DeAngelis calls out Hofmeister

Many of you are familiar with Dr. Corey DeAngelis, the national director of research at the American Federation for Children. One of the nation’s leading authorities on school choice, Corey received the OCPA Citizenship Award this year. (Gov. Kevin Stitt also spoke at the dinner.)

Corey is not content to let his work appear only in the pages of scholarly journals. (He has authored or co-authored more than 40 journal articles, book chapters, and reports on education policy, including in peer‐reviewed academic journals such as Social Science Quarterly, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, and the Peabody Journal of Education.) He goes beyond that, regularly appearing on FOX News, in The Wall Street Journal and USA Today, and at countless speaking engagements.

But best of all is his Twitter account.

The first of his tweets to go viral involved none other than Oklahoma’s own Elizabeth Warren. Then-presidential-candidate Warren is a staunch opponent of school freedom these days. But Mr. DeAngelis was curious about her own school choices. So, using her son’s full name and birth year, he searched for school yearbooks on the premium version of Ancestry.com. Lo and behold, he discovered Elizabeth Warren’s son one year had attended an elite private school (where the tuition currently is nearly $18,000 per year). As for Sen. Warren's constituents, let them eat cake!

Warren was just the first of numerous politicians that Corey has called out on Twitter. Just this week he called out state superintendent Joy Hofmeister for her “school choice for me but not for thee” hypocrisy. (First a fake Indian, then a fake Republican.) State Rep. Jacob Rosecrants has also gotten the treatment, as have numerous politicians throughout the country.

Heck, the bully Anthony Moore was so flustered by Corey’s Twitter activity that he deleted one of his own tweets and blocked Corey on Twitter.

Corey’s Twitter following continues to grow and doubtless will expand further now that Elon Musk has taken over and the shadowbanners and algorithm wokesters have been shown the door. (Ben Shapiro says he gained 40,000 followers in just a few hours today.) Be sure to follow Corey on Twitter.

NAEP tests show academic results plunged under Hofmeister

Oklahoma’s fourth-grade students in 2022 had nearly one-and-a-half years less learning than their counterparts in 2015.

ACT scores declining or flat for 7 of 8 years under Hofmeister

The graduating class of 2022 in Oklahoma had among the worst average composite scores in the nation on the ACT test — a statistic made even worse by the fact that the national score was the lowest seen in three decades. 

Oklahoma Department of Education touts CRT

The quote from Democrat pander bear Joy Hofmeister is priceless.

Anti-Christian discrimination reaches Oklahoma

Credit: The Weekly Standard

[Guest post by Jonathan Small]

It’s no secret government officials often target traditional Christians for harassment, but Oklahomans often view that as a problem that happens in other states, not here. Sadly, that’s not true.

In 2010, lawmakers passed and the governor signed into law the Lindsey Nicole Henry (LNH) Scholarships for Students with Disabilities program. It provides state scholarships for certain students—those with special needs like autism, or foster children—to attend private schools.

A few things are required for schools to participate. The LNH law requires that participating private schools comply with the antidiscrimination provisions of a section of federal law that bars discrimination “on the ground of race, color, or national origin.”

Those are the only three categories listed. Yet, under the leadership of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister, the OSDE drafted new regulations that added “religion” and “sexual orientation” to that list.

As a result, private Christian schools are now being blackballed from serving LNH students.

When Altus Christian Academy and Christian Heritage Academy applied to serve LNH students, they were denied approval by the State Board of Education at the group’s October meeting.

Oklahoma State Board of Education member Kurt Bollenbach complained one of the schools required staff to be “mature Christian teachers,” which he declared was “discriminating against other religions or nonreligions.”

Bollenbach and Brad Clark, who serves as Hofmeister’s top attorney, also stressed the two schools' policies on sexual orientation.

Put another way, if they want to serve LNH students, Christian schools must be prepared to hire strident atheists and embrace all aspects of the LGBT agenda.

Bollenbach even declared Christian schools have the right to set hiring policies only “until they ask for state dollars.” But that is not true, because the LNH program does not force parents to attend any specific private schools. Instead, students attend by choice.

That’s one reason the Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld the law in 2016, saying, “When the parents and not the government are the ones determining which private school offers the best learning environment for their child, the circuit between government and religion is broken.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has also upheld school-choice programs that allow students to attend private religious schools.

It’s notable that the LNH program operated for nine years without any problem before the OSDE concocted these new restrictions on schools’ policies regarding religion and sexual orientation.

The OSDE regulations are, in effect, a unilateral rewriting of Oklahoma law done outside the legislative process. Fortunately, the illegality of that action is apparent to all, and the agency will likely face lawsuits if it does not reverse course.

Even so, this incident highlights a sad fact: Citizens in conservative Oklahoma must be just as vigilant in monitoring their government’s actions as their blue-state counterparts.

There's no way to force teachers to do what they don’t want to do

"Oklahoma’s elementary schools are almost exclusively using a scientifically discredited approach to reading," Greg Forster writes.

Unfortunately, decades’ worth of efforts nationwide to educate, cajole, bribe, and finally bully recalcitrant schools into using methods that are supported by evidence have a track record of total and uninterrupted failure. The only option with a reasonable prospect of success is to empower parents to take their students to schools or tutoring services that actually want to teach them properly.

Hofmeister refuses to discuss LGBT newsletter at public forum

State school superintendent Joy Hofmeister is adamant that every student—including transgender students—should be able to attend school "feeling safe, secure, and ready to learn." 

For some boys, that may mean showering in the girls' locker room. Is that permissible? 

It would be helpful if Hofmeister would provide some clarity.

Oklahoma education agency informs local districts of LGBT 'best practices'

One of which is this: “Never reveal a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity without the student’s permission—even to the student’s family.”

Hofmeister investigation over

The Hofmeister investigation is over, Ben Felder reports today in The Oklahoman.

Any investigation into state schools Superintendent Joy Hofmeister for campaign finance violations is "completely over," said Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater. 

"It's dead, it's over, (the charges) will not be revived," Prater told The Oklahoman on Tuesday. "There is nothing there to look at." 

Prater's confirmation that his case into Hofmeister is complete comes a year after he dropped felony charges against her and four others, claiming any of the charges could be refiled. … 

In 2016, Prater charged Hofmeister with felony counts of accepting illegal donations to her 2014 campaign and conspiring to break campaign fundraising laws. … 

While Prater said there would be no further charges against Hofmeister, he did not rule it out for the other four individuals: Fount Holland, Hofmeister's former chief campaign consultant; Stephanie Dawn Milligan, the political consultant for Oklahomans for Public School Excellence; Lela Odom, who in 2014 was the executive director of the Oklahoma Education Association; and Steven Crawford, who was the executive director of the Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration. 

"I won't say it's over ... for the others," Prater said. "But (Hofmeister's) part of it is over, completely."

This is obviously welcome news for Hofmeister. "I knew I was innocent and that I had conducted myself appropriately,” she said last year when the charges were dropped. She said the accusations were “unjust and untrue."

In a court of law, the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Joy Hofmeister is innocent, and we can rejoice with her and her family that this dark cloud has been lifted. Though I disagree with her views on parental choice, I actually like Joy. She seems to be a genuinely nice and caring lady, the kind of person you’d want your child to have for a first-grade teacher. I enjoyed our little chats as we toured schools in Indianapolis a few years ago.

At the same time, "innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections," as Mitt Romney remarked last year. Oklahomans still have every right to consider what OCU law professor Andrew Spiropoulos has described as “the damning evidence in the public record.”

Make no mistake, that's the elephant in the classroom. The evidence against the Republican candidate for superintendent is still there in the public record. And for any observer with even half the bewilderment quotient of Ricky Ricardo, it begs explanation. After all, Hofmeister texted to her consultants Fount Holland and Trebor Worthen that a wind lobbyist is "interested in my IE 😁." She joked to Fount Holland, "Obviously, we can't do anything about the IE. 😁" She informed the Jenks superintendent that one strategist recommended "Chad Alexander for the independent campaign which would be where he would put CCOSA. OSSBA, OEA money, plus amounts from corporations as it would all be anonymous. This independent campaign would do negative ads and allow me to take the high road with my own campaign." In short, as Professor Spiropoulos observed last year:

No matter what Prater ultimately decides, there is no doubt that Hofmeister, her campaign consultants, and the operatives of the chief education establishment organizations agreed to run a campaign in which outside groups, funded by the establishment and their corporate toadies, would attack the incumbent, while Hofmeister would pretend her hands were clean. Remember that the public record contains emails from Hofmeister and the other principals confirming the plan. Hofmeister even joked about her skating of the law, never imagining that the rest of us would see her infamous smiley-face emojis.

Oklahomans have every right to weigh that evidence—as well as any explanation that Hofmeister may now provide as to how her conduct was somehow "appropriate" and why the accusations were "untrue." She may very well have a good explanation.

Doubtless the watchdog press will dig into the matter and ask her for one. 😁


UPDATES:

• Despite "a raft of damning evidence of illegal campaign activity," Professor Spiropoulos writes in The Journal Record, "many of us who sharply criticize Hofmeister’s skewed ethical compass do not think that felony prosecution is the proper way to address her alleged breaches of legal and ethical norms—elections, legislative investigations, and impeachment charges should do the job."

The criminalization of politics only exacerbates the tribal warfare that is poisoning our politics and culture. Winning and losing elections shouldn’t be the difference between freedom and facing prison. I do not need or want my local district attorney to act as a censorious guardian of our political hygiene. ...  

But we cannot be distracted from understanding the institutional corruption lying at the core of the Hofmeister imbroglio. We must remember that the principal perpetrators of this attack on both fair elections and the effort to conduct education policy for the benefit of children are the capos of the education establishment interest groups who supplied both the money and the manpower for the coordination scheme.

• In a new development, "a prosecution witness in the 2016 criminal case against state schools Superintendent Joy Hofmeister blames her in a lawsuit for the loss of his job," The Oklahoman reports. Hofmeister says the claim is "entirely untrue and unsupported."

Oklahoma AG says school districts may offer Old and New Testament courses

Many stay-at-home parents like the four-day school week

Bridge Creek teacher Jalaine Watham is a fan of the four-day school week, CBS News' Omar Villafranca reports.

"It has allowed that weekend time with my family, but I also really truly feel like it has made me a better teacher by being purposeful and looking at time management," Watham said.

Two-hundred and ten of the state's schools operate on a four-day schedule. Many stay-at-home parents we spoke to in this community endorsed the shortened week. "It's that extra day. You're like, I feel like I have a whole entire day with my kid," said one parent.

But state superintendent of instruction, Joy Hofmeister, worries about the long-term impact on students.

Hofmeister visits Robert E. Lee Early Childhood Center

The Durant Democrat has the story.

Does school choice expand the welfare state?

It's unlikely that state Superintendent Joy Hofmeister was sincere in her concern about ESAs expanding government. But in any case, as Greg Forster explains,

a well-designed school choice program won’t cost money, but merely redirect existing levels of spending. Most choice programs actually save money for state budgets, even as they improve educational outcomes. Parents making choices for their own children are more efficient and more effective than the bloated bureaucracy that controls spending decisions under the government school monopoly. A state in fiscal trouble has more reason, not less, to enact universal school choice pronto.

Read the whole thing here.

Drain the swamp

When a GOP campaign consultant advises Joy Hofmeister to feign conservative views and then do the bidding of the education establishment, that’s a problem. Read Andrew Spiropoulos's column today in The Journal Record.

Law professor raps Oklahoma's 'ruthless and self-serving education establishment'

"The best reason to conduct an inquiry into Hofmeister’s conduct is to expose the most damaging corruption exemplified by her campaign—the destructive power wielded by the state’s ruthless and self-serving education establishment," Andrew Spiropoulos writes today in The Journal Record ("House should consider impeaching superintendent").

The evidentiary affidavit submitted in support of the criminal charges describes a conspiracy to commit a political crime far worse than violations of the campaign finance laws. It appears that the principal organizations leading the fight to undermine genuine reform of our failing system, including the Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration and the Oklahoma Education Association (the state teachers union), conspired to use any means necessary to elect a Republican superintendent who would do the bidding of these organizations and their allies. All Hofmeister had to do is pose as a conservative reformer—which the establishment, the evidence shows, knew she was not—while the teacher unions, school superintendents, and the useful idiots in the Republican ranks raised the money to fund both Hofmeister’s disingenuous campaign and the not-so-independent negative campaign designed to destroy her Republican opponent. 

Any competent and thorough impeachment inquiry will lay bare how those who cling to the unacceptable status quo maintain their power at the expense of those who hope that our dysfunctional system might someday be reformed. The Legislature, for example, can ask questions prosecutors could not thoroughly explore, including whether and how deeply other establishment organizations, such as the Oklahoma State School Boards Association, were aware of or involved in the conspiracy.

I encourage you to read the entire column here. 

'The evidence arrayed against Hofmeister is remarkably damning'

"The interesting question is why we haven’t heard a word from Gov. Mary Fallin or the incoming Republican legislative leaders about Hofmeister’s future," Andrew Spiropoulos writes today in The Journal Record. "One can’t help but believe that if Hofmeister were a Democrat, they would demand that she immediately resign."

Hofmeister's 'claims about money issues have appeared ill-informed'

Noting "a trend line that gives Oklahomans reason for growing concern," The Oklahoman recently discussed a few instances in which state Supt. Joy Hofmeister's "claims about money issues have appeared ill-informed." Read the entire piece here, but I want to highlight what The Oklahoman identified as "a bogus fiscal impact statement":

This year, Hofmeister's agency produced a fiscal impact statement regarding Education Savings Account legislation. That document said the department would need to buy $700,000 in new computer equipment to process ESAs. Yet the calculations involved were no different than what the agency already does with existing equipment on a daily basis. 

It turned out the $700,000 was to replace the Department of Education's entire state aid system, a change in no way tied to potential passage of ESA legislation. The department had requested that equipment purchase as far back as November 2015—months before the Legislature was even in session. 

In a subsequent radio interview, state Finance Secretary Preston Doerflinger bluntly noted that the superintendent had “provided a fiscal impact that was completely inaccurate.”

For an accurate fiscal impact statement—showing that the state of Oklahoma will save $267,000 for every $1 million it spends on an ESA program—click here. This fiscal note should come as no surprise, considering that the empirical evidence shows quite clearly that "school choice saves taxpayer money and also has a positive fiscal effect on school budgets—especially when it uses a voucher or ESA structure," as education researcher Greg Forster points out. "When a student leaves, the public school loses all the expenses associated with that student but not all the revenue, because of the convoluted way we fund public schools. Twenty-eight empirical studies have examined school choice's fiscal impact on taxpayers and public schools; of these, 25 have found that school choice programs save money, and three have found that the programs they study are revenue neutral. No empirical study has found a negative fiscal impact."

In a down budget year, ESAs can help

Some state lawmakers declined to support Education Savings Accounts this year on the grounds that the state couldn't afford them. But as The Oklahoman noted yesterday ("Conservative policy takes a hit with Oklahoma ESA decision"), "the math of ESAs blows that claim out of the water."

ESAs would provide parents around $3,500 to $4,000 per child. Based on state data reported to the federal government, Ben Scafidi, a professor at Kennesaw State University, notes Oklahoma spent about $8,716 per student in 2009. 

This means ESAs would allow the state to provide the same or better quality education to a student for $4,000 to $5,000 less than what officials would otherwise spend, while freeing up the remainder for other students. Note to Republicans: In a down budget year, that's a good thing. 

According to a Department of Education estimate, perhaps $14.6 million might go to ESAs next year. None of that money is diverted from education; it's only shifted from one school to another. Yet some lawmakers still said $14.6 million is an unaffordable “cost” to schools. But then an overwhelming majority of House members supported a bill mandating new Medicaid spending on autism therapy at an additional cost of $22 million. 

In a year of budget shortfall, that $22 million for Medicaid is money that won't go to education. So lawmakers who claimed they couldn't “afford” to provide a quality education to students for $4,000 per student less at a phantom “cost” of $14.6 million somehow saw no problem with truly diverting up to $22 million from education. Republicans wound up choosing to prioritize inefficient education spending over efficient spending in the name of protecting school funds they were simultaneously voting to divert elsewhere, while abandoning their longtime supporters to cater to a minority of voters who are hostile to Republicans.

According to a fiscal analysis performed by the Friedman Foundation, the state of Oklahoma will save $267,000 for every $1 million it spends on an ESA program. Click here to see how.

The fiscal impact of an Oklahoma ESA program

Oklahoma Secretary of Finance Preston Doerflinger recently noted that state school superintendent Joy Hofmeister is a Democrat in Republican clothing (something I have pointed out here and here). He especially took issue with her fiscal impact statement on Education Savings Accounts. Fortunately, the Friedman Foundation provides an accurate fiscal note here.

'Superintendent Hofmeister supports school choice'

This according to a representative for Oklahoma State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister, who told KTEN: "Superintendent Hofmeister supports school choice. But her commitment to school choice also means working to make the neighborhood school, the school of choice for parents."

This is a reasonable, balanced approach, and perfectly consistent with what Superintendent Hofmeister has been saying since she took office.