2016 Previews, Friedrichs Day! NY Principals Speak Out, LA Vouchers, Choosing Schools, Pot And Schools, Admission Preferences, WFF Plans, Loan Fixes, And More…

One of the more interesting 2016 previews you’ll read: Dmitri Mehlhorn on 2016 being the year of education law.  In another interesting one Sara Mead says it could be a big year for -pre-K.

PPI on Summit Public  Schools. Rural ed. President Obama’s domestic policy legacy (includes education).  Admissions preferences for low-income students (pdf). New Walton Family Foundation plan. Dynarski with student loan fix ideas.

Is Powerball a windfall for schools? Not as much as you might think and depends where you live.

Friedrichs being argued today at the Supreme Court. SCOTUSblog previews here. Dan Chamberlin of TNTP urges the unions to get out of the bargaining business. LA Times sides with the unions. Washington Post sees big problems but says it’s a political not constitutional question. Does this case put our democracy at risk? Seems overwrought and romantic given the operational realities. My take on the case and possible implications here.  Update: Transcript from the argument here (pdf).

The complicated intersection of medical marijuana and schools. “This is a situation in which the changing social norms are ahead of the existing operational structure.” Is there really any issue in public education you can’t say that about?

Blogger gets results: New hard-hitting Newark blog about schools – the mayor responds by video.

Missed this good list of advocacy films.  Here’s another look at the Louisiana voucher data.  The ethics of choosing a school.  And the time honored tradition of celebrating “success” and a lack of acrimony that most education leaders would not allow their own children to participate in. Slow and steady, good enough for other people’s kids!

Add the principals union to the list of critics of how schools are being run in New York.

David Bowie writes a young fan.  Bulbous beer glasses.

20 Responses to “2016 Previews, Friedrichs Day! NY Principals Speak Out, LA Vouchers, Choosing Schools, Pot And Schools, Admission Preferences, WFF Plans, Loan Fixes, And More…”

  1. David Triche Says:

    “The primary (and surprising) finding is that attending a voucher-eligible private school reduces voucher students’ test scores in math, ELA, science, and social studies. The outcomes are even bleaker for younger children.” If Amber M. Northern, Ph.D. and Michael J. Petrilli knew anything about Louisiana, they would not be surprised about these results. High quality private schools in Louisiana would certainly not want poor students, especially poor black students. I am sure many of the schools that accepted vouchers put theology and football ahead of academics.

  2. PhillipMarlowe Says:

    Even better blogs on Newark:

    http://www.bobbraunsledger.com
    http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com
    http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/

    Blogs that argue with facts.

  3. PhillipMarlowe Says:

    Some of The Friedrichs Freeloaders, like Harlan Erlich, seem confused about what their case actually is all about. Erlich didn’t like that his union supported marriage equity, but the law is actually quite clear: he doesn’t have to support the union’s political activities. A couple of quick checks on a form and Harlan can rest assured that his dues won’t go to helping make sure two people in love can have legal rights. Because this is America, and you have the right to live in the Dark Ages and be a bigot if that’s what you want. – See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/#sthash.XZx8yEhH.dpuf

  4. carefulreader Says:

    You mean Dan Weisberg of TNTP?

  5. sandy kress Says:

    money’s fungible, marlowe. that old fiction doesn’t fool anyone any more. and it looks like it may not fool the Court either. freedom to marry. freedom to have one’s own views. and freedom to associate with whatever group one wants. i suspect that’s where the court will end up and where most Americans would want it to.

  6. PhillipMarlowe Says:

    Sandy, as Bob sang, “To live outside the law you must be honest”
    Elrich complained about the union using his agency fees to pay him and provide benefits better than what the people in his school district have.
    Did he give up the extra money and benefit?
    No.
    To quote John Lennon: “stupid hypocrite.”

  7. David Triche Says:

    Money is fungible Sandy, I certainly would not like to be forced to pay for useless American invasions of Vietnam that killed millions of Vietnamese and 55,000 U.S. soldiers. Not to mention the disastrous invasion of Iraq killing 0.5 million Iraqis, 5000 U.S. soldiers, and leading to the birth of ISIS, but in a democracy, for better or worse, some times you have to go with the majority.

  8. sandy kress Says:

    I’m a citizen of the United States of America.. I am connected to, and must live by, the policies of George Bush or Barack Obama or whoever is president, whether I like them or not. But what does that have to do with being required to pay money to a group I have no desire to support? No one should be forced to be a member of a union or pay its dues or fees. I think the Supreme Court is about to decree that. Then people can have the freedom to decide who represents them and who doesn’t, which is generally, outside of the requirements of citizenship, how this country works.

  9. Ajay Srikanth Says:

    But the union still does represent the freeloaders! The plaintiffs themselves said they aren’t challenging the union as the sole representative for bargaining for labor. So they reap the higher salaries without paying anything. Personally, I think the school district or state should cover the agency fees but that’s never going to happen. If only there were a way to let those who want no part of the union completely on their own to negotiate salaries and benefits (a scab salary scale…)

  10. sandy kress Says:

    It’ll be interesting to see what happens to pay, benefits, and working conditions for effective teachers in the new world.

  11. David Triche Says:

    I worked at a school where the “effective” teacher was the woman who was sleepting with the principal, both of whom were married to other people. She received all kinds of fringe benefits and I, the library media teacher, was espected to cover her class when they went to “meetings” together.

  12. sandy kress Says:

    I’m not a fan of “ineffective” masquerading around as “effective” under any banner.

  13. David Triche Says:

    Who is a fan of “’ineffective” masquerading around as “effective’”? However, a union protects teachers from ineffective principals and administrators and frees teachers up to teach.

  14. David Triche Says:

    Sandy your expectations about methods of identifying effective teachers are naive, in my opinion. Eliminating unions will give ineffective administrator free reign to run rough shod over effective teachers.

  15. sandy kress Says:

    I am not, nor have I ever been, for eliminating unions. I have seen my fair share of ineffective administrators and get your point. But I have also seen my fair share of truly ineffective teachers who are protected by unions.

  16. David Triche Says:

    That’s what I mean by naive. You seem to be looking for a perfect system. Having a system that everyone is vested in protects teachers better than anything else I know of. Without agency fee I think so many teachers will opt out that it will eliminate them. I know teach in a prison. The correctional officers have a very stron union. They earmark far more for political action than teachers. The result is there pay and working conditions have improve dramatically. At the same time COs i Texas make half of what CA officers make. With out strong unions that will happen to teacher also.

  17. Sandy Kress Says:

    Calling people naive and using names doesn’t strengthen your argument, by the way.

    I’m not for a perfect system, just one better than the status quo. I think the time is coming for a change. The issue will be what that looks like.

  18. David Triche Says:

    Using names? What are you taking about. I have never thought calling someone naive is name calling. Should I have said your argument is naive. I don’t know any other way to say it. That seems a bit too sensitive to me. So what is your vision of what will be better than the status quo?

  19. Sandy Kress Says:

    I figure we’ve both lived full lives, are both pretty bright, and have given these matters a lot of thought. I don’t see myself or my argument as naive. But do and say what you will.

    It looks like the Supreme Court may void this requirement to pay fees. That will make life different for everyone, including teachers and unions. I agree with you that teachers should be respected, treated fairly, and paid better. I also agree with you that management is far too frequently mediocre and arbitrarily and poorly done. I also agree unions will and should continue to play a major role in all this.

    But I believe the system has to become more effective in educating students better and more successfully. This “us or them” war that’s been fought needs to ease, and solutions to all the key issues need to be worked on together. How do we measure growth and effectiveness? What do we do in response to those measures? How can accountability be honest, strong, and fair? How do all have a seat at the table? I have ideas (that I don’t think are particularly naive) as to answers to those questions, but I wouldn’t claim them to be perfect either.

    My main point is the world is changing, and the old answers must, too.

  20. PhillipMarlowe Says:

    More on the supposed hard hitting blog on Newark:
    http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2016/01/dear-reformy-bloggers-bbye.html

    “Baby, I got my facts learned real good right now.” Bruce Springsteen, not Eric Dawson

Leave a Reply


eight × = 64