A regular commenter on the blog who calls him/herself “Democracy” posted these insightful thoughts about the state of “leadership” and its willingness to follow the corporate reform script instead of standing up for sound policies and practices that promote good education:
Part 1
I’ve been commenting on this blog for a while, lamenting the state of “leadership” in pubic education.
The fate of Joshua Starr in Montgomery County, MD is a good example. Starr was actually trying to bring more equity to the system, he wanted to de-emphasize testing, he opposed merit pay, and he was collaborative, generally. A teacher rep said Starr made sure teachers were “included in the decision-making process for most major decisions.” Still, Starr seemed to favor the Common Core, and in an interview with NPR he bragged about the county’s “SAT and AP scores.” Sigh.
Starr’s replacement was to have been Andrew Houlihan of Houston, who later withdrew his name from consideration.
Houlihan’s dissertation was on the use of data. He has described himself as “a big data person. I love using data to make decisions.” Except, apparently, Houlihan never really understood what the “data” said. He bragged about an Arnold Foundation grant that, he said, was “transforming” the recruitment of teachers. And he bragged about Houston’s merit pay program – ASPIRE – that, he said, rewarded “our most effective educators” for “accelerating student progress.”
The Arnold Foundation is a right-wing organization founded by a hedge-funder who resists accountability and transparency in derivatives markets but calls for them in education. Its executive director, Denis Cabrese was former chief of staff to DIck Armey, the Texas conservative who now heads up FreedomWorks, the group that helps to pull the Tea Party strings and gets funding from the billionaire arch-conservative Koch brothers.
Fairfax County recently hired Karen Garza, who was also in Houston. Garza led the ASPIRE program, a pay plan that was funded (in part) by the Broad, Gates and Dell foundations, the very same groups that fund corporate-style “reform” and that support the Common Core. And while researchers point out the dangers of value-added models, noting that they “cannot disentangle the many influences on student progress,” Garza said they were “proven methodology” that are both “valid and reliable.”
Fairfax and Montgomery, by the way, are considered two of the better school systems, nationally.
Part 2
Meanwhile, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Virginia Association of School Superintendents (VASS) recently concluded its Spring conference, titled “Inspiring Leadership for Innovation.” The conference was focused on “college and career readiness,” “leadership skills essential to changing school cultures,” and “superintendent success stories.” The featured speakers were Jean Claude Brizard and Marc Tucker.
Brizard has been a failure as a superintendent in Rochester and Chicago. According to a columnist who followed him closely, Brizard “engaged in gross misrepresentations of data and sometimes outright lied. He made promises he didn’t keep. He did one thing while saying another.” As to his two failed superintendencies, Brizard admits that “there were some mistakes made.”
Marc Tucker says that he wants high-stakes tests in grades 4, 8 and 10, and “the last exams would be set at an empirically determined college- and work-ready standard.” Additionally, “every other off year, the state would administer tests in English and mathematics beginning in grade 2, and, starting in middle school, in science too, on a sampling basis. Vulnerable groups would be oversampled to make sure that populations of such students in the schools would be accurately measured.” Tucker wants all schools systems to take PISA, because he thinks that the test scores of 15-year-olds are somehow tied tightly to economic growth and competitiveness. You know, jobs.
Sigh. Tucker just keeps regurgitating the same-old song, all over again: college and career “readiness.” To Tucker, that’s why public education exists. He says nary a word about citizenship.
And what about those jobs? The Bureau of Labor Statistics points out that most new jobs created in the United States over the next decade will NOT require postsecondary education. These are jobs like personal care aides, retail clerks, nursing assistants, janitors and maids, construction laborers, freight and stock movers, secretaries, carpenters, and fast food preparers.
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/most-new-jobs.htm
In addition to its Spring fling, VASS selected its 2016 superintendent of the year. While the award comes from VASS, a VASS-selected panel –– comprised of the state superintendent of instruction, and the heads of the Virginia Education Association, state PTA and state school boards association, the state ASCD, and the directors of the state associations of secondary and elementary school principals –– picked the winner. In other words, the top education “leaders” in the state –– those who should be familiar with research and evidence –– were responsible for choosing the state’s “best” superintendent.
A few years back, this recently-named “superintendent of the year” forced a test-score-tracking software program called SchoolNet on teachers. She was advised against it because of its problems, but she went ahead anyway. It ended up being a $2 million-plus failure. SchoolNet was later bought by Pearson. The superintendent is still withholding 268 SchoolNet-related emails from public scrutiny, claiming they are “exempt” from the Freedom of Information Act.
Part 3
This VASS-award-winner’s school division sent out what it called a “leadership” survey several years back. It was a skewed-question survey designed to produce pre-determined results. But it did allow for comments. And they were instructive. They included comments such as “..this is the worst leadership the county has ever had,” and “Honesty, integrity and fairness are lacking,” and “…teachers have very little voice, and “…the system does not care about me or most other employees as individuals, and “county schools leaders seem to be increasingly inept and far-removed from the day-to-day realities of public education.” Again and again and again, commenters said these things about the top “leadership:”
“does not listen to teachers…”
“does not ask what people think before it accepts major policies…”
* “…teachers are not listened to…our opinions have been requested and ignored…”
* “…when I offer my opinion, i has been dismissed.”
* “l..leaders seek input, but then usually, disregard the opinions of those not in agreement with the administration…decisions are made top-down before input is received.”
* “decision making is so top-down — stakeholders are seldom consulted…”
* “…decisions have already been made…”
* “…teachers feel that their professional judgment is not valued…”
* “most administrator are arrogant…and remove themselves with any type of collaborative dialogue with teachers.”
* “…they do not want to hear complaints, or you are labeled as a troublemaker…”
* “the county asks its employees for input but these requests are superficial…the decision have already been made by the people ‘downtown’…”
* “you ask people to think critically but we must toe the party line…”
* “We are not asked what we think…it is common knowledge here that you are not allowed to address concerns that may be negative…”
“I see few examples of teachers being involved in decision making.”
A blue ribbon resources utilization committee recommended a climate survey of the schools years earlier, noting that one had been done repeatedly in county government. Teachers asked for a climate survey in the schools too, and even offered to help write one. A climate survey still hasn’t been offered.
This “superintendent of the year” forced STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) “academies” on all of the county high schools. The original claim was that research showed a STEM “crisis” in America, and that this move was “visionary.” Norm Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin – which has laid of thousands of STEM workers – was invited to the schools to make his STEM spiel. When asked for the “research,” the superintendent couldn’t produce any. There’s a reason for that. The research shows there is no “crisis,” no “shortage.” In fact, there’s a glut.
For example, Beryl Lieff Benderly wrote this stunning statement recently in the Columbia Journalism Review (see: http://www.cjr.org/reports/what_scientist_shortage.php?page=all ):
“Leading experts on the STEM workforce, have said for years that the US produces ample numbers of excellent science students. In fact, according to the National Science Board’s authoritative publication Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, the country turns out three times as many STEM degrees as the economy can absorb into jobs related to their majors.”
When VASS selected this “superintendent of the year” for 2016, it noted certain “indicators of success.” What were they? It cited an increase in the “number of students enrolled in AP courses” and SAT scores that were higher than the state average. Never mind that the SAT is not tied to the school curriculum and that this school division is one of the most affluent in the state. There is no better predictor of SAT score than family income.
The research on SAT – and ACT – and AP courses finds that they are mostly hype. The SAT and ACT just don’t do a good job of predicting success in college or life. Moreover, research finds that when demographic characteristics are controlled for, the oft-made claims made for AP disappear. In the ‘ToolBox Revisited’ (2006), a statistical analysis of the factors contributing to the earning of a bachelor’s degree, Adelman found that Advanced Placement did not reach the “threshold level of significance.” Other research finds that while “students see AP courses on their transcripts as the ticket ensuring entry into the college of their choice…there is a shortage of evidence about the efficacy, cost, and value of these programs.”
This is the current state of public education’s “leadership.”
Unlike the Allstate commercial, I don’t think we’re in ‘good hands.’
I knew there was no good reason to trust Marc Tucker’s supposed new stance on high-stakes standardized testing. I still suspect he got a Hillary Memo, but we shall have to wait and see if she alters her position, too.
Marc Tucker is the education equivalent of Schroedinger’s cat.
The cat was both alive and dead at the same time — and Tucker is simultaneously for and against standardized testing.
It’s not until you do an ‘experiment” (in the case of the cat) or have an election (in Tucker’s case) that the cat and Tucker “collapse” into one state or the other.
SDP: Sounds like Obama–you know, what he’s said about teachers needing to be able to teac creatively, & that there’s too much testing.
And, yet again, being the one responsible FOR the very agenda that has propagated the “too much testing.”
And expect more of the same from Hillary.
Heed the warnings of The Who–“We won’t be fooled again!”
(Did you all see Bernie on Late Night w/Seth Meyers this morning?)
Look out for rebranding and lots of hype about it being new, different and locally determined, as states have tried to get away with doing with Common Core for the sake of PR, but with minimal changes, if any, and not necessarily for the better. Adding the testing of 2nd Graders is outrageous. On a sample basis is likely to become for all soon, just like he wants to make PISA for all 15 year olds now. Lipstick on a pig.
There’s an old saying in public education. “Let those that don’t want to teach become administrators” While I know this is untrue of some talented, honest administrators, there is a fair amount of those in educational leadership for whom this saying is true.
good blog….good information
This blog inspired me to write about how many, not all, public education leaders are complicit in school privatization. It started with ads on book covers and then moved, albeit with some controversy, to Edison putting televisions in classrooms with ads. We now think nothing of corporate-sponsored score clocks and ads adorning our gyms and football fields, as well as our marquees.
For a very long time professional associations from NCTE to NSBA, including administrator and teacher organizations, financed much of our conference expenses and much of our work from trade show exhibits. At first there was no quid pro quo, but now we see how Bill Gates has attempted to buy support for the Common Core and high-stakes tests by giving huge sums of money to professional and civil rights associations, corrupting both the individuals running them and the organizations themselves.
Then the vendors began to “sponsor” keynote addresses and choosing who spoke. Then they began to sponsor the workshop sessions. Their ads paid for the elaborate conference program books. Everywhere we looked there were corporate reps hawking their products, and then in many cases educators went home and bought those products.
We saw these strategies greatly expanded during GW Bush’s rollout of NCLB. I was personally in a meeting of leaders from eight states when we were told by a rep of USDE that we could not use Marie Clay’s assessments for Reading First. She said, “that test is a Democratic test, and DIBELS is a Republican test, and Republicans are running this.” I kid you not.
In Texas and many other states a district could not be awarded a Reading First grant unless it included implementation of the Voyager program. So money in politics corrupted federal and state leaders, and kids and taxpayers were big losers.
Corporations spend an unbelievable amount of money taking educators to dinner, hosting parties for them, paying their hotel bills, and flying them to meetings at expensive resorts, sometimes including spouses. Gifts arrive in the mail. Flowers are delivered.
In the 1980’s there was a big push to privatize student transportation, cafeteria management, janitorial and yard services. Workers lost the benefits they had had with school districts and generally earned less money. We forgot that those workers were parents of our students, and so our kids had fewer resources at home, and the schools lost important support.
The Internet has brought a whole new field of corporate involvement in public schools. Look at the webpage of just about any professional association, and you will be overwhelmed with ads or “sponsorships” of corporations. Their money funds the expense of the website and only God knows what else.
We are now seeing supporters of charters and vouchers winning places on state and local school boards, their campaigns fueled by the likes of the Waltons, the Arnold’s, etc.
It seems to me that public education is the frog in that proverbial pot of water that has been allowed gradually to come to a boil. If we don’t hop out right now, we will very soon find ourselves cooked to death! We can start to turn things around in our own backyards by eliminating all complicity and by organizing and educating the grassroots. If we fail our kids with this, there is no hope for a sustainable democracy.
@ Bonnie.
Your comment – sadly – sums up well the current state of public education “leadership.” Simply, it ain’t.
For example, in a September 3, 2011 column in The Washington Post, Robert McCartney reported that he attended a half-seminar-half vacation retreat in Florida with “award-winning principals.” McCartney wrote that among these Post award-winners, “everybody agrees that improving education is the key to restoring the nation’s long-term economic health and international competitiveness.”
Sadly, though, those “award” winners didn’t know very much.
the World Economic Forum (WEF) ranks nations each year on their economic competitiveness. The U.S. continues to rank highly, but when it drops, as it has recently, public schools are not the problem.
For example, four years back, when the U.S. dropped from 2nd to 4th, four factors were cited by the WEF for the decline: (1) weak corporate auditing and reporting standards, (2) suspect corporate ethics, (3) big deficits – brought on by Wall Street’s financial implosion, and (4) unsustainable levels of debt.
The U.S. is now and always has been an economically competitive nation. Boosting 15-year-olds’ test scores on a test is not going to magically translate into a multi-trillion-dollar-shot-in-the-arm for the economy, which is, basically, the premise of the Common Core.
Smart political decision-making is a much better option.
In its most recent reports, the WEF cites that the biggest obstacles in the U.S. to “macroeconomic stability” – and thus growth and prosperity – are increasing inequality and political dysfunction. Toss in what the WEF noted earlier –– the corruption that plagues high finance (witness the deal-making pleas on the rigging of the Fx market) –– and these are “the country’s greatest area of weakness.”
Some argue that, besides better scores, we need more STEM, science, technology, engineering, and math. In one Virginia school district, all the high schools were turned into STEM academies, though the superintendent –– who recently was named ‘superintendent of the year’ –– could not cite any research whatsoever to bolster the idea that a STEM “shortage” or “crisis” existed.
There’s a reason for that. There is no shortage. In fact, there’s a glut.
As Michael Teitelbaum writes in The Atlantic, “The truth is that there is little credible evidence of the claimed widespread shortages in the U.S. science and engineering workforce.”
(http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/03/the-myth-of-the-science-and-engineering-shortage/284359/
Teitelbaum points out that “a compelling body of research is now available from many leading academic researchers and from respected research organizations such as the National Bureau of Economic Research, the RAND Corporation, and the Urban Institute. No one has been able to find any evidence indicating current widespread labor market shortages or hiring difficulties in science and engineering occupations that require bachelors degrees or higher.”
All of them conclude that the U.S. “far more science and engineering graduates annually than there are S&E job openings…”
Meanwhile, back in Virginia, the Virginia Association of School Superintendents released a “New Blueprint” for the future of public education in the Commonwealth at its Spring conference.
The “New Blueprint” uses words like “demands, world, global, recession, measure, future, prescriptions” to say – essentially – that the role of public education is to prepare students to “compete across the world.” The superintendents say that this is a “shared vision.”
The “New Blueprint” calls for more expanded “pre-k learning experiences,” more flexible accountability systems, and more state funding – a LOT more state funding. The funding section takes up the biggest portion of the “New Blueprint.”
The “Blueprint” says that “evidence-based research” should be used to guide reform.
Then the report says the purpose of education is “to enhance student performance.” To do that teachers must be expert at obtaining and analyzing “data.” The superintendents advocate “differentiated compensation to reward meritorious performance” Merit pay. They obviously haven’t read – or don’t believe – what research says about merit pay.
The superintendents acknowledge that “teacher and staff morale is low” [sic].
How to fix this problem? Leadership, perhaps? Shared decision-making? Honest communication? Respect? Changing the organizational culture?
Nope. Nope, none of those. Instead, “professional development needs to address this issue” in order to improve “teacher and staff performance.”
These are – I think – fairly characteristic of public education’s “leaders.”
It isn’t a pretty sight.
“Corporations spend an unbelievable amount of money taking educators to dinner, hosting parties for them, paying their hotel bills, and flying them to meetings at expensive resorts, sometimes including spouses. Gifts arrive in the mail. Flowers are delivered.”
Back in the 80s when I was purchasing pharmaceuticals that’s exactly what the big pharmaceutical companies were doing with physicians under the guise of continuing professional education. And guess what the docs learned about? Each company’s new “blockbuster” drug(s). It was a tad unseemly.
Thanks for the post, Democracy.
In a nation robbed of its middle class, the cataclysmic employment event, is neither lack of skills nor grit, it is lack of demand.
Despite the valiant sacrifices for a different destiny, democracy was vanquished by the divine right of kings, as Lincoln and Jefferson warned. The time it took to destroy the US government of the people, by the people and, for the people, was one-third of a generation, the length of one, of ten chapters, in its history. But for five oligarchs, the nation could have fulfilled its promise.
Easy to forget that Achieve,INC. was formed in 1996 as the operational arm for CEOs and governors of states who set the agenda in education that we have been living with since then. The CEO of IBM jump-started the fiasco of the last 15 years and was the big cheerleader as Achieve,working on behalf of the CEOs and the Governors schemed to nationalize and standardized public education.
Achieve’s 1991 agenda included organized efforts to
1. establish alternative paths to teaching, recruit the most “talented,” raise standards for certification, and target professional development to higher standards
2. align curriculum to rigorous state standards and tests
3. provide extra learning time and help for low achieving students,
4. train school leaders to improve instruction, manage organizational change, reward the best teachers with pay for performance, hold schools accountable for results
5. intervene in chronically failing schools and expand public school choice and charter schools
6. benchmark and compare standards, tests scores and other data state by state and with other nations ( This is funded with $1 million from the Gates Foundation)
7. align college admission standards with high school standards and expand the number of companies that will use student academic records in hires.
Slight variations in the details, but this was the long game, the grand experiment, the plan and why it is properly called corporate reform.
That agenda was enabled by Governors no longer in office, and by statisticians who used school data from 1988 and labor market data from 2000 to sell the concept of college and career ready, and then had the audacity to maintain all of that outdated information as if valid now, never mind that the economy tanked, never mind that overqualified persons are working in Starbucks, and never mind that the lies are still being perpetuated that test scores are the best predictor of our nation’s economic fate.
From the get-go, the under the table agenda in standardization was this: marketing one size fits all on a national scale is easier than dealing with pesky state and district rules and regulations, plus if you push hard on expanding choice you also enlarge and churn the market. Also in the works by participants and consultants and supporters of Achieve was (and is) the expansion of on-line education and the promise of big profits from the guarantees of federal and state dollars.
Achieve, Inc.’s board includes Louis Gertner, who’s bad-mouthed public education for decades. It also includes Tennessee Republican governor Bill Haslam, a pro-life, anti-gay, corporate friendly politician. The board also includes Prudential executive (and former big banker) Mark Grier (Prudential has been fined multiple times for deceptive sales practices and improper trading), and Intel CEO Craig Barrett (who keeps repeating the STEM “crisis” myth). Intel has laid off thousands of workers and is masterful and aggressive at avoiding tax payments and seeking subsidization, much like Boeing, and Microsoft, and GE, and IBM, and Chevron, and AT & T. These are some of the biggest corporate tax dodgers in the country.
Achieve’s funders include – not surprisingly – Boeing, Intel, GE, IBM, Chevron, Microsoft, Prudential (and State Farm, MetLife and other insurance companies), and the Gates Foundation.
Achieve was instrumental to the development of the Common Core. So was Gates. So was the College Board, and ACT, Inc. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable are major supporters.
Really great info and observations, both in the OP and the comments. I”m commenting here so I can follow this discussion.
Or, as they say on other blogs, sub.
Great information! I have felt like I was howling in the wind about STEM jobs. Politicians are clamoring for STEM emphasis in education. They are even limiting non-STEM majors in universities. Florida opened its 12th university, Florida Polytechnic University, because a term limited Senate leader, JD Alexander, wanted it in his neighborhood. All this effort, all this money, and STEM jobs are projected to make up 4.1% of all jobs in Florida in 2018. Our leaders are as shallow as a puddle. They make long term decisions based on “what is trending today.”