برچسب: Stop

  • Anand: The Plutocrats Stop Pretending to be Philanthropists

    Anand: The Plutocrats Stop Pretending to be Philanthropists


    Anand Girihadaras writes in his blog “The Ink” that the billionaire elite have given up their pretense of using their fortunes to make a better world. Two events stripped away the veil: one, the greedy gaudy wedding of Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez in Venice and the announcement by Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan that they are abandoning their lofty goals of curing the world of disease.

    Naked greed is in, big-hearted philanthropy is out. The oligarchs revel in their splendor.

    Anand writes:

    Like bottomless mimosas and a mother’s unsolicited advice, eras don’t just end. The new thing elbows its way in, the old thing lingers like a houseguest, and they compete for primacy. Only eventually — sometimes long after — do you notice the eclipse.

    No one was ever going to announce that the era of performative elite do-gooding had ceded to the era of naked oligarchy. But this week three events made that eclipse clear.

    The first was the multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos’s wedding, in Venice, to Lauren Sánchez, who would surely float if she fell into a canal. As celebrities poured into a city already strained by tourism, and the happy couple was photographed frolicking in a literal foam party aboard a yacht, there was an almost refreshing, well, nakedness to the avarice, to the carelessness, to the not-giving of civic fucks.

    There was a reminder of the omnipotence and the utter loneliness at the commanding heights: you can get anyone you want to your wedding, and the people you want are the people you’d invite if you told your assistant to run to the dentist’s office, pick up People magazine, write down names in it, and invite them. These are people who have everything, and who don’t have the thing everybody else does.

    The second was the inevitable announcement by multi-billionaire Mark Zuckerberg’s charitable foundation, run with his wife, Priscilla Chan, that it is no longer focused on ending all the diseases, as it once promised. Rather, in the Trump era, it is focused on things that would not be any trouble to Trump. “Can we cure all diseases in our children’s lifetime?” read a screen behind the couple at a rehearsal in 2016. The answer turns out to be: No. The Washington Post, owned by the oligarch in the above item, nonetheless rightly warned, in the Zuckerberg-Chan case, of “the risks for communities reliant on wealthy private donors.”

    The third event was the passage today of Donald Trump’s and the Republicans’ budget, a document of searing meanness that former Labor Secretary Robert Reich calls the “Worst Bill in History” — a “giant budget-busting, Medicaid-shattering, shafting-the-poor-and-working-class, making-the-rich-even richer bill.” Like the Bezos wedding and the Zuckerberg-Chan pivot, the bill had one refreshing quality, though. It made zero effort to mask its ugliness. It said the cruel part out loud.

    There is a nakedness to our oligarchy now, and it is pruny as hell. But at least there is this: As far as I can tell, the era of highly performative elite do-gooding is passing. The billionaires who felt the need to give TED talks about eradicating poverty while also causing poverty. The incessant blabbing about Africa by oligarchs who rarely left Connecticut. The pledges to save democracy, save the planet, and, yes, end all diseases. The buy-one-donate-one products. Red things involving Bono.Subscribe

    I wrote a whole book about that era and its maneuvers and deceptions and costs, and it occurs to me now that the entire complex of activities I chronicled is giving way to something altogether different. What is ascendant now is nakedness — of greed, of sociopathy, of power thirst. Somewhere along the way, the professed goal of the elite morphed from fighting inequality from above to defending their castles in the sky.

    There is a kind of progress in this, because what is naked is easier to see, even if pruny.

    This eclipsing of performative virtue by pungent avarice, of fake billionaire “change” by real billionaire wolfishness, is part of why figures like Zohran Mamdani are rising. When I published Winners Take All in 2018, the things I was trying to deconstruct took explaining. That is, after all, why you write a book. I’m not sure a book is needed now.

    The moves, the lust, the underlying goals — all of it is in the open. This era is less confusing. And people are voting accordingly.

    It’s also why a generation gap is opening. The old guard power elite, seeing Mamdani’s rise, is terrified that the Soviet Union could soon be coming to a bodega near them, even though they probably don’t live near any bodegas and probably think the word “bodega” is Arabic. But their children and grandchildren are not afraid of free buses and childcare. They’re willing to take a chance on something that would switch their trajectory off the track from nothing to nowhere and on to a course of life.



    Source link

  • Netanyahu Is a War Criminal. Will Trump Stop Him?

    Netanyahu Is a War Criminal. Will Trump Stop Him?


    Gideon Levy, a writer for the Israeli progressive publication Ha’aretz, excoriates the ongoing military campaign in Gaza. It’s about to get worse. Netanyahu is perpetuating the war for no reason. He has utterly destroyed Gaza. He has ordered the bombing of hospitals and schools, claiming that they sheltered terrorists while knowing that he was committing war crimes. For the last three months, Israel has prevented food, medicine and humanitarian aid from entering Gaza.

    Nothing the Israeli Defense Forces do can eliminate Hamas. Their soldiers live in an elaborate city of well-supplied tunnels, protected from the bombing. When hostages were released, members of Hamas appeared in their uniforms, faces hidden, brandishing their weapons, letting the Israelis know that they are still a force, still in charge. This served to goad the extremists who surround Netanyahu. More killing lies ahead. The only one who could end it is Trump. He’s in the region. He’s not stopping in Israel. He’s not using his relationship with Netanyahu to stop the killing. He should.

    He could intervene instead of musing idly about turning Gaza into “the Riviera of the .Middle East” and expelling its people elsewhere.

    Gideon Levy wrote:

    About 70 people from dawn to noon on Wednesday. Almost twice the number of those killed in the massacre at Kibbutz Nir Oz. 22 of them were children, and 15 were women. The previous evening, 23 were killed in a hospital. 

    Operation Gideon’s Chariots has yet to begin, and the chariots of genocide are already warming their engines.

    How will we call this massacre, so indiscriminate and pointless, even before the big operation has begun? 23 killed in the bombing of a hospital – one of the most serious war crimes – just to try and kill Mohammed Sinwar, the latest devil, with nine bunker buster bombs – everything to provide Yedioth Ahronoth in their lust for the main headline: “In his brother’s footsteps.” 

    The readers loved it, Israelis loved it, no one came out against it on Wednesday.

    They made peace in Riyadh, and in Gaza they massacred. It’s hard to think of a more grating contrast than this, between the scenes in Riyadh and those in Jabalya on Wednesday.

    Children’s bodies being carried by their parents, the bulldozer trying to clear a way for the ambulance and being blown up from the air, the people burrowing in the ruins of the hospital searching for their loved ones – all this in the face of lifting sanctions from Syria and the hope for a new future.

    Nothing, not even the elimination of another Sinwar, can justify the indiscriminate bombing of a hospital. This unwavering truth has been totally forgotten here by now. Everything is normal, everything is justified and approved, even the attack on the intensive care ward in the European Hospital in Khan Yunis is a mitzvah. 

    No choice exists but to cry out again: You cannot attack hospitals – and not schools that have been turned into shelters, either – even if the strategic air command of Hamas is hiding underneath them. Even if Sinwar is there, whose kill is so pointless.

    Is there anything left we can do in Gaza that will be seen in Israel as morally and legally unacceptable? 100 dead children? A thousand women for Sinwar the brother? It was necessary to eliminate him, they explained, because he was an “obstacle to a hostage deal.” 

    We’ve even lost our shame. The sole obstacle to a hostage deal sits in Jerusalem, his name is Benjamin Netanyahu, along with his fascist partners, and no one can even conceive that it’s legitimate to harm them to remove the obstacle.

    What happened on Wednesday in Gaza is just a promo for what will occur in the coming months, if no one stops Israel. The further Donald Trump’s colossal campaign in the Gulf advances, the pistol that will stop Israel has yet to be seen.

    When supposedly there was still a purpose, when the goals were seemingly clear, when the human need to punish and take revenge for October 7 was still understandable, when it still seemed that Israel knew what it wanted at all; it was still possible somehow to accept the mass killing and destruction. 

    But no longer. Now, when it’s clear Israel has no goal and no plan, there is no longer any way to justify what happened in Gaza on Tuesday night.

    No Israeli leader opened their mouth, not a single one. The left’s hope, Yair Golan, on a good day calls to end the war, and like him, tens of thousands of determined protesters. 

    They want to end the war to bring the hostages home. They are also worried about the lives of the soldiers who will fall in vain. 

    But what about Gaza? What about its sacrifice? How have we reached a situation in which no Zionist politician can come out in its defense? Not one righteous man in Sodom, not a single one. 

    The sights from there once again scorched the soul on Wednesday, once again body carts, once again children in a long line of body bags on the floor, here lie their bodies, and once again the heartbreaking weeping of parents for their daughters and sons. 

    About 100 people were killed in Gaza on Wednesday. Almost all of them innocent, except for their being Palestinians who live in the Gaza Strip. They were killed by Israeli soldiers. This is their appetizer for the campaign their military aspires to – and we remain silent.



    Source link

  • How California can stop losing great teacher candidates before they start

    How California can stop losing great teacher candidates before they start


    Tylyn Fields, with some of her fifth-grade students, is now a beloved teacher. But she almost never made it to the classroom.

    Courtesy: Tylyn Fields

    During California’s most recent teacher shortage, Tylyn Fields, a trained social worker, saw teaching as a calling and a promising career. Smart and motivated to make a difference, she was an excellent candidate for the high-need schools in the community where she lived and worked. Sadly, her research into teacher education revealed an impossible choice. A quality preservice program would require quitting her job for a year of unpaid coursework and student teaching. Taking out more loans was a nonstarter: she already owed thousands for previous student loans.

    We desperately need more well-trained teachers across the state. And while there are countless aspiring teachers eager to make a difference in their communities, the financial barriers to entering the profession are pushing promising candidates toward emergency credentials or away from teaching altogether. Teaching is a public service profession. For too many, their future earnings as public school teachers are not enough to pay back the upfront costs of preparation, causing them to enter the profession as an Intern with little or no training so they can earn a salary, or simply give up on the idea of becoming a teacher.

    California has made impressive progress in recent years to begin addressing this issue. In 2019, the state began investing in the Golden State Teacher Grant (GSTG) program to offer $20,000 tuition grants for teacher candidates who commit to teaching in high-need schools. And over the past 5 years the program has evolved to prioritize candidates who need the funding most and who seek meaningful teacher preparation before becoming teachers.

    The GSTG program has made an extraordinary difference for thousands of teachers, including Tylyn. At the Alder Graduate School of Education, we focus on community-based recruitment of aspiring teachers and saw a significant jump in applications thanks to GSTG. Without the financial support from the state, Tylyn said she would have waited until she could pay off her student loans – about 10 years, she estimated.

    To extend allocated funding for longer, GSTG awards were cut in half – to $10,000 – and the funding has run out. The Governor’s revised May budget for 2025-26 includes $64.2 million for the program, which is barely enough to extend GSTG for one more year.  By the time the funding could be signed into law, teacher candidates will already be enrolled in programs, having less of a potential impact on recruitment.

    We propose three big ideas to better support California’s teacher preparation pipeline. 

    1. Establish consistent financial aid for aspiring teachers so that districts and preparation programs can share reliable recruitment offers with candidates. Multi-year funding for the GSTG program is one way to do this and would allow for more reliable messaging to candidates. Another could be a teacher candidate loan program that could draw from Proposition 98 funds that are somewhat more shielded from the volatility of California’s General Fund.
    1. Create a layered system of needs-based financial support, with baseline financial support for those meeting need criteria, and layered support for candidates who commit to a high-need subject, school, or region. This would broaden access for lower-income individuals while giving the state tools for influencing candidates’ choices.
    1. Restructure aid such that pre-service preparation can compete with the financial appeal of emergency pathways. Ideally, candidates could earn pay and benefits while they learn to teach and have their training costs paid for. We wisely do this for Army and police cadets because it’s unthinkable that we’d send them directly to the field without training or have them pay for their own training. Similarly, teacher candidates should be paid for their pursuit of this public service profession.

    In these tight budget times, the most helpful short-term action is to increase the proposed GSTG reinvestment to cover at least two or three years of awards, so that it is useful for teacher recruitment.

    Ending with some great news: after enrolling in Alder’s pre-service residency program, Tylyn graduated a year later with a teaching credential and master’s degree in Education, and took a job as a elementary school teacher in her local school district. She is about to enter her second year of teaching and she is thriving – her students, principal and colleagues are grateful she was able to become a teacher. As a state, let’s continue to push forward with the good reforms we started six years ago, so that many more candidates like Tylyn can find their way to the classroom.

    •••

    Heather Kirkpatrick is CEO and president of Alder Graduate School of Education, a nonprofit, community-based, professional workforce development pathway that partners with public TK-12 school systems across California.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Next stop on transfer students’ journey: UC Berkeley’s new, high-end dorm

    Next stop on transfer students’ journey: UC Berkeley’s new, high-end dorm


    Students move into UC Berkeley’s Anchor House on Aug. 21, 2024.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Elizabeth Diaz was the valedictorian of her high school class in Bakersfield. But that does not mean her path to a four-year university has been easy.

    “Honestly, (UC Berkeley has) been my dream university since I was in high school,” Diaz said. “I had originally committed before, but unfortunately I wasn’t able to afford it.”

    Instead, Diaz spent two years at Bakersfield College, where she “felt a lot of stigma” for not having gone further from home for the next step in her education. “I felt like, you know what, I’m here. I’m not going to be able to make it anymore. I’m just going to stay here in my city,” Diaz said.

    Former Bakersfield College student Elizabeth Diaz settles into her dorm room for transfer students at UC Berkeley’s new Anchor House.
    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    While attending community college, she pushed herself to get involved during the first two years, knowing it would take more to prepare herself for another shot at UC Berkeley than simply attending classes. “I started off getting involved with on-campus jobs as a tutor,” Diaz said. “I got involved with student government. I was a student activities manager, I created the history club on campus trying to, you know, get rid of that sense that ‘history sucks,’ because history is so cool. We’re living in it all the time.”

    Diaz also got involved in the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) because the organization is “tied … with my identity growing up as a daughter of an undocumented family … (I’m glad about) getting involved with the nonprofit CHRILA (and) advocating for other families who are still struggling,” Diaz said, adding, “Thankfully my family has been transitioning; my dad actually now has citizenship.”

    And she also took advantage of resources like Bakersfield College’s Extended Opportunity Programs and Services.  

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LMUVNQMsZY

    Watch Elizabeth Diaz move into her new dorm room with her family.

    “I kept myself accountable. Being a part of resource programs like EOPS … and the TRIO Student Support Services made me really, really, really super grateful for my community college, for allowing me the opportunity to get to know myself better and what I wanted to do.”

    Last month, Diaz finally achieved that dream, enrolling in UC Berkeley as a transfer student and moving into Anchor House, a brand-new residence hall specifically for transfer students on the university’s campus.

    Anchor House, a gift from the Helen Diller Foundation, is an apartment-style community that features high-end amenities such as a yoga studio, a rooftop vegetable garden and multiple lounge areas. It is also home to the new Transfer Student Center.

    “It’s like walking into a nice hotel,” a parent marveled when passing through the entrance.

    Immediately upon entering, the extravagance of the modern fixtures screamed resort more than undergraduate student housing. Even with ceilings akin to a cathedral, the front desk emitted an approachable warmth with the eager smiles of the resident assistants — a far cry from many freshman dorm buildings at UC Berkeley that don’t even have a lobby.

    Anchor House’s transfer-exclusive status brings both security in housing and an opportunity to grow relationships.

    “Last year coming in, I was still waiting on on-campus housing until the last round of housing offers, which was three weeks until the school semester started. It was nerve-wracking not having a place to live as the semester was approaching,” said Max Ortega, a transfer student from Los Medanos College in Pittsburg, now entering his senior year.

    Without a well-established transfer community, the transition to UC Berkeley was difficult last year as a new student, said Jonathan Zakharov, a rising senior from Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill. He noted the stark contrast between new first-year students “right out of high school,” and transfers with life experience and diverse backgrounds, saying it was “impossible” to find other transfer students to connect with after moving in.

    “If this were my first year while living at Anchor House, it would have been easier to relate to people,” Zakharov added.

    While transfer students make up 21% of undergraduates at UC Berkeley, the lack of community was clear. According to Anchor House resident director Ryan Felber, transfer students can feel “impostor syndrome,” which he hopes to remedy through a “built-in” community in students’ residential lives.

    “This space will be a literal anchor for them to hold onto and a place to call home,” Felber said.

    Jennifer Dodson
    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Anchor House is open to both newly admitted and current transfers — and for Jennifer Dodson, a re-entry student who spent 20 years working in corporate accounting, living at Anchor House in her final year will be a major shift from last year’s housing.

    “As a junior transfer, I was placed in Unit 1 Putnam, which is primarily a freshman dorm,” Dodson said. “I was also roommates with a freshman student, but she was mature, and we got along very well.”

    Dodson, who turned 40 in June, is looking forward to Anchor House’s “networking opportunities,” an aspect she wasn’t able to experience in her first year living in Unit 1, in addition to building new friendships and meeting new people from diverse backgrounds.

    “It’s never too late to go back to school,” said incoming junior transfer and re-entry student Amye Elbert, who raised three children and one grandchild up until starting at UC Berkeley this fall.

    Elbert recently turned 52 years old, and is a first-generation college student.

    “Growing up, I always wanted to have a college degree, but in my aversive background, no one talked about college,” Elbert said. “I had kids early and had to take jobs I wasn’t interested in. Once my kids grew up and I didn’t have four mouths to feed, I knew I wanted to fulfill my dream of going to school.”

    After spending three years at Los Medanos College and earning three associate degrees in fine arts, art practice and art history, she will major in art practice at UC Berkeley with the aim of becoming a middle school art educator.

    “When I was in middle school, I just entered foster care and felt awful. But I had this art teacher who made me feel important and loved my artwork, and I want to do something similar for young students in situations like mine.” 

    Jo Moon is a third-year political economy and media studies student at UC Berkeley and a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Let’s stop tinkering and really change how schools address mental health

    Let’s stop tinkering and really change how schools address mental health


    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    What are education leaders doing about transforming the way schools address learning, behavior and emotional problems? The current answer, it seems, is: not much.

    We do see increasing discussions among education leaders about transforming education in general. Naturally, much of the focus is on improving instruction and making major changes in how schools are managed (e.g., financed, administered, held accountable). However, when it comes to improving how schools play their role in providing support when students are not doing well, proposals for transformative changes generally are not forthcoming.

    The result: As the number of learning, behavior and emotional problems increases, schools continue to react in inadequate ways.

    What’s wrong with what schools are doing now?

    All schools devote resources to coping with student problems. Some are able to offer a range of student and learning supports; others can provide only what is mandated. In the majority of schools, what is available usually covers relatively few students. More resources would help. But school budgets always are tight, and adding the number of student support staff that advocates call for is really not in the cards.

    In general, districts plan and implement student and learning supports in a fragmented and piecemeal manner, generating a variety of specialized programs and services. Over many years, increasing concern about fragmented approaches has produced calls for “integrated services” and, recently, for “integrated support systems.”

    However, by focusing primarily on fragmentation, policymakers and school improvement advocates fail to deal with a core underlying problem. What drives the fragmentation is the longstanding marginalization in school improvement policy of the role schools must play in addressing barriers to learning and teaching.

    A fundamental challenge for education leaders and policymakers is ending this marginalization. Meeting the challenge requires escaping old ways of thinking about how schools address learning, behavior and emotional problems.

    What might a transformed approach look like?

    Addressing the pervasive and complex barriers that impede effective teaching and student learning requires a systemwide approach that comprehensively and equitably supports whole-child development and learning. This involves districts and schools rethinking how they frame the practices they use to address learning, behavior and emotional problems.

    In this respect, the current widespread adoption of some form of a multitiered “continuum of interventions” (commonly known as MTSS) is a partial step in the right direction. This framework recognizes that a full range of intervention must include a focus on promoting whole-student healthy development, preventing problems, providing immediate assistance when problems appear, and ensuring assistance for serious and chronic special education concerns. But moving forward, our research has clarified the need to reframe each level of intervention into subsystems designed to weave together school and community resources.

    Moreover, our research indicates that the various programs, services, initiatives and strategies can be grouped into six domains of classroom and schoolwide student and learning support. The six arenas encompass interventions that:

    • Embed student and learning supports into regular classroom strategies to enable learning and teaching
    • Support transitions (e.g., new grade, new school, before/after school, during lunch and other daily transitions)
    • Increase home and school connections and engagement
    • Respond to — and, where feasible, prevent — school and personal crises
    • Increase community involvement and collaborative engagement
    • Facilitate student and family access to special assistance.

    Organizing the activity in this way helps clarify what supports are needed in and out of the classroom and across each level of the continuum to enable effective teaching and motivate student learning.

    We recognize that the changes education leaders are already pursuing represent considerable challenges and that the changes we discuss can be daunting.

    But maintaining the status quo is untenable, and just doing more tinkering will not meet the need.

    Transforming how schools play their role in addressing barriers to learning and teaching into a unified, comprehensive and equitable system that is fully integrated into school improvement policy and practice is essential to enhancing equity of opportunity for students to succeed at school and beyond.

    •••

    Howard Adelman and Linda Taylor are co-directors of the Center for MH in Schools & Student/Learning Supports at UCLA, an initiative to improve outcomes for students by helping districts and their schools enhance how they address barriers to learning and teaching.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Trump Signs Executive Order Urging CPB to Stop Funding NPR and PBS

    Trump Signs Executive Order Urging CPB to Stop Funding NPR and PBS


    The Constitution says Congress has the power of the purse, not the president. The president executes the funding decisions of Congress.

    Yesterday Trump called on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to stop funding public radio and public television. Never mind that National Public Radio brings news to listeners in areas totally saturated by rightwing Sinclair stations. Never mind that PBS is the best source of documentaries about science, history, nature, medicine, other nations, and global affairs. PBS is educational television at its best.

    The Washington Post reported:

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday evening seeking to prohibit federal funding for NPR and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). The order, which could be subject to legal challenge, called the broadcasters’ news coverage “biased and partisan.”

    It instructs the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to cease providing direct funds to either broadcaster. It also orders CPB to cease indirect funding of the services through grants to local public radio and television stations.

    CPB is the main distributor of federal funds to public media. It receives about $535 million in federal funds per fiscal year, which it mostly spends on grants to hundreds of stations nationwide. The stations spend the grants on making their own programming or on buying programming from services such as NPR and PBS.

    CPB, created by an act of Congress in 1967, also sometimes provides direct grants to NPR and PBS to produce national programs.
    Thursday’s order instructs the CPB board to ensure that stations receiving its grants “do not use Federal funds for NPR and PBS.”



    Source link

  • Stop shortchanging charters serving the highest need communities

    Stop shortchanging charters serving the highest need communities


    Students at Lodestar Charter School in Oakland.

    Courtesy: Lighthouse Community Public Schools

    While we wait for the governor’s budget — and a much leaner projection for public education funding — many district and charter school officials have started making significant cuts in preparation for the upcoming school year.

    Unfortunately, at a time when every dollar matters, charter schools serving some of California’s highest-need students are getting shortchanged.

    Critical dollars following each and every student is a fundamental construct in our state’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Schools and districts that serve a higher number of high-need students — English learners, low-income students, and foster youth — get additional funding in the form of supplemental grants for each student, along with concentration grants for schools where more than 55% of the student body is from at least one of those student groups. These funds are meant to follow the students and be invested in their programmatic needs.

    Unfortunately, the only exception is if these students attend a public charter school. 

    Current law caps the concentration grant funding for charter schools at the unduplicated pupil percentage of high-need students in the school district in which they are physically located. This restriction disproportionately affects students and families who attend charter schools in districts where the percentage of high-need students is lower than that of individual charter schools. For example, 82% of Oakland Unified’s students are eligible for the additional funding, but many charter schools in East Oakland serve student populations with unduplicated high-need student percentages ranging from 85% to 99%. Yet concentration funding for these charter schools is capped at 82% despite their serving a higher percentage of high-need students. This is also true for many charter schools in the LA area, in the wider Bay Area, as well as across the state. 

    A new bill seeks to correct this inequity by ensuring that dollars actually follow students to their schools.  

    Assembly Bill 1062 would enable charter schools serving greater percentages of high-need students than their district to apply for a waiver to receive concentration grant funding based on their actual student population, rather than being capped at the local district average. 

    Take for example Lodestar: A Lighthouse Community Public School in the Sobrante Park community in deep East Oakland. Like many communities impacted by the pandemic, the school’s demographics have shifted over the last five years. Today, Lodestar serves a student population where 98% of the students have high needs, including 47% English learners, 8% newcomers to our country, 17% qualifying for special education services, and 5% homeless. Should they be expected to meet their community’s needs at “82 on the dollar” while still being expected to meet the state’s stringent charter renewal criteria brought on by Assembly Bill 1505? (This 2019 law requires charters to outperform state averages on standardized tests and other measures to qualify for streamlined approval.) 

    Shouldn’t dollars that are directly tied to students and families follow them regardless of the school a family chooses for their child? 

    Many charter schools and charter management organizations that serve East Oakland exist to provide strong school choice options to students and families in historically under-resourced communities. It’s not surprising that one-third of Oakland students have selected charter schools. Over the last three years, Oakland’s charter high schools have had college readiness A-G completion rates for African American and Latino students that are significantly higher than at district high schools.

    Despite Oakland’s rich history of political activism for historically marginalized and under-resourced families, this clause in the funding formula prohibiting charter schools from fully accessing these funds has not been studied nor evaluated.

    The Assembly Education Committee has an opportunity to consider and address this funding inquiry. This committee, which includes progressive assembly members from the Bay Area and greater Los Angeles area, can advocate for public dollars following each student for their education and future impact.

    It’s time to ensure that state funding follows students equitably, so they are not penalized for choosing to attend a public charter school.

    •••

    Rich Harrison is CEO of Lighthouse Community Public Schools, which operates two K-12 public charter schools serving more than 1,600 students in East Oakland.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • What Did You Do to Stop Fascism?

    What Did You Do to Stop Fascism?


    ECE Professional says:

    What did I do? I have health problems and can’t get out much, so at a distance, I’ve tried to help others understand what the concerns and issues are, and I’ve contacted representatives in Congress many times and urged them to take action.

    Like



    Source link