8 ms·

Governor Ducey Signs Most Expansive School Choice Legislation in Recent Memory

18 points by nec4b 4y ago

jmpman 4y ago
Ducey regularly subverts the will of the people to push his party’s agenda. During the recession, the republicans convinced the teachers to take a pay cut, convincing them it will be returned in more prosperous times. Ducey, under pressure of a limp strike, provided a fraction of the promised increases. Unhappy with the underfunded schools, the public twice voted for higher taxes on the wealthy, only to have Ducey fight them in court, and most recently set all taxes to a flat tax, negating the citizen supported initiative. The AZ schools have a large population of students from immigrants from Mexico and Central America who join with English as a second language barriers and parents without a history of educational prioritization. This leads to districts with extremely poor test scores. The republicans point to these poor test scores, and claim that the public schools are failing the students and school choice is the answer. Ducey continues to push for school vouchers, citing school such as Basis. Basis charter school is a for profit school, which takes in a class of self selected students in ?7th? Grade, and is extremely rigorous. A sizable fraction of the students drop out after the first year, not to be replaced with new students. After the second year, more students drop out, again not to be replaced. By the time the end of high school rolls around, the remaining students are regularly being admitted to Harvard and Stanford. It’s listed as the best school in the country. Effectively all it’s done is taken the elite students from all the surrounding school districts and concentrated them down into a stream of successful graduates. The remaining charter schools are regularly for profit schools, where the children of a church congregation end up attending the pastor’s school. The results are lower test scores than the public schools. None of these options solve the really tough problem of educating the migrant students with English difficulties. And the charter schools are not required to provide services to these students, further concentrating the underperforming students in public schools. The result is that a fraction of the elite students are given a slightly better education than they would have in their already excellent honors programs. The religious are able to scam money from the system, providing arguably worse outcomes. And the underclass remain underserved and under-motivated. That’s what Ducey’s school reform have provided.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > all it’s done is taken the elite students from all the surrounding school districts and concentrated them down into a stream of successful graduates This creates a valuable learning enforcement and social network for those students. > None of these options solve the really tough problem of educating the migrant students But it improves outcomes for some students. At the same time, support for public funding is broadly maintained. The alternative is an increasing fraction of voters switching to private schooling. In the long run, that will undermine political support for public education entirely.
  - JKCalhoun 4y ago
    > In the long run, that will undermine political support for public education entirely. Yeah, that kind of seems like the actual plan, doesn't it?
  - jmpman 4y ago
    > But it improves outcomes for some students. Correct, but it’s a fraction of 1%, and those students would have already graduated in the top of their classes. Ducey cites a program that works better for the top fraction of students as a solution for the larger population. In other charter schools with true open enrollment, the outcomes are worse than public schools. Overall, this will damage education in Arizona, and it’s all done for politics. That makes Ducey the worst of politicians. If he could demonstrate general improvements over public schools, I’d happily support the change.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  Public education was such an amazing (dare I say progressive?) undertaking in 1800's America. Even from just doing genealogy I often find the point where my rural farmer relatives went from being: "Can Read/Write?" : "No" to their progeny answering "Yes" in the decades that follow. (For whatever reason, it seems to have kicked off after the Civil War.) No doubt it allowed the rural migration to cities where no doubt literacy (and math literacy) became increasingly important. To return more or less to an era where only the wealthy get good educations is shockingly regressive in my mind. Say what you want about the degree to which this is already the case with post-Secondary education and the better funding that even public schools get in the wealthier neighborhoods, exacerbating this trend is, in my opinion, not a good idea. Often when this is pushed (whether through vouchers or similar) it seems to be an attempt to either reward the rich by returning their education tax dollars that they were foregoing anyway since their kids went to private schools or, worse, a mechanism to erode or destroy the fabric of public education in general.
_-david-_ 4y ago
This is great news. Middle class and the wealthy already tend to have options in school or tutoring if necessary. Poor people never had those options. If this succeeds this will give poor people the same options that wealthier people have had.
- hprotagonist 4y ago
  can i interest you in a brooklyn bridge NFT?
  - _-david-_ 4y ago
    I said if this succeeds. I don't know if it will, but I can tell you keeping poor kids in crappy schools won't work. We need to try something and this could be it.
    - hprotagonist 4y ago
      "burn it down and save on taxes" doesn't sound like a state fulfilling its civic obligations to itself or its citizens, to me...
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you are saying? The government could run public schools as well? If the government schools provide a good, quality education parents will send their kids. The problem is they are not. Even when funding is increased there isn't an increase in the quality. Also, you may or may not actually be saving tax money? I would rather have good private schools funded by the government than crappy public schools. This may or may not be the result from this bill, but it is one possible outcome. What is your solution to fixing the public education system?
        hprotagonist 4y ago
        my solution certainly isn’t putting a private corporation in charge with no oversight that citizens have direct access to. Some things really are a public good, and schools are on that list. incidentally if you want to feel very uneasy, have a look at how many charter schools have just gone out of business in the middle of the school year. we know how to have good public schools. it involves teachers that are well paid with a strong union behind them, for a start, which is another thing that corporations are historically bad at tolerating. One of my parents was until recently a public school teacher in arizona. I have no confidence in whatever the governor says; what i think he actually wants is to cut loose and abandon any care over the education of people who aren’t rich and white, and i think that’s both entirely on brand for him, and completely beyond the pale and an utter abrogation of the responsibility of the state. it’s also a horrible idea; a well educated and civically minded populace is one of the better things you can have, and it’s in your best interests to make sure you have one.
frognumber 4y ago
America is at the very bottom of the developed world for education. Broadly speaking, providing school choice seems like a good way to fix it. Properly designed, charter schools can close achievement gaps (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/sunday/schools-that-work.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/sunday/schools-th...), allow academic excellence, and be more sensitive to cultural differences. Specifically speaking, a good choice system ought to fund students and not systems, but ought to also provide checks-and-balances on those systems. Charters which work are found in states like Massachusetts, which have basic oversight of those charters. Arizona seems to lack that. We seem to have two types of systems: Red states: School choice with no oversight Blue states: Limited school choice with basic oversight I'd like school choice with oversight. Basic oversight means: - Non-profit, with proper board governance - Comply with all relevant transparency laws (public records, FERPA, PPRA, etc.) - Fair lottery; schools cannot pick-and-choose students who go there - Some amount of standard data reporting - Charters can't charge beyond the voucher amount With that, I'd like to have an uncapped number of private charter schools.
- willcipriano 4y ago
  If the same people would do the oversight are the people currently in charge of the education system, I wouldn't expect different results. Parents are fleeing this oversight, it's really only the people who can't afford to leave that put up with it.
  - frognumber 4y ago
    Re-read the oversight. It's based on transparency and governance. There aren't people doing the oversight, beyond handling complaints and shutting down non-compliant schools. The oversight is: - Non-profit, with proper board governance - Comply with all relevant transparency laws (public records, FERPA, PPRA, etc.) - Fair lottery; schools cannot pick-and-choose students who go there - Some amount of standard data reporting - Charters can't charge beyond the voucher amount There is no proposed oversight of what's taught or how it's taught. That's basically how charters work in Massachusetts, where they blow away one of the best public education systems in th world.

18 points by nec4b 4y ago

Ducey regularly subverts the will of the people to push his party’s agenda. During the recession, the republicans convinced the teachers to take a pay cut, convincing them it will be returned in more prosperous times. Ducey, under pressure of a limp strike, provided a fraction of the promised increases. Unhappy with the underfunded schools, the public twice voted for higher taxes on the wealthy, only to have Ducey fight them in court, and most recently set all taxes to a flat tax, negating the citizen supported initiative. The AZ schools have a large population of students from immigrants from Mexico and Central America who join with English as a second language barriers and parents without a history of educational prioritization. This leads to districts with extremely poor test scores. The republicans point to these poor test scores, and claim that the public schools are failing the students and school choice is the answer. Ducey continues to push for school vouchers, citing school such as Basis. Basis charter school is a for profit school, which takes in a class of self selected students in ?7th? Grade, and is extremely rigorous. A sizable fraction of the students drop out after the first year, not to be replaced with new students. After the second year, more students drop out, again not to be replaced. By the time the end of high school rolls around, the remaining students are regularly being admitted to Harvard and Stanford. It’s listed as the best school in the country. Effectively all it’s done is taken the elite students from all the surrounding school districts and concentrated them down into a stream of successful graduates. The remaining charter schools are regularly for profit schools, where the children of a church congregation end up attending the pastor’s school. The results are lower test scores than the public schools. None of these options solve the really tough problem of educating the migrant students with English difficulties. And the charter schools are not required to provide services to these students, further concentrating the underperforming students in public schools. The result is that a fraction of the elite students are given a slightly better education than they would have in their already excellent honors programs. The religious are able to scam money from the system, providing arguably worse outcomes. And the underclass remain underserved and under-motivated. That’s what Ducey’s school reform have provided.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> all it’s done is taken the elite students from all the surrounding school districts and concentrated them down into a stream of successful graduates This creates a valuable learning enforcement and social network for those students. > None of these options solve the really tough problem of educating the migrant students But it improves outcomes for some students. At the same time, support for public funding is broadly maintained. The alternative is an increasing fraction of voters switching to private schooling. In the long run, that will undermine political support for public education entirely.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  > In the long run, that will undermine political support for public education entirely. Yeah, that kind of seems like the actual plan, doesn't it?
- jmpman 4y ago
  > But it improves outcomes for some students. Correct, but it’s a fraction of 1%, and those students would have already graduated in the top of their classes. Ducey cites a program that works better for the top fraction of students as a solution for the larger population. In other charter schools with true open enrollment, the outcomes are worse than public schools. Overall, this will damage education in Arizona, and it’s all done for politics. That makes Ducey the worst of politicians. If he could demonstrate general improvements over public schools, I’d happily support the change.
JKCalhoun 4y ago
Public education was such an amazing (dare I say progressive?) undertaking in 1800's America. Even from just doing genealogy I often find the point where my rural farmer relatives went from being: "Can Read/Write?" : "No" to their progeny answering "Yes" in the decades that follow. (For whatever reason, it seems to have kicked off after the Civil War.) No doubt it allowed the rural migration to cities where no doubt literacy (and math literacy) became increasingly important. To return more or less to an era where only the wealthy get good educations is shockingly regressive in my mind. Say what you want about the degree to which this is already the case with post-Secondary education and the better funding that even public schools get in the wealthier neighborhoods, exacerbating this trend is, in my opinion, not a good idea. Often when this is pushed (whether through vouchers or similar) it seems to be an attempt to either reward the rich by returning their education tax dollars that they were foregoing anyway since their kids went to private schools or, worse, a mechanism to erode or destroy the fabric of public education in general.

_-david-_ 4y ago

This is great news. Middle class and the wealthy already tend to have options in school or tutoring if necessary. Poor people never had those options. If this succeeds this will give poor people the same options that wealthier people have had.

hprotagonist 4y ago
can i interest you in a brooklyn bridge NFT?
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  I said if this succeeds. I don't know if it will, but I can tell you keeping poor kids in crappy schools won't work. We need to try something and this could be it.
  - hprotagonist 4y ago
    "burn it down and save on taxes" doesn't sound like a state fulfilling its civic obligations to itself or its citizens, to me...
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      I'm not sure what you are saying? The government could run public schools as well? If the government schools provide a good, quality education parents will send their kids. The problem is they are not. Even when funding is increased there isn't an increase in the quality. Also, you may or may not actually be saving tax money? I would rather have good private schools funded by the government than crappy public schools. This may or may not be the result from this bill, but it is one possible outcome. What is your solution to fixing the public education system?
      - hprotagonist 4y ago
        my solution certainly isn’t putting a private corporation in charge with no oversight that citizens have direct access to. Some things really are a public good, and schools are on that list. incidentally if you want to feel very uneasy, have a look at how many charter schools have just gone out of business in the middle of the school year. we know how to have good public schools. it involves teachers that are well paid with a strong union behind them, for a start, which is another thing that corporations are historically bad at tolerating. One of my parents was until recently a public school teacher in arizona. I have no confidence in whatever the governor says; what i think he actually wants is to cut loose and abandon any care over the education of people who aren’t rich and white, and i think that’s both entirely on brand for him, and completely beyond the pale and an utter abrogation of the responsibility of the state. it’s also a horrible idea; a well educated and civically minded populace is one of the better things you can have, and it’s in your best interests to make sure you have one.

frognumber 4y ago

America is at the very bottom of the developed world for education. Broadly speaking, providing school choice seems like a good way to fix it. Properly designed, charter schools can close achievement gaps (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/sunday/schools-that-work.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/sunday/schools-th...), allow academic excellence, and be more sensitive to cultural differences. Specifically speaking, a good choice system ought to fund students and not systems, but ought to also provide checks-and-balances on those systems. Charters which work are found in states like Massachusetts, which have basic oversight of those charters. Arizona seems to lack that. We seem to have two types of systems: Red states: School choice with no oversight Blue states: Limited school choice with basic oversight I'd like school choice with oversight. Basic oversight means: - Non-profit, with proper board governance - Comply with all relevant transparency laws (public records, FERPA, PPRA, etc.) - Fair lottery; schools cannot pick-and-choose students who go there - Some amount of standard data reporting - Charters can't charge beyond the voucher amount With that, I'd like to have an uncapped number of private charter schools.

willcipriano 4y ago
If the same people would do the oversight are the people currently in charge of the education system, I wouldn't expect different results. Parents are fleeing this oversight, it's really only the people who can't afford to leave that put up with it.
- frognumber 4y ago
  Re-read the oversight. It's based on transparency and governance. There aren't people doing the oversight, beyond handling complaints and shutting down non-compliant schools. The oversight is: - Non-profit, with proper board governance - Comply with all relevant transparency laws (public records, FERPA, PPRA, etc.) - Fair lottery; schools cannot pick-and-choose students who go there - Some amount of standard data reporting - Charters can't charge beyond the voucher amount There is no proposed oversight of what's taught or how it's taught. That's basically how charters work in Massachusetts, where they blow away one of the best public education systems in th world.