Archives for the month of: July, 2013

Many who post and comment on this blog have been critical of Paul Vallas. All have their own reasons, but much criticism has focused on the tales of “saving” Chicago, Philadelphia, and Néw Orleans. The latter two turned privatization into a “reform” strategy.

But there is another side to Vallas, which came as a comment by a reader:

She writes:

As we know, nothing in life is black or white which is how I view Paul Vallas. I worked for Paul at the Chicago Public Schools as the Director of Policy and Program Development. Specifically my role was to identify and obtain non-traditional, sustainable funding for school based social and health services. Why? Because Paul Vallas felt that unless you addressed the holistic needs of children, you weren’t serious about students’ reaching their full academic potential.

I realize it is extremely simplistic to frame education policy in short phrases but for purposes of making a point, I will take that liberty. One of the most critical debates of our time is how do we effectively educate children/youth- especially those in large urban school districts. On the one hand, there are those that believe that it is all about the “effectiveness of the teachers” as measured by the outcomes of standardized tests taken by their students in one day. On the other hand, there are those of us who believe that unless you address the impact of poverty, the most incredible teachers imaginable will be compromised in their efforts to enable their students to reach their full academic potential.

Since I judge leaders by their actions and not their words, Paul Vallas exemplified the position that educators must address the impact of poverty on students lives. Since Paul knew that some kids were failing because they literally couldn’t read the blackboard due to not having eye glasses, he started CPS’ Vision Program in which students who failed their vision screenings were bused in a school that had been set up as Vision Center in which students received full exams and eye glasses on site- all for free. The Vision program continues to serve thousands of students at CPS-95% of whom needed glasses. But since Paul knew that students couldn’t attend school regularly if they didn’t have access to a doctor, he funded the KidCare Program- a school based enrollment program for free and low cost health insurance. School based enrollment in public benefit programs continues at CPS by the Children and Family Benefits Unit who enrolled over 13,000 students in food stamps/SNAP and Medicaid/SCHIP Insurance last year.

Paul was also the first superintendent to fund a school based teen pregnancy program, “Cradle to the Classroom”, that was in over 70 high schools. Why did he do that when needless to say, it was not a popular idea in Chicago at the time? Because when advocates showed him the impact of school based programs on attendance and graduation rates as well as the long term outcomes of the teens’ babies, he never hesitated. Cradle to the Classroom went on to become a nationally recognized program. Paul also understood the impact of violence on students’ ability to thrive and learn.

As a historian, Paul understood the risk of people becoming desensitized to children and youth being murdered or struck down by a stray bullet. So he funded the Youth Outreach Workers to not only mitigate the potential for violence by having school patrols before and after an incident of school based violence but also to address the psychological and economic needs of the victims’ families and their peers. Specifically, Paul ensured that students were buried with dignity which meant that when needed, CPS paid for the whole funeral- first with Paul’s personal funds and then later with the Childrens’ First Fund created for that purpose. To try and help with the grief of the victims’ friends and teachers, crisis workers were immediately deployed to the victims’ schools and grief counseling was provided. He even funded buses to transport students from their schools to the funeral home.

There are many more examples that I could give but hopefully these few illustrate my point. Paul never wavered in his support for these programs even when others said that with strains on school funding, why should CPS fund social and health service programs? They also criticized him for his prioritization of early childhood education but Paul did not waver since he saw early childhood education as the cornerstone of learning and one of the most effective anti-poverty strategies available to educators.

As some would say- Paul marched to his own drum. In my opinion, as well as the majority of my colleagues then working under Paul at the time, we admired Paul’s priorities and guts. Did I agree with all of his initiatives- of course not. But who is perfect which is my very point!! In my opinion, it is not helpful to view Paul Vallas and his legacy through one lens because that is too simplistic and counter-productive in our attempts to learn from history. Compounding that complexity is Paul’s willingness when it really counts to admit to his mistakes such as when Paul stated that the messaging of modern day education wan NOT the problem,but rather it’s the product that is the problem including a reference to the “testing industrial complex”. He even made fun of himself by saying that this might sound like Nixon going to China hearing this from him. Do some of us wish that he had realized and admitted this sooner- of course. But its better late than never and its only one part of the story.

Paul Thomas has invited his fellow educators to help compile The Arne Duncan Reader.

This would be a reading list for Secretary Duncan of books, even articles and essays, that he could read during his summer vacation.

Given his devotion to testing, data, choice, competition, and charters, what should he read to broaden his understanding of children and education?

What would you add to Secretary Duncan’s reading list?

One of our regular readers and commenters Is a Tea Party activist who likes to joust with anyone who dares to express compassion for those whose lives are blighted by poverty. He scoffs at the idea that there is such a thing as communal responsibility. In his world, it is always nasty and brutish, and it is each one for himself.

So here is a story that appeared in the New York Times on July 2. It is about a woman who works for Kentucky Fried Chicken. She is a shift manager, and she is paid $7.75 an hour. She makes an extra 50 cents an hour because of her title and extra responsibilities. Her husband is unemployed. From her meager earnings, she must feed and clothe three children and pay the rent. She said, “I’m beyond not satisfied. This isn’t the life I want for my children. This isn’t the life I want for myself.” Last year, when boiling oil scalded her hands and she was out of work, she got $58 a week in workers’ compensation. A welfare queen, right?

The CEO of YUM!, which owns Taco Bell and KFC, makes $11.3 million per year. The Times says he “helped lead the battle against paid sick days.”

Fast food workers and other workers whose wages are barely above the poverty line are trying to unionize. Imagine that.

A reader describes a problem at a Gulen-related charter school:

Diane check out this letter a friend wrote to her school admin, Horizons Science Academy. Expressing concern over their new discriminatory hair policy in the student handbook that prohibits natural African-American hair textures in students.

I guess we don’t deserve an education at their school unless our hair is “fried, dyed, and laid to the side”

No diversity wanted here.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/amber-la-shae-pettaway/new-discriminatory-policy/10151409338931618

A reader shares the great new dictionaries of Reformy rhetoric, where language is turned inside out to disguise reality.

Volumes 1, 2 and 3 are out!

Scott Waldman writes thoughtfully about education for the Albany Times-Union newspaper in upstate New York.

In this article, he demonstrates what most educators know and what ought to be common sense for everyone else:

The schools rankings in affluent districts have the highest rankings, and the schools in districts with high levels of poverty have the lowest rankings.

Some people don’t seem to know this. Unfortunately, the people who don’t know this are in Congress, state legislatures, the U.S. Department of Education, and the governors’ offices.

Thus, policymakers berate those who teach children in impoverished districts and even close or privatize their schools.

Children who grow up poor are not destined to do poorly in school. If they attend well-resourced schools that are not dominated by poverty and segregation, they do better in school.

Call it peer effects, or something about getting the attention and resources needed.

Rob Powers is a high school teacher of social studies in Massachusetts.

He read the report of the National Council on Teacher Quality and saw that it gave a low rating to his alma mater, Plymouth State University in New Hampshire, and he was shocked.

PSU, he wrote, “has been preparing teachers since 1871, a tradition that few schools can match. The institution is fully accredited by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, which holds incredibly high standards for its member schools. In fact, PSU has held continuous accreditation since 1954, when it was a member of the first cohort of schools to receive such status.

“Beyond ratings and labels, I can say without a doubt that I have been a successful social studies teacher because I received a top-notch education at Plymouth State. When I entered the classroom, I was completely prepared for all the challenges I faced because I took many practical courses and participated in hundreds of hours of supervised pre-service practicum work at PSU.

“My professors were highly respected experts in the field of education and they work tirelessly with practicing teachers and administrators to make sure that what we learned in our program was directly addressing the ever-changing needs of our K-12 students.”

What Rob doesn’t realize is that NCTQ didn’t visit any of the campuses it ranked, and that only about 10% of the campuses agreed to cooperate with their survey by voluntarily supplying their reading lists and course descriptions. But Rob makes an important point: NCTQ knows nothing about the quality of the faculty at any of the teacher preparation programs. Despite their rhetoric about great teachers, they acted on the assumption that the printed courses were an adequate way of judging the whole institution.

Robert Shepherd, experienced writer, textbook developer, curriculum designer, and loyal reader posted some interesting critiques of the way a Common Core will affect teaching and teaching materials:

He writes:

The fact that the “standards” are entirely highly abstract descriptions of skills to be demonstrated, that they are content free, will be ENORMOUSLY distorting in their effects on curriculum development. Instead of presenting a coherent, progressive body of knowledge having to do with some subject like the short story, literary archetypes, Romanticism, the oral tradition, Greek history and thought, etc., we shall see curricula that present materials pretty much at random to teach x set of abstract skills. Even those Common Core standards that are process related are at such a high level of abstraction that they do not encourage the operationalization of those processes, and when one attempts to create a lesson that does operationalize them, that, for example, steps students through the process of, say, writing a press release, one will find that the necessary specific processes that students must learn are nowhere even suggested by the “standards.” Educational publishers will reject manuscripts with this extraneous material and insist that every lesson “cover” some number (six or seven, for example) of standards, whether it makes sense to deal with these together or not. That’s because, over the course of the year, all the standards will have to be “covered.” So, the abstract standards will drive the curriculum development. It’s the tail wagging the dog, and it is entirely predictable that this will be the case because that is what has largely happened with materials developed to meet state standards.

Think of it this way: What is the difference between sitting down and saying, I want to develop a unit that teaches kids about the Civil War or mythology or whatever and saying, I want to develop a unit that teaches kids standards L.3.1 through L.3.6. The curriculum designer starts making decisions based on whether the standard is covered rather than on whether the subject being studied is.

And the point about learning something so that one then has something to write about is KEY. Content must drive instruction. The CCSS have this exactly backward.”

In another comment, Shepherd adds:

“One can already see how distorting this stuff is. Look at an American lit book from one of the big basal publishers. Turn to the units on, say, the Puritans or the Transcendentalists. Ask yourself, how much does the student actually learn from this unit about what happened during that time and what those people actually thought? The answer is, precious little. The emphasis is not on learning about the thoughts and behaviors of the Puritans and Transcendentalists but on learning some abstract set of skills. The content is WAY down the list of concerns in each lesson. The result: These units are, in current texts, incredibly dumbed down. The student who does the unit on the Puritans does not come away knowing about original sin, election, predestination, salvation through Grace, local governance, individual responsibility, the Protestant work ethic, the direct relation without intermediaries between people and God, the significance of the Word as a direct pipeline between people and the divine. But all of these were incredibly important to the development of American thought. Much in our current culture is a direct consequence of this stream that has run through our history, and if people don’t understand it, they won’t understand a lot of why things are as they are today. If one goes back to textbooks written twenty years ago, all of this stuff is dealt with in the unit on the Puritans. Now, that stuff is considered too difficult, and besides, the emphasis is supposed to be on this or that set of abstract skills described by this or that subset of the CCSS in ELA. That’s what will be one the only test that matters–the high-stakes test. It will be a test of isolated “skills.”

And he concludes:

“The Common Core will be the final nail in the coffin of coherent curriculum development in the English language arts.”

A comment from a reader:

I have a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree in English Lit, and I find the Common Core to be only tangentially related to the teaching and learning of literature, culture, history, etc. If one knows literature or history or whatever the subject, there is a richness in the material that cannot be turned into formulaic lessons and checklists. Furthermore, it is turning into another load of how-to-ism and bureaucratic nonsense. And we’ve seen the how-to-ism and culture of testing kill off students’ interest in literature. Our “professional developments” only focus on strategies and cute little random teaching moments that would be suitable for elementary school but not high school where I am. It was the same with the state standards. It is really an insult to the intelligence of teachers and students. All anyone seems to be looking for is a Pavlovian response.

Newly elected Indiana State Superintendent Glenda Ritz won a smashing victory last fall, collecting even more votes than Governor Mike Pence. Since taking office, she has been an effective leader.

However, those hoping for a slowdown of the attacks on public education in Indiana were disappointed to learn that Governor Pence had selected the executive director of the state charter school board as his education advisor. She has a long history as an advocate of privatization.

What’s happened to the Republican Party? Why are so many Republicans dedicated to harming public education? Do they hate public schools? Why?
What is it about having a dual school system that appeals to them?