The New York Times has a terrific article today by Michael Brick about the destructive policies that are called “reforms.” This is the first time in my memory that an article in the newspaper of record–albeit an opinion piece–has acknowledged that both political parties share the same demented and punitive approach and that their ideas are hurting, not helping.
Please read it. It gives me hope that our message is breaking through the elaborate publicity machine of corporate education reform.
Here is a sample:
“For the past three decades, one administration after another has sought to fix America’s troubled schools by making them compete with one another. Mr. Obama has put up billions of dollars for his Race to the Top program, a federal sweepstakes where state educational systems are judged head-to-head largely on the basis of test scores. Even here in Texas, nobody’s model for educational excellence, the state has long used complex algorithms to assign grades of Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable or Unacceptable to its schools.
“So far, such competition has achieved little more than re-segregation, long charter school waiting lists and the same anemic international rankings in science, math and literacy we’ve had for years.
“And yet now, policy makers in both parties propose ratcheting it up further — this time, by “grading” teachers as well.
Fantastic share!
I don’t see this article as so damning of the reform movement. If I were so inclined, it would be very easy to make the case that testing did, in fact, change Reagan High for the better.
The introduction and the conclusion seem to be asserting that the testing isn’t working, but the body of the article is essentially a story about a school that actually improved, apparently by the desire to move out of an undesirable classification caused by testing.
Brick is making the point that the testing and subsequent labeling of schools is exactly what harmed schools in the first place.
“In 1994, the state education agency started applying its boilerplate labels, which became shorthand for real estate agents. Reagan High was rated “Academically Acceptable,” the second-lowest grade. Families of means departed for the exurbs, private schools and eventually charter schools.”
It’s a curious sort of “bipartisan consensus” where the politicians enact policies that have nothing to do with the will of the people in the base of either party. You’d almost think the Top had created a Party unto itself and is running the Restivus ragged in a Race to serve them and them alone..
Read the article early this morning over coffee. What a treat to see some sense in my beloved (albeit imperfect) New York Times.
Keep in mind the Times article earlier in the week about how the students in China need to pay off the teachers and administrator in order to get ‘considered” for education. Is that what a charter school is in China?
Listen to Karen Lewis / CTU talk about related issues: http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2012/11/lets-be-thankful-for-karen-lewis-hear.html
Short on time, watch 16:20-33 min.
This part of the article bothered me:
“Most of all, though, their efforts focused on something more difficult to quantify. I watched Coach Davis revive the basketball team, dipping deep into his own paycheck and family time to inspire the school with an unlikely playoff run. I watched the principal, Anabel Garza, drive around the neighborhood rousting truants out of bed, taking parents to court and telling kids their teachers loved them. I watched a chemistry teacher, Candice Kaiser, drive carloads of kids to cheer on the basketball team, attend after-school Bible study and make doctors’ appointments. I watched the music director, Ormide Armstrong, reinvent the marching band as a prizewinning funk outfit that backed Kanye West.”
These activities should neither be expected of teachers nor glorified. It should be acceptable and honorable for a teacher to focus on teaching and lesson planning–and then to have time outside of school for study, pursuit of interests, and private life.
“I watched a chemistry teacher, . . ., drive carloads of kids to cheer on the basketball team, attend after-school Bible study “.
Man she must not want her job long. A public employee driving students around not only to a BBall game but to a religious study. As Larry the Cable Guy says: “That ain’t right”.
She is probably uncertified. Teaching 101 tells you not to do any of those things or else you could get sued or fired.
I believe she is certified. Anyway, Texas is a different beast. The home to many a court case involving school prayer, the length of student’s hair (male) and most notably, Texas cheerleaders and Bible verses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/us/court-says-texas-cheerleaders-can-use-bible-verses.html
Yes. The staff is doing the parent’s job. This is why grading a school is ridiculous.
Michael Brick and others at the Texas Book Festival:
http://www.booktv.org/Program/13978/2012+Texas+Book+Festival+Education+Panel+featuring+Michael+Brick+Meira+Levinson+and+Paul+Tough.aspx
His latest book on Book TV:
http://www.booktv.org/Program/13768/quotSaving+the+School+The+True+Story+of+a+Principal+a+Teacher+a+Coach+a+Bunch+of+Kids+and+Year+in+the+Crosshairs+of++++Education+Reformquot.aspx
Evaluating a teacher based on standardized test scores is so unfair to the students. It is a one-size-fits-all evaluation…ironically at a time when we know more about differentiated instruction, different learning styles, multiple intelligences…all that goes down the drain because student only get to demonstrate their learning according to one particular measure. Imagine if doctors were evaluated based on the health of all of their patients…but then we only used a cholesterol screening and a vision test to rate them. Everyone would be taking lipitor and wearing glasses, and doctors would stop taking cancer patients. It is such a myopic view of teaching which appeases many, but will cause many children a great deal of anguish.