Archives for the year of: 2013

In a post this morning, I said I was doing a book talk at PS 15 in Red Hook, Brooklyn.

I gave the wrong date!

It will be December 11, NOT December 9.

I should have said:

I will be holding a book talk at P.S. 15 at 71Sullivan Street in Red Hook, Brooklyn, on December 11 from 5-7. No lecture, just conversation. Read the book first. If you live in New York City or anywhere nearby, you are welcome to attend.

The following comment was posted on the blog:

 

As a parent in the Kansas City Public Schools who has been fighting from the trenches the last 3 years, I’m thrilled to see Missouri on your blog. Dr Nicastro’s true stripes are starting to show.

Below is the letter I sent on September 10th after realizing the selection of CEE-Trust (paid for by private foundation funds) to “study” KCPS’ and St Louis’ unaccreditation problem was really a well-orchestrated attempt to dismantle the schools and district my daughters attend.

Dear Commisisoner Nicastro and Members of The State Board of Education,

My name is Jennifer and I am the parent of two elementary children in the Kansas City Public Schools. I have been involved with KCPS since 2004. I am writing to you because I feel the voices of KCPS parents are being marginalized and cannot let this go unaddressed anymore. To me it feels as if more weight and value is being placed in the opinions of a small group of influential Kansas Citians (Civic Council, Kauffman and Hall Family Foundations) versus those of us actually utilizing our public schools; those of use who see and experience first-hand how changes which began 5 years ago are finally starting to bear fruit.

I can only assume you would want to listen to ALL affected stakeholders in order to make balanced, reasoned and well-informed decisions related to the accreditation status of the Kansas City Public Schools.

As a parent leader, I have personally witnessed the transformation of the last 5 years and only wish to share my experience with those in a position to make a decision affecting my city, district, schools, classrooms, teachers and my children. I can attest that we (the Kansas City Public Schools) ARE on the right track; a board well-versed in policy governance, a stable superintendent, a financially sound house AND 2 years of sustained improvement in academic achievement with a well-defined plan to deliver again in SY14. As such, I wholeheartedly support Dr Green’s assertion that KCPS has earned the right to seek provisional accreditation now.

What I am most afraid of is that the voices of a few have already influenced you to seek the consultation of an organization such as CEE-Trust. It’s no secret what sort of recommendations they will likely make based upon their funding sources and some of their previous work. In my mind their selection is tantamount to putting the fox in charge of the hen house. But more importantly, the reforms they are likely to recommend have been shown to exacerbate the racial and economic achievement gap AND negatively impact student achievement for students in Chicago, New York, DC and New Orleans.

I seriously question the underlying motive of any decision to alter the current proven course of improvement for something as unproven as that which CEE-Trust is likely to recommend. In my opinion as a parent, such a decision is nothing short of wanton neglect.

Respectfully,
Jennifer

I participated in one of the parent CEE-Trust focus groups to get an insider’s view and am now working with a dedicated group of parents, teachers, administrators and community members to derail the reform train in Missouri and specifically Kansas City Public Schools.

To Readers,

Thank you for your good wishes.

I am on the mend. As you may have noticed, I have not stopped blogging!

I am on blood thinners and blood pressure medication. I had a pulmonary embolism in 1998, and I am lucky that this time the blood clots in my legs did not turn into a pulmonary embolism, which is life-threatening.

My spirits are good. I will be holding a book talk at P.S. 15 at 71Sullivan Street in Red Hook, Brooklyn, on December 11 from 5-7. No lecture, just conversation. Read the book first. If you live in New York City or anywhere nearby, you are welcome to attend.

On January 11, I will be speaking at the Modern Language Association annual conference in Chicago about Common Core. It was supposed to be a debate with David Coleman, but he informed the MLA that he had to attend a meeting elsewhere that weekend.

On January 16, I will speak at Fox Lane School in Bedford, New York, at 7:30 pm, to superintendents, school board members, and the public about testing and Common Core and other issues.

On January 22, I will be speaking at the University of Florida in Gainesville.

On February 1, I will speak to the Kentucky School Boards Association.

On February 3, I will speak to the New York City Performance Standards Consortium

On February 11, I will be in Raleigh, North Carolina, to speak at the Emerging Issues Institute

On March 1, I speak in Indianapolis to AACTE. After I speak, I fly to Austin, where I will speak to the first national conference of the Network for Public Education in Austin. The conference will be held on March 1 and 2. I speak on March 2.

March 3, I speak at the SXSW in Austin about standardized testing.

Much more in store for the balance of the spring!

I intend to slow down, occasionally smell the roses, and try to stay healthy.

Laurel Sturt was a fashion designer who decided to give up her career and become a Teaching Fellow. She was motivated by a desire to help children and make a difference, as most teachers are.

In an interview in the Atlantic, she explains what happened to her. Her experience is not unique, but it is important that it appears in a mainstream publication.

Laurel Sturt was a 46-year-old fashion designer in New York City whose career trajectory took an unlikely shift one day on the subway. A self-proclaimed social activist, Sturt noticed an ad for a Teaching Fellows program. Then and there, she decided to quit her job in fashion design and shift her focus to her real passion: helping others. She enrolled in the two-year program and was assigned to teach at an elementary school in a high-poverty neighborhood near the South Bronx.

She wanted to be a social activist but she arrived as No Child Left Behind and Mayor Bloomberg’s similar program took effect. This is how she described what she saw:

I saw a lot of problems with all the testing, with all the slogans everywhere, as if you were in North Korea or something. It was very strange. … It was all about achievement through test scores. I resented the fact that we were test-prepping them all the time and we couldn’t give them a rich, authentic education.

And she learned the reason for the “achievement gap” or “opportunity gap”:

It was a very poor neighborhood with a lot of English-language learners who knew little or no English. With poverty comes this condition called Toxic Stress. It explains why the children were so difficult to handle, needy, and so behind in learning. When your dad is in prison or your mom is on drugs, or your mom drank alcohol when you were a fetus, if you didn’t sleep the night before because you were allowed to play video games all night, or maybe there was a shooting, your cognitive ability is harmed. It rewires their brain so they’re unable to employ working memory, which is what you use when you’re learning. We’re charged with being the parents of these kids, being the friends, the mentors. Teachers are given all these social responsibility towards children that aren’t ours. It’s a failure of the system to address the poverty that creates the achievement gap.

Having been enticed by the subway ads to make a difference, she signed up, she did her best, but she eventually left teaching. Why?

I saw that no matter what I wanted for the kids, it wasn’t going to happen. The system purported to be supporting students just wasn’t there. They need remediation, tiny class sizes, one-on-one attention—they need parenting, basically. Their parents are affected by the same Toxic Stress that they are, and it repeats itself in a cycle from parent to child. In America, the wealthiest school is going to get ten times more funding than the lowest one. For every dollar my school was getting, one in the suburbs was getting ten dollars. That’s huge. The kids come in disadvantaged, and they’re subjected to this disadvantaged school. My school was completely third-world. And through it all, it completely negated your life outside school. It was so exhausting. To teach anyway means to be giving, to deliver something. You’re giving out, giving out, giving out. And when you come up against these natural obstructions because of poverty, and then the lack of support from the administration, it’s just too much.

Finland was not at the top of the PISA league tables in the latest assessment. So what does this mean for the future?

Here, Pasi Sahlberg explains that Finland never cared about being first.

What it wanted most was to have the kind of education that was best for youth development.

What will happen now that its scores have dropped?

Sahlberg writes:

Finland should not do what many other countries have done when they have looked for a cure to their ill-performing school systems. Common solutions have included market-based reforms, such as increasing competition between schools, standardization of teaching and learning, tougher test-based accountability and privatization of public schools. Instead, Finns must protect their schools from the Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) that has failed to help schools to get better in other countries.  The better way for Finland is to ensure that schools are able to cope with increasing inequality, that teachers have tools to help students with individual needs, and that all schools get support to succeed.

PISA results are too often presented as a simple league table of education systems. But there is much more that the data reveal. The Finnish school system continues to be one of the most equitable among the OECD countries. This means that in Finland, students’ learning in school is less affected by their family backgrounds than in most other countries. Schools in Finland remain fairly equal in learning outcomes despite the rapid growth of non-Finnish speaking children in schools.

Finland should also continue to let national education and youth policies — and not PISA — drive what is happening in schools. Reading, science, and mathematics are important in Finnish education system but so are social studies, arts, music, physical education, and various practical skills. Play and joy of learning characterize Finland’s pre-schools and elementary classrooms. Many teachers and parents in Finland believe that the best way to learn mathematics and science is to combine conceptual, abstract learning with singing, drama, and sports. This balance between academic and non-academic learning is critical to children’s well-being and happiness in school. PISA tells only a little about these important aspects of school education.

The news reports say that the test scores of American students on the latest PISA test are “stagnant,” “lagging,” “flat,” etc.

The U.S. Department of Education would have us believe–yet again–that we are in an unprecedented crisis and that we must double down on the test-and-punish strategies of the past dozen years.

The myth persists that once our nation led the world on international tests, but we have fallen from that exalted position in recent years.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Here is the background history that you need to know to interpret the PISA score release, as well as Secretary Duncan’s calculated effort to whip up national hysteria about our standing in the international league tables.

The U.S. has NEVER been first in the world, nor even near the top, on international tests.

Over the past half century, our students have typically scored at or near the median, or even in the bottom quartile.

International testing began in the mid-1960s with a test of mathematics. The First International Mathematics Study tested 13-year-olds and high-school seniors in 12 nations. American 13-year-olds scored significantly lower than students in nine other countries and ahead of students in only one. On a test given only to students currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students scored last, behind those in the 11 other nations. On a test given to seniors not currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students again scored last.

The First International Science Study was given in the late 1960s and early 1970s to 10-year-olds, 14-year-olds, and seniors. The 10-year-olds did well, scoring behind only the Japanese; the 14-year-olds were about average. Among students in the senior year of high school, Americans scored last of eleven school systems.

In the Second International Mathematics Study (1981-82), students in 15 systems were tested. The students were 13-year-olds and seniors. The younger group of U.S. students placed at or near the median on most tests. The American seniors placed at or near the bottom on almost every test. The “average Japanese students achieved higher than the top 5% of the U.S. students in college preparatory mathematics” and “the algebra achievement of our most able students (the top 1%) was lower than that of the top 1% of any other country.” (The quote is from Curtis C. McKnight and others, The Underachieving Curriculum: Assessing U.S. Mathematics from an International Perspective, pp. 17, 26-27). I summarized the international assessments from the mid-1960s to the early 1990s in a book called National Standards in American Education: A Citizen’s Guide (Brookings, 1995).

The point worth noting here is that U.S. students have never been top performers on the international tests. We are doing about the same now on PISA as we have done for the past half century.

Does it matter?

In my recent book, Reign of Error, I quote extensively from a brilliant article by Keith Baker, called “Are International Tests Worth Anything?,” which was published by Phi Delta Kappan in October 2007. Baker, who worked for many years as a researcher at the U.S. Department of Education, had the ingenious idea to investigate what happened to the 12 nations that took the First International Mathematics test in 1964. He looked at the per capita gross domestic product of those nations and found that “the higher a nation’s test score 40 years ago, the worse its economic performance on this measure of national wealth–the opposite of what the Chicken Littles raising the alarm over the poor test scores of U.S. children claimed would happen.” He found no relationship between a nation’s economic productivity and its test scores. Nor did the test scores bear any relationship to quality of life or democratic institutions. And when it came to creativity, the U.S. “clobbered the world,” with more patents per million people than any other nation.

Baker wrote that a certain level of educational achievement may be “a platform for launching national success, but once that platform is reached, other factors become more important than further gains in test scores. Indeed, once the platform is reached, it may be bad policy to pursue further gains in test scores because focusing on the scores diverts attention, effort, and resources away from other factors that are more important determinants of national success.” What has mattered most for the economic, cultural, and technological success of the U.S., he says, is a certain “spirit,” which he defines as “ambition, inquisitiveness, independence, and perhaps most important, the absence of a fixation on testing and test scores.”

Baker’s conclusion was that “standings in the league tables of international tests are worthless.”

I agree with Baker. The more we focus on tests, the more we kill creativity, ingenuity, and the ability to think differently. Students who think differently get lower scores. The more we focus on tests, the more we reward conformity and compliance, getting the right answer.

Thirty years ago, a federal report called “A Nation at Risk” warned that we were in desperate trouble because of the poor academic performance of our students. The report was written by a distinguished commission, appointed by the Secretary of Education. The commission pointed to those dreadful international test scores and complained that “on 19 academic tests American students were never first or second and, in comparison with other industrialized nations, were last seven times.” With such terrible outcomes, the commission said, “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.” Yet we are still here, apparently the world’s most dominant economy. Go figure.

Despite having been proved wrong for the past half century, the Bad News Industry is in full cry, armed with the PISA scores, expressing alarm, fright, fear, and warnings of imminent economic decline and collapse.

Never do they explain how it was possible for the U.S. to score so poorly on international tests again and again over the past half century and yet still emerge as the world’s leading economy, with the world’s most vibrant culture, and a highly productive workforce.

From my vantage point as a historian, here is my takeaway from the PISA scores:

Lesson 1: If they mean anything at all, the PISA scores show the failure of the past dozen years of public policy in the United States. The billions invested in testing, test prep, and accountability have not raised test scores or our nation’s relative standing on the league tables. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top are manifest failures at accomplishing their singular goal of higher test scores.

Lesson 2: The PISA scores burst the bubble of the alleged “Florida miracle” touted by Jeb Bush. Florida was one of three states–Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Florida–that participated in the PISA testing. Massachusetts did very well, typically scoring above the OECD average and the US average, as you might expect of the nation’s highest performing state on NAEP. Connecticut also did well. But Florida did not do well at all. It turns out that the highly touted  “Florida model” of testing, accountability, and choice was not competitive, if you are inclined to take the scores seriously. In math, Florida performed below the OECD average and below the U.S. average. In science, Florida performed below the OECD average and at the U.S. average. In reading, Massachusetts and Connecticut performed above both the OECD and U.S. average, but Florida performed at average for both.

Lesson 3: Improving the quality of life for the nearly one-quarter of students who live in poverty would improve their academic performance.

Lesson 4: We measure only what can be measured. We measure whether students can pick the right answer to a test question. But what we cannot measure matters more. The scores tell us nothing about students’ imagination, their drive, their ability to ask good questions, their insight, their inventiveness, their creativity. If we continue the policies of the Bush and Obama administrations in education, we will not only NOT get higher scores (the Asian nations are so much better at this than we are), but we will crush the very qualities that have given our nation its edge as a cultivator of new talent and new ideas for many years.

Let others have the higher test scores. I prefer to bet on the creative, can-do spirit of the American people, on its character, persistence, ambition, hard work, and big dreams, none of which are ever measured or can be measured by standardized tests like PISA.

What’s the gripe of those “white suburban moms” (and dads) who have turned out in large numbers to complain about Common Core and the increase in testing?

Here is a good analysis by a local Long Island reporter.

Jaime Franchi at LongIslandPress.com interviewed parents and leaders of the revolt and gives a full picture of the uprising.

The story begins:

Eighth grader Ryan Pepe, 13, of East Islip, reads his “intense” Common Core-assigned homework in his parent’s dining room. (Jaime Franchi/Long Island Press)

“Uncomfortable. Impossible. My chest hurts,” says Vincent Pepe, 10, pointing to his t-shirt where he feels his heart rate accelerating. He won’t make eye contact. He doesn’t like talking about the state tests he took last year.

“There wasn’t enough time,” he says. “It makes you quit.”

His older brother Ryan, 13, looks up from under a pile of homework. Ryan has served as Vincent’s protector since he was born. But Ryan can’t protect him from everything.

Neither will be taking the state tests this year. And they’re not alone.

A battle is being waged in New York State with Long Island on the front lines. The warriors come armed with manila folders of research on topics such as Common Core, data-mining and a billion-dollar company named Pearson. They have bags under their eyes from long, weary nights in front of sometimes-incomprehensible homework. The battlegrounds are the classrooms, the kitchen table, and auditoriums packed with parents and teachers who are demanding a three-year moratorium on high-stakes testing, but will settle for the resignation of New York State (NYS) Commissioner of Education John B. King, Jr. and the head of Gov. Andrew Cuomo. They are an army formed on Facebook, with groups informed by a national movement but concentrated right here, mobilized and motivated by the stress of their children. Their vow is to defeat Common Core, the educational reform so extreme that kids are mutilating themselves in response to the psychological stress that experts are calling “Common Core Syndrome.”

State officials are intransigent. Despite the near-unanimous condemnation of the state’s high-stakes testing regime, the Regents and the Commissioner of Education have made clear that they have no intention of backing down. The kids will get the tests again and again, no matter how many fail.

Nearly 20,000 parents have signed petitions against the testing; that number will grow. The Long Island principals have led a statewide rebellion against the untested “education evaluation” tied to the high-stakes test.

The parents, teachers, and principals of Long Island understand what state officials do not.

Education policy cannot be rammed down everyone’s throats. Collaboration and respect are needed, not the power to compel compliance.

 

Civil rights attorney Wendy Lecker writes here about a battle over the future of two elementary schools in Connecticut.

In both cases, parents resisted efforts to turn their children over to corporate reformers.

She writes:

In recent weeks, parents from two community schools protested proposals by Christina Kishimoto, Hartford’s outgoing “reform” superintendent, and Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor, to hand their schools over to private companies. Neither school community was consulted before the plans were developed.

The initial proposal was to give Hartford’s Clark Elementary school to Achievement First, Inc., the charter school company co-founded by Pryor. Almost 18 percent of Clark’s students have disabilities, and 15.2 percent are English Language Learners. Clark’s school governance council has begged the district, in vain, for additional resources, including teachers, a psychologist, a guidance counselor and basic school repairs such as a functional heating and cooling system.

Only 6.7 percent of Achievement First’s students have special needs, 6.7 percent are English Language Learners. Moreover, Achievement First has the highest rate of suspensions in the state for children under 6 years old, and has been investigated and cited for federal violations in mistreating students with disabilities.

Upon hearing of the proposed Achievement First takeover, Clark’s parents fought back. They openly feared that their special needs children would “not have a place” at an Achievement First school. One parent said “Our teachers work very hard and they love our kids.” Another remarked that when children do not listen, Achievement First suspends them. “Our teachers find a way to keep them in school, find out what is behind their (behavior).” Noting the school was praised by the district in 2013 for its academic progress, a parent declared, “We didn’t ask for our school to be redesigned but only for supports to keep making improvements.”

In the face of the strong opposition from parents, the mayoral-controlled majority of the school board backed down.

In the second instance, the board rejected an effort to turn another elementary school with large numbers of high-need students over to Steve Perry’s new private management company.

The “reformers” are still looking for a way to execute their plans.

Lecker is not sure that the parents will prevail unless they stand together and refuse to permit this hostile takeover of their community school.

 

Massachusetts released teacher ratings, and lo and behold, all the best teachers seem to be in the most affluent districts.

In Boston, the lowest ratings went to old and minority teachers. The highest ratings went to central office administrators.

EduShyster did not use the phrase “makes no sense,” which is the headline of this post.

Actually, the teacher evaluations do make sense. They are doing what they were designed to do. They are bogus. This is the regime imposed on the state by Jonah Edelman and Stand for Children. Firing old and minority teachers is the civil rights issue of our day? When wil there be accountability for the people who push these demoralizing ideas? Other countries support and develop teachers, helping them improve. We rand and rate and humiliate them to force out those whose kids don’t get high scores and to make room for young college graduates who want to try their hand at teaching for a while until something better comes along.

Pennsylvania is home to some of the nation’s most unscrupulous charter operators, some of whom are under criminal investigation or on trial for fraud and misappropriation of public funds. But say this for some of the sleaziest: they give generously to political campaigns. That is why the Legislature is considering SB 1085, which would allow new charters to open without local approval.

If you want to protect public schools in Pennsylvania from reckless privatization, if you want to maintain local control, take action now to oppose SB 1085.

Here is advice from the pro-public education Keystone State Education Coalition:

SB1085 ALERT:

Charter School Reform bill is on the PA Senate calendar for December 3rd.

Call your state senator; urge them to vote no on SB1085 which would remove local control over tax dollars.

Use this link to find contact information for your state senator:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/contact.cfm?body=S

1. If you are concerned about SB1085 giving unelected charter operators the power to spend tax dollars without any local oversight or control, please call your state senator’s office and let them know ASAP.

Urge them to maintain local control over tax dollars by locally elected, locally accountable school boards; urge them to vote no on SB1085.

SB1085 would allow colleges and universities to authorize new charter schools without local approval.
SB1085 would eliminate enrollment caps on charter schools. This will allow for the unfettered expansion of charter schools in PA.
SB1085 would increase the initial term of a charter from 3 years to 5 years, and allow a charter school to be granted a 10 year renewal
SB1085 would allow two or more charters to consolidate and transfer oversight to the PA Department of Education; local taxpayers would still pay the tuition
SB1085 would remove the provision that requires charter applications to be evaluated based on the extent to which the school may serve as a model for other public schools.
2. Please forward this alert to any interested public education stakeholders.

3. If you have a few minutes more to spare, please consider calling any or all of these Senate officers:

Majority Leader Senator Dominic Pileggi
(717) 787-4712 FAX: (717) 783-7490

dpileggi@pasen.gov

Majority Whip Senator Patrick Browne
(717) 787-1349 FAX: (717) 772-3458

pbrowne@pasen.gov

Majority Caucus Chair Senator Michael Waugh
(717) 787-3817 FAX: (717) 783-1900

mwaugh@pasen.gov

Majority Caucus Secretary Senator Robert Robbins
(717) 787-1322 FAX: (717) 772-0577

rrobbins@pasen.gov

Majority Appropriations Chair Senator Jake Corman
(717) 787-1377 FAX: (717) 772-3146

jcorman@pasen.gov

Majority Caucus Administrator Senator John Gordner
(717) 787-8928 FAX: (717) 787-9715

jgordner@pasen.gov

Majority Policy Committee Chair Senator Edwin Erickson
(717) 787-1350 FAX: (717) 787-0196

eerickson@pasen.gov

You can also use this Education Voters PA link to send an email to your state senator opposing SB1085:

http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/6041/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=8833