Archives for the month of: July, 2012
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Teaching in a Cybercharter

By dianeravitch
July 15, 2012 //
6

I have posted a few articles about the sham education offered in cybercharters, which have only one great benefit: They make big money for their sponsors.

One of the worst is ECOT–the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow–which rakes in millions despite its high attrition rates and the terrible performance of its students. The owner of ECOT gives generously to Republican politicians, and they in turn favor ECOT. The scariest thought is that this might be the “classroom of tomorrow,” and if it is, our nation is in deep trouble.

I got this email today:

As a former ECOT teacher, I can definitely say that the school is a joke and a waste of taxpayer dollars for the majority of students who attend. Money is spent holding huge professional development sessions several times a year that do little than repeat the things heard at the previous sessions. Student performance is abysmal and administration does nothing to curb truancy. You can log in every 29 days, do no work and absolutely nothing happens. They try to push horrible grading policies, such as a 35% in each quarter = a 70% for the year = passing the class with a C.
Categories Education Reform, Ohio, On-Line Education

Does Privatization Help the Poor?

By dianeravitch
July 15, 2012 //
4

I recently posted about the article and editorial in The Economist praising charter schools. The Economist is a booster of free-market capitalism so it is no surprise that it would admire this venture in privatization. What interested me about the articles was that the magazine quite bluntly described these privately-managed schools as privatization. Charter school advocates here try to hide that distinction. They go to lengths to call themselves “public charter schools” and claim to be “public schools” because they get public money. The Economist sees them plainly as privatization with public funds, outsourcing public schools to private management.

One reader is worried about how this trend towards privatization will affect developing countries:

My main worry about the claim made by the Economist is that now this idea is going to the developing countries and influencing the governments policy to privatization of public education. Many international aid agencies are already talking about it. What I fear is with this movement of privatization, children from poorer households or poor community will be even poorer with no education at all! We all think market is great where we can buy and bargain and negotiate. But market and public welfare really do not go hand in hand or does it?
Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, Poverty, Privatization

Merit Pay for Congress and State Legislatures?

By dianeravitch
July 15, 2012 //
13

Some while back, I suggested on Twitter that members of Congress should get merit pay. It doesn’t seem fair that all of them are paid exactly the same, no matter how effective or ineffective they are. The same might be  said of state legislators. Why don’t they get merit pay? They are eager to impose it on teachers, based on student scores, but they don’t want it for themselves.

The problem with the idea is this: how do you judge effectiveness?

A reader has a good proposal:

I think we should push for MORE merit pay, but in this way:  our state and federal legislators should be paid based on how well their constituents are doing.  percent of unemployment, average family income, property values, crime rate, health/illness rates, etc.  Of course, they will complain about how they can’t control these factors, but it’s very similar to what we are judged on.

Categories Education Reform

Realism in New Jersey: Can We Face It?

By dianeravitch
July 15, 2012 //
6

My favorite New Jersey blogger, known as Jersey Jazzman, is a teacher and one smart guy (I’m assuming he is a guy because of his moniker, which is not Jersey Jazzperson or Jazzwoman).

He has written a very important post. I urge you to read it carefully. It reflects on where the reform movement is heading in his state, and for that matter, nationally. He looks specifically at Newark, which has been a focal point for “reform” money and programs.

He shows (relying on the work of Bruce Baker) that the successful charters are the ones with the least challenging students, and the less successful charters have the most challenging students. The independent variable, as he points out, is not the teachers but the students.

The reformers want even more charters, as they do everywhere else. They want more public money in private hands. Why are they so unwilling to let local residents and parents have any role in the future of their schools other than to choose which one to apply to? Why do billionaires who live in California have more to say abut the future of Newark than the people who live there?

Why do the reformers blame the teachers in Newark for low scores? Why do they blame tenure and seniority for poor results? In the neighboring town, the teachers also have tenure and seniority and get great results.

This is a powerful post. Jersey Jazzman looks deep into the heart of the current American dilemma: Intense concentration of poverty and segregation in certain communities. And he calls on us to look too.

You should.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, New Jersey, Poverty, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration

Disgrace in Detroit

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
44

The city of Detroit is a city with high levels of poverty.

The Detroit public school system has an emergency manager who has imposed a new contract.

This contract will allow class sizes in the upper grades (6-12) to rise to as many as 61.

In grades 4-5, class size might go as high as 46 before officials step in.

In K-3, class size might balloon to 41.

Remember, folks, this is called “education reform.”

I can think of better words to describe what is happening in Detroit.

It’s not about the children. And it’s not about education.

Categories Education Reform

Can You Teach a Great Curriculum by Command?

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
58

I am a fan of Core Knowledge as a concept. I believe in a rich and deep curriculum. I would love to see all students immersed in the study of the great ideas in history, literature, science, mathematics and other fields. I understand that a curriculum doesn’t teach itself. It needs teachers who are well educated and knowledgeable to make the ideas come to life. Some years ago, when I researched the implementation of Core Knowledge, I discovered that many of the most successful sites were applying the concepts in a progressive, constructivist way. Talented teachers were engaging students in real-life projects and activities to make the knowledge into an experience.

I am also an admirer of Robert Pondiscio, who writes wisely and edits the Core Knowledge blog. But I disagree with Robert’s takedown of Carol Burris’s post on this blog. Carol criticized the militaristic style taught to charter teachers by the Relay Graduate School of Education, and Robert for some reason took her post as an abandonment of knowledge. I think that is wrong. Nothing she wrote disparaged the content of curriculum.

If anything, the militaristic style that she criticized is the antithesis of teaching a great curriculum. No one learns Shakespeare by command and by wiggling fingers. No one reflects on history by shouting out answers when called upon.

In my ideal school, students would read, discuss, debate, question, and thirst to learn more. They would take the received wisdom and pull it apart. They would ask why it is wise and why it might not be wise. I don’t see how this kind of lively reflection can happen if a teacher commands obedience and silence at all times. It’s not that classrooms need be noisy. It’s that students need to care. They need to think. Compliance may get obedience, but can it create caring? Do students think on command?I don’t think so.

So while Robert and I are on the same page about curriculum, I think in this case he picked the wrong battle. Burris did not make a case against curriculum. She made a case against a teaching style that does not support the rich curriculum that Robert and I both admire.

Categories Curriculum, Education Reform

Transforming Education into a Marketplace

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
16

This reader scrutinized the website of the Capital Roundtable. This is what he learned:

Although I am not a middle-market investor, I sure did learn a whole bunch over at the Capital Roundtable website. You see, I did not know this:

“Education is now the second largest market in the U.S., valued at $1.3 trillion.  So while an industry of this size will always be scrutinized by regulators, the most onerous recent changes are likely over, and investors should face an easier climate down the road.  And while eventual passage is not guaranteed, several pieces of legislation favoring the for-profit industry have been proposed in Congress.”

And I have been following Arne Duncan and the Race to the Top but it was nice to see the following in black and white.

“In the K-12 space, the federal “Race To The Top” initiative has enabled a growing level of privatization in the K-12 segment, and rewarding districts for embracing alternative models, technological advances, and locally-based criteria.”

So in this new “space” public education is a market not a public good. RTTT enabled privatization. OK, now I get it.

Categories Education Reform, For-Profit, Race to the Top

Is This the Best Lesson Ever?

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
4

Susan Ohanian reports what she describes as possibly the best lesson ever.

Read it for the sheer pleasure of watching a master teacher inspire his students.

Hey, Mike Petrilli and Robert Pondiscio, this is great teaching, great curriculum, and great student engagement.

The teacher is not snapping his fingers, the students are not waving their fingers, and no one is expected to do that SLANT thing about total attention. The teacher has authority because he is teaching a great lesson.

Categories Arts Education, Teachers and Teaching

What Is “Addition Through Subtraction”?

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
10

Critics of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have long warned that the federal government’s demand for ever higher test scores would lead to perverse consequences. There would be narrowing of the curriculum, teaching to the test, cheating, and gaming the system. All of these things have happened, but the advocates of high-stakes testing don’t listen and don’t care.

It isn’t always easy to explain what it means to “game the system.” Connecticut provides an excellent exemplar of what it means and how it is done.

Quite simply, there are districts that have figured out that the best way to raise test scores is to assign more children to the alternate assessment given to students with special needs. As the number of reassignments grows, the scores on the regular state tests rise.

And without any change in curriculum or instruction, the leadership can boast of getting great results. This is what has been called “addition by subtraction.”

It is also a good example of gaming the system.

Categories Accountability, Connecticut, Education Reform, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Race to the Top

Whistleblower in DC Is Suing Rhee, Principal Who Fired Him

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2012 //
10

A U.S. District Court judge ruled that a special education teacher who was fired for complaining about cheating may sue former Chancellor of Schools Michelle Rhee and his former principal Donald Presswood. The teacher, Bruno Mpoy, complained that the principal directed him to falsify test scores. He refused to do so, and he said he was subjected to harassment and suspended. When he brought his complaints to DCPS administrators and Chancellor Rhee, according to his testimony, he was “investigated, harassed, threatened, and ultimately terminated from his teaching position at the direction of Chancellor Rhee, DCPS, and Mr. Presswood.”

Mpoy originally sought to sue not only Rhee and Presswood, but also Mayor Adrian Fenty and the New Teacher Project. The judge decided that he could sue only Rhee and Presswood, based on claims that his First Amendment rights had been violated, and that the D.C. Whistleblower Law had been violated.

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, Rhee, Michelle
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »