Admitted sex offender David Byrd is out as chair of a House Education subcommittee just one day after his vote against Governor Bill Lee’s school voucher plan. While some had speculated Byrd might vote in favor of vouchers in exchange for cover from Lee, Byrd voted NO on Lee’s plan yesterday in the full House Education Committee.
The move to oust Byrd comes after months of controversy surrounding his appointment to the post. Speaker Glen Casada and Governor Bill Lee backed Byrd despite calls from the public for him to resign. In 2018, both Lt. Governor Randy McNally and then-House Speaker Beth Harwell called on Byrd to resign from the General Assembly. Instead, he ran for re-election and won, then was appointed by Casada to a subcommittee chairmanship.
Citing bipartisan concerns over the controversy surrounding Rep. David Byrd, House Speaker Glen Casada has removed the Waynesboro Republican from his chairmanship of an education subcommittee.
The move, announced by Casada on Thursday, comes just two months after the speaker appointed Byrd — who has faced allegations that he sexually assaulted three women in the 1980s — to serve as chairman of the House Education Administration Subcommittee.
“Following discussions with members of the House and after careful consideration, I have formally asked Representative Byrd to step down from his position as chairman of the House Education Administration Subcommittee,” the speaker said in a statement.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes reporting education news possible.
Is the BEP fully funded? Bill Lee wants you to think so. A recent Tennesseanstory calls this issue into question, however. Taking into account the reality of the BEP is more complicated, but the bottom line answer is this: No, Bill Lee’s budget does NOT fully fund the BEP and he and his staff should know better.
The Tennesseanpoints out that despite new investments from Governor Haslam and now Governor Lee, educators are not happy with the adequacy of the state’s funding formula.
There is good reason to be concerned. For example, Tennessee is now investing less per pupil than we did in 2010:
To translate, in 2010 (the year before Bill Haslam became Governor), Tennessee spent an average of $8877 per student in 2016 dollars. In 2016 (the most recent data cited), that total was $8810. So, we’re effectively spending slightly less per student now than in 2010. The graph indicates that Tennessee spending per student isn’t really growing, instead it is stagnating.
Average teacher salaries in the United States improved by about 4% from the Haslam Promise until this year. Average teacher salaries in Tennessee improved by just under 2% over the same time period. So, since Bill Haslam promised teachers we’d be the fastest improving in teacher pay, we’ve actually been improving at a rate that’s half the national average. No, we’re not the slowest improving state in teacher pay, but we’re also not even improving at the average rate. By contrast, states like California and North Carolina have seen increases of over 9% over the same time period, making them the two fastest improving states. Vermont is close behind at just over a 7% total increase.
While talking about teacher salaries, it’s important to note the BEP does NOT fully fund teacher pay and in fact, funds a level far below the actual average cost of hiring a teacher:
As for teacher compensation, the state pays 70% of the BEP calculated rate — which is now $46,225. The good news: That calculated rate has been increasing in recent years. The bad news: That rate is still $7000 LESS than the average teacher compensation paid by districts in the state. What does this mean? It means districts have to make up a big difference in order to maintain their level of pay. As one example, Nashville is struggling to pay teachers on par with similar cities nationally. Based on current BEP formula allocations, funding teaching positions at the actual average rate would mean MNPS would receive an additional $21 million for teacher compensation. Those funds would certainly help close the pay gap that plagues the system.
One possible solution would be to embed funding for school-level RTI2 specialists in the state’s funding formula for schools, the BEP. In fact, Rep. Joe Pitts offered legislation that would do just that last year. His plan would have added funding for three RTI2 specialists at each school for a total projected cost of $167 million. Commissioner McQueen was quick to shoot that idea down and came back this year with the funding proposal of $13 million, or one specialist per district. That’s only $154 million short of adopting a plan that would actually meet the needs of a program many suggest is an important way to improve educational outcomes for Tennessee students.
Our own Comptroller, a Republican, also indicates the state is significantly behind where it should be to adequately fund the BEP:
The Comptroller’s Office of Research and Education Accountability is out with a new report that suggests Tennessee is underfunding its schools by at least $400 million. That’s because the BEP (the state’s funding formula for schools) fails to adequately fund education personnel.
Finally, it’s worth noting that Bill Haslam created a fake BEP task force designed to let him out of the responsibility to adequately fund schools and then effectively froze BEP 2.0. In that sense, it’s actually inaccurate to say our state is “fully funding” the BEP. In fact, we’re funding “growth only” in a frozen formula. Facts matter. History is difficult, I know. But those talking about this issue would do well to cite the recent history in their reporting.
Enter Governor Bill Haslam. He appointed his own BEP Task Force independent of the statutorily mandated BEP Review Committee. At the time, I speculated this was because he didn’t like the Review Committee’s recommendations and its insistence that the state was at least $500 million behind where it should be in education funding.
Now, he’s proposing a “BEP Enhancement Act.” This so-called enhancement is sailing through the General Assembly. It is seen as the most likely vehicle to get money to rural districts and in a year when education funds are increasing, why sweat the details?
As I’ve written before, a few districts lose significantly in the move because it eliminates the Cost Differential Factor (CDF).
It also freezes BEP 2.o. Gone are the dreams of full funding of this formula. The law makes permanent the 70% state funding of BEP-generated teaching positions and funds teacher salaries at a rate well below the state average salary.
Someone should tell Bill Lee and legislative leadership about this. They keep going around repeating the lie that the BEP is “fully funded.” The truth is quite different. I suspect Lee’s staffers know the reality, and are just not telling him. Alternatively, they don’t know the facts — in which case, they don’t deserve their jobs.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support — either a one-time or ongoing gift — makes reporting education news sustainable.
Despite being represented by top voucher advocate Jack Johnson, the Franklin Special School District is speaking out against vouchers. Johnson, best known for his poor math skills and penchant for hypocrisy, is taking the lead in pushing forward Governor Bill Lee’s “Education Savings Account” proposals. Education Savings Accounts, or ESAs, are simply a nicer way to explain the process of taking money from public schools and funneling it to unaccountable private schools.
The Franklin Special School District Board of Education approved unanimously, by consent agenda, a resolution opposing the governor’s Education Savings Account (ESA) proposal, or voucher program, that would use public education dollars to fund private school education.
During his first State of the State address earlier this month, Gov. Bill Lee-R, proposed state funding of an Education Savings Account (ESA), or voucher, program that would allow qualifying parents to use public school funds to enroll their children in a private school, or non-public entity.
In recent days, both Eric Welch and Brad Fiscus of the Williamson County School Board have made their opposition to vouchers known.
While no one should be shocked that Bill Lee supports efforts to dismantle our public schools by way of both vouchers and rapid expansion of charter schools, what’s suprising to me is the number of school board members I talk with who supported Lee. It’s difficult to square support of Lee with support of public education in our state. Lee made clear both during the campaign and by his past involvement in voucher efforts that he is a proponent of using public money to fund private schools.
I suppose some of these same school board members are voting in favor of resolutions opposing vouchers. Perhaps if voucher legislation passes, they’ll explain to their constituents why a local property tax increase is necessary not to support any improvements in what’s offered, but to make up for lost revenue due to an ever-expanding voucher school district.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Williamson County School Board member Brad Fiscus offers thoughts on vouchers.
During Tennessee’s State of the State address, Governor Bill Lee made it clear that privatizing public education would be a significant initiative of his legislative agenda. While he professed his support for public schools, he also laid out his plan to strip away funding from public schools.
The
Governor’s plan proposes vouchers that would eliminate public accountability by
channeling tax dollars into private schools or home school programs that do not
face state-approved academic standards. Private schools do not publicly report
on student achievement and do not meet the public accountability requirements
outlined in major federal laws– including laws which protect students with
special needs. Vouchers are an easy, yet ineffective “out” for our
legislators– relieving our state leaders of their responsibility to provide
oversight and accountability for public schools as demanded by our state
constitution.
Governor Lee
has promised to restrict his “Education Savings Accounts” (ESA) to use by
students from low-income families from the lowest performing schools. These
Education Savings Accounts or education scholarship accounts or individual
education savings accounts or education scholarship tax credits are euphemisms
for vouchers.
In Indiana
in 2011, while now-Vice-President Mike Pence was Governor, vouchers were
approved. Similar to Governor Lee’s proposal, Indiana’s program initially
limited ESAs to 7500 students from low-income families in low performing
districts. As of 2018, over 35,000 students now utilize taxpayer money intended
for public education to pay private school fees. Indiana has spent a combined
$685 million on this publicly-funded private-school experiment. However, a
significant number of participating students were already attending private
schools or participating in homeschool programs. What’s more, studies reveal
these students are not improving academically. Voucher programs don’t work. Imagine
the benefit if Indiana had invested an additional $685 million in its public
schools, instead of subsidizing private schools.
Contrary to what proponents purport, voucher
programs do not support parent and student choice. Instead of voucher programs
providing options for parents and students, private schools have the chance to
choose which students will be accepted, while public education districts are
expected to provide a local system of free public education for all children.
Governor
Lee’s misguided plan will undermine the very schools the State of Tennessee
should be supporting. Until we address the socio-economic conditions that are
predominant in neighborhoods where underperforming schools operate, we will not
solve the issue of suboptimal school performance. We must invest in systems of
support and training, such as mentorship and literacy programs, that have been
proven effective with underserved children and youth, instead of taking
financial resources away.
In
Williamson County, a district with some of the highest performing schools in
the state despite some of the lowest per-student funding, we’re being told by
Senator Jack Johnson and House Speaker Glen Casada that “vouchers won’t affect
us because we have strong schools.” We have been told we “shouldn’t be
worried.” Why would the state’s top-ranked county want to ensure they are not
affected if vouchers are good for public education?
If Indiana’s
experience with vouchers is any indication, we can be sure this plan will
affect Williamson County schools. Even if it doesn’t, shouldn’t we care enough
about public education in other parts of Tennessee to prevent this program from
happening there?
Tell your legislators and our Governor that vouchers are not welcome in our state.
Brad Fiscus is a veteran teacher, a leader in the Tennessee Conference of The United Methodist Church, and a member of the Williamson County Board of Education, the following Op-Ed is his personal views and does not represent the thoughts or opinions of Williamson County Schools or the Board of Education.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes reporting education news possible.
The Tennessee Education Association is raising concerns about Gov. Bill Lee’s school privatization agenda. More from a recent article posted on the TEA website:
In his State of the State address, Gov. Bill Lee announced his intent to allocate more than one-fifth of his K-12 education budget to advance privatization in Tennessee. His proposed budget includes more than $25 million for education savings accounts and $12 million for a charter school building slush fund.
“TEA has serious concerns about the governor’s plan to fund a program that is essentially private school vouchers with even less accountability that are more susceptible to fraud and abuse,” said TEA President Beth Brown. “At a time when classrooms lack needed resources and teachers are digging into their own pockets to buy classroom supplies, it is discouraging to see funding going to something proven to harm student achievement in other states.”
The increase in the building fund for private charter operators is partnered with a proposal to make it easier for new charter schools to be approved. While details on this are still not final, TEA strongly opposes any charter legislation that limits the authority of the locally elected school board to be the final voice on new charter school applications.
“Charter schools need to be a local decision, because local taxpayers bear a majority of the costs,” Brown said. “Also, local boards of education better understand the needs of their district and are better equipped to make the right decision for the students they serve.”
Both charter schools and any form of private school vouchers have proven to destabilize public school budgets and negatively impact existing classrooms. These privatization schemes also have a track record of harming student achievement.
“We have seen in other states where students in voucher programs and unaccountable charter schools are not keeping up with their peers in traditional public schools,” Brown said. “There are many proven ways to improve public education for all schools; unfortunately, the governor is choosing to invest significant resources in two dangerous paths.”
The more than $35 million currently slated for education savings accounts and rapid charter expansion would be better used in ways proven to increase student performance, like reducing class sizes and updating text books and classroom technology.
“As a rural educator, I understand the assumption that these risks will only impact metro areas, but that is simply untrue,” said Brown. “Educators and public education advocates from every corner of the state need to stand together to defeat every single attempt to privatize education. If passed, these proposals would erode the foundation of all public schools.”
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes reporting education news possible.
That’s how Nashville school board member Will Pinkston describes Gov. Bill Lee’s proposals to expand charter schools and enact a voucher program. Pinkston’s comments come via The Washington Post and the education column of Valerie Strauss.
Here’s some of what Pinkston has to say:
In Tennessee, our state constitution guarantees “a system of free public schools” — not a system of taxpayer-funded private schools, which is what you’d be creating with vouchers. Setting aside the unconstitutional nature of vouchers, it’s just bad policy at a time when the state is already underfunding our public schools. If your plan is enacted, it will likely end up in court.
Gov. Lee: Tennessee is ranked in the bottom seven states in America when it comes to per-pupil funding. Let’s instead have a conversation focused on large-scale priorities like dramatically improving teacher pay, expanding early childhood education, and committing to adequate funding for all public schools — not privatizing our school systems vis-à-vis charters and vouchers.
I noted previously that New Vision Academy was in violation of Metro fire code and that a number of students would be forced to leave. Now, it turns out, the entire school is closing down after tomorrow.
The closure of New Vision means some 150 students will now return to traditional public schools in MNPS after 3/4 of the school year has passed.
The troubling development comes as Tennessee Governor Bill Lee is proposing both boosting state tax dollars made available to charter schools and circumventing local school board authority over such schools.
The tireless advocates of “school choice” at any cost will likely note this is just “market forces” making a correction.
The problem is, that “correction” impacts real people. Specifically, 150 middle school kids who are now displaced.
While Governor Lee claims to want to innovate and try new things, he’s simply not looking where he should be. One thing Tennessee has never seriously tried is making a long-term, sustained investment in our schools. In fact, we spend less per student now than we did in 2010 in inflation-adjusted dollars.
We’re seeing Governor Lee propose adding some $200 million to the rainy day fund while students in districts and schools with high concentrations of poverty are facing rain every single day. The numbers suggest we can and must do better.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes publishing education news possible.
Governor Bill Lee gave his State of the State address last night and outlined his budget and vision as he begins his first term. Among the items he discussed was the creation of a state charter school authorizer.
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee is proposing legislation that would make it easier to establish charter schools. He announced the plan Monday night during his State of the State address. If it passes, it would allow a sponsor to go directly to a state-run authorizer for approval, instead of a local school district.
The proposed change is significant because current law requires a charter operator to submit a proposal to a local school board first. The local board then evaluates the proposal and makes a decision as to whether or not it would be a good fit for the needs of students in the district. If the local board rejects the proposal, the operator may appeal to the State Board of Education.
The State BOE often looks to the local board’s evaluation of the charter application for guidance. Sometimes, operators revise and improve the application. Sometimes, the State BOE determines the local board made a sound decision based on the evidence, as was the case with Rocketship in Nashville not long ago:
Let’s review. Rocketship was denied expansion by MNPS and the State Board of Education last year. Rocketship applied again. MNPS denied them. Rocketship appealed. MNPS denied the amended application by an 8-1 vote. Rocketship is now appealing based on a technicality instead of working with MNPS to find a satisfactory way to address concerns.
Here’s what MNPS said when they reviewed the Rocketship application:
In summary, with no additional state accountability data to consider, and no compelling evidence presented that provides confidence in the review team, converting an existing low-performing school before Rocketship has demonstrated academic success on state accountability measures would not be in the best interests of the students, the district, or the community.
If Governor Lee’s proposal is successful, schools like Rocketship will now be able to circumvent local input altogether. In this case, MNPS identified key problems with Rocketship and decided an expansion was not in the best interests of the students of the district.
Why shouldn’t charters be required to present a proposal to a local board of education first? Shouldn’t the citizens of a community, by way of their duly elected school board, be able to weigh-in on the appropriateness of a given charter school proposal?
Moreover, why doesn’t Bill Lee trust local school boards?
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support helps make publishing education news possible!
While there is clear evidence suggesting vouchers don’t improve academic outcomes for students, a new concern is getting the attention of Tennessee lawmakers: Fraud.
Reports from across the nation show situations in which private-school officials and parents spent voucher money for items unrelated to education. Cards were used at beauty supply stores, sporting good shops and for computer tech support, in addition to trying to withdraw cash, which was not allowed.
The Arizona Republic found many parents there put voucher funds into college-savings accounts then sent their children to public schools, among other fraudulent activity, all amid lax oversight. The Phoenix newspaper also reported the state investigated one case in which voucher funds were allegedly used to pay for an abortion after it adopted an Empowerment Scholarship Account program in 2011.
The Wisconsin State Journal reported in 2014 the state paid $139 million over 10 years to schools it wound up removing from its voucher program for not following Wisconsin’s financial reporting rules and other guidelines.
It’s not clear if voucher legislation will move forward this session, though Governor Bill Lee has consistently supported using public money to fund private schools.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Earlier this month, Nashville school board member Will Pinkston released his report on Tennessee’s Race to the Top Experience. Included in his analysis was a discussion of Tennessee’s struggling Achievement School District (ASD).
Here’s more on the troubled turnaround effort:
The controversial Achievement School District, created by Race to the Top to take over and turn around persistently failing schools, saw its fortunes nosedive.
YES Prep, the Houston-based charter chain founded by ASD chief Chris Barbic, announced in March 2015 that it would not proceed with turnaround work in Memphis — based on a lack of community support for the ASD. At the same time, traditional schools in Memphis suddenly began to outperform ASD schools, calling into question the turnaround model.
That summer, Barbic threw in the towel. The soft-spoken, congenial reformer — who a year earlier, under stress, had suffered a heart attack — wrote an open letter explaining the rationale behind his departure. Understandably, his reasons for leaving included health and family. On his way out, Barbic also offered a mea culpa of sorts that earned him a little goodwill among public-education advocates and derision among his fellow reformers.
“Let’s just be real,” Barbic said in his letter. “Achieving results in neighborhood schools is harder than in a choice environment.” He added: “As a charter school founder, I did my fair share of chest pounding over great results. I’ve learned that getting these same results in a zoned neighborhood school environment is much harder.”
In 48 words, Barbic eviscerated a key argument by radical reformers. As it turned out, charter schools weren’t the silver-bullet solution. His simple but honest admission was a shot-heard-round-the-world in education circles. And it had the added benefit of being true.
Priority
In September 2018, Chalkbeatreported on the continued struggles of the state’s failing turnaround district:
Most of the schools that were taken over by Tennessee’s turnaround district remain on the state’s priority list six years after the intervention efforts began.
Four of the six original Memphis schools that were taken over by the state in 2012 are on the newest priority list released last week. And more than a dozen schools that were added to the district later also remain on the list.
For years, the district has fallen short of its ambitious promise to dramatically raise test scores at the schools by handing them over to charter operators — a goal that the district’s founder later acknowledged was too lofty. And researchers with the Tennessee Education Research Alliance recently concluded that schools in the state district are doing no better than other low-performing schools that received no state help.
I’ve also written extensively about the ASD’s struggles and even suggested that the real problem was mission creep:
Here’s something that should give policymakers pause: According to the most recent State Report Card, the ASD spends more than $1000 per student MORE than district schools and yet gets performance that is no better than (and sometimes worse) the district schools it replaced.
By creeping beyond its admirable mission, the ASD has become an example of good intentions gone awry. Focusing on the original goal of using highly focused effort to both improve struggling schools AND learn new strategies to help other schools would be a welcome change.
Yes, the ASD is one more example of education policy failure by Team Haslam. Bill Lee and Penny Schwinn have a big mess to clean up — if they’re up to the task.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support helps making writing about education policy possible.
