Archives for the month of: June, 2012

This teacher sent a comment; he or she has figured it out. If the galvanic response skin bracelet will give teachers a high effectiveness rating when students are excited, there is an easy way to game the system and fool the bracelet:

Can this galvanic contraption distinguish between different types of excitement? Sometimes a beautiful new female student joins my class and the young men are visibly excited–about the girl, but not about my thrilling explication of adverbs. If I want to keep my job, do I have to hire supermodels to audit my classes to raise the galvanic excitement levels?

Creative teachers will think of many ways to get their students excited. Suppose you invite students to have a wrestling match in the middle of the lesson? How about bringing out the dice and play a game of craps? Show exciting movies?

Let’s hear how you would fool the bracelet and win yourself a high effectiveness rating.

Diane

Since No Child Left Behind began its reign of error a decade ago, the American public has slowly but surely changed its understanding and expectations of schools.

We have come to think that every school must “make” every student proficient, and if it cannot, then the school is a “failing” school.

We have come to look on schools as “failing” if they enroll large numbers of students who don’t perform well on standardized tests, regardless of their personal circumstances, their language ability, or their disability.

We have come to believe that teachers alone can bring every student to high test scores. And if we don’t believe this is possible, we are accused of defending the status quo or not caring about students or not believing they can succeed.

In pursuit of impossible goals, goals that no nation in the world has reached, we have come to accept (with glee, if you are a corporate reformer, or with resignation, if you are informed by reality) that schools must close and staff must be fired en masse in pursuit of that evanescent goal of “turnaround” from failure to success.

And here is the latest small and barely noticed episode in the continuing assault on common sense and public education.

The Los Angeles Times reported that students and parents demonstrated to protest the planned layoff of at least of the staff at Manual Arts High School. This school has been run for four years by a private group called L.A.’s Promise.

It is no longer unusual to see students and parents protesting the mass dismissal of teachers, so they will be ignored. That’s the new normal.

What is odd here is that L.A.’s Promise laid off about 40% of the staff last year. 50% last year, 40% this year.

It seems that this organization will just keep firing teachers until they finally get a staff that knows how to raise test scores and graduation rates higher and higher.

Such punitive actions display a singular lack of capacity on the part of leadership to build and support a stable staff.

Such heavy-handed measures surely demoralize whoever is left.

We have become so accustomed to mass firings and school closings that we have lost our outrage, even our ability to care.

Another school reconstituted, another school closed, more teachers fired. Ho-hum.

That’s the new normal. That is what is called education reform today.

So normal are such crude and punitive measures that the events at Manual Arts High School didn’t even merit a real story in the Los Angeles Times. It was posted in a blog.

Destroying public schools is called reform. Mass firings of staff are called reform.

It’s the New Normal.

Don’t accept it. Don’t avert your eyes. It’s not supposed to be this way.

Schools need a stable staff. Schools need continuity. Schools need to be caring and supportive communities.

Schools need to be learning organizations, not a place with a turnstile for teachers, administrators and students.

Don’t lose your own values. What is happening today is wrong. It is not education reform. It is wrong.

It does not benefit children. It does not improve education. It is wrong.

Diane

I received a comment from a teacher of children with high needs. The teacher writes about the challenges she or he faces every single day and the small victories achieved when a child is able to understand expectations or accomplish a limited task. Yet no matter how demanding the job, the teacher will be judged by the students’  test scores. The teacher will be held accountable to meet goals set by politicians who have no concept of the situation and who would not survive a day in this teacher’s classroom.

The teacher wonders: How do we get these politicians to stop acting as our superiors? This question suggests other questions: How dare the politicians pretend that they know more than teachers who do the work? How do teachers regain their professional autonomy? Who will want to teach in the future under these conditions? Will we ever be free of their harmful intrusions? What makes them think they are improving education when they impose so many harmful policies?

I love how you think! I just started reading your blogs and have learned a lot from them. I teach the severely handicapped and our day’s progress (miracles) might be getting a kid to look at me, to get to the potty before an accident occurs, or having a student respond appropriately to greetings. Now I’m told that their test scores will be used to grade me! Nothing on the Florida Alternative Assessment tests these skills. These wacko politicians have no clue what is involved in teaching at these center schools. It cannot be tested on the FAA. Further, i-observations that are being required by many districts in Fl have many good teachers becoming “needs improving” teachers. I fear our future. How can teachers control their own profession like doctors and lawyers and get these politicians out of the schools? Just wondering!

For this teacher, every piece of evidence that a child makes a connection is a miracle. Progress is slow, sometimes glacial. What standardized test will reflect these miracles? What measure will validate the teacher’s daily work? Which of the politicians who now determine the teacher’s value could do what he or she does every day?

Diane

A reader writes:

What grabbed me was this part:
“electrodermal activity that grows higher during states such as excitement, attention or anxiety and lower during states such as boredom or relaxation.”

So, this means that they can’t tell the difference between excitement, attention and anxiety? So all you have to do is keep a class in constant fear and you ace the evaluation? It also can’t tell the difference between boredom and relaxation. So if you’re doing “sustained silent reading,” which is it? Are students supposed to be “on” all the time?

I’m not a teacher, and even I can see that this is a huge steaming pile. But it got them a $500K grant! Nice work if you can get it – and stomach it.

Let’s see now. The teacher who keeps the class in a state of high anxiety gets points on the “effectiveness” scale. The teacher whose students are feeling at ease in the classroom will get a low rating.

If this reader saw through this flaw, why did no one at the Gates Foundation?

Last night, I googled “galvanic response skin” and got thousands of hits. It is happening, it has many uses apparently.

But surely you can see how it can be used to mine classroom data, to find out whose students sit on the edge of their seats in a state of alertness, attention and anxiety, and whose are slacking off.

Data mining is now a customary part of the business of online corporations who record our every move, which web pages we open, which products we buy online, which books we are interested in. All of this information is assembled, filtered, and compressed into a personalized profile, so that advertisers can target us with their messages wherever we go on the ‘Net. No point advertising automobile products to me, but they will be just right for someone else. Once gathered, this information can be sold and resold.

Once you understand the template, you can understand the logic of the Galvanic Response Skin bracelets. They will be one more piece of “objective” data to add to test scores, student surveys, and observations when evaluating a teacher. He or she may contest the observations, but how can they protest the objective readings of students’ skin responses to instructions?

And think of the professional development opportunities! Soon there will be workshops on how to increase your students’ GRS ratings. And there will be trained GSR facilitators and GSR measurement experts and GSR coaches.

It all fits so nicely with the U.S. Department of Education’s huge investment in data warehouses for every state. Before long, there will be a statistical profile for every student, compiled from their vital statistics at birth to their pre-kindergarten readiness assessments to everything that happens thereafter.

And to what end?

Diane

Yesterday I posted a blog about the Gates Foundation funding research at Clemson University for something called Galvanic Response Skin bracelets. The project will enable researchers at Clemson to work with researchers in the Gates Foundation’s Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project to measure student engagement physiologically. MET is the Gates program to identify the most effective (and ineffective) teachers. It is the heart of the Gates’ teacher evaluation program, into which the Foundation has invested hundreds of millions of dollars. It is the program that will one day make possible what Melinda Gates recently predicted:  And so what the foundation feels our job is to do is to make sure we create a system where we can have an effective teacher in every single classroom across the United States.

These bracelets, as I understand it, would be worn by students to measure how engaged they are, how bored they are, how they respond to their teachers. If they are bored, it won’t look good for the teacher. If students who show a high level of engagement, the teacher will get credit. The teachers too will wear the bracelet, to find out how engaged or bored they are. If this technology works, it will provide a foolproof tool for teacher evaluation. Or that’s the idea behind it.

On Twitter, one of the readers of this blog told me about yet another Gates grant, this one to the National Center on Time and Learning, Inc., last November. This grant, for $621,265, has the following purpose: “to measure engagement physiologically with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Galvanic Skin Response to determine correlations between each measure and develop a scale that differentiates different degrees or levels of engagement.”

I’m sorry. I think this is madness. Is there a mad scientist or psychologist advising the Gates Foundation? Does Dr. Moreau work in a Gates laboratory in Seattle?

This stuff crosses the line from legitimate research to investing in technologies to control and manipulate people by monitoring their emotions.

Have these people ever heard of rights to privacy? Does this GSR bracelet and MRI constitute some sort of emotional hacking?

I am hoping to get an outraged email from the Gates Foundation tomorrow informing me that someone hacked into their website and that none of this is true.

I hope.

Stay tuned.

Diane

In response to my blog about the latest Voucher Follies, this teacher wrote as follows:

There’s this little thing about miracles.


They are miraculous. Now, don’t tell me. I know. That’s saying the same thing.

The thing is, miracles are not normal. They are the stuff that converts normal humans into saints. Saints are rare, unless you count the football team in New Orleans. Hmm. Just a minute, NFL Commissioner doesn’t think their behavior is too saintly just now.

We are, most of us, pretty ordinary folks. We work hard and go home tired. We expect to do the same tomorrow. We don’t expect miracles. We expect progress, or at least the opportunity to do as well as we did today.

Children in schools are not looking for miracles either. School is the place kids go that gives them challenges. Children are pretty happy if they meet the challenge head on and struggle through. Children are used to daily challenges. Their teachers give them challenges, support them when they slip, encourage them to stick to it. The good teachers make school a safe place to slip, to stumble, to fall. That is because a good teacher is human, approachable, real, not too saintly, not perfect, not a miracle worker.

That is, of course, unless you think getting Johnny to read or Sally to multiply is a miracle.

Asking for miracles, describing public education as “failing”, using words like “crisis” in the headlines, these are setting a crummy tone for the conversation. It makes parents wonder whether a day’s worth of challenge and success is good enough for their child. It makes kids doubt the chances for their future. Parents and children begin to look at their teachers, their school and see not the reality of hard work, but the specter of doom. Don’t go in there. There aren’t any miracles happening.

Phooey.

Let’s start talking about the reality of learning. It is incremental. It is a constant struggle. If it isn’t a struggle, it isn’t worth doing. It is not a winner-take-all proposition, either. Being the “best” is typically a temporary honor. Being the middle of the pack is okay, and only in the worst situations, where parents, teachers, peers and administrators are harsh or even cruel, even being at the trailing edge, the bottom of a class isn’t so bad. I’m better this year than I was last year, right? You still like me, right? You still love me, right?

Keeping a positive attitude, getting up after a fall. Moving ahead to the next challenge. Those need to be our expectations. We need to try not to be disappointed if every child in a school doesn’t enter college at age 14. Come to think of it, I don’t want to be around for the frat parties that will follow from that.

No miracles for me, thanks.

Gary Stager, an expert in technology and constructivist pedagogy, sent a bulletin from Australia about the latest events there.

He notes that American teachers have been subject to a campaign of bullying, vilification and shaming, that goes beyond name-calling to pink slips, cuts in their compensation and benefits, and removal of what were once standard protection for their freedom to teach. According to the Metlife Survey, teachers are demoralized. I have talked to thousands of teachers these past two years, and I can verify the survey’s finding. Teachers speak of feeling powerless, depressed, angry. They don’t know what to do. And the assaults on their professionalism continue in state after state.

By contrast, teachers in Melbourne, Australia, reacted swiftly and sharply to a proposal by the conservative state government for performance pay. 25,000 teachers stayed home, 10,000 marched on Parliament, and 150 schools were shut down. Parents got notice to make plans for their children, and many principals marched with their teachers.

The Australian teachers are not feeling powerless. They are standing up for their profession. Let’s see what happens next.

Diane

When Louisiana’s voucher plan begins in September, the Upperroom Bible Church Academy in New Orleans plans to enroll an additional 214 voucher students. The addition of these students will add $1.8 million in taxpayer dollars to the school’s coffers.

Upperroom Bible Church Academy is already a voucher-receiving school. New Orleans has had a small voucher program since Hurricane Katrina (about 1800 students). Because the school is already getting public funding, its students take the state tests (called LEAP). Last year, only  21% of its students in grade 3, 4 and 5 scored above basic on state tests of reading and math. Some parents left comments about the school on this site (and be aware that this site is unmonitored and thus the comments are not necessarily accurate).

Among the state’s voucher and charter schools, it was third to last on the state LEAP rankings. This raises the possibility that children may be “escaping” from a low-performing public school to an even lower-performing voucher school.

That link demonstrates that most charter and voucher schools perform well below the state average in a low-performing state. If you are looking for a miracle, you won’t find it here. Nor will you find evidence that the Jindal administration is raising standards or expanding opportunities for students in Louisiana to get a better education.

Diane

I opened the following email and at first I thought it was a prank or, as another reader put it, an article taken from The Onion. See what you think:

—–Original Message—–
From: Leonie Haimson
To: nyceducationnews ; paa news
Sent: Fri, Jun 8, 2012 10:08 am
Subject: [nyceducationnews] Gates Foundation: one more step into the dystopian future with electronic bracelets for students & teachers

 
Gates Foundation experimenting w/Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelets in teacher eval project
 See Susan Ohanian, excerpt below:
 http://goo.gl/KBXtO
 
Look up “effective teaching” on Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grants. Here’s one of the awards.

To: Clemson University
Purpose: to work with members of the Measuring Effective Teachers (MET) team to measure engagement physiologically with Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelets which will determine the feasibility and utility of using such devices regularly in schools with students and teachers [emphasis added]
Amount: $498,055

Think about that!!

NOTE: The emerging field of neuromarketing relies on biometric technologies to determine a participant’s emotional and cognitive response to certain stimuli. In the case of neuromarketing, this stimulus is anything from a television commercial to an internet advertisement. There are six primary biometrics used to gather data on physiological responses to marketing…

So Gates wants to apply it to effective teaching.

The Affectiva Q Sensor is a wearable, wireless biosensor that measures emotional arousal via skin conductance, a form of electrodermal activity that grows higher during states such as excitement, attention or anxiety and lower during states such as boredom or relaxation.

Here’s a paper on the topic: MobiCon: Mobile Context Monitoring Platform for Sensor-Rich Dynamic Environments

Smart mobile devices will be the central gateway for
personal services in the emerging pervasive environment
(Figure 1). They will enable a lot of personal context-aware
applications, forming a personal sensor network with a
number of diverse sensor devices, placed over human body
or in surrounding spaces. Diverse sensors act as the useful
tool for the applications to acquire users’ contexts1 , i.e.,
current status of an individual or surrounding situation that
she/he faces into, without their intervention [42].
 
Wikipedia says neuromarketing is a new field of marketing research that studies consumers’ sensorimotor, cognitive, and affective response to marketing stimuli. So the Gates Foundation joins Google, CB S, and Frito-Lay in looking for ways to measure consumer reactions to products.

Put a Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelet on every kid in the class and you can measure teacher effectiveness in keeping their attention.

Maybe the next step is for the bracelet to zap them with electric current when their attention wanders.

And then the next generation will be the Galvanic Skin Response bracelet on every teacher–to zap her when she veers from the Common Core curriculum. Then. . . bring on the drones to eliminate such teachers.
 
 Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.

I needed A reality check, so I googled “galvanic skin response” and added “Clemson.” up popped the following link:

Home/Clemson University
SHARE
Clemson University
Date: November 2011
Purpose: to work with members of the Measuring Effective Teachers (MET) team to measure engagement physiologically with Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) bracelets which will determine the feasibility and utility of using such devices regularly in schools with students and teachers
Amount: $498,055
Term: 1 year and 2 months
Topic: College-Ready Education
Region Served: Global, North America
Program: United States
Grantee Location: Clemson, South Carolina
Grantee Web site: http://www.clemson.edu

What can I say? Shades of Brave New World.

Which district will be first to put the bracelets on their students and teachers? Will charter school students have to wear them, or only children in public schools? Who will pay for them? Will schools raise money by selling the data to Amazon and Google and other data-mining corporations? Have we lost all common sense?

Diane

I asked my readers if Melinda Gates was right when she said that an effective teacher would get three times the “gains” of an ineffective reader and if you knew the source of this statistic or claim. I had many thoughtful replies. Many people had heard the claim, which was made not only by Melinda Gates but Michelle Rhee. Some attributed it to Eric Hanushek, some to Education Trust, some to William Sanders.

Surely there can be no doubt that some teachers are more successful than others, at least with some children in some years. Can all teachers get the same gains every year? Not so clear.

Imagine if every child in every classroom in the U.S. had an effective teacher every year, as Melinda Gates said would one day be possible due to the work of the Gates Foundation. That would mean that every child would gain 18 months of instruction every year. By the end of eighth grade, every child would be ready to go to college, having gotten the test score gains equivalent to twelve years of schooling. College-readiness by 13 or 14! That would surely be a break-through for our society and would change the nature of college-going.

In the search for the provenance of Melinda Gates’ statement, Gary Rubinstein seems to have cracked the code with his research. Gary teaches math at Stuyvestant High School and has his own blog, as you will see if you open the link. Gary tracked the claim back to a paper by Eric Hanushek in 1992 (which was cited by some other readers as well). His analysis is worth reading. What Rubinstein discovers about this 20-year-old study will surprise you and make you wonder why so many people are citing it today as definitive proof of certain policy ideas. No one offered any evidence that the 1992 study (or whenever it was conducted) has been replicated, so we don’t need to worry about a sudden explosion of 14-year-olds prepared to enter college.

Diane

PS: A reader on Twitter suggests that she would be satisfied if 14-year-olds arrived with appropriate skills and knowledge for their grade:

Margot Durkin ‏@mrsdurkinmuses

,@DianeRavitch re: M Gates: how about we strive to have every 14 year old ready for real high school work?