Archives for the month of: December, 2013

Camika Royal is an alumna of TFA and a critical friend. She knows what is wrong with TFA, but she is not sorry she joined. TFA helped to shape who she is today, even as she questions its efficacy and its boasting.

What she does know for sure is that TFA does not address the structural inequities of American education.

She has read the flurry of articles saying “don’t join TFA,” but she doesn’t agree with them.

She concludes:

“I won’t say don’t join Teach For America or I won’t write recommendation letters. Whether you enter the profession through TFA, a school of education, or some other path, I care about who enters our schools and classrooms, why they come, why they stay, if they stay, and what they do while they are there. Should you choose to teach, please examine your motives and aspirations .

“TFA teachers may have been sold tall tales of being able to correct educational injustice in the two-year commitment, but Wendy Kopp has acknowledged “I know we are not going to change the education system with people teaching for two years. That’s not what we are trying to do.” Then what, educator, are you trying to do? What is your purpose? Urban schools and classrooms don’t need hyped-up heroes who burn out before their fire really gets going. We need resilient, lifelong educators who are focused on collective responsibility and the greater good. We need servant leaders, not self-serving saviors. In too many instances, Teach For America does more for those who join it than for the students and communities it hopes to serve. If you do choose to teach FOR America, please make sure your work improves more than just your life.

“As for whether or not I would join TFA if I knew in 1999 what I know now, this question is just as spiritual and philosophical as it is political and career-oriented. If I hadn’t been affiliated with TFA, I wouldn’t be who I am now. I am better for having had my TFA experience. I hope TFA is better for having had me in it. I hope my students were better for having had me as their teacher. Still, the impacts the organization claims to have are likely gross exaggerations. (I’m not buying claims of 2.6 extra months of math growth.) And I do not support some of the directions and choices the organization makes. But that’s why I’ve also chosen to be a critical friend to the organization. Somebody has to tell TFA, in a way they can hear it, when their stuff stinks. Might as well be me.”

Mercedes Schneider is a Wonder Woman of data. She teaches high school English in Louisiana, holds a Ph.D. in research methods, and writes lengthy, carefully documented articles when she is not teaching.

I can’t wait to see her book, which will be published in 2014.

When the so-called “Center for Union Facts” purchased a full-page ad in the New York Times to attack Randi Weingarten and teachers’ unions for the alleged “decline” in PISA scores, Schneider wrote a post exposing that the CUF is neither a “center” nor does it deal in “facts.” It is a public relations firm that represents rightwing corporate interests and specializes in union-busting, among its other unsavory projects.

I also wrote a post about CUF, describing my personal encounter with its president Richard Berman at a conference of rightwing  philanthropies, where he explained his campaign to discredit teachers’ unions.

CUF wrote a response, attacking me and ignoring Schneider’s expose of their funding.

In this post, Schneider blasts back. It is Mercedes at her best, the dogged researcher who is principled, courageous, witty, and fearless.

Let’s see if the CUF has the nerve to go after Mercedes.

I place my bets on her.

Lisa Alva Wood, a teacher in the Los Angeles public schools, belonged to an array of corporate reform groups.

She belonged to Educators for Excellence and other corporate-sponsored groups.

She participated in an E4E video, along with other teachers, supporting a group that promotes high-stakes testing, evaluation of teachers by test scores, charter schools, etc., all in the name of “civil rights” and “excellence.”

She believed in their promises, she thought they were sincere in wanting the best for all students.

Then she listened in to a phone conversation and was stunned by what she heard.

She realized that she was part of a “team” that was working to protect John Deasy.

She realized that she did not share the goals of the larger group, which consisted of some 51 organizations.

And she quit.

Read here to find out why.

Here is a sample of what she heard and why she quit:

Long story short, these folks made a huge showing outside the morning Board meeting, while 35,000 union members were busy serving the needs of our youth. It was a much needed wake-up call. I began to realize the extent of the ignorance and hubris that fuels many ed-reform decisions, as well as the extent of my own ignorance. The addition of businessmen and socialites to a board I sat on made sense suddenly, as did their posturing and pronouncements. If you’ve ever heard people mis-speaking about things you know intimately, or talking about you when they thought you weren’t listening, you know how pained I was and still am. I couldn’t speak then and have just found the words, now.

Some of the groups in the pro-Deasy rally – Students First, Green Dot, KIPP LA – were to be expected, although they have no business in LAUSD’s superintendent evaluation. Others made me gag in wonder – Goodwill of Southern California? Inner-City Struggle? LA Education Partnership? I thought we were friends!

They weren’t talking about me, personally, but they clearly saw themselves as supporting their hero, a hero whose arch-enemy is my union, UTLA. It was, and is, very difficult to understand why they need to draw a protective circle in the sand around John Deasy. (Speculation is rampant, but facts are hard to come by). The bottom line for me personally is that there are too many good people distracted by too many superfluous groups. The best place for an educator to protect and promote public education is the teachers’ union. Over time, for better or for worse, the union is the educators’ bastion and it is set up via a democratic process in which any member can participate. If UTLA needs to be more positive and professional, we need to make it that way ourselves, but that’s another story.

What do these people want, for our youth, really? School choice is a wonderful thing for those of us who actively choose – but we all have the sacred obligation to provide a quality public education for all children. This means I could get my own daughter into a magnet school by filling out the applications, kissing principal butt, following through with phone calls and then getting her to the bus stop at oh-dark-thirty; I did that. But I still have a very real obligation to the kids down the street to make sure that our neighborhood school is fully staffed and resourced, and functioning with district support.

A reader submitted this comment about a new group formed to push back against Teach for America.

 

Join Resist TFA and spread the word to end this cult. Stephanie Rivera at Rutgers University started this program and she’ll send the materials on request. Spread the word. I print them and leave the flyers in the libraries & on student bulletin boards. My students spread the info via social networking.

http://studentsresistingtfa.k12newsnetwork.com/resources/
https://www.facebook.com/StudentsUnitedForPublicEducation

Just learned this from Victoria Wilson, my great editor at Knopf. “Reign of Error” was selected by Apple as one of the year’s best books in the category “Politics and Current Events”:

Apple announced its 2013 Editorial Picks of the Year this morning.

ONE SUMMER has been named Best in nonfiction for year and TENTH OF DECEMBER Best of the Year in fiction.

iTunes.com/iBooksBestof2013

Additional Picks by Category are:

Literature & Fiction
ALL THAT IS
THE LOWLAND
DISSIDENT GARDENS

Mystery & Thriller
SYCAMORE ROW
POLICE
LITTLE GREEN

Science Fiction
MADDADDAM

Fantasy
WOLVES OF MIDWINTER

Business
LEAN IN

Science & Nature
SCATTER, ADAPT, AND REMEMBER
THE STORY OF THE HUMAN BODY

Politics & Current Events
REIGN OF ERROR
GOING CLEAR

Biographies
WAVE
LAWRENCE IN ARABIA

History
ONE SUMMER
BOOK OF AGES

Apple would appreciate any sharing of this great news on Social Media. Here are the guidelines they’ve provided:

When talking about the feature in social media, please keep in mind these bullet points:

Include link: iTunes.com/iBooksBestof2013

Include the phrase “iBooks Best of 2013”

Include hashtag #Bestof2013

For more than two decades, we have heard that charter schools will “save” poor kids from “failing public schools.”

Most comparisons show that charter schools and public schools get about the same test scores if they serve the same demographics. When charter schools exclude English learners and students with severe disabilities and push out students with low test scores, or exclude students with behavioral issues, it is likely to boost their test scores artificially.

Nicole Blalock, who holds a Ph.D. and is a postdoctoral scholar at Arizona State University, compared the performance of charter schools and public schools on NAEP 2013.

She acknowledged the problems inherent in comparing the two sectors. Both are diverse, and demographic controls are not available.

Nonetheless, she identified some states where charter performance is better, and some where public school performance is better.

The result, as you might expect: Mixed.

Bottom line: charters are no panacea.

Education Week reports that 68% of districts plan to buy new instructional resources to meet the demands of Common Core.

That is, some 7,600 districts plan to buy new materials.

Most are planning to buy online resources, presumably to prepare for online testing.

I wish some researchers would estimate the shift of resources to pay for the new stuff.

As districts purchase more Common Core aligned materials, hardware and software, what do they spend less on?

Class size? Teachers? The arts? Physical education? Social workers? Guidance counselors? Librarians?

A newly elected school board in Pittsburgh voted to cancel a contract with Teach for America, reversing the vote of the previous school board, which planned to hire 30 TFA recruits.

The motion passed with six affirmative votes; two opposed and an abstention. The outgoing board previously approved the contract, 6-3.

This was remarkable because it is one of the few times–maybe the first time–that a school board rejected a TFA contract and recognized how controversial it is to hire young inexperienced teachers for the neediest students.

The school board also voted to keep open an elementary school that the previous board had decided to close.

 

You can view here the results for the NAEP for urban districts, known as TUDA, or Trial Urban District Assessments.

Five districts volunteered to take the NAEP in 2002.

Since then, the number has grown to 21 districts.

Test scores have generally risen, though not in all districts and not at the same rate.

Demographics affects the scores, not surprisingly.

Watch for changes over time in the proportion of high-poverty students.

As a New Yorker, I was very interested in the progress of what was once known as the “New York City miracle.” It disappeared.

On NAEP TUDA 2013, there was no “New York City miracle.” For almost every group and grade, scores have been stagnant since 2007. This year, the only group that saw a gain was white students in eighth grade. Black students and Hispanic students in fourth and eighth grades saw no gains at all. Black and Hispanic scores have been flat since 2005.

Knowing of Mayor Bloomberg’s large public relations staff and his pride in having “transformed” New York City’s public schools, I was curious to see how they would spin these flat results.

Here it is, in the Wall Street Journal:

“NYC Student Test Scores Rise Slower Than Other Cities”

“City Says Its Already High Scores Are Tougher to Improve”

But New York City is not number 1; it is not even number 2.

It is in sixth, or seventh, or eighth place in reading and mathematics, as compared to cities like Charlotte, Austin, Hillsborough County, Boston, and San Diego, yet its officials feel compelled to claim that they are just too darn accomplished to make improvements.

 

 

Once again, we are treated to a New York Times editorial on education that is a mix of good and bad.

Bottom line: The Times blames teachers for the U.S. scores on PISA. And once again, the Times assumes that the scores of 15-year-olds on a standardized test predict the future of our economy, for which there is no evidence at all.

On the good side, the Times recognizes that entry standards into teaching in this country are far too low. In many states, a college graduate may become a teacher with no professional training or with an online degree or with only five weeks of training (TFA). That is not what the much-admired nations cited by the Times do.

On the good side, the Times notes that Finland has extensive social services for children in its schools. Entry into teacher education programs in Finland is rigorous. Teacher education is a five-year program.

On the bad side, the Times fails to mention that state after state is busily dismantling the teaching profession by eliminating collective bargaining (which Finland has); teacher tenure; salary increments for masters’ degrees; and actively discouraging and demoralizing experienced teachers. To call for an improved teaching profession, as the editorial does, while demonstrating total indifference to the widespread attacks on the teaching profession shows an astonishing ignorance of the political realities on the ground.

On the bad side, the Times never acknowledges that Finland has NO standardized testing until the end of high school.

On the bad side, the Times never notes that nearly one-quarter of children in the U.S. live in poverty, as compared to fewer than 5% in Finland. The editorial completely ignores poverty as a cause of low academic performance.

On the bad side, the Times cites the NCTQ as if its review of course syllabi and reading lists made it a credible research organization, which it is not.

On the bad side, the Times assumes that Shanghai has included all the migrant children in its schools and in its PISA testing, when Tom Loveless has demonstrated that this is an aspiration for 2020, not a reality.

Here is Tom Loveless’s comment on the New York Times‘ gushing praise for Shanghai: “dumb and dumber.”

Here are some tweets from this morning:

  1. @chingos Draws causal conclusions from X-sectional data. And praises Shanghai for equitable migrant ed. Dumb and dumber.

  2. @pasi_sahlberg @nytimes NYT draws causal conclusions from X-sectional data. Praises Shanghai for equitable migrant ed. Dumb and dumber.

  3. @NeeravKingsland @nytimes Bold isn’t the right word. Too bad NYT didn’t do some reporting before it editorialized.

    •  More
  4. Amazingly uninformed! NY Times praises Shanghai for equity in migrant education. Why Other Countries Teach Better