G.F. Brandenburg, retired math teacher, has done a close analysis of Michelle Rhee’s. state report card.
He calls it a “Brave New World-type Orwellian fantasy,” in which words mean the opposite of what they say.
Her ranking does not measure whether states have high test scores or high graduation rates. it does not measure whether states have laws and policies that have encouraged better teaching and successful schools. It des not measure anything that matters.
Read the full story on his blog to see how and why Rhee gave out her abysmal grades, in which almost every state gets a D or an F except those run by her rightwing buddies.
Here is a sample from Brandenburg, stating first what Rhee claims she is measuring, followed by Brandenburg’s short explanation of what she really measured:
■ Reduce legal barriers to entry into teaching profession and permit alternate certification programs to provisionally place teachers in the classroom (Brandenburg: In other words, make a 5-week summer program like TFA, or no program at all, the legal equivalent to a traditional one- or two-year professional teaching license system.)
■ Pay structures based on effectiveness and performance pay (Brandenburg: In other words, make teachers’ pay dependent on the score from an arcane mathematical algorithm that no one understands (VAM) and which jumps around widely and wildly from year to year for the same teacher; and which correlates with nothing else. BTW, none of the many studies conducted on performance pay has yet shown that ‘performance pay’ for teachers does anything to help students. What’s more, many teachers in jurisdictions that have bonuses for teachers who score high on these formulas refuse to accept the bonuses, because of the ‘poison pills’ attached to the bonuses.)
■ Parental notification and parental consent for student placement with ineffective teachers (Brandenburg: in other words, public shaming of teachers who happen to end up on the short end of the VAM yardstick; this is part of Rhee’s Orwellian use of the phrase “Elevate the Teaching Profession”)
■ Remove arbitrary caps on public charter establishment and establish alternative authorizing and fast-track process for high-performing public charters (Brandenburg: We now know that charter schools are frankly aimed at destroying public education, not improving it. We also know that in 5/6 of the cases, charter schools do the same as OR WORSE THAN their peer public schools. We also know that the few charter schools that have good student achievement records do so by winnowing out all of the problem students — who are sent back to the public schools — and by having longer days, longer years, and summer programs, all of which cost more money.)
■ Provide comparable funding and prohibit authorizers from charging fees from public charter schools for oversight and administration (Brandenburg: In other words, make sure that charters get MORE money per pupil than the regular schools, since just about all charter schools receive large private donations. My administrator friends in DCPS and elsewhere tell me that private donors essentially refuse to give anything to regular public schools these days, no matter how worthy the program.)
“Parental notification and parental consent for student placement with ineffective teachers”
I dunno, I guess I’m enough of a radical that I would specifically ask that my child be placed with an “ineffective” teacher. It probably means that s/he isn’t toeing the rheeformers’ line, which is all good. I realize I’m probably an outlier that way, but wouldn’t it be something if a lot of parents started clamoring for the “ineffective” teachers? Sure would stick in Rhee’s craw.
The above, by the way, is not in any way intended to be a defense of the heinous practice of labeling teachers “effective” vs. “ineffective” in the first place, much less this publication and parental notification nonsense.
Dienne, the thing about VAM is that it does not consistently classify any teacher, not even the so-called ineffective ones. So, unfortunately (tongue in cheek), your goal to have the ineffective teacher would likely be “thwarted” by having that teacher declared effective the next year (assuming he/she still has a job).
I am basing the above on my own writings on the 2011 Louisiana VAM pilot study: http://pdf.investintech.com/t/o/83zu7uz/VAM_explanation_for_legislators_REVISED_01-02.html
“Provide comparable funding”
Fine. If I recall correctly, there’s a proposal on the table for CPS to get about $700 million, about half of which is to go to Uno charter schools and the other half to go to actual public schools. So let’s make that comparable. Uno runs about 15 (?) schools while there are several hundred regular schools. Let’s divvy that $700 million equally among all schools regardless of whether they’re Uno or public. Sound good, Michelle?
Actually, my analysis wasn’t all that deep, but if you look deeper it doesn’t get any better.
My home, DC, which is not known for having wonderful school systems, is rated #1 in the report for the following, and I quote:
“Five states provide a per-pupil facilities allowance. The District of Columbia is the only true exemplar in terms of supporting public charters in acquiring and maintaining facilities. D.C. provides a right of first offer that prioritizes highperforming schools, as well as a financing trifecta of a per-pupil facilities allowance, access to bond revenue, and alternative financing structures.”
Wow, since DC has made the most progress (except for that other stunning exemplar, New Orleans) in dismantling its public schools and turning education (and funding) over to private entities, it’s #1!
Remember 1984 by George Orwell? “War = Peace”?
Wouldn’t DC schoolchildren be better served if their district pursued the nation’s Education Criteria for Performance Excellence?
The “ineffective” teachers, like the fired ones, are usually the best teachers.
It didn’t “measure” a damn thing. There is no measurement here, maybe some choice picked metrics and little bit of rubric/grading thinking thrown in but nothing has been measured.
My big question is wht Rhee gets to define the terms of the whole thing,
When will the media stop giving Rhee so much attention, putting her on so many talk shows to spout her nonsense? I guess because she is “controversial”, they hope she will attract viewers. (Problem with our news media today–being more interested in sensationalism than truth.)
What happened to the investigation about the cheating going on under her leadership in DC? Has it been concluded?
There is a special about Rhee tonight on PBS Frontline. (Check your local PBS TV listings.) (In SoCa, I believe on KOCE at 10 PM.) Although I just complained about the media giving attention to Rhee, and I have no idea what this PBS documentary will be like, I am hoping that it might include some serious investigative journalism exposing her nonsense. (I don’t know that, btw, just hoping.)
Folks might want to read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/dc-principal-slammed-for-reporting-cheating/2013/01/10/24e7b47a-5ac7-11e2-9fa9-5fbdc9530eb9_blog.html