Archives for the month of: September, 2012

The Heartland Institute in Chicago, a major advocate for charters and vouchers, has issued a statement supporting Rahm Emanuel and urging him to be firm in resisting the demands of the Chicago Teachers Union. Is Mayor Emanuel at the right convention?

Heartland Institute Education Expert Reacts to
Chicago Teachers Union Strike Threat

The Chicago Teachers Union on Wednesday filed unfair labor practice charges against Chicago Public Schools, and CTU President Karen Lewis says the union will not extend its Monday, September 10 deadline to reach a new contract or go on strike.

The following statement from Joy Pullmann of the Chicago-based Heartland Institute – a free-market think tank – may be used for attribution. For more comments, refer to the contact information below. To book a Heartland guest on your program, please contact Tammy Nash at tnash@heartland.org and 312/377-4000. After regular business hours, contact Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org and 312/731-9364.


“The Chicago Teachers Union is playing a game of chicken with taxpayer dollars, parent patience, and children’s futures. Their threats to strike, bluffs or not, should be seen for the craven malfeasance that represents what’s wrong with the incredibly expensive and ineffective Chicago Public Schools.

“Chicago teachers make about a third more than the average Cook County worker, and they receive far better pensions. The city is as broke as its hobos. Mayor Rahm Emanuel shouldn’t blink, and voters should demand the union stand down.”

Joy Pullmann
Research Fellow, The Heartland Institute
Managing Editor, School Reform News
jpullmann@heartland.org
312/377-4000

 

Andrea Gabor wonders why Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick drew national attention to Orchard Gardens while ignoring the true turnaround at Brockton High School, the state’s largest high school?

Orchard Gardens fits the Duncan script: Blame the teachers, fire 80% of them. But the school made modest gains and still has low scores. Contrary to what Governor Patrick claimed, it is not “one of the best schools in the state” in only one year. He neglected to mention that the school has had six principals in seven years.

Brockton High, however, is truly a remarkable story of collaboration and success. And it does not follow the Duncan script. There were no mass firings. There was no blaming teachers. Instead there was a focused effort to improve literacy, not by testing and test prep, but by reading, writing, and discussion. The change did not occur in a single year. And the results are impressive.

Why didn’t Governor Patrick tell the story of Brockton High?

At the Democratic National Convention, Arne Duncan renounced many of his own policies.

He came out in opposition to teaching to the test, although his own Race to the Top demands it (he never mentioned Race to the Top.)

He denounced the millionaires and billionaires who are supporting the charter school movement and privatization of public education (he didn’t mention that either).

He didn’t mention that he wants education colleges to be graded by the test scores of the students of their graduates.

He didn’t mention merit pay, into which his Department of Education has pumped nearly $ billion.

He didn’t mention the proliferation of for-profit schools.

He didn’t mention that he campaigned with Newt Gingrich to rally support for Race to the Top.

He didn’t mention that he called Bobby Jindal’s choice for state commissioner a “visionary leader,” who now promotes vouchers and the disestablishment of public education.

We should be grateful, I suppose, for what he did not mention.

Computer adaptive assessments are all the rage. They are supposed to be not only cost effective but they allegedly are objective and standardize grading. Also, and not incidentally, they are big business in an age of mass testing.

The idea behind them is that the student answers a question (picks a bubble), and if it is the right answer, gets a question that is slightly harder. If the answer is wrong, the next question is slightly easier. In this way, the computer soon figures out what the student’s level of competence is. Watch for the next round of computer assessments that score student essays. Expect an end to imaginative writing as computers are not programmed to understand what they have never before encountered.

This parent explains why her daughter doesn’t like computer adaptive assessments and how she copes with them. It appears that her daughter has never taken a test that asked her to show what she knows, just to pick the right bubble.

 

My kid doesn’t like online adaptive assessments. She likes knowing there are 50 questions in 40 minutes.  She hates tests that give you many more difficult questions when you answer correctly. The test seems to go on forever.

So, one time she decided to hit buttons randomly and get a bunch wrong. Then the computer spit out fewer, easier questions, and she was able to finish the test at last.

New Jersey has announced the schools that are targeted for aggressive intervention.

It will not surprise readers of this blog to learn that most of these schools serve children of color and children of poverty. Many, most or all of these schools will be closed. If Governor Christie has his way, many new charters will open to replace public schools.

According to the Education Law Center of New Jersey:

In early April, NJDOE released the list of schools in the new classifications. An ELC analysis of the list shows:

  • 75 schools are classified as Priority Schools based on low scores on state standardized tests; 97% of the students attending these schools are Black and Latino, 81% are poor, and 7% are English language learners. 
  • 183 schools are classified as Focus Schools based on low graduation rates or large gaps on state tests; 72% of the students in these schools are black and Hispanic, 63% are poor, and 10% are English language learners.
  • 112 schools are classified as Reward Schools based on high achievement or high levels of growth on state tests; 20% of the students in these schools are black and Hispanic, 15% are poor, and 2% are English language learners.

Priority Schools – those potentially targeted for closing – are almost all Black and Latino, very poor, with many students who do not speak English as a first language. The student mobility rate in Priority Schools is a staggering 24%. These schools are located in some of the poorest communities in the state. 

Reward Schools – those receiving financial bonuses – are clustered in the highest wealth districts in the state and serve a small percentage of Black and Latino students. These schools also have low poverty rates, few English language learners and little student mobility. Many of the Reward Schools are magnet high schools and vocational schools with highly selective admissions.

A reader sent this comment:

Here is my take.  Our school in NYC used an online, computer based reading program for the first time last year.  Some of our students were clocked in as reading 600 articles and having their lexile scores increase by 4 grade levels.  At the end of the year, the representatives from the program came to the school and gave an assembly for all of the students who participated; giving out prizes and accolades to the most prolific readers.  One student in particular kept going up to the stage to receive accolade after accolade.  NYS’s ELA and Math scores recently came in, and guess what? – she did not show any growth from last year.

Here’s the problem:  When I observed the students who were clocking in an inordinate number of articles, I noticed that they were just answering the questions in order to get the “rewards” that the system gave out.  I asked them why they weren’t reading the articles. Their response was that it was boring.  You see, it’s like a video game.  They are doing it for the rewards that the system produces; not for the enjoyment of reading.

 There is always room to game the system.  Ask any video game player about “cheats” and they will tell you.  Kids will always find a way to game the system.  Online publishers will always find ways to game the system as well.

Mark Naison has written a passionate plea: It is time to start suing to stop the harm inflicted on children, teachers and schools.

The political parties have abandoned them and use well-honed PR rhetoric to paint abandonment as “reform.”

The media swallow the rhetoric.

The foundations have an open wallet for those who are destroying public education.

The Republicans want to intensify the  harm. Arne Duncan boasts of bipartisanship with a party that hates public education.

Naison says it is time to go to the courts to prevent further damage to America’s children and its education system.

Any public interest law firms listening? ACLU? Anyone?

 

A reader sent the following comments about the online for-profit schooling industry (by the way, that line about “current performance is no prediction of future performance” comes right from the prospectus of investment funds):

Interesting story about the K12 schools performance in Tennessee: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/aug/31/andy-berke-criticizes-dismal-scores-of-for/?politics

What’s truly stunning is that, according to the article, the K12 schools performed in the bottom 11% of all TN schools tested using the state’s value-added assessment.  As I recall, value-added assessments have been championed by the same reformers who also push for on-lines schools.

K12’s response has been familiar–move the goal posts and change the game.  They claim that current performance is no prediction of future performance–why don’t we who support public education get to use that line?–and their own testing using the private Scranton Performance Series shows they are meeting or beating the Scranton norm group in all categories.   In other words, in their own private world they’re doing just fine. So, why don’t the public schools in TN get to use these tests too?

And they’re making improvements to improve future outcomes.

So, let me get this straight–K12 in TN can’t hack the very performance tests the reformers have shoved down the throats of the public schools.  In response, they get to claim that current performance is no indication of future performance.   But public schools are roundly condemned on the basis of their current performance.  K12 then gets to tout its own private testing results that show–surprise!–K12 is doing just fine, compared to norm among the customers of the private testing service.  But the public schools have to be tested using national and international standardized tests that are not private.  Finally, despite claiming they’re doing just fine in their own little universe, they are working to improve.  Of course, the public schools–that are doing better than K12–are beyond help.

Oh-Kay!

      Alan Singer wrote an article about Pearson and its leaders in Huffington Post.

      I linked to it in a post yesterday about the high attrition rate of teachers.

In his original article, Singer pointed out that Susan Fuhrman is a director of Pearson. She is the president of Teachers College. Singer said she had $20 million in Pearson stock. As he notes here, he misread the British currency by a multiple of 10.

      He made the correction, and I reprint it here.

      There remains the question of conflict of interest when the president of the nation’s most prestigious graduate school of education (and the president of the National Academy of Education) is also a member of the board of directors of a profit-seeking seller of standardized testing, online instruction, online charter schools, and course materials for the Common Core. Pearson is deeply entwined in the current destructive reform movement. It is hard to see how the leader of major education institutions can be a spokesman for the best interests of both Pearson and American education.

                 Important Corrections to the Latest Pearson Article

 

London Stock Exchange prices are quoted in pounds and pence. Unless indicated, the price of shares is shown in pence. I00 pence equal 1 pound. I wrote “The sales brought Ethridge alone 20,474,712 GBX or approximately 32,350,000 in U.S. dollars.” However, GBX is in pence, so the U.S. dollar value of the transaction was only be $323,500.

http://www.stockexchangesecrets.com/london-stock-exchange-prices.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sterling

 

In official Pearson PLC reports available online, Susan Fuhrman, President of Teachers College-Columbia University is listed as a non-executive director of Pearson. As of February 29, 2012, she held 12,927 shares of Pearson stock valued at $240,000. As a non-executive director she also receives an annual fee of 65,000 or almost $100,000. Fuhrman has been a non-executive director since 2004 and has received fees and stock I estimate worth more than a million dollars, certainly a substantial sum, but not the $20 million I initially reported.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/pearson-plc/20-f-annual-and-transition-report-foreign-private-issuer/2012/03/27/section2.aspx

 

I thank “Nick50000” for bringing this to my attention.

 

Corrected Version — Pearson “Education” — Who are these people?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/pearson-education-new-york-testing-_b_1850169.html

 

According to a recent article on Reuters, an international news service based in Great Britain, “investors of all stripes are beginning to sense big profit potential in public education. The K-12 market is tantalizingly huge: The U.S. spends more than $500 billion a year to educate kids from ages five through 18. The entire education sector, including college and mid-career training, represents nearly 9 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, more than the energy or technology sectors.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/02/usa-education-investment-idUSL2E8J15FR20120802

 

Pearson, a British multi-national conglomerate, is one of the largest private businesses maneuvering for U.S. education dollars. The company had net earnings of 956 million pounds or approximately 1.5 billion dollars in 2011.

http://www.answers.com/topic/pearson-plc

 

Starting in May 2014, Pearson Education will take over teacher certification in New York State as a way of fulfilling the state’s promised “reforms” in its application for federal Race to the Top money. The evaluation system known as the Teacher Performance assessment or TPA was developed at Stanford University with support from Pearson, but it will be solely administered and prospective teachers will be entirely evaluated by Pearson and its agents. Pearson is adverting for current or retired licensed teachers or administrators willing to evaluate applicants for teacher certification. It is prepared to pay $75 per assessment.

http://www.regents.nysed.gov/meetings/2012Meetings/March2012/312hed5.pdf

http://www.nystce.nesinc.com/NY_annProgramUpdate.asp

http://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-and-pearson-collaborate-deliver-teacher-performance-assessment

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.scoretpa.pearson.com/

 

The Pearson footprint appears to be everywhere and taints academic research as well as government policy. For example, the Education Development Center (EDC), based inWalthamMassachusetts, is a “global nonprofit organization that designs, delivers and evaluates innovative programs to address some of the world’s most urgent challenges in education, health, and economic opportunity.” EDC works with  “public-sector and private partners” to “harness the power of people and systems to improve education, health promotion and care, workforce preparation, communications technologies, and civic engagement.” In education, it is involved in curriculum and materials development, research and evaluation, publication and distribution, online learning, professional development, and public policy development. According to its website, its funders include Cisco Systems, IBM, Intel, the Gates Foundation, and of course, Pearson Education, all companies or groups that stand to benefit from its policy recommendations.

http://www.edc.org/about

http://www.edc.org/about/contracting

http://www.edc.org/about/funders

 

EDC sponsored a study on the effectiveness of new teacher evaluation systems, “An examination of performance- based teacher evaluation systems in five states,” that Pearson is promoting but there are two VERY BIG FLAWS in the study. First, of the five states included in the study, Delaware, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Texas, four, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Texas, are notorious anti-union states where teachers have virtually no job security or union protection, and Delaware used the imposition of new teacher assessments to make it more difficult for teachers to acquire tenure. In Texas, North Carolina, and Georgia collective bargaining by teachers is illegal. Tennessee, Texas and North Carolina used the new assessments to make it easier to fire teachers and Georgia used the assessments to determine teacher pay. The second flaw is that the study draws no connection between the evaluation system and improved student learning.

ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2012129.pdf

publications.sreb.org/2011/11S11_Focus_Tenure.pdf

 

According to the Financial Times of London, a Pearson owned property, in what I consider a conflict-of-interests, Susan Fuhrman, the President of Teachers College at Columbia Universityhas been a “Non-Executive Independent Director of Pearson PLC” since 2004 and a major stockholder in the company with over 13,000 shares worth according to my estimate over two hundred thousand dollars. Fuhrman also is “president of the National Academy of Education, and was previously dean of the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and on the board of trustees of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.”

http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/Tearsheets/Directors-and-dealings?s=PSON:LSE

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

In official Pearson PLC reports available online, Susan Fuhrman, President of Teachers College-Columbia University is listed as a non-executive director of Pearson. As of February 29, 2012, she held 12,927 shares of Pearson stock valued at $240,000. As a non-executive director she also receives an annual fee of 65,000 or almost $100,000. Fuhrman has been a non-executive director since 2004 and has received fees and stock I estimate worth more than a million dollars, certainly a substantial sum, but not the $20 million I initially reported.

http://sec.edgar-online.com/pearson-plc/20-f-annual-and-transition-report-foreign-private-issuer/2012/03/27/section2.aspx

www.pearson.com/investor/ar2010/files/pdf/Pearson_AR10.pdf

 

There has been some resistance to Pearson’s influence over American education.

In May 2012, students and teachers in the University of Massachusetts Amherst campus School of Education launched a national campaign challenging the forced implementation of Teacher Performance Assessment (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?pagewanted=all). They argued that the field supervisors and cooperating teachers who guided their teaching practice and observed and evaluated them for six months in middle and high school classrooms were better equipped to judge their teaching skills and potential than people who had never seen nor spoken with them. They have refused to participate in a pilot program organized by Pearson and to submit the two 10-minute videos of themselves teaching and a take-home test. They are supported by United Opt Out National, a website that organized a campaign and petition drive to boycott Pearson evaluations of students, student teachers, and teachers (http://unitedoptout.com/boycott-pearson-now/). In June 2012, New York parents protested against Pearson designed reading tests that included stand reading passages and meaningless choices.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/07/new-york-standardized-tests-protest-pearson-field-tests_n_1579187.html

 

The question that must addressed is whether the British publishing giant Pearson and its Pearson Education subsidy should determine who is qualified to teach and what should be taught in New York State and the United States? I don’t think so! Not only did no one elect them, but when people learn who they are, they might not want them anywhere near a school – or a government official.

 

From what I can make out from its website, the three key players at Pearson and Pearson Education are Glen Moreno, chairman of the Pearson Board of Directors, Dame Marjorie Morris Scardino, overall chief executive for Pearson, and William Ethridge, chief executive for North American Education. Although the largest stockholders are a British investment firm called Legal & General Group PLC which controls 32 million shares or 4% of the company and the Libyan Investment Authority with 24 million shares or 3% of the company. According to the Financial Times of London, the Libyan Investment Authority was founded by Libyan dictator Muammer Gaddafi’s son Seif al-Islam, his heir apparent until the regime’s collapse, in January 2007.

http://www.pearsoned.com/

http://www.pearson.com

http://www.pearson.com/about-us/board-of-directors/Boardmembers/Glen-MorenoChairman-47/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1b5e11b6-d4cb-11e0-a7ac-00144feab49a.html#axzz24qXoOwON

 

Glen Moreno is wealthy, powerful, influential, and highly suspect. According to Wikipedia, Moreno was born in California in 1943 and has a law degree from Harvard University. He worked for 18 years at Citigroup in Europe and Asia, running the investment banking and trading divisions. Moreno was a director of Fidelity International Ltd. And became chairman of Pearson, the publisher of the British newspaper Financial Times in October 2005.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_Moreno

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/lloyds-says-deputy-chairman-moreno-to-step-down.html

 

Moreno was chairman of UK Financial Investments, the group set up by the British government to protect public funds used to bail-out banks after the 2008 global economic collapse. He was forced to resign in 2009 when it was revealed that he was a trustee of Liechtenstein Global Trust (LGT), a private bank accused of aiding tax evasion.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/feb/12/moreno-uk-financial-investments

 

Moreno was also deputy chairman of Lloyds Banking Group, Great Britain’s largest mortgage lender, but stepped down there in May 2012.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/lloyds-says-deputy-chairman-moreno-to-step-down.html

 

Among the Pearson troika, Moreno is the lowest paid, although he apparently has other resources. According to Forbes, his total compensation in 2011 was a little over $600,000. He does however own a home in London and a cattle farm in Virginia and according to the Times of London, managed to contribute half a million pounds to the British Conservative Party in 2009, and purchase 200,000 shares of Lloyd stock in 2010.

http://www.forbes.com/profile/glen-moreno/

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/sitesearch.do?querystring=glen+moreno&p=tto&pf=all&bl=on

 

Dame Marjorie was also originally an American but became a British citizen. She has been CEO of Pearson since 1997. Before becoming CEO of Pearson she was a lawyer in Georgia and a newspaper publisher. In 2007, Forbes magazine placed her seventeenth on its list of the 100 most powerful women in the world. She was named a “Dame of the British Empire” in 2010. According to Forbes, her total compensation in 2011 was $2,455,000. But that represents a tiny fraction of her compensation that includes stock options. Scardino holds 1.5 million shares of Pearson stock.

http://www.forbes.com/profile/marjorie-scardino-1/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

William Ethridge became chief executive of Pearson’s North American Education division in 2008. He has what Pearson considers educational experience because he previously worked for Prentice Hall and Addison Wesley. At Pearson he has been head of its Higher Education, International and Professional Publishing division and chairman of CourseSmart, a Pearson sponsored consortium of electronic textbook publishers. According to Forbes, his total compensation in 2011 was $1,390,000. He holds a half million shares of Pearson stock.

http://people.forbes.com/profile/will-ethridge/62414

http://www.pearson.com/about-us/board-of-directors/Boardmembers/Will-EthridgeChief-executive,-North-American-Education-235/

http://lt.hemscott.com/SSB/tiles/company-data/forecasts-deals/major-shareholders.jsp?epic=PSON&market=LSE

 

According to ILSE or London South East, which reports British stock market transactions, on July 30 and 31 2012, Dame Marjorie and William Ethridge were heavily involved in Pearson stock transfers and sales on the London exchanges earning them millions of dollars. If I read the ILSE report correctly, the percentage of their holdings that Ethridge and Scardino sold seemed to be a bit less than 4% of their total holdings. The sales brought Ethridge alone 20,474,712 GBX or approximately $323,500 in U.S. dollars.

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?SharePrice=PSON

 

 

This was at a time when financial observers including the influential Nomura Group were questioning whether Pearson stock was overvalued. ILSE reported that “Pearson had warned in April that its adjusted operating profit would be down in the first half of 2012 . . . Sales at Penguin dropped 4%, with profits falling 48% to £22 million, which management said was caused by lower sales in its more profitable U.S. market. Uncertainty over potential national and local government spending cuts in the US continues to cast a shadow over the group’s Education business.”

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?SharePrice=PSON

 

In other words, Pearson’s chief operating officers, who are also heavily invested in the company, are busy trading stocks and racking up dollars and pounds while the corporation’s financial situation is shaky. And their solution is to sell, sell, sell their products in the United States.

 

Are these the people we want designing tests, lessons, and curriculum for our students and deciding who is qualified to become teachers?

Alan Singer, Director, Secondary Education Social Studies
Department of Teaching, Literacy and Leadership
128 Hagedorn Hall / 119 Hofstra University / Hempstead, NY 11549


 

Teachers know more about increasing rates of poverty than most people.

Teachers see the children who come to school without decent clothes or shoes.

They know the children who are homeless.

They teach children who are sick but never get medical care.

Here is the documentation:

Poverty is worse in the U.S. than in other advanced nations.

Child poverty is about 23%, which makes the U.S. #1 in child poverty.

Teachers already knew it.