Archives for the year of: 2014
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Kevin Welner: The Silver Lining in the Vergara Decision

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
27

Kevin Welner, director of the National Educational Policy Center in Colorado, is both an education policy analyst and a lawyer. He read the Vergara decision and saw a bright side. While he was struck by the weak evidence for the judge’s conclusion, he thinks the case might open up an avenue to advance lawsuits based on the importance of equality of educational opportunity.

He writes:

“Although I can’t help but feel troubled by the attack on teachers and their hard-won rights, and although I think the court’s opinion is quite weak, legally as well as logically, my intent here is not to disagree with that decision. In fact, as I explain below, the decision gives real teeth to the state’s Constitution, and that could be a very good thing. It’s those teeth that I find fascinating, since an approach like that used by the Vergara judge could put California courts in a very different role —as a guarantor of educational equality—than we have thus far seen in the United States.”

The judge’s reasoning could be used, for example, to rule that tracking is unconstitutional.

“To see why this is important, consider an area of education policy that I have researched a great deal over the years: tracking (aka “ability grouping”). There are likely hundreds of thousands of children in California who are enrolled in low-track classes, where the expectations, curricula and instruction are all watered down. These children are denied equal educational opportunities; the research regarding the harms of these low-track classes is much stronger and deeper than the research about teachers Judge Treu found persuasive in the Vergara case. That is, plaintiffs’ attorneys would easily be able to show a “real and appreciable impact” on students’ fundamental right to equality of education. Further, the harm from enrollment in low-track classes falls disproportionately on lower-income students and students of color.”

Welner sees many areas where “judicial activism” could reverse policies that have a harmful impact on minorities:

“This type of analysis could be repeated for a wide array of other policies and practices, such as transportation, school choice, buildings, funding formulas, access to computer technology, enriched curriculum, testing and accountability policies, and segregated and stratified schools. If the relatively anemic facts and evidentiary record in Vergara support the striking down of five state statutes, it’s almost mind-boggling what the future may hold for education rights litigation in California (again, if the appellate courts use similar reasoning).”

Categories California

Williams and Kilfoyle: Why “Reformers” Today Are Not the Civil Rights Movement

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
23

Yohuru Wiliams and Marla Kilfoyle explain here why reformers today are not entitled to claim the legacy of the civil rights movement. Their essay was written to mark the 50th anniversary of what was known as Freedom Summer, when advocates for civil rights risked their lives to advance the cause of freedom and equality.

They begin their essay:

“One of the more disturbing narratives employed by corporate education reformers, who support both Teach for America and the Common Core, is the claim that they are cast in the spirit of the Civil Rights Movement—specifically in the use of education as a tool to challenge economic and political inequality. The larger claim of the Common Core defenders is that it will close the achievement gap. Their rhetoric is that CCSS will increase “rigor” and make children “college and career ready.” The idea that a set of standards can erase child poverty, systemic racism that continues to exist in our educational system, and squash the rise of classist privilege is beyond absurd. To do this in the name of Civil Rights is insulting. Have the CCSS really leveled the playing field? Are they really doing what the corporate reformers say they will do.”

Williams and Kilfoyle go on to describe significant differences between then and now. One that matters is that none of the contemporary “reformers” are risking their lives. They are making monetary contributions in hopes of raising test scores. They are advancing the privatization of public schools. They are seeking to strip teachers of their rights. It is impossible to confuse the current movement–funded by the richest people in the nation–with a movement for freedom and equality.

Categories Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Teach for America

Chicago Teachers Union Reacts to Vergara Decision

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
22

The Chicago Teachers Union reacts to the Vergara decision in California. Here is the key quote:

“If we really want to improve public education, let’s provide all children the financial and social resources that children in David Welch’s home of Atherton, CA, the most expensive zip code in the US, have. Then we need to let teachers, the real experts in curriculum and instruction, do their work without fear that they could lose their jobs at any time for any reason.”

CTU Statement on California Tenure Decision

It must be nice to be a wealthy tech mogul like David Welch. When you want to “prove” a theory, you just go get someone else’s kids to be the guinea pigs. When you want to “prove” a theory, you conveniently omit the most relevant and direct causes of harm. Such was the case in this week’s California lawsuit decision against tenure for teachers. Fortunately, our Constitution and legal system have clear protections for speech and structured processes for appeal so that we non-billionaires have an opportunity to air the facts.

Teacher laws vary from state to state, and so the ruling in California is not automatically a blueprint for changes in states like Illinois. Despite a recent law that makes tenure much more difficult to acquire in Illinois, the myth that tenure equals a permanent job persists. In fact, teacher tenure is not a guarantee of lifetime employment. Tenure provides protection from capricious dismissal and a process for improving unsatisfactory practice, but as in any job, teachers can be dismissed for serious misconduct. Further, as we have seen in California and Illinois, persistent budget “crises” stemming from insufficient revenue generation have decimated the teaching profession.

Contrary to popular belief, the school boards routinely dismiss teachers. Deep budget cuts have savaged the teaching corps, either through probationary teacher non-renewals or tenured teacher lay-offs. Fully half of all teachers leave the profession within their first five years, either because of the difficulty of the work or job insecurity. And for those who do stay, lay-offs are a constant threat, even to the most highly decorated, talented, and dedicated teachers. One Chicago Public School teacher was laid-off three times in a little more than a year. A holder of National Board Certification, the highest certification a teacher can have, he left the profession because of the tumult, and his students at multiple South Side high schools lost out on the opportunity to work with a highly qualified and dedicated public servant. Far from “obtaining and retaining permanent employment”, in the words of Judge Rolf Treu, tenure provided my colleague with no long-term job protection.

Judge Treu also misinterpreted the real causes of discrimination against low-income students of color. Teacher tenure does not cause low student achievement. Rather, the root causes of differences in student performance have to do with structural differences in schools. Omitted from his decision are the impacts of concentrated poverty, intense segregation, skeletal budgets, and so-called “disruptive innovation” that have been at the heart of urban school districts for decades. Scripted curricula, overuse and misuse of standardized testing, school closures and school turnarounds, and the calculated deprivation of resources are the real reasons low-income students of color face discrimination. So-called reformers like David Welch and Arne Duncan push those policies. In other words, the new “reform” status quo has made worse the problem it purports to fix.

If we really want to improve public education, let’s provide all children the financial and social resources that children in David Welch’s home of Atherton, CA, the most expensive zip code in the US, have. Then we need to let teachers, the real experts in curriculum and instruction, do their work without fear that they could lose their jobs at any time for any reason.

Categories Chicago, Corporate Reformers, Illinois, Poverty, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration, Teacher Tenure

Salon: Is America Abandoning Public Education?

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
75

This article in Salon tries to understand education from an economic perspective. It says that the great expansion of public education occurred when our factories were expanding and we needed more workers. Now, with outsourcing and autation, society and our elites are less willing to invest in education, and so we live in an era of austerity and privatization.

Eric Levitz writes of the Obama administration’s reluctance to address glaring inequality:

“We have an economy in which 46.5 million Americans live in poverty, the real unemployment rate is above 12 percent, and our 400 wealthiest citizens enjoy as much wealth as the entire bottom half of the population. But a political system designed for gridlock, the grossly disproportionate influence of the rich, and Americans’ ideological aversion to class politics conspire to make it politically inadvisable for a Democratic president to even speak the words “income inequality” before a national audience. Absent the political will to explore redistributive structural reforms, we’re left with “ladders of opportunity,” and a vision of economic salvation through higher test scores.”

Levitz interviews philosophy of education professor David Blacker. He asks him about how charter schools fit into the current era, and Blacker replies:

“I think the logic there is a kind of marketization logic. It’s an ideal of privatization which I think is ultimately tied to… I think privatization is the twin of austerity. Austerity being withdrawal of public commitment and public expenditure. I see those things as hand in hand, and they are symptomatic, from my point of view, of this decrease in commitment to that project of universal public education. Because the market logic sort of implies that education is this contingent matter for individuals. It’s less of a social good. It’s less of something we ought to worry about collectively, and more a commodity that individuals need to seize or take advantage of on their own. Invest in yourself. Or parents, invest in your children.”

Categories Charter Schools, Economy, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

Dana Goldstein: What Will the Vergara Decision Change?

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
56

In an article in The Atlantic, Dana Goldstein explains the reasons for tenure–mainly to protect against politically motivated hiring and firing–and she assesses the likely effects of the decision.

She agrees that California’s current timeframe for tenure decisions is far too brief. Teachers need at least three years to demonstrate that they are qualified for the protection of tenure.

But “Is the premise of Treu’s ruling correct? Will axing tenure and seniority lead directly to better test scores and higher lifetime earnings for poor kids?”

She concludes that: “Getting rid of these bad laws may do little to systemically raise student achievement. For high-poverty schools, hiring is at least as big of a challenge as firing, and the Vergara decision does nothing to make it easier for the most struggling schools to attract or retain the best teacher candidates.”

And she nails her argument here:

“The lesson here is that California’s tenure policies may be insensible, but they aren’t the only, or even the primary, driver of the teacher-quality gap between the state’s middle-class and low-income schools. The larger problem is that too few of the best teachers are willing to work long-term in the country’s most racially isolated and poorest neighborhoods. There are lots of reasons why, ranging from plain old racism and classism to the higher principal turnover that turns poor schools into chaotic workplaces that mature teachers avoid. The schools with the most poverty are also more likely to focus on standardized test prep, which teachers dislike. Plus, teachers tend to live in middle-class neighborhoods and may not want a long commute.

“Educational equality is about more than teacher-seniority rules: It is about making the schools that serve poor children more attractive places for the smartest, most ambitious people to spend their careers. To do that, those schools need excellent, stable principals who inspire confidence in great teachers. They need rich curricula that stimulate both adults and children. And ideally, their student bodies should be more socioeconomically integrated so schools are less overwhelmed by the social challenges of poverty. Of course, all that is a tall policy order; much more difficult, it turns out, than overturning tenure laws.”

Categories California, Teacher Tenure, Teachers and Teaching

Iris Rotberg: How the PISA Tests Mislead the World

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
6

Dr. Iris Rotberg of George Washington University writes that international tests have been fraught with methodological problems for fifty years. None of the problems have been addressed or corrected, yet today the international tests such as PISA are driving educational policy in dozens of nations, all competing for higher test scores.

Rotberg writes:

“The methodological critiques of international test-score comparisons began shortly after the comparisons were first administered 50 years ago, and they have continued. Methodological critiques of research are not unusual, but this situation is quite extraordinary for several reasons. First, the critiques of the international test-score comparisons are extensive and address virtually every aspect of the studies—sampling, measurement, and interpretation. Second, the studies continue to be administered, with few of the critiques addressed, but with continued participation of a large number of countries and other jurisdictions. These massive data collection efforts have been conducted 13 times in the past 18 years. The results of the most recent study, the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), were released in December 2013, only a year after the release of the other two major comparisons, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) (National Center for Education Statistics, n.d.-a, n.d.-b, n.d.-c). Third, despite the critiques, the studies have had a large impact on political rhetoric, public opinion, and public policies in countries throughout the world. This commentary focuses on PISA, the most recent international comparison released. Although the three international comparisons differ in some respects, the basic methodological problems described here are inherent in international test-score comparisons more generally.”

She adds:

“The international test-score rankings are almost universally interpreted by countries as an indication of the quality of their schools, despite the extensive methodological problems that make it virtually impossible to draw causal relationships between test scores and school quality. We are taking tenuous results and applying them in a questionable way. Even if the rankings were sound, a causal leap from test-score rankings to school quality would be unwarranted given the wide range of other factors that influence the rankings, such as the differences among countries in poverty rates, income distribution, immigration rates, social support services, and the extent to which children participate in academic programs and cram courses outside of school. And beyond all of these variables, there remains the basic question of whether a test score is a fair representation of the complexity and quality of a country’s entire education system. It has proven to be virtually impossible to unravel the cumulative effects of all the uncontrolled variables and then make valid interpretations of the implications of the test-score rankings.”

The international horse race, she says, has led to policies of dubious merit.

And she concludes:

“PISA’s own findings support a transition to studies of individual countries. They show that the proportion of variance in student achievement accounted for by socioeconomic status and other differences within member countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is nine times greater than the proportion accounted for by differences among OECD countries (OECD, 2010)—a finding that has been obscured by the emphasis on test-score rankings and largely ignored in the public dialogue. It is consistent with a research approach that focuses on problem areas within countries rather than on test-score competitions among countries. It also offers an opportunity to take Einstein’s advice and focus on issues that count, and count only what can be counted. After 50 years of test-score rankings, it’s worth a try.”

Categories Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), International, Testing

Charters In Néw Orleans Explain Why Students Must “Walk the Line”

By dianeravitch
June 12, 2014 //
58

Many charters in Néw Orleans tape a line in their hallways and insist that students must walk on the correct side of the line.

Reporter Danielle Dreilinger of the Times-Picayune writes here about this controversial policy and includes a video created by the charters to explain the value of this practice.

“Critics say it prepares students for prison, not college. A civil rights complaint filed this spring accuses Collegiate of imposing unnecessarily harsh penalties for stepping outside the lines — even, in one case, when a student’s disability made walking difficult.”

Defenders of the policy say it saves time and teaches automatic obedience to small rules, which later translates into unquestioning obedience to rules and authority, preparing students to succeed in life.

Categories Charter Schools, New Orleans, Students

David B. Cohen: A Thoughtful Analysis of Vergara Decision

By dianeravitch
June 11, 2014 //
17

David B. Cohen is a teacher who is a leader in the teaching profession in California. In this post, he offers a calm, thoughtful appraisal of the Vergara decision. While not agreeing with the decision, he points out ways in which the issues can be resolved in the future.

He acknowledges his outrage towards the group that brought the case, which dared to call itself “Students Matter”::

“I’m suspicious of wealthy and powerful individuals and groups whose advocacy for children leads to “reforms” that won’t cost a cent, but will weaken labor.

“Students matter – but apparently, California’s shamefully inadequate funding levels don’t. That’s the status quo they accept; teacher protections are apparently the status quo to fight. In many funding categories, California is at or near the bottom of the state rankings. Students Matter has done nothing that will put a needed book or computer in a school. Not one wifi hotspot. Not one more librarian, nurse, or counselor. Not one more paintbrush or musical instrument. Not one hour of instructional aide support for students or professional development for teachers. They don’t have any apparent interest in the more glaring inadequacies that their considerable wealth and PR savvy could help. But forming a non-profit organization for litigation purposes and calling it “Lawsuits Matter” wouldn’t be as catchy. Their arguments regarding education problems and policy were flawed and unconvincing. Their standing in the case may be legal, but has the look of opportunism, with some incredible wealth and some powerful connections to education “reform” and charter school interests permeating the organization.”

He goes on to analyze the decision with care. On the subject of the time frame for tenure, he notes that he and other teachers had previously proposed that the probationary period should be extended to three years. He gives a spirited defense of seniority, saying it is the fairest way to handle the pain of layoffs.

He concludes with an appeal for calm:

“Judge Treu’s ruling closes by invoking Alexander Hamilton on the topic of separation of powers; he reminds us that judging and legislating are separate functions, and that the legislature must remedy what the court finds unconstitutional. Therefore, with years of appeals ahead, and then a legislative process to follow, I think it’s too soon for teachers or unions to begin talk of disaster. Mine is an admittedly amateur reading, but it would seem possible to under this ruling to pass constitutional muster with laws that make the following changes:

“Permanent status awarded in third year rather than second year
Streamlined (not eliminated) due process laws
Seniority used as one factor rather than the sole factor in layoffs

“Don’t get me wrong: just on principle, I’d rather see the whole case rejected on appeal. But if the ruling, or parts of it, should stand several years from now, then teachers still have room to advocate for a strong profession. Let’s stay informed and engaged. Stay vigilant, even adversarial as necessary – but calm.”

Categories California, Teacher Tenure, Teachers and Teaching

The Vergara Trial Teachers Were Not “Grossly Ineffective”

By dianeravitch
June 11, 2014 //
112

I was curious to learn whether the plaintiffs in the Vergara trial actually had “grossly ineffective teachers.” The answer is “no, they did not.”

Not only did none of them have a “grossly ineffective” teacher, but some of the plaintiffs attended schools where there are no tenured teachers. Two of the plaintiffs attend charter schools, where there is no tenure or seniority, and as you will read below, “Beatriz and Elizabeth Vergara both attend a “Pilot School” in LAUSD that is free to let teachers go at the end of the school year for any reason, including ineffectiveness.

It turns out that the lawyers for the defense checked the records of the plaintiffs’ teachers, and this is what they found (filed as a post-trial brief in the case): (See pp. 5-6).

“Plaintiffs have not established that the statutes have ever caused them any harm or are likely to do so in the future. None of the nine named Plaintiffs established that he or she was assigned to an allegedly grossly ineffective teacher, or that he or she faces any immediate risk of future harm, as a result of the challenged statutes. The record contains no evidence that Plaintiffs Elliott, Liss, Campbell or Martinez were ever assigned a grossly ineffective teacher at all. Of the remaining five Plaintiffs, most of the teachers whom they identified as “bad” or “grossly ineffective” were excellent teachers. Because none of the five Plaintiffs are reliable evaluators of teacher performance, their testimony about the remaining purportedly ineffective teachers should not be credited. Nor could Plaintiffs link their assignment to purportedly “bad” or “grossly ineffective” teachers to the challenged statutes. Not a single witness claimed that any of Plaintiffs’ teachers were granted permanent status because of the two-year probationary period, would have been dismissed in the absence of the dismissal statutes, or would have been laid off had reverse seniority not been a factor in layoffs. Indeed, Plaintiffs did not call any administrator of any of Plaintiffs’ schools to corroborate their testimony or in any way connect the teachers they identified to the statutes they challenge. Furthermore, any threat of future harm to Plaintiffs caused by the challenged statutes is purely speculative. Plaintiffs Elliott and DeBose are high school seniors who will almost certainly graduate in spring 2014. Plaintiffs Monterroza and Martinez both attend charter schools that are not subject to the challenged statutes at all. Beatriz and Elizabeth Vergara both attend a “Pilot School” in LAUSD that is free to let teachers go at the end of the school year for any reason, including ineffectiveness. As for the remaining three Plaintiffs, there is no concrete, specific evidence supporting any claim that they will be assigned to grossly ineffective teachers due to the challenged statutes; instead, their claims are based on pure speculation.”

One of the plaintiffs (Monterroza) said that her teacher, Christine McLaughlin was a very bad teacher, but McLaughlin was Pasadena teacher of the year and has received many awards for excellent teaching (google her).

Surely, there must be “grossly ineffective” teachers in the state of California, but no evidence was presented that the plaintiffs in the case had teachers who were “grossly ineffective.”

What about turnover of teachers in high-poverty schools in California:

Betty Olson-Jones, former president of the Oakland Education Association, testified: “Oakland has an extremely difficult time retaining teachers. The statistic that I was always struck with was of the beginning teachers in 2003, there were about 300 who began in Oakland, and by 2008 about 76 percent of those left. Generally, the turnover rate is about 50 percent, even higher among some — in some schools. I feel that part of the reason is that the conditions are very difficult, very high-poverty rate in Oakland, lack of support services. Oakland has very few counselors, nurses, one librarian left, high class size, high standard of living in the bay area. Children come with a lot of needs that aren’t fulfilled, and teachers are expected to make up that difference and are agonized often by their inability to do so because they lack the support and the conditions to do so.”

What about working conditions? Anthony Mize taught at the Vergara sisters’ school. He testified: “There was a back-to-school night where there was drive-by shooting 30 to 50 yards from behind my classroom. I remember talking with a mother at the time. And I was just about to say to the mom, ‘and your son has trouble paying attention,’ and seven to nine shots rang out.”

None of this testimony impressed the judge.

Categories California, Teachers and Teaching

Eric Cantor, Republican Champion of Charters, Defeated in Virginia

By dianeravitch
June 11, 2014 //
22

The report from politico.com on Eric Canto’s defeat:

“HOUSE LOSES ‘CHAMPION’ OF CHARTERS AND CHOICE: Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor – crusader for immigration reform, school choice and charter schools – lost his primary race to Randolph-Macon College professor Dave Brat in an astonishing upset Tuesday night. Spectators said some of Cantor’s pet education issues aren’t necessarily at risk. “I wouldn’t call it a blow, but it’s disappointing to lose a leader who has dedicated so much of his life to ensuring that students have access to additional options,” said Nina Rees, president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Rees said that if Cantor ran as in independent, he could win because he has so many supporters. (Although others point out [ http://bit.ly/1kZnnqf%5D that Virginia law would only allow him to mount a write-in bid.) And Anne Hyslop, policy analyst at the New America Foundation, said it doesn’t mean House Republicans aren’t supportive of school choice anymore. “But with Cantor such a big champion of choice and charter bills, it might create a more difficult path for them going forward if it’s not as high a priority for the next person in that role,” she said. POLITICO’s James Hohmann has five takeaways from Cantor’s loss: http://politi.co/1xHwmR4

– “I’m hoping there will be others in Congress who look to try to fill Eric Cantor’s shoes on [school choice] because few others were talking about it as much as he was,” said Michael Brickman, national policy director at the Fordham Institute. It’s unclear if Republican leadership will continue Cantor’s enthusiasm, he said.

– On Common Core, Cantor hasn’t been so outspoken. But Brat’s tea party politics put him at odds with the standards. In an April interview with FreedomWorks, Brat said he was “absolutely opposed to Common Core and top down education.” [http://bit.ly/1s4hhbQ] Kate Tromble, director of legislative affairs at The Education Trust, said Cantor was able to find some cohesion between the tea party and other Republicans. But “I don’t see how there’s any control” with Cantor gone, she said. The tea party becomes “emboldened.”

– On immigration, Tromble said, “Cantor … wasn’t in any way championing comprehensive immigration reform. And the DREAM Act has been fairly uncontroversial. … It’s hard to see a path forward for anything rational on immigration reform.”

– Randolph-Macon College – a private, four-year college with about 1,300 students in Ashland, Va. – might get some attention through November. Brat heads the Department of Economics and Business. Democratic challenger Jack Trammell is an assistant professor of sociology and director of disability support services. “Randolph-Macon College is blessed to have remarkable faculty and staff members who are passionate about their students and about making significant contributions to our society,” President Robert Lindgren told Morning Education. “We are proud of both Dr. Brat and Dr. Trammell for their desire to serve our country and wish them both the best of luck in November.”

– According to RateMyProfessor.com, both Brat and Trammell earned peppers for hotness. (Yes, I went there.) http://politi.co/1l6GwAw

Categories Charter Schools, Common Core
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »