Editor's Notes: The PPI "21st Century Schools Project Update" is a bi-weekly email newsletter published by PPI's 21st Century Schools Project. To sign up for a free subscription, click here. (Check the box next to "Education.") Original links are included though some may have expired.
News and Commentary
1.) Brown 50 Years Later
2.) Campaign 2004: Education
3.) Special Education
4.) Teacher Quality Notes
5.) Borrowing Trouble?
Departments:
6.) Charter Schooling News: State Legislative Updates, A UFT Charter, Buffalo, and more
7.) Quick Clicks: Susan Neumann, Arnie Fege, SOLs, Supplemental Services, and more
8.) 21st Century Schools Project Announcements: Save the Date! Friday Forum June 4
And be sure to visit www.eduwonk.com for daily news and analysis not in the Bulletin, including an update on the vaunted lawsuit against No Child Left Behind, the latest (and smallest) iteration of Lamar Alexander's GI Bill For Kids, a roundup of Brown v. Board stories and commentary, an insidious whispering campaign, and a notable conservative endorsement of pre-k education!
Fact to Consider:
Among black voters, 68 percent believe black children in the United States do not have equal educational opportunities with white children. (Source: Gallup poll, cited by Education Trust)
Monday marked the 50th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision declaring de jure racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. Coming as it does midway into an election year, it's hardly surprising that proponents of all sorts of educational and partisan agendas are seizing on the anniversary to bolster their causes, with varying degrees of plausibility.
Yet it is appropriate and fortuitous that the Brown anniversary draws attention to various educational issues now. As the federal government, through No Child Left Behind, is again (though now legislatively rather than judicially) pushing states and schools to undertake significant and challenging education reform initiatives in the name of equity for poor and minority students, Brown provides an important perspective for these debates.
First, as nearly every article on the subject points out, improved education access for minority students as a result of Brown, while essential, has not been enough to close the still staggering achievement gaps between white and black (as well as Hispanic) students. Half of all black high school freshmen don't graduate, and the average black high school senior today performs only as well as the average white eighth grader on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. To meet the unfulfilled promise of educational equity, educators and policymakers must focus on achievement, putting in place further reforms that are more complicated and demand a different type of resolve. In particular, this means holding educators accountable for the achievement of all children. As NCLB critics complain that the law unfairly labels schools failing if one subgroup of students isn't meeting goals, Brown provides an important reminder of why we shouldn't accept schools failing to educate one group of students.
Second, it is instructive to consider the parallels between NCLB today and desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s. It is important to note that NCLB critics are not motivated by the same ugly racism as Brown foes, and many care deeply about the welfare of poor and minority children. But many of the obstacles cited as reasons to abandon NCLB were also arguments leveled against Brown and efforts to enforce it: People won't stand for it, schools and school districts are seeking to opt-out (indicating that it's unworkable), and it's utopian social engineering.
Changes to improve things for the disadvantaged in society often require that someone, somewhere, give up an existing privilege, comfort, or stake in the status quo. While the accrued influences and accustomed practices that NCLB opponents want to protect are less repugnant than those of white supremacists, it's still an issue of adults refusing to give up something they value in order to improve opportunities for disadvantaged children.
What Brown shows most of all is that despite current shortcomings there is such a thing as progress. That's no small lesson.
Roundup of Brown News Stories and Commentary on Eduwonk.com:
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_16_archive.html#108479551266716987
"The New Face of Inequality,"
Andrew Rotherham, Blueprint Magazine, Vol. 2004, No. 2:
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252576
&kaid=110&subid=900023
"Still Separate, Still Unequal,"
New Dem Daily (05/17/04):
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131
&subid=192&contentid=252642
"A Dream Deferred: 50 years after Brown v. Board of Education, the Struggle Continues,"
Education Trust (05/12/04):
http://www2.edtrust.org/EdTrust/Press+Room/2004+reports.htm
"Survey Probes Views on Race,"
Karla Scoon Reid, Education Week (05/12/04):
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=36brownpoll.h23
The education issue is becoming more crisply defined in the presidential election, in ways that could lead to a productive education debate. Two weeks ago, Senator John Kerry laid out the details of two new education proposals. First, Kerry announced plans to reduce high school drop out rates and increase high school graduates by 1 million over the next five years. Specific initiatives to support that goal include smaller high schools, stronger curricula, mentoring for disadvantaged middle school students, and taking away drivers licenses of students who drop out. Kerry also pledged to improve graduation rate reporting under NCLB. Later that week, Kerry announced a teacher quality agenda that is easily the most interesting education proposal so far during the 2004 campaign. It includes proposals for differential pay, performance-based pay, incentives for National Board Certified teachers to work in hard-to-staff schools, mentoring for new teachers, more attention to low-performing schools, higher standards for new teachers, more accountability for schools of education, and faster dismissal for low-performing teachers.
On both these issues, Kerry has made a good, and gutsy, choice to focus on issues that both address real problems and are politically smart because they encompass both stronger accountability and new resources, avoiding a phony war of spending versus accountability. Perhaps most encouraging, by focusing on substantive proposals to make No Child Left Behind work rather than simply bashing the law, Kerry is helping to move the debate forward and challenging the administration to take action in areas where it really hasn't done enough to support the law.
Last week, President Bush responded to Kerry's initiatives with his own week of education events, visiting Arkansas, West Virginia, and Maryland. Ignoring the funding question, for the most part his message -- that it is essential to hold schools accountable for student learning and imperative that we do a better job looking out for challenging students -- is an important one that progressives should be trumpeting, not resisting. He's also calling the bluff of anti-NCLB Democrats by pointing out that NCLB's provisions are not punitive or draconian as opponents claim. Yet Bush is in a hole of his own creation because he's only saying these things now and focusing on education when his back is to a political wall. He left implementation of the most ambitious federal education law in a generation -- which would have been a challenge in the best of circumstances -- to an ideologically driven Department of Education that quickly turned it into a mess. In the process he became an unlikely ally for the law's most virulent opponents.
"Kerry Proposal Would Boost Teachers, But With a Price,"
Ronald Brownstein and Maria L. La Ganga, Los Angeles Times (05/07/04):
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-kerry7
may07,1,1220004.story?coll=la-home-headlines
"Kerry Zeroes in on Drop Out Levels,"
Ronald Brownstein and Matea Gold, Los Angeles Times (05/05/04):
www.latimes.com/la-na-dropout5may05,1,4988506.story
Read more about the Kerry and Bush plans on Eduwonk.com:
President Bush:
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_09_archive.html#108441640463390291
Senator Kerry on Teacher Quality:
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_02_archive.html#108391563995559122
Senator Kerry on Graduation Rates:
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_02_archive.html#108382121261208033
"Kerry Unveils Plans on Graduation Rates, Teachers,"
Erik W. Robelen, Education Week (05/12/04):
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=36Kerry.h23
Last week, the Senate passed its IDEA reauthorization bill after a debate conducted under narrow rules that allowed consideration of only six amendments. They include amendments about attorney's fees, transient students, research into the causes of some disabilities, a 15-state pilot paperwork reduction program, and two funding amendments. All the amendments were accepted except a proposal by Senators Harkin (D-IA) and Hagel (R-NB) to make special education funding a mandatory spending item (meaning automatic rather than subject to annual appropriations). A majority of senators favored the Harkin-Hagel plan, but budget rules required 60 votes for passage. Instead, the Senate passed an alternate funding bill that would accelerate spending increases but keep them on the discretionary side. While there are still significant differences between the House and Senate bills, taking the most controversial issues off the table could lead to faster passage of the final package. It's likely that the president wants to sign an education bill this year during a close election, so that will certainly figure into the calculus of both sides during the conference committee.
"Senate to Renew, Update Education Act,"
Ben Feller, Associated Press (03/13/04):
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/8654773.htm
"Senate Does Its Own Dirty Work,"
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_09_archive.html#108439826693693082
"The Politics of IDEA Funding,"
Andrew J. Rotherham, Education Week Commentary (10/09/02):
http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110
&subsecID=900030&contentID=250939
It's noteworthy when New York City's United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten endorses financial incentives for teachers in hard-to-staff schools. Of course, the UFT wants this on top of an across the board raise for all teachers, but that they're even entertaining some form of differential pay shows how far this debate has come. The same day it reported this, The New York Times also ran a story by Diana Jean Schemo on Denver's performance and differential pay initiative, also undertaken with local union support and endorsed by Denver teachers in a vote earlier this year.
Similarly, last week Virginia Governor Mark Warner announced a plan to bring high-quality teachers to the state's lowest-performing schools. The initiative includes both salary differentials for hard-to-staff assignments and additional support and mentoring to help teachers succeed there. And of course, Senator Kerry's plan includes these elements, too. It's worth remembering the skepticism and pessimism that greeted Bryan Hassel's 2002 PPI paper on this topic. Again, there is such a thing as progress.
On a less positive note, there's a slew of news stories out this week about teachers obtaining sham degrees from "diploma mills," putting a whole new spin on the old canards about "useless education degrees." For the most part, these are cases of current teachers using diploma mills to gain advanced degrees that meet requirements for additional salary and recertification. Seems like one reasonable response to this problem would be to change compensation schemes that reward teachers for degree completion with no link to job performance, as well as altering certification policies to make professional development more focused on skills teachers need rather than clock or coursework hours.
If you're interested in teacher professional development issues, we strongly recommend a recent report from the Finance Project by Katherine Neville and Casey Robinson. The report offers a wealth of data on the context, funding, and, to the extent possible, effectiveness of both pre- and in-service teacher training and professional development. It particular, the authors have done yeoman's work trying to pick apart and make sense of the myriad streams of funding that are used to finance teacher professional development.
"A Proposal for Incentive Pay at Low-Performing Schools,"
David M. Herszenhorn, The New York Times (05/09/04):
www.nytimes.com/2004/05/09/education/09teach.html
"When Students' Gains Help Teachers' Bottom Line,"
Diana Jean Schemo, The New York Times (05/09/04):
www.nytimes.com/2004/05/09/national/09TEAC.html
"Warner Seeks to Place Best Teachers in Struggling Schools,"
Jason Wermers, Richmond Times-Dispatch (05/06/04):
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/
Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle
&c=MGArticle&cid=1031775297539
"The Delivery, Financing, and Assessment of Professional Development in Education: Pre-Service Preparation and In-Service Training,"
Katherine S. Neville and Casey J. Robinson, The Finance Project (2004):
http://www.financeprojectinfo.org/Publications/
ProfDev_ExecSum.pdf
"Teachers Net Pay Hikes with Bogus Degrees,"
Associated Press (05/04/04):
http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/05/04/
bogus.degrees.ap/index.html
"Senators Call for a Crackdown on Diploma Mills,"
Dan Carnevale, Chronicle of Higher Education (05/12/04):
http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/05/2004051203n.htm
(subscription required)
"Educators' Degrees Earned on Internet Raise Fraud,"
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=34Online.h23
"Better Pay for Better Teaching,"
Bryan C. Hassel, Progressive Policy Institute (May 2002):
http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110
&subsecID=135&contentID=250543
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing on Higher Education Act reauthorization last week: There are two key student loan issues shaping up to be contentious along mostly partisan lines. The first is whether student loan interest rates should be fixed or variable; the second concerns whether students paying off their loans should continue to be allowed to consolidate them at a fixed interest rate.
Right now, student loan interest rates are variable, but student and borrower groups are advocating for a fixed rate or a cap to protect students if, as expected, interest rates rise in the future. House Democrats support this plan, while Republicans oppose it. In addition, House Republicans are proposing to make interest rates on consolidation loans, which are currently fixed, variable. Right now, students can consolidate their loans and lock in current low interest rates, but analysts predict this will carry significant costs to the federal government in the future when interest rates rise. Students argue that the Republican positions would make student loans harder to repay, while Republicans counter that the changes are necessary for fiscal discipline. Adding to the political complexity of this issue is the strong hostility of many traditional lenders to loan consolidators, who they see eating into their business and profits.
Of course, House Republicans are notoriously selective about when they do and do not care about fiscal discipline. Another way to save government money that Republicans aren't embracing is to get more students and schools into direct (rather than subsidized) loans, a program created in the Clinton administration that is more cost-effective because the federal government loans to students directly rather than subsidizing financial institutions to do so. The previous Bulletin noted that efforts to address California's state budget problems might include forcing the state's university system out of the direct lending program, a significant loss in volume that could undermine the federal direct loan program. Last week, however, a California budget agreement included the news that the state's universities will stick with direct lending. At the same time, New York Governor George Pataki is calling for New York's public institutions to leave direct lending because doing so would increase revenues for the state's higher education services corporation. Similar machinations have been considered in other states with little intervention from the Bush administration, but last week the Education Department warned New York that pressuring schools to direct students to subsidized rather than direct loans is a violation of the law.
Also, last week the Governor Bill Owens of Colorado signed legislation converting the state's higher education subsidy system into a voucher system, with $2,000 in funding a year for each state resident public college student (and smaller vouchers for students at some in-state private schools, as well). The policy has been sold as a way to make the state's public education system more competitive and market-driven, but it's also an accounting trick to get around spending limits for higher education. However, the legislation doesn't include additional money needed to fund the voucher system as laid out.
"House Hearing Highlights Divisions Over How to Renew the Higher Education Act,"
Stephen Burd, Chronicle of Higher Education (05/13/04):
http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/05/2004051302n.htm
"Big Money On Campus,"
Megan Barnett, Julian E. Barnes, and Danielle Knight
U.S. News and World Report (10/27/03):
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/031027/
education/27loans.htm
"Governor, Colleges OK Budget Deal,"
Jim Miller and Marisa Agha, The Press-Enterprise (05/12/04):
http://www.pe.com/sharedcontent/southwest/pecom/
schwarzenegger/vt_stories/PE_News_Local_deal12.576ef.html
"U.S. Warns New York State on Student Loan Program,"
Diana Jean Schemo, New York Times (05/08/04):
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/08/education/08loan.html
"Colorado Approves Higher Education Vouchers,"
Sean Cavanaugh and Marianne D. Hurst, Education Week (05/05/04):
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=34Colo.h23
"College Vouchers Become Law,"
John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News (05/11/04):
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/
education/article/0,1299,DRMN_957_2876137,00.html
Legislative Update: CO, MA, and SC: The last few Bulletins have included updates on charter legislation to create a new authorizing alternative to local school districts in Colorado. It finally passed! The new law establishes a nine member state board to grant charters in communities where school districts are uninterested or resist charters, with a specific focus on increasing public school choice options for disadvantaged students. This is important in Colorado because unlike most states, about one-third of the state's charter schools are in the suburbs. Denver state Representative Terrance Carroll (D) had to take on many fellow Democrats and the state teachers union to pass this bill. His efforts -- and those of state Senator Peter Groff who sponsored the Senate version -- are to be commended.
***
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has already vowed to veto a moratorium on new charter schools in the state, but it hasn't stopped the legislature from proposing more legislation that limits charters' funding and growth. The Senate recently came up with a "reform-minded" initiative that funds charter schools by the "actual" per pupil cost of educating those children enrolled in charters as opposed to the system that bases funding on the average cost of educating students in district schools. While this might be a more accurate and "equitable" way to peg specific per pupil costs and fund schools, the plan doesn't account for facilities and maintenance costs, with which charters already struggle. Another Senate proposal includes a charter moratorium similar to one that passed the House earlier this month.
Adrian Walker of The Boston Globe writes that most opposition to charters seems to come from suburban lawmakers and their constituents, not from low-income and urban parents who are filling wait lists for charter schools. The Globe also reports that more than 60 percent of urban charter schools in Massachusetts outpaced comparable schools on the latest MCAS, and some of the highest performers came from schools serving poor and minority children. Although many charters still lag behind district schools in Massachusetts, charters are also providing quality options for underprivileged and minority youngsters.
***
The South Carolina House approved a bill last week creating a statewide charter district. Governor Mark Sanford (R) urged the bill's passage to encourage the growth of charter schools in South Carolina. The pot was sweetened by a $20 million pledge from philanthropist and Imagine Schools President Dennis Bakke to fund the state's charter schools if the bill passed. $20 million is great news for South Carolina's charter schools, but beware implicit strings and messages. Bakke and Governor Sanford are close friends and business partners so some may argue this makes the gift a "personal favor" rather than an actual legitimate investment in charters. And although Bakke supports charter schools he may like vouchers even more. The Bulletin is skeptical of conflating these two different ideas.
A UFT charter? The United Federation of Teachers (UFT) may open its own charter school in New York City, something the Bulletin thinks is a great idea and a chance for the union to demonstrate its reform bona fides. But the New York Post has a different view. They argue that --at best-- the UFT charter school would be a "Potemkin village" and at worst would be inappropriately construed by the media as validating current teacher contracts in New York, which critics say are a barrier to school improvement efforts. Although the Post may have a point, an important feature of charter schooling is it provides parents with quality, innovative education options that they can choose or reject. If the UFT can create a good charter school, all the better. If they cannot, that's also notable.
Buffalo: The emerging charter district in Buffalo is on shaky ground. Four new school board members, elected with the backing of the Buffalo Teachers Federation, are opposed to the charter plan, leaving only a slim 5-4 majority in favor. An opinion piece in The Buffalo News reminds the new school board members that bagging the so-called Renaissance Project won't make charter schools disappear. Instead, it will simply kill the district's chances of using charters to complement well-performing, quality district schools while at the same time helping to improve those that need the extra help. In Buffalo and elsewhere, good charter schools have proven effective at providing a quality education to poor, minority, and hard-to-serve students, often with less money than district schools. A good number of students in Buffalo represent that demographic and stand to benefit from an all-charter district. Considering the alternative, isn't that a valid reason for the "skeptics" on the board to give charters a chance?
Arizona: An interesting Arizona Republic opinion piece hails the state's charter school movement as a "visionary" success, arguing that while many other states only cautiously embraced chartering, Arizona has created the most liberal system of charter schools in the country. Yet the Bulletin would caution that, while "open" chartering has advantages (and Arizona has its fair share of success stories), a laissez-faire approach to chartering creates openings for lower-quality schools and can lead to serious problems without steps to balance openness to innovation with strong charter accountability. In the next few weeks, PPI will release a new analysis of Arizona's charter experience by Bryan Hassel and Michelle Godard Terrell that investigates these issues and offers several recommendations for policymakers.
Minnesota: In the meantime, if you have yet to read Jon Schroeder's excellent recent PPI analysis of the current state of play on charter schools in Minnesota, check out "Ripples of Innovation: Charter Schooling in Minnesota, the Nation's First Charter School State," available on PPI's website. Schroeder traces the history and status quo and offers ideas for improvement that are applicable both in Minnesota and elsewhere. It's the second in a series of 21st Century Schools Project analyses of state and urban experiences with public charter schooling.
"Bill Would Overhaul Charter School Formula,"
Michael Kunzelman, The Daily News (5/13/04):
http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/localRegional/
view.bg?articleid=33055
"The People's Alternative,"
Adrian Walker, The Boston Globe (05/6/04):
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/05/06/
the_peoples_alternative/
"Urban Charters Score a Win,"
Peter Schworm, The Boston Globe (05/10/04):
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/
articles/2004/05/10/urban_charter_schools_score_a_win/
"A UFT Charter School?"
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_09_archive.html#108429710520402913
"Charter School Plan in Peril,"
Peter Simon, The Buffalo News (05/6/04):
www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040506/1029132.asp
"Charter Plan Deserves a Second Look,"
Opinion Editorial, The Buffalo News (05/13/04):
www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040513/1053365.asp
"Visionary Step,"
Opinion Editorial, Arizona Republic, (05/11/04):
www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/
articles/0511tue2-11.html
"Charter Schools Will Grow,"
The Charlotte Observer, (05/16/04):
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/
local/states/south_carolina/counties/york/8678987.htm
"Philanthropist pledges $20 million dollars to charter schools,"
Amy Geier Edgar and Jim Davenport, Associated Press (05/12/04):
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/
article?AID=/20040512/APN/405120910
"Ripples of Innovation: Charter Schooling in Minnesota, the Nation's First Charter School State,"
Jon Schroeder, Progressive Policy Institute (April 2004):
http://www.ppionline.org/documents/MN_Charters_0504.pdf
Department of Buried Ledes
It looks like a standard article on the reading wars, or a bland summary of the International Reading Association's latest conference. But what really makes this Education Week article an interesting read is what looks to us like the first on-record venting by former Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Susan Neumann about why she left the administration and some of her concerns about their approach to No Child Left Behind implementation.
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_09_archive.html#108432376271921836
Certifiable
More misleading studies about whether the current regime of state teacher certification guarantees quality. Kate Walsh does a good job debunking them.
http://www.eduwonk.com/archives/
2004_05_16_archive.html#108456660942744107
More or Less Better
This sharp new PPI piece by former Superintendent Paul Kimmelman argues why forcing arts and music out of the curriculum to make room for more math and reading in response to No Child Left Behind may be counterproductive, since what struggling schools need most is in many cases not more of the same but rather more effective approaches.
http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110
&subsecid=136&contentid=252643
Public Will
Arnie Fege argues that providing schools the resources to succeed is not a pipe dream but a matter of political will, and that doing so requires commitment both to funding and to the reform and accountability needed to make schools work.
http://www.asbj.com/current/0504asbjfege.pdf
Standards of Learning
The Washington Post's Rosalind Helderman looks at Virginia's new graduation requirements, which have real consequences for students this year.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/
A11073-2004May8.html
Making Sense of Supplemental Services
A new website from the American Institutes for Research aims to help parents, educators, policymakers, and service providers understand the supplemental services provisions of NCLB and to help families choose and access supplemental service providers.
www.tutorsforkids.org
Good News and Bad News in Chicago
The good news for Chicago parents whose kids are in low-performing schools: An analysis prepared by the Chicago school district finds that students who transferred schools under NCLB's public school choice provisions are showing stronger achievement growth. Now the bad news: Again this year the district says it has space to provide transfers for only a tiny fraction (less than one percent) of eligible children. If you want to follow Chicago school reform issues more closely, Windy City-based education writer Alex Russo just started a weekly e-mail blast about education policy goings on there and more generally, too. If you'd like to get it, send him an e-mail at
AlexanderRusso@aol.com.
www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=34Transfer.h23
Teaching Interrupted
This new study from Public Agenda, with support from legal reform group Common Good, looks at parent and teacher positions about school discipline and finds, not surprisingly, that both parents and teachers think discipline is essential but too often lacking in schools, in part due to excessive fear of lawsuits and lack of support for teachers who discipline students. Another interesting finding: 91 percent of teachers say that having more emphasis on classroom management in teacher training programs would improve discipline.
http://www.publicagenda.com/research/
research_reports_details.cfm?list=3
Pathways to Where?
Bob Shireman's perceptive Education Week commentary on high school reform argues that, while high schools should offer multiple paths to prepare students with different interests and goals for varying postsecondary and career options, educators owe all students a rigorous academic curriculum as an essential component of every high school option.
www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=36shireman.h23
SAVE THE DATE to join PPI's 21st Century Schools Project on Friday, June 4, for a Friday Forum on charter school districts featuring Bryan Hassel, Todd Ziebarth, and Alex Medler, who will present and discuss their recent report on charter school districts and collective bargaining. The Forum will run from 9:30 to 11:00 AM at PPI's offices in Washington, D.C. Check our website for additional information about the event, or RSVP by e-mailing education@dlcppi.org.
The 21st Century Schools Project Bulletin is written by Sara Mead and Renee Rybak and edited by Andrew Rotherham. The Bulletin is published every other week. For more information about us visit:
www.ppionline.org/ppi_ka.cfm?knlgAreaID=110
Do you like reading the Bulletin to start your morning, relaxing with a 21st Century Schools Project paper or report after a long day, or do you just have some extra cash? You can help support our work by contributing online. Small contributions welcome, large ones graciously accepted! Contributions to PPI are tax-deductible. Click to https://secure.ga3.org/05/support to support the 21st Century Schools Project's work on education reform.
In addition, purchasing books from Amazon.com that are linked to in this newsletter also helps support our work on education policy.
