Archives for the year of: 2013

Pennsylvania is overrun with cyber charters. There are 16 of them competing for customers, sucking money out of real public schools, supplying a terrible education. Some are under investigation. The legislature protects them because of campaign contributions.

Meanwhile public schools are suffering due to budget cuts while these sham schools make profits.

They have extracted $4 billion from the state’s taxpayers in inflated costs, padded enrollment data, and legislative beneficence. This is legal graft.

Carol Burris of South Side High School in Rockville Center, New York, sent out the following notice:

Thank you again for signing the petition against high stakes testing. It will be delivered on June 8 at the Rally for Public Education in Albany.

The purpose of the rally (12:00-3:00) is to express opposition to high stakes testing and support educational funding. Although it is sponsored by NYSUT, other groups are marching as well, including parents and principals.

Fellow principals and I will march behind a banner that says

http://www.newyorkprincipals.org

Our kids and teachers are more than a number .

We are assembling at the bottom of the egg, so if you are coming alone, feel free to join us or come by and say “hello”.

Parking is available under the egg. You can park for free in the two lots
on Madison Ave. I hope to see you there.

http://www.theegg.org/about/directions

*Field Testing*

This is a link to a site that gives parents information about field testing
http://www.scribd.com/doc/141872303/say-yes-to-learning-and-no-to-field-testing-what-nyc-parents-need-to-know

Although it was designed for New York City parents, it is relevant to all New York State parents.

inBloom and your children’s data

Please urge your legislators to support the bill A.6059/S.4284, to block the state’s plan to share private student and teacher information with inBloom Inc. and for-profit vendors, which has 59 co-sponsors in the Assembly and 20 in the Senate. It’s especially important to call Sen. Flanagan at 631-361-2154 and Sen. Skelos at (516) 766-8383 and ask them to support the bill and hold hearings on it now.

More about VAM and APPR

Whether you are a parent, principal or teacher, I think you will find this article on VAM of importance.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/20/principal-why-our-new-educator-evaluation-system-is-unethical/

Here is the bottom line: No measure of teacher or principal performance should put the best interests of students in conflict with the best interests of the adults who serve them.

Jersey Jazzman is fast on the draw. Here he dissects Rick Hess’s defense of Ben Austin.

JJ wonders how Hess would feel if the parents of Newark and other cities in New Jersey–which have not had local control for two decades– were given a “parent trigger” to eliminate state control of their districts.

Good question:

Why is parent trigger swell when Parent Revolution organizes a parent petition to kick out the staff but not good at all when parents are denied the power to kick out their district superintendent?

This is off-topic, since it is not about education. But, hey, it’s my blog and I am allowed now and then to think about other topics.

I just read in the New York Times that New York City is planning to ditch its new electronic voting machines and go back to using the old lever-operated machines, first invented in 1890. The city has already spent $95 million on the electronic machines, and some critics said that it was wrong to revert to the old technology. The old machines are apparently in a warehouse, covered in plastic.

The reason I mention this was that I served on a federal commission to review the electoral process after the fiasco of the disputed Presidential election in 2000. The commission was co-chaired by ex-Presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford. Our report was released in August 2001.

One of the subjects of our investigation was the voting machines: which were in use and which were most effective. We saw demonstrations of all the electronic machines, as well as some existing machines. The technical people said the best, most foolproof machine was the New York City lever machine, which many considered a dinosaur. It counted every vote and had a low error rate. The electronic machines were subject to hacking.

Ironic that the city is now planning –at least temporarily–to bring back the tried and true lever machines.

Jeb Bush really truly doesn’t like public schools. He sees them as the essence of mediocrity, strangled by unions.

What does he want? Charters, vouchers, virtual schools. Anything but public schools.

Gary Rubinstein came across an article in which Tennessee State Commissioner Kevin Huffman boasted about the merit pay scheme he was proposing and derided the leader of the Memphis teachers’ union for expressing caution about the program. Gary decided to take a closer look at the merit pay program and concluded that the union leader’s concern was well placed. Teachers would receive $2,000 to sign up and would receive another $5,000 only if they got the required gains.

I am constantly amazed that policymakers pay no attention at all to the evidence on merit pay. It has failed again and again. The most spectacular failure was in Nashville, where teachers were offered a bonus of $15,000 to produce higher test scores. There was a control group and an experimental group. After three years, there was no significant difference in the test scores of the two groups. Merit pay also failed in New York City and in Chicago.

Merit pay is faith-based policy.

 

A teacher explains how useless high-stakes testing is for some students, and for this one student in particular:

He writes:

In response to a state standardized test question about analyzing the author’s use of hyperbole, a student of mine recently responded with one brief sentence: “I don’t know what analyze means.” This student (who receives special education services) sat with his head down for most of the testing session. I was struck by the fact that he felt compelled to finally lift his pencil and scribble this when he could have easily just turned in a blank test booklet. It tells me that, even at a school that does not emphasize the importance of these tests (like ours), they are stressful and demoralizing to students. Students’ self-esteem is damaged and they feel the need to explain why they can’t produce a satisfactory answer. Mainly, it reminds me that these tests are a huge waste of time and resources that could go toward engaging students in actual learning.

But what does it tell them?

A test scorer looking at this student’s response would conclude that the student’s response is “totally incorrect or irrelevant or contains insufficient information to demonstrate comprehension (0 points).” Same for most of this student’s other answers. So, he’s got a “below basic” achievement level in “literature,” according to the test. Most people could tell you that by listening to the kid read aloud for one minute. So what else can we gather from his poor performance? He’s probably not learning anything in school? Doesn’t keep up with the assigned readings? Doesn’t finish any of his writing assignments? His teachers must not be addressing his unique learning needs by teaching him all the state instructional standards… I bet he attends one of those “corrective action” schools that have failed to meet AYP measures over and over… (Hey, we should close all those schools!) …if he even attends at all.

The reality is that he attends an alternative high school that doesn’t believe in testing their students in the traditional way. Instead, this student demonstrates his learning through the completion of a multidisciplinary project each semester. His project is based on real world learning that he engages in at his internship at a reputable local motorcycle shop. Last semester, with the guidance and support of his internship mentor, he built a “go-ped” motor scooter from scratch using technical schematics that most of us would be hopeless at deciphering. He collected data on the cost of all the materials as well as retail pricing and crunched the numbers to determine how much he could reasonably charge for his product. He researched and wrote an essay on the inadequacy of driver education programs, presenting evidence from several studies that showed that teen drivers are largely unprepared for emergencies on the road. He developed a hypothesis and and analyzed the results of a science experiment that involved taking samples of and growing bacteria in a petri dish (How “dirty” are those go-ped handlebars anyway?). Instead of a final exam, he created and delivered an exhibition where presented evidence of all of this learning to a group of his teachers, mentors, and peers. Pretty amazing accomplishments for a student who is “below basic,” I’d say.

I keep this student’s response to the “analyze” question in mind as a good example of why these tests pretty much useless.

Teacher Aaron Pribble wrote a critique of high-stakes testing for “Edutopia.”

He explains how high-stakes testing warps teaching and distorts the educational process.

When teachers get rewards and punishments tied to test scores it ruins education.

He has a simple idea: Raise the standard for entry into teaching. Then give teachers the freedom to teach. Treat them as the experts they are.

Imagine this: a candidate for the school board who was constantly thinking of students, not hoping for a political stepping stone.

Imagine this: a candidate who thinks of students–not in the abstract–but as real children with names and faces, children she knows.

Imagine this: a candidate who doesn’t make absurd campaign promises because she understands the problems and needs of children, teachers, and schools.

That’s Monica Ratliff. She hated asking people for money. She taught her class every day instead of campaigning. She didn’t wring her hands and long for someone who had the power to make changes that helped students and teachers and schools..

She took responsibility and ran for the Los Angeles school board. She was the longest of long shots. She didn’t have powerful backers. She was outspent nearly 50-1. And she won. She is the real deal.

She is a challenge to the status quo.

She is the embodiment of the famous statement by Margaret Mead:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

It is clear by now that there is a very small number of very wealthy people who just don’t like public education. They don’t like teachers who work in public schools and want to strip them of any and every right, privilege, and status. They want to treat them like fast-food workers or salesmen who work on commission.

Given the chance, they would take the public’s money and give it to voucher schools, religious schools, entrepreneurs, to anyone who wants to start a school or an online business, regardless of their experience or qualifications. No one can take seriously their claim that they want to improve education or that they are “doing it for the kids” or they “put kids first” or they want to make kids “globally competitive.”

None of this is true.

Here Mike Deshotels explains who the haters are. They need do do some rethinking about the damage they are doing to our students, our teachers, and our nation.