Wednesday, October 30, 2019

DA investigating alleged violent hazing incident at Muldrow High School

"The Sequoyah County District Attorney's Office is investigating an alleged violent hazing incident involving athletes at Muldrow High School," KFSM reports. "After several complaints from parents, the Sequoyah County District Attorney has been asked to bring in two investigators to assist the school's on-campus police department, according to Muldrow Police Chief George Lawson."

Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Every kid—every kid—deserves an opportunity


Last week I accompanied several Oklahomans, including state legislators and policy staff for Gov. Kevin Stitt, to Tampa, Florida, on an educational-choice fact-finding trip.

One thing that stood out was a comment by Patricia Levesque, chief executive officer for the Foundation for Excellence in Education. She lauded Oklahoma's tax-credit scholarship program for its expansive student eligibility. Including the middle class in the program was wise, she said, because it gives Oklahoma a base of political support on which to build.

EdChoice agrees: Oklahoma's tax-credit scholarship program "has a tremendous opportunity to be one of the nation’s strongest if the legislature expands eligibility and raises or removes the overall funding cap and removes the pro-rata method for distributing tax credits."

Here's hoping the legislature does just that in 2020. But beyond that, regardless of whichever educational-choice programs Oklahoma policymakers enact in the coming years—whether it's an individual tax credit, a scholarship for bullied kids, an education savings account (ESA), or whatever it may be—policymakers should resist the temptation to means-test the program. Means-testing would be bad politics and bad policy.

In 2014 and again in 2015, pollsters asked registered Oklahoma voters whether educational choice should be available to all families or should be means-tested. A Braun Research survey, for example, asked if ESAs should be available only to those in financial need; Oklahomans rejected that idea by a margin of 53 percent to 37 percent. But when asked if ESAs should be available to all families, Oklahomans overwhelmingly (58 percent to 32 percent) said yes.

A Cole Hargrave Snodgrass and Associates survey asked Oklahomans if ESAs should be available only to low-income students. By a margin of 65 percent to 27 percent, the answer was no. [The results were similar among Republicans (67 percent to 24 percent) and Democrats (63 percent to 29 percent).]

Political Science for Ed Reform Dummies

In an article at Education Next (“Political Science for Ed Reform Dummies”), University of Arkansas professor Jay P. Greene reminds us that “a basic lesson about political reality is that more advantaged people tend to have more political power.”
Rather than lament this fact, reformers should try to use it to advance their goals. The old political adage that programs for the poor tend to be poor programs is all too true. Reformers have made horrible political mistakes in concentrating programs in disadvantaged areas, means-testing participants, and focusing on options that are mostly of interest to lower-income families. Not only do these programs tend to be less-well funded, overly regulated, and generally of lower quality, but they are always highly vulnerable to being weakened further or eliminated. 
To increase the odds of having better quality programs that are more generously funded and more reasonably regulated, reformers should be sure to include higher-income families as potential beneficiaries. And those wealthier families are more likely to be mobilized politically to protect and expand programs. If reformers should seek to organize concentrated interests of beneficiaries, it would really help if they did not exclude higher-income families that tend to have better resources, networks, and experience to participate more effectively in politics [emphasis added].
In other words, as EdChoice says, "the best way to improve the lot of the disadvantaged is to include them in a system of universal educational choice."
Welfare programs for the poor are often on the chopping block while universal entitlements (e.g., Medicare, Social Security) almost never are. Calling for the abolition of public schools, by contrast, is politically unthinkable. Choice programs will be safe only when middle and upper middle-income families can benefit from them as well.  
Why do you think the folks promoting early-childhood education for disadvantaged children hitched their wagon to the universal pre-K star? "I think there may be a political calculation," says American Enterprise Institute scholar Katharine Stevens. "If you’re promoting something universal, you will stand a much better chance of getting public support. ... Disadvantaged mothers and infants do not have huge interest groups or lobbying organizations."

Professor Greene, who earned a Ph.D. in political science from Harvard before teaching at the University of Texas and elsewhere, reiterated the point in explaining why charter-school expansion would fail at the ballot box in Massachusetts in 2016.
If you want to help the poor, you should design programs that include the middle and upper-middle classes. This is the political genius of Social Security. It is extremely effective at alleviating poverty among low-income seniors because high-income seniors, who tend to be better positioned for political advocacy, also get it. This is the political genius of many college-subsidy efforts—the poor can benefit from them because wealthier families are also eligible.
Dr. Jay P. Greene speaks in 
Oklahoma City on Dec. 3, 2015.
"Don't point angry fingers at selfish Massachusetts voters," Robert Pondiscio wrote. "Blame falls equally upon a movement that has long been a bit too enamored of its own civil-rights-movement-of-our-time rhetoric to worry much about building a constituency among the middle class."

Why Exclude the GOP Base?

Education researcher Matt Ladner also has some helpful insights. For example, he reminds us that public school eligibility is universal.
Imagine a district school official telling a student “Sorry Johnny, we would let you participate in our dual enrollment program, but your parents pay too many taxes so it disqualifies you.” How about, “We regret to inform you, Susanne, that your parents’ income has been too high to allow you to attend the University of Arkansas—which is reserved for low- and middle-income taxpayers.” How about, “economic diversity will not be tolerated in charter schools. We have learned about your father’s high income and you are hereby expelled!”
So, for example, if an Oklahoma billionaire could send his or her kids to get a $10,000-per-year education at a suburban public school, what’s so awful about a $5,000 tax credit if that parent decided to homeschool or choose a private school instead? What's so awful about a $7,500 voucher or ESA?

Why should a homeschooling Edmond heart surgeon be excluded from receiving a tax credit?

Why should a Tulsa oil-and-gas entrepreneur who sends his kids to Victory Christian School be excluded from getting a voucher or an ESA?

After all, as Dr. Ladner reminds us, they pay more taxes than most other people, both directly and indirectly by creating jobs and creating companies that also pay taxes. Since when do GOP politicians want to make enemies out of a key portion of their base?

The education special interests are going to fight school choice no matter what. They’re going to demagogue it as “school choice for the rich” no matter what. So there's no reason not to aim for the ideal policy. If it turns out that the sausage-making process demands compromise, a better route would be to keep the eligibility universal but use a graduated scale that provides a larger tax credit, voucher, or ESA for lower-income kids.

As Dr. Ladner puts it, “I think we have our hands full fighting the union bosses, superintendents, etc. without going out of our way to make enemies out of high-income people in a way no other education option would even seriously entertain.”

In short, "universal choice should be the long-term goal," Greg Forster writes.
The Louisiana debacle and other experiences from the past 20 years point to the value of making school choice programs more widely and easily accessible. Programs created with strict limits on which students they can serve and how they can serve those students struggle, educationally and politically. Programs that create more freedom for more parents create more benefits for schools and students, and have a larger political base upon which they can draw to defend the program against invidious attacks of special interests. The whole logic of school choice—that it puts parents in charge, that it creates opportunities for schools to try diverse approaches and invent the education of the 21st century—points to the value of universal choice. As long as we’re only putting some parents sort of in charge, school choice programs will be limited in what they can accomplish. Only putting all parents really in charge holds out the promise of more dramatic improvements, which has always been latent in the idea of school choice but has not yet been unleashed in a universal and unfettered school choice policy.


UPDATE:
  • Four years after the 2015 Cole Hargrave Snodgrass survey cited above, the pollster reminds us in 2019 that the numbers are still overwhelming:

 

Monday, October 28, 2019

Don’t overregulate choice

"There is no real need to regulate private schools, in choice programs or otherwise, for anything other than health and safety," Greg Forster writes. "Parents are the real accountability system."

Friday, October 25, 2019

Study finds local districts not prioritizing spending for classroom necessities

FOX 25 has the story.

Union student brings gun to school

"A Union student is facing possible criminal charges after school officials said he brought a gun to school in his backpack," the News on 6 reports.

Sunday, October 20, 2019

Putnam City School District has 800 security cameras, facial-recognition software

"The specter of mass shootings has pushed school administrators across the country to consider investment in an array of new and emergent security technologies that have been sold as potential solutions to head off these tragic incidents," Lucas Ropek reports for Governing magazine.
Chief among the new technologies is facial recognition—a technology that has recently exploded to prominence in many other sectors of society. ... One place where the technology has been welcomed with open arms is Putnam City School District in Oklahoma.

Covering a significant swath of Oklahoma City, as well as several smaller, neighboring cities, Putnam already has an extensive security system: over 800 cameras are equipped at 30 school buildings spread out over some 43 square miles, said Mark Stout, the district's chief of police. Still, improvements are always being sought, he added.

The district began looking into the facial recognition market in early 2018. After selecting Israeli vendor AnyVision, equipment was installed during the late months of that year; officials then ran the cameras through a period of testing that lasted four to five months—with a heavy emphasis on rooting out any potential for gendered or racial bias, Stout explained.

While still relatively new, district administrators feel the technology gives an added layer of sophistication to security processes already in place. When coupled, for instance, with a system of strategically placed metal detectors and Genetec-powered access control devices—which allow officials to remotely lock down certain parts of the school—the new cameras hopefully have the capability to help quickly identify and isolate threats.

Also important is the product's "watchlist" feature, which helps security officials archive and identify certain students who have been suspended, do not belong on school grounds, or who may pose some sort of threat. While some schools have seen backlash over this feature, Stout said that the public has been receptive to it as a key security function.

At the same time, the software is also moving closer to accurate object recognition, which would help security personnel identify "someone with a rifle, or a long gun, or a handgun," Stout said. This future capability would greatly advance the ability to minimize threats, he added.

Thursday, October 17, 2019

Security screens can protect Oklahoma students from school shooters

"A company has developed screens that go over classroom windows to block the sight of active shooters," the News on 6 reports.

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Police arrest Mid-Del student after finding stolen pistol in backpack

"Del City police say they have arrested a juvenile after discovering a stolen pistol in the student’s backpack," KFOR reports.

Tuesday, October 8, 2019

Putnam City teen arrested after allegedly raping another student at school

"A juvenile was arrested after allegedly raping another student at Putnam City High School," KFOR reports.

Sunday, October 6, 2019

OKCPS student with hit list says 'I will wreak havoc in Oklahoma City'

"A 14-year-old boy's journal reveals a hit list, his desire to murder his mother, and plans to 'wreak havoc on Oklahoma City,'" News 9 reports. The OKCPS student's mother "contacted police, fearing her son would commit an act of violence on a school. The mother said her child fantasizes about horrific shootings that have left behind mass carnage, specifically Columbine High."

Friday, October 4, 2019

‘We can’t afford more than one guard, so we try to fill the gaps with with armed staff’

"With more mass shootings happening every year," Caroline Halter reports, "protecting kids has become a priority for school administrators in Oklahoma."