The would-be school year is fast
approaching and thousands of parents across Arizona are panicking.
How will their children learn
this year? When will they have a
physical place to go? Will parents be
able to return to work? Will they have
to pay for tutors out of pocket?
With most of the critical
reopening decisions now in the hands of Superintendent Kathy Hoffman, school
districts and ultimately the teachers’ union, it’s obvious now that crafting a
system that works for parents and kids won’t be the top priority for the
educational establishment. Every
decision from here on out will be to cater to the desires of administrators and
teachers. Period.
Come August 17th,
district school families will be forced to accept whatever dysfunctional
Covid-schooling platform that is thrusted into their laps. Parents of low-income families will be hit the
hardest, especially those who can’t work from home. Special needs children will
be hung out to dry. Kids in abusive households will continue to have no escape
from a hostile environment.
And if any parent or taxpayer
questions why their needs appear to be secondary to those of the educational
establishment, they are immediately shouted down and told that they just want
people to die. So what if your child
needs in person learning—you should just accept paying unlimited amounts in taxes
to feed a substandard educational system that only adds to the chaos in your
life.
Even more infuriating is the “solution”
now being offered to parents that require in person schooling to address their
work/life situations. Rather than open up for learning, several school
districts are now offering paid
childcare services.
That’s right – residents already
paying over half of their state taxes to education are now expected to pay
to have their kids in school to not learn. Representatives of the teachers’ union claim it
is too risky to teach kids in a classroom, but apparently it is plenty safe to not
teach them in a classroom.
Parents and kids deserve better
than this.
Families were willing to extend
grace at the end of the school year when districts scrambled to reformat the
educational experience for online and distant learning. The legislature passed emergency
measures to ensure funding would be uninterrupted. And instead of
developing a real plan that catered to families that MUST HAVE in person
learning, the school districts and education lobby instead put all their time
and energy into a public relations campaign to push back the start date of
school to October 1st.
It should be noted that there are
many schoolteachers and administrators ready and willing to resume in person
learning. Afterall, through the peaks
and valleys of the pandemic, essential workers have stepped up and done their
jobs. Truck workers continued to deliver
critical goods, grocery store workers continued to stock shelves, and doctors
and nurses continued to man hospitals and treat the unwell. Those teachers that recognize that education
is an essential service and wish to provide in person learning to our children
should not be stopped by administrators and union thug bosses.
If district schools believe that
there is no limit to the mistreatment of hardworking families, they are in for
a rude awakening. Most parents are very
supportive of their local district school, but they will have no problem
walking away from a broken K-12 system if it benefits their child.
They may not be vocal or have
active twitter accounts, but these parents are paying attention and are wide
awake to this rolling disaster. They are thinking creatively about education and
observing more closely than ever the best ways in which their children
learn. This will lead to rapid
innovation and adoption of flexible models.
Post-pandemic, there may very
well be an explosive demand for testing new educational models, from micro-schools,
“forest schools,” digital classrooms, to expanded ESAs. An educational Renaissance is a possible and
welcome outcome.
It is no secret that most
universities and colleges across the country are teeming with professors and
adjuncts unafraid to insert their liberal biases into their courses and
teachings. A survey
of 40 leading universities in the country found that Democrat
professors outnumber their Republican colleagues at a ratio of nearly 12 to
1. Conservatives
are a genuine minority on higher education campuses and
intellectual diversity has become nonexistent.
The result is an ideological
double standard that is destroying our colleges and universities. If you are
liberal college professor lecturing your students on the evils of capitalism or
how America is a cesspit of bigotry, your academic freedom is sacrosanct. Students
that don’t agree with this sentiment are wise to keep quiet and not rock the boat.
What happens when conservative
students and speakers don’t fall in line and decide to stand up for their
beliefs? They are discriminated
against by their professors, or are “shouted
down” and attacked for expressing the minority position on campus.
Conservative professors that refuse
to embrace the liberal Marxist worldview of their peers don’t fare much better.
Case in point: Professor Nick Damask at Scottsdale Community College.
Professor Demask teaches World
Politics at SCC and is considered an expert in the area of international
terrorism. This spring he had his
students take a quiz that included several questions about Islamic
terrorism. One student in the class
claimed that he was offended by the quiz and wrote the professor about his
complaints. Professor Damask provided a clarification of his questions and
offered to discuss the issue further with the student, but before further
discussion could occur, the student posted the quiz on social media.
The professor and the college
were excoriated by liberal pundits and the media for suggesting that there are
terrorists that self-identify with Islam. At that point SCC had a choice—treat
Professor Demask like how they would have treated every other liberal professor
and protected his academic freedom, or throw him under the ideological bus. To
no ones’ surprise, they chose the latter option.
SCC immediately voided the test results,
issued an apology from the college to the student and sent the professor a
pre-written apology letter for him to sign. To his credit Professor Damask, who
has taught at SCC for 23 years, did not apologize but instead
pursued legal representation for violations of his academic freedom.
After Professor Damask decided to
fight back the Maricopa County Community College Board opened up an
investigation to determine if SCC handled the situation properly. Nearly a
month later the interim Chancellor of Maricopa Community Colleges published his
findings and determined that administrators
acted inappropriately, and that the school violated the professor’s
academic freedom.
Though Professor Damask was vindicated, in many respects it is a hollow victory. His reputation has been permanently damaged, which shows that college leadership can’t be trusted to provide due process or protect individuals with different beliefs than their own.
This freezing of any divergent
speech on campus is a double-edged sword. If serious steps are not taken to address this
issue it won’t take long before conservatives start playing thought police on
campus and engage in their own guerilla tactics to point out every liberally
slanted lesson they deem offensive.
Amid the chaos of the Covid19
pandemic, Arizona lawmakers have proceeded with conducting the state’s
business. Monday March 23rd,
the legislature officially passed an
$11.8 Billion budget as well as a targeted Coronavirus relief
package. They then adjourned until April
13th or until the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House
call them back to reconvene.
The “skinny budget” that passed
was a simple baseline budget with a small amount of growth baked into the
formulas in order to keep agencies operational.
There were no ornaments on this Christmas tree.
In fact, though it seems like everyday
a new bit of disheartening news breaks, the state’s unusually trim budget is
definitely a silver lining. This is
likely the most conservative budget passed by the legislature in a decade. Considering all the big government bills, special
interest tax credit programs, and local pork
projects that were moving through the system and were likely to be
packed into the budget – passing a skinny budget was a win for taxpayers.
In addition to finalizing the
budget, lawmakers also passed two bills to address specific issues with the
Coronavirus – closure of schools and unemployment benefits. The bill related to public
school closures included provisions to not require schools to
make up for normally required days, extending state-wide assessment deadlines
and requiring districts to continue to pay their employees through the crisis. The bill for unemployment
benefits was an emergency measure that allowed the state to establish
alternative unemployment insurance benefits for people specifically impacted by
COVID19.
The budget and these bills now
sit on the Governor’s desk and await his signature.
Meanwhile, the executive branch
has been coordinating with the Department of Health on policies to curb the
impacts of COVID-19. Here are some of the steps their
administration has taken sequentially:
March 11th
– Governor issued Executive order
declaring a State of Emergency. The order
allowed ADHS to waive licensing requirements for healthcare officials, allowed
the state to access emergency funds and gave the state emergency procurement
authority. It also required insurance
providers to cover out of network providers for tests and treatment of
COVID-19.
March 15th
–
In conjunction with Kathy Hoffman the Superintendent of Public Instruction,
ordered the closure of all schools.
March 17th
–
Issued new guidelines for restaurants, child care providers and nursing homes
for social distancing and recommended gatherings of more than 10 people be
cancelled or delayed.
March 19th
–
Activated the National Guard to assist grocery stores and food banks.
March 19th
–
Issued three Executive Orders: 1. Delaying
requirements to renew drivers licenses and permits by 6 months
(September 1, 2020); 2. Required the closure of bars, movie theaters and
gyms. The Order limited
the operations of restaurants as well as gave them the ability to deliver
alcohol off premises; 3. Required
the delay of elective surgeries to conserve personal protective
medical equipment.
March 20th
–Executive
Order expanding access to unemployment benefits to individuals
impacted by COVID-19. The Governor’s
office also extended the filing deadline for state income taxes to July 15th,
mirroring the extension at the federal level.
March 20th
–
Extended the closure of all schools by another 2 weeks; through April 10th.
March 23rd
–Executive
Order issued to preempt cities and towns ability to supersede the
Governor’s emergency protocols including closures of businesses. He also defined which entities and businesses
and government services would be considered “essential.”
March 24th
– Executive Order
delaying evictions for renters specifically impacted by COVID-19.
March 25th
– Expanded
telemedicine services and prohibited regulatory boards from
requiring in-person examinations prior to the issuance of prescriptions.
Many of the executive orders
issued represent vast deregulatory strides.
Issues that have been highly contested for years such as expansion of
telemedicine, allowing prescriptions to be issued without an in-person
examination, and the waiving of licensure for medical professionals outside of
the state are being swiftly implemented out of necessity. Despite the unfortunate circumstances that
have precipitated these changes, they are a benefit to the state and to
Arizonans. These regulatory roll backs
and a lean state budget are a few silver linings for which we can all be
grateful.
Over the weekend Republicans and
Democrats in Washington were working toward an agreement on a Coronavirus
relief package to assist businesses and employees being hammered by the
economic shutdown. A bipartisan deal was close until at the last second Democrats
moved
to block the legislation, followed by an announcement by House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi that she would be drafting her own package.
The reason for the opposition?
Democrats are trying to use the bill to pass their wish
list of radical reforms! Some of the demands from democrats include:
Mandated Climate Change Studies
Increased fuel emission standards for airlines
Diversity reporting for corporate boards
Expanded collective bargaining power for unions
Same day voter registration
All mail-in elections
Elimination of all debt at the post office
Retirement plans for community newspaper employees
Study on all climate change mitigation efforts by all businesses benefiting from the legislation
Looking at this absurd list of
demands from Pelosi and Schumer brings clarity to what House Majority Whip Rep.
James Clybern meant when
he said that the Coronavirus crisis, “is a tremendous opportunity to
restructure things to fit our vision.”
They don’t care that none of
these items help patients, hospitals or the regular person currently sitting at
home waiting for this to end. They see an opportunity to exploit the process
and will try to bully Trump and Republicans into accepting their demands.
Make no mistake, every democrat sees this as a political opportunity to implement the Bernie Sanders plan, including Senator Kyrsten Sinema. Earlier this week she joined the democrats in blocking the Coronavirus relief package and then tried to spin it to be about providing enough help to small business and the health care community. How exactly does eliminating the debt at the Post Office and mandated diversity on corporate boards keep small businesses open? How does implementing the Green New Deal help hospitals fight Coronavirus?
It was a shameful display and
exposed every Democrat in Washington. They may talk about the need to fight the
current crisis, but when it came time to act it turns out that expanding
union power clout is more important to them. Even Sen. Sinema was seduced
by this power grab and went along.
Republicans have rightfully excoriated
Democrats over their antics, and so far have not given in to their demands.
They must hold firm—the public will understand why they are rejecting the
liberal wish list and will hold them accountable. Not even the compliant media
will be able to save them—although they will
try.
Since 1994, when Arizona passed
legislation to allow students to “open enroll” in a district school outside
their boundary, families have been taking advantage of the power of school
choice.
Open enrollment’s popularity is
evident when you consider approximately half of Arizona kids do not attend
their designated district school. Of
these migrating students almost
half of them are choosing one district school over
another.
Recently, the Arizona
Republic wrote a story about hundreds of parents waiting in line for
up to 36 hours outside Sunnyslope High School with the hope of capturing a slot
for their child. The Glendale Union District operates on a ‘first come, first
register’ basis, and parents were not going to risk missing out on the
opportunity to get their kid into this high-ranking school.
This should be recognized for
what it is: evidence that school choice works.
No longer are children trapped in underperforming schools by virtue of
their zip code, parents are free to exercise their right to vote for their
preferred school with their feet, and schools are getting market feedback on
the quality of their product.
Yet, the AZ Republic gets the
narrative all wrong:
“Educational inequality continues in Arizona despite
a 2018 teacher strike that pushed Gov. Doug Ducey and the Legislature to
give educators a three-step, 20% raise that will conclude this year. Even with
tens of millions more in tax dollars going to Arizona public schools, the state
remains among the bottom five for educational funding.”
The implication being made is that parents are camping outside of Sunny Side high school to flee the Phoenix Union District because of lack of funding and “educational inequality”. This story proves exactly the opposite!
According to the state Auditor
General, Phoenix
Union High School District (PUSD) received $13,853 per student. If
Phoenix Union was its own state it would be #15 in
the country in per pupil funding. By any metric they do not
qualify as an “underfunded” district.
By contrast, Glendale Union receives $10,385 per student. Think about that: every parent lining at SunnySlope is willing to take $3,500 less to educate their child.
It’s easy see why parents are
willing to forfeit the extra funding after comparing the performance of the two
districts. According to the Arizona Department of Education, only 4 Schools
in Phoenix Union (28%) are rated an A or a B.
Six others are a C and four a D. State assessment scores corroborate
these ratings with only about 20 percent of PUSD students passing math, English
and science. Glendale scores double and
even triple these statistics when it comes to science testing.
You can’t blame demographics
either. Poverty rates are similar in both districts, and Phoenix has much
smaller class sizes (17.7) than Glendale (21.6). The bottom line is the
district that should have a distinct advantage is failing to compete. GUSD
is simply producing better academic results with less money. Families in the area are savvy enough to
understand this.
As for educational inequality,
the only unfairness that exists in this situation is an
entrenched school financing model that allows under-performing
districts to receive the more funding (and be rewarded for this failure) than
successful ones. Perhaps these parents should be able to take a portion of the
$3,500 they lose when they relocate. That would help address funding inequality
in a hurry. It could also go toward helping expand capacity in Glendale so that
parents don’t have to camp out for days in the hopes of providing their child
with a better education.
But don’t expect the education
establishment or their media enablers to support any real reform. Even when all
of the facts point toward the need to reward success and tying reforms to
funding, they will never abandon their ‘throw money at the problem’ narrative.
Here is an under-reported education fact: K-12 schools in Arizona have received over $1 Billion in new funding from the state over the last two years. This infusion of cash is the largest education spending increase in state history, boosting per pupil funding by 20 percent. Even adjusting for inflation, we are now back to the pre-recession funding levels for education last reached in 2008, which was the previous high water mark for K-12 spending by the state.
One
would hope that our policymakers are keeping close tabs on this massive
expansion of funding and scrutinizing how our tax dollars are being spent. Instead,
it appears that state lawmakers are preparing to skip this step and commit more
dollars to K-12, no questions asked.
Hopefully
this attitude will change with news that the largest school district in the
state decided to use their K-12 funding boost to go on an administration spending spree:
“Even
as teachers were canvassing neighborhoods, fighting to pass a budget override
in the state’s largest school district, new documents reveal Mesa Public
Schools Governing Board members were handing out hefty bonuses and spending
record amounts on administration in the district’s front office.
Budget
documents and memoranda obtained by ABC15 show the district’s administrative
spending soared more than 42 percent from 2018 to 2019, exceeding its own
budget by more than three-quarters of a million dollars.
The
new revelations about administrative spending come just a day after the governing
board voted to put Superintendent Ember Conley on administrative leave, signaling
it is parting ways with the district’s leader, who has only been on the job
since March of 2018. The board is expected to buy out the remainder of her
contract – a cost which is expected to exceed $500,000.”
A
large chunk of the payouts went toward bonuses to employees close to embattled
Superintendent Ember Conley. Twelve members of her executive team received
$22,500 bonuses, while several others had large amounts put into tax sheltered
annuities.
Adding
insult to injury is all of this largesse occurred behind the scenes while the
district actively pushed for more funding through a budget override. Voters in the East Valley are outraged
and one ex-school board member has filed a criminal complaint with the Attorney General’s office to
investigate the matter.
Taxpayers
deserve answers, but it’s unclear if they will ever get any. At last week’s district meeting, the Mesa
school board refused to discuss why Superintend Conley was placed on
leave, and provided no explanation as to why the district spending spree was
hidden from the public. They did, however, attempt to defend the payouts and
declared that exceeding the approved administration budget wasn’t really an
issue.
The
lack of candor isn’t surprising given the current political environment
surrounding K-12 funding. There is tremendous hubris among the education establishment,
based on the belief that policymakers are afraid to hold them accountable.
That
is how you end up with several education groups openly bickering on what tax hikes (sales, property,
income, all of the above?) to send to the ballot in 2020. It appears they have concluded
it is politically unnecessary to explain how the additional $20,000 per
classroom provided by the state has been spent or justify why a tax increase is
required given the news that Arizona has amassed a $500 Million (and growing)
budget surplus for next year.
The
only way this cycle ends is if Governor Ducey and the State Legislature send a
clear signal that future K-12 appropriations will be tied to results,
accountability and reform. If they don’t, then taxpayers should expect more
demands for additional education spending and higher taxes with no explanations
or expectations that it is being used wisely.
Recent Comments