Archives for the year of: 2014

For a few years, the American Indian Model Charter Schools in Oakland, California, were the most celebrated charter schools in the nation, beloved especially by the conservative and rightwing media, not only for their high test scores but for their founder’s scathing comments about liberals, unions, and “multiculturalists.” Despite the name of the charter, it enrolled few American Indians; most of its students are Asian-Americans. Its discipline was harsh. The school boasted of its “back to basics squared” conservative philosophy.

The adulation slowed when an audit revealed that the founder had diverted $3.8 million in public funds to his other business activities. The district and county officials wanted to close them because of financial mismanagement and possible fraud, but a three judge panel ruled that their high test scores were reason to keep them open.

“The Oakland school district can appeal to the state Supreme Court, but if the injunction stands, the schools would stay open while the legal case plays out.

“Presiding Justice J. Anthony Kline, in the unanimous ruling by the First District’s three-member panel, agreed with the lower court ruling, saying in the decision that district officials did not adequately consider the schools’ academic performance in the revocation decision.”

And more:

“In the meantime, a Superior Court judge is expected to rule on the actual merits of the case, determining whether the decision to close the schools was valid. The two sides presented their arguments on May 20 and a ruling is expected any day, said district spokeswoman Sue Piper.

“The three schools, which had about 850 students in grades K-12 in the 2013-14 school year, have been among the highest-scoring schools in the state.

“While the schools were initially created to serve American Indian students, enrollment is about 70 percent Asian, 12 percent English learner and 75 percent low-income, according to state data.

“While the charters have been lauded academically, a 2012 audit of the charter organization found financial impropriety, including $3.8 million in payments to the school’s former director, Ben Chavis, and his wife through real estate deals, consulting agreements and other services, raising ethical and conflict-of-interest concerns. An April 2013 report by the state Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team confirmed those findings a month after the Oakland school board voted to shut the schools down.”

Chavis stepped down as director of the schools but he is doing well financially as he collects rent from them. He owns the properties.

Meanwhile, “the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service raided the schools and Chavis’ Oakland home, seizing several boxes of documents, phones and computers. FBI officials did not respond to inquiries regarding the scope or nature of any ongoing investigation.”

The saga continues.

Peter Greene responds to the NEA resolution. Calling for Arne Duncan to resign. he first deals with the debate on Twitter, about who would replace Arne Duncan. The assumption behind the discussion is that President Obama has no idea what Duncan has been doing and that when he finds out, Duncan will be ousted.

Then he takes on the NEA resolution.

Greene quite rightly points out that Duncan is doing exactly what the President wants. Were he to leave, which is unlikely, he would be replaced by someone as committed to high-stakes testing, privatization, closing schools, and undermining the teaching profession as Duncan. A likely replacement: Ted Mitchell, the newly appointed Undersecretary of Education, was most recently the CEO of NewSchools Venture Fund, the epicenter of privatization and anti-public school activism. Then there is always Michelle Rhee, whom the President and Duncan have lauded.

I can personally vouch for the fact that Duncan is doing exactly what Obama wants. In the fall of 2009, I had a private meeting with Secretary Duncan, just the two of us, no staff. It was very pleasant. He was charming, pleasant, and took notes. I asked him, “Why are you traveling the country to sell Race to the Top accompanied by Reverend Al Sharpton and Newt Gingrich? Why Gingrich?” His answer: “because the President asked me to.”

Bruce Baker reviews the Vergara claim that teacher laws in Néw York deny students a quality education and shows that it is fallacious.

He writes:

“VergarGuments are an absurd smokescreen, failing to pass muster at even the most basic level of logical evaluation of causation – that A (state laws in question) can somehow logically (no less statistically) be associated with selective deprivation of children’s constitutional rights.

“Are children in New York State being deprived of their right to a sound basic education.

“Absolutely.

“Yes.

“Most certainly.

“Are VergarGuments the most logical path toward righting those wrongs? Uh… no.”

Arthur Camins, Director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ., points put that drug makers are not allowed to make unsubstantiated claims. They are required to gather evidence and to disclose possible negative side effects. They can make boasts, offer up dubious facts, and get away with it. They speak about the individuals’ “right to choose” without acknowledging the harm to the community’s public institutions.

In a thoughtful article, Camins says that the debate about school reform has been obscured by “the fog of war,” a public relations blitz that appeals to individualism and self-interest, replacing evidence and any sense of the common good.

He writes:

“One weapon in the arsenal of opponents of current policies has been to point out the absence of evidentiary support. In fact, there is no system inside the U.S. or around the world that has made substantial systemic progress through charter schools, merit pay or test-driven accountability. Resistance is growing, but so far this line of attack has not built enough widespread public understanding to deter policy makers. Maybe that is because the supporters of these policies have effectively obscured their real goals and values.”

He concludes::

“Stories of dysfunctional, conflict-plagued, private agenda-driven local school boards abound. There are countless examples school boards making uniformed decisions that do not serve the interests of children. However, privatization and shrinking of public participation in decision-making is not an antidote to ineffective, uninformed democracy. Public knowledge and clear-eyed evidence are. History is replete with evidence that the side effect of disenfranchisement in the name of improvement is benefits to the few and disaster for the many. Arguments that restricting democracy will benefit everyone have always been the coins of autocrats and self-appointed experts driven by blind faith or ideology and narrow self-interest.

“The drive to privatize educational governance, especially with respect to expansion of charter schools, has two unstated goals. One is to open up the vast education market to individuals looking for a new profitable place to invest their capital. Another is more cynical. Some people have given up hope for systemic improvement. Instead, they are willing to settle for a system that only provides an opportunity for those they deem to be the deserving and capable few among the unfortunate many. Hence, the negative disruptive side effects of school closings in poor communities are the price that the many will pay to save the lucky few.

“Let’s report the evidence and side effects so the public can decide: Which side are you on? Are you willing to give up your right to democratic participation and risk the future of your child or your neighbor’s to privilege the lucky few? Are you ready to give up on the common good?

“For the sake of clarity, I’ve attempted to present complex issues in binary terms. Assuredly, there are gradations. In reality, ensuring the wellbeing of individuals is inseparable from advancing the common good. The old labor slogan, an injury to one is an injury to all, said it simply, but well. Put another way, my personal gain is diminished or even negated when it comes at the expense of another.

“We need an educational system based on these values. I think, when asked, the public may agree.”

Why should Common Core tests require 8-10 hours? Does anyone know? Why should third graders, 8 or 9 year-old children, be expected to sit for eight hours of testing? This is nuts!

This from a teacher in Utah, responding to a post called “Good Riddance to Common Core Tests.” Let the parents know. They recognize child abuse.

“And it’s not just the SBAC or PARCC that are long and awful. Utah went with its own CC testing, created by AIR. The 7-9 grade students at my school were forced into NINE 70 minute testing sessions per student, and MANY students took much longer than that. This included TWO major essays. There were several topics instead of one: how can you reliably compare students who wrote essays on different topics? The essays required reading several articles and then formulating and writing the essay. The test designers estimated that the expository essay would take a total of 30 minutes to read the articles and write, and that the argumentative essay would take 60 minutes. The tests were not timed, so theoretically the kids could take weeks to write the essays, and some did. No one, including the extremely talented, high-level writers, could finish the essays in the short time the test makers estimated, which, in my mind, calls into question the entire enterprise and the entire test writing company. ALL of us who work with students KNEW that these essays would take far longer than the estimated times. So if this company really knew how to write tests, how is it that they so grossly underestimated the time these essays would take?

“I have tried to let parents know how ridiculously long these tests are. I have now been told that I cannot do that, or the state will take discipline against my license. So how do parents even know what is being done to their children?”

Aaron Short of the New York Post shows how New York City used the $107 million in Race to the Top funding that it received during the Bloomberg administration.

Let’s just sat it was NOT a game-changer:

“Bureaucrats are winning the Race to the Top.

“Less than a quarter of the $107 million that the school system received in federal Race to The Top funds last year was sent directly to school principals.

“The decision on how to spend most of the money — $83 million — was made by the central Department of Education, which channeled the federal funds to support staff, consultants and fringe benefits, according to a study by the Independent Budget Office.”

A spokesperson for the DOE defended the allocation of funds to central office, saying that it takes a lot of people to run such a big system.

My question: why is the de Blasio administration defending the bad decisions of the Bloomberg administration?

I don’t know about you, but I am sick of the test score obsession. I think our schools need to have a prolonged testing moratorium so we can figure out what education should be about and how to reduce our dependence on testing.

But since that has not happened yet, we are compelled to look at the rise and fall of test scores. .

When Tennessee’s scores went up on NAEP last year, Arne Duncan speedily pointed to Tennesssee as a shining star of Race to the Top, and the state even got a shout out from the President in his State of the Union.

Now the state scores are in, and there won’t be any boasting. If there is, it is simply spin.

Gary Rubinstein reports that Tennessee’s state scores were flat. they were up a wee bit in math, grades 3-8, and down a bit in reading, same grades. The biggest drops were in third grade, the kids most exposed to reform magic, where the reformers should be showing big gains.

Don’t expect to hear anything about Tennessee’s state scores from Arne Duncan or the President.

Now that the purchasing agent for New Mexico approved the $1 billion PARCC contract tailor-made for Pearson, that lucky British company will write the Common Core tests for 6-10 million American children.

But consider Pearson’s history of testing errors:

“PEARSON SCORE FOUL-UP HISTORY, by Bob Schaeffer, Public Education Director, FairTest: National Center for Fair & Open Testing (updated February, 2011)

1998 California – test score delivery delayed

1999-2000 Arizona – 12,000 tests misgraded due to flawed answer key

2000 Florida – test score delivery delayed resulting in $4 million fine

2000 Minnesota – misgraded 45,739 graduation tests – lawsuit with $11 million settlement – judge found “years of quality control problems” and a “culture emphasizing profitability and cost-cutting.” — (note FairTest consulted with plaintiffs’ attorneys)

2000 Washington – 204,000 writing WASL exams rescored

2005 Michigan — scores delayed and fines levied per contract

2005 Virginia — computerized test misgraded – five students awarded $5,000 scholarships

2005-2006 SAT college admissions test – 4400 tests wrongly scored; $3 million settlement after lawsuit (note FairTest was an expert witness for plaintiffs)

2008 South Carolina –“Scoring Error Delays School Report Cards” The State, November 14, 2008

2008-2009 Arkansas — first graders forced to retake exam because real test used for practice

2009-2010 Wyoming – new computer adaptive PAWS flops; state ordered Pearson to repay $9.5 million for “complete default of the contract”

2010 Florida – test score delivery delayed by more than a month – nearly $15 million in fines imposed and paid. School superintendents still question score accuracy.

2010 Minnesota — results from online science tests taken by 180,000 students delayed due to scoring error

2011 Florida – some writing exams delivered to districts without cover sheets, revealing subject students would be asked to write about”

After Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced new rules for special education, requiring higher standards and more testing for students with disabilities, many teachers and parents debated this course of action on the blog. This teacher in Florida offered some real-life experience to inform the debate and, perhaps, the Secretary:

“Let me start by saying that I am an ESE teacher. I teach students with learning disabilities and language impairments. The students I have are in the unit they are in because they are at least two grade levels below their regular ed peers in reading.

“Currently, in Florida, we already have to give these students access to the same standards that their on-grade level peers enjoy. That has been the case for years. We already know that Florida tests pretty much everyone, no matter their disability. Again, this has been the case for years. I can’t believe that in this education environment that there are many other states that are significantly different. And yet, Arne is going to say that these students aren’t getting a quality education? That they aren’t held to high expectations?

To me, it is pretty obvious that these students are held to much higher expectations than their regular ed peers. It would be like telling two mountain climbers that they have to reach the same peak, but one of them will do it with both hands tied behind his back. Sure, he can have some accommodations. Someone can hold his rope steady. Someone else can yell out supportive verbal encouragement. He can even take longer breaks, and we’ll take away any time requirement (as long as he finishes in the same day that he started).

“The world of special ed was already insane. I’m not sure where this takes us. As I said, in my class, the students are all at least two years behind in reading. What I didn’t tell you is that I teach in an elementary school. What this means is that many of these 3-5th graders are non-readers. The few that can decode are either doing so at a kindergarten/first grade level or at a level approaching grade level but without any comprehension whatsoever of what they have just decoded. Despite this, they have the same designation on paper (or computer) that other LD kids have who are just slightly behind their regular ed peers.

“In Florida, as I imagine is the case in other states, we already track academic progress. You might think it would be as easy as seeing what they are capable of doing at the beginning of the year and then comparing that with what they are capable of at the end of the year. Not so. Remember, they are working on the same standards as their regular ed peers. And, so, they are tested with the same tests that their regular ed peers take. This means that a fourth grader who cannot read anything above “see sam run” is being tested on those “rigorous” non-fiction passages that are on a fourth grade level (not the fourth grade level of yesteryear but the new, improved 6th grade, I mean 4th grade level of today). And then we track their progress on a graph. If you’re thinking that these graphs look like random peaks and valleys, you are correct. When you cannot read and you are given a test, you are just going to guess. Which is what these students do. Sadly, they have become so inured to this that they guess on the few items that they actually are capable of doing.

“The federal government is already involved through NCLB, etc. These students count towards AYP. They count towards the school’s “grade.” The schools have every reason to give these students everything they’ve got, so why aren’t the slackers doing anything to give them a “quality education”? Well, they are. Florida is an RtI state. To get an ESE label, a student has to show that they are “resistant to interventions.” That is, they have to show that they require extensive interventions, that if they are weaned off of the interventions, they regress. Or, they have to show that despite intensive, research-based interventions, they are still showing no progress. In other words, before these students come to me, they have already received every intervention imaginable. In addition, even after they are found eligible for ESE services, they are usually started in a less restrictive environment. If none of this has worked, why should it work when they get to my class? Indeed, it had to be shown that it did not work in order for them to get into my class in the first place.

“Alas, I’m afraid I do not have a magic wand or a bag of pixie dust with which to work miracles. So, what is an ESE teacher to do? Most of us actually work with the studennts where they are at. And we move them forward from there. There is no huge spurt of growth (very rarely anyway), but they do make academic gains. None of these gains will show up on the regular ed grade level assessments, but they are there nonetheless. We’ve often wondered why these students aren’t given meaningful assessments that will show growth and that will actually tell us where these students are still struggling (thanks, FCAT, I already knew they couldn’t read on grade level). Now we know why. It’s to show that these students aren’t getting a “quality education.”

“I would tell you that these students, who are as bright as you or me, struggle immensely with academic subjects. That they are usually Language Impaired as well. That most of them are also ESOL students. That most of them come from low SES homes. That most of them come from single-parent households. That many of these parents come in to thank us because their child used to hate school and now they want to go. That their regular ed teachers in the past told us that they wouldn’t do anything in class, that they would shut down when anything was required of them, and now they are working in class. That through a lot of hard work and effort of both the teachers and students, the students get to a point where they stop saying, “I can’t do this, I’m stupid.” That non-writers become independent writers (legible despite the many spelling, grammar, and convention errors). That non-readers become readers (yes, still way behind their regular ed peers) and learn to enjoy reading. I would tell you these things, but it doesn’t matter because none of it shows up on the tests. The tests show that these students are not making any gains. And, as we all know, there are no excuses.”

The Arizona Department of Education under the leadership of John Huppenthal is strongly supportive of the Common Core.

When officials at the Department learned that teacher Brad McQueen had written an article critical of the Common Core standards, they decided that something had to be done about him. He had worked on the Common Core assessments, and state officials began to harass him. Several of them worked together to deal with the problem of Brad McQueen. They could not permit dissent because they wanted to maintain the illusion that the Common Core was both popular and inevitable.

Their efforts were in vain. Despite the best efforts of Huppenthal and his subordinates, Governor Jan Brewer announced that Arizona was pulling out of the federal Common Core tests. And Huppenthal embarrassed himself by posting anonymous comments on the Internet.