Archives for the month of: May, 2012

David L. Kirp asked in a recent article why our society has abandoned school integration since it is “the one tool that has been shown to work.” Kirp wrote:

“To the current reformers, integration is at best an irrelevance and at worst an excuse to shift attention away from shoddy teaching. But a spate of research says otherwise. The experience of an integrated education made all the difference in the lives of black children — and in the lives of their children as well. These economists’ studies consistently conclude that African-American students who attended integrated schools fared better academically than those left behind in segregated schools. They were more likely to graduate from high school and attend and graduate from college; and, the longer they spent attending integrated schools, the better they did. What’s more, the fear that white children would suffer, voiced by opponents of integration, proved groundless. Between 1970 and 1990, the black-white gap in educational attainment shrank — not because white youngsters did worse but because black youngsters did better.”

Kirp’s article drew a response from James S. Liebman, a law professor at Columbia University and former chief accountability officer for the New York City public schools. Liebman, wrote a letter asserting that today’s “reformers” had found a way to advance racial integration. He wrote:

“David L. Kirp (“Making Schools Work,” Sunday Review, May 20) is right that school integration has done more to improve the life chances of poor and minority children than other known interventions. He is wrong to suggest that there’s no longer any way to achieve integration and to pit it against recent school reforms that also improve life chances.

“A cornerstone of the new reforms is to replace failing schools with higher performing ones. If the new schools are integrated, as a number of civil rights and new-school groups have recently proposed, we can get the best of both worlds.”

Kirp has the better of this debate.

When was the last time you heard a testing-and-choice corporate reformer propose a plan to reduce racial segregation in the schools?

What proportion of charter schools are racially homogeneous or racially integrated?

What evidence is there that new schools are more integrated than the large schools they replaced?

What evidence is there that the brand new school will be high-performing in comparison to the low-performing school that it replaces?

How many of the new schools “succeed” by avoiding or excluding the low-performing students who were previously enrolled in the “failing school”?

How many of the new schools are racially integrated?

If the Schott Foundation’s latest report is correct, New York City systematically provides schools that are more segregated and less likely to have adequate resources to students who are poor and black and Hispanic.

Until we have answers to these questions, it is wishful thinking to see the “closing schools” strategy as one that advances racial integration.

Based on history as well as research, it is likely that the reformers’ strategy of school choice will exacerbate S. And the replacement of large schools by small schools will also exacerbate racial segregation. One of the reasons that public policy encouraged comprehensive schools in the 1960s was to increase the demographic reach of schools and promote integration.

But that was then. We seem to learn nothing from history.

Diane

As Mitt Romney continues his advocacy for vouchers, he should follow  developments in Louisiana.

As I mentioned in a previous post, the New Living Word School has offered to nearly quadruple its student enrollment, from 122 to 437, even though it lacks the facilities or teachers for the new students. Millions of public dollars will flow to this small church school, where students spend most of their class time watching DVDs.

A reader alerted me that another little school that will reap the benefits from the voucher program is the Eternity Christian Academy in Calcasieu Parish. It currently enrolls 14 students. It has offered to take in 135 new students. Its small budget will grow by $1 million in taxpayer dollars.

Perhaps Romney and Jindal might hold a joint press conference to explain why they think that putting more students into religious schools will prepare them for the 21st century. I wonder if they will learn about science as it is taught in the public schools. Will they learn about evolution and modern biological concepts? We need to hear more from reformers like Jindal and Romney about their views of what constitutes a good education.

Diane

As you may know, there has been growing parent dissatisfaction about the amount of testing that their children are subjected to.

initially, the tests and test prep increased because officials wanted to measure student growth on tests.

Then, the testing increased because officials want to measure teacher quality.

From the vantage of parents, the school day and year are increasingly devoted to testing, not teaching.

Just weeks ago, students sat for the annual spring testing. Now, in New York state, there will be testing in June, but this time it will be a field test, part of the testing company’s trials of its test items.

When parents got wind that there would be more tests in June, and that the tests were for the benefit of Pearson, several parent groups began organizing boycotts. After all, neither the school nor the teachers would be penalized if students didn’t take the field tests, so it is an opportune time to opt out and make a statement.

Last week, the New York State Education Department sent out a memo instructing teachers that they must not tell students that the June tests are field tests. They must pretend that it is a real test.

Parents were aghast that the State Education Department would tell teachers to lie to students.

I’m beginning to sense a trend. Once the public understands that all this testing is counter-productive, that it steals time from instruction, that it has become an end and not a means, the game will change. The bureaucrats are hunkering down. But once the tide turns, there will be no going back.

Diane

I read the other day that Occupy Wall Street and its librarians are suing the New York Police Department for destroying the OWS library of 3,600 books. The librarians had carefully catalogued every book they received. People checked them out and returned them, no questions asked.

When the police destroyed the OWS encampment at Zuccotti Park last fall, they swept up the OWS library, threw the books into a Sanitation Department truck (i.e., a garbage truck), and carted them off to a Sanitation Department depot, where they remained–soiled, crushed, torn, ruined.

This was of more than passing interest to me. Of course, I was outraged to read that the police had treated books with such disdain. I love books. I like to hold books. I like the smell of books. Books are precious. When I learned about the destruction of the OWS library, I had thoughts of book burnings, a bit melodramatic, but not entirely far-fetched.

I had a personal interest in these events. A few weeks before the OWS camp was destroyed, I was invited by email to speak at the park and to donate a book to the library. So I showed up early, donated my book, and searched for the organizer who invited me. I had a first name and a cell number, but I couldn’t find him. He was nowhere to be found, and I ended up wandering around among a mass of friendly, happy people. Some wore silly hats, some wore T-shirts or carried signs declaring their love for the earth or animals, whatever. There was nothing menacing, just a congregation of disparate views and causes.

It was only a matter of time until Mayor Bloomberg–apparently acting in concert with mayors across the country–decided to disperse OWS. They did so with a level of force that was unnecessary. As I watched the scenes of protesters dragged away, I kept thinking of that clause in the Bill of Rights that guarantees the people’s right to peaceably assemble. I thought that OWS was peaceably assembling and that this right was protected. But the mayors decided that this was an assembly they could not tolerate, and so the encampments in cities across the nation were destroyed.

But the books! My book. My book in a dumpster. How did it feel to know that one’s own book was thrown into the garbage by the NYPD? I was angry. But in some way, the idea of crushing books seemed ludicrous in this age of free-flowing information. So, the trashing of the books was a symbolic action. It’s not as if we don’t have the Internet and free public libraries. What NYPD did, what the mayor authorized, was a symbolic book-burning (ironically, his own book about his success in business, was in the OWS library).

I am hoping that the courts decide in favor of OWS. And that OWS returns in full vigor to remind us of the many unaddressed grievances of our increasingly unequal and increasingly uncaring society.

Diane

A while back, I read a story in the New York Times that really bothered me.

It explained that neighborhood public schools are now compelled to “market” themselves because of competition with charters. In Harlem, charters are omnipresent, and the city administration has closed many public schools to make way for charters. New York City Department of Education officials make clear their preference for charters, leaving no one to fight for or defend the public schools against their competitors. If charters want public school space, they get it, usually over the opposition of the parents and community.

But what was so striking about the story–and you have to read to the end to find this–was the contrast between the resources of the public school and the invading charter. The public school had $500 or less to market itself, with flyers, brochures, volunteers. The charter–in this case, Harlem Success Academy–spent $325,000.

Wow. How can a public school compete when the charter can expend $325,000 to persuade people to participate in the lottery?

This story made me realize that the lottery isn’t really about admission to the school. The lottery is a marketing device. By whipping up interest, curiosity, and enthusiasm, all that money produces large numbers of applicants for the lottery. The lottery is an extravaganza with balloons, the turning of the wheel, the announcement of the winners, the disappointment of the losers. The daughter of a hedge fund manager in Connecticut, who is deeply involved in the charter school “movement,” produced a documentary called “The Lottery,” to promote charters.

Marketing is part of the business plan. Public relations is part of the business plan. Promoting the idea that charters are a cure for the ills of poverty is part of the business plan. Presenting charters as “the civil right idea” of our time is part of the business plan (a cry echoed by both Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney).

In some cities, the business plan is to replace public education altogether with corporate sponsors.

It’s sad that public schools must waste money and time marketing themselves. They should be devoting themselves completely to their mission, not to competing with the charters.

It’s also sad that the corporate and philanthropic interests that push charters so insistently don’t give a thought to the damage they do to an essential democratic institution.

Diane

I live in New York City, where charters are aggressively expanding. Many, perhaps most, of our charters have hedge fund managers on their board of directors. They want to win. They want higher test scores than the neighborhood public school. They compete with one another and they compete with the neighborhood school.

The city government–which is to say, Mayor Michael Bloomberg–believes in charters. He pushed energetically to get the Legislature to double the number of charters in the city from 100 to 200. In a city with a student enrollment of more than 1 million, the charters enroll a very small proportion, at this point about 5%. Yet you would think by reading the tabloids that they are the only schools that matter.

The charters are very assertive on their own behalf. Whenever there is a public hearing about whether to close a neighborhood public school or a legislative hearing about charters, you can be sure that the charters will bus in hundreds of charter students and parents in identical T-shirts to advocate for more charters or for closing the neighborhood school.

When I see the students and their parents with their placards demanding “more change, faster change,” I have had two reactions. First, if any public school were to spend public money bringing its students and their families to a political event, it would be a major scandal, and the principal would be fired for bad judgment.

My second reaction is to wonder why the students and their parents want more charters. They are already enrolled in a charter. How many schools can one student attend? Are they there because they want everyone to have what they have? Or are they there because the sponsor wants more charters? In other words, are they being used to expand the chain and the power of the board? It is obvious that their presence is highly orchestrated. After one big public meeting, one of the parents dropped the script.

This behavior by the charters is disturbing. It shows the worst traits of corporate America. It’s not about education. It’s about winning, even if winning is at the expense of others.

Others find it problematic, even repulsive, which explains why more and more communities are reacting negatively to charters.

Competition may be the way of the world, but collaboration is the best path for building community and goodwill. Collaboration is also the route to school improvement.

Diane

Yesterday I wrote a blog about a tiny rural district in Idaho where the community did everything possible to support their school but it wasn’t good enough. The tax base was so meager that the school was in deficit, and budget cuts were putting the school in peril.

A reader commented that this was an instance where the district might benefit by abandoning its public school and turning it into a charter school. This, the reader said, would make It possible to leverage funds from corporate sponsors.

Another reader responded to the first one and wrote:

“If you turn your tax supported schools over to corporate sponsors, in the process you lose your local representative government.  The corporate sponsors control all aspects of your public school/s-plus they will train your children for whatever the global economy dictates.  I suggest, there will be no upward mobility for your children in that area of Kansas or anywhere else in the USA. These charter schools destroy the “American Dream”. There is an old song that goes something like this:  “I owe my soul to the company store”.  Don’t allow the multi national corporations to do this to our children and destroy their American Dream!  We must, if we are to prevail as a nation, at least give every child the equal opportunity to achieve in the American Dream.”

 “Charter/Choice/Voucher schools destroy the American Dream.  Not only that- they destroy representative government  e. g. local school boards and local representation.  This is taxation without representation.  We fought a war of independence for that principle.  Why have Americans forgotten that?”

I agree with this response. I have come to believe that there is a vital connection between the community and the school. If public policy severs that connection, it is an abandonment of democracy. And in the case of charters, now the fad du jour, it hands children over to wealthy benefactors or corporate interests. I don’t mean to suggest that either wealthy benefactors or corporate interests have evil intent, but that their interests may not coincide with those of parents and the community. Public schools are an instrument of democracy to the extent that they maintain a vital connection with families and their community.

In the past decade, there has been a strong effort to hand schools over to some powerful figure or authority to “fix” them. So we have seen mayoral control in some cities, where the mayor has (in New York City, for example) unlimited authority to do as he wishes without regard to community wishes. This is nothing more nor less than the elimination of representative government. The purpose is to establish autocratic rule, in which the voices of the community don’t count. Schools are closed no matter what their communities say. We have also seen state takeovers (as in Philadelphia and St. Louis) where the state is so ineffective that the public schools are made worse than before the state intervened.

Democracy is hard, but it is still the best form of government that we know. We destroy the notion of public education at our peril.

This is my blog, and there’s no rule that says I’m only allowed to write about education. Right now, I want to write about the animals I lost in the past three years. It’s been really hard because I miss them. I miss them every day.

Molly, a Tibetan terrier, died in 2010 at the age of 13. Molly had lymphoma for three long, hard years. What a wonderful, funny dog she was. She was a clown, and her last few years were so hard. Traditional western medicine didn’t work for her. The traditional vets said “put her down.” She survived on Chinese herbs after we found a vet whose specialty that was.

Lady, a cocker spaniel, died in 2011, at the age of 14. She had diabetes for three years. We got her in 2001 as a rescue dog. We wanted Molly to have a companion. Molly was depressed for six months after Lady arrived, but then they became fast friends. What a great dog she was. Lady never learned how to play when she was a puppy. Her strong point was loyalty. She made you love her. There was no escaping her fierce love.

Schatzie, the cat, arrived in 2006. She adored the dogs. She cuddled up next to them on their dog beds. They ignored her. She didn’t care. She loved them unconditionally. They seemed indifferent to her. Schatzie was a great girl. She was regal, as cats tend to be. She went into hiding when it was time to take a car trip. She was a great lady. She was seriously sad when the dogs died, so we brought in Dandy (aka, Dandelion), thinking that he would perk her up.

Bad idea. Didn’t work. Schatzie didn’t like Dandy, didn’t understand why we needed another cat. Dandy was an alpha male, and he was not intimidated by the 6-year-old Schatzie. He became increasingly aggressive with her.

She seemed so withdrawn. She stopped eating. We took her to the vet, who had no diagnosis. Then another vet, no diagnosis. Then to the Animal Medical Center, a major hospital.

Bad news: Schatzie was diagnosed with FIP: feline infectious peritonitis. The doctor said simply “She has a disease that is fatal and incurable.” Schatzie died a month ago at the age of six.

This is so hard.

Dandy lifts our spirits. He’s so funny, so spirited. Such a kitten.

But at night I think of the girls who were such an important part of my daily life for a decade. And I miss them.

Diane

What happens to a small town in Idaho whose residents love their public school, support it, paint the building, fix it up, tax themselves to pay for it, but is suffering because of state budget cuts? Raise taxes? Well, they are already paying 17 times the rate of the state’s wealthy districts. Because of its low property values, it can’t squeeze out enough to keep up with expenses. Meanwhile, the state wants to put everyone in online classes. That won’t help this school. It will still have the same bills to pay.

This is one of the saddest stories I read this week.

Why do so-called reformers avoid any discussion of how to help districts that don’t have a big enough tax base to support the school they love?

Diane

In my experience, if you want to find a sympathetic ear in the media for public education, find someone who has a relative who teaches. Jon Stewart never fell for the teacher-bashing mania because his mother was a teacher. I have been interviewed on several occasions by talk show hosts who confessed that their mother or father was a teacher. They know how hard teachers work, and they share my outrage at the negative treatment of teachers and public schools today.

Yesterday someone sent me an article by Dick Yarbrough, a columnist in Georgia, thanking teachers for making it through another year. I immediately sensed that he had teachers in the family. Towards the end of his article, he mentions that four members of his family are teachers. That’s why he can’t stomach the absurd claims by legislators that teachers represent a class of overpaid, lazy people who are ripping off the public. Addressing teachers, he writes:

“Your rewards for your efforts are unpaid furlough days, larger class sizes, no pay increases (but increased expenses) and a second-guessing public that seems to feel you should be able to stop all of society’s ills at the classroom door. And then there are the politicians who promote “school choice.” That “choice” doesn’t seem to include making public schools better but it does include making all the other choices more attractive.”

What a pleasure to discover this very supportive open letter to the hard-working teachers of Georgia.

Diane