State Rep. Kowalko and State Sen. Lawson pen Op-Ed on Overriding Markell’s Veto of Opt-Out.
This joint and bipartisan op-ed was published in the News Journal and other media outlets today, and we are publishing it here. The position of any Democratic elected official or candidate must be to override the Governor’s veto of House Bill 50, and it should be done immediately, if not in a special session, then on the first day in January once the General Assembly reconvenes.
It has been one week since we received Governor Markell’s message that he had vetoed House Bill 50 (the parental opt out rights bill). We feel it is our obligation, as responsible lawmakers, to thoroughly review and consider all aspects of Governor Markell’s stated reasons for vetoing this legislation.
Unfortunately, we found little if any reasonable logic to the Governor’s action and explanation. Quite frankly, there were a few questionable inaccuracies in the statement that lead us to believe that Governor Markell’s action was premeditated with little thought given to the overwhelming support from parents, teachers, administrators, school boards, and the General Assembly for HB 50.
We made every effort to grasp the argument that the administration was trying to make, but the indefatigable truth remains that he had no logical reason to reject the wishes of the parents and lawmakers and instead chose to diminish the seriousness of the “opt-out” movement with a series of unsubstantiated arguments.
The third paragraph of the Governor’s veto statement suggests that educators and school leaders opposed the legislation when, in fact, the reality is that HB 50 and parental opt-out rights are supported, unequivocally, by the DSEA and its membership and the Delaware PTA and its membership. There were also three of the largest and poorest school districts in the state–Christina, Red Clay, and Capital–who voted for and passed resolutions supporting parental opt-out rights. Also noticeable in its deliberate exaggeration is the Governor’s contention that the civil rights “community” opposed the legislation, while refusing to acknowledge that a larger portion of that community did not oppose “opt-out” legislation. Particularly offensive was the language in the fourth paragraph that stated, “if struggling students are disproportionately encouraged to opt out as has happened elsewhere, we may not be able to identify the children who need intervention to be successful.” Unfortunately, this type of hyperbole paints a false picture of the situation in many ways. There is no proof available or offered that a “disproportionate encouragement “of students to opt out has “happened elsewhere.” There is no evidence whatsoever that the test that will be used in Delaware does or will identify children who need intervention. Most importantly, HB 50 does not and cannot be used to encourage or discourage participation in the assessment test.
The fifth paragraph posits the unsubstantiated and unproven assertion that “students with disabilities and students of color have benefited the most from the adoption of statewide testing requirements.” There is no valid data that would suggest this to be an accurate statement of fact. Out of respect for the office of the Governor, we will temper our comments regarding the deliberate misrepresentation of reality in that sentence and its intention to instill fear and doubt in the minority and disabled communities.
Governor Markell, in his veto statement, also suggests that HB 50 was a construct of those who feel that children are over-tested. This completely misses the point that the legislation is exclusively about parental and child rights to not participate in this specific, unproven, time-consuming distraction called the “Smarter Balanced Assessment,” which hinders their ability to learn expediently and prevents appropriately identifying their shortcomings and needs to succeed. The fact that this administration chooses to engage in the politics of distraction that could result in useful and proven tests being shunned to the detriment of students and educators speaks volumes against the Governor’s decision to veto HB 50.
In conclusion, after having thoroughly examined the Governor’s stated positions on parental opt-out rights and because of the enormous public support expressed for HB 50 by educators (DSEA), parents and families (PTA), school administrators (Capital, Christina, and Red Clay resolutions), and the huge majority of General Assembly members who supported HB 50, we have decided that it is our sworn responsibility to our constituents and all Delawareans to bring HB 50 to the floor in January for a veto override vote.
Representative John Kowalko 25th District
14 Kells Ave. Newark De. 19711
302 547 9351Senator Dave Lawson 15th Senatorial District
302 270 1038
Good luck. If opt out passes and enough people don’t take the tests, Delaware risks losing federal funds.
Just sayin’
Can you show me one shred of proof that Delaware, or any other state where opt-outs by parents have caused the benchmark to dip below 95% for ANY sub-group in any one school, has actually lost federal funds? Once again, for the hundredth time, the law states SCHOOLS and TEACHERS cannot opt kids out. It says nothing about the parents opting their children out. So the law does not apply to parents. And the feds cannot cut funds based on that. Otherwise they would have done so already. It is a threat, pure and simple, meant to bully and intimidate. Nice try SussexAnon!
Sussex Anon is on dope…
Here is what needs to happen. Over the course of the off session, while discussions are being handled among legislators over support of the veto overthrow, a new bill (already written) removing the Smarter Balanced Assessment entirely and requiring a new test be developed in its place within the state, with the express line inserted that it is be developed by true educational experts and not those on corporate expense accounts staying overnight at a Holiday Inn Express. Then immediately after the opt-out overrission is passed, right behind it comes a bill outlawing the Smarter Balanced Assessment as Delaware’s one test… It’s a tough order to undertake out of session, but that is the necessary action that society demands.. If you don’t hear it now, just wait until after the scores are released…..
The “logic” that the op-ed authors miss is that his veto stalls legislation the governor fears most till after his term… Which from his perspective, makes good sense. If he’d allowed the opt-out, a token bill at best, the next battle would begin immediately over the entire removal of the Smarter Balanced Assessment (which like the removal of Prohibition is absolutely necessary)… and THAT would tarnish his tenure since the biggest change he was responsible for during his 8 years of office, would be overruled by the General Assembly as a complete abysmal failure… That is the logic not seen by these authors of the op-ed… They were seeking social logic as in a benefit for society. They are correct, there is none of that type… The logic behind this decision was purely personal.
Parents can opt students out. If enough parents opt out and a certain percentage of students do not take the test, federal funds can be cut. This would have to be on an entire statewide basis. It is a pretty high bar to set to be sure, but the risk, in fact, exists.
This is not hysterics, fear mongering or a threat as I have no dog in this fight whatsoever.
Then you should be in favor of getting out from under the federal funds. If we don’t get federal funds, we don’t have to file federal documents, and we can get our schools back to the job of educating students.
Yeah, I am sure the state will really step up to the challenge of filling that financial gap like they have done on everything else. Or be able to develop a plan to improve education.
When you have executives at DoE that are in the same management mold as the Feds, I don’t see that happening.
Easy to say we shpuld get from under federal funds when you have no kids in these poorer schools who need these funds. Old white guys love playing chicken with the federal government when little black and brown kids are the only ones with skin in the game. Who makes up for the funding?… Yeah I can see that referendum passing to make up for that lost funding… not.
I also think its funny that in order to be a Progressive, we have to support a Dave Lawson bill. Lol You people are stupid.
Republicans can be right once in a while by accident. Where we see corporate overreach on edreform, they see government overreach. It also doesn’t hurt that opt-out offers a way to damage a Democratic governor (who has it coming). But so what? Populism is populism. When conservative positions line up with progressive positions, we should jump on it. Even Rand Paul is right once in a while like a stopped clock.
I have been speaking out for high poverty schools for years – I really ramped up in 2000-2001 when it became obvious that RCCD, through “Choice”, was re-segregating their elementary schools, and, imo, deliberately creating high poverty schools that they then ignored and never funded equitably.
The Neighborhood Schools Act completed the re-segregation among all NCC school districts (to a lesser extent in BSD, since they voted not to implement the NSA, claiming that doing so would re-segregate their students and create high poverty schools.)
I also have trouble seeing the Feds pull money from this demographic, which would basically punish the very children they claim to be concerned about.
My youngest just graduated HS this year and there aren’t enough words to demonstrate how happy I am. The SBA test is a mess. (I trust everyone on here has looked at the test.) My daughter took it her junior year (pilot test school) and her thoughts on the SBA were enlightening. She described the test as poorly worded and confusing, in desperate need of an editor. She pointed out blatant errors (graphing problems that required two number points – like (14, 26) – but would only accept one number. When I asked her how she did on the test she said, “I have absolutely no idea. Many times it wasn’t clear what the question was asking.” This comment from a kid who always knows how she did on tests was an eyeopener.
And as of today where are the test results? Why don’t we have them yet? And what’s the point of taking a test in March if you don’t receive the results in time to help the student who took the test? What exactly is the point of this test? ‘Cause it sure isn’t about identifying student weaknesses and helping them improve. My guess is it’s going to be used to label high poverty schools as failing and convert them to charters or privatize them. Actually, I’m not even guessing. The Governor and the State spell out this outcome every step of the way. That’s the end game – corporate profit. Seriously, follow the money.
Again Pandora.. to follow up on Mr or Mrs, Vanilli’s question…. How does Opt Out solve any of the problems you have identified? It seems like all it does is give people the opportunity to get their kids out of a broken system rather than trying to fix the system. If you are right and Title 1 funding continues, there will be no desire to solve any of these problems because the parents with the loudest voices would have found a way to solve their individual kid’s problem by opting them out of the test. Leaving every other child who doesn’t have active parents stuck in a shitty system. This is the same problem with charter schools who allowed the most active parents and students to exit the traditional public system, leaving the most needy kids behind in shitty schools.
This is not about the kids, this is about the idea that “opt-out offers a way to damage a Democratic governor (who has it coming)”….. This stopped being about the kids a long time ago. This is about trying to stick it to a Governor who is not even running for re-election or another office. It’s Silly… And as for Dave Lawson, he’s rarely ever right.
When you agree with stupid people, you shouldn’t consider them to be right “once in a while”…. You should question the intelligence of your own positions…. Much like Colin Powell said he should have done after Iraq… to use your analogy.
First, let me be clear… I have no problem with National Standards. I have a problem with the SBA. And as far as answering questions, you didn’t answer mine – You’ve looked at the test, right? What are your thoughts? Are you okay with the fact that we haven’t received the results yet?
Opting out isn’t really about giving “people the opportunity to get their kids out of a broken system rather than trying to fix the system”. It’s a way for parents to try and rein in/slow down a process (a test) that is flawed and designed to punish rather than improve education. Yes, opting out will skew the results – if enough people opt out then it renders the results (and planned consequences) useless. Given the speed of Priority Schools (which come with insufficient funding) and the SBA what other option do parents have? (BTW, these test results, when the powers that be decide to release them, will be interesting. I’m expecting a lot more parents opting their kids out. Maybe I’m wrong, but we’ll see.)
“If you are right and Title 1 funding continues, there will be no desire to solve any of these problems because the parents with the loudest voices would have found a way to solve their individual kid’s problem by opting them out of the test. Leaving every other child who doesn’t have active parents stuck in a shitty system.”
There is no desire now. There hasn’t ever been any desire to help the neediest kids among us. Why do you think this test will result in a desire to solve deliberately created high poverty schools? I’m not understanding where you’re coming from. The end game is charter/privatization. (You’ve read the MOUs, right?) It has been for years. Of course, they’ll have to keep a few dumping ground schools (true public schools that take children charters won’t take or will counsel out) because charters don’t work if they actually have to operate as true public schools and serve all the public.
Look at East Side Charter School. In 2013-2014 they had 56 Kindergarteners, in 2014-2015 they had 60 Kindergarteners by 8th grade they had 26 students (2013-2014) and 32 students (2014-2015). That’s approx. a loss of 50% of their students. Where did those kids go? And what about Kuumba? That’s the city charter jewel, right? Before they expanded grades you couldn’t find these students in CSW, AP, IB, etc. So how good is Kuumba really? Can’t wait to see these schools SBA test scores. I’m expecting some people’s educational bubble dreams to burst.
And yes, this is about the kids. This isn’t about “getting” Jack Markell – who, btw, called out charter school cherry-picking when he was a candidate. Ah, the good old days.
And… if your concern is about the poor kids with the least voice you’re about 20 years too late. This has been in motion that long, so if “opt out” results in slowing down or derailing the charter/privatization train (because that is the end game for poor children – not all of them, of course. Not the neediest.) I’m fine with that. Unless… you have another solution? If so, I’m all ears.
Just to pen a note to Pandora’s answer, when these scores do come out, remember that all the priority schools were tested first in March. the public schools in April, the Charters in May. If you can’t see it, the new charter district was tested first with the smallest amount of time for test prep. Then public schools which the DOE wishes to discredit were tested next, then the Charters which the DOE wishes to elevate were tested last… As anyone who has ever crammed for a test in college knows, one day’s postponement makes a lot of difference….
Which means… as Pandora points out, that there is an agenda being pursued here and all data is being manipulated to make that pursuit attainable… So when we see Charters perform well, please remember they had 2 extra months to prepare…….
Which makes the test completely worthless for what it was supposed to do… Provide one standard to provide equal comparison between all schools… No. It is nothing but a propaganda device that ties up 85% of teachers time, and wastes a lot of opportunity for students to really learn something of value… And for what? To make propaganda piece for charter schools and vouchers…
It is nothing more.
This is not about the kids, this is about the idea that “opt-out offers a way to damage a Democratic governor (who has it coming)”….. This stopped being about the kids a long time ago.
It should be ALL about the kids. But, It’s about how we can keep our funding and our redundant school districts and our redundant school administrators and common core.
“This is about trying to stick it to a Governor who is not even running for re-election or another office.”
Well, I don’t know about that. You think the Gov., is going to go back to work in the communications industry? He is looking at an appointment position, with the next President. Secretary of Education, maybe. You havn’t seen the last of this guy!!
Right, we haven’t seen the last of this guy.
And the deliberate (snail’s) pace at which the UD board of trustees is moving in its “search” for a new president tells me they may be waiting for Jack.
They want someone cut from Harker’s mold — i.e., one who cares more about business than what goes on in the classrooms; one who will cultivate relationships with big businesses, especially those that might be persuaded to locate a facility on the new STAR campus.
So, if Nancy Targett proves to be an adequate placeholder at UD, maybe they wait until January 2017 for the son of a UD prof to come back home.
As for a cabinet position in the next administration, Markell does not have close ties to the Clinton wing of the Democratic party. He would be a nice Cabinet fit in a Republican administration, especially if a former governor somehow could win the nomination and the election. Don’t bet the ranch on that.
I never said I support the smarter balance assessment. I said, I don’t see how opting out solves the problem. If you can force the legislators to introduce this bill, why can’t you force them to introduce and pass a bill to get rid of Smarter Balance? Think about it… If that many legislators voted for opting out of the crappy test, why wouldn’t they vote for a bill to get rid of it? Then if the Gov vetos it you, fight to override that… If you’re going to go to war, make the war about the thing you actually want rather than a side issue. Cause even if you win the override for opt-out, nothing changes. People have the same ability they have now. Nobody gets punished for opting out anyway. It’s a solution in search of a problem. If you want people to opt out, do a messaging campaign to get them to opt-out and dare the state to punish them. The bill just seems like a waste of energy, resources, and time….. stupid
Nope, not stupid (altho you seem to really like that word). HB50 was a response to parental concerns and part of that concern was the fact that a few parents were told that they weren’t allowed to opt their children out of the test.
I’m fine with a bill getting rid of SBA. That said, what exactly is your problem with opting out? You seem to think that parents who opt out will receive some sort of academic advantage. Could you explain what you mean when you say, “It seems like all it does is give people the opportunity to get their kids out of a broken system rather than trying to fix the system. If you are right and Title 1 funding continues, there will be no desire to solve any of these problems because the parents with the loudest voices would have found a way to solve their individual kid’s problem by opting them out of the test. Leaving every other child who doesn’t have active parents stuck in a shitty system.”
Why do you think those opting out of the test are placed into some other (better?) system? I’m completely confused by your comments.
Also, what’s going on with opt out is the beginning of a conversation about education. To me, that’s a good thing.
The bill is only “stupid” if you do not value protecting parents from bullying/ridicule/intimidation from districts who are coerced/bullied by the DOE under a made up, never before exercised threat of withholding funds. Add that to the zealots in the schools who are compliance driven instead of whole child driven and you have the recipe for HB 50, a simple, articulate bill designed to codify an existing right yes, but more to warn state bureaucrats to respect that right through force of law since it will not happen otherwise.