LA SCHOOLS … AND OTHER MUSINGS-It’s always interesting or amusing or something when different folks come up with different conclusions from similar data. I often fear that we are being data driven, like Thelma+Louise, off some cliff (photo) in pursuit of vastly differing cinematic endings.
Two headlines from last week:
►MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA'S LATINO VOTERS HIGHLY VALUE SCHOOL TESTING
Zahira Torres, LA Times April 12, 2015 :: Latino voters consider California's standardized tests an important measure of student growth and school performance, according to a new poll that shows the state's largest minority group also feels strongly about teacher accountability and investing additional…
►SURVEY FINDS MANY PARENTS KNOW NOTHING ABOUT NEW COMMON CORE TESTS
Adolfo Guzman-Lopez, KPCC April 23, 2015 :: According to the nonpartisan research group Public Policy Institute of California, 55 percent of public school parents surveyed say they have not heard at all about the new tests that public schools are giving students grade 3 to 8 and grade 11 starting this spring.
Essentially the same questions, infinitely different conclusions. It would be wonderful to conclude that those Latino voters were somehow better informed…perhaps the Translation Units and Communications Departments at the school districts are overachieving?
For the most part, the numbers from the two polls agree – but the interpreters of the data are looking for different patterns in the bottom of the teacup.
The first difference to note is that The Times cites+polls “Voters” – and KPCC/PPIC refers to “Parents”.
We need to remember that the customers of public education are parents – who tend to be demographically Brown – while the supporters of public education, fiscally and at the ballot box, tend to be a little Whiter. If I were to go all cynical and capitalist and register as a Republican I might say that those voter-taxpayers are the true “customers” – and that parents are only providers of raw materials – but I’m not going to. But hold that thought.
The folks who did the parent survey, the Public Policy Institute of California, headline their findings as: “MOST PUBLIC SCHOOL PARENTS UNFAMILIAR WITH NEW ONLINE TESTS: High Hopes But Little Knowledge About Common Core, New Funding Formula” – with two notable bullets:• MOST EXPECT NEW FUNDING FORMULA TO BOOST ACHIEVEMENT
• STATE FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS IS UP, BUT MOST SAY IT’S NOT ENOUGH
I refer all 4LAKids readers to the entire survey - but let’s dig a little deeper into the questions The Times and KPCC are spinning here:
From the actual survey:►PARENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENTS: In the latest chapter of a long history of standardized testing in California, students are taking their first Smarter Balanced tests, which are designed to assess their proficiency in math, reading, and writing. The Smarter Balanced assessments are a new set of tests designed to measure whether students are proficient in math, reading, and writing at their grade levels. Following the implementation of the Common Core standards, these new tests are being administered statewide for the first time this spring.
●How familiar are public school parents with the Smarter Balanced tests?
A majority of public school parents (55%) say they have heard nothing at all about the new tests. Only 8 percent have heard a lot about the Smarter Balanced assessments, while 36 percent have heard a little. Latino public school parents (54%) are much more likely than white public school parents (32%) to say they have heard about the Smarter Balanced tests.
Unlike the paper-based tests they are replacing, the Smarter Balanced tests are administered online. There has been some concern as to whether all schools have the computers, Internet bandwidth, and technology staff necessary to effectively administer these new computer-based tests.
●The question was: “California public school students will participate in the Smarter Balanced Assessment testing this spring. Thinking about the Smarter Balanced Assessment testing, how confident are you that your local public schools have the computers and technology resources they need to administer the test—are you very confident, somewhat confident, not too confident, or not at all confident?”
Seven in 10 public school parents are very (29%) or somewhat (42%) confident that their local public schools have the technology resources needed. Notably, public school parents with incomes over $40,000 are twice as likely as those with lower incomes to say they are not too or not at all confident (35% to 16%).{module [1177]}
►STUDENT TESTING: Californians are divided about whether standardized tests in general are an accurate indicator of a student’s progress and abilities.
●The Question was: “How confident are you that standardized tests are an accurate indicator of a student's progress and abilities?”
Half are very (12%) or somewhat confident (39%) in these tests, while 46 percent are not too (26%) or not at all (20%) confident. Findings were similar in April 2013 (53%), but confidence today is lower than in April 2006, when 63 percent of Californians were at least somewhat confident. Among public school parents, 62 percent are very (19%) or somewhat (43%) confident in standardized tests. Latinos (64%) and Asians (59%) are more likely to express confidence than whites (42%) and blacks (38%). Fifty percent of Democrats, 46 percent of Republicans, and 43 percent of independents are at least somewhat confident about the accuracy of standardized tests.
So The Times story is that Latinos are well informed and convinced while KPCC and PPIC and others like EdSource [http://bit.ly/1PBPmIA] say that most people aren’t informed at all.
And confidence is slipping.
LAST OCT 31, Moody’s Investors Service - a bond rating agency - issued a report: GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS EXACERBATES LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT – that said in part:
“...On October 22, KIPP Schools, the nation's largest network of charter schools, announced plans to more than double its enrollment in Los Angeles by 2020. The continued expansion of independent charter schools is credit negative for the Los Angeles Unified School District (Aa2 stable), because it will exacerbate the district's current trend of declining enrollment. LAUSD, the state's largest school district, has experienced a 20% decline in enrollment over the last 10 years, more than 40% of which is due to attrition to independent charter schools.
• Declining enrollment means lost revenues for school districts under the State of California's (Aa3 stable) revenue allocation formula.
• For every 1% reduction in enrollment, the district's revenues also fall approximately 1%.
• KIPP intends to more than double enrollment within the jurisdiction of LAUSD, from 4,000 students to 9,000 students, by 2020.”
The full Moody’s report is behind a pay firewall and I have yet to locate anyone at the District who will share with me as an Oversight Committee member – let alone 4LAKids readers.
ON FRIDAY THE TIMES endorsed Tamar Galatzan and Ref Rodriguez for school board and got it wrong about George McKenna being on the ballot in the May 19th election. (Note to The Times: McKenna already won, he ran unopposed in the March primary and got 100% of the vote!)
The Times endorsement of Galatzan wasn’t quite as filled with misgivings as their misgiving-filled-one for her was back in the primary. In the editorial board’s opinion her knee-jerk support for John Deasy and failure to ask hard questions grows more palatable with the passage of time …much like their own.
They endorsed another candidate against Bennett Kayser in the primary, he didn’t make the cut so they’ve pivoted to Rodriguez. They say it shouldn’t be a race for-or-against charter schools or the teachers union …but they are the LA Times and we all know how they feel about about charter schools and labor unions!
The Times also endorsed Richard Vladovic without a good thing to say for him… other than they think even less of his opponent.
I’m sure Times publisher Austin Buetner (…and the Billionaire Boys Club, former mayors Bloomberg+Tony, the ®eformers on Jaimie Lynton’s list* [] and the California Charter School Association) would feel much more positive about the LAUSD Board of Ed if he could just install the Times Editorial Board in their place.
LA School Report – which likes to count money like ®eformers count test scores - reports: “Overall, the pro-Rodriguez groups have outspent the pro-Kayser groups by almost 9-to-1, with the charter group outspending the union by nearly 34-to-1.” And that doesn’t count the Lotteria $! (see following)
Luckily, dollars spent don’t count on Election Day, votes cast count on Election Day. If you don’t think so just ask Boardmembers Luis Sanchez, Antonio Sanchez, Kate Anderson and Alex Johnson.
Consistency being the hobgoblin, 4LAKids continues to endorse SCOTT SCHMERELSON IN DISTRICT 3, BENNETT KAYSER IN DISTRICT 5 & RICHARD VLAODOVIC IN DISTRICT 7 – just like we did back in March.
The mail-in ballots have been mailed out, fill ‘em in and mail ‘em in. Early and often. Or go to the polls on May 19th. Tell a friend/bring a friend. Democracy is not a spectator sport.
¡Onward/Adelante!
* - Jamie’s moving to NYC, they can’t print it in the Hollywood Reporter if it’s not true! OMG: Who’ll run the LASR?
(Scott Folsom is a parent and parent leader in LAUSD. He is the former President of Los Angeles 10th District PTSA and represents PTA as Vice-chair the LAUSD Construction Bond Citizen's Oversight Committee. Scott is a member of the California State PTA Board on Managers. He blogs at the excellent 4 LA Kids … where this perspective was originally posted.)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 13 Issue 35
Pub: Apr 28, 2015
