Archives for the month of: September, 2012

Earlier today I posted Anthony Cody’s searing critique of the Gates Foundation’s support for profiteering and privatization. (“When Profits Drive Reform”)

Cody pulled no punches. He went right into the house of the Emperor to tell him that he has no clothes.

His post is now posted on the Gates Foundation’s own blog. They call it “Impatient Optimists.”

Please leave your comments on the Gates’ blog so that the foundation staff is sure to read them.

They need to hear what teachers and principals and school board members think of their efforts to transfer control of public education to private hands and to measure teachers by test scores. They need to hear what you think of handing children over to profit-seeking entrepreneurs.

Five years ago, New York City adopted a new funding formula, with great fanfare.

It was called, optimistically, “fair student funding.”

However, the New York Daily News released the results of its investigation and discovered that the new schools opened by the Bloomberg administration get full funding, but the struggling schools that the administration wants to close get budget cuts.

This is NOT fair funding. This is a conscious effort to cripple the schools that are already on the disabled list and to destroy them by underfunding them.

The fact that these schools enroll disproportionate numbers of high-needs students underlines the cruelty of this policy.

Expect to see a press release soon on the “success” of the mayor’s new schools.

This teacher applied for a job, but was stunned by the hoops and hurdles required to get it.

Your education doesn’t count, they said, only your value-added scores. If you want a higher salary, get the test scores higher.

No gym. No custodian, you will scrub toilets.

And, oh yes, once you agree to all these conditions, please write a little essay about the word “feisty.”

This teacher needs a job. What did the teacher do?

Joel Shatzky is Professor Emeritus at SUNY-Cortland, where he taught from 1968-2005. He presently teaches at Kingsborough Community College. He sent this post:

On a recent trip to visit family and friends in Turkey and Israel I asked, a propos of the Olympics, what importance is given to sports in their respective national universities. After all, many Olympic athletes train at universities in the United States where the excellent coaching and focus is to develop world-class athletes. For instance, Ashton Eaton, the gold medal winner in the decathlon, represented the University of Oregon in collegiate sports and was a world-class athlete when he became a member of the Oregon Athletic Club Elite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashton_Eaton  Many other American athletes begin their careers in college varsity sports. To my question concerning university sports in their respective countries, however, my Turkish friends and Israeli relatives affirmed what I had long thought: varsity sports is not a significant part of the campus culture in these countries. In fact, the United States is almost unique in the world in the emphasis and attention placed upon our collegiate teams, especially in  football and basketball.

            The recent scandal at Penn State and its aftermath brought out some much-needed soul-searching concerning the significance of collegiate sports in identifying a university in the public realm. In an article I wrote in the Examiner several years ago, based on a critical report by the Knight Foundation, it was pointed out that:, “75% of these [Division 1] college athletic programs, instead of making money for their schools, are losing an average of $10,000,000 a year, forcing  cut backs on faculty positions and other expenses for what is supposed to be the primary mission of higher education: learning, not entertainment for alumni boosters.” http://www.examiner.com/article/inside-our-schools-collegiate-sports-wag-the-dog  There is no reason to suppose that the situation has improved markedly since then.

                  If the significance of colleges and universities in our cultural values is to provide entertainment for mass audience on Saturday afternoons or during “March Madness” then we are going to end up, to alter the title of a Neil Postman book, “Entertaining Ourselves into Insignificance.” I wonder when, given all of the problems this country is facing, we behave like mature adults rather than the perpetual adolescents in which big time collegiate sports would like to keep us indefinitely?

            Of course, athletics can be an important part of many students’ educational experience but they need to be balanced by the more daunting objective of properly educating the next generation that will require high-level thinking, establishing clear priorities that require hard work and persistence which govern the behavior of students from other countries. Of course, our educational system has been successful for our top students, but we need  to encourage a culture that nurtures those many students who are not at the top.

            We must face the fact that unless we alter the emphasis of our priorities from forms of escapism to solid learning, we will become in the future the thing we should fear: a country that longs for a return to its past. 

Henry Levin, the distinguished economist at Teachers College, has written an important new article in which he explains that test scores are only one dimension of student and national success. The link is only available for four weeks. It is only about 20 pages, so be sure to read it now or soon.

He shows, with extensive documentation, that non-cognitive qualities– like motivation, persistence, the ability to get along with others–are no less important than cognitive qualities and are undervalued in the present climate.

The international race to get higher and higher test scores ignores the non-cognitive dimension. It is a race that will narrow what children learn, what teachers may teach. It is not good for children or societies. It is a race that no one will win.

Here is the abstract:

Ó UNESCO IBE 2012

Abstract Around the world we hear considerable talk about creating world-class schools. Usually the term refers to schools whose students get very high scores on the international comparisons of student achievement such as PISA or TIMSS. The practice of restricting the meaning of exemplary schools to the narrow criterion of achievement scores is usually premised on the view that test scores are closely linked to the provision of a capable labour force and competitive economy. In fact, the measured relationships between test scores and earnings or productivity are modest and explain a relatively small share of the larger link between educational attainment and economic outcomes. What has been omitted from such narrow assessments are the effects that education has on the development of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills and capabilities that affect the quality and productivity of the labour force. This article provides evidence on some of these relationships, on the degree to which the non-cognitive effects of schooling contribute to adult performance, and on the evidence that deliberate school interventions can influence non-cognitive outcomes. It concludes with the view that the quest for world-class schools must encompass a range of human development characteristics that extend considerably beyond test scores. 

Newark is one of several districts targeted by the education reform industry, where there is a heavy concentration of money and effort to prove that reform works.

Mark Zuckerberg offered $100 million for reform.

Broad-trained superintendent Cami Anderson is in charge of the district.

Mayor Cory Booker is a leader of the Wall Street hedge fund managers’ Democrats for Education Reform  (which may explain why he objected to President Obama’s criticism of equity investors like Romney’s Bain).

The main reform vehicle is charters.

Study after study shows that charters don’t get different results on average than public schools if they serve the same students.

Here is Bruce Baker’s portrait of the effect of charters on Newark schools.

And here is another by Baker that shows who is enrolled in Newark charters.

A group of 30 organizations associated with corporate reform wrote a letter to Secretary Arne Duncan to insist that he hold teacher education programs accountable for the test scores of the students taught by their graduates.

Groups like Teach for America, StudentsFirst, Democrats for Education Reform (the Wall Street hedge fund managers), The New Teacher Project, various charter chains, Jeb Bush’s rightwing Chiefs for Change and his Foundation for Educational Excellence, and various and sundry groups that love teaching to the test stand together as one.

Their views are in direct opposition to those of the leaders of higher education, who oppose this extension of federal control into their institutions.

Read Gary Rubinstein’s blog about it here, where you will see the full cast of corporate reform characters, many of them funded by the Gates Foundation.

They are certain that what minority students need most is more testing. They want the test scores of the students to determine the career and livelihood of their teachers. And they want the federal government to punish the schools of education that prepared the teachers of these children.

If Duncan takes their advice, he will assume the power to penalize schools of education if the students of their graduates can’t raise their test scores every year.

The vise of standardized testing will tighten around public education.

These people and these organizations are wrong. They are driving American education in a destructive direction. They will reduce children to data points, as the organizations thrive. Wasn’t a decade of NCLB enough for them?

They are on the wrong side of history. They may be flying high now, but their ideas hurt children and ruin the quality of education.

When a superintendent has integrity and community support, he can stand up to the Governor, to Washington, and to the winds of fashion.

That’s Michael McGill, the superintendent of the Scarsdale, New York, public schools.

Scarsdale is one of the most affluent communities in the nation. But there are plenty of other superintendents in affluent communities who are going along with absurd mandates.

McGill is not going along. He has spoken out eloquently against high stakes testing. Imagine a superintendent who write a “declaration of intellectual independence.”

He has spoken out against the state’s half-baked evaluation plan for teachers.

When I visited Scarsdale schools a year ago, Mr. McGill gave a speech to the faculty denouncing federal policies that undermined the pedagogical freedom of his teachers.

Michael McGill is a hero superintendent.

A  reader of this blog wrote thiis letter of support:

Dr. Michael McGill, Superintendent of Scarsdale Schools is a hero superintendent guiding  a hero school district with a long history of thoughtful school policy and innovation, sometimes in the face of powerful and regressive political forces (including successful resistance to attempts to limit access in the schools to information and ideas by advocates for McCarthyism in the 1950s).  Continuing that long tradition, Mr. McGill is a vocal opponent of high stakes testing and tying teacher evaluation to tests.

But, he’s not only a hero because of what he opposes; he’s a hero because of what he advocates. Under McGill’s leadership, Scarsdale is providing a thoughtful road map for school improvement that others might well emulate.  He consults with this teachers and community.  Programs and changes are considered thoughtfully and evaluated for their merit before being launched.  His expertise and thoughtful approach to the training and retaining of high quality teachers, his vision for the authentic education of children and his leadership style in the building of his community make him the kind of superintendent any school district would hope to have.

Admittedly, he’s in a district that supports education over measurement. In that way, Scarsdale is already at odds with the testing über alles approach.  In 2001, his parents stood up to the obsessive testing culture created by NCLB and refused to allow their children to take the test.  In 2005, in concert with his faculty, and after two years of researching the value and consequences of the changes under consideration, McGill led the Scarsdale community as it became the first high school in America to drop out of the AP program.  Some might question that policy. Doesn’t that mean that Scarsdale is foregoing a challenging curriculum?  No, it doesn’t. It means the exact opposite.  As he wrote in an article for the AASA, McGill realized that the imperative of test preparation determined both what and often how teachers taught. Although AP courses undeniably met a high standard, teachers wanted their pupils’ experience to be even better and not a cynical process of strategizing to amass the right number of points. Instead of continuing to pursue a test of excellence, he decided to build a course of excellence.  He brought in experts to work with his faculty to build advanced topics that would be superior to the AP and no longer beholden to the AP exams.  Students were still free to take AP exams, but he understood what those in the forefront of the reform movement do not, that learning is compromised when driven by a high stakes testing culture. Scarsdale set their standard higher than the state.

Under the leadership of Dr. McGill, Scarsdale continues a long tradition of educational excellence and innovation.  He surrounds himself with thoughtful, experienced educators and a  School Board dedicated to building better learning environments.  who work with him to continues to innovate and point the way for other school systems that want to set their sights higher as well.  This year, Scarsdale opened its Center for Innovation, the first innovation center to be hosted and supported by a K-12 school district… [b]ased on successful models of university and corporate technology R&D programs, such as the MIT Media Lab and Apple Advanced Technology Group, the Center… provide[s] opportunities for Scarsdale to continue its leadership role in demonstrating innovative instructional practices. The Center plans to partner with concerned others, fostering conversation and collaboration with teachers, students, community members, university researchers, corporate and university R&D departments and other school districts.

Scarsdale provides a principled and meaningful response to the misguided policies of the non-educator driven reform movement.   They are blazing a trail for public educators: a sustainable, well considered approach to practice and innovative, built on experience, expertise and an understanding of the challenges and opportunities ahead in public education.  What better reason for excitement? Informed reform you can believe in.

Anthony Cody entered into a dialogue with the Gates Foundation about its goals and programs.

He just published a brilliant critique of the foundation’s powerful support for market-based reform of public education. 

Please read it and share it.

Cody describes many of the ways that Gates has supported privatization, despite the lack of any evidence for its strategies.

He reviews the poor results of value-added assessment, pushed hard by the Gates Foundation.

He shows how Gates favors programs where someone will make a profit.

Cody raises significant questions at the end of his part of the dialogue:

In the process by which decisions are being made about our schools, private companies with a vested interest in advancing profitable solutions have become ever more influential. The Gates Foundation has tied the future of American education to the capacity of the marketplace to raise all boats, but the poor are being left in leaky dinghies.

Neither the scourge of high stakes tests nor the false choices offered by charter schools, real or virtual, will serve to improve our schools. Solutions are to be found in rebuilding our local schools, recommitting to the social compact that says, in this community we care for all our children, and we do not leave their fate to chance, to a lottery for scarce slots. We have the wealth in this nation to give every child a high quality education, if that is what we decide to do. With the money we spent on the Bush tax cuts for millionaires in one month we could hire 72,000 more teachers for a year. It is all about our priorities.

So as we bring this dialogue to a close, we come up against some of the hardest questions.

Can we recommit to the democratic ideal of an excellent public school for every child?

Can the Gates Foundation reconsider and reexamine its own underlying assumptions, and change its agenda in response to the consequences we are seeing?

Given the undesirable results that we are seeing from the use of VAM in teacher pay and evaluations, is the Gates Foundation willing to put its influence to work on reversing these policies?

Does the Gates Foundation intend to continue to support the expansion of charter schools and “virtual” schools at the expense of regular public schools?

Must every solution to educational problems be driven by opportunities for profit? Or could the Gates Foundation consider supporting a greater investment in programs that directly respond to the conditions our children find themselves in due to poverty? Things like smaller class size, libraries, health care centers, nutrition programs, (none of which may be profitable ventures.)

How will the Gates Foundation answer? Will they dodge his direct questions in this post as they did his powerful column about the Foundation’s silence on the issue of poverty?

An earlier post today came from an educator who said he resigned from ASCD to protest its invitation to Jonah Edelman to speak at the annual convention. It appeared on Fred Klonsky’s blog. The writer was angry because he shared many of Stand for Children’s original principles and was stunned by its anti-teacher activities in Illinois and elsewhere.

Jonah Edelman is no longer listed as a speaker at the ASCD convention.