Don't go spending that $100M yet

 The chair of House Ways and Means weighed in yesterday: 

House Ways and Means Chair Aaron Michlewitz has “some serious concerns” about the governor’s election-year proposal to spend $100 million on public schools before they’ve even collected the revenue to support it. 

“The ink hasn’t dried yet on the actual fiscal year 2027 budget, so I think we’d like to see that be implemented first,” the House budget chief said. “There’s a lot of concerns related to raising that Chapter 70 number further, may further complicate things for future budgets.”

It has been rightly noted that Healey's proposal doesn't actually raise Chapter 70 aid--while it's general aid for K-12 schools, it is not being distributed via MGL Ch. 70, sec. 1--and it explicitly does not raise the chapter 70-designated aid received by schools this year, which sets the floor for next year.

I will observe again, though, that concerns about "future budgets" are very much appropriate given that this is the final year of the Student Opportunity Act implementation.  

Things I am reading this week

•  Not specific to education, but this lengthy piece on "AI mania" in the workplace is a very "the Emperor has no clothes" description, where no one can say the Emperor has no clothes because no one else in business leadership will.
  

  The reality is thus: the people in charge either have no plan, or see no path forwards other than keeping their heads down. Not at banks, not at hospitals, not in our government institutions. The world’s organisations have been captured by people in the throes of frothing excitement, and saner people who now live in a state of constant commingled fear and frustration.

  I again reiterate: for education to put any eggs in this basket is badly thought-out.
  
  
• My main takeaway from Chad Aldeman's look at K-12 education spending hitting a trillion dollars is what a huge difference single payer health care would make: 
  

   In 2023-24, schools spent $197 billion on employee benefits. As another way to look at it, for every $1,000 that a school spent on salaries, it also paid $438 in benefit costs. These trends may help explain why districts with rising personnel costs are not boosting take-home pay for their workers. 

  Imagine if we had all that money to spend on any aspect of education, because employees all already had health care. 
  
  
• It's worth reading Matt Barnum's interview with Ary Amerikaner, who co-founded Brown's Promise (and I say that not only because it echoes some of what I question about the lawsuit). 
  
  
• Not sure if it's because the seniors involved have graduated or just coincidences of timing, but there are good pieces covering two separate episodes of attempted throttling of student reporting that came out this week. Wired covers Redwood High in California, where a student journalist turned up a connection to the Epstein files to his local community. In that case, the decision making was in the hands of the students, though this quote from their advisor deserves mention: 
  

  “With all due respect,” Schneider remembers Bishop replying, “under California’s student press law, being afraid of a lawsuit or backlash is not a valid reason to call for the takedown of content.”

  Colorado Newsline covers Grand Junction High, where the advisor was reassigned apparently due to a single complaint by another staff member over a student editorial on the Gaza conflict most recently; the student paper itself published a piece about student press freedom being under threat from their administration in June. 
  
  
• One would really like to think something like the national civics competition would be outside of meddling from this federal administration. It appears that is not the case.

It is July and so my daisies are in bloom.

keeping an eye on that $100M

 Regarding the $100M of Fair Share Governor Healey filled a supplemental budget to spend, a smidge of insight yesterday from Colin Young at State House News Service (here being interviewed by NEPM): 

Relatedly, yesterday, both the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education¹ and the Department of Revenue sent out this letter from Healey addressed to "municipal leaders," praising what the letter terms "a total of $200 million" coming to them in Fair Share, of which the $100M which she has requested is half; in other words, there isn't $200M yet. And there is a LOT of credit being taken for how much the executive branch is "partnering" with local communities. 

Does this strike anyone else as an untoward use of departmental communication to municipalities and school districts? While there is not an overt "call your legislator" included in the letter, it's strongly implied. 

We look forward to continuing to work with the Legislature to secure this important investment for schools and to building on our partnership with cities and towns as we continue working together to strengthen communities across the state. 

This, about $100M in non-formula funding requested in the summer of an election year, is all feeling pretty icky. 
And again, this is not funding being distributed in a way that meets the highest needs, nor is it funding we have, nor is it a thoughtful consideration of the needs of districts in the current context.

¹which, despite it continually escaping at least this and the last governor, does not work for them. The Governor appoints the Board, which has, save one member, non-conterminous terms with her, and THEY oversee the Commissioner who runs the Department. She cannot fire them. She does not oversee them. I wish we saw more evidence than anyone knew that legally, this is how this is outlined to work.

Skunk at the garden party time

They're kind of cute, though, aren't they.

Though it is, of course, not the done thing to express anything but enthusiasm for additional funding…It is time again for one of my periodic skunk at the garden party posts.

Things I am reading this week

•  Please add me to those not at all shocked that little kids are finding their way around various kinds of restrictions on school laptops to get up to all sorts of nefariousness. 
  

  Kids have been off task and distracted in school long before Chromebooks or iPads existed. But some parents and experts say devices only make it easier to engage in non-academic, inappropriate and even dangerous content.
  This is especially challenging for young children whose brains, self-regulation skills and self-control are still developing.

  
  
• The storied Financial Times of London is out this week with an article on employers pulling back on their encouragement or even insistence on employee use of AI. In an excellent example of Goodhart's Law, when employers made massive uses of AI something that mattered, employees made maximizing use, rather than doing actual good work, their focus.
  I really hope that educators are watching how quickly things are changing in the workforce on such usage, as that keeps being the argument for why we MUST have students using it in schools. We are very much watching a tech bubble in real time. It's unwise to train kids for the bubble. 
  
  
• And speaking of educators and AI use, please do yourself a favor and review this piece of "meta-meta-analysis" from Patrick E. O’Neil, looking at the major flaws in significant parts of the research propping up AI use in schools. From his introduction: 
  

  The audit found that none of the examined meta-analyses provided a valid basis for the claims they advanced: none had a coherent construct, none sufficiently assessed publication bias, and all had severe heterogeneity. Statistics were misapplied, miscalculated, and misinterpreted. A majority (61%) of the randomly vetted primary studies were problematic, most commonly because the outcome measured didn’t match the meta-analysis.

  I await any of the educational publications I read, all of which have ongoingly significantly boosted this breathless urgency of such use in education, to put this one of their front page. 
  
  
• And speaking of research, I took a look at this research into (essentially) what districts did with their ESSER funding, specifically looking at if such grants were used to offset local property taxes. The piece found it did, which might be what you end up seeing circulating.
  What matters a lot though, is what districts they looked at: in order to have groups to compare, the researchers used the 5% poverty rate used for Title I as their cutoff, looking at districts just to either side of the line.
  What that means is they looked at what wealthy districts did with ESSER that got it.; 5% is a very low rate of poverty in a district; as best as I can find, the national average is closer to 13%, and that would leave out all of the very largest districts in the country.
  That's not really the same thing as saying "here's what happened with ESSER funding" at all. 

and we have official FY27 numbers

 And with the Governor's signature, we have a budget. As a result, DESE has released final Chapter 70 and Net School Spending numbers (including, yes, a new complete spreadsheet: download away!). 

Also, because Governor Healey did not make any changes to the budget, the conference committee numbers on the cherry sheets--for municipal and for regional schools--are now final. 

Happy fiscal new year (ten days in)! 

How you frame the tale

 I posted about this over on Bluesky earlier this week, but I thought it also warranted attention here: 

The Cambridge Public Schools moved to a model where all eighth graders take algebra, and The Hechinger Report wrote an article on it. Here is the headline they used: 

Because Hechinger does good work, the resulting article is both worth reading and isn't the default "no" that Betteridge's Law has taught us to expect. This is a work in progress, and the jury is still out on implementation.

The Boston Globe sometimes picks up articles from Hechinger, and they did with this one. Here is how they chose to headline it: 

I'm not at all the first to observe that the Globe doesn't really write the coverage--particularly of issues like education--for people who live in Boston; they're looking just over the city line to the wealthier and whiter suburbs. The message, as so often for such audiences, is "be very afraid; your children are being failed and will fail as a result." 

Rarely does one see it so well illustrated. 

There is a foundation budget review commission in the conference committee budget

 Yes, I am still playing catch-up from being away!

the headline I saw from vacation

The conference committee budget agreed to by both chambers does have a foundation budget review commission in it. As the guide to the outside sections notes, it is compromise language, which here means that they didn't just take the Senate's language, as, as you might remember, the House didn't have such language in the budget. 

I'm going to include the text from the budget in full below; it's in two sections (64 and 111), covering the committee's charge as well as the deadline for the report of the next commission. I say next report, as the language appears to be (again, as this was also in the Student Opportunity Act) to be establishing this as a commission that is to meet periodically. The language establishes it "every ten years" but that's "[u]pon action of the general court."

There are two things that are interesting to me: 

I read the state graduation council report

 ...I am not going to say "so you don't have to," because I think if you have an interest in education, you probably should at least skim the report, which is online here.
As always, this is me writing as me on behalf of me only. 

This image deserves more space than it gets in the report, as it isn't bad thinking and it's a solid try at an outline. 
How is it, though, that they managed parallel structure for all but ONE of the items?
The upper left one is crying out for a noun!

June 2026 Board of Ed; Pioneer Valley Chinese Immersion Charter School

 the report is here

completed the tasks described in the three conditions, around governance of their board
different than demonstrating sustained improvement
will have additional governance requirement; expected that they will apply for renewal next year
now having some conversation around the transportation item
condition was for them to develop a plan; they haven't fully implemented a plan

June 2026 Board of Ed: translation and interpretation regulation

backup is here; public comment summary is here; redline is here 

Martinez notes there's no money attached to this
strategic about what is in regs; "want to be nimble"
"not intended to create a significant financial burden to any of our districts"
balancing making sure that our children's needs are being met

June 2025 Board of Ed: special education regulations

 You can find the backup here, summary of public comment here, and the redline version here. 

Martinez, in introducing the topic, notes the intended move of special education from DoE to HHS at the federal level, stressing that it makes it that much more important that Massachusetts have strong laws and regulations to protect students.

1. amend definition of individualized education program to reference state law, which aligns with federal law
2. add new section on discipline procedures for eligible students; incorporating provisions in federal law

changes made in response to public comment:

• ESL staff specifically listed as required to be trained (already required for all staff, anyway)
• consideration of English learners' needs in IEP dvelopment
• "change in placement" definition streamlined
• definitions for "controlled substance," "illegal drug," "serious bodily injury," and "weapon" all directly from IDEA
• notices comply with state discipline law requirements
• language on appeal of a placement as a result of a disciplinary decision
• reference to state law regarding transmission of student records to law enforcement 

June 2026 Board of Ed: Civics

 Super weird to me that the update includes this "look this curriculum is everywhere"

civics law passed in 2018

student-led civics projects

Oddly, this presentation is from iCivics, not from DESE staff or school district people, or...this is kind of weird; 

"goal of schooling is produced informed engaged citizens"
"health of our constitutional democracy requires sustained commitment"
now speaking about the We Declare! challenge

Here's the Boston Green Academy winning video

June 2026 Board of Ed: State Student Advisory Council

 State Student Advisory Council 
for some reason, they never link to the presentation from the SSAC on these...I wish they would

used extensive amounts of data in their work
host successful regional and statewide stakeholder engagement events

June 2026 Board of Ed: opening comments

 As I noted earlier this week, this agenda has the end-of-year group of reports today: one on civics, because 250th anniversary of the Declaration; the end of year Student Advisory Report; probably some talk about the statewide graduation report, which had its own meeting last night; the Mitchell Chester award; plus they have regulations to update.

There's a pre-meeting rally happening in the courtyard outside about immigration, 'though there has not been a lot directed to the Board on that (and the Governor issued guidance on this topic last month)

The livestreaming video is here.

from my walk to the meeting

News of interest

 Some things I have been reading: 

• The Wall Street Journal covers the parent rebellion on about screentime at schools, particularly looking at Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvania, where the school board recently removed an opt-out provision on tech that they'd previously passed. (Cue "that's a bold strategy, Cotton" gif here). 
  It isn't going away, and the level of resistance in some local administrations to even having the discussion is really...odd? I guarantee every district that has an administrator dismissing parent concerns has, somewhere, something about family engagement somewhere in goals (and in Massachusetts, "two-way" communication is part of the state standards for evaluation!).
  
  
• The good news on education policy and such from New Hampshire is sometimes few and far between, so we'll take that Governor Ayotte (a Republican) has vetoed a trans bathroom bill for the fourth time, each of those times by a Republican governor. 
  Republicans in N.H. are also joining with their Democratic colleagues in considering a tightening oversight of the so-called "education freedom" accounts, the thing where families can just take the money allocated for public schools.
  
  
• Continuing our looking north, Vermont signed into law language restricting ICE access to schools, modeled on the policy of Winooski, which has of course received national attention for standing up for its immigrant students.
  
  
• In case you wondered if the Pioneer Institute has changed, the answer from today's Boston Globe editorial page is a resounding 'no.' "Boston charter schools went DEI" is not going to fly, folks.
  
  
• Special education oversight moving to HHS got lots of press, but it appears that Senator Cassidy, who chairs the Senate education committee, is not on board, considering a vote next month to bar it. You might remember that the Senate is what saved the federal education budget last year (implementing this year) from draconian cuts; this actually doing oversight appears to be continuing. 

It's a two meeting week for the Board of Ed

 As a reminder: the Board has a special meeting tonight (Monday) at 5 PM virtually, specifically on the recently released graduation report. 

They have their regular June meeting tomorrow at 9 AM (yes, both agendas are a single page) in Everett. That agenda includes the end of the school year things--the Mitchell Chester award, the end of year report from the student rep from the State Student Advisory Council--along with some end of year informational reports (off agenda) including both the chronically underperforming schools report, and the non-operating school districts report (my personal favorite Massachusetts education trivia question!). 

There is also a report on civics education (you might remember this was a request of the chair at the last meeting) and a report on the operating conditions of Pioneer Valley Chinese Immersion Charter School, who the Commissioner is recommending being released from their current conditions but:

 While I recommend that the Board remove the current conditions, concerns remain about the board’s governance practices, such as an Open Meeting Law violation and other deficiencies in complying with the Open Meeting Law; inconsistent implementation of the board’s review and approval processes; and, based on review of board and committee meeting minutes and observations of board meetings, indications that board trainings have not led to improved governance practices or a clearer understanding of the role and responsibilities of the governing body. 

This is pretty interesting, as (as you would see if you searched their history on this blog), PVCICS has had what I'd call a storied history when it comes to their relationship with the state that charters them. Among other interchanges, they're the only example I remember of Paul Sagan, when he was chair, being utterly exasperated by something publicly, when they applied over the head of the Commissioner for an expansion that had been refused by the Commissioner. I would say that they have a culture of going their own way, so to speak. Speaking so directly to their governance is interesting. 

There are also two rounds of regulations up for vote: special education (which is aligning regulations with state and federal law) and interpretation and translation. I did a brief thread on my own comment on the proposed regs yesterday on Bluesky, but I do recommend reading the public comment summary overall. 

I won't be on for tonight's meeting, but I'll be posting tomorrow from Everett. 

Do they read all the comments? Yes! There's mine.

I was going to write up something on the literacy bill

 ...but instead I am going to tell you to read this, from someone in Connecticut, because we could learn from their example!

You can do whatever you want creating (blue) hills of paperwork for teacher prep programs to prove to you that they’re doing what you already require them to do. But when it comes to fascism masquerading as curriculum reform, that’s a Yeah-No. Friends don’t let friends.

You’re like: all schools need to have high quality curriculum. I’ve BEEN SAYING there is no such thing, but it’s like you guys are stuck at a rotary and can’t find the damn exit. You’re Charlie on the MTA never getting off. You’re like trying to find ya clickah and coming up with bupkis.

There's Matt Damon, there's Dunkin', you should read it.  

Some days are like that

 We had a one-two punch of "who's in charge of this, anyway?" around public education late yesterday:

• The Trump administration announced that they are moving special education and civil rights enforcement out of the Department of Education; special education is going to Health and Human Services and civil rights to the Department of Justice. This has of course something that this administration been warning of/planning for some time, but it appears they now are rolling forward. 

  The change will move some of the most essential and integrated functions provided by the federal Education Department to two separate agencies and further accelerates the dismantling of the department without congressional approval. Senior department officials said the changes would not reduce or affect students’ rights and would instead lead to more effective services for students and families. But many details are still being worked out.

  I think it's fair to say, given what we have seen of this administration, that this is not going to work out well for students and families.

• The conference committee working on the literacy bill for Massachusetts came out with their joint work, which can be found here. DESE is now going to have a list of what curricula a district may use, and districts have to choose from the list unless they can get a waiver to use curricula that they can prove works (no room, note for new curricula there). No curricula included may include:
  

  implicit or incidental instruction in word reading, visual memorization of whole words or guessing from context and picture cues, also known as MSV or three-cueing, as a substitute for identifying a word.

  
  Words mean things and barring "implicit or incidental instruction in word meaning" from reading instruction may be the silliest inclusion I have read recently.
  Already, it has been asked if barring "guessing from context and picture cues," which is a large reason we actually use picture books with children, would bar the use of picture books:
  

  "Does it mean you can't show a student a picture? Of course you can. Children's books are always illustrated."

  That isn't a ridiculous question, and that it isn't well understood how VARIED are the methods by which children gain access to the quite complex skill of reading underlines that this is not a decision that should have been made by the Legislature. 
  Oh, and they stripped out the $25M fund for implementation. 

The graduation report is out

 ...and now rather than talking about what people think it might say, it can be read. You can find the whole thing here. (I haven't read it yet.)

The report says it is to the Governor and "Legislative Colleagues," but the first formal discussion will take place at a special evening meeting of the Board of Ed on Monday evening at 5 PM. The agenda isn't up yet, but the livestreams come over this YouTube channel. 

State House News (link via WGBH) reports that two things of note for those who have been following this: 

1. This isn't going to happen right away: "The report proposes the implementation of the first MassCore cohort entering 9th grade in 2027-2028, and the implementation of the other requirements the next school year with incoming freshmen."

2. The Council appears to have doubled-down on the recommendations that the state-administered final exams count when it comes to graduation: 
   

   The report recommends one state-designed exam in English language arts, one in mathematics and one in science, while also encouraging further exploration of a history and social science assessment. The tests would be designed, administered and scored by the state and taken when students complete specific courses.
   Unlike the December recommendations, however, the final report explicitly states that "Performance on the EOC assessments will meaningfully count toward students' academic record and path to graduation." 

   Exactly how much those exams would matter remains on open question. 

   The report says, "Following additional planning and engagement of stakeholders, the Council co-chairs will determine the specific role that EOCs will play in students' academic record and graduation." 

   That language leaves unanswered whether graduation could ultimately depend on passing the exams, and seems to contemplate a significant role for test performance.

   As a number of us have been consistently noting: the state is the entity required to ensure there is a public education system that fulfills its constitutional obligation to each student. 

The voucher question is not entirely sliding below the radar in Massachusetts

 ...as it was mentioned today on NEPM in this exchange between Carrie Healey (NEPM) and Colin Young (SHNS): 

Pressure is mounting on Governor Maura Healey to opt Massachusetts into a new federal scholarship tax credit program. Donors can make contributions of up to $1,700 to an approved scholarship group in a participating state that would be distributed as aid.

This is an issue that has quickly turned into a nationwide political football. While Democratic governors in states like Wisconsin and Kentucky have vetoed participation over concerns that the private voucher system lacks public accountability, Republican gubernatorial hopeful Mike Minogue has upped the ante for Healey by promising a maximum campaign donation if she signs on now (and pledges to enact it himself on day one if he's elected.) So, what is known about how this program would impact Massachusetts education funding?

There's not a lot specifically known.

Now, the teachers unions have come out in full force against this. They argue that this is the same as what's known as the voucher system, where they see it as a siphoning of public money towards private education, where by giving people tax credits for these donations that largely benefit private organizations and private schooling, that it's taking money away from public education.

Now, people being able to take a $1,700 tax credit could help in the name of affordability, at a time when Massachusetts has a really high cost of living and our governor is up for reelection, pledging to tackle that high cost of living. So, she has a real tough spot to be in right now.

What are we hearing from the Healy administration regarding her timeline for a decision?

They're playing the 'wait and see game' big time. They have said they have not decided that the state will not opt in, but they want to see more detailed rules from the US Treasury and the IRS before they actually decide to opt in.

And has the other Republican gubernatorial candidate, Brian Shortsleeve, weighed in on this issue?

He has. He's in support as well. He has said that if he's elected, he would opt Massachusetts in on day one as well.

If they're waiting on more detailed rules, we'll be waiting until the end of September.

It is very worrisome and disappointing that a Democratic governor in this state which prides itself on our public educations system would even need to think about this one, though. 

SCOTUS reject second student free speech case in two weeks

 As we're winding down this session of the Supreme Court, there have been two decisions recently that centered on student speech in schools, and in both cases, the Supreme Court declined, backing up earlier decisions that have sided with school districts. 

The first centered on a 3rd grader wearing a baseball cap with a AK-47 and the words "come and take it" on it. The Appeals Court found: 

...school officials made a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption to the school’s educational environment

...in part due to both the age of the students involved and that it was not far from Oxford High School in Michigan. 

The case most recently decided centered on the perception of the school expressing a view: 

A freshman identified as E.D. sought to hang flyers for a local chapter of the national organization Students for Life of America at Noblesville High School in the fall of 2021. But a dispute over a political photo included in the advertisement led the clubs to be shut down.

The lower courts sided with Noblesville, using a four-decade-old precedent on student speech known as Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier. The 1988 ruling concerned the regulation of school-sponsoned publications, allowing administrators some control over content that might be perceived as the opinion of the school.

While the student could use the school bulletin board to advertise for the club, the school objecting to the political statements used as the illustration was backed by the courts.

School buses as tourist attraction

 

You may not know this, but not everywhere on earth has yellow school buses. For many, well, let me quote a visitor: 

“I have waited my whole life for this,” said Martin Friel, a teacher from Scotland, explaining that the only time he’d ever seen a yellow school bus before Saturday was in an episode of “The Simpsons.”

I mentioned back in May that the Scottish soccer fans--the Tartan Army--rented school buses to take them from Providence, where many of them are staying, to the matches in Foxboro. WGBH rode along on one of the buses this weekend. 

And if you've ever wondered why it is a U.S. thing to have yellow school buses, just today, that question was asked over on Ask Historians on reddit, and you can find that thread here.

Also, if you find school buses interesting, I recommend Why Busing Failed: Race, Media, and the National Resistance to School Desegregation by Matthew Delmont. This is particularly true if you are engaged in Massachusetts education and have been given the impression that the Boston busing decision was a failure of policy. 

A voucher by any other name

 ...still doesn't smell sweet, with all apologies to Shakespeare.

You may have noticed a recent flood of reporting around the--let's call them what they are!--vouchers that are a creation of the OB3 bill. This is due to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Kevin Salinger having delivered remarks in a closed-door session earlier this week which were subsequently released. The provision of the bill goes into effect in January; guidance was expected, well, now, but now we are told is coming the end of September. I think that this this summary from Education Counsel out of D.C., is also useful, as is this resource guide from In the Public Interest.

You might remember that this is a pass through: those able can donate to an organization that then provides scholarships from those funds to those eligible, in any state in which the governor has opted into the program, who are from a household with income no greater than 300% of the area’s median gross income. The voucher piece of this is a redirection of what would be federal tax dollars instead to, through the pass-through, private education; per K-12 Dive: 

Starting in 2027, taxpayers will be able to donate up to $1,700 annually to a scholarship-granting 501(c)(3) organization. They then would be eligible for a 100% federal income tax credit for their contributions.

You get a federal tax break if you do this. 

You might remember from the write-up I did of the first round of the Massachusetts push about this the rosy picture of what this can be spent on doesn't bear out. Josh Cowen, whose work on vouchers I appreciate a great deal, came out with what I'd characterize as a "get that money" post this week. As he outlines: 

Yes. Even under the most narrow interpretation of the law, school districts can provide services that students may purchase in addition to their state-funded base funding that comes with enrollment.

The key words there are "may purchase." This is not funding that flows to schools from the public education they, by law, already provide. This for additional programs that families can CHOOSE TO BUY from the school district, that the district creates (or I suppose already has, if a school already charges for some sort of bonus services). The problem, and I again think Peter Greene has outlined this well, is that this has nothing to do with the provision of public education to all students: 

...schools could be explicitly offering a Basic Minimum track. That Basic Minimum could be funded by local taxpayers, and everything offered in the Premium track would be funded with federal dollars, leaving the “extra” offerings at the mercy of donor generosity and federal rule-making. Instead of moving closer to fully funding public schools, federal vouchers will provide excuses to fund them less.

Again, these are not dollars that are going to flow into public schools to "support" programs we already are required to have. The only way this will go to public schools is if they are for shiny special programs that cost more and are outside of the requirements of the school. Anyone who argues otherwise hasn't done the reading. 

Cowen's main point (I think it is fair to say) is that these dollars are going to be coming from every state, and so every state should be sure that they can also receive them. I will say that this "money only flows out" argument doesn't hold a lot of water with me, as I am familiar with the way the federal revenue and expenses work with relationship to my state. 

I also don't buy the idea--agreeing with Joshua Weishart, who outlines it well in this thread--that there isn't a real cost to public education in this system. First, we have ongoing concerns over if federal education funding is going to continue and continue to serve those most in need. I do think this gives fodder to those looking for cuts, if what they see are 50 states opting into systems that remove dollars from federal public coffers and redirect them to private (or privately directed) education. We don't need Title I any more then, right? Or IDEA?

There is a basic question here: Do we believe in public education of all at the public expense or not? It thus isn't entirely a surprise at who we see, even here in Massachusetts, coming out in favor of such a program; this is another round of neo-liberal education reform, which was unfortunately popular on both sides of the aisle. To again quote Peter Greene: 

But what is not being discussed is the effect that such a system could have on the public school mission. From “we are going to try to give your child the best possible education we can afford” to “we are going to give your child the bare minimum and if you want more than that, you’ll have to either pay for it yourself or go shopping for a voucher.” From a system funded and controlled locally with assistance from the state to a system that depends on donations funneled through the federal government.

I will again say that I am concerned that this may have popularity near the Governor's office. We need to be clear: this is not money that can support the programs we need to provide in public schools. 

Here comes Alpha Schools in Massachusetts

 The Boston School Committee this week approved the opening of an Alpha School in Boston. I think those comments quoted are of note: 

The approval was largely a formality. Under state law, the committee had to evaluate whether Alpha met the basic requirements for a school in Massachusetts, though the board has no supervisory role over private schools.

Superintendent Mary Skipper called those state requirements “fundamentals” that don’t guarantee that a proposed private school will succeed.

“I can say that what lies on paper, and what actually it takes [to] make it successful, are very different things,” Skipper said.

Board members also criticized the state evaluation process because it takes resources from Boston’s public school system.

“We are basically approving competitors at a time when resources are short and parents have needs and the needs are great,” said Jeri Robinson, the committee’s chairperson.

Don't think Boston will be the end of it; my understanding is that they have also applied to open in at least Lexington.  

How subcommittees work

 In which John Adams recounts talking Thomas Jefferson into writing the draft of the Declaration of Independence: 

Yesterday was the anniversary of this historic subcommittee meeting. This is, of course, the account Adams gave, which is why you should also take good minutes, lest only one person's version of the meeting persist! 

"Turtles all the way down": Rhode Island looks at how they fund schools

 Our neighbors to the south here in Massachusetts are sending their school finance study to a study: 

At Tuesday’s finance hearing, Sen. Jonathon Acosta, a Central Falls Democrat, expressed his ire that another commission was needed to study the findings of a different commission. He noted the Blue Ribbon panel had itself spun off in part from a previous Senate commission which also studied the funding formula and wrapped up its final report in 2020.

“In so many ways, just turtles all the way down,” Acosta said.

Nevertheless, Acosta deemed Gallo’s new proposal “a significant step forward” and “a signal that the State House is willing to do something,” although any rollout of Blue Ribbon recommendations would likely would not begin until 2028.

As every state's finance system for schools is different, I found this bit about Rhode Island's of interest: 

 Key to the Blue Ribbon recommendations is expanding state funding beyond what the panel saw as a somewhat myopic focus on direct instructional costs, which comprise the bulk of current state aid to schools. The Blue Ribboners concluded that the state should pursue what the report called “full funding” for municipal school districts — a model which would fold costs such as transportation and teacher pensions into the state’s obligations.

Inside Google's AI academy report

 We know from leaked documents that Google considers schools “pipeline of future users,” as leaked documents have shown, and it appears that being "Google trained," as the AI bubble continues onwards, isn't sufficient, as Google is now training Google Gemini evangelists, as NBC news reports.  

I recommend reading it, though I'll also note that Peter Greene does quite a nice job of channeling some of the rage I feel reading it, as well. The observation I'll make is that the notion that those objecting to or opposing the use might have any valid points is of course waved away. 

One must convert or one is not worthy of consideration. 

Screen audit in Cambridge

 The Globe writes today about the work the Cambridge Public Schools has done on auditing their screen use. You might remember my writing about this  back in February, when the Crimson wrote about it. You can find the May 19 report to the Cambridge School Committee online here. Their main takeaway:

Again, note that the district has taken the concerns of families seriously, has done real work on it, and the district is changing policy and procedure as a result. 

Watch those school bus camera contracts

 Because we cannot have nice things, it appears, 404 Media reports that BusPatrol, the school bus stop arm cameras purveyor, that many of us have worked so hard to get legalized are now sharing data directly with police departments well outside of the context of illegally passing stopped school buses: 

BusPatrol has already taken steps to share the collected data with law enforcement contracting giant Axon, according to leaked BusPatrol documents and a source with knowledge of the plans. Internally, BusPatrol has acknowledged how controversial its plan to collect and share this data is pointing specifically to concerns about ICE using license plate data, but emphasizes the likely success of selling the angle of protecting children.

Second verse, same as the verse

Because the old chestnut--claims that the Worcester Public Schools spends wildly too much money on administration, and more than their peer communities--appears to making an appearance again this year, I will again note that such comparisons are done by the state annually, when districts report their district spending.

On the FY27 Worcester Public Schools budget

This is--mostly--my testimony from tonight's budget hearing. They were sticking to two minutes per person, so I did some condensing on the fly. Full video of the hearing is now posted here; you can watch my testimony at this point.

I have three points for you this evening:

1. This budget is balanced on our most needy students. The program closures proposed--and they are proposed, only--for your consideration serve the students we bear the most responsibility to serve and serve well. The budget document itself notes it, as the executive summary lists these program closures, and only these, as how the budget has been balanced.

Weaponizing what's left of the Department of Education

 

trans colored heart on a sidewalk at Smith College
photo by Kate Hobbs

If you follow me on any social media platform other than this one, you've probably caught my ire that the U.S. Department of Education has now started a (well-publicized) investigation into my alma mater, Smith College for, they say, admitting men. Smith is the largest historically women's college in the country; the college started admitting women who are trans in 2015 (after an uproar over not doing so). The admission policy specifically says Smith:

considers for admission any applicants who self-identify as women; cis, trans, and nonbinary women are eligible to apply to Smith.

Batchelor et. al v. DESE et. al

You've no doubt seen that students in Boston, Brockton, Lawrence, Springfield, and Worcester along with four community organizations have filed suit against the MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the Board, Chair Craven, the Commissioner, and the Secretary on the segregation of our school districts. This is filed in state court under the state's Constitutional guarantee of a public education in particular. 

I've read the coverage and just read the complaint filed in state superior court, and I guess I have three thoughts:

1. Yes, Massachusetts absolutely has among the most segregated school systems in the country by district. This is a direct result of our having--unusually for the U.S.--school districts that not only are originally formed by our cities and in towns, but largely have not changed. Those lines are heavily segregated for the same reasons our housing is: historic redlining, discrimination in lending for housing, and the resulting disparities in capital by race. You know this if you've read The Color of Law, or so many other things. It's also extensively covered by Matthew DiCarlo and Bruce Baker in their recent book Segregation and School Funding.
   Regionalization efforts since the 1950's still put the authority and responsibility on the towns to ensure there are public schools; it is towns and cities that are parties to the regional agreements that form regional districts. It is up to municipalities to provide public schools.
   As sort of a side note, but which matters in this context: while most regional districts are groups of towns, but not cities, this is not true of the regional vocational districts, in which Boston, Springfield, and Worcester are outliers in having vocational schools internally rather than being part of a "Greater [city]" vocational district, as Lowell, Lawrence, Fall River, Brockton, and others are. Thus there are regional districts that include cities. They do operate under the "students by community" entrance system, though, and you may remember this coming up in the arguments around moving to a lottery admission for the regional vocational schools, as seats by town, rather than by total population, won’t give a group reflective of the entire student demographic. 
   
   
2. I was confused on reading initially about the lawsuit as to why DESE would be sued, as DESE has authority over none of this at all. 
   I am even more confused after reading the lawsuit, because both the complaint--the lines of school districts and the impact that then has on students--and the parts that suggest remedies-more on that below--are not within the authority of the Department to provide. The lawsuit is against state laws, which are executed by, but cannot be changed by the Department. The Governor is not named here, ‘though the Secretary is. And the argument within the filing is a series of assertions of…things DESE just cannot actually do. 
   
   
3. I'm told there's more coming, but the remedies led towards are so far doing more of the same, only more so.
   METCO covers something like 2000 statewide students; expanding it to other districts (that still can choose to participate or not) does not desegregate the state (not to mention the buses still only go one way).
   More regional vocation districts? schools? does not change that those are either internal to our heavily segregated districts, or are agreements among towns that are heavily segregated and would have seats allotted within the parties. Anything else would require a change in state law.
   Increasing magnet programs within districts doesn't desegregate districts; if you want to do inter-district magnets, you need to change state law.
   Even supporting more transportation between districts is a budgetary authority of the Legislature, not something that is at all done by the Department. 

Look, this is absolutely the right point: We have a very segregated system of school districts.

I cannot understand why one would sue DESE on things DESE can't do, arguing for things that wouldn't fix the underlying issue. 

I'll be watching with interest.

Tech and AI roundup recently

1. I'm going to suggest that districts insisting that children must use technology in schools when parents don't want them to--and when teachers and students are also objecting--is not going to go well for the districts.

2.  Rarely do I agree with Andy Smarick on anything, but when he's right, he's right, and he has nailed it on AI in the classroom in his piece for the National Review entitled "AI in the Classroom Is Our Most Senseless Education Experiment Yet"
   

   Learning is seldom about swiftly generating a final product. It’s about the slow, arduous work necessary for getting to a final product. From a great teacher’s perspective, what a student wrote in her final paper is less important than the weeks of researching relevant sources, assembling evidence, and outlining an argument. That great teacher doesn’t want a student to just write the correct answers on the exam; he wants the student to spend hours and hours reading texts closely, figuring out why that formula works, or trying different approaches until landing on the right method.

    Along similar lines is this opinion piece in The New York Times this week by  David Wallace-Wells (whose level-headedness on cell phones in schools I also appreciate).

3. The chorus of boos from graduates responding to A.I. boosters at their graduates has only grown this week (my count is up to five, if we include the graduation at which the A.I. announcement of graduates' names went haywire), and Marisa Kabas of The Handbasket starts there in her recent "Hating AI is good, actually."

4. And I'll be interested to see what Pope Leo has to say in his encyclical Magnifica humanitas ("Magnificent humanity") being released next week. Encyclicals, which is a letter of Catholic teaching, take their titles from their first few words, so we have a hint of his opening with that. Unusually, the Pope will be releasing the encyclical himself, speaking, it is thought, to how important it is to him.

Board of Ed for May: budget update

 memo here, though there is also a presentation

Hills: not the Board purview for how the resources are allocated (except in some ways it is, which is why the submit a budget request)

Bell: Senate Ways and Means has released its version of the FY27 budget; in formal session now deliberating
continues many of same themes of earlier drafts
committed to working with everyone on issues facing rural districts of which they are aware

happy to entertain questions

Martinez asks steps in the budget process, as it is his first time through
Bell: have seen some headlines on Legislature being committed to earlier process
once through Senate, conference committee formed, deliberates, releases budget that is then passed by both chambers
Smidy asks about how advocating works from Board members
Hills directs to Secretary and Commissioner
Zrike: "we think we do that together in tandem"
would love to talk to Board members about that
met with collaborative members in Northampton: hearing concerns from across the state
"coming on later in the budget process"
"data and information to bring back to the budget process"
"learning this process now"
"very productive conversations with the Legislature"

Board goes into executive session for  Doe et al. v. Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education and Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, Mass. Superior Court, C.A. No. 2481-CV-00994. State House News has this as to why: 

 The case, filed in Middlesex Superior Court in 2024, is a class action suit alleging that the department fails to fulfill its statutory duty to provide special education services to incarcerated students with disabilities. Mass. Lawyers Weekly reported last month that the class action survived a motion to dismiss it in Superior Court, with a judge ruling DESE has a non-delegable duty to provide special education in jails

They will not return to open session 

Board of Ed for May: Research and evaluation

 memo is here

Craven has left; Hills now chairing

speaking on this, per the memo: Rob Curtin, Deputy Commissioner, Matt Deninger, Associate Commissioner of Planning and Research, and Kendra Winner, Research and Evaluation Coordinator

Deninger: as a former high school English teacher, it is always good to be back in a high school

Board of Ed for May: Opening comments

 The Board today is meeting at Hudson High School, the school of student member Isabella Chamberlain. The agenda is here; the livestream will go up here. 

chalking outside of Hudson High School today

There is a good chance this will start late. 

Hey a new Burncoat is happening

 ...and while it sorta felt like things were dormant there for awhile--why can't we announce building committees?--there are updates, and, more importantly, places to weigh in. 
Burncoat High School page has an offshoot on the building project which notes that the building committee met for the first time last week* and there was a visioning session last night. 
But there are more: 

• On Tuesday, May 19, from 3:00-6:00 PM, the Burncoat School Building Project will host Educational Visioning Workshop #1 at Burncoat High School, 179 Burncoat Street, Worcester, in the cafeteria.
  
  
• On Tuesday, May 26, from 4:00-7:30 PM (dinner will be provided), the Burncoat School Building Project will host Educational Visioning Workshop #2 at Burncoat High School, 179 Burncoat Street, Worcester, in the cafeteria.
  
  
• On Wednesday, June 10, from 3:00-6:00 PM, the Burncoat School Building Project will host Educational Visioning Workshop #3 at Burncoat High School, 179 Burncoat Street, Worcester, in the cafeteria.

Good luck if you can only make something after 5, I guess, because only last night's did. 

I really, really urge you to attend this, because Worcester, while it is speedy at getting schools through, in part does that by having one of the least public building processes around. They'll have only the building committee meetings that they are required by MSBA to have. The School Committee in Worcester has very, very limited involvement, so you also won't see updates there.

This is it. Weigh in now. 

__________________
*which also does not say who is on it. Sigh.

not reading the room

 The thing is: having more people trained by a corporation in using that corporation's product is not actually a thing to brag about.

And a cheer for Shawnee Mission School District in Kansas

 ...which has not only refused to sign an agreement with the U.S. Department of Education regarding their "investigation" into the district's inclusion of trans students, they also extensively questioned the grounds of the investigation, and concluded with this: 

“Finally, the resolution agreement you have provided contains provisions that are inconsistent with the values that inform our work of supporting all children in our communities. We will never issue a policy that devalues certain members of our diverse community.”

May we all be so bold in defending our students.*

_____________________
*I wish my alma mater were being so public and bold.

To read this week

•  Don't miss the Wall Street Journal's coverage of the crazy world of high school sports in Florida, which lifted bans on student transfers. Education figures nowhere in that at all. (That's a gift link.)
  
  

• I love a good "isn't this neat?" story, and that UMass Med brought in Worcester high school students for a science fair in which the high school students were the judges is very fun! 

• NPR had a piece this morning on a team of three teenaged boys in the "World Series of Birding" which was a nice look at teenaged enthusiasm in a wonderful way.

• A growing number of school districts are opening parking lots for families who are unhoused to stay in.
  Best summary? 
  

  “Parking lots are a terrible option, but there are options that are worse,” said Jennifer Erb-Downward, director of housing stability programs and policy initiatives for Poverty Solutions, a University of Michigan project to promote economic mobility.

These are on the way to South Station in Boston. Aren't they nice?

Tech backlash is big

For the past two weeks, nearly every day brings at least one, if not more, article about the tech backlash in schools. An attempt at a roundup: 

• If you did not see the graduates of the University of Central Florida's College of Communications and Arts boo their graduation speaker's lauding of AI as the future, please watch (that link is for when it happens, but stay to watch their faces).
  If by chance you're going to be in front of graduates this spring, learn from her (negative) example).
  
  
• NBC News shared an extensive piece on the backlash specifically about iReady, the math and reading assessment program that's now being sued for stealing student data. The reach is huge: 
  

  Nearly one-third of students from kindergarten to 12th grade nationwide use i-Ready, including in nine of the 10 largest school districts.

  And the impact on student learning is not nearly as clear as one might like. I really recommend reading, especially if you're in a district that uses it.
  

• A New York City specific parallel to the excellent piece I linked to last month by Jessica Winter in the New Yorker, New York Intelligencer's "Help! My Kindergarten Is All In on AI. “Are they taking over? Yeah, they’re taking over.”" which speaks not only to the depersonalization of apps teaching kids to read and practice math, but notes the "vast amount of data" that STMath*, for example, is collecting from every child. Never forget what it is actually about for the companies: 
  

   “These companies are literally mandated by their corporate charters to maximize profits in any way possible,” said Bridget Kessler, a mom of elementary-school-age children in Flatlands who also serves on her local community-education council. “So how can I trust that they have the best interests of my kids in mind?”

  Earlier in the piece, by the way, is something I have found particularly insidious: the use of so-called "fellowships" to infiltrate school administrations: 
  

  Three years ago, Google partnered with the AI-focused investment firm Global Silicon Valley Ventures to “advance technology” in education — through programs like Amira, which GSV Ventures has a stake in. Top education administrators have joined the Google GSV Education Innovation Fellowship, including superintendent of Manhattan high schools Gary Beidleman and chief academic officer Miatheresa Pate, who is responsible for the city’s AI guidelines. In a policy document from the fellowship, Beidleman advises educators on how to get parents and teachers to accept AI: Find “early adopters and key messengers” to convert skeptics and achieve a “cultural shift” from within. 

  Such programs are not approved by school committees, despite being a commitment of time, and often no one checks if they align with the goals, policies, and values of the district.
  
  
• Government Technology reports that three-quarters of those surveyed by PA Unplugged think students are spending too much time on screens in schools. The article looks at some specific responses in Pennsylvania. 

• Speaking of making money off of all of this, 404 Media reported that the OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft are all supporting the federal Literacy in Future Technologies Artificial Intelligence, or LIFT AI Act. They aren't doing that out of the best interest of students.

• In terms specifically on AI, I thought this piece in Vanity Fair in which AI is appearing in TV shows and it is always a bad guy was really telling:
  

  The Hacks team also explores the real-life messaging that the tech community has been using—that “AI is coming whether you like it or not,” a catchphrase that is heard around Hollywood on a near-daily basis. Ava (Hannah Einbinder) pushes back on that idea, criticizing this “forced inevitability.” “People like you are always saying that it’s happening whether you like it or not, but you are the ones making it happen,” she says. “You could easily stop it if people could say that they don’t want it—but you don’t give people a choice.”

  Statsky says that aggressiveness from the tech community about AI’s inevitability is a red flag for her as a writer. “Sometimes, when something is being forced so hard, you can smell behind it that it’s not organic and it’s not natural,” she says. “If this was really the dream technology that they were pushing, well, then why are you needing to force it down our throats?”

• The family of one of the victims of last year's shooting at Florida State University is suing OpenAI, which the shooter used in planning the attack. 

“OpenAI knew this would happen. It’s happened before and it was only a matter of time before it happened again,” Joshi said in a Monday statement. “But they chose to put their profits over our safety and it killed my husband. They need to be responsible before another family has to go through this.” 

Attorneys for Joshi also reiterated that “ChatGPT inflamed and encouraged Ikner’s delusions; endorsed his view that he was a sane and rational individual; helped convince him that violent acts can be required to bring about change,” adding that the software provided what he viewed as encouragement to “carry out a massacre, down to the detail of what time would be best to encounter the most traffic on campus.”

• And don't miss John Oliver:
  

where's the plan for FY28 and beyond?

 I broke with my usual tradition of turning first to the net school spending page* when cracking open** the FY27 Worcester Public Schools recommended budget, because, as I've been noting, the looming end of the Student Opportunity Act implementation is high on my concerns. Worcester, as part of adhering to the requirements of the Meritorious Budget Award, does a projection of three years forward. That's on page 32 of the PDF, and it looks like this: 

That's a $7.9M gap next year, rising to $20.2M in FY30.

This problem is not the Worcester Public Schools' nor the city of Worcester's to solve. The requirement to ensure children have a public education belongs to the Commonwealth.

_______________________________________________

*Net school spending is on page 386 of the PDF and, I am somewhat stunned to find that the city is projected to meet required spending. That's at least in part because cityside claims for school services continue to rise (it's over $10M just for administration for FY27) and because WPS transportation is holding down non-net school spending costs.

Nonetheless, that's a positive number at bottom right.

**metaphorically; one does not crack open a PDF.

I literally have done nothing else with this book other than check those two pages, but the flip through shows another year of a tour de force, so congratulations to Sara Consalvo on heading up what I know to be a massive effort for her first time!