Arkansas Blog

But Mr. Daughtery-
Wasn't John Walker one of your biggest campaign contributors? I know he contributed to Curry. Walker is the biggest legal advisary of the LRSD. You voted to settle a lawsuit against him that our lawyers felt like we were winning. Isn't this a conflict of interest?

ARK. BLOG: Fair question, to the extent that it is always fair to note who makes financial contributions to political candidates. But as to financial conflict of interest, there is none for school board members. They are unpaid.Unlike Naccaman Williams who works for Walton.

You are right about the conflict of interest. However, I have very little sympathy for Daugherty. Competition seeks out weaknesses in the market. That weakness seems to have been found in Daugherty's district. Daugherty and friends can't stop the trend by hoping to deter the competition, they have to do it by improving their game.

ARK. BLOG: Apart from the fact that this "competition" is mostly a bogus construct, I do think the playing field should be level. This week, at least, the focus was on a school nominally designed to reach the kids who really need reaching, not just providing a haven for children who are already achieving. That's what charter schools were supposed to be about. That's not how they are being used. And nobody seems much interested in seeing which ones really work -- that is advance children who were behind or advance faster those who were already ahead. There's evidence that the KIPP schools have done this, though they, too, enjoy some advantages over conventional public school.s

As someone who personally knows Dr. Williams (I am a former student of his), his ethics are of the highest. He comes from humble beginnings and worked his way up the ladder as a PUBLIC school math teacher, then as college professor, dean and now WFF. He loves and values education, no matter what you may think about his voting habits. I am not charter supporter, but I do know that Dr. Williams is voting in the best interest of the children first, WFF second. As and for Mr. Daughtery, Dr. Daughtery or whatever you want to call yourself, his argument is valid, it just doesn't carry much weight with me, given his inability to validate his education credentials. He may be a good person, I don't trust him.

ARK. BLOG: If his ethics were high, he wouldn't vote on applications in which his employer has invested.

I think that the e-Stem's raking off the brightest students, with Walton-Hussman support, is awful. It's sort of like a luxury car dealer having exclusive access to Chenal. Of course, they would sell more if they're the only ones who could sell to those folks.

Now, that being said, where is the financial interest for the Waltons that makes Williams' votes on the board a conflict of interest? I agree it smells to high heaven, but the Waltons are donors here; it's not a business. It may be wrong-headed philanthropy, but philanthropy it is. The e-Stem school is not a for-profit business, is it? Is it truly a conflict of interest when they don't have a profit at stake? I love to rant, but I don't see much of a basis for a conflict of interest/financial ethics rant. I would simply limit it to a "please quit helping to destroy our school district" rant.

ARK. BLOG: Williams works for the Waltons. His employer approves certain charter schools for funding and not others. He votes on propoosals from charter schools expecting his employer's support. Do you think he's likely to vote against his employer? Do you think his employer's single-minded view on education allows room for evaluating the other side of the charter school equation -- for example the impact of providing unnecessary outlets to better students to leave schools that are NOT failing? It is fair to believe his paycheck makes it difficult for him to see this side of the equation, particularly when his voting record demonstrates as much. The conflict is not with the school, it is with his employer's interest in the school.

Not a single argument has been made to invalidate your premise Max. The only arguments are simplistic and completely off the point: Daugherty = Bad Guy or Williams = Good Guy.

Two have even admitted to the conflict of interest. That Dr. Williams lets such taint this approval shows a decline in his character and his integrity. That it is so obvious and blatant does show that Walton money is ruling, not common sense.

The Reagan administration began manufacturing an educational crisis back in the 1980s and nothing has yet stopped this artificial and phony debasement of public schools since. The right wing attack machine simply keeps churning out more and more documents playing upon the fears of gullible parents and making them think that the grass is greener on the other side.

Here are some news reports from the Reagan era about education which caused many to be concerned:
1) Minors aged 14-19 accounted for 43% of the crimes; 54% of all murder cases involved jobless youth.
2) Junior high school gang extorts $2500 from 120 classmates.
3) High school girls resort to prostitution for entertainment, curiosity, or a source of revenue; police say rate is up 262%.
4) 14 year old student, repeatedly tortured and beaten by school thugs, hangs himself.
5) 10% of nation's middle schools request police guard for graduation ceremony.

As Paul Harvey would say, here's the rest of the story: this happened not in America but in Japan. These are all reports from the Japanese media about the terrible Japanese youth and the failure of Japanese schools. Guess who still runs a public school system which is one of the best in the world and didn't panic and run off to charter and private schools?

The best public school system in the world until Reagan and his folks started their propaganda spiel was the US public school system. Instead of keeping it that way, Reagan and wrecking crew decided to abandon the system for private schools.

After decades of saturating the public with the message that public schools were failing, is it any wonder that parents began to be affected by this campaign of lies and deceit.

So, if I seem a little bit perturbed by this lack of concern for a conflict of interest, then you are just another victim of this hoax about public education. There is no evidence that as a whole charter schools do any better than public schools in educating our youth. There is evidence that other nations who continue to strongly support their public schools are outperforming our country which is influenced strongly by those who don't support public schools.

Thanks for trying to stem this tiresome attack on public education, Max.

There are only 19 existing or approved Open Enrollment (independent) charter schools in Arkansas; counting the two from last week. With the two approved this week, Pulaski County's number will be 10 next year. Not sure how Mr. Dougherty or Max's number was derived.

eSTEM Elem - LR
eSTEM Middle - LR
eSTEM High - LR
Covenant Keepers - LR
Dreamland - LR
LISA - LR
LISA - NLR
Academics Plus - Maumelle
Little Rock Prep - LR
Lighthouse - NLR
HOPE Academy - Pine Bluff
KIPP - Helena
Imboden Area Charter - Imboden
Sch of Excellence - Humphreys
Benton Co. Sch of the Arts - Rogers
NWA Academy of Performing Arts - Rogers
Haas Hall - Farmington
Osceola Communication & Business - Osceola
AR Virtual - Statewide

Competition is good. Problem is, competition costs money (you got to have your product near or above that of the competition). I took from the Charter section of the board member's letter that the biggest concern is money. When will the LRSD learn that money as the focal priority (not test scores or caring parents) will lead to ruin. If the LRSD product was better than the competition, the highly coveted caring parents and high test score students would stay and not flock to these other schools. Perception has a lot to play here in making people feel the LRSD is inferior and that these Charter schools are better. Test scores so far say it's a push, no one better than the other. But in my mind, and hundreds of other parents...Charter schools are the best thing out there. More money will not change my perception. Giving more of my money to the LRSD will not change my perception (as in a millage increase).
To the LRSD, you had your chance. You blew it. Perhaps when the state board of education comes in and does its 'Clean slate' rebuild of the entire district (pick the reason, financial distress or NCLB), the new board might get a clue. Until then, I will enjoy the charter school life, and I look forward to this years test scores from e-stem. Yep, they are hand picked, they are more than half minority, and they will show the rest of the LRSD parents (who care) that they don't have to settle any more.
This past month, a LRSD teacher sent home a multiplication table for the student to learn. Almost all of the 8's were wrong. Once I saw this, I corrected the sheet and worked to undo the damage that had already been done. I hope to get this student into e-stem, as I am tired of giving the LRSD more chances.

ARK. BLOG: Please remember the numbers show that the kids who moved to e-Stem from LRSD were scoring proficient on tests on the whole. They were not failing. If they succeed at e-Stem, they'll just be continuing on a path they already were on, for the most part. For these kids, the LRSD "blew" nothing (though undoubtedly there are some teachers who fall short, even at e-Stem I'd be willing to bet.)

And please tell me how a "hand-picked" student body against an unwilling, unruly group of kids, often with uncaring or absent parents, serve as proof of anything vis a vis the LRSD. That doesn't describe all kids in the district -- or the many excellent schools -- but it describes a disproportionate number which the charter schools may avoid. A lot easier task.

Students at eSTEM can not be "hand picked". Open enrollment charter schools have to accept students on a first come, first serve basis, unless more students apply than the school has slots; then the students are selected through a random lottery. A lot of parents think there is some status to "getting their child accepted" into a charter school. However, those students can be brilliant; dumb as a post; or anywhere in between ... they just get in through luck of when they enroll and/or how quickly their lottery number is pulled.

ARK. BLOG: The picking is the self-selection that comes from having parents who have picked that school for their children rather than the neighborhood school. They've found a way to get the child to school every day and to pick the child up. They've agreed to whatever additional rules charter schools may institute for their children. This might include accelerated courses that would instantly dissuade some. It might include longer days and weeks and school years. This, by definition, brings a group of parents far more committed to education than those drawn by lot of the map at the average school, particularly in a low-income neighborhood. The racial enrollment alone tells you plenty about this process. In short, the picking begins before the lottery is held.

Jake,

So what exactly did Ronald Reagan do to prevent you and your fellow teachers from teaching the children enough to meet basic grade levels? Reagan didn't pick the books. He didn't prepare your lesson plans. Why is it that such a large percentage of LRSD children fail at the math and literacy tests? How many students in the LRSD are at grade level in Math and in Literacy?

If the E-stem schools have excellent test scores - even more of the smart kids in the district will want to go there for sure. They have longer school days, and they have a more intelligent design for studies. The teachers are more motivated because of the financial incentives.

Max hits a good point (which I freely admit I've quoted slightly out of context): "student body against an unwilling, unruly group of kids, often with uncaring or absent parents".

I think a lot of folks remember my posts and Robert Daugherty's responses a few days back. Since then he and I have emailed each other about my son's experiences and what can be done. The answer is... I don't know.

There is a (for lack of a better term) "inner-city ghetto culture" in our school. Kids are unruly and grow up with Bloods and Crips as role models. Drug dealers and gan bangers are glorified. They don't care about school and consider it great fun to disrupt and tear down. They listen to (c)rap music that calls women "bitches and ho's" and talks in glowing terms about robbery and crime as good things. And their parents don't give a flying rat's ass either.

It's no wonder the kids fail out of school. Then all they can get are menial jobs because they have no usable skills. I see this in black kids and white kids... the parents don't care, so the kids don't care.

My sis-in-law and three cousins are all teacher and they despair at the attitude of the parents. We have talked about it often, but we don't have any idea how to fix the attitudes. Perhaps Barack Obama can become a role model to tear down this ghetto attitude.

To quote Bill Cosby: "People used to be ashamed. Today a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' - or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read.

We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us.

We have to start holding each other to a higher standard. "

"This, by definition, brings a group of parents far more committed to education . . ."

The horror. The horror.

And we will have a new president that says he will increase the number of opportunities for these, "The public school destroyers." Click.

I would like to respond to the questions you raised.

ARK. BLOG: Please remember the numbers show that the kids who moved to e-Stem from LRSD were scoring proficient on tests on the whole. They were not failing. If they succeed at e-Stem, they'll just be continuing on a path they already were on, for the most part. For these kids, the LRSD "blew" nothing (though undoubtedly there are some teachers who fall short, even at e-Stem I'd be willing to bet.)

RESPONSE: I do remember, as I am working with an eStem student now. He was highly able before and continues to be at eStem. I do disagree with you on the issue of the LRSD blowing it. It blew it by creating an environment where both student and parent were unhappy and an option like eStem made it worth the while to get the student to and from the Gazette building every day. The LRSD also continues to fail in competing with eStem (and others like LISA) while other parents make similar choices to get their kids to and from, accept the rules, and continue to care about their child's education in every way they can.

ARK. BLOG: And please tell me how a "hand-picked" student body against an unwilling, unruly group of kids, often with uncaring or absent parents, serve as proof of anything vis a vis the LRSD. That doesn't describe all kids in the district -- or the many excellent schools -- but it describes a disproportionate number which the charter schools may avoid. A lot easier task.

RESPONSE: Well, as proof, once all the caring parents and good kids are gone, all you have left in the LRSD is the "unwilling, unruly group of kids, often with uncaring or absent parents". That is proof enough for me and hundreds others. What else do you need? While there mayl be a minority of the good kids left, they will be unable to get the district to AYP themselves.
I do agree with you on the easier task of allowing the charters to filter the negative influences. That's a big reason I enjoy them over the LRSD schools. The LRSD has lost any credibility with me on discipline. If race is a factor in any discipline, then I say that policy is a failure. Race has no place in determining discipline. There has to be a stick (with some authority) to make the carrot an appealing option. Punishment should fit the crime, not the race of the perpetrator.

Max,

Your point is well taken. It just disturbs me when people want to make "getting into" a charter school appear to be an honor bestowed on their child for some talent, skill, attribute, or achievement. It is not. It is more of a sign that, as you say, the child's parent is on the ball and hitting the right deadline.

But I am pondering the last few posts. What IF the majority of parents realized they couldn't skate if their child was in a charter school; and more and more of those parents decided to begin to act responsibly; and then it became the "in" thing to be a good parent? Positive peer pressure grown up. What if every public school in Little Rock was a chartered one?

Just a thought.

As a look at the test results from LRSD over the past years, the white students which so many say should be leaving the district for better pastures are actually doing as well or better than their counterparts in the private schools. So, this implies that the quality of teaching is basically as good, if not better, than private school teaching.

Unfortunately, it is not the same story for black students and the comparisons cannot be made between public and private black student scores because they do not compare in makeup. As Max indicates, a higher level of black student goes to the private/charter school system. It is not a level playing field. It is also a very common problem with large urban school districts pointing to urban social problems as the most likely culprit. The public schools are then caught between the ultra-liberal ideals of self-esteem and touchy-feely discipline methods and the ultra-conservative message to abandon all hope for public schools and just cut and run.

Toss in white flight, religious flight, and any flight due to social fears; add the continual harping from ultra-conservatives about troubles when statistics show that huge numbers of American public schools are doing just fine; and, we haven't even discussed the rise of gangs, violence, poverty, teen pregnancy, AIDS, and broken families running at such high rates among black and poor families.

It isn't what Reagan did in the classroom but what he did in the public arena, a point which gets conveniently ignored.

Sorry, had to cut last note short because Mama cried out for my help. Wanted to add a proviso to Onesandzeroes point about having all opportunities for the children be similar to charter experiences. Substitute the word magnet for charter and you have basically the same concept. Some within LRSD have even been known to whisper that such ought to be done in the LRSD system.

Unfortunately, it implies massive bussing, a large increase in the number of teachers and classrooms needed, extra prep and training time, contractual and binding agreements with parents, and a host of other logistic, technological, and curricular challenges to overcome. You think NIMBY is bad now, wait until you try to do something like this on a citywide scale. It's not so much which school parents want their children going to, but which students they don't want their children going to school with.

The educational battleground is in the large urban areas. The effort has become so divided and divisive that the polarization has reached into every level involved in educating those kids. Rather than everyone working together, it has become a gladiatorial arena of educantists trying to promote one system over the other. Rather than seek the healing and building power of cooperation and community, we are encouraged to frame the debate in terms of competition and self-interest.

A multitude of mistakes have been made by all sides involved but nothing was more damaging than the massive propaganda against public schools. And Ronald Reagan led the way in his first presidential campaign and throughout his tenure in office. Click on name for documentation showing his dismal record on education, both in California as governor and in Washington, D.C., as president.