Archives for the year of: 2013

I was trying to decide which poem to share with you, when I saw that a reader suggested one of my favorites: “Ozymandias.” What a lesson this poem teaches about life, time, the illusory nature of power and fame. And when we read it, we ask ourselves what matters most, what endures, what can we do in this life that matters?

Ozymandias

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: “Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert… Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”.

Strongest supporters of Common Core: business community, Jeb Bush, StudentsFirst, other corporate reformers.

Strongest critics: Republicans.

As usual, the debate is framed as rightwing vs. rightwing.

It is way more complex than that.

There ought to be a law that anyone commenting on or writing about the Common Core should be required to read them first.

The Los Angeles Times published a first-rate editorial about the disastrous federal micromanagement spawned by NCLB. It also takes the Obama administration to the woodshed for its own misguided micromanagement of the nation’s public schools.

It says: “The nation is ripe for rebellion against the rigid law and the Obama administration’s further efforts to micromanage how schools are run.”

It adds:

“Passed in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act used the leverage of federal education funding to push states into doing more for their disadvantaged, black and Latino students, whose academic achievement was appallingly low. Although public schools fall under state rather than federal purview, the rationale behind the interference was that because Congress provided some funding, it had an interest in making sure that the money was achieving its aims. That’s fair enough.

“Unfortunately, the punitive law ushered in a regimen of intensive testing and harsh sanctions against schools that failed to meet improvement markers that were extremely difficult to achieve, sometimes meaningless and often counterproductive. Later, the Obama administration added more layers of interference by pushing its own favored reforms — such as a common curriculum for all states and the inclusion of test scores as a substantial factor in teacher evaluations — in some cases in return for waivers on the No Child Left Behind requirements.”

The federal government was wrong to make scores on standardized tests the measure of all things. It was a colossal error. We didn’t need NCLB to tell us that poor and minority kids were not getting the same test scores as their advantaged peers. We knew that from state scores and SAT scores and multiple other sources. The issue was what to do about it. Congress decided that measuring the gap was reform. however, none of their “remedies”–enacted without any evidence–was effective. Twelve years after the law was enacted, none of the law’s so-called remedies has worked.

The fact is that no one–repeat, NO ONE–in Congress or the U.S. Department of Education (then or now) knows how to reform the nation’s public schools. Secretary Rod Paige didn’t, nor did Secretary Margaret Spellings. Certainly Secretary of Education Arne Duncan doesn’t. His Renaissance 2010 plan in Chicago was a much-hyped failure that has left the wreckage of lives and communities in its wake. Why was he allowed to turn Renaissance 2010 into Race to the Top?

The one-size-fits-all NCLB is wrong for most schools, and Race to the Top heaps on more punishments while blaming teachers for low test scores. This law and this program, and the thinking behind them, have diverted the public’s attention from the root causes of poor academic performance, which include poverty, segregation, and under-resourced schools. Instead of confronting root causes, our elites confront the failure of the NCLB regime of high-stakes testing by demanding more of the same and making the stakes higher for teachers and principals.

Kudos to the Los Angeles Times for recognizing that the federal government has overstepped the bounds of federalism, has imposed impossible mandates, and is out of its league.

The dilemma in framing the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is that Congress can’t see beyond the narrow and punitive mindset of NCLB. It is locked into stale thinking. It refuses to see the disastrous consequences of both NCLB and Race to the Top.

Future historians will puzzle out why the Obama administration threw away the chance to bring a fresh vision to federal education policy and why it chose to tighten the screws on the nation’s schools and teachers and why it chose to lend its prestige and funding to the privatization movement.

In the future, I believe, the period that began in 2001 and continues to this day will be remembered as the “Bush-Obama era” in education. It will be recalled as a time when a liberal Democratic president watched in silence as states attacked the teaching profession, lowered standards for entry into teaching, enacted laws to end collective bargaining, authorized privatization with federal funding and encouragement, and passed laws permitting vouchers for private and religious schools.

Peg Robertson read the article in the Denver Post in which the president of the Colorado Education Association praised inBloom and said that it would provide great learning tools.

Peg is a teacher and parent in Colorado, and she is a leader of United OptOut. She is opposed to inBloom. Here she explains why.

Read her article in its entirety.

Here is the core of her critique of the teacher who supports inBloom:

“She fails to mention that inBloom can share student data with for-profit vendors to allow them an opportunity to tailor their educational products to students’ needs.  She fails to mention that “personalized learning” too often means hooking children up to computers with software programs – which is really depersonalized learning.

 
She fails to mention that federal privacy laws were weakened to allow for-profit companies access to student data without parental consent, and that Jefferson County schools are not allowing parents to opt out of inBloom.  This despite the fact that inBloom has said they will not be responsible if the information leaks out either in storage or transmission.
 
She fails to mention that inBloom is collecting 400 data points on each child – including the most sensitive information: names, addresses, test scores, grades, economic and racial status, as well as detailed special education, immigration and disciplinary records. These data points could create a detailed profile and follow your child throughout his/her educational career; this could indeed narrow your child’s opportunities within school and after graduation.
 
One must ask, why do they need all these data points about our children? inBloom has also said that starting in 2015, states and districts will have to pay from two to five dollars per student for putting their most sensitive data on an insecure data cloud and offered up to vendors.  inBloom is also considering charging the vendors for access to the data – which is comparable to selling children’s data or renting it out.“

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

InBloom is very controversial, to say the least. This is the collaboration funded by the Gates Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation, to gather confidential student data and aggregate it into a massive database. The actual work will be done by Wireless Generation, which is part of Joel Klein’s Amplify, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation.

Many parents are unhappy about the release of their child’s data without their written consent. Presumably, the information will be used to create and market new technologies directly to schools and students.

Here is an article supporting inBloom, written by the head of the Colorado Education Association. CEA received funding from the Gates Foundation in 2012 and 2013.)

The article provoked some lively comments.

One of my favorites:

“I will tell you the precise moment when I will perhaps re-consider my view of InBloom as a troubling and pernicious development in the education of our nation’s public school children: when Lakeside Prep in Seattle, Sidwell Friends in DC and other august and prestigious private academies decide they want their students to be signed up for this racket. Otherwise they will remain separate and apart from the commoners’ children in the public schools, of course. It must be easy to dictate policies that only affect other people’s children.”

Teacherbiz writes a friendly but very candid letter to Big Brother Bill Gates.

Teacherbiz has some good advice:

“You know that feeling you get when you think you’re doing something good—and then you realize you’re actually doing harm? I’ve experienced it, and it’s not a good feeling—and the only way to get rid of that bad feeling is to change your course of action and make up for the damage you’ve done.”

A teacher sends this description of what passes for critical thought in his school. Read it through and ask yourself whether it makes any sense always to advocate someone else’s opinion. What if their opinion is wrong? What if they are spouting nonsense? If everyone advocates someone else’s opinion, will we be lost in a Tower of Babel where no one has any authority, and everyone is advocating someone else’s opinions, and ideas become fungible and meaningless?

The teacher writes:

“Fabricated and orchestrated grit! Yet we will do it with an appropriate expression on our face, and will do it through “consensus and collaboration.”

Our High School – which has been touting “Global Citizen” and “21st Century Skills” for a few years just created a rubric for “Respect of Another’s Opinion.”

The lowest level was “tolerating another’s opinion.”
The highest level was “Advocating and promoting another’s opinion.”

Not to be mistaken with promoting someones “right” to an opinion, but actually “advocating” their ideas!

Who gets to be the winner? This is consensus group-thinking to an extreme.”

Michael Brocoum recounts his experience as a New York City public school teacher:

“I was a teacher at the Bayard Rustin High School for the Humanities in NYC from 1990 – 2010 and taught before at several other schools in NYC. I also taught Economics as an adjunct at the State Univ. of NY at Farmingdale before that (1975-77).

“BRHS was an excellent school with students opting to attend that didn’t make it into Stuyvesant. Also students that were accepted opted to attend BRHS because of its reputation. A significant number of students were children of diplomats. In other words, well fed and motivated students, involved parents, great staff with great results.

“Some students went on to Ivy League schools, one of mine is a reporter on NBC Evening News, another won a film award from an NYC program rewarding student’s creativity (I don’t recall specific details). Overall a very good school by any standard.

“Then Mayor Bloomberg became, well, mayor. Worse still he gained absolute control and the whole situation was made even worse when Bill Gates decided he wanted to fund a small school movement. There is a lot to explain but not interested reliving all that happened. Simply put we were sent the most difficult and needy students, not violent for the most part, but students reading at 5th or 6th grade levels and also far behind in math skills.

“To make a long story short, good school at the beginning of Bloomberg’s mayoralty, closure near the end of it. I retired in disgust. By the way, Bill Gates admitted his small school program was a failure. He walked away harmless and we were left “holding the bag”.

What a strange bureaucracy is Chicago Public Schools. Also, like many bureaucracies, cold and heartless.

CPS fired veteran Chicago teacher Xian Barrett by informing his mother. The principal called his mother and read a script. It’s not like Barrett is a minor. Why wouldn’t they have the nerve to call him directly?

The mass layoffs follow an unprecedented mass closing of 50 schools.

Could this be payback for last fall’s teachers’ strike? Or just Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s determination to starve public education and call it reform?

“In one of the city’s largest teacher layoffs ever, the district pink slipped 2,113 teachers and other employees.

“Of those laid off, 1,036 are teachers and 1,077 are support staff, with the laid-off teachers accounting for about 4 percent of last year’s total faculty of 23,290.

“Budget cuts are to blame for 815 support staff, 398 tenured teachers and 510 non-tenured teachers; school closings for 68 support staff employees and 194 food staff employees, and changes in school enrollments account for rest, the district said.

“Another 161 highly-rated teachers from the 48 schools that closed permanently in June also learned later Friday they will not follow their students to new schools — there aren’t enough open jobs in the receiving schools, according to CPS spokeswoman Kelley Quinn. Their positions have been cut, but they’re not technically laid off since they continue to collect full pay and benefits in a teacher reassignment pool for the first five months of the school year, and slightly lower pay in the cadre substitute pool for the next five months, Quinn said.”

Watch the billionaires scoop up the treasures of the Detroit Institute of Art.

Is ours a society where the public sector can be ransacked for gain, where legislatures and governors walk away from any responsibility to protect the common wealth?