Julian Vasquez Heilig on TFA’s Rise to Power

8 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. jean sanders says:

   October 30, 2013 at 7:42 am

   I realize this should be posted to an earlier page but I could not find the corect spot.
   quote:

   “Sen. Edward Markey in a letter written to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, questions whether changes in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act have given schools too much authority to share student data with companies without parents’ consent; [he] voiced worries that a growing number of school districts are “outsourcing data storage functions to private companies,” and that federal law might not be doing enough to regulate that flow of information.
   “[D]isclosure of such information, which may extend well beyond the specific private company hired by the school district to a constellation of other firms with which the district does not have a business relationship,” Markey wrote, “raises concerns about the degree to which student privacy may be compromised.”
   Markey asked Duncan to explain the agency’s position on student privacy and data issues in a number of areas, including how regulatory changes made to FERPA in 2008 and 2011 affect schools’ ability to outsource scheduling, data management, and other functions.
   “Did the department perform any analysis regarding the impact of these changes on student privacy?” Markey asks. “If yes, please provide it. If not, why not?”
   The lawmaker also asks if the department has assessed whether various types of information are shared by schools with third party-vendors, such as contact information, and disciplinary and attendance records.”

   ——————————-
   I am concerned that pre-schoolers are being marketed for “Footsteps2Brilliance” that looks to me like a marketing /data mining purpose and that parents are being “hoodwinked” into signing up.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Chiara Duggan says:

     October 30, 2013 at 8:58 am

     “I am concerned that pre-schoolers are being marketed for “Footsteps2Brilliance” that looks to me like a marketing /”

     Preschool expansion under Duncan IN GENERAL scares me.

     I think preschool expansion would be great. I just don’t think expanding for-profits, for-profit lobbyists, online learning, product placement and standardized testing into preschool would be great.

     If Duncan does preschool, we get the reform model, and we know what that looks like because we’ve seen it for a decade.

     If we think K-12 for-profits are gorging at the trough, wait until preschool funding starts flowing. The existing for-profits and EMO’s will simply move into preschool levels.

     We have a wonderful local Head Start. Can’t wait until it’s taken over by a national for-profit chain. They’ll be giving them tests at 3 instead of 5.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • JustCaresAlot says:

       October 30, 2013 at 6:35 pm

       Head Start began testing kids at age 3 long ago –shortly after NCLB became law. What the for-profits are likely to do is what they already do, in order to be competitive in the market place, especially the chains, which is provide a pushed down academic curriculum, beginning as early as infancy, with flashcards and chart boards, and deny kids opportunities to play.

       LikeLike

2. rommeytx says:

   October 30, 2013 at 8:03 am

   Anybody who had the opportunity to see first hand the results of Teaching For America will agree with Julian Vasquez Heilig assessment. There is no way to refute the damage done. But, unfortunately money speaks and it makes people close their eyes… Like Julian says, we need to hasten TFA death by shining the sun light on their obscure deals.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. Chiara Duggan says:

   October 30, 2013 at 9:09 am

   We need an example of a local effort to keep TFA out. A public school district that decides at the local level “thanks but no thanks”. A positive decision to bet on local teachers instead of this national group.
   They’re federally funded and embedded in Congress and the state level action is too attenuated and distant for most people to notice. I think it has to come from below, at the smaller-district school board level, obviously a place where they still have a school board, so not a mayoral-controlled city. At the very least we’d then have a real local debate, where they’d have to defend this practice, explain how it benefits EXISTING public schools.
   Most children attend existing, traditional public schools. If “reform” doesn’t benefit THEM, politicians will have difficulty continuing to back it. Wendy Kopp doesn’t have to get elected, but her politician fan base does.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. alharris161 says:

   October 30, 2013 at 2:12 pm

   With as much public information (articles, blogs, studies, interviews, books, op-eds, TFA alum pro/con letters, social media posts, etc.) available to school districts, superintendents, and principals regarding concerns for TFA, what prevents local hiring authorities from exercising discernment with regards to what’s best for their district/school? It doesn’t seem to me that any hiring authority has a gun to their head and are forced to hire from TFA, Troops to Teachers, TNTP, or other alternative certification programs.

   What prevents school district #1 in poor rural Mississippi from exercising their judgment to hire TFA teachers for middle/high school mathematics because they’ve reviewed the Mathematica study and perceive the TFA teachers will be a good fit, and at the same time exercising their judgment to not hire TFA teachers for their special education classrooms because of concerns raised via public information.

   What prevents school district #2 in poor inner city Chicago from exercising their judgment to hire TFA teachers for middle/high school science/physic/chemistry because they’re finding it difficult to find qualified applicants to fill those positions, and at the same time exercising their judgment to not hire TFA teachers for their elementary classrooms because of concerns raised via public information.

   With as much public information available regarding TFA (and other alternative certification programs), it seems unlikely that school boards, superintendents, and principals are making uninformed decisions regarding hiring. The general public outcry against TFA and other alternative certification programs seems to imply school districts are being forced, at gun-point, to hire alternatively certified teachers. Perhaps the focus should be on the entities that are hiring, not the alternative certification programs that offer their services.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • CTee says:

     October 30, 2013 at 6:51 pm

     “The general public outcry against TFA and other alternative certification programs seems to imply school districts are being forced, at gun-point, to hire alternatively certified teachers”

     The basic narrative is that TFA is controlled by a cadre of evil billionaires who use their money to muscle and/or trick people into hiring TFA teachers. So anyone who supports TFA is either an evil billionaire, someone bought out by an evil billionaire, or someone too stupid to recognize that they are being manipulated by the evil billionaires.

     I’m not being facetious. That is actually the narrative.

     I think the anti-TFA crowd would do well to spend more time (as some have) on thoughtful analysis and empirical results on the costs and benefits of TFA. You will convince more people that way. It starts by realizing that a significant number of people do not consider “X is supported by rich people, therefore X is evil” to be a sound argument.

     LikeLike

     Reply
5. Julian Vasquez Heilig says:

   November 1, 2013 at 12:46 am

   For a “thoughtful analysis and empirical results” on TFA visit http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/teach-for-america

   LikeLike

   Reply