Feeds:
Posts
Comments

“In mid-December I sent you a report documenting the gross inflation of the high school performance scores. The department covered up the inflation by intentionally mislabeling an important column of data in the initial public release of the scores.”

—Grayson teacher Herb Bassett, testifying before the Senate Education Committee on Wednesday that his research of Department of Education (DOE) data “revealed deceit, distortion, manipulation of scores and data suppression.”

“I haven’t heard anything about that but I will certainly look into it.”

—Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) President Chas Roemer, when called to the witness table by the committee to answer questions about Bassett’s charges.

The vote was a foregone conclusion; the minds were made up long before the Senate Education Committee members cast their votes to kill SB 41 by Sen. Bob Kostelka (R-Monroe).

The vote that killed the bill was anti-climactic at best. The testimony of a band director and self-proclaimed “highly qualified” math teacher, however, provided the bombshell that Superintendent John White and the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) would rather you not know.

His testimony evoked memories of Michelle Rhee’s tumultuous reign in Washington, D.C. and of more recent events in Atlanta.

It was purely academic that only two of the eight committee members would vote in favor of sending the bill to make the Louisiana Superintendent of Education position elective again after nearly two decades of having an appointive superintendent.

And one of those two votes in favor—that of Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe) was purely for show because (a) he knew the result well in advance, so his vote would not affect the outcome and (b) about 75 percent of those attending the committee meeting were from Ouachita Parish—and they all supported the bill. Walsworth, if nothing else, is at least capable of reading a room.

Walsworth, you may remember, was the senator who last year made a complete ass of himself during a committee hearing on science vs. creationism. A teacher was testifying about how her science students were growing cultures in her classroom when Walsworth asked the stupefyingly inane question of whether the cultures could produce humans.

This is your senator, Ouachita Parish. Be proud.

But enough of Walworth’s political pandering and asinine questions; Herb Bassett of nearby Grayson was the real story because his testimony placed charges on the table that heretofore have only been whispered about in the halls of the Claiborne Building.

Where others within the Department of Education (DOE) have alluded privately to data suppression and manipulation of school performance scores that artificially inflated graduation rates, Bassett, a band director who said he was “highly qualified” to teach math, publicly charged White, BESE and DOE of misrepresenting test scores and then covering up the lie by removing the data from the Louisiana Believes website. “This is data suppression,” Bassett said.

He said he was asked by his principal last October to look into his school’s score so that it could be improved in the future. “My subsequent research revealed deceit, distortion, manipulation of scores and data suppression,” he said.

“In mid-December, I sent you a report documenting the gross inflation of the high school performance scores. The Department covered up the inflation by intentionally mislabeling an important column of data in the initial public release of the scores.”

Bassett clarified that statement later, saying he sent his findings to all 144 state legislators and every school district superintendent and that he received an acknowledgement from the legislative assistant to Sen. Conrad Appel (R-Metairie), chairman of the committee, that Appel had received his report.

“The data, the Transition Baselines, showed that the GEE (Graduation Exit Exam)—which was being phased out—and the new EOC (End of Course) tests were mis-calibrated by 7.5 points. That’s half a letter grade,” Bassett said. “Had it been correctly labeled, the inflation would have been obvious—at least to me.”

Meanwhile, he said, BESE was given a different version of the scores with the Transition Baselines correctly labeled. “This shows intent to deceive,” he said.

LouisianaVoice has received information from several sources inside DOE that corroborate Bassett’s claim but because of DOE’s refusal to provide requested records, little has been written about the claimed deception.

He later provided LouisianaVoice with a copy of the report that he sent to legislators and local school superintendents. We will be expanding on that report in subsequent posts.

Bassett further cited what he claimed was manipulation of scores.

“At Mr. White’s first BESE meeting as State Superintendent, the department recommended a graduation index formula change. The change ensured that scores would only go up or stay the same. This raised the average score another four points.

“Thanks to the Transition Baselines, the switching to the EOC did not affect the growth scores but this (the graduation index formula change) did. There are at least 20 schools that would not have earned top gains status without it. That’s over $160,000 in those big checks passed out in PR campaigns,” he said in reference to recent teacher bonuses passed out by DOE as performance awards.

“And the graduation rate data set that I used to compute this has been removed from the Louisiana Believes website (the DOE website). That is data suppression.”

Bassett said he made a five-minute video explaining the problems with the 2011 and 2012 DOE reports on the Value Added Model (VAM), also known as COMPASS, the department’s teacher evaluation program. He said the problems he found “clearly contradict DOE’s current claim that VAM is stable. “This inconvenient data have been suppressed,” he said.

He said LEAP and iLEAP data files that contain the actual numbers of students at each achievement level have been removed. “Only percentage data are given,” he said. “Meanwhile, the new School Assessment System will award bonus points based on the number or percent—whichever is greater—of non-proficient students who surpass their VAM targets. This biased system more generously awards points to schools with over 100 non-proficient students. Without the (actual) numbers, we will not know which schools disproportionately benefit from it.

“Most of the data I used are gone from the new website,” he said.

He said that White is asking “that we believe that VAM has miraculously become stable since the reports by its creators have disappeared.”

Though Bassett did not elaborate on the latter point, LouisianaVoice also has received information that the creators of VAM later became concerned at the direction the program was taking and sent several emails expressing that apprehension to superiors who ignored the messages.

BESE president Chas Roemer (R-Baton Rouge) was called to the witness table and asked about Bassett’s charges. Roemer said he had heard nothing about Bassett’s claims, but that he would “look into it.”

It would difficult to imagine that the president of BESE would know nothing of claims of manipulation of data by White and DOE in light of cheating scandals in Atlanta and Washington, D.C. In Atlanta, former superintendent Beverly Hall and several public school staff members were recently indicted in an alleged scheme to cheat on Georgia state tests, including the erasure of students’ incorrect answers and replacing them with correct answers.

A similar scandal brought down the administration of former Washington, D.C. superintendent Michelle Rhee, once the national poster child of school reform.

With the negative publicity those two cheating scandals have received, one would think that the president of a state education board would be aware of any hint of a similar event on his watch.

Roemer was asked to look into Bassett’s allegations and to report back to the committee.

If anyone reading this cares to wager that Roemer will ever report back to the committee members, that the committee will ever follow up on Bassett’s embarrassing charges, or that White or BESE will ever take corrective measures, we know several skeptics who will cover the bet—and give you odds.

“We rely on you as legislators to serve our public interests.”

—Brad Ott, Director of Advocates for Louisiana Public Health Care, testifying before the House and Governmental Affairs Committee on Tuesday in favor of the passage of HB 19 by Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) and Sen. Rick Gallot (D-Ruston) which would have removed the deliberative process exemption from the governor’s office, thus giving greater access to public records.

“Deliberative process did not exist before 2009. It has become somewhat of a virus now. We see state agencies marking emails in the subject line as confidential and exempt from public records disclosure due to deliberative process. This is a problem.”

—Robert Travis Scott, President of the Public Affairs Research Council (PAR), speaking in favor of HB 19. The committee killed the bill by a 6-3 vote, a move that will likely encourage even more deliberative process claims by other agencies, thus choking off the public’s access to public records.

“This governor, in an effort at transparency, passed the first real change (in the public records law) in 2009. The deliberative process protects communications between the governor and his staff so that there can be an unfettered, all ideas welcome process.”

—Thomas Enright, executive counsel to Gov. Bobby Jindal, doing what he is paid very well to do: defend his boss.

“The executive counsel’s explanation falls pretty much flat.”

—Sen. Rick Gallot, in response to Enright.

This is going to rankle some folks in the Legislature, but the fact is there are at least six cowards on the House and Governmental Affairs Committee.

That’s how many members of the committee voted against HB 19 by Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) and Sen. Rick Gallot (D-Ruston) on Tuesday.

HB 19 would have removed the deliberative process exemptions from the governor’s office, in effect, ending abuses of the public records privilege that has been extended throughout the executive branch of government and LSU when the original law passed in 2009 specifically limited the privilege to the governor.

But six members of the committee hearing testimony that was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill, had feet of clay and did not have the backbone to stand up to a lame duck governor who long ago stopped caring about this state.

The three who voted to send the governor a message included Reps. John Berthelot (R-Gonzales), Jared Brossett (D-New Orleans) and John Schroder (R-Covington).

The six who should bear the stigma of being forced to wear the yellow letter “Y” (with apologies to Nathaniel Hawthorne) emblazoned across the front of their freshly starched shirts are:

• Committee Chair Timothy Burns (R-Mandeville);

• Vice Chair Michael Danahay (D-Sulphur);

• Taylor Barras (R-New Iberia);

• Girod Jackson, III (D-LaPlace);

• Gregory Miller (R-Norco);

• Stephen Pugh (R-Ponchatoula).

Why should we be so upset with the Sorry Six? The Gutless Gang? Because they have just made it even more difficult than ever to obtain public records from state agencies, in effect giving them carte blanche to operate in secrecy as never before. If you thought it difficult to get routine public records in the past, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

One witness testified before the committee that she could not readily obtain something as routine as a copy of state contracts without receiving notification from the Division of Administration (DOA) that a “search” was being conducted for the documents (despite the fact that she requested the contracts by contract number) and that once located they would be reviewed for “privileged and confidential information”—something that does not exist with public contracts; they’re public documents, pure and simple.

Thomas Enright, Gov. Bobby Jindal’s executive counsel, offered a lame apology for the difficult in obtaining copies of contracts. “I made a note of this,” he said. “There is no reason you should have problems getting a copy of a state contract.”

Really? Wow, what a champion of the people.

But that weak effort at atonement was easily matched by his equally disingenuous attempt at painting his boss as some great emancipator of the public’s right to know. It was easily the most pitiful performance so far this session by a spokesperson for this administration. And that includes Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols’ incredibly naïve utterance that the administration would not tolerate corruption as she was canceling the $184 million CNSI contract with the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH).

As one witness after another cited the administration’s outright contempt for the public’s right—your right—to know what your government is doing with your tax dollars and how those actions might be enriching certain campaign contributors, the committee members went through the motion of pretending to listen and a few even asked perfunctory questions—probably provided them by the governor’s staff, if claims made by at least two other legislators last year are accurate.

But guess what? It didn’t matter. The fix was in from the get-go and HB 19 never had a prayer despite support from the Public Affairs Research Council (PAR), Leaders with Vision, Advocates for Public Health Care, the Baton Rouge Advocate, the Louisiana Press Association, and others.

This is the government you voted for, folks. You send them to Baton Rouge to represent your best interests and they promptly fall in line with the governor’s or some special interest’s agenda, and then legislators and lobbyists adjourn each night to Ruth’s Chris or Sullivan’s steak restaurants. And one way or another, you pick up the tab.

But don’t bother asking for public records on those sojourns. Deliberative process, don’t you know.

News reporters from other states are quick to point out that Louisiana has one of the strongest public records laws in the country. A New York reporter, for example, was surprised to learn that LouisianaVoice was complaining about a month’s delay in obtaining public records from the Department of Education (DOE) and Division of Administration (DOA).

“I have an FOIA (Freedom of Information Act; the equivalent to Louisiana’s R.S. 44:1 et seq., better known as the Public Records Act) request that’s been pending up here for a year,” he said.

While it is encouraging to know we have one of the most liberal public records statutes in the nation, it may be a bit disheartening and frustrating to know that the law is only as strong as its enforcement.

To that end, Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell office has simply punted, the rationale being that should there be litigation, he is bound by the State Constitution to defend whichever state agency is named as a defendant.

But that is certainly not to say that inasmuch as his office is in fact the official counsel for all state agencies, Caldwell could whisper legal advice into an agency head’s ear as to his/her responsibilities under the public records law in an effort to avert a lawsuit by those with inquiring minds.

It could be that he is too busy with his side job as an Elvis impersonator to waste time on such trivial matters as the public’s right to know.

Because of the lack of a real watchdog to hold agencies’ feet to the fire regarding easy access to public records, many requests are simply ignored or denied with the tired catch-all “deliberative process” explanation.

DOA, however, has found a more original if unethical, immoral and fattening method of avoiding the disclosure of certain embarrassing documents: simply make sure the records no longer exist.

State agencies are required under Louisiana Revised Statute 44:411 to develop and submit a records retention schedule (a listing of their agency’s records with the retention requirements to meet their administrative, legal and financial needs) for review and approval by the State Archives. Until a retention schedule has been approved, La. R.S. 44:36 requires agencies to maintain their records for three years from the date the record is made (unless required longer by specific statute). It is important to note that La. R.S. 44:36 does not exempt agencies from developing a records retention schedule required under 44:411.

The above information was obtained from the Secretary of State website:
http://www.sos.la.gov/tabid/489/Default.aspx

RS 44:411: http://www.legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=99732&showback=Y

RS 44:36: http://www.legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=99704&showback=Y

Contrary to these requirements DOA does not currently have a records retention policy. What that means in terms of one particular type of public record, specifically email? Most state departments participate in Statewide Email which is operated and maintained by the Office of Computing Services (OCS). OCS is a subunit of the Office of Information Technology within DOA. The statewide email function is generally outlined at: http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/ocs/email/statewide_email_services.htm.

The OCS site makes reference to centralized archiving to help with records retention, but does not go into the details of how that is or is not utilized. The OCS will configure records retention settings in line with an agency’s policy; if no such policy exists, then OCS’s default is to retain the records for 30 days. Yes, 30 days. Not three years. Thirty days.

Thus, if a person deletes emails, those records can only be potentially obtained from OCS within 30 days of the email’s being received/sent. After that time, there is truly no record retained of those records (emails). This also holds true if an employee leaves the organization. The OCS deletes the entire mailbox when someone leaves. There is no process or policy in place to retain or maintain those emails.

As such, when a request is submitted for public records relating to email(s), it relies almost entirely on the chance that an individual included in the email chain kept those emails and a willingness on the employee’s part to provide those records to the person in the organization who ultimately responds to the request. In a world in which everyone is operating above-board, retains all of their email for at the very least their own purposes, and has no interest in hiding information, the lack of true centralized records retention policies or processes would not be as necessary. These attributes, unfortunately, do not exist in the current administration in general and in DOA in particular.

Moreover, even if individual employees were made aware of the 3-year law, it would be nearly impossible to monitor or enforce at the individual level. It would only be possible to ensure email records are maintained for 3 years if OCS were required to maintain those records.

In light of the all this, is it not remarkably convenient that DOA has never established a records retention policy? How easy would it be to simply delete emails, wait 30 days, and then simply respond with what will then be a simple truth: the records do not exist?

It has to induce some semblance of paranoia and cynicism to know that one can never be confident that everything that once existed still exists to be included in the response.

Of course, any sixth-grade computer whiz kid will tell you that nothing is ever completely erased. Everything you ever pulled up on your computer is filed away somewhere on your hard drive. You didn’t erase the document; you simply moved it to another file.

Another file that is extremely difficult to access, we might add.

Yes, an erased or deleted document can be retrieved, but it’s no walk in the park—and it’s not only complicated, but expensive.

When informed that a document does not exist, there are not many who can challenge that by fronting the cost of an extensive search—even if litigation ultimately awards the person seeking the document court costs and legal fees.

So, in the final analysis, the transparent and accountable administration does hold the cards and can on occasion dictate the terms of the game. But should some determined individual with the financial backing and necessary determination to not take no for an answer and if that individual eventually discovers documents that have been so concealed from public view, that game could change dramatically.

And it would not be pretty for the agency, the agency head or the administration.

We’re just sayin’…