committee hearings, where my position supporting strong accountability measures is clearly on the record.

I have publicly committed to legislation that requires the following:

• Students on scholarship must take a nationally recognized test such as the Stanford 9, and the scores must be reported to a research entity selected by the state
• Operators of scholarship funding organizations (SFOs)  and all personnel in private schools who come into contact with students must undergo Level 2 background checks
• New private schools must secure a surety bond for the first three years of existence
• Operators of SFOs must not have filed bankruptcy in the past seven years
• SFOs must verify the incomes of every single family every single year.
• SFOs must annually submit to the most demanding financial and compliance audits by an outside accounting firm

The legislation I have supported demands much more; these requirements are only the highlights.

In addition to supporting legislation requiring these measures, I have worked with four SFOs, which came together three years ago and created an association that voluntarily adopted strict accountability. This association has also urged the legislature to pass legislation and has worked hard to promote accountability and transparency. For example, the DOE now has real time access to the computer database of these SFOs.  Your reporters Kimberly Miller and Shirish Date have, at our invitation, visited offices of our organization and were offered the opportunity to examine our records—though the Post did not report on these visits.

As your newspaper is no doubt familiar with the facts of the Florida school choice debate and my role in them, it is obvious that your false assertion--which casts me in a very unfavorable and damaging light--was made with knowledge of the falsity of the assertion or with reckless disregard of that falsity.  I demand that the Post issue a retraction, and I am seeking legal counsel in this matter.

Sincerely,

John Kirtley

-------------------

Voucher thief exploited loopholes that still exist

Palm Beach Post Editorial

Saturday, November 19, 2005

James Isenhour didn't provide an education for Florida voucher students. A jury said so. But did Isenhour provide an education for Florida lawmakers and Gov. Bush?

Last week, the Ocala businessman was found guilty of stealing $268,125 from the state's corporate voucher program. Isenhour's Silver Archer Corp. got the money in 2003 from Michigan-based Pulte Homes, which made the contribution in exchange for a dollar-for-dollar break on taxes due in Florida. The money was supposed to pay private school tuition for low-income students. But Isenhour spent it on himself and his bankrupt correspondence school, called Cambridge Academy.

Isenhour's attorney argued that rules governing the corporate voucher program are so vague that no laws were broken. The defense also claims that the law doesn't impose any penalties for criminal violations. While it's true that the law is deficient, the most serious gaps are in oversight. Isenhour took $268,125 without providing a single voucher. The statute isn't vague enough to make that legal.

The statute and state policies are vague enough, however, that operators could accept corporate voucher money without actually providing a high-quality education. The state subjects schools to very little financial or academic accountability.

Isenhour was able to collect the money he stole despite a personal bankruptcy in 2000 and despite filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2003 for his correspondence school. The Post uncovered those facts as part of a series of articles about abuses in Florida voucher programs. Trials and investigations are pending against other private school operators as the result of a state probe sparked by Post articles. The lack of academic accountability is an even bigger problem.

Traditional public schools are required to give the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test and receive a school grade based on the results. Private voucher schools have no such requirements. John Kirtley, whose $100,000 donation to the GOP paved the way for corporate scholarships beginning in 2001, has opposed meaningful oversight, as has Gov. Bush's chief education aide, Patricia Levesque.

Some lawmakers tried in 2004 and again this year to impose at least slightly improved financial and academic accountability. Despite the obvious abuses, nothing has happened. Now, Isenhour's case has provided another embarrassing example of the program's flaws and provides a test that the 2006 Legislature should not fail.

A lot of truth here:

This reflects the Japanese view that successful teaching is the product of intensive teacher development and self-scrutiny. In America, by contrast, novice teachers are often presumed competent on Day One. They have few opportunities in their careers to watch successful colleagues in action. We also tend to believe that educational change would happen overnight - if only we could find the right formula. This often leaves us prey to fads that put schools on the wrong track.

There are two other things that set this country apart from its high-performing peers abroad. One is the American sense that teaching is a skill that people come by naturally. We also have a curriculum that varies widely by region. The countries that are leaving us behind in math and science decide at the national level what students should learn and when. The schools are typically overseen by ministries of education that spend a great deal of time on what might be called educational quality control.

The United States, by contrast, has 50 different sets of standards for 50 different states - and within states, the quality of education depends largely on the neighborhood where the student lives.

-------------------

November 21, 2005, NY Times

Editorial Observer

Why the United States Should Look to Japan for Better Schools

By BRENT STAPLES

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/21/opinion/21mon4.html

The United States will become a second-rate economic power unless it can match the educational performance of its rivals abroad and get more of its students to achieve at the highest levels in math, science and literacy. Virtually every politician, business leader and educator understands this, yet the country has no national plan for reaching the goal. To make matters worse, Americans have remained openly hostile to the idea of importing strategies from the countries that are beating the pants off us in the educational arena.

The No Child Left Behind Act, passed four years ago, was supposed to put this problem on the national agenda. Instead, the country has gotten bogged down in a squabble about a part of the law that requires annual testing in the early grades to ensure that the states are closing the achievement gap. The testing debate heated up last month when national math and reading scores showed dismal performance across the board....

Computing the Cost of 'Acting White'; Voucher thief exploited loopholes that still exist

1) Wow!  These are some EXTREMELY important findings!  (And I have no doubt they're accurate -- once Fryer explains them, they make sense.)  They raise some interesting questions: Could KIPP actually benefit from having virtually 100% minority schools?  And more importantly, should we, as a society, stop bemoaning (see Kozol's latest book) the utter lack of segregation of so many of our public schools?  Not necessarily, of course -- while the de facto segregation that exists may help with the problem of "acting white", there may be bigger, offsetting consequences in other areas.

By comparing grades with popularity, Fryer showed that "acting white" seems to be a real problem, but not one affecting all minority students. Minority students with good grades at private schools don't become less popular. Nor do students at predominantly black public schools pay a social price for higher grades.

That result, Fryer says, shows that there isn't a pervasive bias among blacks against achievement, or an "oppositional culture" created in response to white racism.

But at integrated public schools, minority students face a special problem, according to Fryer's study. Unlike their white classmates, whose popularity steadily increases as their grades go up, minority students with higher grades end up with fewer friends.

2) The ironies here are so stunning -- the WHITE kids feeling inferior and stigmatized...

At Cupertino's top schools, administrators, parents and students say white students end up in the stereotyped role often applied to other minority groups: the underachievers. In one 9th-grade algebra class, Lynbrook's lowest-level math class, the students are an eclectic mix of whites, Asians and other racial and ethnic groups.

"Take a good look," whispered Steve Rowley, superintendent of the Fremont Union High School District, which covers the city of Cupertino as well as portions of other neighboring cities. "This doesn't look like the other classes we're going to."...

"White kids are thought of as the dumb kids," she says.

Cupertino's administrators and faculty, the majority of whom are white, adamantly say there's no discrimination against whites. The administrators say students of all races get along well. In fact, there's little evidence of any overt racial tension between students or between their parents.

Mr. Rowley, the school superintendent, however, concedes that a perception exists that's sometimes called "the white-boy syndrome." He describes it as: "Kids who are white feel themselves a distinct minority against a majority culture."

So what do the white parents do?  Make excuses that the Asian kids are too narrowly focused, yada, yada, yada and run away:

Many white parents say they're leaving because the schools are too academically driven and too narrowly invested in subjects such as math and science at the expense of liberal arts and extracurriculars like sports and other personal interests.

And:

Four years ago, Lynn Rosener, a software consultant, transferred her elder son from Monta Vista to Homestead High, a Cupertino school with slightly lower test scores. At the new school, the white student body is declining at a slower rate than at Monta Vista and currently stands at 52% of the total. Friday-night football is a tradition, with big half-time shows and usually 1,000 people packing the stands. The school offers boys' volleyball, a sport at which Ms. Rosener's son was particularly talented. Monta Vista doesn't.

"It does help to have a lower Asian population," says Homestead PTA President Mary Anne Norling. "I don't think our parents are as uptight as if my kids went to Monta Vista."

How lame!  Parents should be SEEKING out the most competive, rigorous schools and then kick their kids in their asses, tell them to turn off the TV and stop playing video games, and COMPETE! 

 

Oh, cry me a river!  The gross unfairness of it all!:

Mr. Rowley, who is white, enrolled his only son, Eddie, at Lynbrook. When Eddie started freshman geometry, the boy was frustrated to learn that many of the Asian students in his class had already taken the course in summer school, Mr. Rowley recalls. That gave them a big leg up.

Our public schools could use a whole lot more strivers who (correctly) see educational achievement as the route to success.  That's KIPP's overwhelming focus -- and it works!

 

3) I'm not sure which is more disgraceful: James Isenhour's stealing, or the outrageous smear of John Kirtley in this Palm Beach Post editorial: "Kirtley..... has opposed meaningful oversight".  In fact, John has fought hard for an accountabilty bill the last two years--with required standardized testing, a longitudinal study, and strict financial accountability for scholarship funds.

--------------------

November 19, 2005

Op-Ed Columnist

Computing the Cost of 'Acting White'

By JOHN TIERNEY

http://select.nytimes.com/2005/11/19/opinion/19tierney.html?hp

Roland Fryer, a Harvard economist, has done a couple of very clever things. First he devised a mathematical technique for identifying the coolest kids in school. Then he came up with a surprising answer to a tougher question: If a black student does well in school, will his black friends shun him and accuse him of "acting white"?

Social scientists have been fiercely debating this question since it was raised nearly two decades ago by a study at a high school in Washington. Researchers have found that when minority students are asked to give examples of "acting white," they list taking honors classes along with speaking standard English and wearing clothes from the Gap or Abercrombie & Fitch (as opposed to Tommy Hilfiger or Fubu).

Some conservatives argue that this attitude reflects a self-destructive sense of victimhood that holds back blacks who could succeed if they weren't pressured by their peers to fail. Some liberals reply that it's not the fault of minority students - that they're creating an "oppositional culture" as a way to cope with racism and other obstacles that would keep them from succeeding if they tried.

And many social scientists have argued that the "acting white" phenomenon doesn't really exist. They point to surveys showing that black students value academic achievement as much as white students do, and that black students who get good grades report having just as many (in fact, slightly more) friends than other blacks.

-----------------

The New White Flight

In Silicon Valley, two high schools
with outstanding academic reputations
are losing white students
as Asian students move in. Why?

By SUEIN HWANG
November 19, 2005; Page A1

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113236377590902105.html?mod=home_page_one_us

CUPERTINO, Calif. -- By most measures, Monta Vista High here and Lynbrook High, in nearby San Jose, are among the nation's top public high schools. Both boast stellar test scores, an array of advanced-placement classes and a track record of sending graduates from the affluent suburbs of Silicon Valley to prestigious colleges.

But locally, they're also known for something else: white flight. Over the past 10 years, the proportion of white students at Lynbrook has fallen by nearly half, to 25% of the student body. At Monta Vista, white students make up less than one-third of the population, down from 45% -- this in a town that's half white. Some white Cupertino parents are instead sending their children to private schools or moving them to other, whiter public schools. More commonly, young white families in Silicon Valley say they are avoiding Cupertino altogether.

Whites aren't quitting the schools because the schools are failing academically. Quite the contrary: Many white parents say they're leaving because the schools are too academically driven and too narrowly invested in subjects such as math and science at the expense of liberal arts and extracurriculars like sports and other personal interests.

The two schools, put another way that parents rarely articulate so bluntly, are too Asian.

-------------

Voucher thief exploited loopholes that still exist

Palm Beach Post Editorial

Saturday, November 19, 2005

James Isenhour didn't provide an education for Florida voucher students. A jury said so. But did Isenhour provide an education for Florida lawmakers and Gov. Bush?

Last week, the Ocala businessman was found guilty of stealing $268,125 from the state's corporate voucher program. Isenhour's Silver Archer Corp. got the money in 2003 from Michigan-based Pulte Homes, which made the contribution in exchange for a dollar-for-dollar break on taxes due in Florida. The money was supposed to pay private school tuition for low-income students. But Isenhour spent it on himself and his bankrupt correspondence school, called Cambridge Academy.

Isenhour's attorney argued that rules governing the corporate voucher program are so vague that no laws were broken. The defense also claims that the law doesn't impose any penalties for criminal violations. While it's true that the law is deficient, the most serious gaps are in oversight. Isenhour took $268,125 without providing a single voucher. The statute isn't vague enough to make that legal.

The statute and state policies are vague enough, however, that operators could accept corporate voucher money without actually providing a high-quality education. The state subjects schools to very little financial or academic accountability.

Isenhour was able to collect the money he stole despite a personal bankruptcy in 2000 and despite filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2003 for his correspondence school. The Post uncovered those facts as part of a series of articles about abuses in Florida voucher programs. Trials and investigations are pending against other private school operators as the result of a state probe sparked by Post articles. The lack of academic accountability is an even bigger problem.

Traditional public schools are required to give the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test and receive a school grade based on the results. Private voucher schools have no such requirements. John Kirtley, whose $100,000 donation to the GOP paved the way for corporate scholarships beginning in 2001, has opposed meaningful oversight, as has Gov. Bush's chief education aide, Patricia Levesque.

Some lawmakers tried in 2004 and again this year to impose at least slightly improved financial and academic accountability. Despite the obvious abuses, nothing has happened. Now, Isenhour's case has provided another embarrassing example of the program's flaws and provides a test that the 2006 Legislature should not fail.