Schools Woefully Underfunded, Formula Broken

Will Malloy rise to the occasion and make resolving Connecticut’s School Funding Crisis his legacy?

From today’s Hartford Courant Commentary by JONATHAN PELTO AND WENDY LECKER,0,6000165.story

“Courts have been equally clear that when schools are given adequate resources, learning improves.

In New Jersey, Maryland, Colorado, Massachusetts and elsewhere, increased spending on basic educational resources led to demonstrated improved achievement.

Despite vast differences among states, courts enumerated a remarkably consistent list of educational necessities, including: high-quality preschool, small class size, additional services for at-risk students, supports for teachers such as professional development, curriculum supports, supplies, equipment, adequate facilities, and adequate books and other learning tools.

As Stamford’s mayor, Dannel P. Malloy understood the direct link between resources and achievement. He was a founding member of the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding, the plaintiff in Connecticut’s pending school funding lawsuit.

By joining the coalition’s lawsuit, then-Mayor Malloy acknowledged that the state cannot meet its duty to provide every child with a quality education without providing every school with the resources to meet each child’s needs.

Sadly, as governor, Malloy has not made resolving the lawsuit and properly funding education a true priority. Instead, his new “solutions” for education are privately run charter schools and teacher evaluations based on test scores.

Yet charter schools, serving 1 percent of Connecticut’s public school students, have dismal graduation rates and routinely exclude Latino students, English language learners and students with disabilities.

Furthermore, teacher evaluations based on standardized test scores have been proven to be wildly inaccurate and to massively increase the frequency of standardized tests children must take.

Instead of diverting funds to reforms that do not work, this governor has the historic opportunity to create a fair and equitable school funding system. Malloy’s legacy will rest on how he deals with the education-funding crisis highlighted in CCM’s report. More important, our children’s futures depend on it.”

To read the full piece go to:,0,6000165.story

A must read – Voters have spoken: No corporate school reform by Wendy Lecker

Wendy Lecker, Education Advocate and columnist for the Hearst Connecticut Media Group, has a must read column in yesterday’s Stamford Advocate and CT Post…

“In this age of instantaneous global communication, it is incredible that a simple message sent by voters in Bridgeport has not reached leaders in Hartford, just 50 miles away. On Nov. 6, a rare event in modern politics occurred: democracy prevailed over money. Average citizens defeated a Bridgeport charter revision proposal backed by a veritable who’s who of well-endowed corporate education reformers. This David-vs.-Goliath victory is also significant because it was the first time a core education reform strategy was put directly before Connecticut voters — and voters rejected it.

Recall that in July 2011, Mayor Bill Finch, the charter lobby ConnCAN, founders of Excel Bridgeport, and the chair of the state Board of Education engineered a secret and illegal takeover of Bridgeport’s elected board of education. After Connecticut’s Supreme Court invalidated the scheme, Mayor Finch again attempted to strip voters of their right to an elected school board with a revision to the city charter calling for an appointed board of education. This time, Finch called in the big guns. In addition to Excel Bridgeport and ConnCAN, the revision got support from the Connecticut Council on Education Reform, a business group, and national figures like New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and failed DC schools chancellor Michelle Rhee.

These “reformers” poured over a half a million dollars into ads, videos and pamphlets saying “Vote Yes.” They lauded the “progress” made in Bridgeport by the reformer Superintendent Paul Vallas, who left his previous districts, Chicago, Philadelphia and New Orleans, in crisis. The hallmarks of Vallas’ tenure in Bridgeport so far have been adding an inexplicable and cruel three weeks of standardized testing, and increasing spending on administration. The “Vote Yes” group also made a host of false claims, ranging from assertions that only an appointed school board would help renovate buildings, to declarations that an appointed school board would lead to improved student outcomes, strict accountability for officials and increased parent involvement.”

Read more:


Waivers intensify injustice of No Child Left Behind (Another must read column by Wendy Lecker)

My colleague, fellow public education advocate and commentator, Wendy Lecker, had another “must read” column in the Stamford Advocate, Connecticut Post and the other papers that make up the Hearst Connecticut Media Group.

While many readers know about the problems associated with the federal No Child Left Behind Act, many may not fully appreciated why a federal waiver doesn’t solve the problem.  In her column, Lecker explains why the Malloy Administration’s unquestioning commitment to getting a federal waiver is not the right solution.

Wendy writes;

“If education is supposed to be the civil rights issue of this era, why does Connecticut’s new system for rating schools and districts discriminate against our most vulnerable students? Connecticut instituted the new system in order to obtain a waiver from some of the provisions of the No Child Left Behind law (NCLB). NCLB mandated that states judge schools and districts, and impose punishments, based on test scores of the entire school and district and of subgroups of students: different ethnic groups, English language learners, children living in poverty and students with disabilities. One claimed benefit of reporting scores by subgroups is that this revealed which groups of children tended to score poorly on standardized tests.

However, under NCLB, schools serving a more heterogeneous population were more likely to be punished. Not only did entire schools and districts have to pass the testing goal for a year, called Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), but each subgroup had to pass the goal as well. Thus, a school or district with fewer subgroups had a better chance of making AYP than a diverse one.

Since the ultimate goal of NCLB, that 100 percent of students would be proficient on state tests by 2014, was widely acknowledged as unattainable, more and more schools were failing to make AYP as we approached that deadline. Even homogeneous, affluent districts were bound to fail. Sanctions under NCLB ranged from mandating unregulated tutoring and allowing students to transfer out, to more serious interventions such as firing all staff and/or handing schools over to private operators. None of these sanctions have proven effective at improving schools.”

Read the rest at

Hartford’s Milner School debacle gets attention across Connecticut

“Connecticut’s May 2012 education reform law provides for state intervention to implement “turnaround plans” in the neediest schools. Hartford’s Milner School was among the state’s first targets.

The reformers’ solution was to help Milner School by simply handing it over to the Jumoke Academy, a private charter school operator.

In support of the move, Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor, a founder of the Achievement First charter franchise, declared that having Jumoke take over a public school was “an important transition in the charter school movement.

The comment indicates that some reformers apparently believe that expanding charter schools is more important than addressing children’s needs.”

Wendy Lecker, a columnist for Hearst Connecticut Media Group and one of the leading forces behind the Connecticut chapter of Parents Across America has a must read commentary piece on the Milner School issue.  You can read  Wendy’s article here:  Helping Kids Or Helping Charter Schools.

Wait, What? readers already know the story about Hartford’s Milner School’s

  • A quarter of the students are English Language Learners (ELL) (that is they are not fluent in English)
  • 38.7 percent come from homes where English is not the primary language
  • 11.3 percent are students with disabilities.

Back in 2008, Steven Adamowski, then Hartford’s Superintendent of Schools, and now Malloy’s “Special Master” for Windham and New London’s schools, implemented a “Turnaround Plan” for the Milner School.  But Adamowski and his team never made the investment of resources that were needed to really help the Milner School.

So now, the school in which 1 in 4 four students aren’t fluent in English, 4 in 10 go home to households where English is not the primary language and more than 1 in 10 have disabilities that require special education services, remains a “low-performing” school when it comes to standardized test scores.

Along comes “Turnaround Plan” #2.

This time Hartford’s present Superintendent of Schools, along with Commissioner of Education, Stefan Pryor, and the State Board of Education, have decided to give the school, its students and its entire budget over to the Jumoke Academy, a charter school in Hartford that has never had a student who wasn’t fluent in English and has never had a student who went home to a household where English wasn’t the primary language.

In addition, despite state and federal laws making it illegal to discriminate against students who require special education services, only 2 percent of Jumoke Academy’s students have special education needs.

Wendy Lecker’s piece goes on to reveal the strange and disturbing politics behind the effort to give the Milner School to the Jumoke Academy.

Later in the day, Diane Ravitch, the country’s leading voice for public education, picked up Wendy’s commentary piece and posted it to her blog.  You can Diane’s perspective here:

It makes it very clear that Stefan Pryor’s long-standing relationship with charter schools is helping drive Governor Malloy’s policy of giving scarce taxpayer funds to charter schools at the expense of the local public district schools that need and deserve those resources.