Archives for the month of: August, 2013
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

The Atlantic: “Why Do Liberals Hate Cory Booker?”

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
32

We remember Molly Ball as the writer for The Atlantic who tried to persuade us in 2012 that Michelle Rhee really truly is a liberal and was taking over the Democratic Party. Of course, since then, we have seen StudentsFirst make campaign contributions to rightwing Republicans and to a handful of Democrats who support vouchers. We even saw her select a Tennessee legislator who sponsored notorious anti-gay legislation (“Don’t Say Gay”) as “reformer of the year.”

Now the same Molly Ball has another article, also in The Atlantic, plaintively wondering why liberals “hate” Cory Booker. I don’t hate Cory Booker.

I don’t agree with his views on education, but I don’t hate him.

But education is the issue that is missing from Molly Ball’s article, except at the very end, when she acknowledges the reasons that liberals have a Cory Booker problem:

“Nonetheless, it seems clear Booker will not be riding to Washington on a wave of esteem from national progressives. Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and a former communications director for the New Jersey Democratic Party, said there’s still time for Booker to earn liberals’ esteem. “There’s a healthy skepticism, given his record of cozying up to Wall Street donors, defending corporations like Bain Capital, and supporting Michelle Rhee’s extreme school-privatization agenda,” Green said. “That said, there’s a real willingness to take a second look, given his airtight commitment to oppose any Grand Bargain that cuts Social Security benefits and his openness to actually increasing those benefits.” Booker, he said, would “earn a lot of goodwill” if he committed to the PCCC-backed proposal to expand those programs. For now, though, the skepticism remains.”

At least, Molly Ball is now willing to concede that Michelle Rhee has an “extreme school-privatization agenda,” which is not exactly representative of the Democratic party.

But she never acknowledges that Booker has views that are closely aligned with Rhee. He supports privatization via charters and vouchers. He was chair of the board of the Wall Street hedge-fund managers’ Democrats for Education Reform (DFER), which pushes for privatization and high-stakes testing. He brought Mark Zuckerberg to Newark and welcomed Teach for America, the Goldman Sachs’ construction of a special housing village for TFA, etc. etc.

Critics of Cory Booker don’t “hate” him. But they wonder why he hates public education and the people who teach in public schools.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Democrats for Education Reform, New Jersey, Rhee, Michelle, StudentsFirst

Special Education in New Orleans: “Thoroughly Broken”

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
16

Lance Hill, a New Orleans civil rights activist, describes
the ongoing debacle of special education in that city.
The Southern Poverty Law Center sued the state in 2010 for
pervasive discrimination against students with special needs. Just
recently, SPLC filed another suit against the state department of
education, the state board of education, and Commissioner John
White for continuing discrimination against these students. Lance
Hill writes: “The root-cause of discrimination against
special needs students in New Orleans is the privatized charter
school model in which a school’s viability depends on its ability
to post high or constantly improving annual test scores. Special
needs students are more costly to charters that depend on
inadequate and fixed state funding. The easiest way to decrease
costs and increase test scores in this “competitive market model”
is to exclude special needs students. Louisiana has implemented
some policies to discourage “student skimming” and discrimination,
but we can expect that charters, which are essentially government
funded private businesses, will eventually succumb to market forces
to maximize income over costs–even if it as at the expense of the
most vulnerable and needy student populations.” Millions
of dollars have been poured into New Orleans by philanthropists,
foundations, corporations, and the federal government, all to prove
that privatization is a great success. But the privatizers don’t
tell you about their exclusion of children with special needs. They
prefer to keep it quiet.

Categories New Orleans, Special Education

Pennsylvania: Waivers Arrive, Punishments Follow

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
8

Blogger Yinzercation reports that Pennsylvania finally got its waivers from No Child Left Behind’s irrational goals of 100% success, only to face the equally punitive regime crafted by the Obama administration.

ATP (Adequate Yearly Progress) will be replaced by SPP (Student Performance Profile). Three of the four new measures are based on standardized tests. No surprise there. Love those tests

“This new SPP system will label schools without providing any real help for struggling students. If a school receives federal Title I money (based on its proportion of poor students), it will be labeled “priority,” “focus,” or “reward.” All other schools will get a profile score. It’s not clear if that score will be a number or letter grade (A – F), which is very trendy right now among corporate-style-reformers who support vouchers, charter-expansion, school closure, and other privatization efforts. Either way, the bottom line is these rating systems do not appear to work and are definitely subject to cheating.”

She points to research by Matthew Di Carlo showing that such grading systems typically identify schools serving minority communities as low-performing, setting them up for closure or privatization.

Governor Corbett boasted that the new measures would bring help to struggling schools.

Yinzercation asks, “Hello, what? Where is the money to hire back our teachers, school counselors, nurses, and librarians? How about some funding for our after-school tutoring programs we had to cut? And early childhood education? Maybe SPP should stand for Stupid Public Policy.”

And she adds: “I worry that SPP will just replace AYP: with more high-stakes-testing, more labeling-and-punishing schools, more blaming teachers, and still no results for our kids.”

Categories Federal Waiver, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Testing

Charter Advocate Seeks to Oust Tom Torklakson

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
12

California State Superintendent of Schools Tom Torlakson is
one of the best education leaders. As an experienced classroom
teacher, he knows what teachers and students need. As a veteran of
the Merchant Marine, he has a steady hand on the tiller. As a
former legislator, he knows how to work with the legislature. He
had the wisdom and foresight to avoid Race to the Top, knowing that
a “win” would cost the state $3 billion to comply with federal
mandates. Naturally, the billionaires can’t stand Torlakson because
they don’t control him. Worse, he does not share their ideology of
blowing up public education and calling it “innovative.” So they
are running a candidate against Tom Torlakson. He is Marshall Tuck, who ran Mayor
Villaraigosa’s 15 schools and compiled a mediocre and unimpressive
record. He has also been president of the Green Dot charter chain.

One of Tuck’s big issues: he wants teachers to be evaluated by student test scores.
This is a bad policy that has led to teaching to the test,
narrowing the curriculum, and firing good teachers who teach the
neediest children. With the support of the corporate reformers,
eager to privatize as many public schools as possible, Tuck can
count on big money from the big-money guys who tried to unseat
Steve Zimmer (and lost) and then got beaten by a teacher with no
outside funding, Monica Ratliff.

Tom Torlakson deserves to be
re-elected. He is a fighter for kids, teachers, and public
education. He understands the importance of public education in a
democracy.

Categories California, Corporate Reformers

Tennessee Scandal: Worst School in the State Protected by Lobbyists

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
32

The worst-performing school in Tennessee is K12’s for-profit Virtual Academy.

If it were a public school, it would have been closed by now.

But K-12 is profitable and it hires good lobbyists so there will be no sanctions.

“Students at the Tennessee Virtual Academy, an online school run for profit, learned less than their peers anywhere else in Tennessee last year, data released by the state last week show, but efforts to crack down on the school have been delayed by heavy lobbying on its behalf.

“Results from standardized tests show that students in the Tennessee Virtual Academy made less progress as a group in reading, math, science and social studies than students enrolled in all 1,300 other elementary and middle schools who took the same tests. The school fell far short of state expectations for the second year in a row.

“But the school will remain open this year after an effort by Gov. Bill Haslam’s administration to rein in the school if it failed for a second year was turned back by the school’s owner, Virginia-based K12 Inc. The company, which relies on online learning to educate its students, waged a public relations campaign that involved the school’s teachers, some of its parents and lobbyists.

“Nearly a year after Tennessee Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman declared the Tennessee Virtual Academy’s results “un­acceptable” and demanded an immediate turnaround, the school stands to collect about $5 million in state funds this school year. Last year, the school took in an estimated $15 million.

“Critics say the results fit a pattern for K12’s schools nationwide. The company has opened online schools across the country, taking advantage of state school-choice and charter school laws.”

Meanwhile, Jeb Bush and ALEC continue to promote online virtual charters as the wave of the future, the very essence of “personalized and customized” learning, and the Obama administration remains silent as these low-quality “schools” proliferate, empowered by campaign contributions and lobbying. (Paid for with your tax dollars.)

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, On-Line Education, Tennessee

This Is a Great TV Special about Bipartisan Greed in DC

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
27

I saw Bill Moyers interview Mark Leibovich last night, and I was riveted to the screen.

I began to understand that the privatization of public education is part of a much larger corruption in our politics.

The power of greed is a mighty force. Once let loose on our schools, it will monetize the children.

Please watch this when you have a free hour.

You will be appalled and informed.

And you will be angry.

I just ordered Mark’s book.

Categories Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit

Kris Neilson on Michelle Rhee: Teachers’ Best Friend?

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
7

You will definitely want to read Kris Neilson’s description of Michelle Rhee’s upcoming tour, where she will dialogue with teachers about how to have a great teacher in every classroom.

Rhee will hold “teacher town halls” in Birmingham, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia.

You won’t want to miss the chance to engage in candid dialogue with one of America’s most famous reformers, who will tell you how she was able to transform the public schools of the nation’s Capitol in less than four years.

Categories Alabama, Humor, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Rhee, Michelle

Bruce Baker: Madness in Philadelphia and Tennessee

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
5

Bruce Baker brilliantly explains how absurd the reformy policies are in both Philadelphia and Tennessee.

In Philadelphia, teachers are being blamed for a massive deficit that was in fact caused by historic state budget cuts.

In Tennessee, the reform plan is to tie teachers’ licenses to test scores, even though only 1/3 teach tested subjects.

Baker explains:

“The true reformy brilliance here is that these changes, with little doubt, will cause the best teachers from around the region and even from Finland, Shanghai and Singapore to flock to Tennessee to teach…at least for as long as they don’t roll a 1 and lose their license (pack your dice!). In fact, it is a well understood reformy truth that the “best teachers” would be willing to take a much lower salary if they only knew they would be evaluated based on a highly unstable metric that is significantly beyond their direct control. That’s just the reformy truth! [a reformy truth commonly validated via survey questions of new teachers worded as “don’t you think great teachers should be rewarded?” and “Wouldn’t you rather be a teacher in a system that rewards great teachers?”]

“No money needed here. Salaries… not a problem. Resource-Free Reformyness solves all!

“All that aside, what do we know about the great state of Tennessee?

“Tennessee is persistently among the lowest spending states in the country on its public education system.

“Tennessee is not only one of the lowest spenders, but Tennessee spends less as a share of gross state product than most other states.

“Tennessee has one of the largest income gaps between public school enrolled and private school enrolled children, and has among the higher shares of private school enrolled children.

“Tennessee has relatively non-competitive teacher wages with respect to non-teacher wages.”

Let see if Tennessee races to the top as it sheds teachers.

Categories Philadelphia, Race to the Top, Teacher Evaluations, Teacher Tenure, Tennessee, Testing

Charlotte Danielson Says….DON’T DO IT!

By dianeravitch
August 26, 2013 //
47

This came from a New Jersey administrator who heard
Charlotte Danielson speak about how to use her rubric: “At the
NJAFPA Conference on May 29, Charlotte Danielson (creator of the
Danielson Frameworks for Teaching evaluation system that so many
states and districts have adopted) said in her keynote: “Using
standardized test scores to assess teachers is indefensible.” Very
strong words, considering her audience included members of the
NJDOE. Danielson went on to say: “What counts as evidence? How will
we use it? People are calling me for information on this; I don’t
know; NO ONE KNOWS! Rather than standardized tests, we need to look
at classroom/teacher’s learning evidence.”

Categories Teacher Evaluations

Letter To Georgia Board of Education in Support of Common Core Math

By dianeravitch
August 25, 2013 //
109

I received the following letter, addressed to the Georgia School Board.

Dear Diane,

I know that you do not support the Common Core State Standards, but I also know that you are willing to consider other points of view. Pasted down below is the text of a letter I have written to the Georgia School Board as they reconsider the CCSS at the request of the governor. The letter is also posted at the Mathematics Teaching Community here:

It would be great if you would post this on your blog! Thanks, Sybilla

Dear School Board Members:

I have been teaching mathematics at the University of Georgia for over 25 years and have devoted a large part of my career to issues of K–12 mathematics education. As a mathematics teacher, I am concerned about my profession and about the mathematics learning of students in Georgia. In that capacity, I am writing with comments, which I hope you will consider as you review the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M).

The CCSS-M are the strongest K–12 mathematics standards that I know of.

At the invitation of state superintendents, I have worked on a number of states’ mathematics standards, including Georgia’s and Texas’s. No standards I know of are better than the CCSS-M.

The CCSS-M were developed very carefully with repeated cycles of feedback.

The CCSS-M were informed by previous standards, including Georgia’s, with repeated, extensive input from mathematics education experts who are recognized nationally, and with input from states. The standards were informed by the best available research, including research about mathematics learning summarized in National Research Council reports. I know this because I was an active member of the CCSS-M writing team.

Serious professions deserve standards that are developed nationally.

I think that mathematics teaching is a serious and important profession on par with medical professions, for example. We expect standards for medical practice to be developed nationally by experts based on the available research. Why would we expect something different for mathematics teaching?

The presidents of all the major national mathematical societies have expressed “strong support” for CCSS-M.

This includes the presidents of the American Mathematical Society, the Mathematical Association of America, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and all the members of the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences.
See

Click to access CBMS%20Support%20Statement%20for%20CCSSM.pdf

Having standards does not imply losing autonomy or creativity.

Some of the most creative contributions to art, music, and literature, occur within a framework. Mathematics itself operates within a framework and is full of brilliantly creative results. The CCSS-M allow for creativity and autonomy within a framework.

The CCSS-M need time and support to implement.

Right now, mathematics teaching and learning (at all levels) are not as strong as they should be. The CCSS-M can help us focus on where we need to go. Implementing them will require time, learning, and collective effort. Let’s use the standards we have and work together to make mathematics teaching and learning in Georgia strong and vibrant.

A copy of this letter is posted at the Mathematics Teaching Community, online at
https://mathematicsteachingcommunity.math.uga.edu
where teachers of mathematics (any level) may post comments.

Sincerely,

Sybilla Beckmann
Josiah Meigs Distinguished Teaching Professor of Mathematics
Department of Mathematics
Boyd Graduate Studies Building
200 D. W. Brooks Drive
University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia 30602

sybilla@math.uga.edu
706-542-2548

http://www.math.uga.edu/~sybilla/

Categories Common Core, Georgia
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »