Muszkiewicz Reader

Opposing IDEA in AISD: What’s Next?

We lost. And by lost I mean that not only did the Austin Independent School District Board of Trustees vote to partner with IDEA to replace Allan Elementary and Eastside Memorial High School with IDEA charter schools, but that all the testimony, all the letters, and all the phone calls didn’t seem to garner even a meaningful response from the Board (or District), much less a “no” vote from any but the three trustees who showed an ideological distaste for charter schools to begin with. Superintendent Carstarphen addressed more of our concerns than anyone else; Trustees Bradley and Guzman didn’t seem to notice us at all. It was disheartening.

Not that I don’t believe this issue hasn’t awakened many of us, though, and I do believe that our activism, though late to the fight this time around, will significantly benefit East Austin children. I’m new to Austin and even newer to the Eastside, but it’s clear to me that the only long-term path is to personally invest in our neighborhood schools, send our children and grandchildren to those schools, and advocate their accomplishments widely.

As for right now, well, it’s interesting. I didn’t support IDEA then and I don’t now.

As for the boycott, at first I was uncomfortable with it, thinking it was a bit like running negative ads in a political campaign instead of emphasizing what’s great about our neighborhood public schools. But I support the effort as long as we err on the side of fairness and respect. If IDEA needs certain enrollment to move forward, and if we, by showing parents that our neighborhood public schools are a better choice, can stop IDEA from opening their schools, I think we’ll have done a good thing.

As for demanding answers from the District about IDEA’s implementation, I can’t help but think of Trustee Barksdale tirelessly going through the IDEA contract last month, shortly before the Board voted to approve it. I don’t think she supported IDEA with or without her contract amendments, but I think she knew it would pass anyway. It would have been so understandable for her to sit back and say, well, if you’re not going to listen to the community, if you’re not going to listen to me, then, go ahead, suit yourself, and watch it all crumble. In the end it may well crumble, but there’s no doubt that the students in East Austin will benefit from her commitment to make the IDEA contract better for East Austin students and teachers.

All of which is to say, though a bit paradoxical, working to prevent IDEA from happening isn’t incongruous with working to make it better should it happen.

Because if the day comes, and it probably will, that one of our neighborhood children steps into an IDEA school next fall, well, everything changes. At that point we’ve lost this battle and must direct our attention to the greater cause of providing the best education we can to our neighborhood kids, regardless of which school they attend. On that day, IDEA joins the District, our vertical team, and our community and we must work to better the education provided in that school with no less passion than we would any other school. Because we must remember it’s about the kids, and they must not serve as pawns in our arguments over the best way to educate the next generation.

By Luke M. Muszkiewicz

AISD Hid Response to Concerns Over IDEA’s Performance

Nearly three weeks after the Austin Independent School District Board of Trustees voted to approve their partnership with IDEA to create two in-district charter schools, chief performance officer Bill Caritj released his favorable assessment of IDEA’s student performance data in response to Ed Fuller’s overwhelmingly negative analysis published in mid-November.

Before we get too deep into debating the merits of either study, I hope the second to last paragraph in the Statesman article doesn’t go unnoticed:

Caritj acknowledged his study focused more on the outcomes than on the demographics of the students going into the school and said there was no agenda other than responding to the questions that were raised. He said school board members were provided copies before their final vote in December, though the data wasn’t released to the media until this week.

When I spoke at the December 12th board meeting, I raised concerns over IDEA’s performance, specifically that poorer and lower performing students were less likely to enroll and graduate from IDEA schools. My concerns were in large part based upon Fuller’s work, and several other speakers raised similar issues.

It was hard to believe then that these issues went largely unacknowledged, much less refuted, by either AISD staff or the Board before the vote. But it’s particularly dismaying to see now that in fact AISD staff did respond to the Board in the form of Caritj’s report, but in keeping it from the public deprived anyone from questioning the merits of the response before the Board acted.

Fuller: Are IDEA Charter Schools a Good Idea for Austin?

Caritj/Marder: Analysis of the “Is IDEA a Good IDea for Austin ISD?” Study

Statesman: Austin school district says critical IDEA study doesn’t tell whole story

Fuller: Rebuttal to the Austin ISD critique of my study on IDEA Charter Schools

By Luke M. Muszkiewicz

IDEA Charters Not Just Another Choice

To the AISD Board of Trustees:

I agree with President Williams that the matter of partnering with IDEA to create two in-district charter schools is a philosophical issue. Above all, I hope we can expect a vigorous debate this evening that transcends sweeping condemnations of mediocrity and procedural mishaps and instead focuses on the nature and future of charter schools, the strengths and weaknesses of IDEA, and whether or not the benefits outweigh the costs to East Austin children.

Where I disagree with Mr. Williams and many others, is the contention that IDEA will serve as just another choice for East Austin families, and at the end of the day, how could another choice be bad for anyone?

I view this as a dangerous oversimplification because, unlike the rhetoric suggests, this new choice will affect — significantly — other schools, families, and most of all, children.

First, Govalle and Ortega, the latter of which fell to an Acceptable rating in 2011, will become the bottom rung for students who can’t attend or who attend and are later involuntarily removed from IDEA. TEA and TBEC data suggest that, while most likely unintentional, students who struggle the most are less likely to enroll and more likely to wash out of IDEA schools.

Second, Eastside Memorial HS won’t see IDEA students until 2013, and then will coexist with IDEA, slowly shrinking grade by grade, through 2018. There is no doubt that the continual changes over the past several years at Eastside have taken their toll on students. Bad enough, but for the next six years, incoming Eastside students will have no choice but to attend a school condemned to a slow death, gradually fading away with fewer means to attract better administrators, teachers, and students.

Finally, struggling with under enrollment and inadequate yearly progress, Martin MS will face the same struggles as Govalle and Ortega in taking on the students who don’t succeed with IDEA and as Eastside Memorial in terms of attracting administrators, teachers, and students. It’s unclear how we expect this school to stay afloat, much less continue to improve.

So to say that we’ve nothing to lose by moving forward with the IDEA in-district charter school — that it’s simply one more choice — is to imply that the potential benefits of IDEA won’t also incur very real costs to Govalle, Ortega, Eastside Memorial, and Martin. Whether ultimately right or wrong for Austin, even the most optimistic assessment of the IDEA proposal needs to be weighed against these impacts.

By Luke M. Muszkiewicz
Sent to Dr. Carstarphen and Board of Trustees on 12/19/2011
Published as Examine Complexities of IDEA Issue in the Austin Chronicle on 12/19/2011

AISD’s IDEA: Unanswered Questions

To the AISD Board of Trustees:

I have serious concerns with the proposal to partner with IDEA putting charter schools into East Austin. I’m no expert, but in listening and reading I still have three questions that deserve honest discussion before you move forward.

First, what’s wrong, and what’s right, in our Eastside schools? Inadequate yearly progress is a metric, not a reason. Coming from Lee Elementary, we’re blown away by Metz. Mr. Sanhueza is not only the best teacher my daughter’s ever had, he’s the best I’ve ever known. And he’s not alone. These folks are exceptional. I know Metz won’t be directly affected, but have you learned all you can from them? Have you tried to spread the quality you already have in the Eastside? If you can’t identify and explain exceptional from mediocre, how do you know what to preserve and what to replace?

Second, how does IDEA work? What have they figured out? What can they do that we can’t? Curriculum? Teachers? Or, are they simply not educating kids with the most difficulty learning and behaving, thereby improving test scores without even having to increase student performance? Not clear. How will IDEA keep its promise, and at what cost to other priorities such as dual language instruction?

Third, is it right for Austin? At your meeting last month, I heard the frustration, and I also heard how others have placed their hope in charter schools, so why shouldn’t we? Not good enough. Desperation and peer pressure make bad decisions. This is Austin, Texas, and you’re our school board. If you can’t tell us why this is right for Austin, it’s not.

Bottom line: I don’t want to feel my district is punting when they should be huddling their team and figuring out how to move down the field. This is Austin, these are our kids, and we deserve better.

By Luke M. Muszkiewicz
Public comment at AISD Board of Trustees Meeting on 12/12/2011

Obama’s Job Speech

Good speech, President Obama. Especially the part having nothing to do with policy where you ask us all to simply do better, to work for an America deserving of our legacy. Because despite the rhetoric, politicians don’t create jobs, invent, or teach. We do. But most of us benefit from leadership, and for that I thank you. Technically speaking, I’m all for cutting employer-paid payroll taxes — I buy that that makes it easier to employ, but it is sad that increasing top tax brackets is off the table. Historically speaking, there is simply no correlation between top income tax rates and job growth, prosperity, etc.