Archives for category: Education Industry

Now this is an interesting idea that needs to be deconstructed. Mayor Bloomberg, reputedly worth $20 Billion, suggests that some young people should skip college and be a plumber.

On one hand, that’s good advice for young people who are not interested in going to college. Many, even some who should go to college, can’t afford to go because the cost is so prohibitive. In recent years, the states have shifted the costs to students and made college unaffordable for students unless they are willing to take on heavy debt.

On the other hand, if Mayor Bloomberg really believes this, he should not have gutted so many of Néw York City’s fine vocational programs.

If the mayor is serious, he might look into the German apprenticeship system, which seems to work well. Germany has taken care not to outsource its manufacturing base (as our corporations did), and it has far fewer college graduates than we do.

Clayton Christiansen loves disruption.

He loves the idea that almost everything familiar to us will die and be replaced by competition.

Many corporate reformers swear by him. They think disruption is creative.

I wish they would get out of our lives and make money selling something other than disruption.

In this post, Ed Berger explains the collaboration among stakeholders that is needed to defend our community public schools from marauders and vandals. He identifies the vandals.

The vandals all have the same goal: Destroy public schools. They call it “reform,” and anyone who stands up to them is called “a defender of the status quo.” They forget that they are the status quo.

This article describes what a grass-roots rebellion looks like.

It describes a growing revolt against failed education policies.

It reviews the mounting protests by students, parents, teachers, school boards against senseless mandates.

It even shows clueless Secretary Duncan both embracing and not embracing the so-called “parent trigger” that was defeated twice by Florida’s parents.

This is how a revolution against the status quo begins.

With spontaneous actions by all affected.

Here is the latest newsletter from the Network for Public Education.

Please consider becoming a member and help us as we fight to improve public schools and repel the twin menaces of high-stakes testing and privatization.

If you are a member of a grassroots organization to support your community public schools, please sign on and lend a hand in our shared mission.

This blogger follows the money. That is his hobby and his passion. In this post, he tracks Walton funding for “advocacy.”

I put advocacy in scare quotes because foundations are tax-exempt and supposedly non-political. Yet the tax laws apparently allow them to put some of their money to work advocating for what appear to be political goals, in the case of the Waltons, the privatization of public education.

When it comes to funding “advocacy,” the Gates Foundation is right up there with multi-millions.

Say this for the Waltons: they are consistent. They don’t attempt to hide their agenda. They like charters and vouchers. They don’t like anything involving regulation or government.

High school rankings by popular media usually take into account how many students take AP exams. Some high schools push students to take AP courses whether or not they are prepared, just to satisfy the rankings. But are the AP courses an appropriate measure of high quality?

A few of the nation’s top private and public high schools have dropped the AP courses, on the belief that their teachers created better courses than the AP. See here and here .

A reader responded to an earlier post about the Tucson BASIS charter schools by questioning the value of AP courses and tests:

“Here is the essence of what Tim Steller wrote about BASIS-Tuscon: “the Basis schools require students to take eight AP courses before graduation, take six AP tests and pass at least one…That naturally helps Basis place high in the U.S. News rankings” And, it is ALL about the rankings. And the College Board’s Advanced Placement program (which Diane neglected to mention).

Steller adds this important point in his article about BASIS, made by an education consultant: “AP has pulled the wool over people’s eyes across the nation…”

Actually, it’s the College Board that has “pulled the wool over people’s eyes.” About AP, to be sure. But also about the SAT and PSAT, and Accuplacer, the placement test used by more than 60 percent of community colleges. They’re all mostly worthless, more hype than reality.

Consider the Advanced Placement program, pushed shamelessly buy the College Board, and by Jay Mathews at The Washington Post (Mathews started the Challenge Index, a ranking of high schools based on the number of AP tests they give).

A 2002 National Research Council study of AP courses and tests found them to be a “mile wide and an inch deep” and inconsistent with research-based principles of learning.

A 2004 study by Geiser and Santelices found that “the best predictor of both first- and second-year college grades” is unweighted high school grade point average, and a high school grade point average “weighted with a full bonus point for AP…is invariably the worst predictor of college performance.”

A 2005 study (Klopfenstein and Thomas) found AP students “…generally no more likely than non-AP students to return to school for a second year or to have higher first semester grades.” Moreover, the authors wrote that “close inspection of the [College Board] studies cited reveals that the existing evidence regarding the benefits of AP experience is questionable,” and “AP courses are not a necessary component of a rigorous curriculum.”

A 2006 MIT faculty report noted ““there is ‘a growing body of research’ that students who earn top AP scores and place out of institute introductory courses end up having ‘difficulty’ when taking the next course.”

Two years prior, Harvard “conducted a study that found students who are allowed to skip introductory courses because they have passed a supposedly equivalent AP course do worse in subsequent courses than students who took the introductory courses at Harvard” (Seebach, 2004).

Dartmouth found that high scores on AP psychology tests do NOT translate into college readiness for the next-level course. Indeed, students admit that ““You’re not trying to get educated; you’re trying to look good;” and, “”The focus is on the test and not necessarily on the fundamental knowledge of the material.”

Students know that AP is far more about gaming the college acceptance process than it is learning.

In The ToolBox Revisited (2006), Adelman wrote about those who had misstated his original ToolBox (1999) work: “With the exception of Klopfenstein and Thomas (2005), a spate of recent reports and commentaries on the Advanced Placement program claim that the original ToolBox demonstrated the unique power of AP course work in explaining bachelor’s degree completion. To put it gently, this is a misreading.”

Ademan goes on to say that “Advanced Placement has almost no bearing on entering postsecondary education,” and when examining and statistically quantifying the factors that relate to bachelor’s degree completion, Advanced Placement does NOT “reach the threshold level of significance.”

The 2010 book “AP: A Critical Examination” noted that “Students see AP courses on their transcripts as the ticket ensuring entry into the college of their choice,” yet, “there is a shortage of evidence about the efficacy, cost, and value of these programs.” And this: AP has become “the juggernaut of American high school education,” but “ the research evidence on its value is minimal.”

As Geiser (2007) notes, “systematic differences in student motivation, academic preparation, family background and high-school quality account for much of the observed difference in college outcomes between AP and non-AP students.” College Board-funded studies do not control well for these student characteristics (even the College Board concedes that “interest and motivation” are keys to “success in any course”).

Klopfenstein and Thomas (2010) find that when these demographic characteristics are controlled for, the claims made for AP disappear.

Yet, the myths –– especially about AP, the SAT and PSAT –– endure.

Meanwhile, the College Board is promoting the Common Core and says it has “aligned” (cough, wink) its products with it. And people believe it. Stopping corporate-style “reform and the Common Core is easier said than done. Parents, students and educators are going to have to remove the wool from over their eyes. And that means abandoning blind belief in the College Board and the products it peddles.”

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York released a study of Florida’s accountability system–the one that Jeb Bush brags about–and concludes that the system promotes behavior to game the system. Schools are assigning children to categories where they will not lower the school’s letter grade.

Here is a succinct summary of the paper:, from the Wall Street Journal blog:

“The way some schools are being held to account for student performance can corrupt how these institutions seek to achieve the standards, a new paper from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York warns.

“The bank’s researchers took at look at what happened among some schools in Florida around the turn of the millennium. What they found was alarming.

“Analysts Rajashri Chakrabarti and Noah Schwartz found evidence some Sunshine State schools deliberately moved underperforming students into exempt categories in order to have those students not drag down the performance of the school as a whole.”

This, of course, has nothing to do with improving education or addressing the needs of the children. It is all about meeting a target.

In response to the earlier post about Geofrey Canada boasting about the “100% graduation rate” of his charter, which was not true, while knocking the public schools, Bruce Baker reminded me that he had looked at NYC charters and compared them to NYC public schools in relation to a number of variables.

Geoffrey Canada’s charter is part of his analysis, along with other highly touted charters, like KIPP and Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy.

Charters typically enroll fewer students who are ELL, special education, and free lunch (the very poor). Their teachers are younger and less experienced. They have smaller class sizes. They spend more (in the case of KIPP, a lot more). With some exceptions, they do not get better results. The public schools outperform Canada’s HCZ charter school.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Wall Street investors are very upset by the financial and ethical issues at the UNO charter chain in Chicago.

UNO is a politically connected charter chain. Its founder, Juan Rangel, was co-chair of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s campaign.

UNO obtained $98 million from the state legislature to build new charters. It turns out that $8.5 million of that money went to companies owned by two brothers of UNO’s number 2 official, Miguel d’Escoto. When the scandal broke, he stepped down from his $200,000 job, then Governor Pat Quinn halted payment on the balance still owed to UNO.

In a conference call with Wall Street investors who had loaned UNO $37.5 million through state bonds, Rangel sought to reassure them. Rangel told the investors:

“We’re talking about a construction grant that has no guidelines…In our minds, there was no conflict.”

Of course, the governor did see a conflict of interest, which is why he suspended state funding.

Investors were also concerned about the recent decision by UNO teachers to unionize, because they are paid $20,000 less than teachers in the public schools.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 57,239 other followers