Consumerism

Mail-in Ballot

With the avalanche of propositions and candidates this time around I'm a happy permanent vote-by-mail voter. I take my time with a cup of coffee and do the research.

Most of  the races for office were easy since I followed them for the last few months. Others I had to read up a bit more. Some of the propositions, however, left me stumped and required real work to decide which way I was going to go.

I've made my marks. The ballot is in its envelope and will go into the mail tomorrow. I'm glad I'm done.

An open letter to the Morgan Hill Unified School District Board of Trustees

I rarely take political positions in public, in particular not on this blog, and I do so for good reasons... This one is different, and an issue I deeply care about. Apologies to my regular readers.

On Tuesday evening, the Morgan Hill Unified School District Board of Trustees will vote on whether to extend the charter for the Charter School of Morgan Hill (CSMH) for another 5 years. CSMH has now been operating for almost 15 years. All 3 of our children are -- or were -- students at CSMH and have been happy and successful at the school.

While the relationship between the District and the school has often been a little bit rocky, this time the district staff is going too far by asking the Board of Trustees to extend the charter only with onerous and questionable conditions attached.

I took a close look at the report prepared by District staff outlining their concerns regarding the CSMH charter extension petition. While the report raises some valid issues, none of them rise to a level that would be reason for not extending the charter. Thus I emailed the following letter to all trustees.

Dear MHUSD Board of Trustees,

I have read the staff report on the CSMH charter renewal petition and generally take issue with the underlying tone of the report, which consistently implies that CSMH somehow does a bad job in educating our children.

However, let me address a few specific details that stand out in the staff report.

Since one of the primary factors for granting petitions to charter schools is student achievement, let's look at the data presented on page 8 of the staff report.

The staff report claims that "The highlighted cells demonstrate that in most grade levels MHUSD schools are outperforming CSMH".  The report bases that statement on results in Math testing, a useful, but not necessarily complete evaluation of overall student performance.

Another argument in the staff report is as follows:
"In a number of references throughout the petition, CSMH referred to exceptionally high student achievement based on standardized test scores. These claims have the effect of distorting the public perception of actual student achievement relative to similar students in local public schools due to the demographic exclusivity of student enrollment at CSMH. When the data is broken down by subgroups, it is apparent that the differences in school comparison performance on exams contradict overall student achievement levels in many circumstances."  [highlighting mine]

Since CAASPP scores are the best data available to measure student performance, staff chose to base their argument on disaggregrated CAASPP scores. A sensible choice.

A more detailed look at the table for non-SED Latino students on page 8 reveals that out of the 8 schools listed CSMH ranks as follows:

   3rd grade: 2nd @ 2453 (spread: 2383 - 2491)

   4th grade: 3rd @ 2496 (spread: 2449 - 2508)

   5th grade: 1st @ 2529 (spread: 2437 - 2529)

   6th grade: 2nd @ 2546 (spread: 2442 - 2559)

I.e. non-SED Latino CSMH students are outperforming their peers in most MHSUD schools. Nice.

So the "demographic exclusivity" CSMH apparently serves badly must be in the white population, since that's the other table presented in the report! 

Let's take a look how CSMH ranks among Morgan Hill schools for non-SED Whites in Math:

   3rd grade: 5th of 6 @ 2472 (spread: 2463 - 2500)

   4th grade: 1st of 7 @ 2531 (spread: 2464 - 2531)

   5th grade: 5th of 7 @ 2520 (spread: 2477 - 2557)

   6th grade: 1st of 8 @ 2586 (spread: 2489 - 2586)

   7th grade: 2nd of 4 @ 2617 (spread: 2586 - 2630)

   8th grade: 1st of 4 @ 2614 (spread: 2594 - 2614)

So, with exception of 3rd and 5th grade results, even for non-SED Whites CSMH Math scores compare very well to schools in MHUSD. I find it more believable to treat the latest 3rd and 5th grade results as a fluke than a consistent pattern of bad performance.

In light of above data the quote in the staff report should actually read:
"The highlighted cells demonstrate that in most grade levels some MHUSD schools are outperforming CSMH."

Phrased another way:
CSMH outperforms Nordstrom and Britton in most grade levels.

Nordstrom and Britton are both excellent schools within MHUSD and I wouldn't be surprised if they have similar demographics as CSMH.


Unsurprisingly as a high performing school, CSMH has a wait-list (to my knowledge at every grade level). Thus, the school can address any demographic imbalances primarily through new students in K, as well as to a lower degree when existing students leave the school.

The staff report claims CSMH lottery information is misleading with regards to school admittance.

In particular, on page 15 the staff report claims "In addition to the preference above, CSMH employees and siblings of CSMH current students have been admitted early and therefore exempted from public random drawing since the opening of the school.[...]
Each year, about 50% of the available kindergarten seats are filled with students exempt from public drawing, leaving about 50% of the spaces available and open for students who reside in the district, students who qualify for free or reduced price meals, and any other applicants. The admission process could be misleading to families who believe that their application will be considered based on a lottery."

An unsuspecting reader of the staff report might get the impression, that 50% of the spots are given to students that have not gone through the lottery.

In fact, many of those early admission students have gone through the lottery in previous years and were added to the wait list, as is clearly laid out on the CSMH web site (http://csmh.org/enrollment/faq.html):

"Q: What are the Charter School of Morgan Hill Admission Lottery Preference Categories? Enrollment preferences shall be given in the following order:

1. Children of Launch Team members residing in the District, and children of Charter School staff working 50% or more who also reside in the District.
2. Siblings of existing Charter School students
3. Children of CSMH staff working less than 50% residing in the District
4. All other residents of Morgan Hill Unified School District

[...]"

and

"Q: If I am a prior year applicant who is still on the waitlist what is the status of my application for next year?
A: Your status needs to be updated. You will need to re-apply by submitting another complete application. The good news is that as a prior year wait-list individual you will not go through the lottery again, you will get carried over on the list in your order. Please note Kindergarten applicants are not eligible for prior year's waitlist carryover, even if they applied the prior year. "

As a side-note, we have gone through this exact process 9 years ago when our daughter was admitted to CSMH in 4th grade. The process as outlined above has been in place for many years.

The staff report notes a special section on the CSMH budget. In particular "the reliance on donations to balance its operating shortfalls is troublesome".

As everyone working in public education knows it is very hard to do multi-year projections for school funding. The staff report points this out and notes that "the [CSMH] organization has fifteen years of successful operations including recent experience during a period of unprecedented reductions in State funding for education. CSMH has a strong finance team who have demonstrated credibility in managing the organization's finances."  and "the apparent deficit is the result of expenditures included in the operating budget which would only be incurred if funding is available from the Foundation".

As clearly noted in the staff report, CSMH does not use funding from the Foundation for ongoing operational expenses, but rather for major capital expenses, field trips, class room supplies, etc.

The staff report also clearly notes that detailed budget information was not included in the petition. Instead Staff relied on other sources of financial data to go on a fishing expedition to find *anything*. ... and then goes on to tie future budget projections to a doubtful note "that reducing expenses would likely affect the ability of CSMH to support the education program described in the petition".

I very much appreciate sound skepticism when looking at financial numbers, but the tone in the "Supplement Information: Budget" section goes way beyond skepticism and borders on paranoid.

With that said, the financial viability of a charter school, while important, is not part of the five facts to support a charter petition.

In summary:

Yes, CSMH can and should continue to increase their outreach to under-represented demographics, as well as address certain short-comings around EL teacher certification.

However, these are not grounds for placing onerous conditions on a charter renewal petition.

CSMH continues to excel at educating students that go on to be successful in MHUSD high-schools. This is by far the most important aspect of a successful charter school.

CSMH has a fair admittance lottery system.

CSMH has demonstrated financial stability even with extreme state funding reductions.

Therefore, I urge you to unconditionally approve the CSMH charter renewal petition.

Thank you for your consideration.

Update 2015/09/29:

At the board meeting tonight the charter extension was approved with no conditions, and the whole board voting in favor of a revised resolution that had several unlawful recommendations in the original resolution dropped, and others brought to reasonable levels. Both CSMH and the district pledged to work together on a memorandum of understanding structuring closer collaboration.

Hillary Clinton

I don't go to many talks, but I figured this one would be interesting. You can feel about Hillary Clinton any way you want, this morning she presented a quite nuanced, honest, and balanced view of what's going on in the world. I didn't get one of the prime seating spots, but was happy to see it live. Well worth watching the video linked below if you have an hour to spare.

"Des koennen sie alles senden was ich gesagt hab"

Ich mag den Seehofer ja nicht so unbedingt, aber das hier ist klasse:

As much as I don't like paying taxes ...

"We as citizens don’t take enough personal responsibility for doing our part to pay for the basic services our government provides, and that we use every day."

From The Infrastructurist, click to read their commentary on gas taxes.

Couldn't have said this better.

Kindergarten

The debt-limit "discussion" in Washington makes me sad.

This non-stop posturing for political gain on both sides (but particularly the Republicans) is so lame ... even Kindergarteners have a better sense for when to stop being silly.

Ridiculous

A recent article in the California HSR Blog talks about the security implications of potential terrorist attacks on high-speed rail infrastructure.

Of course, as one response TSA-style passenger screenings (also known as "security theater") are being floated by the folks that own that hammer.
Robert Cruickshank's discussion of the topic in the blog entry is worth reading, as he presents a very level-headed and fact-based response to such suggestions.

My take on this is, that rail systems by their nature are very large, and the tracks are easily accessible. For the determined, it's trivial and quite a bit more effective to attack trains without being inside, so to me the idea to increase train security by screening the passengers is simply ridiculous.

Maybe that's because, like Robert suggests, because I'm used to european trains as an effective, well integrated transportation mode. Contrary to Robert I don't think Europeans are "taking their chances" using public transit. Instead the mode of transportation is a choice that everyone makes when they leave the relative safety of their house. Every year a lot more people die from car accidents than terrorist attacks...

American Politics is just frustrating

The California High Speed Rail blog has an interesting article commenting on a Michael Byrne article basically arguing that major infrastructure improvements -- actually any major public works project -- that can't be completed while one federal administration is in power, is doomed to failure. That is due to partisan politicking and fundamentally different opinions on how tax payer money should be spent, as policies and priorities can change substantially from one administration to the next.

Both articles look at this through the eyes of infrastructure advocates. However, the same pattern is pervasive throughout all levels of government, federal, state, and even local.
In the end I strongly feel that the existing two-party and winner-take-all system is to blame for this, because it leads to a mentality of not wanting, nor needing to compromise. Even the media (TV, newspapers, Web sites) can be fairly easily classified into "right-wing" and "left-wing", catering to their respective constituencies for entertainment, and ad-dollars.

Balanced opinions and thoughtful commentary are hard to find in this climate of pervasive hyperbole. This just makes me sad.

On the positive side I do like the no-nonsense approach Governor Jerry Brown is taking in California. Granted, he has nothing to prove on the political front anymore, which is why he can comfortably play this role, and even propose raising taxes without committing political suicide. I'm very curious how this will play out over the next few months.

Hillary Clinton

So, I just attended an event with Hillary Clinton. Interesting. When I walked over to the building, the motorcade was already parked outside. Police, large SUVs, quiet men in black jackets, just like in the movies. When I got inside it was *packed*. I actually got lucky and managed to get in before they closed the the doors due to overcrowding. The announcement of one of the VC technicians to keep the aisles clear and there is overflow room in one of the adjoining tech talk areas didn't convince many people to leave. We just squeezed togehther a bit more...
There were easily over a thousand people in the room.

I didn't expect Clinton to have the views she presented today on the environment and energy. As with so many polititians she's extremely convincing when in the same room and on stage. She doesn't sound fake, rather genuinely interested in making things happen.

Changing the energy policy to promote clean, green technologies, pulling all levels of government together, from federal to state down to the local level to move in the same direction: 10 years from now, she wants the country be well on the way to energy independence from fossil fuels without wrecking the economy along the way. Interestingly, she used California as the prime example what to do. While the per-capita use of energy has increased by 50% in other parts of the US, it has stayed flat in California. She attributes that to California's insistence on sticking with their state-wide incentive programs and pollution limits when the Reagan administration was dismantling whatever such programs existed on the federal level in the early 80's.

She told a nice story about how she vividly remembers after the Russians shot Sputnik into space, all Americans pulled together to create something amazing, the space program, which grew into DARPA, one of the sponsors of the Internet. Her teacher told the students, "kids the president wants you to study math and sience". She believed at the time Eisenhower actually called her teacher to tell them that. Kinda cute story. She used that as a starting point to talk about how she wants Americans to pull together and rid America from its dependence on fossil fuels, move to clean, green energy, bio-fuels, and fight global warming. She's crossing her fingers for Al Gore that he wins the Oscar for "An Inconvenient Truth". This was a great section of the talk. She came accross very strong and believable.


When asked about the mess in Iraq, she called it "the height of irresponsibility" that President Bush might leave the Iraq war to his successor to sort out. "This is his war. He needs to clean it up. But if he continues to go the way he's going, I don't expect him to." She strongly advocates pulling troops out of the sectarian civil war that is now engulfing the country, and setting up a regional conference involving all neighbors, including Syria and Iran, to make sure they do their part to stabilize the country. She has a very active role in the senate to reign in Bush's war and "force him to do the right thing. To at least send in troops with all the supplies and material they need to be able to fight this war".
One interesting remark was about how silly it is not to talk to your enemies. Throughout the cold war, both republican and democratic presidents talked to the Russians, to learn, to get intelligence and to understand. "you don't make peace with your friends, you don't have to. In order to make peace you have to talk to the people with different views, with ideas that are the exact opposite of yours."

By the way, it will be interesting to see how she's going to pull people to her side who claim she is unelectable next year. She went through pains to paint herself as an inclusive person, that brings people together, using her home state New York (with a blue New York city, and a very red upstate New York) as example. I'd be curious to know how much of the 68% of New Yorkers that reelecred her last year, actually live in upstate New York.

Clinton made several remarks about universal health-care and how electronic record keeping can lower the costs substantially. I'm a little ambivalent about this, seeing how easy it is to abuse that kind of data and how often backup tapes get lost, laptops stolen, and knowing how many providers and companies allow confidential employee or patient data to travel around on standard laptops in the open. Extending electronic record keeping to local doctors who definitely don't have the resources locally to do a job right, that even banks screw up occasionally, makes me shiver. Her presentation on this topic was a bit ... thin.
The general idea of moving away from the company sponsored health plan system, towards something that many european countries have already developed, sounds like a good idea to me, though.

Finally, she was talking about how important education is. How education starts with the parents. In the family. Then extends out to schools. I'm a big believer in getting parents involved in school. If you know what's going on and are aware, it's much easier to help your children to be successful. Clinton's specific ideas on this topic (while it appears close to her heart) didn't excite me, though. "Make school hours more flexible, because they are inconvenient for working parents. Give kids online access to advanced courses, potentially not offered at their school."
Eh, I don't know, call me old-fashioned, but I think bringing excellent teachers into schools, recognize what they do every day, and paying them a decent salary would go a long way, along with giving them the tools and means to be the most effective. This won't happen overnight even in the most favorable environments, but you have to start somewhere.

Overall, a high-profile politician with charisma, and some decent ideas. Seeing Barack Obama next would be great. Maybe they pull this off some time this year.

Joschka Fischer

I went to a talk by Joschka Fischer today. I was really curious about seeing the man that took the oath for German foreign minister in jeans and sneakers. As you can see these days he dresses a little bit more conservative. He had nice words for the audience, "you remind me more of university, than a successful tech company."

Either way, it was very interesting. He gave a quick introduction on his history in the German government, his positions on a variety of issues ranging from a nuclear Iran, the Iraq war, the rise of China and India, over global warming to renewable energies. He cautioned, "I'm not an expert on Internet technologies, but I am for foreign relations and issues affecting the environment." Then he opened it up for questions. A lot of issues were covered in detail, particularly the nuclear program in Iran, Fischer's fear of an arms race in the Middle East and the impact on the region, if Iran were to acquire the bomb. Scary stuff. He disagreed several times on various subjects with the policies set in Washington, DC, and had very harsh words about the Iraq war, "bad idea, poorly planned, bad execution". He outright dismissed claims by the Iranian government that their nuclear program is for civilian use, "Why do they need a closed fuel cycle? Why highly enriched Uranium? The Iranian program looks very similar to the existing Indian and Pakistani programs." Airstrikes on iranian nuclear facilities "with very high likelyhood are not going to be sufficient to destroy the program". And then there is Israel, and the rethoric of the Iranian government. Fischer managed to explain these issues concisely in terms and ways that were easy to follow and even though I'm following the news from the region, it was nice to have all the issues presented together and how they interact.

On renewable energies he considered a program started by the SPD/Greens government an economic success, "Germany is a leader in the field of solar technologies now, as well as wind energy". He talked about how all humans have the same right to fulfill their dreams as everyone in the industrialized nations.

"The developed world can't tell countries like China or India to cut back when their people are trying to go after their dreams", and then looped it back to renewable energies and cooperative world politic as the only solution for long-term prosperity. "In Europe war was the driver of change. My father went to war, my grand-father did, and his father did. War is terrible, but it's also change. You burry the dead, attend to the wounded, and then rebuild. You know where to spend the money and concentrate your efforts on the build-up. However, with the weapons available in the 21st century and the way the world-economy is interconnected, war is no longer an appropriate way to deal with the problems. "Diplomacy and cooperation between countries is the only way."

Immigration and the expansion of the European Union came up as well, particularly admitting Turkey into the EU. Fisher felt compelled to explain to his american audience (which by rough observation consisted of about 2/3 non-Americans, half of them Germans) what such a move would mean, "imagine Mexico, the Central American countries, as well as Columbia, in talks with the US to join the union. Think about the uproar this would create, what people would say".
Fischer compared immigration policy in the US to the Europe. A fairly open policy as it exists in the US would never work in countries like Germany. He explained that with the difference in attitude towards the poor. "The poor in the US are basically ignored and forgotten. If European countries had such a substantial amount of poor people as the US, they would quickly organize into a group with extremist tendencies (left or right) that could not be ignored by the government". This reminds me of the riots in France a couple months ago. It is already happening there. Probably just a matter of time until it happens in Germany.

Overall, I'm very happy I had the chance to listen to Joschka Fischer and meet him in person. This was not as impressive as seeing Michail Gorbatshev last year (or shaking his hand). However, Fischer was much more intellectually stimulating.

Shortly after the talk, the building began to rumble and shake. I went outside and saw 3 Blackhawk helicopters fly by accompanying this rather big military transport helicopter. Oh yes, President Bush is in town today, Airforce One was parked at Moffet Field, Bush probably was on his way to an invited guests only event somewhere on the Peninsula to dispense his usual nonsense. The contrast couldn't have been stronger.