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

Advice to a New Teacher

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
7

I never tell teachers how to teach. But I listen when experienced teachers offer good advice. Here is some that just was posted as a comment to an aspiring teacher:

…absolutely keep listening to those mentors. You learn so much in your education preparation program, and then you learn so much more on the job. I remember feeling woefully underprepared for teaching after I graduated. I learned more by doing than I had learned in my undergraduate classes, but the most important lessons I learned in college were from my cooperating teachers. They were invaluable resources.

Teaching is a people-centric act. We are taught to teach lessons, but what we are really doing is preparing lessons and teaching people. When you enter your classroom, always remember the importance of communicating with your students. Be real, be prepared, be on top of your lesson and its objectives, and always, always be ready to adjust the lesson so that you can foster an atmosphere of relevance for your students. All the things they taught you in school are useful in the mind. To truly put them into practice, you need to wholly connect WITH those people in your charge. That is, above all, your greatest objective. Best of luck to you.

Categories Teachers and Teaching

Why I’m On Your Side

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
5

I was asked to contribute to a blog collection about teachers.

This is what I wrote:

http://teacherpoetmusicianglenbrown.blogspot.com/2012/07/im-on-your-side-by-diane-ravitch.html

Categories Teachers and Teaching

How Can We Cure Very, Very Sick Public Policy?

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
3

A teacher in Philadelphia wrote a terrific article explaining why her school is “incredible.”

The state labeled it “low-performing.”

Now her students will be allowed to “escape” to another school.

But, she points out,

A staggering 95 percent of our students come from poor families, nearly 30 percent are learning English, and at least 16 percent have special needs. You will never hear me use those numbers as excuses, though. I tell anyone who will listen that my students are some of the most intelligent, engaging, enthusiastic, and resilient children in Pennsylvania.

She describes the many successes of her students, each of whom has achieved a personal triumph this year and concludes:

 Each and every child in my classroom had his or her own successes. Will those successes be reflected in their test scores? I hope so. But even if they are not, that doesn’t diminish their triumphs.

Yet when these students come back to school in September, they will hear that they go to an underachieving school, and that they can go to a “good” school. What message will they take away?

It would never cross my mind to call a student “bad.” But now the state is labeling entire schools — and, in turn, communities — “bad.” That is distressing not only because I know my colleagues and I are committed to excellence, but also because it will be one more way society is telling our students they are unworthy.

 

 

 

Categories Accountability, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Philadelphia, Poverty

Why the ACLU Is Suing Michigan

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
2

The ACLU has filed suit against the agencies and people who, they claim, have failed the children of Highland Park. This is one of three districts where a state emergency manager was sent to take charge because of fiscal distress. He shut down the public schools and will turn the students over to charter operators. In this letter, the state’s ACLU director explains why it is suing:

The Detroit News’ July 16 editorial, “ACLU’s Highland Park lawsuit blames wrong defendants,” woefully missed the mark. The News says that the ACLU should have sued only the local school board for having failed the children of Highland Park.

The truth is, there’s plenty of blame to go around. That is why we sued the state, the district, its emergency manager, the state superintendent, the State Board of Education and the state Department of Education. All have failed the children of Highland Park. And all have a legal and moral responsibility to help craft a solution.

Governance of the district may be one important issue, but it is not the only one. The same amount of attention, or more, should be paid to the kinds of programs and academic interventions needed to remedy a district where 90 percent of the students, by 11th grade, are not reading proficiently and 100 percent are failing science and social studies, as measured by the Michigan Merit Exam.

The News never explains howchanging the governance structure would cure all these ills. The children in this district cannot read and there are no plans or programs in place for September when they return. A clear and specific commitment to begin the turnaround now by the state would go a long way in making certain that whoever runs the schools will be held accountable for delivering basic literacy skills.

State law is very specific: “A pupil who does not score satisfactorily on the 4th or 7th grade [MEAP] reading test shall be provided special assistance reasonably expected to enable the pupil to bring his or her reading skills to grade level within 12 months.” No entity charged with educating Highland Park’s children has taken on the educational deficiencies there in any meaningful way.

One of our clients, a seventh-grade student in Highland Park, struggled to write this sentence: “You can make the school gooder by geting people that will do the jod that is pay for get a football tame for the kinds mybe a baksball tamoe get a other jamtacher for the school.”

Although he attends school regularly, he only reads at a first-grade level. He has not been diagnosed with any special learning disability. He has never received any individualized reading intervention or remedial instruction. We should all be asking — how can this be?

This student’s community is in desperate need of intervention programs and education reform policies that put the best interests of the child front and center. And at the end of the day the buck should stop with the state, which is charged, under the constitution, with “maintaining and supporting a system of public education.” It should stop with the district, which is charged with implementing that system. It should stop with the emergency manager who, we understand, is working on a part-time basis in a district whose phones aren’t getting answered. It should stop with the teachers, and the unions, and the parents.

Our lawsuit therefore asks that both state and local officials get to work right away. We ask that they use research-based methodologies to improve basic literacy skills. We ask that they put trained teachers in the classrooms. We ask that they provide each child with the books they need. We ask that they provide safe and clean classrooms, bathrooms and hallways. We ask that they make a determined effort to help every child achieve reading and math literacy.

Rather than play the blame game, The News would better serve its readers by covering stories that show that all children can learn if given the right tools.

Kary Moss is executive director of the ACLU of Michigan.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120730/OPINION01/207300302#ixzz228K2kqoj

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, Michigan

Why Are Teachers Silent?

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
112

Many readers have noted that their colleagues go along with policies they know are wrong. They comply because compliance is easier than resistance. They comply because they fear losing their job or being seen as a troublemaker.

This is sad but understandable. People need to feel secure, they need to feed their family and pay the mortgage.  Few people want to step outside their comfort zone or risk opprobrium and punishment from their supervisor.

Go along and get along is a lot pleasanter than being abrasive. But dream for a minute. What would happen if every teacher in a district refused to give tests that don’t show what their students know and can do? What would happen if teachers said no to policies that hurt children? And to policies that are unprofessional?

Sort of reminds you why teacher unions were created almost a century ago.

Just thinking.

Categories Education Reform, Teachers and Teaching

Recommended Reading for Roland Fryer and His Colleagues

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
1

A reader suggests some reading for Professor Fryer and his colleagues. Fryer has spent years searching for the incentive that works. This reader says he should stop searching and read an article by Frederick Herzberg.  No, it did not appear in the Teachers College Record or the Harvard Educational Review or Phi Delta Kappan or an AERA journal. This is the classic article to which he refers:

Check out the <i>Harvard Business Review</i>.  There is a classic article there from the  . . . 1950s?  1968 originally? often reprinted . . . Frederick Herzberg, “One more time:  How do you motivate employees, <i>Harvard Business Review</i>, 46 (January/February), 53–62.

Motivator-Hygiene Theory.  Loss aversion?  That’s a demotivator, a destroyer of motivation, a destroyer of teams — and ultimately it can lead to violent revolution.

<b>Motivators</b>, in order that Herzberg first found them:  Achievement, Recognition, the Work Itself, Responsibility, Advancement, Growth. Later research notes people will work hard to get on a winning team with good people (but not a winning team with schmucks).

Hygiene factors, or dissatisfiers, again in order:  Policy and Administration, Supervision, Relationship with Supervisor, Work Conditions, <b>Salary</b>, Relationship with Peers, Personal Life, Relationships with Subordinates, Status, Security.  Notice how far down the ladder is “Salary,” but notice that it will dissatisfy, and is NEVER a motivator (except for a about 14 days after a significant pay raise, Herzberg hypothesized).

Fryer’s an economist?  We need a psychologist, a coach, a leader, and a pastor, and we get an economist?  Is this the same guy who figured it would be cheaper to pay the odd successful wrongful death tort suit instead of spending $1.89 to fix the Ford Pinto gas tank?

Give me an economist who values human life over machination, please.  Can we sue him for economic malpractice?  Terroristic threats?  Call Homeland Security.  Get him out of the building.  Don’t listen to him until he gets an appointment to get the word from Herzberg.

(Herzberg is dead, I know.  Loss-aversion should be dead, too.)

Why in the world aren’t they consulting the hard literature and research on motivation, instead of inventing new Hunger Games?  Is that Fryer I hear quacking in the background?

Categories Education Reform, Merit pay, Teachers and Teaching

VAM Madness in Florida

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
13

A reader describes the madness of value-added assessment as practiced in Florida:

I teach English in a Florida high school. Although I taught all juniors last year, my VAM score was based on the school average for 9th and 10th grade. Why? Because they cease testing in 10th grade except for those who don’t pass. Of my juniors who didn’t pass FCAT as sophomores, I had a stellar retake pass rate–but that’s not going to count for me. Only what other teachers are doing with other kids I couldn’t identify if you paid me big bucks.

Don’t even get me started about what they’re doing to my colleagues in the arts, JROTC, or other electives. Data selection is arbitrary. Considering that we were in a high-needs, inner-city school, none of us came out looking good.

I’m all for evaluation, but to conflate test score results with teacher quality is wrongheaded, misguided, and downright crazy. Unfortunately, better ways of doing this take money and time and won’t enrich outside providers’ wallets, so it’ll never happen.

For the love of Pete, folks, get noisy. Talk to everyone, and vote for sane candidates in November!
Categories Accountability, Teacher Evaluations, Teachers and Teaching, Testing

Are Charter Schools Public Schools?

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
11

A school district review in Philadelphia determined that many of the charters set up significant obstacles to students who want to enroll.

In one school, applications are available only one day in the year. “Another unnamed charter required applicants to complete an 11-page application, write an essay, respond to 20 short-answer questions, provide three recommendations, be interviewed, and provide records related to their disciplinary history, citizenship and disability status.”

When the School Reform Commission imposes its massive privatization scheme, there will be many more hoops and hurdles, leaving the public schools with the students who couldn’t figure out how to get into a charter school. A system of haves and have-nots. Winners and losers.

Categories Charter Schools, Philadelphia, Privatization

Fearful of an Election

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
17

I read an editorial in the Wall Street Journal this morning about Bridgeport, Connecticut, where the Connecticut Supreme Court has ordered a special election for the city’s school board.

Read this editorial. What is amazing about it is the palpable fear of an election. The Wall Street Journal says that an election is a “blow” to school reform. It portrays the aspirants for the elected board in a poor light.

The district now has an appointed board (the court said the appointment of the board was illegal). This illegal board hired Paul Vallas. The editorial says that Vallas achieved fame for leading Chicago, Philadelphia, and New Orleans and is now creating a national model for reform in Bridgeport. If what he is doing in Bridgeport is indeed exemplary, why would an elected board stop it from happening?

Why the terror of democracy?

The appointed board has already extended Vallas’ contract for the next year, tying the hands of the elected board. So for a year, the WSJ need not fear.

Categories Connecticut

Arne Duncan Is Imposing NCLB on Teacher Education

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2012 //
32

The U.S. Department of Education is trying to compel institutions of higher education to accept regulations that judge the quality of teacher-training institutions by the test scores of students taught by their graduates. If Johnny gets a low score on standardized tests, Arne Duncan wants to punish his teacher, his principal, his school, and the university that prepared his teacher.

Is there no end to these dunder-headed policies?

Higher education associations are outraged. A group of major organizations representing higher education convened a task force to respond to pressure from the DOE to use standardized testing as the measure of teacher-preparation institutions. To find its statement, google “Higher Education Task Force on Teacher Preparation.” Its statement was signed by:

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education American Association of State Colleges and Universities American Council on Education
American Psychological Association

Association of American Universities
Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities
Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities
Council for Christian Colleges and Universities
National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities

 

Here is a letter from David Warren of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, a member of the task force, to Secretary Duncan:

The Honorable Arne Duncan
Secretary of the U. S. Department of Education Washington, DC

Dear Mr. Secretary:

On behalf of the nation’s non-profit private colleges and universities, and the undersigned organizations that represent the broad diversity of private higher education, I write to share our concerns about the pending regulations on teacher preparation and TEACH Grants.

As you work on preparing the regulatory language to issue an NPRM for public comment, I hope you will take our concerns into consideration, since consensus was not reached during the negotiated rulemaking process earlier this year. Meredith College, a small women’s college in North Carolina, represented NAICU and private colleges as an alternate negotiator during the process, so we have first-hand knowledge of the discussions that took place around the negotiating table.

The draft regulations proposed by the Department during the final negotiated rule making session raise four major concerns for private colleges. The proposals circumvent current statute, apply the tenets of NCLB to higher education, prescribe an untested one-size-fits-all accountability model for teacher preparation, and set the precedent of awarding Title IV student financial aid based on program evaluation rather than student need.

No Child Left Behind for higher education: While Congress is trying to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and get states away from NCLB high stakes tests, the draft regulations would require states impose such high stakes test in higher education on teacher preparation programs. States would be required to rate every teacher preparation program on a four-point scale, using criteria that have not been determined to be valid and reliable for this purpose. These criteria represent a federal mandate on the state for quality control in a field governed by individual states. There is no statutory authority for either requirement.

One size fits all accountability: The draft criteria have not been documented by research to be valid and reliable measures of preparation program effectiveness. While value-added assessments are helpful for classroom evaluations, we are concerned that those scores, stretched beyond their intention, do not reflect the quality of a teacher preparation program. Job placement and job retention rates do not reflect the quality of a preparation program. Multiple factors outside of graduates’ preparation have an impact on their ability to find a job and their decisions to remain in the teaching workforce. Multiple factors influence K-12 student performance beyond the teacher’s preparation, such as school working conditions, school leadership, and school resources. It is unfair to the teacher candidates, the schools and the children in the classrooms to have so much riding on their outcomes.

Unprecedented link between Title IV student aid eligibility and program quality: We are greatly concerned that the draft regulations make an unprecedented link between need-based student aid and the rating of the teacher preparation program quality. Defining “high quality preparation program” for the purposes of TEACH Grant eligibility based on the state rating mandated from the federal government criteria is a complete change in the federal role in providing Title IV need-based student aid. Any changes to Title IV student aid should be made through the congressional reauthorization process. Student financial aid should be based on the students’ financial need and the quality of the institution (as determined through institutional accreditation), not on the programs in which they enroll.

States and colleges aren’t ready: While many states are building data systems, few of these systems are developed enough to follow graduates into the workforce, as would be required by the proposed regulations. The proposal adds multiple reporting requirements – not authorized by statute – to the current institutional and state teacher preparation report cards. There is no cost- estimate for state and college implementation of the increased regulatory burden, such as the cost for collecting the new data, conducting annual employer and graduate surveys, could be exorbitant.

With more than 1,000 members nationwide, NAICU reflects the diversity of private, nonprofit higher education in the United States. Members include traditional liberal arts colleges, major research universities, church- and faith-related institutions, historically black colleges and universities, women’s colleges, performing and visual arts institutions, two-year colleges, and schools of law, medicine, engineering, business, and other professions. NAICU is committed to celebrating and protecting this diversity of the nation’s private colleges and universities.

We would be happy to meet with you and your staff before the NPRM is issued this summer. We look forward to commenting on the proposed regulations once they are released.

Sincerely,

David L. Warren President 
Categories Accountability, Duncan, Arne, Higher Education, Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »