 |
I got my start as a journalist freelancing stories for the old Milwaukee Sentinel about problems with achievement test results at Milwaukee Public Schools. Throughout the 1980s, the media’s increasing focus on problems at MPS helped to lay the groundwork for a radically different alternative – a voucher system where low-income families could choose to send their children to private schools. The case for school choice could not have been made without years of achievement test data showing the below-average performance of MPS schools.
So it is highly ironic – and quite alarming – that Gov. Scott Walker is proposing to end the requirement that choice schools participate in the state system of standardized testing. I can’t think of a better way to guarantee these schools are failures.
Last week the media reported the results of state tests for MPS and choice schools. The average scores were astoundingly bad for some choice schools. The proportion of students who were proficient in reading and math was just 12 percent and 14 percent at Texas Bufkin Christian Academy; 17 percent and 6 percent at Travis Technology High School; 20 percent and 7 percent at Washington DuBois Christian Leadership Academy; 23 percent and 9 percent at Right Step, Inc.; 18 percent and 0 percent (Did no one take the math test?) at Dr Brenda Noach Choice School; 16 percent and 9 percent at Destiny High School. You get the feeling some of these schools worked harder on creating their name than educating the students.
Standardized tests are only signposts. They cannot measure much of the learning that goes on – or doesn’t – in schools. But when the signposts look this bad, good grief – it’s obvious the school is having problems. Yet Walker and many Republicans want to end this testing, arguing the tests are unneeded because the free market will magically make these schools work.
For starters, this ignores what educators at both choice schools and MPS (which for many years allowed considerable parental choice) have found. As a past story in Milwaukee Magazine noted, parents may choose schools based on word of mouth, on how close the school is to their home or how safe its surrounding neighborhood, on the busing schedule (if the child is on the bus longer that means less need for parental care at home) and many other factors. These decisions might be quite sensible for a particular family, but they undercut the idea that the highest performing schools are the ones that will inevitably be chosen – and survive – in a free market system. If there was any doubt, all you have to do is look at the many choice schools with abysmal test results.
Howard Fuller, the former Milwaukee Public Schools superintendent and nationally known leader of the school choice movement, has broken with many of his former confederates on the issue of accountability. He argues that the state tests are needed. Too many unqualified and poorly run schools are getting into the school choice program, he told Milwaukee Magazine. “We need a combination of parental choice and wise regulation.”
Republicans would never propose a school system without any state testing for their own political districts. Nor would the taxpayers tolerate this. Yet GOP leaders are willing to allow such a system for some of the poorest students – and those most in need of a great education – in the state.
The choice schools now serve some 20,000 students, and that is likely to greatly increase, as vouchers are expanded to all Milwaukee students regardless of their income. This is essentially the second biggest school system in the state, and could potentially grow to become the biggest, and Republicans want no accountability of the voucher schools’ performance. State taxpayers will have no assurance the money isn’t being wasted. And all those choice schools with the colorful names and dreadful test scores will get the message that educational performance doesn’t matter.
Weird Candidate Endorsements
Last week, I raised the question whether the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel would change its endorsement in the county executive race, just seven weeks after picking Chris Abele in the primary. The newspaper decided against such a flip-flop, but the wording of its endorsement almost made it sound like the editorial board preferred Jeff Stone. The two candidates are not far apart on the issues, the editorial noted, which would seem to leave personal character as the deciding factor. The editorial cited no problems on that count for Stone, while noting of Abele that “allowing seven years to pass before resolving a drunken driving ticket was irresponsible, as was throwing a firecracker into a neighbor’s property and not showing up in court, as was his slowness to pay a slew of parking tickets.” Yet Abele got their endorsement.
Then there is the newspaper’s endorsement of incumbent David Prosser for State Supreme Court Justice. The editorial describes challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg as “brilliant” and calls Prosser “competent and modest.” It suggests Prosser needs anger management classes and chastises him for calling the chief justice a bitch, “issuing a news release indicating he would complement the new Republican governor” and “trying to appeal in a ham-handed way to Milwaukee County voters by citing his rulings.” Yet it tells us to vote for this seemingly loose cannon, for one reason: Because according to a Wisconsin Law Journal article, Prosser was the least predictable conservative on the court, and therefore more independent, whereas Kloppenburg is likely to join the court’s liberal wing. But that same law journal article shows the court usually has a 5-2 majority, which includes Prosser. If that’s the case, Kloppenburg would be more independent of the current majority, while bringing a brilliant mind. So why are we voting for Prosser?
I had previously predicted the Shepherd Express would make no endorsement in the race for county executive, and I was wrong. But just like the JS, the alternative weekly seems to find it a painful endorsement to make. The Shepherd notes it is suing Abele (in a dispute centering around the film festival that the weekly lost control of), that it has had its differences in trying to work with him, that some readers have difficulty connecting to Abele, and that he has “many shortcomings.” But given Stone’s “radical” Republican agenda, better to hold your nose and vote for Abele, the weekly suggests. That at least is more philosophically consistent than the JS editorial.
Yet both publications advertise their unhappiness with Abele with warnings to him. Abele “needs to understand he’s on probation,” the JS declares. “He’ll have less than a year to prove himself” before he has to run for reelection, and among other things, “must demonstrate that he can follow the rules that everyone else has to follow.”
He’ll also be on probation with the Shepherd, which promises “we will monitor his administration very carefully and provide you with a critical analysis.”
So vote for Abele, the candidate who is on probation and needs careful monitoring.
The Buzz
-The results for some choice schools were terrific: Notre Dame Middle
School, for instance, surpassed not just the average scores for MPS,
but for the state.
-I’ve gotten a bunch of literature from Prosser, all about how he will protect our right to have guns. Great stuff in many parts of the state, but two mailings of this in the city of Milwaukee? Bizarre.
-Incumbent Supreme Court candidates almost always win reelection. But predictions are for a typical low turnout for this kind of race but bigger turnouts in Democratic Dane and Milwaukee Counties, which both have hotly contested races for county executive. That should make this a very close race.
-Here’s an interesting piece in Progressive magazine covering a Scott Walker speech where he explained that God helped him decide when to run and not run for governor.
-The Sunday JS piece by reporter John Fauber – on how UW-Madison professors promoted addictive pain killers made by companies who funded their work – is a must-read. The increasing trend of professors getting in bed with private businesses who pay them off is a timely issue to consider as we discuss giving more independence and ability to respond to the marketplace for UW-Madison.
