500

Wall Street ♥ charter schools

in

Call them cynical, but the widespread involvement of financial firms in the charter school movement raises suspicion among many public school advocates.

The map below illustrates just a few entanglements of big league investors in national school-choice organizations.

[readon2 url="http://news.muckety.com/2013/05/05/wall-street-charter-schools/42601"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

The Science of Value-Added Evaluation

in

"A value-added analysis constitutes a series of personal, high-stakes experiments conducted under extremely uncontrolled conditions".

If drug experiments were conduted like VAM we might all have 3 legs or worse

Value-added teacher evaluation has been extensively criticized and strongly defended, but less frequently examined from a dispassionate scientific perspective. Among the value-added movement's most fervent advocates is a respected scientific school of thought that believes reliable causal conclusions can be teased out of huge data sets by economists or statisticians using sophisticated statistical models that control for extraneous factors.

Another scientific school of thought, especially prevalent in medical research, holds that the most reliable method for arriving at defensible causal conclusions involves conducting randomized controlled trials, or RCTs, in which (a) individuals are premeasured on an outcome, (b) randomly assigned to receive different treatments, and (c) measured again to ascertain if changes in the outcome differed based upon the treatments received.

The purpose of this brief essay is not to argue the pros and cons of the two approaches, but to frame value-added teacher evaluation from the latter, experimental perspective. For conceptually, what else is an evaluation of perhaps 500 4th grade teachers in a moderate-size urban school district but 500 high-stakes individual experiments? Are not students premeasured, assigned to receive a particular intervention (the teacher), and measured again to see which teachers were the more (or less) efficacious?

Granted, a number of structural differences exist between a medical randomized controlled trial and a districtwide value-added teacher evaluation. Medical trials normally employ only one intervention instead of 500, but the basic logic is the same. Each medical RCT is also privy to its own comparison group, while individual teachers share a common one (consisting of the entire district's average 4th grade results).

From a methodological perspective, however, both medical and teacher-evaluation trials are designed to generate causal conclusions: namely, that the intervention was statistically superior to the comparison group, statistically inferior, or just the same. But a degree in statistics shouldn't be required to recognize that an individual medical experiment is designed to produce a more defensible causal conclusion than the collected assortment of 500 teacher-evaluation experiments.

How? Let us count the ways:

  • Random assignment is considered the gold standard in medical research because it helps to ensure that the participants in different experimental groups are initially equivalent and therefore have the same propensity to change relative to a specified variable. In controlled clinical trials, the process involves a rigidly prescribed computerized procedure whereby every participant is afforded an equal chance of receiving any given treatment. Public school students cannot be randomly assigned to teachers between schools for logistical reasons and are seldom if ever truly randomly assigned within schools because of (a) individual parent requests for a given teacher; (b) professional judgments regarding which teachers might benefit certain types of students; (c) grouping of classrooms by ability level; and (d) other, often unknown, possibly idiosyncratic reasons. Suffice it to say that no medical trial would ever be published in any reputable journal (or reputable newspaper) which assigned its patients in the haphazard manner in which students are assigned to teachers at the beginning of a school year.
  • Medical experiments are designed to purposefully minimize the occurrence of extraneous events that might potentially influence changes on the outcome variable. (In drug trials, for example, it is customary to ensure that only the experimental drug is received by the intervention group, only the placebo is received by the comparison group, and no auxiliary treatments are received by either.) However, no comparable procedural control is attempted in a value-added teacher-evaluation experiment (either for the current year or for prior student performance) so any student assigned to any teacher can receive auxiliary tutoring, be helped at home, team-taught, or subjected to any number of naturally occurring positive or disruptive learning experiences.
  • When medical trials are reported in the scientific literature, their statistical analysis involves only the patients assigned to an intervention and its comparison group (which could quite conceivably constitute a comparison between two groups of 30 individuals). This means that statistical significance is computed to facilitate a single causal conclusion based upon a total of 60 observations. The statistical analyses reported for a teacher evaluation, on the other hand, would be reported in terms of all 500 combined experiments, which in this example would constitute a total of 15,000 observations (or 30 students times 500 teachers). The 500 causal conclusions published in the newspaper (or on a school district website), on the other hand, are based upon separate contrasts of 500 "treatment groups" (each composed of changes in outcomes for a single teacher's 30 students) versus essentially the same "comparison group."
  • Explicit guidelines exist for the reporting of medical experiments, such as the (a) specification of how many observations were lost between the beginning and the end of the experiment (which is seldom done in value-added experiments, but would entail reporting student transfers, dropouts, missing test data, scoring errors, improperly marked test sheets, clerical errors resulting in incorrect class lists, and so forth for each teacher); and (b) whether statistical significance was obtained—which is impractical for each teacher in a value-added experiment since the reporting of so many individual results would violate multiple statistical principles.

[readon2 url="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/01/16/17bausell.h32.html"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

A doomsday bill for public ed

in

Innovation Ohio follow up on the news that the public school privatization bill (HB136) is going to change, with some interesting new analysis on what some of the proposed changes might mean

Huffman admitted that in its current form, HB 136 could create a potential “doomsday scenario” for Ohio’s public schools. He said that estimates of the bill’s cost to public schools—$500 million just to pay for students who already attend private schools, and nearly $1 billion in lost revenue once the bill was fully phased in—were “valid.”

The good news is that Huffman announced that a scaled back version of HB 136 would either be introduced as a new bill or rolled into a new education plan Gov. Kasich is expected to submit next year.

The bad news is that even this “scaled back” version would cost districts up to $76.5 million, effectively doubling the cost of private school vouchers from last year.

And many of Huffman’s proposed changes would still present public schools with massive problems.

Take his proposal to cap the amount of state money any district could lose at $4,500 per student, for example.

Under this proposal, locally raised property taxes would still be sent to private schools. Why? Because the $4,500 per pupil in state money Huffman cites is a phantom figure. Its what a district might get before “deductions” for Charter Schools, Open Enrollment, and other voucher programs. Last year, for example, the state provided public school districts with $6.5 billion—which equated to nearly $3,800 for each of the 1.75 million children in those districts. But after “deductions” for charters, vouchers, and open enrollment, that $3,800 shrunk to roughly $3,200. So if districts get $3,200 per pupil from the state—but could lost up to $4,500 per pupil for private school vouchers—they would still lose money. And that would require the schools to either cut programs or seek more funding from taxpayers through local levies.

You can read the whole piece here.

Gutting education for a cup of cheap coffee

in

It has been repeated often by the Governor and Republican legislators that raising income taxes is not a solution to the budget problem Ohio faces, but instead, draconian cuts to education are the way forward. Consequently we face almost $3.1 billion in education cuts over the next 2 years as a result of this policy preference.

But how much of an impact do the 2005 income tax cuts have on take home pay? We thought it would be interesting to look at this question from a teachers perspective.

According to Ohio's Legislative Services Commision (LSC), the average teacher earned $54,656 in 2009, and about $47,500 in 2004, the year before the income tax cuts were phased in.

Ohio average teacher salaries

The Ohio Department of taxation has produced this handy guide to tax rates for each year since 2004. Let's see how much tax a teacher making average salaries in 2004 and 2009 would have paid to the state.

Comparing tax bills for average salaried teachers

Average Teacher in 2004 Average Teacher in 2009
Average Salary $47,500 $54,656
Tax Forumla $1,337.20 + 5.201% of excess over $40,000 $1,112.50 + 4.327% of excess over $40,000
Taxes Paid $1,727.28 $1,746.67

The difference between 2009 and 2004 being $19.39 per year, a nickel a day MORE today.

Republicans would have us believe that for a nickel a day MORE in tax, we have to gut public education, or Ohio would be too uncompetitive to survive. Draw your own conclusions. Perform your own calculations using your own salary and the tax tables to see your "savings".

For those wondering, or thinking it fairer, what tax would be paid on $54,656 if the tax code had not changed

2004 Tax Rates 2009 Tax Rates
Tax Forumla $1,337.20 + 5.201% of excess over $40,000 $1,112.50 + 4.327% of excess over $40,000
Taxes Paid $2099.46 $1,746.67

Which equates to about a buck a day savings ($352.79 per year). A cup of cheap coffee a day.

White Hat Management Political Contributions

in

Plunderbund has an article detailing the failings of White Hat Management as a charter school management company, and in light of the news of the GOP plan to privatize public education, the political crosswinds that created the plan

The goal of this budget seems pretty obvious. White Hat has a problem with their schools and boards and sponsors so the legislature just removes them from the picture, allowing White Hat to drirectly start up schools as for-profit companies, eliminating the hassle of oversight. White Hat has a problem with people questioning how they use public funds provided by the state, so the legislature just makes those funds private as soon as they are delivered to White Hat.

Some of the language in this budget is so specifically directly at helping White Hat that it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Brennan’s lawyers write it themselves. Whether it’s true or not, Ohio’s GOP politicians appear to be paying back one of their largest campaign donors with millions of state dollars while completely disregarding the educational needs of thousands of Ohio’s students.

The whole article is worth a read.

Just to highlight the scope of Brennan's political largese, here is a list of the almost $1.6 million in political campaign contributions made by some of the main players involved with White Hat Management since 2000.

Cycle Amount Contributor Name Recipient Name
2010 $50,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2010 $50,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2010 $30,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2010 $30,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2010 $30,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2010 $25,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2010 $25,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2010 $17,075 BRENNAN, ANN AMER REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2010 $17,075 BRENNAN, DAVID L REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2010 $17,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN CMTE
2010 $17,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2010 $17,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2010 $17,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN CMTE
2010 $11,396 BRENNAN, ANN AMER MANDEL, JOSH
2010 $11,396 BRENNAN, DAVID L KASICH, JOHN & TAYLOR, MARY
2010 $11,395 BRENNAN, DAVID L KASICH, JOHN & TAYLOR, MARY
2010 $11,395 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUSTED, JON
2010 $11,395 BRENNAN, ANN AMER KASICH, JOHN & TAYLOR, MARY
2010 $11,350 BRENNAN, ANN AMER WAGONER, MARK
2010 $11,350 BRENNAN, DAVID L NIEHAUS, TOM
2010 $11,350 BRENNAN, ANN AMER FABER, KEITH
2010 $11,350 BRENNAN, ANN AMER NIEHAUS, TOM
2010 $11,300 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUSTED, JON
2010 $11,300 BRENNAN, ANN AMER MANDEL, JOSH
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L DEWINE, MIKE
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER MORGAN, SETH
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L BATCHELDER, WILLIAM G
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER BATCHELDER, WILLIAM G
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L AMSTUTZ, RON
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUFFMAN, MATT
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L BATCHELDER, WILLIAM G
2010 $11,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER AMSTUTZ, RON
2010 $6,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L YOST, DAVID A
2010 $5,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L BACON, KEVIN
2010 $5,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L YOST, DAVID A
2010 $4,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2010 $3,125 MANNA, ANTHONY OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2010 $250 WEBER III, JOSEPH R MANDEL, JOSH
2010 $250 RICE, MARK A MANDEL, JOSH
2010 $250 MESSER JR, QUENTIN MANDEL, JOSH
2010 $250 WEBER III, JOSEPH R LAROSE, FRANK
2010 $100 MESSER JR, QUENTIN HUSTED, JON
2008 $100,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $100,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $100,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $100,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $50,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $50,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - EXECUTIVE CMTE
2008 $30,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY - STATE CANDIDATE FUND
2008 $25,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L MR Republican National Cmte
2008 $16,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2008 $16,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2008 $16,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2008 $16,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2008 $15,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN CMTE
2008 $12,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L OHIO HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN CMTE
2008 $10,650 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HARRIS, BILL
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L BACON, KEVIN
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER TAYLOR, MARY
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L TAYLOR, MARY
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER BATCHELDER, WILLIAM
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER BATCHELDER, WILLIAM
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L BATCHELDER, WILLIAM
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER COLEY, BILL
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER DOLAN, MATTHEW
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L HOTTINGER, JAY
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L DOLAN, MATTHEW
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L HUSTED, JON
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L PATTON, THOMAS
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L NIEHAUS, TOM
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER CAREY JR, JOHN A
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUSTED, JON
2008 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER JONES, SHANNON
2008 $5,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L HITE, CLIFFORD
2008 $5,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L GINTER, TIM
2008 $5,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HOTTINGER, JAY
2008 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L SCHLICHTER, JOHN
2008 $2,300 HARRISON, E D MS George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $2,300 BRENNAN, ANN Lamar Alexander (R)
2008 $2,300 BRENNAN, DAVID Lamar Alexander (R)
2008 $2,300 BRENNEN, NANCY J George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $2,300 BRENNAN, DAVID L James D Jordan (R)
2008 $1,300 BRENNAN, DAVID L George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $1,000 HARRISON, E D MS George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $1,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $1,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER TIFFANY, TOM
2008 $1,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER DARLING, ALBERTA
2008 $1,000 BRENNAN, ANN AMER COUGHLIN, KEVIN
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER EGELHOFF, JO
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUSTED, JON
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER DAVIS, BRETT
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER PETROWSKI, JERRY J
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER MURSAU, JEFFREY L
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER NERISON, LEE
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HINES, J A
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HELLMAN, DAN
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER NERISON, LEE
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HONADEL, MARK
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER TOWNS, DEBI
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER RIPP, KEITH
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER VAN ROY, KARL
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER FRISKE, DON
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER MURTHA, JOHN
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER WILLIAMS, MARY
2008 $500 BRENNAN, ANN AMER DOCKERY, PAULA
2008 $400 BRENNAN, ANN AMER HUEBSCH, MIKE
2008 $200 BRENNAN, DAVID L George V Voinovich (R)
2008 $200 BRENNAN, ANN AMER VOS, ROBIN J
2008 $200 BRENNAN, ANN AMER COLE, RANDY
2006 $15,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGN CMTE OF OHIO
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, ANN GREEN, MARK A (G)
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L CAREY JR, JOHN A
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L TAYLOR, MARY
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L HUSTED, JON
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVE GREEN, MARK A (G)
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L PETERSON, JON
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L HARTMANN, GREG
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L BRADLEY, JENNETTE B
2006 $10,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L LYNCH, DAVID
2006 $7,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L CAREY JR, JOHN A
2006 $5,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L TAYLOR, MARY
2006 $5,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L SEITZ, BILL
2006 $4,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L PETERSON, JON
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L LUTHER, BRANT
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L BACON, KEVIN
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L MARTIN, EARL J
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L STIVERS, STEVE
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L CATES, GARY
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L NIEHAUS, TOM
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L HOPPEL, JIM
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L STIVERS, STEVE
2006 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L HAYES, WILLIAM C
2006 $2,100 BRENNAN, DAVID L Craig Foltin (R)
2006 $2,100 BRENNAN, DAVID L Craig Foltin (R)
2006 $2,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L PATTON, THOMAS F
2006 $2,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L MARTIN, EARL J
2006 $2,000 BRENNAN, DAVID L WEBSTER, SHAWN N
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L HAGAN, JOHN P
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L SETZER, ARLENE J
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L CALVERT, CHARLES E
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L NIEHAUS, TOM
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L CATES, GARY
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L PADGETT, JOY
2004 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L PETRO, JIM
2004 $2,000 BRENNAN, NANCY J MRS George W Bush (R)
2004 $2,000 BRENNAN, ANN A MRS George W Bush (R)
2004 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY Steven C LaTourette (R)
2004 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY Mike DeWine (R)
2004 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY Bill McCollum (R)
2004 $1,000 KROHN, MARK E MR George W Bush (R)
2004 $1,000 MORRIS, JOHN C MR George W Bush (R)
2004 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY J George V Voinovich (R)
2004 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY J George V Voinovich (R)
2004 $500 BRENNAN, DAVID SPADY, FAWN
2002 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L RAUSSEN, JAMES
2002 $2,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L RAUSSEN, JAMES
2002 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY J George V Voinovich (R)
2002 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY Mike DeWine (R)
2000 $1,500 BRENNAN, DAVID L GARDNER, RANDALL
2000 $1,000 BRENNAN, NANCY J George V Voinovich (R)

Data taken from www.transparencydata.com.