Peter Campbell has the scoop:

The Associated Press ran a story on August 12, 2008, citing a report from the Government Accountability Office that revealed that two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005. About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts. And, according to the report, about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes altogether over the same period.

How ironic in the age of No Child Left Behind that the GAO - the Government Accountability Office - would be the one that would point out corporate America's lack of accountability when it came time to paying the bills in this country.

It's clear to me that we have a Corporate Achievement Gap here. What is the Corporate Achievement Gap? The Corporate Achievement Gap is the difference between what taxpayers paid into the general coffers -- for roads and bridges, for schools and fire trucks -- and what 25 percent of U.S. corporations did not put in. This gap is an achievement gap because it underscores the potential for achievement if only these corporations would help fill this gap.

But they are simply not doing their part, not shouldering their load, not paying their dues.

Right now, the US federal government pays for between 7 and 10 percent of the total budget for public preK-12 education. The other 90 to 93 percent is paid for by state and local taxpayers.

Imagine, if you would, what kind of impact there would be if the US federal government doubled its current investment in public education from about 10 percent to 20 percent. Imagine the difference this could make.

In his amazing book Class and Schools, Richard Rothstein wrote:

All told, adding the price of health, early childhood, after-school, and summer programs, (the) down payment on closing the achievement gap would probably increase the annual cost of education, for children who attend schools where at least 40% of the enrolled children have low incomes, by about $12,500 per pupil, over and above the $8,000 already being spent. In total, this means about a $156 billion added annual national cost to provide these programs to low-income children.

These are 2003 - 2004 data, and they're probably not completely accurate. But these numbers at least give you an idea of what it might take to actually close the educational achievement gap. They give you the sense that closing the educational achievement gap might actually be something that could be done.

But before we can close the educational achievement gap, we must first close the Corporate Achievement Gap.

Teachers and schools are being held accountable. It's time to start holding corporations accountable, too. We must demand that they contribute to the health and well-being of the country by paying their fair share.

Thanks, Dr. Kovacs and Educator Roundtable. And ht to Susan Ohanian:

From the Forum for Education and Democracy:

Posted by Gloria Ladson-Billings at 3/18/08 5:30 AM
Tags: Education Policy

(A version of this paper will appear in the Journal of Teacher Education)

Dear Mister/Madam President:

The very fact that this letter begins with addressing either a man or woman in the office of President of the United States is in itself a cause for celebration and a tribute to the historic nature of this year’s presidential contest. For this we all—regardless of political persuasion—should feel more deeply invested in the promise of democracy to include all Americans regardless of race, class, and gender.

My letter to you is linked specifically to the question of public education and what I believe are the more pressing issues facing your administration and the nation at large regarding the future of public education in our society. To address these issues I want to speak specifically to the question of what has been called popularly, the racial achievement gap.

The “Achievement Gap” has been on the lips of almost every politician, education researcher, education leader, and education policy maker in the nation. The provision of the re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, more conventionally known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), that profoundly illuminated this achievement gap was the requirement to disaggregate student test score data based on categories like race, special needs, and English language proficiency. We know that African American and Latino students score substantially lower than their White and (some) Asian American counterparts. According to the National Governors’ Association, the achievement gap is, “a matter of race and class. [And], across the U.S., a gap persists between minority and disadvantaged students and their white counterparts.” It further states, “this is one of the most pressing education-policy challenges that states currently face” (http://www.subnet.nga.org/educlear/achievement/ retrieved electronically 10/27/05). We want to erase this achievement gap. Indeed, that sounds like a noble and good goal.

However, as a new president with presumably a new vision I want to suggest that it is important to begin re-thinking or re-conceptualizing this notion of the achievement gap. Instead of an achievement gap, I believe we have an education debt (Ladson-Billings, 2006). The debt language totally changes the relationship between students and their schooling. For instance, when we think of what we are combating as an achievement gap, we implicitly place the onus for closing that gap on the students, their families, and their individual teachers and schools. But, the notion of education debt requires us to think about how all of us, as members of a democratic society, are implicated in creating these achievement disparities. . . .

Read the rest here.

While merit pay, combat pay, do-gooder pay, and all other symtom treatments fail to solve the teacher retention problem, the dropout problem, or the academic problem, these band-aids also keep teachers from the reason they went into teaching to begin with--to make a difference in the lives of children and to see children grow. These so-called solutions offer more evidence of a persistent, self-imposed blindness that we refuse to give up.

An illustrative clip from an op-ed by Walt Gardner:

Beset by the retirement of veteran teachers and the flight of younger faculty, schools in poor neighborhoods across the country are increasingly turning to combat pay to recruit and retain replacements. But the controversial strategy will not produce the 700,000 teachers they need in the next decade. The bleak outlook has particular relevance for California, where every year 10 percent of teachers in schools serving poor students transfer to other schools. The most recent evidence comes from Dallas, which had only 65 takers for its offer of $6,000 annual bonuses to lure teachers to the city's hard-to-staff schools. Researchers at the University of Texas at Dallas attributed the disappointing results to the amount tendered. They estimated that bonuses would have to equal 45 percent of base pay to attract the number of teachers required. If they are correct, the amount would come to an average of $20,000 for mid-career teachers.

But even that overly optimistic prediction offers only a partial solution because it focuses solely on the recruitment side of the equation. It says nothing about the equally important retention side.

Churn is costly. It forces a school to repeatedly screen new teachers, undermines instructional continuity, and makes students feel abandoned. Massachusetts serves as a case in point. In 1999, the Bay State began offering $20,000 sign-up bonuses to teachers, primarily to lure them to failing schools. After one year, however, one-fifth of these teachers bailed out of the classroom entirely, while many others fled to suburban schools.

Massachusetts's experience does not bode well for Denver. Under a recently implemented strategy known as ProComp, which was funded after voters agreed to pony up an additional $25 million in property taxes, teachers receive bonuses for working in hard-to-staff schools as well as for meeting three other requirements. This likely explains why teacher applications, so far, are up substantially. But it's doubtful that the trend will continue once word travels through the grapevine about the daunting task of educating students with huge deficits in socialization, motivation and intellectual development. . . .

The deployment of standardized tests to guarantee the continuation of privilege by those who have it remains one the great unacknowledged shames of education policymakers throughout the world. And as the poor get poorer and their "achievement" goes with it, the powerful who are responsible for deepening that poverty and widening the learning gaps divert attention from their crimes against humanity by blaming the victims and the educators who lamely try to humanize their incarceration.

From the BBC:

Children from the most deprived areas of England are falling further behind in school compared to more affluent pupils, say the Conservatives.

Shadow Schools Secretary Michael Gove highlighted figures showing a widening of the social gap in achievement.

There is a 43 percentage point gap in the proportions of wealthy and deprived pupils achieving five good GCSEs including English and maths in 2007.

In 2006, this gap in favour of the wealthiest was 28 percentage points.

This social divide in exam results shows "the education system is letting down the poorest," says Mr Gove.

Wealth gap

The figures are based on comparisons of the GCSE results of pupils from the 10% most affluent areas and the 10% most deprived.

The growing lead reflects an accelerating improvement in the results of children from better-off families - with 68% of these pupils now reaching the benchmark of five good GCSEs including English and maths, up from 57% in 2006.

Meanwhile, the results of the least well-off pupils have slipped back - down from 29% to 25% reaching this GCSE benchmark.

The government figures show how the link between home background and achievement stubbornly persists throughout children's years in school.

At the age of seven, there is a 20 percentage point gap between the proportion of most and least affluent pupils who have reached the expected standard for reading - 93% to 73%.

By the age of 11, this gap has widened to 23 percentage points for English.

In secondary school, these latest figures for GCSE level show that the gap between richest and poorest grows even further to 43%.

When the school population is divided into 10 bands of affluence and deprivation, the level of achievement rises in precise step with increased wealth in every subject and at every level.

The figures also show that this most deprived group are a major factor in the drop-out rate at the age of 16.

In primary school, those living in these 10% most deprived areas are the biggest single social group. In terms of those studying beyond the age of 16, they are the smallest group, with numbers shrinking by about 90%, and their average A-level point score is the lowest.

These figures reflect the attainment gap using another poverty indicator - free-school meals.

In 11 year olds reaching the expected literacy levels, there is a 21 percentage point gap between pupils who qualify for free-school meals and wealthier pupils who do not qualify.

A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families said that "closing the attainment gap continues to be a top priority".

"We have invested more than £21bn in child care and the early years since 1997, so that poor children get better chances in early life.

"One to one tuition and personalised support will help every single child achieve the best of their ability at school and we have ensured that in future all young people will stay on in education or training to 18 and beyond."