CONNCAN Spanked By NEA-backed Policy Group

By On June 3, 2012 · 25 Comments

More fallout from this year’s education reform legislation: an independent education policy think tank at the University of Colorado has slapped a “Bunkum Award” on ConnCAN, the business-backed education reform group. The National Education Policy Center, which recieves funding from the National Education Association, cited ConnCAN for ”nonsensical, confusing, and disingenuous education reports … marvels of mult-colored packaging garnished with impressive-looking footnotes, charts and appendices; advocacy pieces cloaked in research panoply.”

The “If Bernie Madoff Worked in School Finance Award” went to ConnCan, which supports more funding for charter schools, for a report it wrote advocating controversial “money follows the child” proposals. Under money-follows-the-child, school funding would be distributed, in part, based on where children choose to attend school. Here’s what the policy center said:

This report from a Connecticut-based education advocacy group aims to Fix Our Broken School Funding System with a reverse Robin Hood take-from-the-poor approach nicely wrapped in a pious package of verbiage designed to hide its true effects. In truth, few areas of school policy are as ripe for legitimate critique as the way states allocate funds to schools. A disconcerting level of arbitrariness and inadequacy often marks these funding formulas. Yet this report doesn’t make use of well-established research conventions (adequacy or equity studies), or for that matter any sensible approach for determining if a formula is in fact broken. Instead, it promotes a “money follows the child” funding system that our reviewer points out would have the effect of making the system even more inequitable by shifting funding away from students learning English and those in poverty.

 

 
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Reddit Facebook Twitter Delicious

25 Responses to CONNCAN Spanked By NEA-backed Policy Group

  1. Richard says:
    June 3, 2012 at 11:33 am

    You picked up on the funding angle. There’s nothing independent about the NEPC. They were established by a group of State Univerity professors who long advocated against all forms of privatization.

    Alex Molnar went from the University of Milwaukee Wisconsin to Arizona State to Colorado University. As near as I can tell from his past research, public institutions never misspend money on education. It only occurs when non-public institutions are involved. At least that’s the lucrative research niche Mr Molnar’s concentrated on for 20 years. Not surprisingly, a new education think tank opposing non-public spending springs up anew at each University Molnar goes to. That’s part of his sales pitch and recruitment. Got a floundering University in need of professor who knows how to create an educational research group and quickly get it funded? Call the Alex’s of the world.

    Of course, I think most non-profits should be outlawed and their donations taxed.

  2. Linda says:
    June 3, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    Rick,

    Do you know who backs/funds/supports ConnCan? Weren’t they started by Achievement First, a charter group management company? Can you insert their affiliates into your post as well? That would only be fair. Not sure if you wanted to comment on the merits of the research. I see you mentioned business backed..however,.do you know specifically who funds them?

  3. Linda says:
    June 3, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    Oops…forgot to mention.you could also include their backers in the headline like you did for NEPC. Leaving that out of the headline, and inserting NEA shows your bias.

  4. JM says:
    June 3, 2012 at 6:42 pm

    I’m with Linda. NEA-backed…, but nothing specific for ConnCan?

    Not even a mention of Patrick Riccards, ConnCan’s CEO. He has his paws on education policy in CT and people need to see the ‘research’ that he has used to sell Dannel his services.

    • Linda says:
      June 3, 2012 at 7:05 pm

      To J: to me “spanked”, as a chosen word by Rick, implies that it is a minor violation or silly finding. Now this is my opinion only, but knowing how Rick is not a supporter of us, the public school teachers, I thought his word choice was interesting or typical.

      I wish once Rick wouldn’t put a negative spin on a piece where it is not necessary and where he is putting down public education again.

      I understand this is an opinion piece, but most of the post is cut and pasted information with his bias in the headline.

      Rick, since Riccards was always available in the past, did you try to get a a quote or an acceptance speech for the award?

  5. R.L. says:
    June 3, 2012 at 9:13 pm

    Rick Green, a Faux “News” affiliate.

  6. Richard says:
    June 4, 2012 at 2:03 am

    Someone needs to feed the Pelto devotees their hashish and take them for some munchies.

  7. JM says:
    June 4, 2012 at 12:05 pm

    Pelto devotees? Don’t people realize that teachers don’t need a leader to follow. We are very capable of making educated decision about what we read and our opinions. Just like the many that assumed that NEA/CEA were feeding us lines.

  8. Terry Cowgill says:
    June 4, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    Wow, why does anyone blog anymore? Put up a post and people immediately accuse you of bias and question your motives for every word choice.

    • Linda says:
      June 4, 2012 at 4:10 pm

      Yeah, I know…words don’t really matter much when you’re writing….such a bother.

  9. sarah Darer Littman says:
    June 4, 2012 at 6:23 pm

    Terry, I do think in this case, the criticism is entirely valid. Rick did make a point of mention the NEA funding connection but disparages any mention of the strong link between ConnCan and Achievement First. http://courantblogs.com/rick-green/pelto-vs-riccards-education-reformers-duel/

  10. Rick Green says:
    June 4, 2012 at 7:22 pm

    Yikes. Spank me! I said ConnCAN was “business backed.” I’m sure you know this includes the Walton Foundation, among others. Investors in ConnCAN are also supporters of Achievement First.

  11. Richard says:
    June 4, 2012 at 10:00 pm

    Remember the AFT’s Sharon Palmer when she opposed war expenditures under a GOP President? Palmer and the Public Sector Unions used to organize and fund those “Impeach Bush”, “Peace”, “Butter not Guns” rallies at Bushnell Park in the 2006-08 glory years of the Democratic Party/Public Unions cluster Frak.

    People marching. Signage everywhere. Pictures of the US war dead exploited.

    The after Obama was elected there was silence. No more concern for the war dead. Or war expenditures. Or protests against new CT weapon contracts to benefit AFL-CIO workers.

    We know the character of people out their representing the teachers and running for office. It’s why we oppose them.

    Read this exploitive crap:

    “More than two hundred and fifty million dollars a day is being diverted into the war in Iraq,” said Palmer. “Money that could have been used to improve public services in Connecticut. Ned Lamont understands this and will stand up to the Bush Administration. That’s why AFT Connecticut is proud to endorse Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate. Ned Lamont will fight to improve education, healthcare and public services for Connecticut’s working families”

    Yeech. Sharon! Really!

    The hypocrisy over the SustiNet and SEBAC negotiations was the definitive test of union leadership character. They were advocates for ‘one policy to cure them all’ before Malloy was elected. Then it turned out the only reason AFSCME head Sal Luciano was on the SustiNet committee was to ensure his union would never be on SustiNet. The old, patented CT Democrat duplicity trick.

    You’ve got to know the character of the union leaders to understand union rank and file and to understand why half the AFSCME left the Union in Wisconsin over the last year. They hate their own leadership and hate paying their dues. Walker freed them from the racketeers and those who would exploit the war dead for political advantage.

    Oh! Here’s a brochure featuring all the exploiters from 2007. Sharon Palmer. Donovan. Bysiewicz. Luciano. The whole disgusting crooked lot in Bushnell Party antiwar rally together.

    http://www.hopeoutloud.org/flyers/March_17th_flyer_v2.pdf

    I say Al Queda is not the problem in CT.

  12. Richard says:
    June 4, 2012 at 10:13 pm

    The loss of $300 million in ‘Race to the Top’ funds to CT.

    That’s squarely on the shoulders of Sharon Palmer and Mary Loftus Levine and their racketeering. That’s not Bush. That’s not Al Queda that’s raping and pillaging and stealing from the CT taxpayers.

    There’s a war coming. And it isn’t Al Queda that exploits the CT war dead for public sector union worker gain or to pick up a couple easy blocks of votes and some campaign financing.

  13. AM says:
    June 5, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    Why so angry Richard? I know you’re a failed teacher and have a grudge…but please seek therapy so you can get over it.

  14. Rick Pink says:
    August 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    ConnCan exposed yet again. Riccards should move back to the Carolinas so he can mess up their education.