Julian Vasquez Heilig is one of the bloggers I enjoy enormously because he has the statistical smarts and energy to vet dubious claims. Follow his blog. He always has smart insights, with the data to back them up. It is called cloakinginequity.com.
The other day I put up a post about an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal that asserted that Texas needs many, many, many standardized tests because students don’t know the classics. Presumably, the more Pearson bubble tests they take, the more they will know about Shakespeare, Milton, Melville, and the Founding Fathers. They went on to tout their own charter schools, which presumably were succeeding at all these tests while turning children into philosopher kings.
Gosh darn, Julian checked the data. He discovered that their charter chain was underperforming the regular public schools on those tests that the authors touted.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Wait. You mean the charters… LIE… using… STATS??
It’s not just John White doing so??
(To the more serious readers, a disclaimer: This is sarcasm.)
Don’t you just love it, when the opposition steps in it!
It’s more like they took a bite.
“Underperforming” is unjustified; neither you nor Mr. Heilig has any information whatsoever that would justify such a claim. Heilig’s own link shows that Responsive is primarily a DROPOUT RECOVERY chain of schools. That is, they focus on taking kids who dropped out of public high schools.
People with doctorates in education and related fields should know better than to compare one year’s “college readiness” rates as between a dropout recovery school vs. the regular schools from which the dropouts came!
But it is the same “unjust” comparisons that are being used to fire teachers and close schools…there are many great public schools that serve “dropout recovery” students that are being closed in order to expand privatization efforts.
As a history teacher I love how they stress so many meaningless bits of trivia. Maybe they should look at Common Core Standards for 11th and 12th grade history. It makes social studies an ELA class that just happens to use historical information as the source for reading and writing assignments. So it isn’t getting any better.
I can also tell you that standardized tests don’t ask what date something happened. I present timelines as an understanding of an order of events but date memorization is passe. They really honed in on some meaningless facts.
My World History classes just covered the Columbian Exchange. We spent time analyzing the effects of this exchange in terms of smallpox, horses, crops (tomato especially) and world population trends. My test questions were nearly all short constructed writing response prompts. I didn’t ask for specific dates.
Oh and as a final note, the narrowing of the curriculum to meet test standards is very real. Social studies instruction K-5 has dropped dramatically in the last decade. We’re getting kids with less geographic and historical literacy than ever.
These WSJ shameless self-promoters might want to consider that the effects of their precious reforms have accelerated the lack of historical perspective. But I guess that wouldn’t fit their agenda.
Corporate Interference in Texas!
Below are 2 emails from HD Chambers (Supt in Alief ISD, large district in Texas). Read for yourself. Bottom Line= Texas Instruments would lose substantial money with a drop in the hand held calculator business if Alg II isn’t part of the required graduation plans.
On Mar 29, 2013, at 9:57 AM, “Chambers, HD” <HD.Chambers@aliefisd.net> wrote:
Good morning
I have been asked by several supts what was the latest on the next steps for HB 5, SB 3 and 1724. None of this is official or substantiated other and only based on what I have been told by those that are working on our behalf. Sorry for the length but…
Either before or right after the strong vote in favor of HB 5 and Chair Aycock Tuesday, I was told the Lt Gov received a letter from Exxon and TI (maybe others) encouraging him to pull SB 3/1724 because they felt these bills (HB 5, SB 3 and 1724) were a retreat away from rigor since Alg II and Physics were not required. This is coming from the influence Bill hammond and Sandy Kress have over them. That is why 3 and 1724 were not considered on the senate floor Wednesday like originally scheduled. Late Wed., the republican senators caucused on this issue and I was told by several people they were going to let SB 3 and 1724 die in the senate and let HB 5 be the bill they debate and make amendments to. Thursday morning, the senate democrats caucused on this issue as well and I was called in the middle of that caucus and asked if I was ok if there were four math and science requirements (an increase from the 3 we have been proposing and that are included in HB5) as long as the math and science courses added above the foundation course requirements did NOT include a requirement that all students take Alg II and Physics. Speaking only for myself and Alief ISD, I said I did not want to change what is in HB 5 period. However, if we get to the finish line and the threat of a veto or the Lt Gov killing this entire bill, I could live with that as long as the additional math and science course was not mandated (alg ii and physics) and that NO EOC was included. I was assured (as much as you can be assured in this process) that Alg II and Physics would not be required for all students and there would be no EOC. We will see. I did tell them over and over that a majority of students in Texas will take Alg II and physics anyway through the endorsement programs if the state will leave HB 5 alone. Every additional required course they add strips away at the meaningful flexibility we have tried to create. I have said they need to trust the foundation courses for all students and allow the endorsement courses to address the additional rigor we all want for students. As an FYI, Dan Branch’s amendment to HB 5 in the house takes care of the four math and science courses and Aycock agreed to it so the senate does not have to mess with that.
Bottom line- in my opinion, everyone one of us (and other supts in your regions) need to be very vocal to our senators that we want HB 5 in tact and as is. WE all need to have our Board, teachers, community groups, Chamber of Commerce’s, etc, call our senators and Dewhurst’s office and demand that HB 5 be used as the vehicle for the beginning of meaningful changes to pub ed in Texas.
There will be a conf call Monday morning I am involved in that will shed some light on what might happen next. I will pass along as soon as we know something. Those of you attending our TAS/MUS conf next week will also receive the latest update as well.
I also think we should all be encourageing our local reps/senators to support HB 2824. This is the bill that is being created by the High Performing Schools Consortium. As you know, we have several TAS/MUS members particpating in that important work. HB 5 was designed with the thought it could be a vehicle that could be used for future improvements through the work of these districts.
Thx and have a great Easter Weekend (and sorry for the length of this). See those of you attending the conf next wek at Horshoe Bay.
HD
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 21, 2013, at 4:27 PM, “Chambers, HD” <hd.chambers@aliefisd.net> wrote:
To All
I was asked about what I considered to be the bill of choice. In my opinion, and most others, there is no question HB 5 is the stronger bill and addresses everything we have been working on since the fall. SB 3 and 1724 are more troubling with the number of EOCs, the endorsement requirements, etc. so as you make your calls, you might want to focus on HB 5. Just my thought.
Thanks
HD
From: Chambers, HD
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 8:40 AM
To: Adair; Alfred L. Ray, Ed.D.; Alton Frailey; Andrew Kim; Angi Williams, Ed.D.; Anne Poplin; B. Core; B. Lancaster; B. Rees; Barbara Qualls; Bob Morrison; Bret Jimerson, Ed.D.; Brian G. Gottardy, Ed.D.; Brian Woods; Bruce Gearing; Buck Gilcrease; Buddy Echols; C. A. Bshier; C. Culwell; Cynthia Lusignolo, Ed.D. ; D. Bedden; D. Manning; Darrell Brown; Darrell Floyd ; David Faltys; David Harris; David Vinson; David Vroonland; Don Stockton, Ed.D.; Douglas Killian; Duncan Klussman (duncan.klussmann@springbranchisd.com); E. Coulson; F. Brent; F. Hayes; F. Molinar; G. Eschr; G. Gibson; Gary Mooring; Gary Patterson; George Kazanas; Guy Sconzo, Ed.D.; HD Chambers; Heath Burns (heath.burns@abileneisd.org); Horace Williams; I. Garza; J. Chadwell; J. D. Kennedy; J. Espino; J. Frossard; J. Hanks; J. Hartman; J. Lyon; J. Maze; J. McCullough; J. Richardson; J. turner; James E. Wilcox, Ed.D.; James Largent; Jeff Bailey; Jerome Stewart; Jesús H. Chávez, Ph.D.; Jodi Duron; John E. Sawyer, Ed.D.; John P. Kelly, Ed.D.; Jose Parra; K. Brown; K. Franklin; Karen G. Rue, Ed.D. ; Karen Garza (kgarza1@lubbockisd.org); Kay Waggoner; Kelly Crook; Kelly Rodgers; Ken Helvey; Kevin Brackmeyer; L. Henrie; L. Hindt; Lane Ledbetter; Larry Nichols; Lloyd Graham (supt-secretary@lpisd.org); Lloyd Verstuyft, Ed.D; Lynne Leuthard; M. Crawford; M. Nelson; M. Whiteker; M. Zolkoski; Marc Smith, Ed.D.; Mark Henry; Michael Holland; Michael McFarland; Michael McKie; Mike Brown; Mike King; N. Wellman; Pam Wells; Peter Running; R. Draper; R. O’Connor; R. Reedy; R. Steeber; Randy Moczygemba ; Randy Reid; Reece Blincoe; Richard Matkin; Robin Ryan; Rod Townsend; Ryder Warren, Ed.D.; S. Bell; S. Clyde; S. Holmes; S. Perez; S. Waddell, Ed.D.; Salvador Cavazos; Scott Davis; Scott Niven; Steve Flores; Steve Murray; Susan Simpson; T. Chargo; T. Hanks; T. Stephens; Ted Moore; Thomas Wallis; Timothy Miller; V. Giles; Vicki Mims; Wanda Bamberg (wbamberg@aldine.k12.tx.us); Willis Mackey, Ed.D.
Subject: URGENT-HB 5 SB3/1724
Importance: High
TAS/MUS Members
I wanted to update you on a few critical issues regarding HB 5 and SB 3/SB 1724. As an FYI, HB 5 is a comprehensive House Bill that includes graduation plan flexibility, test reduction and accountability revisions. The reason there are two senate bills is that SB 3 is the graduation plan flexibility and SB 1724 is the test reduction portion of the bill. Attached is a side by side chart/comparison of the most recent components for each bill at this time. This chart was prepared and provided by Moak/Casey.
As of now, the plan is to have HB 5 considered and voted on by the full House of Representatives this coming Tuesday, March 26th. The plan for SB 3/1724 is to be considered and voted on by the full Senate the following day, March 27th.
After participating in a series of meetings yesterday regarding these subjects, we (superintendents, staff and community members, etc.) have been asked to contact every one of our local representative and senators and strongly encourage them to support and vote for these bills. I would suggest a personal phone call from you as soon as possible so there is no doubt in any member’s mind about the support these bill have from all across Texas, regardless of district size, etc. I also encourage you to share this information with all the supts. in your area that are not members of TAS/MUS and ask them to do the same. I realize we have several TAS/MUS districts that are participating in the SB 1557 Consortium group and to that end, we have worked hard to allow these bills be a transition to future improvements to public education in Texas.
You will also be receiving a TASA Capital Alert with the same information today and tomorrow and more details on each bill as well as what we need to guard against.
As I was told yesterday, we need to apply the “full court press” between now and Tuesday. If you agree with this, please begin contacting your reps. as soon as possible.
Thanks and let me know if you have any questions.
HD
“He discovered that their charter chain was underperforming the regular public schools on those tests that the authors touted.”
I’ve been studying your blog for awhile now and I notice that you don’t discuss salaries much in your analysis. There’s an old adage that you get what you pay for. Why does Canada consistently beat America in International competitive exams in education? Consider the following salaries for teachers published in today’s Toronto Star. (The Canadian dollar is at par with the American dollar so although these numbers are in C.D. they can be transposed to U.S.D.)
Sam Hammond: $172,034.54
Elementary School Teacher, Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board
Paul Elliot: $170,288.87
Teacher, Rainy River District School Board
Harvey Bischof: $170,377.47
Secondary teacher, Durham District School Board
Earl Burt: $163,602.23
Secondary Teacher, Toronto District School Board
Stephanie Ledger: $162,339.76
Elementary teacher, Waterloo Region District School Board
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/03/28/highlights_from_the_2013_sunshine_list.html
After all we hear about how charter schools like KIPP are serving a different group of students, one would think it beyond dispute that it is utterly unfair to compare college readiness rates between two groups of schools if one of the groups is dedicated to kids who dropped out from schools in the other group.
There’s no question that kids who dropped out from regular public school were less motivated and prepared, and that a charter dedicated to serving dropouts is going to have lower rates of college readiness from the get-go. Without before-and-after data on the students, any comparison is completely meaningless.
Heilig’s basic competence is looking more and more questionable here. (Schneider too, for that matter).
Everyone gets measured with the same ruler. Pay attention.
You really do miss the point JSB. The reformers stake their claim on improving the scores of all children, no excuses! If you bring up reality and other such mitigating factors, you are labeled inadequate and your school a failure. The wonder charter/turn around school does not have to follow the same rules as the public school it replaces, the student body can be shipped out, then the new improved test scores are touted. In this case, the miracle was proclaimed, but it did not actually happen! The low performing students did not do any better than they did before. The reformers don’t have a better education plan or methods, they have a better publicity campaign and money.
Old Teacher: your comment indicates you actually read Diane’s and Heilig’s postings. Hence, your point is spot on. Thank you.
Old debater’s trick: when you are face with a difficult argument or topic switch the conversation so you play to your strengths and downplay your weaknesses. Remember: winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing!
🙂
The charters are claiming to be the answer to those awful public schools who are full of lazy teachers who are compromising national security. They are the ones making the claims that they can do miracles and are the answer to traditionally low performing students. So much hype, so little to show for it all. They are nothing but a bs scam.