THE AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL AND ITS INFLUENCE ON STATE EDUCATION POLICY

Julie F. Mead

Department of Educational Leadership & Policy AnalysisUniversity of Wisconsin

School BoardLanark Unified School District

Lanark, Illinois1976

What is Public about Public Education?

• Public Purpose• Public funding• Public access• Public

accountability to communities

• Public curriculum

What is Public about Public Education?

Vouchers ChartersPublic purpose Mix of public/private

purposesMix of public/private purposes

Public funding Retains Retains

Public access Schools Control access Theoretically the same, but research raises concerns about race, disability, & language

Public accountability to communities

No public accountability• no testing • completely shielded

from voters

Some public accountability• Participates in state testing• Ability for voters to influence

depends on authorizer type• More attenuated

accountability, generally

Public curriculum

No public definition Curriculum defined by state standardsSchool can select curricular focus

What are we up against?

Interests that are • Well organized• Well funded• Vocal• Persistent

What is ALEC?

“The American Legislative Exchange Council works to advance the fundamental principles of free-market enterprise, limited government, and federalism at the state level through a nonpartisan public-private partnership of America’s state legislators, members of the private sector and the general public.”

What is ALEC?

State Legislators

Nominally non-partisan

Ideologically conservative

Private Corporations& Organizations

Ideologically conservative

Model Bills

ALEC’s Legislative AgendaA-Plus Literacy ActAlternative Certification ActAutism Scholarship ActCharter School Growth with Quality ActEducation Savings Account ActFamily Education Tax Credit Program ActFoster Child Scholarship Program ActGreat Schools Tax Credit ActGreat Teachers and Leaders ActIndiana Comprehensive Reform PackageLongitudinal Student Growth ActNext Generation Charter Schools ActOnline Learning Clearinghouse ActOpen Enrollment ActParent Trigger ActParental Choice Scholarship Program ActPublic School Financial Transparency ActResolution Adopting the 10 Elements of High-Quality Digital Learning for K-12Special Needs Scholarship Program ActStudent-Centered Funding ActTeacher Choice Compensation ActTeacher Quality and Recognition Demonstration ActVirtual Public Schools Act

ALEC’s Legislative AgendaIntroduce market factors into schools,

particularly the teaching profession.

Privatize education through vouchers,tax credits, and tax incentives.

Increase student testing and reporting.

Reduce the influence of local school districts & school boards

PublicSchools

ALEC’s Whack-a-Mole Strategy“Across the country for the past two decades, education reform efforts have popped up in legislatures at different times in different places. As a result, teachers’ unions have been playing something akin to “whack-a-mole”—you know the game—striking down as many education reform efforts as possible. Many times, the unions successfully “whack” the “mole,” i.e., the reform legislation. Sometimes, however, they miss. If all the molespop up at once, there is no way theperson with the mallet can get them all. Introduce comprehensivereform packages.” ALEC Report Card (2010) – 16th Edition, p. 108

Tennessee Example• K-12 & Connections

Academy serve on Education Task force

• Task force creates model “Virtual Public Schools Act”

• Tennessee members introduce model bill

• Passes on a party line vote 6/16/2011

• K-12 gets no-bid contract to create Tennessee Virtual Academy - $5,300/student

Virtual Education Bills• 23 states introduced 44 bills that affected

virtual education • 15 states passed bills that expanded virtual

education in some way• Of those 15 states, 13 had members on

ALEC Education Task Force• 37 States had legislators on the Education

Task Force• 19 of those states passed a law relating to

virtual education.

51%

Indiana’s Choice Scholarship Program• Except as provided under subsections (b)

through (h), it is the intent of the general assembly to honor the autonomy of nonpublic schools that choose to become eligible schools under this chapter. A nonpublic eligible school is not an agent of the state or federal government, and therefore:

• (1) the department or any other state agency may not in any way regulate the educational program of a nonpublic eligible school that accepts a choice scholarship under this chapter, including the regulation of curriculum content, religious instruction or activities, classroom teaching, teacher and staff hiring requirements, and other activities carried out by the eligible school;

• (2) the creation of the choice scholarship program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, the state's officers, or a school corporation to impose additional regulation of nonpublic schools beyond those necessary to enforce the requirements of the choice scholarship program in place on July 1, 2011; and

• (3) a nonpublic eligible school shall be given the freedom to provide for the educational needs of students without governmental control.

ALEC’s “Parental Choice Scholarship Program Act”

• A participating, private school is autonomous and not an agent of the state or federal government and therefore:

• (1) the Department or any other state agency may not in any way regulate the educational program of a participating, private school that accepts a Parental Choice Scholarship;

• (2) the creation of the Parental Choice Scholarship Program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, its officers, or any school district to impose any additional regulation of private schools beyond those necessary to enforce the requirements of the program; and

• (3) participating schools shall be given the maximum freedom to provide for the educational needs of their students without governmental control.

Indiana’s Choice Scholarship Program• Except as provided under subsections (b)

through (h), it is the intent of the general assembly to honor the autonomy of nonpublic schools that choose to become eligible schools under this chapter. A nonpublic eligible school is not an agent of the state or federal government, and therefore:

• (1) the department or any other state agency may not in any way regulate the educational program of a nonpublic eligible school that accepts a choice scholarship under this chapter, including the regulation of curriculum content, religious instruction or activities, classroom teaching, teacher and staff hiring requirements, and other activities carried out by the eligible school;

• (2) the creation of the choice scholarship program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, the state's officers, or a school corporation to impose additional regulation of nonpublic schools beyond those necessary to enforce the requirements of the choice scholarship program in place on July 1, 2011; and

• (3) a nonpublic eligible school shall be given the freedom to provide for the educational needs of students without governmental control.

ALEC’s “Parental Choice Scholarship Program Act”

• A participating, private school is autonomous and not an agent of the state or federal government and therefore:

• (1) the Department or any other state agency may not in any way regulate the educational program of a participating, private school that accepts a Parental Choice Scholarship;

• (2) the creation of the Parental Choice Scholarship Program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, its officers, or any school district to impose any additional regulation of private schools beyond those necessary to enforce the requirements of the program; and

• (3) participating schools shall be given the maximum freedom to provide for the educational needs of their students without governmental control.

And in Wisconsin?• Limitations on

Public Employee Bargaining

• Voucher Expansion• Special Needs

Scholarship• Proposed charter

School changes

AB 682The legislative service agency may contract with one or more qualified researchers who have previous experience evaluative school choice programs to conduct a study of the program with funds other than state funds.

The study shall assess:

(1) the level of participating students' satisfaction with the program;

(2) the level of parental satisfaction with the program;

(3) the percentage of participating students who were victimized17 because of their special needs status at their resident school district compared with the percentage so victimized at their participating school;

(4) the percentage of participating students who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district compared with the percentage exhibiting behavioral problems at their participating school;

(5) the class size experienced by participating students at their resident school district and at their participating school; and

(6) the fiscal impact to the state and resident school districts of the program.

(C) The researchers who conduct the study shall:

(1) apply appropriate analytical and behavioral science methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study;

(2) protect the identity of participating schools and students by, among other things, keeping anonymous all disaggregated data other than that for the categories of grade level, gender, and race and ethnicity; and

(3) provide the legislature with a final copy of the evaluation of the program.

(7) STUDY. (a) The legislative audit bureau shall contract for a study of the program under this section with one or more researchers who have experience evaluating school choice programs. The study shall evaluate all of the following:

1. The level of satisfaction with the program expressed by participating pupils and their parents.

2. The percentage of participating pupils who were victimized because of their special needs at their resident school district and the percentage of such pupils at their participating school.

3. The percentage of participating pupils who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district and the percentage of such pupils at their participating school.

4. The average class size at participating pupils’ resident school districts and at their participating schools.

5. The fiscal impact of the program on the state and on resident school districts.

 

(b) The contract under par. (a) shall require the researchers who conduct the study to do all of the following:

1. Apply appropriate analytical and behavioral science methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study.

2. Protect the identity of participating schools and pupils. (c) The contract under par. (a) shall require that the results of the study be reported to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature under s. 13.172(3) by January 9, 2017.

AB 682The legislative service agency may contract with one or more qualified researchers who have previous experience evaluative school choice programs to conduct a study of the program with funds other than state funds.

The study shall assess:

(1) the level of participating students' satisfaction with the program;

(2) the level of parental satisfaction with the program;

(3) the percentage of participating students who were victimized because of their special needs status at their resident school district compared with the percentage so victimized at their participating school;

(4) the percentage of participating students who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district compared with the percentage exhibiting behavioral problems at their participating school;

(5) the class size experienced by participating students at their resident school district and at their participating school; and

(6) the fiscal impact to the state and resident school districts of the program.

(C) The researchers who conduct the study shall:

(1) apply appropriate analytical and behavioral science methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study;

(2) protect the identity of participating schools and students by, among other things, keeping anonymous all disaggregated data other than that for the categories of grade level, gender, and race and ethnicity; and

(3) provide the legislature with a final copy of the evaluation of the program.

(7) STUDY. (a) The legislative audit bureau shall contract for a study of the program under this section with one or more researchers who have experience evaluating school choice programs. The study shall evaluate all of the following:

1. The level of satisfaction with the program expressed by participating pupils and their parents.

2. The percentage of participating pupils who were victimized because of their special needs at their resident school district and the percentage of such pupils at their participating school.

3. The percentage of participating pupils who exhibited behavioral problems at their resident school district and the percentage of such pupils at their participating school.

4. The average class size at participating pupils’ resident school districts and at their participating schools.

5. The fiscal impact of the program on the state and on resident school districts.

 (b) The contract under par. (a) shall require the researchers who conduct the study to do all of the following:

1. Apply appropriate analytical and behavioral science methodologies to ensure public confidence in the study.

2. Protect the identity of participating schools and pupils. (c) The contract under par. (a) shall require that the results of the study be reported to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature under s. 13.172(3) by January 9, 2017.

ALEC Grades Wisconsin

A Policy Plumb Line• What “problem” is being

addressed?• How do we know it’s a

problem?• How do we know it’s a

problem here?• What is the proposed

solution?• What research

connects the proposal to the problem?

Be aware of…

• Orwellian titles• Research that isn’t

– Think Tank Reviews– http://nepc.colorado.edu/think-tank-

review-project

• Solutions that bear no relationship to the problem

• Who benefits - $$

Be Proud – Be Loud• Public Schools out-perform private

schools• Public Schools out-perform charter

schools• Public schools schools, where poverty

rates were under 10 percent, scored the highest or among the highest in the world.

• Public schools where the poverty rates were 10-25 percent of the student body, scored among the top few nations of the world.