I try to be careful in terms of what I write and what I repost from readers. If readers express their personal experiences and strong views, I have no problem with that, and I never repost anything that uses epithets or goes beyond the bounds of civility or fair disagreement. If I err, it is not knowingly.
I just received a comment about Tennessee’s evaluation system and its provenance. This was in response to my post today about “legal fraud.” I would appreciate readers’ responses, not opinions, but citations and facts:
| TN bought TEAM/TAP, a teacher evaluation system from a Milken owned company called NIET. http://www.tapsystem.org/about/about.taf?page=nietbio_lmilken The 1-5 scoring rubric met the requirement in Race to the Top to evaluate teachers with “objective” measures.The Milkens have been marketing TEAM/TAP since the mid 1990’s. If it is so effective, shouldn’t there be dozens of studies replicating its success? There are none. Peer-review constrains bad science and practices, and protects those from harm who are subjected to its application. It’s not an overstatement to say that, absent critical review, the TEAM evaluation can identify teaching quality about as well as rolling dice. That the Milken family foundation has bypassed peer review and critical analysis and sold its “product” to the taxpayers is very curious. This use of our public funds deserves further scrutiny. Recall that co-founder Michael Milken is a convicted felon. Rudy Giuliani successfully prosecuted him for a massive fraud in 1989 that destroyed his company and cost the taxpayers millions in the ensuing cascade of savings and loan failures. Milken’s crimes were so egregious, president G.W. Bush refused to give him a presidential pardon. Caution and study here would seem wise. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/03/business/fi-milken3 Outsourcing to contractors with a history of fraud has the potential to be a spectacular boondoggle. Our students will be the victims. Who will be held accountable? |
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Diane,
I’m not sure what you are requesting. What information needs fact checking?
The link says that niep is a charity, so I’m not sure why the commenter calls it a company. The mention of Michael millken seems like an irrelevant ad hominem attack.
I’d put “charity” in quotes. And you can quibble over semantics but Milken and his brother’s history of fraudulent behavior is not irrelevant given the Milkens are marketing a teacher evaluation system to the public. Michael couldn’t be certified to teach given his felony conviction. And Lowell turned states evidence against Michael or he too, would have gone to prison. Is that a group Lawyers or Doctors would choose to develop their professional evaluation protocols?
Teachers’ professional careers and livelihoods are being determined by Milken’s 1 -5 measurement scale that has no known scientific validity for identifying teaching quality. The scoring metric is eerily similar to Microsoft’s stacked ranking in an article published in Vanity Fair this month.
Ad hominem attack? I’m crying tears over those poor MIlkens. Teachers have been humiliated, demonized, called “crappy”, had their VAM scores published in news papers, been subjected to media scorn, their professionalism and veracity constantly questioned in propagandistic movies, by powerful politicians, and billionaires.
It’s time we call out profiteers and expect them to be accountable to teachers and the public for the claims they make about their products.
I largely agree with your comments. I was just doing a small piece of fact checking. It is a registered nonprofit, with their tax returns available online if anyone wants to look further. It could be problematic in many ways without actually being profiteering, and Diane was looking for facts on this one.
It’s true.
“The National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) is pleased to announce that the Tennessee Department of Education has selected the TAP Teaching Standards as the basis for the qualitative evaluation instrument for the new statewide Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM). ”
http://www.tapsystem.org/newsroom/newsroom.taf?page=features&id=127
Re: ad hominem attack – I agree with Sandra on this. . . and to the point about his effect on the savings and loan industry, the negative effect on the economy was determined to be only 300k by the court, spread out over a period of several years. In the Bruck book that Diane mentioned in her original post, it’s suggested that the allegations for insider trading could not be proven by Giuliani and when the government had threatened other members of his family, Milken accepted a plea deal for several minor offenses (offenses that no longer even exist today) – http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1991/Judge-Indicates-Losses-Much-Less-than-Government-Estimates/id-a76e40716cd1aa7bb78dd85feba13736
Michael Milken was convicted on 98 counts of racketeering and fraud. He was sentenced to ten years in prison but served less than that.
Do read the Connie Bruck book. He may some good qualities, but his greed destroyed many wonderful American companies and familiar brand names. It was actually sickening to learn about his misdeeds. He was a central part of ruining the American that I knew.
Based on the latest securities fraud lawsuit filed against K12, Inc. I very much doubt he has any redeeming qualities. He also accepted a fine of more than $500 million dollars.
He appears to like teaching. I believe that while in prison he was teaching finance and investments. Oh the irony. You have to love it.
Since this was supposed to be a post about fact-checking, I think it’s worth mentioning that you would read in Bruck’s book or any book about about the case that he was charged with 98 counts, but the plea was for 6 of the counts, none of which included insider trading.
It’s also true that TAP has been in existence since 1999 and that it was created by the Milken Family Foundation, which was co-founded by Michael Milken. I don’t know for a fact that there are no peer-reviewed studies, although one would think TAP would list these on their website. They do not.
I’m glad that I now know more about the evaluation instrument used by most of Tennessee, but it’s important to note that Memphis uses a different rubric, TEM, which was based on the IMPACT rubric established in Washington, D.C. under Michelle Rhee. That evaluation system has produced dismal results in D.C.
So Michelle lent it to her ex, the commissioner and ex-TFAer. This TFA force is getting to be over the top. I thought their mission was to close the achievement gap…twenty years and they still haven’t.
Not sure that is their focus anymore…..getting rid of teachers and creating a need for more TFA temps must be more lucrative for the Kopp/Barth venture.
The rubrics used in Memphis and in the rest of Tennessee (including Shelby County Schools which is now absorbing Memphis City Schools) are different, but are only 10% different. The sequence of events is that MCS applied for the Gates funding and won it. Tennessee then adopted, almost exactly word-for-word, the language in the Memphis application and used it for the RTTT application. MCS calls it TEM, SCS calls it TEAM. Both use 35% TVAAS, 15% other student performance metric, and 40% observation. In SCS, the last 10% is still observation (for a total of 50% observation-based). In MCS, the last 10% is 5% teacher content knowledge and 5% student perceptions.
http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org/sites/346/uploaded/files/HR_Personnel_Meeting_Minutes_Preread_Material__032812.pdf (see Slide 13).
They are basically the same thing.
I’m going to say your reader has inaccuracies that make the message behind the comment questionable. The release about the adoption states “…selected the TAP Teaching Standards as the basis for the qualitative evaluation instrument.” It does not say “TN bought TEAM/TAP, a teacher evaluation system” as the reader claims. This is a major distinction as the full TAP system is costly to implement to it’s full extent.
As a fully implemented program, TAP involves Mentor & Master teacher positions at a building — essentially an instructional coaching model. Teachers have a huge amount of PD and peer observations/evaluations from those coaches who go through an intensive training process to fine tune their ability to observe and consult with their peers and become certified TAP evaluators. Team planning and regularly scheduled meetings are also an integral part. A final component of TAP is what amounts to merit pay; some based on school achievement, some on individual performance.
Finally, while connected to the Milken Family Foundation, it appears as though it is Lowell Milken who has led the creation of TAP: http://www.tapsystem.org/about/about.taf?page=nietbio_lmilken
Personal Opinion: TAP has many, many wonderful components that can be very beneficial for teachers & schools with the right people in the right positions. However, it also has additional costs that will prohibit schools from fully implementing the model to the proper extent in this era of public school funding cuts. That idea alone led me to be skeptical of the notion that Tennessee was adopting the full TAP program. “Borrowing” TAP’s standards to layer on a system they’re creating is likely to cost much less (if anything).
Do I smell bovine excrement here or is it the smell of porcine excrement that they spread on the fields or is it just because I live in in a rural area to be able to distinguish such putrid smells.
LOL. I will totally be stealing that language for future use, by the way.
Here’s the deal: Diane said, “I would appreciate readers’ responses, not opinions, but citations and facts.” Therefore, I tried to provide such. Diane knows that I post progressive/liberal viewpoints from Ohio in staunch defense of public education on a regular basis. I think it’s an important distinction to be able to filter comments for their accuracy, especially when the truth about attacks on public education is damning enough. In this situation, the comments that Diane received don’t seem to be entirely accurate and do seem to shift to an attack on the Milken Foundation (won’t argue their shadiness) unnecessarily. Short of additional information about the partnership and any transaction that may or may not have occurred, the comments are excessive. The official statements only say that TN has “selected the TAP Teaching Standards as the basis for the qualitative evaluation instrument,” NOT that they are purchasing the TAP system for full state adoption. That’s a major difference and one that Diane should be aware of.
Finally, as for the full TAP system, I went through the 4-day evaluator training this past year along with some classroom teachers and found it to be of a very high quality and the teachers involved in TAP have always spoken highly of the collaborative process they are involved in as a result of full implementation. But again, full implementation requires a major commitment by the district to employ additional non-classroom teachers at the school building along with add’l compensation. In the end, as a program that seems to offer support and growth opportunities for teachers, it’s a decent program.
Now, that has NOTHING to do with the Milkens and their dastardly deeds, and I won’t debate that point at all. But I guess I’m able to separate their involvement as founders(?) of the program from the current structure of the program and its potential benefit for teachers. (Side note: the internal cost finally resulted in the program being completely eliminated from our district.)
Finally, I think it needs to be further uncovered as to what, exactly, TN is using/stealing/purchasing from TAP before we can accurately critique whatever financial transaction accompanies it. The truth will surely be shocking enough without us having to go wild about things that happened in the past (we’ll have plenty of time for that, too).
The fundamental problem is our inability to locate the cost of TEAM/TAP and to whom it was paid. Given that we are still required to use the NIET website for certification and continue to use their copyrighted materials, it is highly relevant that taxpayers and educators know where and to whom that money went.
A colleague and myself searched extensively through our University Library System for independent research validating the claims made in the TEAM/TAP materials. We found one unpublished white paper with this citation: Schacter, J. Schiff, T., Thum, Y.M., Fagnana, C. Bendotti, M., Solomon, L. Firetag, K. & Milken, L.(no date). The impact of the teacher advancement program on student achievement, teacher attitudes, and job satisfaction. Milken Family Foundation, 1250 Fourth St. Santa Monica, CA 90401-1353.
All other information was published by The National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET). Citations are located in our training manuals and are copyrighted so I cannot legally reproduce them. I will say the data presented in the manuals are unusual.
Are you suggesting that the state taxpayers of TN paid NIET nothing for use of it’s TEAM/TAP model?
Our county purchased training personnel and materials with the NIET logo and copyright. Where did that money go if it did not go to NIET?
I have no idea and was only going with the language in the press releases. I think information about those expenses would be exactly what Diane would be looking for and would help to clarify exactly what TN is doing with this. If you have any links that detail those purchases/costs you should probably post them here.
I’d look at Niet’s tax returns and county budget info, which should also be public information. Your question sounds rhetorical but can probably be answered.
not commenting on this directly. Commenting on the Milken awards to educators. Two of the principals for whom I worked received such awards.
To me it does not matter that Lowell is the Milken behind the education stuff. Michael cut a deal to keep Lowell out of jail – the feds had enough to convict him as well.
I often wondered what I’d do were I suddenly surprised with the announcement of a Milken – it was not necessarily a totally impossible event. I decided I would decline, because the money behind came from the corrupt business practices of both Milken brother, and while maybe someone can come up with enough money to buy my sole, the 25K from the Milkens was not even close, even at a time when that amount was more than half my salary.
I have to agree with TeacherKen. I don’t think it much matters which Milken name is indicated as being involved because, in my experience working with Milken companies and researching their corporate structures, most often, Mike appeares to have taken steps to make sure that his own name is not listed, let alone as being the top person in charge.
The university that he owned was also a 501(c)3, but it could hardly be called a “charity”. When I came onboard, his model was having 90% of the faculty hired as Independent Contractors, with no labor law protections and no benefits. However, eventually, ALL faculty were hired as Independent Contractors. Yes, not even one faculty member is a full time employee.
I never saw Mike’s name listed on public documents related to the school, but the board of trustees was stacked with Milken associates and the school was managed by another Milken company. When questions about the school’s ability to self-govern and make decisions on its own were called into question by the regional accrediting body, due to those incestuous Milken company relationships, after lot of denial and resistance, eventually, another company was brought in, but that turned out to be a Milken company, too. I believe that one of the reasons why Milken didn’t want to let go of control over the school was because it served as a training ground for many employees from his other companies, as they sent us thousands of students and reimbursed for their tuition.
I created some of the certificate and degree programs and taught many of those employees, so I have to add here that, while Milken reps wanted a say in program design, I based those programs on the standards of my specialized professional association (SPA) and no one controlled what I taught students. I think this is imporant to highlight, because I taught what are considered to be best practices in my field, but most of our SPA’s standards contradict what students learned in their jobs. My Department Chair and I were both appalled by many of the things our students reported learning and doing at work, and we were determined to teach them best practices. Fortunately, we were not pressured to do otherwise, as I would not have been able to continue there if I didn’t have that academic freedom.
Milken’s name was never mentioned in any public disclosure notices, but it still seemed to be clear to many faculty, the regional accreditors, and the feds that denied financial aid, who controlled the purse strings and was calling the shots administratively.
So you’re saying that M Milken suckered in another well meaning/intentioned human to make himself a ton of money???
M Milken was associated with the school originally because he was in on the ground floor when it was first established and that was announced in many news reports. It was begun by a consortium of faculty from different universities and he helped provide the funding.
I’m not sure exactly when Milken’s company assumed their management role, or when the board became stacked with his posse, because the school went through restructuring a few times and has had four different names. I believe the management company was involved in all four configurations though.
I was told the management company charged the school a lot of money. So, yes, I think Milken benefitted financially in several ways and probably did make a boat load of bucks off the backs of people who were not suspecting a non-profit to operate that way.
“TN bought TEAM/TAP, a teacher evaluation system from a Milken owned company called NIET”
Since this organization is selling something, the key would be to try and figure out how such a “charity” would be putting revenue back into the organization, since they’re not supposed to be making a profit. I would suggest keeping in mind that start-up costs are usually much higher than the cost of maintenance down the road, since they’ve been around for awhile. Check for the name of the publisher on printed materials, because I saw materials indicating Milken companies self-publish, which saves on expenses.
I came in during the third school configuration/school name, which was at the mostly maintenance stage, and can’t say that I saw much evidence of money going back into my non-profit university.
So glad to see that Michael “Milk Them” Milken the Junk Bond King is still seeking redemption. I don’t believe that may happen in this lifetime. Although you know, nothing is impossible. His most notable contribution to the business world was the rise of junk bonds and the subsequent demise of Drexel Burnham Lambert.
Recently, his latest venture, K12 Inc., (founded with moralist- in- chief William Bennett), found itself the subject of a securities fraud class action filed by Newman Ferrara LLP for investment fraud. (Jeez…some people just never learn.)
http://www.faruqilaw.com/LRN
http://www.4-traders.com/K12-INC-434108/news/K12-Inc-Newman-Ferrara-LLP-Pursues-Securities-Fraud-Claims-Against-K12-Inc-and-Reminds-Investor-14157858/
According to the Complaint, K12, an educational service software company, failed to disclose that: (1) it engaged in fraudulent recruiting and sales strategies designed to attract students irrespective of their potential to properly complete the curriculum; (2) that its infrastructure purposely pressured its employees to pass students despite insufficient demonstration that the students had met the criteria for completion of the material; (3) that its results with math and reading performance did not meet minimum statewide standards for those subjects; and (4) its assertions made to investors regarding its overall financial and academic success were false and misleading.
I can’t tell you how shocked I am that this occurred. Junk bonds. Junk education. Perfect symmetry!