It's You. Hi, You're the problem, It's You

“History does not always repeat itself. Sometimes it just yells, 'Can't you remember anything I told you?' and lets fly with a club.”
― John W. Campbell Jr.

Sure is a lot to report on when it comes to education policy in Tennessee. Much of it would be comical, if not for the serious implications.

Most of it remains concealed from the public behind a thin veneer.

Over the years I've frequently discussed the input of outside forces on Tennessee's state education policy, and to a lesser extent, on the local level.

This issue continues to grow in importance.

Many of you probably labor under the false illusion that Tennessee's legislators craft public education policy based on the desires of constituents. Hate to break it to you, shit ain't like that.

Tennessee education policy has long been steered by outside think tanks like Chiefs for Change and ExcelinEd, two national entities created by Jeb Bush, along with the State Collaborative for Reforming Education (SCORE), the Bill First created entity. Both are fueled by funding from the Bill and Melanie Gates Foundation.

This year alone, the two Bush-created groups have pocketed about $2 million from the Gates people, while SCORE reaped another cool million. In both cases, the grants were tagged as "support for general operation expenses". Remember, nothing is free.

Despite a decade of influence and the successful implementation of several policies, neither organization has an overwhelming success story to tell. Most of the policies they advocate for, tend to fizzle out after a couple years, if not before then.

In other words, if we were making pro football comparisons, these guys would be the Dallas Cowboys and Baltimore Ravens of the education world. Lots of money, talent, and flash, no championships.

They are not alone in their efforts to convert Tennessee students and teachers into the nation's education lab rats. TNStand, EDTrust, American Federation for Children, TNTP, and Teach For America, have all tried to force their personal agendas on Tennessee's kids, some with more success than others.

Throw in the Tennessee Charter School Association, and you've got everybody jockeying for position at the feeding trough. often at the expense of teachers and students.

Back about a decade ago, influence seekers had a hard time gaining traction at the state level, so they tried to drop down to the local level. Everybody from Moms for Liberty, Stand for Children, and Democrats for Education Reform has tried to sway local school board elections. That hasn't worked out so well for any of them, so it's back to the state level.

All of them will try and tell you they speak for Tennesseans, and then only produce a handful to rally at the Capitol.

The smoke generated by these snake oil salesmen tends to create a screen that makes legislators' jobs all the more difficult.

Who do you believe?

How do you get clarity while still trying to keep up with the million and one other legislative issues you are required to be well versed in and maintain some sort of stability in your work and professional life outside of the General Assembly?

Invariably, any time Tennessee has a big education policy initiative, super agents emerge from the pack to advocate for their particular interests. Almost always they position themselves as voices for the common man. These folks often appear on the surface to be experts devoid of self-interest, but if you look a little deeper, you'll find they are neither.

This year the Tennessee General Assembly is pushing towards implementing a universal voucher plan. While teachers, parents, city councils, school boards, and school superintendents all stand in opposition, private interests continue their push for implementation.

Two voices have been at the forefront in championing the cause for their respective organizations - Corey DeAngelis and Michael Lotfi. A few years ago we'd have called them education tourists.

DeAngelis is a self-proclaimed school choice evangelical. He is a senior Fellow at the Betsy DeVos-created American Federation for Children, which is located in San Antonio, Texas. If you look at his resume, you'll see lots of jobs with policy groups - Cato, Reason, Educational Freedom Institute - but none as a professional educator.

He's got a degree in Economics and a degree in Education Policy. Like Tennessee's Commissioner of Education Lizette Reynolds, he's got a lot of experience in education policy, but none in practice. Which begs the question, why are they considered qualified to dictate policy?

Corey's got some interesting theories he likes to espouse. For example, in 2016 he wrote a piece that argued against government funding of schools. He didn't argue for less money, he argued for no money.

Even limited government intervention in the education system is not socially desirable. Though the limited intervention through finance and certification is well-intentioned, we should recognize the consequences of such policies. We should also recognize that the potential market failures may be more desirable than the current government failures in education.

That stance confuses me because in supporting school choice and by extension a voucher system, DeAngelis is actually arguing for increased government funding. Go figure.

But it gets more interesting.

[caption id="attachment_14325" align="alignleft" width="300"]

Screenshot[/caption]

DeAngelis, besides heading up AFC, serves as a policy expert for UNESCO, the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, who has been charged with seeing the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 (Quality and Inclusive Education for All) through to completion by 2030.

Their aim was addressed in a background paper commissioned for their Global Education Monitoring (GEM) Report. In the article The Strings of School Choice, the authors lay out how public money funding private schools through school choice (and the public regulation that comes with it) can be utilized “as the main policy option to tackle education inequalities resulting from private actors’ involvement in the provision of education.”

The paper shows that the regulation of evaluation (assessments) and accountability frameworks could  “play a strategic role in promoting that all publicly-funded schools, independently of their ownership, are correctly aligned with quality standards and also with the equity goals and objectives set by the government.”

In other words, UNESCO believes that the government shouldn't oversee public schools, it should oversee all schools. Since DeAngelis is cashing their checks, it is not a stretch to assume he shares that view, and by extension, so does Governor Lee.

In exploring UNESCO's role, author Lisa Logan writes,

Unsuspecting parents are cheering what they view as educational freedom through school choice legislation that allows public money to be used for private education and permits them to escape the indoctrination caused by these initiatives. Little do they know that UNESCO is eagerly anticipating the ability this gives them to stick its regulatory camel nose into the hole this creates under the tent and worm their way into private education to demand those same initiatives.

Logan goes on to write,

Proponents of legislation that make public education funds available for use in the private education sector have incredible marketing slogans.  “Fund students not systems” they say.  The accompanying mantra that parents should be able to “take the money that belongs to them” and “choose what education is best for their child” offers hope to droves of desperate parents looking for an easy exit to an incompetent system that seems hell-bent on indoctrinating their kids.  Unfortunately, those same proponents who are very vocal when it comes to the supposed benefits of ESAs and vouchers are eerily silent when it comes to being honest about the strings attached to public money and how it could be used to bring regulation into private and homeschools.

Tennessee's homeschoolers are already wise to the con, they've told legislators, keep us out of this bill, we are good.

This all feels like the age-old bait switch, as long as our perceived interests align and I can use you to bring mine to fruition, I'm your biggest advocate. Once my agenda is realized, I'm out the door with the check while you're left behind to navigate the wreckage.

If you look at the Governor's proposed initiatives this legislative session, you'll see him talking out of both sides of his mouth. Per Lee, parents are smart enough to make education choices for their children, but not savy enough to monitor their social media choices without government intervention. The two would seem to go hand in hand, if you are qualified for one, you are qualified for the other.

DeAngelis was at the forefront of the recent fight over vouchers in Texas. The self-proclaimed school choice evangelist seems to surface in just about any state where a voucher program is proposed. He's got his wagon loaded down with snake oil, and his shtick honed to perfection.

in Texas, legislators didn't buy the product hawked by the DeVos acolyte. Other states have proven to be a little bit more gullible. In most cases, the proposed cure has been worse than the perceived illness.

A favored strategy of the snake oil salesman from Texas is to threaten lawmakers at the ballot box.

Recently the globalist told The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy :

“Everybody’s doing it and there’s a reason for that. It’s become a political winner, but it’s also the right thing to do. And the fear-mongering from the other side, it just hasn’t played out. The burden of proof should be on them to show the doomsday scenarios they predict. It never happens. That’s because giving families more choices is always a good idea,”

He goes on to say:

"There’s a new special interest group in town and they’re called parents and they’re paying more attention than they ever had before. In Tennessee, actually, two years ago, you had in the primaries, ten of the Tennessee Republicans running for House were endorsed or funded by the teachers union out here, and nine of them lost. It has become the political kiss of death, and that’s because parents are paying attention. They want more of a say in their kids’ education.”

I don't dispute that parents are becoming more involved, but I'm not sure their interests and his are as closely aligned as he would have you believe. Despite his claims, I've seen little, to no evidence, that those legislators who lost their races, did so due to accepting money from TEA or a lack of support for expanded school choice.

It could be that TEA is just really bad at picking candidates or that those candidates were really bad on other issues.

The radio host and DeAngelis proceeded to discuss the oldest voucher program in America, Vermont's town tutoring program. Maine has a similar program.

Both are century-old programs that provide vouchers for students who reside in rural communities that don't have public schools. It serves around 3600K students with the average voucher size being about $16,000. If you do the math, that is about 79 percent of per-student spending at Vermont’s district schools. More than double what's being proposed in Tennessee.

A report by education researcher Christopher Hammons shows that students who participated in Vermont's voucher program did have higher test scores.

Now establishing a link between the program and school improvement is a little tenuous. Sure the improvement could be due to increased competition, or it could be that parents in those rural areas better prepare their kids because there is no public option to rely on. It's another case of our old friend - causation or correlation.

Either way, we are not talking about a larger differentiation, it is around three and a half points.

Hammons does add this caveat, "To buy the same 3.4 point gain in test scores mentioned above would require Maine and Vermont to increase current per-pupil spending by an average increase of $909 per student. Given the tremendous amount of money already spent on education, an additional $909 for every student in Maine and Vermont would cost the states roughly $300 million a year extra in combined spending."

That's a lot of lettuce, for not a lot of return. Are legislators really interested in investing hundreds of millions of dollars for a 3-point return? If so, I have a bridge for sale we need to talk about.

remember who will be paying that bill as well. It won't be the man from Texas, but rather the men and women of Tennessee.

While DeAngelis has a pocketful of studies that he frequently references, Joshua Cowan, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University, notes that his studies often produce reports that indicate a different benefit than what's touted by the policy wonk.

“If you took the report at its word,” he says, “it’s possible to achieve exactly what they’re describing simply by exiting the children who are the most expensive to educate.”

I don't think that's what Tennessee parents are looking for.

As previously mentioned, DeAngelis's organization was created by former US Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. The former secretary is closely affiliated with the notorious Hillsdale College, once courted by...wait for it...Governor Lee.

Following the logic, if Tennessee voters are so closely aligned with the views of Cory DeAngelis and his posse, why has Hillsdale College had such a hard time getting a toehold in Tennessee?

And, how can a Texas resident have any clear insight into what the voters of Tennessee are thinking?

Again, as I often do, I find myself asking, who's really calling the shots on education policy in Tennessee?

DeAngelis's counterpart, Michael Lotfi, is an even better story.

To his credit, Lofti is a Tennessee resident, albeit one with a questionable political background.

Lofti first arrived in the public arena in 2013.

In response to the implementation of Obama Care, Lofti wrote a public letter to President Obama blaming him for his withdrawal from the pursuit of being a doctor.

After quite literally losing my hair from the internal conflict, considering the sunk costs and evaluating different avenues I have decided.

I have decided that I believe in the principles of a truly free-market, and I trust the free-market. Because of this deep, internal value system I cannot, with clear conscience, continue on this path. My life has value. Such value cannot be calculated by Washington bureaucrats. I won’t allow it. Only a true free-market can accurately assess the value I am capable of.

Mr President, I’m leaving the medical field. I’m hanging up the white coat. However, let me be clear. You have not won. Unless something “changes”, you’ve lost and will continue to lose. You will fail because you lack principle. Meanwhile, we will succeed because we are born of principle.

I know, the irony of the self-proclaimed principals isn't lost on me. Especially because Lofti wasn't in medical school, he was in nursing school.

Free Thought Blogs shared Lofti's letter, and readers were savage towards him in the comments, summed up by the author of the blog.

As has been pointed out in the comments, Lotfi is a poseur. His essay carefully phrases everything to give the impression he’s in med school, and he poses in a lab coat and stethoscope, but he isn’t actually a med student. He’s a “political commentator”, or no-talent hack with no real skills.

And thus a lifelong calling was realized.

In 2016, he was fired from his job as a legislative assistant for State. Rep Andy Holt (R-Dresden). He claimed it was a political move, while Connie Ridley, the state's director of legislative administration, told a different story.

"His separation is a result of policy violations regarding outside employment being in conflict with his work at the Legislature," Ridley said. She added that employment policies prevent any outside activities that create disruption or interfere with one's job duties and that employees are expected to "retain a satisfactory working relationship with colleagues."

At the time there were persistent rumors that he wrote the innuendo-filled blog, Rocky Top Politics. Rumors denied by Lofti.

In 2019, Lofti went to work for then Speaker of the House Glen Canada in a position that provided the consultant with an "alternative work schedule".

"I was hired by the Speaker and I advise the Speaker on policy and narratives -- and Caucus members as well -- as far as if they have any policy questions or how is the district going to react to this or how is the media going to react to this," Lotfi said.

Well, we all know how that turned out. Lofti was forced to resign and Casada was indicted. It begs the question, how much of Casada's actions were based on advice delivered by Lofti?

Over the last year and a half, he's served as the State Deputy Director of Americans for Prosperity.

Like DeAngelis, Lotfi does not have any professional experience in education. His degrees, from Belmont University, are in nursing.

These are the two individuals, along with ExcelinEd and their alumni Tennessee Education Commissioner Lizzette Gonzales, pulling the strings on Governor Lee's drive to expand school choice, even as the original program has yet to reach full capacity.

Some of you may argue against the implication of Reynolds being here with the sole intent of promoting expanded voucher offerings. In response, I urge you to read ExcelinEd's annual report and watch her testimony before the Senate Education Committee. They ain't keeping secrets, you just have to be willing to hear them.

Reynolds, like her private sector counterparts, has never worked in a school system. Not public, private, or charter.

What we are doing is relying on plumbers to give us advice on buying a used car. Nobody would tout that as a wise or frugal decision.

Does nobody run risk/reward calculations anymore?

While I don't necessarily disagree with expanded parental choice, based on the slim detail available, I don't see a reward big enough to justify the risk involved with Governor Lee's proposal.

Early next week we'll probably get a look at what the House's kitchen sink bill looks like, but if early indications are true, there will be a cap on available vouchers. That won't be a universal voucher bill like Lee has called for, how does he reconcile anything less than a universal plan as anything but a loss?

How does a loss of this magnitude impact his future and his legacy?

Maybe he gets a participation trophy and that's enough.

But it shouldn't be enough for the rest of us.

In designing an expanded school choice system. we ought to probably talk with some folks who have experience running school systems.

Tomorrow I'll be back with some other stuff, but for today...this will have to do.

Time 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 real tight, while the blogging workload increases exponentially.

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,