Archives for the month of: August, 2013

This letter was sent today by Superintendent William Hite to staff members in Philadelphia.

The only conclusion to be drawn is that the leadership of Pennsylvania and Philadelphia don’t care about children and whether they get an education.

What are they thinking? My child is okay, tough for yours.

Shameful!

 

Here is the letter:

 

Dear Colleagues,

For weeks, the District has been awaiting additional funding from the
city that will allow us to restore the crucial services and staff
needed to open and manage schools.

With the first day of school only a month away, if the District does
not receive at least $50 million by Friday, August 16, we will be
forced to consider delaying the start of the 2013-14 school year. This
may involve delaying the opening of all schools, opening a partial
number or operating on a half-day schedule. We will not be able to
open all 212 schools on Monday, September 9 on a full-day schedule in
the absence of additional funds for supports and staff.

I must be able to tell parents that when their child is walking
through the hallways, eating lunch or at recess, an adult will be
supervising them. I must be able to tell parents that counselors will
be available to serve children in our largest and neediest schools,
and that an assistant principal will be on hand to resolve any
disciplinary issues that keep children from learning. I must be able
to tell parents that the principal can leave the office to address
issues and support staff in other parts of the school. At this point,
I cannot do so.

We will continue to keep you abreast of what will hopefully be a swift
resolution to this urgent matter. I appreciate your continued patience
and support.

Sincerely,
William R. Hite, Jr., Ed.D.
Superintendent

Arthur Goldstein, a New York City high school teacher, has a great article in today’s Daily News lambasting the Common Core and the tests based on the Common Core.

Goldstein writes that if he gave a test and 70% of his kids failed it, his principal would be outraged at him.

He wonders why state officials predicted high failing rates and then–voila!–the failing rates were as high as they predicted.

He scoffs at those who say that Common Core is the salvation:

“Are our kids failures? Have schools and teachers failed? Have parents failed?

If there is failure, it’s on the part of those who set the curriculum. It’s those who hired teachers and ran schools. It’s those who boasted of the very successes they now paint as worthless.

If anyone has failed, it’s the very people who now tell us Common Core is the answer to all our problems.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/common-core-tests-answer-article-1.1420940#ixzz2bOfM4eu0

In his comments at a press conference about the collapse of the New York test scores, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said,

“Too many school systems lied to children, families and communities,” Mr. Duncan said. “Finally, we are holding ourselves accountable as educators.”

Since he used the term “we,” it means that he too is accountable for the lying and debacle in New York, where it was revealed that 70% of the students couldn’t pass the Pearson-made Common Core test that Duncan funded.

Does he really mean “we”?

If he holds himself accountable, will he resign?

After all, he has been Secretary of Education for five years, and he can’t escape accountability.

New York adopted the  Common Core and the tests because it won Race to the Top funding, Duncan’s signature program.

Duncan pushed Common Core. Duncan pushed the testing.

Duncan is right. He too is accountable for the children’s low scores.

Now, what will he do about it?

Seattle just held its local elections, and Sue Peters won a spot in a run=off election for the Seattle school board. She won 41% of the vote, despite being vastly outspent, and her opponent won 47%.

Sue wrote the following letter, thanking the Network for Public Education for providing its endorsement, which identified her as the real education supporter.

Please send her support if you can. Her website is here.  I just made a contribution via Paypal.

I thought that readers would want to read her description of her vision for the Seattle public schools:

I just wanted to extend my deepest thanks to you and NPE for the timely and meaningful endorsement of my candidacy. It came at a crucial time, right when my opponent’s side chose to go negative (twice!), and as we led up to the primary election.

Diane, thank you for your tweet on my behalf as well.

Locally, people are very impressed by this honor and support, and nationally I have received a constant flow of donations ever since the endorsement and tweet.

And here’s more good news: Last night I qualified for the general election, earning 41 percent of the vote so far (with 50 percent of ballots counted). (My opponent is at 47 percent at the moment.) This is despite being outspent 6-1, without hiring political consultants, and without resorting to smear tactics against my opponent. I am proud of my authentic, community-based campaign which has focused on the issues and maintained its integrity. I am confident that my positive and constructive message, and the value of my nearly decade of knowledge of the Seattle Public School District, will resonate with voters throughout the city as we go forth into the general election.

Here is what I support:

  • Fiscally and academically responsible decisions that prioritize directing resources to the classroom and our kids.
  • An education system that embraces & celebrates the individuality and diversity of our children & helps each child fulfill his/her potential.
  • A rich, engaging curriculum that includes the arts, sciences, math, humanities, music & P.E.
  • Decisions and policies that reflect the needs of our schools and families.
  • More teaching & learning, less testing.
  • Respect for teachers.
  • Keeping public education public.

Thank you all again.

Best,

Sue

Stephanie Simon reports that some of NYC’s most celebrated charter schools were outperformed by the city’s much maligned traditional public schools. KIPP and Democracy Prep had lower scores than the public schools with less funding. Only Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy charters aced the tests.

“Just 23 percent of charter students scored proficient in language arts, compared with 31 percent in public schools overall. That’s a greater gap than had shown up in last year’s exams.
In math, charter schools beat the public school average in each of the past two years — but not this year. On the new tests, just 31 percent of charter students scored proficient, the same as in public schools overall.”

Earlier this year, Secretary Duncan gave $9.1 million to Democracy Prep to expand its chain because it was so much better than public schools.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/new-york-fails-common-core-tests-95304.html#ixzz2bOOFxCK4

Policymakers are mostly agreed that they can measure teacher quality by whether scores go up or down.

Research does not support this simplistic notion.

Mostly, researchers have found that teachers in affluent districts get bigger score gains on standardized tests than teachers who are in poor districts, who have many children who don’t read English or have special needs.

And there is what I think of as the cardinal rule: Tests should be used only for the purpose for which they were designed.

A test of fifth grade math tests whether students have learned fifth grade math, not whether their teacher is effective.

Matt Di Carlo here discusses a research study whose author suggests that there should be two different tests: one for students, another for teachers.

I have trouble visualizing what the teacher test would look like, or what it would measure that would be an accurate gauge of “teacher quality.”

But then I have grown increasingly weary of our public infatuation with standardized testing as the answer to our educational needs.

In a brilliant essay in the Los Angeles Times, Susan Ochshorn says that the United States is squandering its future by not investing in the well-being of children.

Ochshorn, an advocate for early childhood education, cites an Urban Institute study showing that “federal spending on children fell by $2 billion from 2010 to 2011, the first dip in 30 years. The children’s share of the budget pie was reduced from 10.7% to 10.4%. By 2022, the children’s portion of the budget is expected to drop to 8% and their share of GDP is expected to drop from 2.5% to 1.9%, which will include significant cuts in early care and education. With the Census Bureau reporting nearly 25% of the nation’s children younger than age 6 in poverty, this is not good news.”

It is a cliche to say that “children are our future,” but it is actually true. Children are our future, and if we neglect their basic needs, we sacrifice the future.

Ochshorn writes: “We now know more than ever about how to nurture human capital, with eye-popping technology offering graphic evidence of the rapid pace and complexity of brain development in the first years of life. The bottom line is that kids need time for sensitive, stimulating interactions with adults to promote growth, resilience and mastery, the foundations for their healthy development and academic success. They need access to good healthcare and nutrition, and high-quality early learning settings, not to mention viable communities invested in their well-being.”

Her article cites numerous authoritative sources to demonstrate one basic fact: We are not investing in the well-being of children. Instead, we are spending more and more to test them and to hold their teachers accountable. This is not good social policy. This is criminal neglect.

 

Leonie Haimson, executive director of Class Size Matters and administrator of the New York City parents’ blog, wrote this analysis of the new state test scores:

Dear parents: As you may have probably heard, the new state test scores were released to the press and they are disastrous.

Only 31% of students in New York State passed the new Common Core exams in reading and math. More than one third — or 36% — of 3rd graders throughout the state got a level I in English; which means they essentially flunked. In NYC, only 26 percent of students passed the exams in English, and 30 percent passed in math – meaning they had a level 3 or 4. Only 5% of students in Rochester passed.

Though children’s individual scores won’t be available to parents until late August, I urge you not to panic when you see them. My advice is not to believe a word of any of this.

The new Common Core exams and test scores are politically motivated, and are based neither on reason or evidence. They were pre-ordained to fit the ideological goals of Commissioner King and the other educrats who are intent on imposing damaging policies on our schools.

Here are five reasons not to trust the new scores:

1- The NY State Education Department has not been able to produce a decent, reliable exam with a credible scoring system in at least ten years. That’s why there have been wild gyrations from year to year in the percent of students making the grade. For example, 77% of NYS students were at level 3 or 4 in English in 2009; this dropped to 53% in 2010 and 31% now. The last two years of exams created by Pearson have been especially disastrous; from the multiple errors in questions and scoring on the 2012 exams (including the infamous Pineapple passage) to the epic fail of this year’s tests – which were too long, riddled with ambiguous questions and replete with commercial logos for products like Mug Root Beer. Top students were unable to finish these shoddy exams, and many left in tears and had anxiety attacks. To make things worse, the exams featured reading passages drawn straight from Pearson textbooks which were assigned to some students in the state and not to others.

2- For nearly a decade, from at least 2003-2010, there was rampant test score inflation in NY state, with many of the same people who are now supporting the current low scoring system claiming with equal conviction that the earlier, rising test scores showed that NYS and NYC schools were improving rapidly. The state test score bubble allowed NYC Mayor Bloomberg to coast to a third term, renew mayoral control and maintain that his high-stakes testing regime was working, when the reality was that, according to everyone who was paying attention, the exams had gotten overly predictable and the scoring too easy over time. At the same time as the state exams showed huge increases, scores on the more reliable national exams called the NAEPs showed little progress. In fact, NYC made smaller gains on the NAEPs than nearly any other large school district in the country during these years.

3. The truth is that the new cut scores that determine the different proficiency levels on the state exams – which decide how many kids “pass” or are at Level 3 and 4 — are arbitrary and set by Commissioner King. He can set them to create the illusion that our schools are rapidly improving, as the previous Commissioner did, or he can set them to make it look that our public schools are failing, as King now is doing, to bolster support for his other policies.

4. The primary evidence that Commissioner King now bases his overly-harsh cut scores upon is that the results are mirror the percent of students who test “proficient” or above on the NAEPs. Yet while the NAEPs are reliable to discern trends in test scores, because they remain relatively stable over time, the cut scores that determine the various NAEP achievement levels are VERY controversial. See Diane Ravitch on how the NAEP’s benchmarks are “unreasonably high”; or this article that reveals that even the National Academy of Sciences has questioned the setting of the NAEP proficiency levels, and how many experts believe that level 2 on the NAEPs – or basic — should be used instead to estimate which students are on track for college:

Fully 50% of 17-year-olds judged to be only basic by NAEP ultimately obtained four-year degrees. Just one third of American fourth graders were said to be proficient in reading by NAEP in the mid-1990s at the very time that international assessments of fourth-grade reading judged American students to rank Number Two in the world.

In fact, by using NAEP levels as support for his cut scores, King is either confused or disingenuous about what these levels really represent.

5. So why are King, Arne Duncan, Joel Klein and the billionaires like Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch who are pulling the strings so determined to prove that more that 69% of the students throughout New York State are failing? This is the Shock Doctrine at work. Naomi Klein has observed that when you scare people enough, it is easier to persuade them to allow you to make whatever radical changes you want, since the status quo will be perceived as so disastrous.

In the case of Commissioner King, Bill Gates and Arne Duncan, they would like to convince parents that their corporate agenda, including a steady diet of developmentally unsound standards, the Common Core’s rigid quota for “informational text” and overemphasis on testing, and their favorite policies of closing schools and firing teachers based on test scores, expanding charter schools and online learning, data-mining and outsourcing educational services to for-profit vendors will somehow improve the quality of education in our state, even though there is little or no evidence for any of these policies.

NYSED has even tried to persuade parents to accept their unethical plan to share the personal data of the state’s children with inBloom and for-profit vendors by saying this will help ensure these students are “college and career ready.” (By the way, as Politico reported last week, North Carolina became the fifth state to pull out of inBloom; now only New York, Illinois, and Colorado are still involved, and Massachusetts is sitting on the fence.)

Joel Klein, who wrote an oped for Rupert Murdoch’s NY Post this morning, appropriately entitled the The Good News in Lower Test Scores, now heads Amplify, Rupert Murdoch’s online learning division, which is the largest contractor for inBloom. For Klein and Murdoch, the drastic fall in state test scores is indeed good news, because it will help them market their computer tablets, data systems, and software products to make more profit. In the case of Pearson, the world’s largest educational corporation, more schools will now be convinced to buy their textbooks, workbooks, and test prep materials, as 900 NYC schools have now done – in hope that their students may do better on the Pearson-made exams, that may even include the same reading passages as happened this year.

Rick Hess, the conservative commentator at Education Week, revealed the motives behind the promoters of these exams in a column called the “Common Core Kool-aid”:

First, politicians will actually embrace the Common Core assessments and then will use them to set cut scores that suggest huge numbers of suburban schools are failing. Then, parents and community members who previously liked their schools are going to believe the assessment results rather than their own lying eyes… Finally, newly convinced that their schools stink, parents and voters will embrace “reform.” However, most of today’s proffered remedies–including test-based teacher evaluation, efforts to move “effective” teachers to low-income schools, charter schooling, and school turnarounds–don’t have a lot of fans in the suburbs or speak to the things that suburban parents are most concerned about….Common Core advocates now evince an eerie confidence that they can scare these voters into embracing the “reform” agenda.

My advice is not to let this ruin your summer or your view of your child’s school. When you receive your children’s scores, do not allow the results to wreck their self-confidence. These new Common Core exams and harsh proficiency levels are meant to scare parents.

To achieve their ideological ends, politicians, billionaires, and educrats are not only willing to define your children in terms of their test scores, but also to redefine them as failures – to help them implement their mechanistic, reductionist, and ultimately inhumane vision of education. It is all a high-stakes game, carried out by people with little thought about how these wild test score gyrations affect the self-esteem of the children whose fate they claim to care about.

For an eloquent critique of the callous thinking at work, please also read Carol Burris, NYS principal of the year, in today’s Washington Post, and Diane Ravitch, on the political motives of the people who are setting these standards.

Below are links to articles about the scores, and the NYSED website.

Talk to you soon,

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-674-7320

http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/pressRelease/20130807/home.html

Click to access 2013ELAandMathemaitcsDistrictandBuildingAggregatesMedia.pdf

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-674-7320
leonie@classsizematters.org
http://www.classsizematters.org
http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com

This was my effort to educate the public about the fiasco created by the Common Core testing in New York.

The ending may surprise you. Or may not.

The New York Times editorial board, which has uncritically endorsed every bad piece of legislation or policy that is based on high-stakes testing, warmly endorses the absurd results of the Common Core tests in New York. It echoes Secretary Duncan in asserting that the tests prove how terrible US public education is.

The Times displays its ignorance of the scoring rubric, in which Commissioner John King decided to align New York’s test scores with those of NAEP.

Any student who is not proficient has failed, according to the inexperienced Mr. King.

King seems not to know that the NAEP definition of proficiency does not demonstrate grade level performance, but a very high level of achievement representing superior performance. In everyday terms, proficient on NAEP is a solid A.

But in John King’s world, anyone who is not proficient has failed.

If New York continues to use this definition of proficiency, in which anything less than an A is failure, the majority of New York students will be failures forever.

This is a recipe for killing public education and destroying children’s lives and crushing teacher morale.

Are you listening, editorial writers at the Times?