Archives for the month of: September, 2012

During the strike, there was an outpouring of ads undermining and attacking the union. This blogger wondered who was paying for them. The group is called Education Reform Now. It is the non-profit arm of Democrats for Education Reform. DFER, as it is known, is the political action group of Wall Street hedge fund managers.

So many of them went to Andover, Exeter, Deerfield Academy, and other elite private schools. But for some reason, they want something different for poor and minority children: Not schools like Andover, Exeter, etc., which have small classes and a rich curriculum and beautiful facilities, but boot camps, where children learn to be silent, to walk in straight lines, and to obey without question.

Someday sociologists will figure out how the hedge fund managers became the primary players in “school reform,” and why they want minority children to have a schooling for compliance, not the kind of schooling they had or the kind they want for their own children. And why they hate unions and look down on teachers.

For now, it will remain a puzzle of our time.

An article in the recent issue of Education Week suggests that there is support for vouchers among Democrats at the state and local level.

The article cites Newark Mayor Cory Booker, but he is an outlier.

It also quotes the head of a group called the American Federation for Children. This group attracts support for vouchers from very wealthy Republicans. It is headed by Betsy DeVos, a very conservative Republican advocate for vouchers and privatization. Last year, AFS honored Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and Michelle Rhee. The AFS might is hardly a barometer of opinion in the Democratic party.

The article is indicative of the fact that groups on the right are giving money to Democratic candidates in order to buy off opposition to their privatization campaign.

There comes a time when the seemingly disparate parts of a puzzle fit together. Or the time when you see the pattern on the rug.

That’s when you see that the attacks on teachers, the concerted efforts to roll back collective bargaining rights, the frequent–and false–claims that public education is failing, the advocacy for virtual schools, movies like “Waiting for Superman,” laws that advance privatization….a pattern emerges.

These are not isolated events.

Read my take on the pattern.

A reader sees how the pieces of the reform movement fit together:

I think that all the double-speak is just to divert attention away from the major process of dismantling education that has been taking place across the country, and the smoke and mirrors is to conceal the intention to ultimately declare brick and mortar schools obsolete and teachers expendable and unnecessary. Effectively, the goal is to not have teachers anymore.

One online teacher I work with put it this way recently, “We’re just glorified graders now.” Honestly, for a teacher, there is no glory when your job boils down to just grading. But politicians, corporate reformers and companies like Pearson and K-12 seem to think that education can be reduced to presenting material on a screen and testing, and that they can train virtually anyone to be graders.

Actually, online, you can set it up so that tests are self-administered and automatically generate grades, so currently instructors are grading papers, class discussions, group projects, participation, etc. and I can see how that might one day be considered superfluous to the powers that be.

Kenneth Bernstein explains why he didn’t get the job:

“I was once interviewed for a teaching position where because I had done my own homework I knew that the principal wanted everyone on the same page at the same time.

I was being interviewed by the department chair and an assistant principal. Having signed an open contract for that district, the only question on the table was at what school I would teach. It was clear they wanted me, having mentioned that if I came I could probably also be the boys head soccer coach.

But the following exchanged ensued.

Me: I understand your principal wants everyone on the same page at the same time.

Assistant Principal: – Yes, she is a strong instructional leader.

Me: I don’t doubt that. But I know you called my current school for a reference and I know what they told you, that if it made instructional sense I could have my six different classes doing six different things. Why would you want to hire me and then take away from me what makes me an effective teacher?

The two of them looked at one another, and I knew I had made certain that they would not select me for that position.

It goes further than that. For much of my career I taught government and politics. It was important for me to be able to be responsive to news that was relevant to the course and to the students.

And most of all, if students in one class failed to fully grasp a content, why should I be moving on, merely to stay on the pacing guide? How is that helping their learning? If in another class it was clear they grasped the material in less than the expected time, why could I not enrich their learning by doing something else.

When I first worked with computers in the Marine Corps in the 1960s, our primary source of input was punch cards which were labeled “Don’t fold, spindle or mutilate.” When we insist upon teaching our children and the classes they attend exactly the same way, when we ignore the differences among them, we are folding, spindling and mutilating them and their opportunity to learn in a meaningful way.”

Kenneth J. Bernstein is a retired award-winning Social Studies teacher, who before he switched to teaching late in life spent several decades working in data processing.

A reader asks whether we have lost our minds.

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/CCSS/PreK_ELA_Crosswalk.pdf

Click to access PreK_ELA_Crosswalk.pdf

The links above take you to draft Connecticut documents relating to CCSS for preschoolers. The introduction states that the adoption of CCSS for K-12 “has naturally led to questions regarding standards for preschool and/or prekindergarten students.” The next section talks about a work group that has been charged with the task of creating comprehensive learning standards for birth to age 5.

Yes, the CCSS and these documents have “naturally led to questions” in my mind. Here are some of them: Are you crazy? Have you ever spent a full day with a toddler? How about with a room full of toddlers? Has your life experience not taught you that children are not little robots that all develop the same skills at the same time? What are all of the wonderful memories you cherish from your own childhood? I’ll bet those memories are about things like books and blocks and crayons and swings. Are any of those precious memories about being assessed?

This teacher had to make a tough decision about parent night.

Should he tell them how the state’s “reforms” are robbing their children of instruction?

Should he explain that the state is hunting “bad” teachers in his school even though it got a high rating?

See what he did.

If every teacher did this, we could turn the education debate around.

The Economic Policy Institute has published its annual report on the state of working America.

There are some deeply worrisome trends. Here are some of the findings:

*America’s vast middle class has suffered a “lost decade” and faces the threat of another. The wages of typical Americans, including college graduates, are lower today than they have been in over a decade. Because hourly wages and compensation failed to grow after the 2001 recession, household incomes had declined even before the Great Recession. Furthermore, forecasts of high unemployment for many years ahead suggest that another lost decade for typical American workers and their families, as measured by wages and income, has already begun.

*Income and wage inequality have risen sharply over the last 30 years. Income inequality has grown sharply since 1979, a fact that is universally recognized by researchers. The trends that have driven this growing inequality in overall incomes are growing concentration of both capital income (the returns to financial assets) and labor income (wages and benefits), as well as a shift from labor income toward capital income.

*Rising inequality is the major cause of wage stagnation for workers and of the failure of low- and middle-income families to appropriately benefit from growth. The typical worker has not benefited from productivity growth since 1979, though there has been sufficient economic growth to provide a substantial across-the-board increase in living standards. Instead, higher earners have reaped a disproportionate share of wage income, and the top one percent of households have received a disproportionate share of all income growth. Aside from the period of strong growth in the late-1990s, wages for low-and middle-wage workers were stagnant from 1979 to 2007, and incomes for lower- and middle-class households grew slowly.

*Economic policies caused increased inequality of wages and incomes. Inequality between the very top wage earners and all others grew from 1979 to 2011 except during stock declines, driven by growing executive compensation and an expanded and increasingly highly-paid financial sector. Inequality between the top wage earners and middle-wage earners also grew from 1979 to 2011. A number of policies played a role in this growth, including those that: (1) targeted rates of unemployment too high to provide reliably tight labor markets for low- and middle-wage workers; (2) hastened global integration of the U.S. economy without protecting U.S. workers; (3) failed to manage destructive international trade imbalances; (4) allowed employer practices hostile to unions to flourish; (5) privatized and deregulated industry, including the financial sector; and (6) eroded labor standards. Inequality between middle-wage earners and the lowest wage earners grew only in the 1980s, fueled by the erosion of the purchasing power of the minimum wage and, again, the targeting of rates of unemployment that were too high. Tax and budget policies have compounded the inequalities that have been generated in market-based, pre-tax incomes.

*Claims that growing inequality has not hurt middle-income families are flawed. Some recent studies have suggested that measures of comprehensive income since 1979 show that middle-income families have seen adequate income growth. Rather, incomes for the middle class have not grown as fast as average incomes, and middle-income growth was much slower between 1979 and 2007 than it was between 1947 and 1979. Furthermore, more than half of the income growth between 1979 and 2007 was made up of government transfers, which reflects the strength of programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not the strength of the labor market. In fact, higher household labor earnings can be traced to increasing work hours, not higher wages. Finally, the data on comprehensive incomes are technically flawed because they count rapidly rising health expenditures made on behalf of households by employers and the government as income, without taking excessive health care inflation into account.

*Growing income inequality has not been offset by increased mobility. There is no evidence that mobility—changes in economic status from one generation to the next—has increased to offset rising inequality, and some research shows a decline.
Inequalities persist by race and gender. Key economic measures, including unemployment, wealth, and poverty (particularly child poverty), continue to show staggering disparities by race and ethnicity. Gender disparities also persist, and while gaps in labor market outcomes have closed in recent decades, a number have done so because men lost ground, not because women gained it.

This is an excellent analysis by economist Laura D’Andrea Tyson about poverty and educational opportunity. She provides excellent links to up-to-date statistics about children living in poverty. She understands that their opportunities are shadowed by the circumstances of their lives.

But at the end of this otherwise excellent article, she concludes that President Obama’s Race to the Top program is addressing the problem of poverty and limited opportunity.

I am guessing she has no idea what the Race to the Top consists of. I wonder if she knows that it is designed to cater to the “no excuses” crowd at the NewSchools Venture Fund that believes that poverty is no obstacle if public schools are turned over to private management, if students take more tests, if teachers are evaluated by their students test scores, and if kids are taught to walk in straight lines and drilled to take tests.

I left a comment, something I seldom do. You should too.

Please read Students Last, who noticed the absence of any real, actual teachers at the New York Times conference on “Schools of Tomorrow.”

He says there is a rumor that NBC’s “Medication Nation” might invite a physician, to add to the panel of pharmaceutical giants.