MCPS Superintendent Joshua Starr and Charter Schools

Is MCPS superintendent Joshua Starr being hypocritical? He recently wrote in Education Week praise to a Boston pilot school. (Pilot schools are very similar to charter schools, but have somewhat less flexibility in teacher pay and seniority rules). He praised the autonomy given the principal and teachers, and the results of a tailored education that flexibility gives to meet the needs of the students.

Joseph Hawkins notes on Patch that this is nothing new for Starr; he has offered admiration before for progressive schools and others that provide a more flexible approach than that mandated within strict MCPS guidelines. That’s all well and good – but it appears to be just talk. He has spoken out against charter schools, in the fashion of Henry Ford’s dictum about car colors. Everybody should be happy with what MCPS provides – nothing better or different is necessary.

If charter schools are going to be given a chance in Montgomery, they will have to overcome the “one-size-fits-all-and-you-should-be-grateful-we’re-giving-you-this-much” attitude of the teachers’ union and the MCPS leadership.

Success — Reluctant, Begrudging, Hesitant, Minimal — but Success

After several tries, and pleading for years, the Montgomery County Board of Education has finally begrudgingly agreed to allow a charter school to operate in the county.  The Community Montessori Public Charter School will open in Kensington next fall (2012).

There must have been some arm-twisting going on, because the Board still was clearly opposed to the idea of a school that would compete with Montgomery County Public Schools.  Of eight members, two voted against the application, and the Board president showed his distaste, too. 

I can only conclude that they had run out of roadblocks to throw in front of the school organizers.   Another applicant, Seneca Creek Charter School ,  gave up on Montgomery County and will organize in Frederick County, instead.

I  hope that this is the beginning of the loosening of the MCPS monopoly, but I’m not optimistic.  The new superintendent, Joshua Starr, is not a fan of charter schools, finding them “unnecessary”.  Note the attitude there: You can have a free education at any school that he thinks is “necessary” to exist.  He will fit right into Montgomery County, where the government does not want residents to have a choice, but rather accept what the county thinks is best for them.

I don’t know whether the students will get a “better” education at one of these public schools than their local public school.  But I know that we are all better off if the choice exists.   That choice exists at 51 charter schools that will be operating in Maryland next fall.  Only one of those fifty will be in Montgomery County.

A Breakthrough for School Choice?

Who’dathunkit?  A significant blow to the stone walls of the Montgomery County Public Schools monopoly — and it’s wielded by Jerry Weast.

The MoCo school superintendent has finally recommended approval of a charter school in the county.  The application is the third from the Community Montessori Public Charter School.  The Board of Education in the County, historically focused on defending MCPS from competition, must approve the application.

The Board of Education has previously rejected all applications,  with such extreme bias that the state has berated them.   Professionalism and concern for the best education for the county’s children have taken a distant back seat to protecting their fiefdom and privileges.  Has the call for choice in education finally reached even the board of education?   They are scheduled to vote on Thursday.

Leviathan winning battles in Montgomery

It seemed like it was time to keep an eye on Big Government in MoCo, which has been rolling forward lately.

First, the new bag tax.

Then, the (admittedly coerced) agreement to divert resources from crime to tracking immigrants.

And now, distressingly, more bad news from the education front.  Incoming schools superintendent Joshua Starr (who looks like a real loser so far), is adding to that initial impression.

Starr told the Gazette recently that he doesn’t see the need for any charter schools in Montgomery.  Charter schools, I shouldn’t need to note, are those which would be outside of Starr’s control.

A Second Chance for Charter Schools in Montgomery?

Last week was School Choice Week, highlighted by activities around the nation supporting the ability of parents to choose the best education for their children.  One aspect of school choice is charter schools. There are over forty charter schools in various jurisdictions around the state – but none have ever  been approved in Montgomery.

MoCo is a particularly dismal place for those trying to establish charter schools.  Montgomery County Public Schools  fights hard to maintain their monopoly, and they are strengthened in the iron triangle with the support of the Montgomery County Board of Education and the Montgomery County Education Association (the teachers’ union).    That’s a power trio that you don’t mess with in this county.

In 2010, two applicants for charter schools found that out the hard way, as the Board of Education summarily dismissed their applications to establish public schools that would not be beholden to the MCPS bureaucracy.  (In a textbook example of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the County Board of Education is given control and decision authority over charter school applications ).

One application came from Global Garden Public Charter School, envisioned as a small K-8 school in the Kensington/Wheaton area.   The school would feature a longer school day and a longer school year, an IB program, and have a substantial focus on foreign language education.

Another application came from Crossway Community Charter School, a K-6 Montessori school, also in Kensington.

Upon appeal, the State has slapped the County Board for their decision to reject the applications.

-           The Board of Education did not provide any rationale, in writing or orally, for turning down the 350-page application.

-           TheBoard of Education used criteria for evaluating the applications that are nearly impossible to meet.

-           The Board of Education did not follow state regulations for evaluating the applications

-           The state’s decision also implied that several members of the Board were biased against allowing any charter school to operate in Montgomery.  They cited explicit statements by Board members  that were hostile to charter schools, because they might take resources away from MCPS.   The State had to remind these Board members that charter schools are public schools.  These Board members were not concerned with public schools, therefore; they were surely  not concerned with the education of Montgomery students.  They were concerned with protecting the MCPS monopoly.

-           The stated also cited statements to the same effect by MCPS superintendent Weast.  <Why, you have to ask, is the MCPS superintendent involved in the decision to allow competing public schools?  Because MoCo can’t even manage the façade of a fair evaluation. >

The ruling from the State concluded that the County Board of Education needs to re-evaluate the applications.  Unfortunately, we don’t have reason to believe that the Board will be any less biased this time around.   It might help for those who are interested to contact the Montgomery County Board of Education and emphasize the need for professional evaluation, instead of defending their turf.

The Problem of Inadequate Secondary Education

If you had a suspicion that our high schools are not adequately preparing the students, we now have some verification. One out of six Maryland high school students are not passing the High School Assessments.

The HSAs are a series of tests in algebra, government, biology, and English. Originally, the state thought to require passing the HSAs in order to earn a diploma. Then students were given an out; those who failed twice could complete “an academic project” in lieu of passing the test. At some schools (like Einstein High), nearly a third of students don’t pass the tests.

The logical plan of action, of course, is to make the standard easier; MoCo school superintendent Jerry Weast is in favor of getting rid of the requirement altogether.

Then, you pass the problem on to the next guy (the college, or the employer), and let him deal with it.

The problem shows up in the college, of course. Here in Montgomery County, it shows up most clearly at our community college. An analysis by the Washington Examiner shows that 2/3 of entrants at Montgomery College need remedial courses. For graduates coming from some Montgomery schools (Einstein, Wheaton, Blake), the number hovers around 80%. A related article laments not only the lost time, but the costs of not learning the first time around, noting that a student had to pay about $600 for one such remedial offering. But the costs aren’t just the tuition the student pays. What about the costs to the taxpayer for ineffective education in the high school?  What about the resulting costs of high school dropouts?

We need more choices and more variety from our monolithic public school system. Public charters are a great way to achieve that. Just over the border in DC, charter schools abound. Some fail, but that’s good. Some public schools should be allowed to fail and close up, too. Overall, though, the students in DC’s charter schools are outperforming students in the traditional public schools. The charter schools have been demonstrated to be particularly effective for low-income students. Meanwhile, there are still no charter schools in Montgomery County.

Parents’ group lobbies for higher taxes; Barve seeks to oblige

Parents are the most highly subsidized group in Montgomery County.  They get an annual gift of over $20,640* per child from the taxpayers (Okay, it’s not really a gift if I am forced to give it to you, but let’s leave that aside for the moment).  The Gazette reports on a group of parents who thinks that isn’t enough.

They are complaining about small fees charged by schools for extra expenses, supplies and equipment associated with certain activities.  These fees are generally charged for workbooks (which can’t be shared with the next year’s students), , materials for art and photography classes, food costs for international cooking classes, calculators, and other costly “extras.” Right now, these are considered to be incremental activities (beyond the school curriculum and resource base) and students are asked to pay for these additional expenses – if they can afford it.  If they can’t, the school system provides these add-ons for free.  The charges are generally small (less than fifty dollars), but these parents aren’t complaining on the basis of the burden.  They insist that everything provided through the school system should be completely paid for through taxes.   One parent showed up at a school board meeting to request a refund of $8 in towel fees paid for her high school teenager.

Montgomery delegate Kumar Barve seems to have been inhaling the populist air from Denver and St. Paul.   He is seeking to propose a bill that would make it illegal for school systems to charge students fees.  His rationale: “The purpose of public school education is to allow each child to get a great education regardless of their economic background.”  But since everyone gets these services, whether they can afford it or not, no one is being deprived right now.  The only issue is whether parents should bear any portion at all of the costs of extra activities for their children.  For some parents – and for Delegate Barve – the apparent answer is “no.”

*That’s a school operating budget of $2.067 billion, plus capital budget of $778 million, serving 137,763 students this year.

Tuition Freeze: Making College More Affordable for the Wealthy

Governor O’Malley announced a tuition freeze at state institutions this month. Making college more affordable seems like a good idea. Children of janitors and fast-food workers often have a hard time coming up with tuition payments, even at public institutions. There are a plethora of programs and policies to help low-income families with college costs. Unfortunately, freezing tuition is one of the worst ways.

To see why, ask the standard question: “Who benefits?” The freeze was achieved by increasing funding for colleges, so that they could spend more without increasing tuition. That provides an equal benefit for all students’ families; those with annual incomes of $20,000 get the same benefit as families with incomes of $200,000. If the same increase in funding was instead put into financial aid, lower-income families would get more advantage from it, and higher-income families less advantage.

Instead, a tuition freeze subsidizes both lower income and high-income families. Since college students overall tend to be higher income, the net effect of a tuition freeze is to take money from taxpayers (including, of course, low-income taxpayers) to subsidize high-income families. A tuition freeze, in essence, is blatantly regressive and inequitable. As if to emphasize the tradeoff, the state Board of Public Works voted last week to roll back need-based financial aid programs. Take from the low-income, and give to the upper-income. The low-income citizens are less reliable voters, you know.

So from St. Mary’s County to Allegheny County, middle class and wealthy families cheer. Now they can buy that third car, take that vacation in Puerta Vallarta instead of Orlando, knowing that the taxpayers will pick up even more of little Tiffany’s tuition costs. And when Tiffany completes school and is making a nice six-figure salary as a corporate lawyer, her student loan payments will be easier, too. Remember that when she sues you in twenty years.

The cost of tuition is going up, and the reasonable thing to do is to have the students – the beneficiaries, the ones consuming the service – pay the costs. Isn’t that more fair than having the taxpayers pay for it? In fact, tuition at state schools nationwide is up by an average of 6.4%. But not here. What do you know that hasn’t increased in price at all in the last four years? How about tuition at Maryland state schools. That hasn’t increased at all in the past four years, as the state chose to place the burden on taxpayers instead. The chancellor of the university system had a chuckle at their expense. As the Post reported, “When he discusses the tuition freeze with leaders of other university systems, he said, “Their mouths drop open.”

When the state takes such regressive action, our mouths should drop open, too.

TANSTAAFL, My Foot. It All Starts With Free Lunch

Sorry, Robert Heinlein and Milton Friedman, but in public school there is such a thing as a free lunch. And then a free breakfast. And then, in case going to the cafeteria was too much effort, free breakfast brought to your classroom. And then a free after-school snack.

When did schools become restaurants? They’re not. They are a means for buying the loyalty of politically active constituents of parents. And, because funding comes from USDA, they are a means for buying support for subsidies to farmers. In Congress, it’s called logrolling; I’ll support your farm supports if you’ll support my subsidies for urban school food programs. Everybody wins, (except those paying the bill, because, as we know, in reality, There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch).

But the budgetary issues are really secondary here. More disturbingly, these kinds of programs cement in some of the most destructive trends in our socioeconomic culture: dependency, loss of personal responsibility, paternalistic government, decline of the family. Okay, I hate to sound like Bill Bennett here, but sometimes I have to agree. School breakfast was promoted as a means to provide nutrition, to those who could not afford it, for improving educational outcomes. It quickly morphed into a program that subsidizes all the kids’ food. Eligibility applications are unchecked, so they are widely falsified, and kids get it fraudulently. Instead of a stopgap to help a few kids in need, the program inevitably becomes the norm for everyone. And before you know it, parents balk at providing lunch or breakfast (or snack!) for their kids, because “that’s the government’s job.”

The newest trend is establishing medical clinics in school. MoCo announced this week plans to establish a school health center at New Hampshire Estates Elementary School. Typical services at such a center are described by a principal: “We have a pediatrician once a week, a nurse practitioner who can write prescriptions 20 hours a week, a registered nurse 40 hours a week and a health technician for 40 hours a week.” Access to the services will not be limited to children in the school, or even their families, but to anyone in the neighborhood. Nor will it just be for uninsured students.

And sadly, once again, the scope of civil society and voluntary activity decreases, and the scope of Leviathan spills over. Soon we will hear the cry, “Why should I take my child to the doctor? That’s the government’s job.”

School Choice: Charter Schools in Montgomery

When it comes to schooling, one size doesn’t fit all. Charter schools are one of the easier ways to give parents some choice about their children’s education. Charter schools also provide some wiggle room from the stifling bureaucracy of the Board of Education / teacher union nexus. Charter schools have been a successful alternative to regular public schools all around the country.

A principal need for charters is to get independence from the bureaucratic and union-dominated mentality of the local school board or district. The Center for Education Reform points out that the best charter schools are in locations where there can be more than one chartering authority (e.g., at the county and state level).

But that creates a danger for the public school monopoly, which can’t tolerate the idea of someone else doing these outside of their control.

Maryland, in fact, is considered one of the worst states for charter schools. For facilitating school choice and focusing on childrens’ needs, the District’s charter law was graded “A”, one of the best in the country. Maryland got a “D”, rating as the sixth weakest charter law in the country.

Yet, despite that, there are now 32 charter schools operating in Maryland, educating nearly 6,000 students. In Baltimore City, charter schools rank among the top performing schools in the whole public school system. In Montgomery — zero. Why?

The schools bureaucracy / teacher union colossus has fought the idea of charters tooth and nail. In fact, the Board of Education has taken an explicit lobbying position against allowing other chartering authorities:

“The Montgomery County Board of Education supports local control [read, their control] of educational policy, administration, and curriculum, and opposes any legislative initiatives that have the effect of reducing local and state Board authority….”

Unable to get past the control freaks at the MoCo Board of Ed – which rejected their charter proposal twice — the parents at the Jaime Escalante Charter School tried appealing to the state. The school board rejected the application without even providing a statement of the rationale for the denial, instead referring to oral remarks that were made at a public hearing!

The result is that there are no charter schools in Montgomery County. The Board of Education is working to pursue its own interests, not the interests of children. Because of them, if you don’t have the resources to attend a private school, you don’t have any options.