Can We Talk Policy Instead Of Personality?
“In my experience, those who have the greatest respect for the rules also take the most enjoyment in breaking them.”
― Lucy Foley, The Guest List
Life comes at you fast and oft in an unpredictable manner.
Late last week, my wife flipped her car. It was one of those inexplicable accidents that life throws your way. She was a mile from school, on her way to work, when it happened.
Luckily she escaped with a bump on the head and some aches and pains. The car was not so lucky, it was totaled.
While we are grateful that it wasn't more severe, it served as a reminder that nothing is guaranteed and we must always hold our loved ones close.
I haven't written for about a week as we navigate the aftermath. At times, that's almost worse than the accident itself.
That said, I'm back, so let's dive into the latest in Tennessee education news.
Shortly after Governor Lee announced his intent to pursue voucher legislation, I predicted that vouchers would be our primary topic of conversation in the coming months. So far, I haven't been wrong, and the noise is only growing.
When last I left you, three separate voucher bills - or Education Freedom Accounts if you prefer - had been introduced and the House version (014222) had made it through the K-12 subcommittee. Both sides took away too much from this mostly procedural move.
Since then, both bills have passed out of their respective bodies despite being widely disparate bills.
Seeing as this is the pet project of the AC repairman from Williamson County, protocol calls for the bill to reach the floor for debate in both the Senate and the House. How how bloody it gets on the way, remains to be seen.
The Senate process continues to be a mostly staid affair with their bill easily progressing forward. The House is a little more raucous.
Opponents have been critical of the House's attempt to sweeten the pot by adding non-voucher-related education elements to the bill. To me it's just good horse trading, which is the underlining theme of all politics - you got something I want, and I got something you want, how do we compromise. That's called basic contractual politics.
Democrat House Representative Antonio Parkinson D-Memphis) blasted that idea in yesterday's House Education Committee meeting, when during an exchange with bill sponsor Representative Scott Cepicky (R- Culleoka) Parkinson questioned the motive behind tying long-desired education initiatives to undesired voucher legislation.
Cepicky explained that the "vehicle had never presented itself" to get the education department and governor on board for these "meaningful changes" to the education system.
Parkinson called bullshit, saying, ""We are the vehicle manufacturer," Parkinson said, referring to the General Assembly. "We could have created a vehicle anytime we wanted to. But for some reason, we've chosen to create a lemon. That vehicle now has all of these great options that are in it, but it's tied to four flat tires."
The reality is that - to use Parkinson's example - the General Assembly can build all the cars it wants, but it can't build universal desire. Right now, these reforms have a heightened value because there is something the other side wants. Where I come from, we call that leverage.
As someone who often engages in altercations with no leverage, I can testify that it's a whole lot better when you have some leverage.
This makes Representative Charlie Baum's (R-Murfreesboro) question if it would be more "cost-effective" to have a straight, "pure vote" on the Education Freedom Scholarships proposal and tackle other education reforms in separate legislation, a bit suspect. He's basically asking for somebody to surrender their leverage. That would be kind of dumb.
The amended bill, despite some state superintendents' assertions, has some pretty attractive items in it.
For example, Level 5 teachers would only be evaluated once every three years, and Level 4 teachers every two years, with Level 3 teachers being evaluated every other year. Only Level 1 and Level 2 teachers would be evaluated every year.
Taking that pressure off of teachers who don't really need to be evaluated every year is huge. Allowing principals time to focus on just the struggling teachers may have an added bonus of retaining teachers. There is a lot to like just in this portion.
When it comes to fourth-grade retention, the amended bill would arguably remove the risk of retention for underperforming students in fourth grade. Another big deal.
Rural districts would see weight added to TISA weights, which puts more at their disposal.
The inclusion in the amendment of adding teachers in the state medical plan at 60%, instead of the current 45%, is an intriguing proposal, that could lead to increased teacher salaries.
Lawmakers have grappled for decades with ensuring that approved raises actually get to teachers. Too often the General Assembly has approved money for increased teacher wages only to have the monies diverted elsewhere at the local level. Remember, Tennessee's governing body has little control over where approved funds are eventually spent.
Tennessee's new school funding model, TISA, was supposed to address that issue, but the jury remains out on whether it will successfully do so.
Another interesting caveat in the amended bill is an effort to decrease testing. In concept, I'm 100% for the idea. Unfortunately, I'm not sure it's an issue that can be addressed at a state level.
Quick aside on testing and accountability models for private and public schools.
During her brief testimony last week Tennessee's Commissioner of Education Lizzette Reynolds attempted to contrast the testing administered by private and public schools. To paraphrase the Commissioner, private schools use norm-referenced testing while public schools employ a criterion-referenced model.
Those are big words and can lead to confusion but simply mean that one is based on performance against Tennessee State Standards, and the other generates a score based on the performance of peer students. Tests themselves are not inherently criterion- or norm-referenced, rather criterion and norm-referenced refer to how tests are scored.
In the instance of norm-referenced interpretations, we don't know what a student knows or can do based on the test score. We just know how they compare to other students. That's not a random sample of kids either, it's. ones who took that test.
When many of us were kids in TN schools, the TCAP provided norm-referenced interpretations. Your report always read "Your child is in the x percentile". This is typically how norm-referenced reports talk about scores.
Criterion-referenced test interpretations provide insights on how students perform relative to achievement standards. They allow for statements to be made about what a student knows/can do. In the current implementation for state testing, including the TCAP, these tests also allow for "leveling", meaning the results are interpreted to make a statement about whether a test taker has reached a certain level of mastery (on track, exceeds expectations, etc). These score reports make statements such as "your child is on track".
Criterion-referenced test scores and their associated levels are central to Tennessee's school accountability policies of the last few decades. It makes sense why this type of interpretation is important for public officials and policymakers. It allows them to make statements about what percentage of students in the state, district, and school, meet some standard of achievement so they can measure improvement, program effectiveness, and policy efforts. It also provides parents with reporting that should convey what their kids can do and know. In their purest form, criterion-referenced tests should be useful in supporting instruction.
This means that a lack of common assessment only assures that lawmakers will be unable to assess the effectiveness of any voucher program. Knowing that a student performs at the 47 percentile is not information that policymakers will be able to interpret to understand the student or school's achievement level. I'm not even sure how useful it is to parents.
Furthermore, if one part of the state is measuring students against the state standards, and the other is measuring schools based on how parents feel, coupled with how they do against students nationally who employ similar curricula, I would think the achievement gap would grow.
I was talking with a superintendent of a high-performing district, and he expressed his disinterest in the testing portion of the amendment, because in his words, "We test our kids about the same as we did 30 years ago."
The statement blew me away, and I proceeded to list the multitude of assessments my children take annually as Metro Nashville Public School students. He dismissed my argument with a "Yeah we don't do all that."
That's my other gripe about yesterday's testimony by state superintendents. The majority of comments came from superintendents from high achieving well-funded districts, who once again made the supposition that if they weren't interested, nobody was interested.
This is where it gets really complicated for me, we are fighting for the life of something - public education - that doesn't even have universal properties.
Public Education in Knoxville is a different beast than it is in Nashville. Memphis public schools are a lot different than Williamson County public schools. Sharing a common description doesn't always equate to a quality or equitable product.
That's why, despite now having actual bills to argue over, the majority of the arguments made remain rooted in ideology.
Instead of vetting the potential benefits of the bill, we are focusing on students already in private schools buying computers and the possibility of LGBQT, Satanic, or Muslim schools.
As for the latter, who cares? The current ESA plan in Tennessee gives money to Christian schools, so fair is fair. Though I would argue further separation of students into silos only waters down the purpose of public education,
Proposing a school is a whole lot different than going through the accreditation process, locating property, building the school, staffing the school, and populating the school. It's tough ground to sow, and I just haven't run into a whole lot of parental demand for the school of satan. I'd argue the likelihood of one being successfully established is slim at best.
Furthermore, I question why a superintendent in a sparsely populated district wouldn't support the House amendment. The reality is that nobody is building a private option in those districts, especially the ones where the public school system is the primary employee. The House amendment would put more in the coffers with little of the risk.
Sure there is the homeschool contingent, but they've already made it clear they don't want any part of this, so that risk is also eliminated.
The worst-kept secret in Tennessee is that once the safety features embedded in TISA drop off in three years, most districts will be looking at a property tax increase to keep up with necessary school funding. Arguably the extra money in the amended bill could buffer that need.
The concerns regarding the separate bodies approving separate bills and the benefits falling off in reconciliation is a legitimate fear. But, shouldn't talk about how to protect those benefits?
As I've said repeatedly, the Governor's plan is a shit sandwich, but the condiments being brought to the table could make it more palpable. This arguably could be the only chance to get some needed reforms, that would only serve to strengthen public schools.
While I remain unconvinced that the votes exist to bring the Governor's dream of universal vouchers to fruition, I still think looking at the positives is a worthy action. After all, Tennessee has had 2 voucher programs for several years and neither has bee able to secure over 3K participants.
If the bill is defeated this year, what is won?
Public schools have been protected for a year, but rest assured, none of those reforms are going to get passed in the next 5 years and voucher legislation will be revisited. Is it worth risking future passage sans any of the benefits just to win this year? That's a question we all need to ask ourselves.
We spend so much time in the weeds, that we often forget about the treetops.
We like to look at Arizona, but today's focus should be on Texas. They defeated vouchers legislation last year, but this week 6 of those Republicans who voted to reject the legislation lost their seats, while four more are headed to a runoff. Only 4 held on to their seat. In the wake of those results, supporters are vowing to bring back voucher legislation. Will it pass this time?
Looking at our own House Representatives, Representative Todd Warner (R-Chapel Hill) is gathering accolades for being a courageous lawmaker and standing up for transparency and decency. That's all fine and good, makes good headlines until after this session.
Warner has already drawn an opponent. Tennessee Star editor-in-chief Michael Patrick Leahy has vowed to help “lead the charge” to primary the Chapel Hill Republican, remarking that “nothing would please me more than to lead the charge that would take Todd Warner and retire him from the Tennessee General Assembly because that’s where he belongs.”
Great news if I'm a Democrat because Leahy's action will only divide Chapel Hill Republicans and possibly open the door for a Democrat to take the seat. The district lies South of Nashville and is currently overwhelmingly Republican, but remember Nashville is continuing to grow and new residents are pushing out into surrounding counties.
Getting back to the computer argument. That activity is portrayed as a universal negative. Not always true.
I personally know a black family with a single-parent mother facing this conundrum. They ain't poor, but they don't have extra income either.
The son is a fantastic athlete and an even better student. He's been accepted into a very reputable private school. The school is offering to cover about 40% of the tuition and they are struggling to figure out if they can find the rest.
This is a tremendous opportunity for this young man, and 7k would go a long way to allowing him to seize this opportunity, aiding with both tuition and extra costs. He's not the only child facing the dilemma.
Trust me, I'm not a fan of shit sandwiches, and the Governor's proposal remains a shit sandwich, but sometimes we need to pull back and evaluate.
In over a decade of covering Tennessee Education policy, I've heard about a plethora of initiatives that would doom public schools. Some have come to fruition, others have not, but none have caused irreparable damage to the system. I can't say the same for public school systems, but that is another topic for another day.
As a parent of limited means, over the years, I've had to eat a lot of shit sandwiches to make sure my kids get what they need to reach their full potential. My caveat is, and always will be, am I getting as much as I can to support my child by wolfing down this distasteful meal.
Ultimately, the devouring of the sandwich isn't about me, it's about securing opportunities for my children.
I'd ask every one of those superintendents who testified yesterday, along with the affluent county school board members who whined because they were denied, is this about you and your ideology or is it about the needs of kids.
That question is raised in all sincerity because I don't presume to know the answer.
Let me leave you with this photo from the committee room where everyone in attendance was purportedly fighting to protect the future of minority and impoverished children.
Notice anything missing?
As much as I'm loathe to say it, this all feels like an exercise in privilege.
I don't propose to know the answer here. It has been over a decade that I've been involved in beating back voucher proposals, and yet here we are again.
It's the same old same, lots of battle plans, few plans for the peace. Few of the people being championed or defended were present in that room, why?
Remember there are rewards for everyone in the pursuit of perpetual warfare.
I'll be back tomorrow with news on 4th-grade retention, dumb flag bills, and a look at the bullying of an incompetent State Education Commissioner.
As always, I need to rattle the cup a little bit before I head out the door.
If you could help a brother out…and you think this blog has value, your support would be greatly appreciated. This time of year money gets really tight, while the blogging workload increases exponentially. that can't be overstated.
To those who’ve thrown some coins in the basket, I am eternally grateful for your generosity. It allows me to keep doing what I do and without you, I would have been forced to quit long ago. It is truly appreciated and keeps the bill collectors semi-happy. Now more than ever your continued support is vital.
If you are interested, I’m sharing posts via email through Substack. This has proven to be an effective way to increase coverage. Readers have the option of either free or paid subscriptions. Paid subscriptions will potentially receive additional materials as they become available. Your support would be greatly appreciated.
If you wish to join the rank of donors but are not interested in Substack, you can still head over to Patreon and help a brother out. Or you can hit up my Venmo account which is Thomas-Weber-10. I don’t need much – even $5 would help – but if you think what I do has value, a little help is always greatly appreciated. Not begging, just saying,