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

What We Can Learn from Japan

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
5

The New York Times had a front-page story about a generational divide in Japan.

The article begins, “As Japan has ceded dominance in industry after industry that once lifted this nation to economic greatness, there has been plenty of blame to go around. A nuclear disaster that raised energy costs. A lack of entrepreneurship. China’s relatively cheap work force.”

The article says that the government’s decision to have a strong yen favors the elderly and protects their pensions, but makes Japanese products prohibitively expensive, which is “hollowing out the country’s industrial base” and “exacerbating the nation’s two-decade-long economic stagnation.”

As I read the article, I thought about how American policymakers look enviously at Japan’s high test scores on international assessments.

And it struck me that the economic problems in Japan are not caused by the schools. And the high test scores are not a source of entrepreneurship, nor have they guaranteed a strong economy.

All this deserves consideration. In our nation, our greatest strength is creativity, innovation, risk-taking, and imagination.

Now our policymakers want us to use Japan and other nations with high test scores as a model, claiming that this will lead us to even greater economic growth in the future.

Japan’s dilemma today disproves the theory on which contemporary corporate-driven school reform is based.

Let us learn from their example.

Economic decisions drive the economy. Creative people build a better economy. Higher test scores do not produce a better economy, nor do they nurture the creative genius needed for future innovation.

Will there be an “aha!” moment when leaders of the corporate reform movement realize they are on the wrong track?

Categories Corporate Reformers, Economy, Education Reform, Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), International, Testing

What’s the Purpose of TFA?

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
23

A teacher in Chicago asked this simple question in an article on Huffington Post.

He noted that TFA was created to fill “chronic teacher shortages,” and he quotes Wendy Kopp saying so.

He asks why Chicago is hiring TFA when 2,000 certified teachers have been laid off and remain jobless.

He notes that some of the teachers who were laid off are nationally board certified.

Why are these experienced teachers being replaced by young college graduates with only five weeks of training?

This is a good question.

Is there a good answer?

Categories Chicago, Teach for America TFA

Privatization, Profits, and Politicians

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
8

A reader noted the similarity between Governor Chris Christie’s plan to privatize low-performing public schools, and Governor Rick Snyder’s reform plan in Michigan. Other readers have commented on the irony of conservative Republican governors–allegedly committed to small government–aggressively using the powers of government to undermine local control and privatize schools.

The similarity goes beyond Christie and Snyder. The same ideas–privatize low-performng schools, close low-performing schools–are embedded in Race to the Top, also in the Boston Consulting Group’s plan for Philadelphia, the Mind Trust plan for Indianapolis, the Bloomberg reforms in New York City, Mayor Frank Jackson’s plan for Cleveland. None of these plans ever works, other than by pushing out the low-performing kids and sending them to other struggling schools. It makes you wish that these guys would take a peek at evidence or actually care about the kids. And it also makes you wonder why none of them ever has an original idea. They just copy one another ad infinitum. And the more they copy stale, failed ideas, the more they praise themselves as “innovators.”

When you see how popular these ideas are among conservative Republicans, it shows how far to the right the Republican party has gone, when the principle of profit trumps the principle of local control and respect for tradition:

This sounds very eerily the same as what Gov Rick Snyder has already done here in Michigan. The Educational Achievement Authority (EAA) is set to operate the lowest performing 5% of Michigan schools starting in the 12-13 school year. Here is a quote from the michigan.gov website explaining the EAA ” It (EAA) will first apply to underperforming schools in Detroit in the 2012-2013 school year and then be expanded to cover the entire state.” Is this not a state takeover?
Categories Boston Consulting Group, Michigan, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Privatization

A Debate about U.K. Education

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
3

A reader in the U.K. Offers a dissent to a previous post:

I think that the current British Government are seeking to emulate the worst travesties present in the US system. This is largely because emulating the best practice in more successful education systems will cost money and as such is the last thing they are likely to do.

I disagree the free schools and academies freedom from following the National Curriculum is not a move towards standardised testing. What it does is give them licence to not teach subjects that they view as peripheral (arts, Design and Technology, Food Technology, RE etc) which is likely to lead on more focus on the subjects that are EBAC subjects. This is likely to result in more standardisation of the curriculum and a significant narrowing of the curriculum. it also allows them to opt out of certain subjects that require expensive specialist rooms or equipment.

The governments decision that Qualified Teacher Status is not needed is a nonsense that can only harm children. It is an attack on the teaching profession and a transparent attempt to worsen teachers pay and conditions and make our ineffectual unions even less effective. It also proves that all their rhetoric about raising the status of the profession was nothing more than a lie.

Their making the process for sacking poor teachers part of the performance management process is ill conceived and makes a poor, meaningless process significantly worse. Their constant teacher bashing displays a dislike of and contempt for the profession that fits in with their decision to allow academies and free schools to employ unqualified teachers.

Sadly there are a large number of teachers that appear to be enthusiastic about the worst of these changes and are determined to be the turkeys that vote for Christmas.

There are those that support performance related pay and local pay bargaining because they for some reason believe these will result in them getting paid more.

There are those career-oriented types that vocally support any nonsense that is introduced without first engaging their brains and looking at it. So desperate are they to appear on message they will endorse any old nonsense and try to make us all embrace it too. When I think of the amount of money that has gone from our schools into the hands of private companies for all kinds of nonsense I despair.

My main concern is that government policy flies in the face of their stated aims.

They say they want to give schools more autonomy:
1) They have dramatically increased the number of schools that are only answerable to the secretary of state for education (and nominally the market).
2) The league tables essentially determine which subjects schools teach and which they focus on most
3) OFSTED (the inspection regime) have a staggeringly prescriptive definition of good teaching which is borderline facistic in its demands that certain things MUST be included in lessons if teaching is to be considered satisfactory or better. Many of these things have little or no evidence to support their inclusion in my opinion.

They say they want to raise the status of the profession:
1) They have removed that requirement that teachers have a teaching qualification
2) They constantly focus on coasting and bad teaching and incessantly denigrate the profession.
3) The constantly misuse statistics and mangle the english language to create the impression that the results are worse than they are.

They say they want to support teachers with behaviour issues:
1) The policy of penalising schools for excluding pupils remains and has in fact been worsened.
2) They constantly claim to have given us new rights. Mostly these are things we didn’t want, need or are not new. (Searching pupils bags, confiscating phones, no notice detentions etc)
3) They have not actually done anything that is likely to make behaviour in schools any better and their constant attacks on the profession are only going to make teachers less respected.

I think that all of these moves are a prelude to privatisation and the creation of a two tier system. The creation of academies once past a certain number of academies will make national pay bargaining impossible. The removal of national pay bargaining is an essential step for the right in the march towards privatisation.
Categories Education Reform, Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), International

Is the Department of Education Over-reaching?

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
10

I posted about the Department of Education’s plan to rate the teacher preparation programs in colleges and universities by the test scores of the children taught by their graduates–that’s a stretch, if you think about it. One reader saw the absurdity of it and wondered if others saw it too:

Going after universities – Yowzer! I’ve heard rumors and have periodically seen articles and posts regarding this. I’m past ticked. This is asinine. What is the reasoning? Why should a professor who taught me, be responsible for me and my students? Who thinks dreams and rationalizes this horse mess?

Please, someone, share with me the thought process and decision trees that brought about this policy. This is like something out of the old Andy Hardy movies (I like classic films- I never saw them when they came out). When money was needed, Andy and Polly would put on show. This is similar. Let’s dictate policy. Cool. What do you think about…? Hey that sounds great. Problem solved. NOT!

When I ask will the grown-ups enter the room?  What is going on? I thought the Department of Education was to provide support to the states. Not run the schools, colleges and universities of the United States.

I don’t care what side of the political spectrum you’re on- this is definitely overreach. I’m wondering who he’ll/they’ll go after next. The students or the parents? Shouldn’t they be held accountable? Eventually Arne should be held accountable. Who knows when; if ever.

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, Teacher Evaluations, Teachers and Teaching, U.S. Department of Education

Why Does StudentsFirst Deceive?

By dianeravitch
August 3, 2012 //
10

A reader posts a particularly egregious example of the deceptive tactics used by StudentsFirst to enroll new members. I long ago reported that Change.org had decided not to allow Michelle Rhee’s organization to lure the unsuspecting into signing a petition that seemingly supports teachers, but actually enrolls them as in an effort to eliminate collective bargaining rights, tenure, seniority, and any form of job protection for experienced teachers. That’s what Change.org said, but it never acted on this new policy. It’s still enabling Rhee’s deceptive recruitment..

Diane, you have informed readers of your blog several times that you inadvertently signed a Students First petition because you did not know it was posted by Michelle Rhee’s organization.

In Philadelphia, the school nurses posted a petition to restore 100 positions that have been cut because it means nurses now have 1500 students they serve rather than 750, and most schools only have a nurse two days a week as a result. 

http://www.change.org/petitions/school-reform-commission-school-district-of-phila-restore-the-certified-school-nurse-ratio-to-1-nurse-to-750-students

When you sign the petition, you are taken to another petition which says vote on our petition “Good Teachers Deserve Decent Pay”. (I don’t know if this happens to everyone, it did to me.) In the fine print, it says this is a Students First petition. I’m sure many people click on it not realizing this is a vote in support of privatization.

By their deceptive methods, the deformers show their contempt for democracy. As far as they are concerned deception, lying, and stealing public property are OK as long as it promotes their privatization agenda.

Categories Education Reform, Rhee, Michelle, StudentsFirst

Is This the True Christie Plan?

By dianeravitch
August 2, 2012 //
40

A reader suggests the real purpose of the Christie “school reform” plan. Or could it be to introduce private markets to public education, with profits for some, losses for others?

Chris Christie, like many Republicans, main goal is to break the teacher union; it has nothing to do with education. He has no real interest in helping underperforming schools or struggling students.

Categories Education Reform, For-Profit, New Jersey, Privatization, Unions

Chris Christie’s Plan to Privatize NJ’s Low-Performing Schools

By dianeravitch
August 2, 2012 //
21

The Education Law Center, an independent organization that advocates for the children of New Jersey,  obtained a copy of a proposal that the Chris Christie administration made to the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation in Los Angeles.

The plan calls for aggressive state intervention in the state’s lowest performing schools. Acting Commissioner Chris Cerf wants to set up an “achievement district” for the low-performing schools. These schools would likely be closed and handed over to private managers as charter schools. The state plan calls for eliminating collective bargaining in these schools.

The amount requested was $7.6 million, of which the Broad Foundation has thus far supplied $1.6 million.

This should not be a difficult sell for Cerf. He is a “graduate” of the Broad Foundation’s unaccredited Superintendent’s Academy. And the chairman of the board of the foundation is his former boss, Joel Klein.

It’s somewhat strange that people like Cerf (and Arne Duncan, for that matter) think that a school gets “reformed” or “turned around” by firing the staff, closing the school, and handing it off to a charter operator. Cerf is a smart enough guy, and he surely knows that charters on average don’t produce better results than the public schools they replace unless they push out the low-performing kids.

One of the news stories says that Cerf wants to use New Orleans “recovery school district” as a model for New Jersey, but I wonder if he knows that 79% of the charters in New Orleans were graded either D or F by the state, and that New Orleans ranked 69th of 70 districts in the entire state.

How long can this shell game go on?

I understand that the people in the Abbott districts (the poorest cities where the lowest-performing schools are) may be accustomed to getting pushed around by the state, but how will the people of New Jersey feel about Christie and Cerf bringing in a raft of charter school operators to privatize what used to be their public schools?

Categories Accountability, Broad Foundation, Cerf, Chris, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Klein, Joel, New Jersey, New Orleans

Profiteers Circling the Schools, Looking for $$

By dianeravitch
August 2, 2012 //
61

So here it is folks. Stephanie Simon of Reuters attended that private equity investors’ conference at an elite Manhattan setting and the boys are looking to make money from selling their stuff to the schools, running schools, teaching math, investing in new ventures of all kinds.

This is what many suspected but found hard to believe. The Wall Street crowd says this is their moment.

They see the steady advance of privatization and for-profit ventures and they love it.

They know that the purpose of the new academic standards is to create winners and losers, and they will invest in product to sell to both ends of the spectrum.

They will monetize the children, outsource the teaching, do anything that turns a buck.

Who will stop them?

We know Romney won’t. Will Obama?

Categories Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization

What If We Had Medical Reformers in Congress?

By dianeravitch
August 2, 2012 //
9

Gary Rubinstein has played with an analogy. What if Congress and the Administration and the governors became alarmed about life expectancy rates?

What if they decided that we need a serious dose of med reform?

What if they followed the same principles as school reform?

What if these policymakers knew as little about medicine as they know about education?

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »