Archives for the year of: 2013

Some party!

EduShyster crashed it and couldn’t find many happy events.

Hanna Skandera, one of the shrinking number of Jeb’s Chiefs for Change, was a no-show.

Tony Bennett, ex-Indiana chief, ex-Florida chief, was not sure whether to lecture on A-F grading systems. Rahm Emanuel insisted he was not a reformer, maybe just a passerby.

Was anyone happy? Sounds more like a wake than a party.

Are the reformers down in the dumps because they realize they ARE the status quo?

Who can you rail against when you control the federal government, the biggest foundations, and most states?

Just those darn teachers.

This comment just arrived. Read it and weep for two lost lives. Think of the children whose social and emotional needs are ignored in pursuit of test scores

“Dear Diane,

“I do not know if you will get this or not; however, I am so grateful to receive this particular communication. You have done an excellent job of explaining the purpose of charter schools.

“I am writing from Spark, NV, where the school shooting took place yesterday. All 3 of my kids attended this middle school. I am a former elementary, middle and high school principal in (Washoe County) NV and I am in awe of what is taking place in education.

“As for a young student coming onto a campus with a gun, I feel that he must have been bullied and set-out for revenge. Additionally, I feel that given the relentless, inflexible and unyielding focus on “test-taking” and school rankings and scores, etc., could have possibly contributed to this horrible school shooting.

“When teachers and counselors are spending an inordinate amount of time preparing, worrying and focused on test results, their time to connect with students is limited and scarce. (By the way, I hired this teacher who was killed and I guess I am upset and needed to vent). If one teacher, counselor or administrator had had a few extra minutes to look into this student’s eyes and possibly connected with him in a meaningful way, maybe this catastrophe could have been averted.

“I just want to express my deep appreciation for your daily communications about what is going on in education. I am a huge fan of yours. Keep up the great work and the communication.

All the best,

Dr. Debra A. Feemster

Tue, 22 Oct 2013 16:00:33 +0000 To: dsmithfeemster@hotmail.com”

Hoping to calm teachers’ fears about the state’s new, untested, and probably invalid teacher evaluation system, Commissioner John King announced that only 1% of teachers were rated ineffective.

NYC scores were omitted due to failure to reach agreement on time.

“ALBANY—More than 90 percent of teachers outside New York City have earned high ratings in the state’s first year of mandated performance evaluations, a fact that state education commissioner John King said “should” ease unions’ concerns about attaching “high stakes” to testing in a new, more difficult curriculum.

“King presented preliminary numbers to the state Board of Regents Tuesday morning, announcing that nearly 50 percent of teachers received a “highly effective” rating, which is the top score. Another 42 percent were deemed “effective,” with only 4 percent as “developing” and 1 percent as “ineffective.”

“Teachers who earn two consecutive “ineffective” ratings could be fired under the law. Those with “developing” or “ineffective” will be outfitted with an individualized professional development plan to help them improve.

“The state’s data includes evaluations of nearly 127,000 teachers. So, while about 117,000 teachers were rated in the top two categories, nearly 7,000 teachers got the lower ratings and will require professional development. The remaining teachers were not accounted for in those reports.”

Most researchers consider test-based evaluations to be invalid.

Charter schools were supposed to be creative sources of innovation. They were supposed to show what could be accomplished when government got out of the way. The newcomers would give lessons to the professionals, who couldn’t be trusted.

But it hasn’t worked out that way. In Ohio, charter schools are some of the worst schools in the state. 83 of the lowest performing 84 schools in the state are charters.

Guido H. Stempel III, a distinguished professor emeritus in the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism at Ohio University, says that the people of Ohio have been cheated.

Stempl says the driving force behind charters is greed.

He writes:

“There are 27 organizations, and 25 of those are for-profit. One of those, with 17 schools, is run by an Islamic minister.
We have a double standard. There are 200 state laws that apply to public schools and not to charter schools Qualifications of teachers are not checked as they are for public school teachers. Auditing of finances does not occur as often.
The names of public school board members are public and listed in a state directory. There is no record of who the members of school boards for charter schools are or how they are chosen. Public school boards must have a regular meeting schedule, and if they schedule additional meetings they must notify local media. The public does not know when charter school boards meet.
There is, in short, a lack of oversight.”

When the state ordered the state’s largest charter operator, David Brennan, to close two of his low-performing schools, “One reopened in the same place with a new name and the same staff. The other was the same story except that they replaced 30 percent of the staff.

“The charter schools are getting almost a billion dollars from the state. This year charter schools got bigger increases in state funding that the public schools did. Money was taken from appropriations for districts. More that a million dollars was taken from the five districts in Athens County.

Why do the legislature and governor protect charters from accountability?

Simple.

Charter school owners contribute generously to political candidates.

Two different conservative critics have lambasted me for saying in “Reign of Error” that early childhood education was a research-based way to improve the achievement of low-income students and narrow the achievement gap.

Mike Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute called such a proposal “pie-in-the-sky,” as did a reviewer for the (ironically named) “Public Sector,” published by the conservative Manhattan Institute.

There may be many good reasons to attack my book and my policy proposals–even though each of them has a solid research base–but attacking pre-school education is simply bizarre. There are few policy ideas that have more research or more bipartisan support. It is frankly embarrassing when reviewers say “the money is all gone” or “we can’t afford it” or “the research isn’t there” or come up with some other half-cocked reason not to do what other advanced nations long ago recognized as valuable and necessary.

Today, Motoko Rich in the New York Times has an article supporting (yet again) the importance of early childhood education, but in this case, reporting on research showing that the achievement gap begins as early as 18 months. The implication is that starting pre-school at age 4 is already too late.

Let the defenders of the status quo take their argument to the New York Times and to Nobelist James Heckman and to Susan Ochsborn of ECE Policy Works or to others in the research community.

What they have amply demonstrated if they don’t care about poor kids or closing the achievement gap, only maintaining the status quo.

With the Bloomberg era winding down after twelve long years, top executives are fleeing or rewriting their history. No one at Tweed knows how to help schools that are struggling. They know only how to close them and open new ones. Then they close the new ones when they fail.

Here is an inside report:

“Anyone who follows the debates on the best ways to improve education in America has to wonder: do the educators who tout corporate style reforms really believe what they preach? Do the corporate-style reformers really believe that testing, sanctions, charters, and metrics of all shapes and sizes are really best? How can they refuse to acknowledge the research demonstrating that that these things have perverse consequences and don’t work? Why won’t they consider rich curricula, quality early childhood programs, and expanded support services for schools and for children?

Current events in New York City have helped shine light on these questions. Until the recent upset in the Democratic primary, it was widely expected that the next mayor would be Ms. Christine Quinn. She was expected to continue Mayor Bloomberg’s corporate-agenda-driven education policies. Now it is clear that Bill de Blasio, a progressive who has run on a platform of prioritizing opportunity and equity for all students, will be the next mayor of New York City. He has said “it is clear that the lights are out and no one is listening in the Tweed building.” This has left the bureaucrats at Tweed, the education headquarters of New York City, scrambling.
When Dennis Walcott, the Chancellor, proclaimed to an audience of principals that he doesn’t “involve myself in politics” they laughed. Perhaps we can expect no better from a political appointee. But we can definitely expect more from professional educators. How have they held up?

Just a couple of weeks ago Marc Sternberg, the deputy chancellor responsible for closing over 100 schools, fled to a position with the Walton Foundation. Then the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, an academic institute at Brown University, released a report showing that thousands of struggling students had been deliberately sent to the schools that ended up being closed. Although many of these schools did an admirable job in educating the students they were sent, they were closed anyway. It goes without saying that thousands of struggling students were not sent to the new schools opened up under Bloomberg. Those schools were granted special privileges. Mr. Sternberg escaped just in the nick of time. After refusing to release these data for years he does not have to face the truth. The new schools are Bloomberg’s Potemkin villages.

Shael Suransky, the #2 official at Tweed, has suddenly started to write columns acknowledging the limits of the pseudo-science metrics used to evaluate schools. He seems to have forgotten that he was in charge of the unit that produced those bogus metrics. Or, that less than a year and half ago, he wrote a letter defending them to the New York Times. When education researchers pointed out the flaws of these metrics 5 years ago (see, for example, the eduwonkette blog) he was silent and continued to use those flawed metrics to punish schools and the communities they were a part of. Six months ago New Visions, an organization that supports high schools in New York City, published a comprehensive report noting many flaws with these metrics. Mr. Suransky was silent. He continued to use those flawed metrics to evaluate principals and to decide whether or not to grant teachers tenure. Now that the political landscape has changed he has miraculously found his voice and changed his tune.

As for the other top bureaucrats, although they insist that every educator in every school be evaluated and held accountable we now know, thanks to the intrepid reporting of Leonie Haimson, that not a single one of them receives a performance evaluation. For those not already inured to such things the hypocrisy is astounding

That the educators at Tweed do not care about the truth is not surprising. People want power and will overlook facts and the genuine interests of children to obtain and remain in power. If we truly care about children and want to develop policies that provide educational equity for all students we need to clean out Tweed and develop systems that won’t allow such things to happen again.
It seems clear that mayoral control is a better system than the balkanized structure that existed before. But in order to make it work the Panel on Education Policy needs to be an honest broker of education policy in New York City. The panel should be granted access to all the data and the authority to call on outside evaluators to assess the merit of proposed policies. They will need to serve a conduit for community and parent voice. Only then will the public know and be able to trust that education in New York City in moving in the right direction.”

Commissioner King and the New York Board of Regents have scheduled 16 events around the state to tell parents how terrific the Common Core is, how good they should feel about their child’s failing grade on the Common Core tests, and how overall magnificent the State Education Department is. There are 12 hearings and four televised presentations. No hearings are scheduled for Néw York City, although parents there (including potential troublemakers) can always watch on TV.

Here is a statement by the Grassroots Education Movement and Change the Stakes:

STATEMENT: NYC Parents Deserve to be Heard

October 22, 2013 · by Grassroots Education Movement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: changethestakes@gmail.com

New York City Public School Parents Deserve to be Heard by Education Commissioner John King

New York City – It is unacceptable that State Education Commissioner John B. King, Jr. and the State Board of Regents are planning to hold a series of 12 forums across the state to meet with parents and educators to discuss the Common Core Standards and other education reforms, yet not a single forum will be held in New York City. NYC’s one million public school students account for a third of the state’s total public school enrollment. Change the Stakes calls on state legislators who represent NYC students, their parents and their teachers to demand that the Board of Regents schedule a public forum in each of the five boroughs. These forums must offer meaningful public discussion in which education officials acknowledge and respond to questions and concerns rather than dismissing them or explaining them away.

The Regents scheduled the forums, along with four additional events to be broadcast on public television, after Commissioner King abruptly cancelled four state-sponsored PTA town hall meetings after parents responded angrily at being given little time to speak at an event in Poughkeepsie. King later alleged that the meeting was “co-opted by special interests whose stated goal is to ‘dominate’ the questions and manipulate the forum.” The newly scheduled forums will undoubtedly be much more tightly controlled than the original large, town hall meetings.

King’s outrageous statement about “special interests” and the shutting down of public debate are indicative of a much larger problem: New York State education officials, from the governor on down, have completely disregarded the genuine, sincere and deeply-felt concerns of parents about what is in the best interests of our children. It is demeaning, demoralizing and downright undemocratic to attempt to silence parents, teachers, principals and others who, day in and day out, witness the harmful effects on children of poorly formulated and rashly implemented state education policies.

Commissioner King: The public school parents and educators of NYC deserve to be heard.

According to an October 18th press release from the State Education Department:

The first forum will be held in the Albany City School District on October 24. Other locations for the forums are Rochester, Westchester, Suffolk County (2), Nassau County (2), Schroon Lake, Binghamton, Amherst, Syracuse, and Jamestown.
The four PBS televised forums will be in Syracuse -WCNY (November 7), Plattsburgh-WCFE (November 20), Binghamton- WSKG (date tba) and Rochester- WXXI (December 3). King said more PBS forums will be scheduled.
###

Change the Stakes (changethestakes.org) is a group of parents and educators working to reduce the harm caused by high stakes-testing, which we believe must be replaced by valid forms of student, teacher, and school assessment.

__,_._,___

This mother has adapted a question that she says appears in her child’s homework assignment. Is she exaggerating? If you have a child in this grade, please chime in.

“Second grade question: If Jack and Jill go up the hill, and a bucket of olives is $5.00 then how much tapenade can John concoct with boughten oil. (Actually not far off from actual 2nd grade math homework – infer that Jack=John, understand the archaic past tense form of buy, be inspired to look up the word ‘tapenade’, find a tapenade recipe, estimate the amount of olives in a bucket, then solve – assuming that Jack/John had five dollars.) It integrates skills (sure it does) – as if you were a 24 year graduate student intern at the food network.

“Frustrating in the extreme doesn’t begin to describe this nonsense. Parents have been posting their kids homework all over Facebook. The questions/problems are absurd. The only aim is to make all the teachers take expensive training, sell expensive computer systems, and make everyone feel inadequate.

“This emperor has no clothes, none of this is proven to produce results. It is an expensive and damaging program.”

Wendy Lecker, who is a civil rights lawyer, writes here that the Common Core standards have been rolled out without any forethought.

Children are being tested on materials they have never been taught.

States do not have a curriculum that aligns with the Common Core standards.

The federally-funded tests are being developed independent of the curriculum, which does not exist.

Teachers are not prepared.

Students are not prepared.

Yet the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Arne Duncan, and other corporate thought-leaders say: Full speed ahead! We cannot delay! Now! Now! Now!

Lecker concludes:

The Common Core requires massive investments in textbooks, tests, training, and technology. Money is spent on the Common Core experiment at the expense of strategies with a long track record of success, such as high-quality preschool, small class size, wraparound services and extra help for at-risk children.

The benefits of the Common Core are speculative at best. A New York comparison of the 2013 Common Core tests, the previous standards and college completion rates, revealed that the previous standards were better predictors of college readiness. Moreover, the evidence is clear that neither tests nor standards raise achievement. Countries with national standards fare no better than those without, and states with higher standards do no better than states with lower ones. In states with consistent standards, achievement varies widely. The difference in achievement lies in those resources that states are now foregoing to pay for the Common Core.

As for justice, schools serving our most vulnerable students suffer most from a narrow test-based curriculum. A new report in New York reveals that poor children and children of color are least likely to be in schools with libraries, art and music rooms, science, and AP classes. Expanded Common Core testing will disproportionately harm our neediest children.

It is time to ask policy-makers why they made our children guinea pigs in the rush to impose the not-ready-for-prime-time Common Core.

 

Almost everyone agrees that high-stakes testing for little children is a huge mistake. The parents not only wrote their elected officials, they took direct action.

More than 80% of the parents of the children at the Castle Bridge Elementary School in New York City refused to allow their children to be tested.

They opted out.

The tests were canceled.

NO TESTS. NONE!

The parents knew that the only purpose of the tests was to evaluate the teachers, not the children.

Most Castle Bridge School parents — representing 83 of the 97 students — refused to permit their children to be tested.

“My feeling about testing kids as young as 4 is it’s inhumane,” said PTA co-chairwoman Dao Tran, mother of first-grader Quyen Lamphere, 5. “I can only see it causing stress.”

The state now requires schools to factor test scores — in one form or another — into their teacher evaluations, which are new this year in the city.

The parents thought the testing was absurd.

As the Daily News reported earlier this month, such exams, given to kids as young as 4, require students to fill in bubbles to show their answers.

It’s like the SAT for kids barely older than toddlers. And parents resent it.

“Our principal does a good job,” said PTA co-chairwoman Elexis Pujolos, mother of kindergartner Daeja, 4, and first-grader AJ, 6. “A test could not possibly measure what she is able to.”

Principal Julie Zuckerman canceled the required tests because the scores wouldn’t provide statistically meaningful data once so many parents opted out.

She also hates judging teachers even partly on the basis of a test.

“It can’t be used as evaluation tool of teachers even if it were a valid test — which it’s not,” she said.

If all parents did this, they could stop the testing madness that is ruining education and children’s love of learning.

If it can happen at Castle Bridge, it can happen anywhere!

Without data, the giant testing machine can’t function. The children can learn stress-free. Education becomes possible.

Message: OPT OUT.