Education

by David Safier

Sometimes I agree with Tucson Citizen's Mark Evans, sometimes I don't. Right now, I disagree vehemently with his argument against the one cent sales tax for education initiative Prop. 204. (If you got the Monday paper edition of the Star, you may have read his column there, but it's only online at the Citizen.)

Mark's a smart guy, and he makes a complex argument, but it's wrong-headed. You know the adage, "The perfect is the enemy of the good"? Mark's argument is an example of "The theoretical best case scenario is the enemy of what's happening down here on planet Arizona."

Basically, Mark says, rightly, that the one cent sales tax initiative makes sure the state doesn't spend any less on education than it did in the 2011 or 2012 budget, and the sales tax revenues will be added on top of that figure. Mark hates that idea.

[T]o use the initiative process to wall off billions of dollars from budget writers only makes Arizona’s overall fiscal problems worse and, on balance, is bad policy.

He acknowledges there's a reason to "wall off" the money: to stop the Republican-majority lege from just rolling the money from the sales tax initiative into the budget and either maintaining or lowering spending for education. If the initiative passes and the sales tax dollars are added to current spending, that will result in a $500-$600 per student funding increase (If that sounds like a lot of money, read on). But even though Mark acknowledges that's the only way to assure the money will go to education and he acknowledges we need more money for education, he thinks the "walling off" the funds will stop the state from responding responsibly if there is a serious economic crisis.

Mark's solution? Elect better legislators who will do the right thing for education. It's a lovely idea in that better, theoretical world of his. But down here on planet Arizona, it's a pipe dream to think the state's voters will elect enough progressive legislators to repair our broken tax system (broken, among other reasons, because the income tax has been cut by a third over recent decades, which has beggared the budget) any time in the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, Arizona's children (the state's future) are getting screwed out of the education they deserve.

We are now dead last in the amount we spend per student, as we have been for years, and if our children get that added $500-$600, we'll still be dead last. So to say the lege should be allowed to cut education funding still further if the economy goes further south is to say it's OK to balance the budget on the backs of our children, who are already carrying too much of the burden on their shoulders by having their educational opportunities diminished.

by David Safier

The CEO of Imagine Schools, Dennis Bakke, is using the same expand-or-die model for his charter school empire he used for the energy company he ran, AES Corporation, which he nearly ran into the ground by over-borrowing. Bakke appears to abide by the motto of the shark: Keep moving or die. It may be time for Bakke to pay attention to the line in "Annie Hall" where Alvy Singer/Woody Allen says to Annie Hall/Diane Keaton about their relationship, "What we got on our hands is a dead shark." (For Woody Allen fans, you can watch the classic 16 second scene below the fold.)

Six Imagine Schools in St. Louis closed in June because of abysmal test scores. Other Imagine Schools around around the country (including in Arizona) are hemmoraging money. And all three previous Imagine Schools in Georgia have cut ties with the corporation. The latest is Wesley International Academy charter in the Atlanta area. Without Imagine at the helm, its rent has been cut from $1.1 million to $540,000 per year, and it's no longer paying management fees to the corporation, which means more of its money can go toward educating students. (The charters of the other two schools, by the way, were not renewed.)

With news stories across the country about Imagine's failing schools as well as those economically crippling rent costs and management fees, what state in its right mind would grant the corporation a charter for a new school? This could signal the beginning — or the early middle — of the end for Imagine.

by David Safier Virtual (online) schools maintain a constant drumbeat for the idea they should get as much in funds as brick-and-mortar schools. Sure, they don't have buildings, utilities expenses or custodial costs, and they maintain 50-to-1 student-to-teacher ratios (in a good year. Sometimes the number skyrockets into the 100-to-1-plus territory), but that doesn't shake … Read more

by David Safier Kudos to Luke Knipe for giving the details behind the details of Pedicone's new TUSD contract on his pocobravo blog. For me, Knipe's revelations fall into the "I didn't know that" category, even after reading the Star article on the contract. For instance, giving away his $35,000 bonus was a nice thing, … Read more

by David Safier In one sense, the push for charter schools was a necessary middle step by the conservative "education reform" movement in the push for private school vouchers. First privatize a bit with charter schools to get people used to the idea of using taxpayer dollars to fund privately run schools (It was hoped … Read more