________________________________________  THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT June 27, 2005 - Vol. 5, No. 26 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯  Covering education news in Vermont and beyond... Informative, provocative, unique... Published by Vermonters for Better Education  VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com NEWS & ANALYSIS... STILL GETTING MIXED MESSAGES ON EARLY ED Was it legal or wasn't it? Supporters of public preschool have always argued that ADM calculations for public preschool were legal already. That begs the question -- why the frantic push to include such language in statute this year if it was already kosher to use those ADM calculations from the get-go? The only logical answer is that statute was, in fact, murky at best on this point and supporters of public preschool were afraid they'd lose funding if they didn't insert specific language into statute. Thus the rush to put preschool ADM language in this year's budget bill, sneaking around the legislative Education Committees that had been considering early education initiatives. Throughout the year, the governor unambiguously indicated he was not supportive of S.132, the early ed bill making its way through the Senate. This bill would have opened the floodgates to universal preschool -- publicly funded programs for rich and poor alike. But last week, the governor sent mixed messages about universal preschool now being funded in the state. On the one hand, the governor expressed in a press release strong concern about the possible ramifications of universal preschool -- "skyrocketing" property tax burdens. On Vermont Public Radio, however, he took a milder approach, saying he didn't think the preschool program represented that big an expansion of the public school system.  What's even stranger is that the press release was being circulated at almost the same time the governor was making his comments on VPR. Here are the details During an appearance on VPR's Switchboard show last week, the governor responded to a question about early ed initiatives as follows "Their (the Commissioner of Education and SBOE Chair's) initial take is it's not as significant an expansion of the state role in pre-k education as we might have read and maybe not an expansion at all." The governor appears to be saying he doesn't believe the institution of universal preschool - either by continuation of current practice or through new initiative - is "significant." Just as troubling, he's relying on the Commissioner of Education for his advice on whether current practice of drawing down Education Funds for universal preschool is okay. The Commissioner has never swayed from his position that current practice is legal, even going so far as to say he didn't need the budget bill ADM language to keep encouraging schools to use ADM calculations to pay for preschool students. Therefore, relying on the Commissioner's opinion on this issue is like the farmer asking the fox if it's safe to forgo a fence around the henhouse. It doesn't bode well for the chickens, in this case the Vermont taxpayers. While the governor was appearing on Switchboard, his press office was circulating a release about the budget with this headline GOVERNOR SIGNS FY 2006 BUDGET ALSO EXPRESSES CONCERN WITH LAST-MINUTE EARLY EDUCATION PROVISION The press release itself contained strong language. The governor, it said, "expressed frustration with an early education provision that was slipped into budget at the last-minute without the proper legislative process or debate." "Early education programs should be provided primarily through private pre-schools and not through development of a parallel system in the public schools," said Governor Douglas. "While it is important to give 'at-risk' children a priority for early education opportunities, we must find ways to keep the property tax burden on working families from skyrocketing." So which is it - is the governor concerned about skyrocketing property tax burdens due to public preschool expansion, or isn't he? His press release indicates he is. His VPR appearance says otherwise. THE CULPRIT THE VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY Sen. Susan Bartlett (D-Lamoille) has revealed why she believes it was important to include ADM calculations for preschool students in the budget bill -- the threat of "right wingers" made her do it. In an Associated Press article by Lisa Rathke, Sen. Bartlett said that superintendents worried about the direction of the State Board of Education, fearing a loss of funding for current preschool students. "The administration has so stacked the Board of Education with right-wing appointments," Sen. Bartlett was quoted as saying, "there are a number of superintendents who are afraid that if it isn't there and codified that they wouldn't have the money." We suspect Sen. Bartlett is using "right-wing" as a pejorative term. If so, people who elected many of the administration's State Board appointments to local school boards over the years might be offended to hear their choices so demonized. The administration, in fact, has stacked the Board of Education with QUALIFIED appointments - people who have been involved in education on the local level through school board membership or even teaching assignments. Sen. Bartlett and others might not always agree with these appointees' points of view, but there's no question they care about education and children in Vermont. As pointed out in a previous newsletter, these appointees don't rubber stamp everything coming from the Education Lobby which usually argues for more money and less accountability. That's a good thing for the taxpayers and students of Vermont. Shame on Senator Bartlett for making a sweeping and denigrating generalization of their tough work.  ABOUT THAT MEDIA "F" After we handed out an "F" to the Vermont media last week for their lack of substantive coverage of education, several people appealed the grade. We now offer an amended report card. The mainstream media (or msm, as they're known in the blogosphere) were definitively deficient in covering education this session, ignoring until very recently the early education issue and other important education stories. Their grade still stands. Several nontraditional media venues, however, were outstanding in their attention to education issues and they deserve A's - perhaps even A-plus for extra effort. These media outlets include the True North radio program where host Laurie Morrow regularly interviewed experts on education issues and fielded calls from interested listeners. Her work on the early education topic, in particular, was stellar, bringing an in-depth discussion of this subject to her many listeners many times over the past few months. Just last week Morrow hosted Darcy Olsen of the Goldwater Institute who has written extensively about early education and has studied other states' forays into publicly-funded preschool. On True North, Olsen pointed out that Georgia, which has had publicly funded preschool for many years now, has seen no increase in test scores or learning readiness among children attending these expensive programs. True North airs weekdays from 11 a.m. to noon on WDEV (550 AM and 96.1 FM) and WSYB (1380 AM) and can be found on the web at http//www.truenorthradio.com. Also deserving of an A is James Dwinell of the Dwinell Political Report. In the interest of full disclosure, the editor of this newsletter used to co-write a political report with Dwinell. But that makes our oversight of his education coverage all the more embarrassing. For months, Dwinell's sassy and insightful newsletter has mentioned the early education issue, warning of its potential cost and impact on private providers. Dwinell is on the web at http//www.dwinellpoliticalreport.com. Finally, readers have informed us that WDEV radio regularly included coverage of the early education issue, especially on the Mark Johnson show during his reports from the statehouse. Our apologies to these folks - they definitely deserve the highest of grades, covering an important topic when it was being ignored by the "msn."  AN UNVARNISHED PLEA FOR MONEY Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of this newsletter, is a small operation with one part-time staff member and a volunteer board. Yet policy-makers and policy-watchers regularly rely on this newsletter for important education information they won't get elsewhere. Meanwhile, the Education Lobby, consisting of the teachers union and allied groups, has both money and personnel to promote their agenda. Despite being outgunned in the resources department, VBE has played an important role in education issues over the past few years, with at least one Vermont Department of Education employee observing how "powerful" we are. But we need your help to continue our work. We need money. Won't you please help us? Send contributions to VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701. Thank you for your continued support!  SPEAKING OF OTHER EDUCATION STORIES STATEHOUSE ROUND-UP Early education wasn't the only issue considered by the legislature this session. Below is a quick round-up of education bills that actually passed this year. They mostly addressed small details in education statute and didn't institute any sweeping new programs H.201 An Act Related to a Vacancy on a School Board This bill amends statute so that members of local school boards can, by majority vote, fill vacancies that occur mid-term. Previously, town select boards had some input into filling such vacancies. S.81 An Act Relating to School Buses This bill changes the definition of a school bus to any vehicle used to transport children to and from school or in connection with school activities, with certain specific exceptions. School buses are subject to a variety of safety regulations. H.299 An Act Relating to an Agency Fee for Teachers and Administrators This bill allows the teachers union to charge teachers and administrators who opt not to belong to the union a fee for representation in collective bargaining. In other words, teachers are not required to be union members but they still have to pay for union services. H.135 An Act Relating to an Extension of the Council on Education Governance and the No Child Left Behind Oversight Committee This bill merely extends these committees' work until July 1, 2009.  *   *   * FROM ELSEWHERE... FROM....THE FORDHAM FOUNDATION On the web at: http://www.edexcellence.net/ DOING CHOICE RIGHT ACROSS THE POND In this month's Policy Review, Paul Hill chronicles one key element of Britain's two-decade old education reform strategy, one that does an imaginative job of blending private largesse, innovation and management expertise with public education.  As Tony Blair has built atop a foundation of Thatcher-era reforms, he has boosted the popular program of "specialist schools" (secondary schools with an emphasis on engineering, arts, math, etc.) by offering prospective schools onetime government grants of £100,000 to convert to specialist status, dependent upon the school raising £50,000 in private donations. Sixty percent of English secondary schools are now specialist schools, and the number continues to grow.  The Specialist Schools Trust, a nonprofit organization that receives government contracts but remains a private firm, oversees this fleet of educational institutions and works to support and expand the good ones while weeding out the failures. Hill writes that England was uniquely prepared for the competition in education that specialist schools bring. It has a national curriculum, which necessitates core subjects and thus allows specialization, as well as a national testing system that serves to hold all schools accountable for their results.  Moreover, school governance is highly devolved, with principals controlling teacher hiring and firing and ninety percent of school funding. Thus, parents (and communities, benefactors, etc.) can easily judge and choose schools on objective and uniform criteria, and principals have freedom to adapt to individual circumstances. When debating these reforms, Blair heard the same criticism from his own Labour party that choice opponents level in the U.S., yet he persevered and seems to have proven the naysayers wrong. "Lessons from Blair's school reforms," by Paul T. Hill, Policy Review, June and July 2005 http//www.policyreview.org/jun05/hill.html  *   *   * WHO COVERS EDUCATION IN VERMONT? We do! Consider a gift to Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of the weekly Vermont Education Report, Vermont's ONLY continual source of education news. Send donations to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701. VBE is a nonprofit organization and contributions are tax-deductible.  *   *   * The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.   Subscribe Here SubscribeRemove

---

Return to Education Report Index | Return to VBE Index | Vermonters for Better Education Homepage

---

........