Showing posts with label Milwaukee Public Schools. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Milwaukee Public Schools. Show all posts

Saturday, July 16, 2016

People In Glass Houses Shouldn't Throw Stones

Van Wanggaard (if that is your real name?!), Wisconsin state senator from Racine, recently opined in the Journal Sentinel that, basically, before citizens in other cities and municipalities, within the state, have their tax dollars redistributed for anything concerning Milwaukee, Milwaukee needs to get their act together.

Wanggaard throws out a lot of big numbers, but gives little context to those numbers. He rambles on about the money going to Milwaukee Public Schools, but carelessly doesn't break that down into a cost per student or even compare that to what other communities are getting or spending. He writes about failing schools and proficiency tests, but fails to show how this compares to others in the state. Without this context, just throwing out big numbers is meaningless.

And, as conservatives continually do, in the face of data that shows otherwise, Wanggaard praises the school choice program. Yet, as I've written before,
If we actually look at the data, we find that there is little difference between voucher school students and Milwaukee Public School students. Researchers at the University of Arkansas found, "City property taxes go up for each student who uses a voucher, compared to what would be the case if that student went to MPS, while state income taxes go down, as do property taxes in most of the rest of the state.
But why let the data get in the way of kicking Milwaukee. That's just what Wisconsin conservatives do. If you're going to keep pounding that drum as some sort of alternative public education option, at least give us information showing improved test scores, cost-savings or some metric we can hang our hat on. To just knock MPS and hold up school choice as a ticket out of that "quagmire" is sloppy at best, but totally inappropriate and misleading for a state senator.

He also seems to not understand that Racine, too, receives money from taxpayers outside of Racine. He makes it sound as if all money collected at the state level goes to Milwaukee. And, beyond this misrepresentation, state aid has been declining. Since 1995, Milwaukee has seen a 36% decline (in real dollars) in state aid.

According to the Wisconsin Department of Revenue's 2015 Notice of State Aid and Credit Payments, Milwaukee (with a population of 599,164) received roughly $219,000,000 in state aid; approximately $365 per person. Racine (population 78,199) received roughly $25,000,000 in state aid; $321 per person.

This type of finger-pointing equates to blaming the victim. Milwaukee has been the destination for much of the state's poor and mentally ill. There are obviously large costs involved, social and financial. Wanggaard even writes about Milwaukee's high poverty rate. He seems to assume, though, that Milwaukee likes it that way, that Milwaukee is choosing to have a high proportion of the state's poor. More like monied interests have left the City and its problems behind. Ever heard of white flight, Mr. Wanggaard?

According to the Census Bureau, Milwaukee's poverty rate is 29%, Racine's is over 22% and for Wisconsin 13.2%. The percent of persons, age 25 or higher, with a high school diploma or higher - in Milwaukee 81.8%, in Racine 81.2% and Wisconsin 90.8%. The percent of persons, age 25 or higher, with a bachelor's degree or higher - in Milwaukee 22.8%, in Racine 17.2% and Wisconsin 27.4%. People under 65 without health insurance - Milwaukee 15.9%, Racine 16.7% and Wisconsin 8.6%.

Maybe Mr. Wanggaard shouldn't be throwing stones from his glass house.

I think some of our public servants have no idea what their mission is supposed to be. Yes, you're supposed to serve your constituents, but, as a STATE senator, you also need to reach across the isle, find compromise and solve issues that have implications beyond village and city boundaries.

If Wanggaard really wants to solve things and since he believes in choice so passionately, why not improve public transportation between the City, suburbs and the surrounding communities and allow students to attend any school they want? Let's not stop there - since we would now have efficient transportation connecting the region, Milwaukee's poor citizens could now have access to jobs in the surrounding communities.

Something tells me that's not what he or any other Wisconsin conservatives want - keep those "problems" in Milwaukee.

In the end, Wanggaard's article really just seems to be another kick at Milwaukee. In his article, he admits "the Milwaukee area still is the economic driving force of our state. Almost one-third of the state's economy takes place in metro Milwaukee...with world class attractions, restaurants and festivals. It attracts visitors, investments and spending. Cranes and construction are everywhere. Wisconsin needs a healthy Milwaukee so that the state can continue to thrive."

Yes, despite Scott Walker and the Republicans best efforts to handicap Milwaukee, the city is thriving. Billions of dollars are being invested in this "quagmire" of a city. Maybe Republican scorn is the key to economic growth? Republicans continually disparage and blame Milwaukee for almost everything, yet the city has been booming.

With a little over 10% of the state's population, Milwaukee is responsible for a third of the state's economic activity. But in Mr. Wanggaard's world, this indicates Milwaukee isn't pulling its weight? I guess night is day and up is down for Mr. Wanggaard. Hey Milwaukee, you're only producing three times what would be expected, pick it up!

Maybe Mr. Wanggaard should worry more about the houses in Racine that are soon to be part of Lake Michigan. Milwaukee will continue its efforts to improve conditions for all its residents whilst continuing to fuel the economy for the entire state.

Sunday, March 3, 2013

About The Residency Requirement Stifling Potential Job Applicants...

Huge Crowd Turns Out For MPS Teaching Jobs
School district officials estimate more than 1,000 job candidates turned out hoping to land one of the roughly 700 teaching job openings for the next school year in a district that recently bumped its starting teacher pay up from $37,721 to $41,000.

Sunday, February 3, 2013

False Choice

The usual suspects are out stumping for expanding school choice and vouchers.

Instead Of Lifting Residency Requirement, Let's Expand School Choice

Walker Presses Case For Expanding School Choice
School choice includes voucher programs, in which the government helps pay for tuition at private schools, including religious schools.
Tough Decisions Lie Ahead For Wisconsin's School Voucher Program
Voucher advocates have long desired an increase to the $6,442 per-pupil allotment taxpayers spend on children in participating private schools; they want at least equal funding to public charter schools, which receive $7,775 per-pupil. MPS state aid is $7,723, but with local funding the per-pupil amount is closer to $10,000, according to MPS Chief Accountability and Efficiency Officer Bob DelGhingaro.
Bringing the voucher schools into an accountability system that systematically identifies and weeds out perennially low performers is something that has gotten more attention lately. The new state report card system for Wisconsin's public schools was not obligated to include the 112 private voucher schools, and the data systems those schools use (or in some cases, don't have) do not jibe with the systems used by public schools that report to the Department of Public Instruction.
If we actually look at the data, we find that there is little difference between voucher school students and Milwaukee Public School students. Researchers at the University of Arkansas found, "City property taxes go up for each student who uses a voucher, compared to what would be the case if that student went to MPS, while state income taxes go down, as do property taxes in most of the rest of the state."

Diane Ravitch, lead debunker of all things voucher-related, elaborated in The Myth of Charter Schools:
Known as the CREDO study, it evaluated student progress on math tests in half the nation’s five thousand charter schools and concluded that 17 percent were superior to a matched traditional public school; 37 percent were worse than the public school; and the remaining 46 percent had academic gains no different from that of a similar public school. The proportion of charters that get amazing results is far smaller than 17 percent.Why did Davis Guggenheim pay no attention to the charter schools that are run by incompetent leaders or corporations mainly concerned to make money? Why propound to an unknowing public the myth that charter schools are the answer to our educational woes, when the filmmaker knows that there are twice as many failing charters as there are successful ones? Why not give an honest accounting?
According to University of Washington economist Dan Goldhaber, about 60 percent of achievement is explained by nonschool factors, such as family income. So while teachers are the most important factor within schools, their effects pale in comparison with those of students’ backgrounds, families, and other factors beyond the control of schools and teachers. Teachers can have a profound effect on students, but it would be foolish to believe that teachers alone can undo the damage caused by poverty and its associated burdens...
It bears mentioning that nations with high-performing school systems—whether Korea, Singapore, Finland, or Japan—have succeeded not by privatizing their schools or closing those with low scores, but by strengthening the education profession. They also have less poverty than we do. Fewer than 5 percent of children in Finland live in poverty, as compared to 20 percent in the United States. Those who insist that poverty doesn’t matter, that only teachers matter, prefer to ignore such contrasts.
Most recently, Ravitch wrote in the Journal Sentinel:
Milwaukee's choice program is a failure. There are now three separate systems - the public schools, with about 80,000 students; the voucher schools, with about 23,000 students, and the charter schools, with about 20,000 students. There is very little difference among the three sectors in terms of student achievement...
19% of the students in the Milwaukee Public Schools have disabilities, compared to somewhere between 7% and 14.5% in the voucher schools.
It is inefficient to run three separate school systems. Not only does it triplicate costs, but it divides civic energy. All the people of Milwaukee should work together to build a school system that meets the needs of all the children. 
Twenty years of experience with choice in Milwaukee demonstrates that it is not effective or efficient to run three school systems. It does not meet the needs of children.
For Further Reading:
Vouching For Delusion
The Myth of The Milwaukee Miracle
Charter School Riddles

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Residency Requirements

Much (in the last year) talk about ending the residency requirement for City of Milwaukee (especially for police and firefighters) has been bandied about. Primarily by persons whose motives, and interest in this topic, are unclear. The residency requirement has been in place since 1930. Why is the state interfering with a City of Milwaukee employment policy?

Recently, Gary Kraeger, a Wind Lake appraiser, weighed in - The Principles Of The Residency Rule. He opines, "Milwaukee is everyone's business in the state, especially since Milwaukee is very dependent on state money [state aid to Milwaukee has actually plummeted]... On a third hand, Milwaukee is the fourth-poorest big city in America [not sure where this number comes from, Kraeger doesn't say], at last word, and I suspect it might move up a bit if we dump the residency rule. In which case, I expect Milwaukee to need even more of our money. On another hand, it sounds sensible that if you want taxpayers to pay your salary in a community, you should be one of them. In that way, if your compensation benefits from high taxation, at least you're pulling the cart, too. Also, normally you care more about the community you live in."

Kraeger states, "On principle, however, the residency rule should be lifted and lifted by Milwaukee itself." Um, yeah, so if it should be up to Milwaukee, why are so many people outside of Milwaukee concerning themselves with Milwaukee governance?

"The biggest hand of all is the principle of freedom," claims Kraeger. When it comes down to it, Americans should be able to do what they want, when they want, and where they want. No rules, no questions.

Kraeger continues on describing how removing the requirement could hurt property values in the City. So, he has laid out numerous economic examples of why the residency requirement is in place. Numerous reasons why it should be there. But he then concludes that it should be ended. Why? Freedom.

If the ultimate rationale for an argument one poses is "freedom," one really doesn't have much of an argument or a rationale.

The residency requirement is a pretty simple, straight-forward policy - as a public worker, you should live in the city that employs you. The economic idea of "leakage" is addressed by such a policy. Much of the dollars earned by these public employees will be spent back within the community. Which also addresses the economic multiplier effect - money earned and spent in the same area, thus percolating and rippling throughout the local economy, over and over. As opposed to City of Milwaukee tax dollars funding a Milwaukee Police Officer who now lives in Waukesha and spends most of his/her money there.

There are 2,697 City of Milwaukee fire and police employees. The average police employee earns $65,649; for fire it's $67,554. This a potential $177 million dollars of earnings "leaking" out of the city, including property taxes, sales taxes, and other spending.

The possible loss of property taxes, spending at local businesses, and neighborhood stability are more than sufficient reasons for maintaining the requirement. The economics behind the requirement make it a no-brainer.

Governing is a set of rules. If you want to live or participate in certain communities you have to follow their rules. Some subdivisions make homeowners have 5-acre lots. Others require certain facades or materials be similar amongst the homes. If you don't like those rules, you go somewhere else. That's freedom. Freedom isn't doing away with things one doesn't like.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

The Commercialization of Everything

Milwaukee Public Schools need to be open for business?

Because we are unable to raise taxes on corporations and the rich [because these same people own our government, they make sure the representatives never introduce legislation that decreases their wealth], MPS must beg and plead with the wealthy to pay for our schools, to donate money.

Having our public education system dependent on the whims and altruism of corporate and commercial interests is a recipe for disaster. Not only is it the marketization of education, but it is also a completely inappropriate commingling of consumptive excess (corporate sales objectives) with an captive audience (students).

It would be much better to simply tax these organizations and allow the proper entities to decide on budgets, spending, and programs for the schools. Rather than allowing our schools to become corporate public relations extensions and our students to become (even more so) consumptive zombies, lets maintain public control of one of the most copied and admired institutions Americans have created - our public school system.