IN THIS ISSUE

First-Ever NAEP Charter School Results Repeatedly Delayed
The AFT has unearthed data that show charter schools' 2003 NAEP scores generally trail achievement in regular public schools, but the results were not released with other 2003 NAEP scores. More . . .

ED Officials Override Experts, Award Grant to William Bennett's Online Company
Political appointees at the Department of Education overruled peer reviewers to award a grant to K-12 Inc., the online education company run by former Education Secretary William Bennett, according to Education Week's David J. Hoff and Michelle R. Davis. More . . .

When is a Fact Not a Fact?
In his July 31 radio address, George W. Bush cited various stats to support his claim that the U.S. economy is on a "rising path." If that sounds too good to be true, that's because it is. More . . .

Wal-Mart's Budget: Big Bucks for Better Press, Not Much for Wages
Wal-Mart is spending money to soften up media coverage to rebut "criticism of its labor practices, expansion plans and other business tactics," according to a recent article in the New York Times. More . . .

Worth Reading
A researcher makes recommendations for improving NCLB's adequate yearly progress formula, two professors describe the effect that Wal-Mart's low wages have on California and a school-funding activist explains how the courts can help strengthen public education. More . . .

* * *

First-Ever NAEP Charter School Results Repeatedly Delayed

The 2003 administration of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in math and reading included the first-ever sample of charter schools, but the results were not released by the National Center for Education Statistics and the U.S. Department of Education with the 2003 NAEP scores. They were brought to light only after AFT researchers discovered and examined the data. Furthermore, the federal government has repeatedly delayed public reporting of NAEP data on charter school achievement. These are among the findings of a report from the AFT, which was able to obtain and examine the NAEP charter school data.

The 2003 NAEP results were released in November 2003 without the charter school results, while the NAEP charter school achievement data originally were scheduled for release in January 2004. After numerous delays, the NAEP results reportedly now are scheduled to be officially released in December 2004. In the meantime, the NAEP results (often called the "gold standard" in education data) from the charter school sample are effectively unavailable to educators, parents, and public policy makers.

"While government officials mull over how and when to release this information, countless parents, communities, and policy makers are making crucial choices about the kind of education children receive—including in charter schools," said Bella Rosenberg, an author of the AFT report. "Public information should be available to the public."

When the late AFT president Albert Shanker introduced the idea of charter schools in 1988, he envisioned innovative public schools with the potential to improve education for all students. The AFT's early support of charter schools reflected Shanker's belief that there should be careful experimentation with the charter school model, with high standards for achievement and accountability to help realize their potential. Unfortunately, the charter school movement has taken a very different turn. The preponderance of independent research shows that most charter schools underperform regular public schools and that many lack accountability.

The AFT analysis of the NAEP data (compiled in the same way all other NAEP results are reported) shows that charter school students mostly underperform and sometimes score about as well as regular public school students. Researchers at the AFT were able to unearth the NAEP charter school data by using the Web-based NAEP Data Tool, a difficult, if not impossible, task for a layperson.

A further implication of the delayed charter school data is that, across the country, states are generating lists of schools that did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward the goals of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). One of the possible sanctions in NCLB for public schools that consistently do not make AYP is restructuring as charter schools.

Related Link:
New York Times article about the NAEP results for charter schools, includes video

ED Officials Override Experts, Award Grant to William Bennett's Company

Education Week reporters David J. Hoff and Michelle R. Davis have uncovered yet another case of questionable grant-making at the U.S. Department of Education (ED). They write that ED officials overruled peer reviewers to award a grant to K-12 Inc., the online education company run by former Education Secretary William "Book of Virtues" Bennett. (Click here for a look at earlier reporting from Ed Week about ED's grants to political allies.)

ED had only enough federal funding for 10 grants, and K-12's application was ranked 11th by independent peer reviewers. That should have meant that K-12 got nothing more than a "thanks, try again next year" letter. But instead, ED's political appointees intervened, funding Bill Bennett's program instead of a grant that peer reviewers judged to be more worthy. In other words, when given a choice between using tax dollars to help students or to help a political ally, ED chose the latter path and wrote Bennett a check.

Sadly, this continues a trend of political paybacks and sloppy grant-making at ED that began shortly after George W. Bush took office. As People for the American Way described in its thorough 2003 report, "Funding a Movement," more than $75 million in ED grants has gone to GOP supporters and organizations that push education privatization.

When is a Fact Not a Fact?

In his July 31 radio address, George W. Bush claimed that the U.S. economy is on a "rising path." But just a few days after the radio address, the Commerce Department, a private company and the Labor Department all released independent reports that cast doubt on the president's spin.

The Commerce Department reported that private wages fell by $2.7 billion in June and consumer spending fell more than $50 billion. Chicago-based recruitment firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas revealed that U.S. businesses announced nearly 70,000 job cuts in July, up 8 percent from June. The Labor Department announced that the U.S. economy had added only 32,000 jobs in July, a figure that the AP described as a possible sign that "the economy is stuck in summer lethargy." The 32,000 figure is nearly 200,000 short of Wall Street's expectations for July and also about 200,000 short of the number of new entrants to the job market last month. Worse still, 32,000 is nearly 270,000 short of the number of jobs predicted by the Bush administration.

So, was the president lying when he said the economy is on a "rising path"? Not necessarily. Maybe he meant to say only that his economic policies have forced workers to climb a dangerous path like this.

George W. Bush is the first president to have an MBA, but perhaps it's unfair to expect him to be aware of information that wasn't released until after he recorded his radio address (although it's hard to believe no one at the White House was aware of the data). At the very least, the president should have known he was wrong when he repeated his claim that the U.S. economy is growing "at a rate as fast as any in nearly 20 years." The Economic Policy Institute's Josh Bivens points out that, before the radio address, the president's own Commerce Department released new data that contradicted the president's claim. And in the spirit of "tell a lie often enough and people will believe it," the American Enterprise Institute's James Glassman repeats Bush's error in a commentary published in the New York Post, the Washington Times and other newspapers.

Wal-Mart's Budget: Big Bucks for Better Press, Not Much for Wages

Wal-Mart has been roundly--and rightly--criticized for mistreating workers, hiring illegal aliens to clean its stores, using illegal tactics to quash unions, refusing to pay overtime, gouging taxpayers and driving local stores out of business. (You can find some of the criticism here, here and here.)

The logical response to such criticism would be to change company policies, but that's not the Wal-Mart way. Instead, the company is spending money to soften up media coverage, according to a recent article in the New York Times. The giant retailer has begun to underwrite public television and public radio programming. Wal-Mart also has announced it will provide $500,000 in scholarships for minority students in university journalism programs.

The PR spending is being reported on the heels of further evidence of the harmful effects of Wal-Mart policies. "Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs: Use of Safety Net Programs by Wal-Mart Workers in California," by U.C. Berkeley professors Arindrajit Dube and Ken Jacobs, finds that Wal-Mart's notoriously low pay means that the families of Wal-Mart employees are a greater drain on public assistance programs than families of workers at other retailers. For example, California's Wal-Mart families use an estimated 38 percent more in food stamps, earned income tax credits, subsidized school lunches, subsidized housing and similar assistance programs. The authors note that the situation could get worse: "If other large California retailers adopted Wal-Mart's wage and benefits standards, it would cost taxpayers an additional $410 million a year in public assistance to employees."

Perhaps Wal-Mart's journalism scholarships and programming sponsorships will result in better media coverage for Wal-Mart, but it's probably not enough to counter the publicity about the myriad lawsuits against Wal-Mart and the many reports condemning Wal-Mart's corporate practices. Expect to hear Wal-Mart announce scholarships for future lawyers, researchers, lawmakers and economists. Just don't expect the company to change the way it does business.

Worth Reading

"Rethinking the No Child Left Behind Accountability System," by researcher Robert L. Linn, addresses what the author describes as "fundamental problems" with the law. Linn's approach is "mend it, don't end it." He praises NCLB's goal of closing the achievement gap even as he predicts that "almost all schools will fall short of the adequate yearly progress targets within the next few years." For a one-page summary, click here.

"Why Adequacy Lawsuits Matter," by Michael A. Rebell, argues that lawsuits to reform school finance systems, based on state constitutions that require an adequate education for citizens, are vital in the effort to raise academic standards for all students. In this Education Week commentary, Rebell writes that adequacy lawsuits require states to ascertain the cost of an adequate education, to ensure that every school has enough resources and to hold school leaders accountable. Although that sounds like a formula nearly everyone could agree on, Rebell's commentary is a response to an earlier Education Week piece based on the dubious argument that adequacy lawsuits actually harm schools.

"State, ACLU Settle Suit on Education," from the Los Angeles Times, describes the just-announced agreement that will send $1 billion to California's schools. The agreement, if approved by the court, will settle a claim that California failed to provide a million students with the resources they need to succeed in school. "It's going to end generations of neglect with respect to these kids," said Mark Rosenbaum, the ACLU's Southern California legal director.

If you have a comment or suggestion for AFT's Closer Look, let us know.

AFT's Closer Look is a publication of the public affairs department of the American Federation of Teachers, 202/879-4458, 555 New Jersey Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20001.