Sent to KNS publisher Patrick Birmingham, editor Jack McElroy, editorial page editor Scott Barker, local editior John North, education reporter Lydia McCoy:

Knowing that other Tennessee school districts are now issuing Requests for Proposals (RFPs) from charter school applicants, I have been expecting an action of this sort from Knox County Schools (KCS), too.

It was no surprise to me, then, to note your newspaper’s story on the subject last Saturday.

It was no surprise to me, either, that I once again had numerous objections to the utter and complete lack of curiosity on this compelling topic harbored by your newspaper and demonstrated by your account of this latest development in so-called “education reform” underway in Tennessee and across the nation.

That KNS gave this important story the innocuous headline "District changes charter school application process" foretold the shallow and inadequate report that was to follow.

The KNS article failed to define for readers what is meant by a "request for proposal (RFP) process," i.e., that it is an active solicitation on the part of KCS, in this case for charter school applicants.

As to soliciting applications for new charter schools, the KNS article failed to report who serves on this Charter School Review Committee, how they came to serve there, how and/or when the composition of the Committee might be altered in the future, or by what impetus the Committee might be altered.

The KNS article failed to report that the RFP solicits proposals to convert existing schools to charters, too (pdf page 4 in the RFP).

As to soliciting applications to convert our existing schools into charters, the KNS article also failed to report that the RFP allows the Director of Schools to make decisions on such conversion applications independent of the school board (also pdf page 4, same).

The KNS article also failed to report that the just approved written policy guiding the formation of charter schools applies only to “newly created” charter schools, not to such conversion applications. Neither did the KNS article link that limited written policy.

The KNS article failed to report any details whatsoever as to how, in the absence of any written policy, the Director of Schools might go about exercising all by his lonesome this new power to convert our existing schools to charters.

This KNS article also passed on an excellent opportunity to spell out for readers which for-profit Education Management Organizations (EMOs) already deliver services to existing Tennessee charter schools, as is allowable under state law.

Jack et al, I am someone who has always declined to seek news from our broadcast media, primarily because of their propensity to reduce complicated issues into three-sentences-and-a-sound-bite and leave me scrambling to find the answers to other of my questions on the Internet.

In the past, I have therefore relied heavily on the Knoxville News-Sentinel to give me a more complete understanding of complicated issues, and to offer me convenient links to the source documents on which your reports rely.

On the compelling issue of so-called “education reform” efforts underway regionally and nationally, though—so rife with opportunity for private profiteering--you folks flat aren’t giving me the information I need.

And the only reason I know you’re not is because I seem to already have more information than you do.

Unless you’re just sitting on information?

So I have to ask you straight out: Is the KNS reporting I’m reading on this topic inept or is it insidious?

Tamara Shepherd
(Home address and phone)

No, she couldn't be the staff education reporter because she has an agenda. You can't do that in straight news.

You and I have a disagreement reguarding the KNS coverage of the county mayor, as we have discussed else where. And you aren't able to see that objectively because of your friendship with him.

What's my agenda, Pam?

You have a stated opinion on charter schools, which is fine. But you couldn't have that opinion and be a straight news reporter. You also have stated opinions against McIntyre and against the state Education Secretary. Again, as a citizen that's fine. But as a newspaper reporter, it wouldn't be acceptable. The folks who report the news should be neutral on all things.

I was only responding to the suggestion that you should be the staff reporter coverinflated education and why that wouldn't be a good idea.

In my opinion, it should include Jamie and every other reporter on staff at KNS.

Professionals who have lobbied for a cause would be in appropriate to suddenly be reporting on that same issue. Yes, reporters have opinions, but they don't share them publicly. It's inappropriate. And if they feel restricted by that then they need to change jobs.

It's very freeing for me to be writing opinions instead of straight news. And I can name some reporters who perhaps should consider doing the same. I think the smartest thing Donilla ever did was stop his blog because he was writing opinion while also writing news. It's a dangerous mix.

I'm shut up now. I didn't mean to get on a soap box. It is something that I feel strongly about. And that I have had several private conversations about with Jack McElroy.

Right now it's my afternoon to volunteer at the church. Later.

I asked: "What's my agenda, Pam?"

Pam responded: "You have a stated opinion on charter schools..."

That is not my agenda. My agenda is that the conversation in which the subject of charter schools has arisen assumes--erroneously and in contradiction to the facts--that a situation of "failing schools" necessitates charter schools.

Again, it is this erroneous assumption that our public schools are "failing" that is my agenda.

International test data confirm unequivocally that our public schools are the best in the world for the vast majority of our students. The BEST in the world.

The only population for which our public schools are not the best in the world is that population existing within public schools that serve an inordinate percentage of children living in poverty.

Q: If our public schools are serving the vast majority of our students in such a way that these students generate the highest international test scores in the world, should we then dismantle that public school system, OR should we address this root problem in America of our having an inordinate number of children living in poverty?

A: ???

Pam, anyone citing a need for "school improvement" or "education reform" has failed to understand where our problem lies.

It appears that many people on our local board of education, in our state department of education, or in our federal department of education fail to understand where our problem lies.

It is alarming that so many of them are being hoodwinked by parties intent not on addressing our problem, but on exacerbating it.

The U. S. Chamber of Commerce is no friend of public education.

McIntyre, the Chamber and the KNS have advocated a idealogical position.

Ms. Shepherd has presented facts and data contrary to that position, which may appear to some as advocacy because it puts her on an opposing "side".

Still, one is just dealing with an idea, while the other is dealing in fact supported by data.

Exactly, SnM. The editorial board does its thing and the news room does its thing.

I worked for newspapers that had very strong editorial boards, but they never interferred with what I did in my daily reporting. There's an invisible wall between the editorial page and the news room that newspaper people understand, and that the rest of the world would be much calmer if they would finally just accept.

Um, Pam?

In my first post on this thread, I didn't take exception to an editorial, I took exception to a matter of "daily reporting."

I didn't voice in any way my personal opinions on charter schools, McIntyre, or the U. S. Department of Education.

I did voice--and pretty specifically--my objection to multiple points of information missing from this particular "daily reporting."

I implied that these errors of omission leave the reader unable to fully understand either the action to have transpired in this meeting or the implications resulting from that action, either one.

In the "who, what, where, why" every matter of "daily reporting" should touch upon, let's then start here:

Why did the school board opt to issue this request for proposals?

The explanation tendered in the article is that they did so in order to "articulate specifically what the school board is looking for in its charter schools."

However, given that KCS doesn't have any charter schools and its board has never before indicated its any interest in having any charter schools, a reasonably inquisitive reporter might therefore ask "gee, why did you elect to begin looking for charter schools?"

I don't see that the reporter asked this question or that the interviewee volunteered any answer to it, either.

Do you see in the article any explanation for why KCS is now looking for charter schools?

I'll bet you a dollar that article came from a press release.

I'd ask Melissa Copelan, if shd'd return my call...

Meanwhile, I don't know where it came from, but I have spoken at length with a school board member of whom I asked this same question--why did you vote to issue this RFP?

The SB member replied that McIntyre advised them an RFP was necessary because his staff sometimes lost time reviewing applications from applicants proposing charter schools that don't satisfy the system's needs and/or goals.

I asked why the SB couldn't just outline their criteria on their site, and maybe require of applicants at the front end this letter of intent that would confirm applicants' understanding of the criteria? Wouldn't this approach also offer McIntyre's staff an early "heads up" of any off-track proposals, and wouldn't this approach also save his staff time?

The SB member replied "well, I guess so, but no SB member suggested that."

So now the SB is to entertain reams of charter school applications it presumably didn't care to entertain???

Sounds like KNS isn't the only party failing to ask many questions...

I also asked this SB member a question I've had for forever, namely whether either our RttT app or our more recent NCLB waiver either one requires KCS in particular to open a charter school.

The SB member said "no," neither contract specifically requires that of KCS.

Good. Let's leave the other three urban schools systems in TN to reap what they've sown.

Since Scott's now sittin' here in the room with us, I should concede to you folks that he responded to my above e-mail and did, in fact, offer a correction on one point I made, here:

I said in the e-mail: "...the KNS article also failed to report that the RFP allows the Director of Schools to make decisions on such conversion applications independent of the school board."

Scott pointed out, and I believe he's correct, that the operative word in that RFP was that the Director of Schools could initiate the conversion of an existing school into a charter school. Such a process would still culminate (or not) with approval of the school board.

However, Scott, I'll defend and repeat my protest that the KNS article did not reference in any manner how the conversion of an existing school might be initiated or culminated, either one (else I might not have erred in my attempt to find an answer to that question within the text of the RFP), the article did not reference that the RFP is nevertheless soliciting such proposals, and the article did not advise that the newly revised policy on charter schools fails to instruct in the question, either.

In fact, the SB member I spoke with at length today was quite surprised to realize that this new charter school policy fails to instruct in the matter of converting any existing school to a charter.

The SB member explained that the policy used to instruct in this regard, but doesn't any longer.

What are we to make of this, I wonder???

I'm not real clear on who's talking to whom here, but...

AG, my comment about the "help" afforded schools when we shrink available housing for the poor was sarcastic, I hope you understood?

Pam, if you're asking me (?) whether I suspect someone's "influence" on KNS reporting on education issues, I'd say "not exactly."

What I sense is more aptly characterized as "acquiesence" on the the part of some KNS staffers themselves. They sometimes lack the background or context in which to understand what they're witnessing, they don't know or don't care to dig it up, and their end product reveals that.

For every objection of this sort you hear me raise on the subject of the so-called "education reform" effort, I assure you I squelch another two or three only because I grow tired. I read through posts at KNS--and sometimes even here--and just lack the stamina to jump in with my "endless citations."

Reading over my good friend Scott's posts here tonight, I could quite easily have offered him another half dozen links to dispute some of his comments, but it's 1:30 a.m., eh?

Sigh. Glad I'm outta town for a couple of days. Later.

WHY does Knox County need charter schools if all of the INDEPENDENT research reveals they produce poor outcomes and are terrible models for replication?
Here are the facts that are not in dispute about charters (i.e, there are not 2 "sides"):
1.they increase economic and racial segregation,
2.they are exempt from IDEA regs that guarantee protections to kiddos with special needs,
3.they expel lower performing students at an exceptionally high rate,
4.mask their high attrition rates behind graduation statistics,
5.their teaching methods and curriculum are questionable and can be abusive,
6.teacher churn is higher than in public schools, resulting in,
7 higher numbers of untrained, inexperienced people working with our most vulnerable kids
8.test scores, even with a self-selected population,are no better and often times WORSE than public schools, and
9.are unaccountable to parents and public scrutiny in spite of their "choice" rhetoric,
10.public schools stay in a constant state of disruption when they must enroll children expelled by charters, resulting in
11.higher classroom sizes in receiving schools whose staff has no time to prepare for children expelled from charters

Tax money going to corporate charters comes straight out of our minimal public school money and is funneled to third parties. It's a zero sum gain for Knoxville Public Schools.

Bruce Baker at Rutgers has done some excellent analyses of charters in NJ and their performance across several dimensions. His work, and many other experts in education, is replicated yet ignored by policy makers and the media. Most of the public info on charters is disseminated by think tanks and private philanthropies advancing agendas. They purposely bypass peer review and write for inexperienced reporters and lawmakers. (TEAM/TAP anyone?)

(link...)

On average, this statewide picture is actually pretty ugly. It would certainly be very hard to argue that charter school expansion across New Jersey has led to any substantive overall improvement of educational opportunities. Numerous charter schools are substantial underperformers. And overall, as the regression model indicates, the net performance is bread even.

Advancing charter schools is a betrayal of public trust. Our lawmakers, the school board, and anyone promoting charters as a solution for improving educational outcomes are either in denial, delusional, or dishonest.
(link...)

Will McIntyre and the School Board be held accountable for wasting our public school dollars on charters?

"The board concluded that they could not move forward based on the current political climate and legislative policies,"

"the group said it is looking into the possibilities of establishing a private Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)-focused academy in Blount County, [an independent, non-profit school that will be open to all, including economically disadvantaged students]"

I guess Blount County is a tough audience.