Archives for the year of: 2014

Recently the Education Justice Center named Nevada as one of the states where funding was most inequitable and inadequate. Teacher Angie Sullivan in Nevada sends out the following news:

 

Just to be clear . . .

There were one billion in cuts to education under Democratic leadership and the Governor of Reno. We have not restored that money.

Our schools are starving.

No one has the guts to fund public schools in Nevada. Our scores have declined as our funding has declined.

Our schools are starving.

Now the state is going to participate in wholesale union-busting which affects how many under-funded schools? And how many under-supplied professionals? Take Over?

Our schools are starving.

Nice to see some failing charters that further siphon tax payer money on the list too – but what did you think would happen without regulation and oversight. Twice the cost and not able to produce.

Our schools are starving.

The state is going to “take us over”. Who is that? The state will love my at risk students more than I do?

Our schools are starving.

Does that mean sell us to a corporation – like Edison? Remember that Edison Corpirate experiment on kids? $10 million later there was no improvement. What a failure – sad to think we might do that again.

Our schools are starving.

This state can blame teachers who are on the front line all it wants. Go on a witch-hunt again. Waste time and money without addressing the community issues of poverty and racism and disenfranchisement.

Our schools are starving.

You get what you pay for and you wanted to starve the schools – and look what happened.

Our schools are starving.

Tell me this is not union-busting plain and simple. Tell me this is not about punishing women who teach kids to read. Tell me it’s not the already impoverished schools with at-risk populations that will be sold to the highest bidder.

Our schools are starving.

If you keep looking for solutions from a CEO who refuses to acknowledge the real issues – you will continue to fail. Public schools are not about return on investment – they are investment in community, democracy, and opportunity.

Our schools are starving.

O God hold your children in your hand. Where will kids go to school if they privatize them all. Please do not allow experiments without research to kill our schools and hurt our most vulnerable children.

Angie

 

 

 

 

 

http://m.reviewjournal.com/news/education/nevada-mulling-dramatic-crackdown-low-performing-schools

NEVADA MULLING DRAMATIC CRACKDOWN ON LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS

 

 

By TREVON MILLIARD
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

 
Nevada’s underperforming public schools are about to feel the squeeze from state education officials who have long identified the chronic strugglers but have done little more than watch them.

 

Plans are in the works at the Nevada Department of Education in Carson City to tighten the state’s grip on struggling schools that receive extra support, taking action if they fail to improve, say state Deputy Superintendent for Student Achievement Steve Canavero and members of the State Board of Education.

 

“We would all like to make nice, and we would all like to have the grownups get along,” President Elaine Wynn told her fellow state board members Nov. 6. “But I would remind you of the mood we had at our last meeting, when we were horrified at the results.”

 

Those results: 51 public schools labeled low-performers, with few making substantial improvements often requiring urgent and disruptive changes instead of the small, incremental steps commonly seen in Nevada education, Canavero said.

 

Of the 51 low performers, 29 schools are in Clark County.

 

The state has identified nine “priority schools” on the 51-school list. All but one shared in $34 million in federal School Improvement Grants over the past three years, but none improved their standing in the state’s one-to-five-star accountability system ratings.

 

“We obviously can’t go back and fix the past,” said board member Allison Serafin, calling for an accounting of how the grant money was spent and any effect it had.

 

Wynn asked the board to “send a very clear signal” that it won’t passively accept the status quo.

 

“We’re here not to have meetings once every six weeks. We’re here to make a difference in how our kids learn and achieve,” said Wynn. “What is the evolving role of the state board?”

 

The state department and board have never used their power to regularly monitor underperforming schools and mandate improvement plans, which can include choosing principals and other school leaders and prescribing curriculum.

 

Canavero said he doesn’t see the state choosing a curriculum for schools, which harkens to the concern of board member Alexis Gonzales-Black. She said the state needs to be careful to not micromanage schools.

 

The state also can turn chronically underperforming schools over to management organizations, which usually run charter schools, or close them and send students elsewhere.

 

That far-reaching power came to the state board in 2012, when the federal government offered states a chance to opt out of certain provisions of No Child Left Behind, the federal accountability system implemented under the George W. Bush administration in 2002.

 

The state submitted an alternative accountability plan to the U.S. Department of Education, creating the school star-rating system and granting more autonomy to high-performing schools while setting in place more state power over underperforming schools.

 

In that waiver from No Child Left Behind, Nevada defined low-performing as schools that fit in one of three designations: focus, priority and those schools earning one star.

 

Focus schools are those with the largest achievement gaps for certain groups of students, such as poor or minority students who lag far behind their peers.

 

Priority schools are the bottom 5 percent in terms of student achievement, as determined by annual state test scores.

 

But an impending extension to the three-year waiver may increase that number from nine to about 38 priority schools, due largely to the inclusion of high schools with graduation rates below 60 percent, Canavero said.

 

“I think we have plenty of accountability,” said Canavero, referencing the powers granted by the waiver. “What we have yet to do is build the system to exercise that accountability.”

 

He advocated a more prescriptive process for spending, especially at priority schools. That would entail a memorandum of understanding between the state and local schools laying out improvement needed to be removed from the underperformers list, as well as what the state will do if nothing changes.

 

“It’s a very thick, muddy place that we’re in,” said Wynn, re-emphasizing her question to the state board. “Are we ready to assume more responsibility for what’s happening in our state’s schools? I am very supportive of putting the pieces in place.”

 

Canavero and department staff have continued to draft the tighter controls and is expected to detail its next step later this month.

 

 

Contact Trevon Milliard attmilliard@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0279. Find him on Twitter: @TrevonMilliard.

 

 

 

UNDERPERFORMING SCHOOLS

(* Clark County schools)

NEVADA PRIORITY SCHOOLS

Canyon Springs High School*

Chaparral High School*

Del Sol High School*

Desert Pines High School*

Mojave High School*

Valley High School*

Western High School*

Amargosa Valley Elementary School

Washoe Innovations Academy High School

NEVADA FOCUS SCHOOLS

Numa Elementary School

Craig Elementary School*

Diaz Elementary School*

Fitzgerald Elementary School*

Kelly Elementary School*

Lowman Elementary School*

One Hundred Academy*

Paradise Elementary School*

Petersen Elementary School*

Reed Elementary School*

Roundy Elementary School*

Squires Elementary School*

West Preparatory Academy Secondary*

Tom Williams Elementary School*

Owyhee Elementary School

Owyhee Middle School

McDermitt Elementary School

Caliente Elementary School

Lovelock Elementary School

Pershing Middle School

Corbett Elementary School

Hug High School

Robert Mitchell Elementary School

McGill Elementary School

Ben Chapman of the Néw York Daily News reports on a study by the Center for Popular Demcracy, which reviewed audits of charter schools in Néw York state.

62 of the state’s 248 charters have been audited. The review showed $28 million misspent since 2002. “The Center for Popular Democracy’s analysis charter school audits found investigators uncovered probable financial mismanagement in 95% of the schools they examined…..”

“Kyle Serrette, executive director of the progressive, Washington-based group, said the review of previously published audits showed the schools need greater oversight.

“We can’t afford to have a system that fails to cull the fraudulent charter operators from the honest ones,” said Serrette. “Establishing a charter school oversight system that prevents fraud, waste and mismanagement will attack the root cause of the problem….”

“All told, Serrette’s group estimates wasteful spending at charters could cost taxpayers more than $50 million per year.”

About 9% of New York City’s charters were audited. “Each audit found issues.”

“A 2012 audit found Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School was paying $800,000 in excess annual fees to the management company that holds its building’s lease.

“A 2012 audit of Williamsburg Charter High School revealed school officials overbilled the city for operations and paid contractors for $200,800 in services that should have been provided by the school’s network.

“A 2007 audit of the Carl C. Icahn Charter School determined the Bronx school spent more than $1,288 on alcohol for staff parties and failed to account for another $102,857 in expenses.

“The city spends more than $1.29 billion on charters annually.”

As the previous post shows, the Education Justice Center declared that Nevada has one of the worst funded and most inequitable school systems in the nation. However, the new Republican majority in the State Legislature has a new agenda that does not involve funding:

School prayer. The right to carry weapons on college campuses. End collective bargaining. Vouchers. Merit pay. Firing “bad” teachers. The new majority doesn’t like unions because teachers get too much money and that causes budget problems. Probably the legislators figure if they pay teachers less, they can recruit better teachers. The Governor wants vouchers, but he would have to get the voters’ approval to change the state constitution. Voters have never approved vouchers in any state, so legislators will probably come up with “opportunity scholarships” to subsidize private school tuition.

 

 

Assemblyman Jim Wheeler, R-Minden, said that without question improving public education is the top priority of the caucus.

“We will see what the governor wants to do,” he said. “He leads our party and our state. Parental choice is the biggest issue but not the only one. We need to reward good teachers and get rid of bad teachers. We need to see if we can streamline school district administration.

“Obviously throwing money at it isn’t working,” Wheeler said. “We need parental involvement.”

Wheeler has requested a school prayer bill, and said the motivation is to ensure that students are not punished for engaging in prayer, such as making the sign of the cross after a touchdown in a high school football game.

If you guessed Nevada, you are right!

 

According to the Education Justice Center, Nevada ranks among the very worst state in supporting the education of its children adequately and equitably.

 

Because the state distributes aid unfairly and fails to use a reasonable amount of its economic capacity to support its public schools, Nevada’s funding system ranks among the worst in the U.S.

 

The State needs to design and implement a new school funding system that provides the opportunity to learn to all students.

 

On the National Report Card, the state receives an “F” in funding distribution, which measures the extent to which the state’s funding system is structured so that higher poverty districts receive more aid than lower poverty districts. In Nevada, the pattern is actually regressive with higher poverty districts receiving, on average, only about 69 cents for each dollar their wealthier counterparts receive. Such a skewed funding system thwarts efforts to improve achievement and close achievement gaps.

 

Nevada receives another “F” for state fiscal effort, measured as the proportion of the state’s economic productivity that is spent on education. Nevada’s ranking dropped this year. Furthermore, the state’s overall funding levels are below average compared to other states, when adjusted for regional wages, economies of scale, and other factors.

 

Nevada will need to increase “effort” if it is to improve funding distribution and raise the overall funding level enough to support student achievement. For example, the state funds only a few small pilot programs for students learning English, even though 19% of Nevada students are English learners.

 

Legislators recently voted a $1.3 billion subsidy to lure a Tesla battery factory to the state. But nothing for the children.

 

 

It has to annoy Bill Gates that he has not yet been able to buy the schools of Seattle, where he lives. But the stars are aligning for him. He is pushing behind the scenes for a mayoral takeover–which is a sure path to charters and corporate reform. Nothing like killing off democratic control of public education to clear the way for corporate reform.

Next on the docket is a rushed process to make the interim superintendent, Larry Nyland, the permanent superintendent. He seems like a pliable sort, and he is surrounded by Broadies left over from an earlier superintendent who was Broad-trained.

The school board announced hearings just a few days ago, while everyone was thinking about Thanksgiving, that the future of Nyland will be decided Wednesday. Forget about the national search the board promised.

Citizens should turn out, ask questions, and insist that the public schools belong to the public, not to Bill Gates, Eli Broad, or their billionaire friends.

Myra Blackmon, who writes for the Athens (Georgia) Banner, poses a question. What if Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world, came up with an idea for a drug? Would we skip clinical trials and the FDA? Would we just dispense because he said so?

 

That’s what Bill Gates is doing to our children, she writes, and we shouldn’t stand for it.

 

But that is exactly what Bill Gates, another megabillionaire, has done with education. Gates is rich, he has purchased his bully pulpit and we are swallowing his “brilliance” hook, line and sinker.
Just because he has made a lot of money. Just because he is smart. Gates is suddenly the education expert, advising the president and secretary of education on what is “best” for America’s children. He funds the development and promotion of his idea of “good” education practice.
He has never taught nor studied education. His own children went to private schools that wouldn’t touch his ideas with a 10-foot pole. But he is Bill Gates and we let him get away with it.
Gates decided, for example, that the Common Core State Standards are a great idea. And he proceeded to pour mountains of money into bringing it to market with little or no research, no clinical trials and absolutely no evidence of efficacy. He gives organizations big money to push the Common Core, which was developed in virtual secrecy, with almost no input from real teachers.
Gates also espouses “data-driven” education, in which numbers and data analysis take precedence over what teachers and parents believe is best for individual children. Their scores on high-stakes tests trump any firsthand knowledge or special circumstances that might determine the educational course for any given child.
There is no evidence that Gates’ big ideas work. We are allowing him to experiment on our children, absent even the simplest protections we would expect for a new medication or a new infant formula. We believe that because he is smart and rich, he knows what is best for our children.

 

Where is the moral outrage? Why on earth do we accept what Bill Gates says and deny the research that tells us not only that data-driven, test-based education doesn’t work, but tells us what can best help our children learn?

 

 

 

 

This is a pictorial graphic that shows the richest woman in every state.

 

Do you know any of them?

 

The Network for Public Education is looking for an angel who will help us fight corporate reform. We are trying to defend public schools, teachers, and children from predatory takeovers by powerful special interests.

 

We would love to find a billionaire who loves public schools.

 

We would actually be happy to have the help of the second or third or tenth richest person, woman or man.

 

Until we find that person, we will continue to count on your help with whatever you can afford.

 

We are not especially well-funded (we are not well funded at all), yet we are beating back the billionaires. Why? Be ause we have the strength of our numbers, including you. We speak for 5 million teachers and for the families of about 45 million students, give or take a few million. With all their billions (of dollars), they can’t beat our millions (of people).

 

And we are winning because we care about principle, not profit. We believe that right makes might, that failing “reforms” will be exposed as frauds and scams, and that in a democracy, the truth eventually prevails.

Bob Shepherd, veteran designer of curricula and textbooks, explains why he objects to PARCC:

 

 

How to Prevent Another PARCC Mugging: A Public Service Announcement

 

 

The Common Core Curriculum Commissariat College and Career Ready Assessment Program (CCCCCCRAP) needs to be scrapped. Here are a few of the reasons why:

 

1.The CCSS ELA exams are invalid.

First, much of attainment in ELA consists in world knowledge (knowledge of what—the stuff of declarative memories of subject matter). The “standards” being tested cover almost no world knowledge and so the tests based on those standards miss much of what constitutes attainment in this subject. Imagine a test of biology that left out almost all world knowledge about biology and covered only biology “skills” like—I don’t know—slide-staining ability—and you’ll get what I mean here. This has been a problem with all of these summative standardized tests in ELA since their inception.

 

Second, much of attainment in ELA consists in procedural knowledge (knowledge of how—the stuff of procedural memories of subject matter). The “standards” being tested define skills so vaguely and so generally that they cannot be validly operationalized for testing purposes as written.

 

Third, nothing that students do on these exams EVEN REMOTELY resembles real reading and writing as it is actually done in the real world. The test consists largely of what I call New Criticism Lite, or New Criticism for Dummies—inane exercises on identification of examples of literary elements that for the most part skip over entirely what is being communicated in the piece of writing. In other words, these are tests of literature that for the most part skip over the literature, tests of the reading of informative texts that for the most part skip over the content of those texts. Since what is done on these tests does not resemble, even remotely, what actual readers and writers do in the real world when they actually read and write, the tests, ipso facto, cannot be valid tests of real reading and writing.

 

Fourth, standard standardized test development practice requires that the testing instrument be validated. Such validation requires that the test maker show that the test correlates strongly with other accepted measures of what is being tested, both generally and specifically (that is, with regard to specific materials and/or skills being tested). No such validation was done for these tests. NONE. And as they are written, based on the standards they are based upon, none COULD BE done. Where is the independent measure of proficiency in CCSS.Literacy.ELA.11-12.4b against which the items in PARCC that are supposed to measure that standard on this test have been validated? Answer: There is no such measure. None. And PARCC has not been validated against it, obviously LOL. So, the tests fail to meet a minimal standard for a high-stakes standardized assessment—that they have been independently validated.

 

2. The test formats are inappropriate.

 

First, the tests consist largely of objective-format items (multiple-choice and EBSR). These item types are most appropriate for testing very low-level skills (e.g., recall of factual detail). However, on these tests, such item formats are pressed into a kind of service for which they are, generally, not appropriate. They are used to test “higher-order thinking.” The test questions therefore tend to be tricky and convoluted. The test makers, these days, all insist on answer choices all being plausible. Well, what does plausible mean? Well, at a minimum, plausible means “reasonable.” So, the questions are supposed to deal with higher-order thinking, and the wrong answers are all supposed to be plausible, so the test questions end up being extraordinarily complex and confusing and tricky, all because the “experts” who designed these tests didn’t understand the most basic stuff about creating assessments–that objective question formats are generally not great for testing higher-order thinking, for example. For many of the sample released questions, there is, arguably, no answer among the answer choices that is correct or more than one answer that is correct, or the question simply is not, arguably, actually answerable as written.

 

Second, at the early grades, the tests end up being as much a test of keyboarding skills as of attainment in ELA. The online testing format is entirely inappropriate for most third graders.

 

3. The tests are diagnostically and instructionally useless.

 

Many kinds of assessment—diagnostic assessment, formative assessment, performative assessment, some classroom summative assessment—have instructional value. They can be used to inform instruction and/or are themselves instructive. The results of these tests are not broken down in any way that is of diagnostic or instructional use. Teachers and students cannot even see the tests to find out what students got wrong on them and why. So the tests are of no diagnostic or instructional value. None. None whatsoever.

 

4. The tests have enormous incurred costs and opportunity costs.

 

First, they steal away valuable instructional time. Administrators at many schools now report that they spend as much as a third of the school year preparing students to take these tests. That time includes the actual time spent taking the tests, the time spent taking pretests and benchmark tests and other practice tests, the time spent on test prep materials, the time spent doing exercises and activities in textbooks and online materials that have been modeled on the test questions in order to prepare kids to answer questions of those kinds, and the time spent on reporting, data analysis, data chats, proctoring, and other test housekeeping.

 

Second, they have enormous cost in dollars. In 2010-11, the US spent 1.7 billion on state standardized testing alone. Under CCSS, this increases. The PARCC contract by itself is worth over a billion dollars to Pearson in the first three years, and you have to add the cost of SBAC and the other state tests (another billion and a half?), to that. No one, to my knowledge, has accurately estimated the cost of the computer upgrades that will be necessary for online testing of every child, but those costs probably run to 50 or 60 billion. This is money that could be spent on stuff that matters—on making sure that poor kids have eye exams and warm clothes and food in their bellies, on making sure that libraries are open and that schools have nurses on duty to keep kids from dying. How many dead kids is all this testing worth, given that it is, again, of no instructional value? IF THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NOT OBVIOUS TO YOU, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ANYWHERE NEAR A SCHOOL OR AN EDUCATIONAL POLICY-MAKING DESK.

 

5. The tests distort curricula and pedagogy.

 

The tests drive how and what people teach, and they drive much of what is created by curriculum developers. This is a vast subject, so I won’t go into it in this brief note. Suffice it to say that the distortions are grave. In U.S. curriculum development today, the tail is wagging the dog.

 

6. The tests are abusive and demotivating.

 

Our prime directive as educators is to nurture intrinsic motivation—to create independent, life-long learners. The tests create climates of anxiety and fear. Both science and common sense teach that extrinsic punishment and reward systems like this testing system are highly DEMOTIVATING for cognitive tasks. The summative standardized testing system is a really, really backward extrinsic punishment and reward approach to motivation. It reminds me of the line from the alphabet in the Puritan New England Primer, the first textbook published on these shores:

 

F
The idle Fool
Is whip’t in school.

 

7. The tests have shown no positive results.

 

We have had more than a decade, now, of standards-and-testing-based accountability under NCLB. We have seen only miniscule increases in outcomes, and those are well within the margin of error of the calculations. Simply from the Hawthorne Effect, we should have seen SOME improvement!!! And that suggests that the testing has actually DECREASED OUTCOMES, which is consistent with what we know about the demotivational effects of extrinsic punishment and reward systems. It’s the height of stupidity to look at a clearly failed approach and to say, “Gee, we should to a lot more of that.”

 

8. The tests will worsen the achievement and gender gaps.

 

Both the achievement and gender gaps in educational performance are largely due to motivational issues, and these tests and the curricula and pedagogical strategies tied to them are extremely demotivating. They create new expectations and new hurdles that will widen existing gaps, not close them. Ten percent fewer boys than girls, BTW, received a proficient score on the NY CCSS exams–this in a time when 60 percent of kids in college and 3/5ths of people in MA programs are female. The CCSS exams drive more regimentation and standardization of curricula, which will further turn off kids already turned off by school, causing more to tune out and drop out.

 

Unlike most of the CCSS-related messages that you have seen–the ones pouring out of the propaganda mills–this message is not brought to you by

 

PARCC: Spell that backward
notSmarter, imBalanced
AIRy nonsense
CTB McGraw-SkillDrill
MAP to nowhere
the College Bored, makers of the Scholastic Common Core Achievement Test (SCCAT),

 

nor by the masters behind it all,

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (“All your base are belong to us”)

Hah! This is what we have been waiting for! Economists are now borrowing from the education research literature to develop value-added metrics for physicians. Next, I hope, will be the development of VAMs for lawyers and soon you will hear the screams of outrage not only from the American Medical Association but the American Bar Association. With the economists figuring out metrics to measure these politically powerful professions, teachers won’t be alone in their battle against obsessive compulsive metrical disorder. If only someone would come up with VAM for elected officials! Better yet, how about a VAM for economists? For example, how often do their predictions about the economy come true?

 

Here is how you measure the value-added of physicians according to the link above from the National Bureau of Economic Research:

 

“Despite increasing calls for value-based payments, existing methodologies for determining physicians’ “value added” to patient health outcomes have important limitations. We incorporate methods from the value added literature in education research into a health care setting to present the first value added estimates of health care providers in the literature. Like teacher value added measures that calculate student test score gains, we estimate physician value added based on changes in health status during the course of a hospitalization. We then tie our measures of physician value added to patient outcomes, including length of hospital stay, total charges, health status at discharge, and readmission. The estimated value added varied substantially across physicians and was highly stable for individual physicians. Patients of physicians in the 75th versus 25th percentile of value added had, on average, shorter length of stay (4.76 vs 5.08 days), lower total costs ($17,811 vs $19,822) and higher discharge health status (8% of a standard deviation). Our findings provide evidence to support a new method of determining physician value added in the context of inpatient care that could have wide applicability across health care setting and in estimating value added of other health care providers (nurses, staff, etc).”

“Reformers,” as we all know, want to raise standards and improve education. Or so they say. To reach their goals, they say our schools are failing, our economy and national security are at risk, and our educators are rotten apples. their propaganda war against public education is relentless and has the financial support of the U. S. Department of Education, the Gates Foundation, the far-right Walton Foundation, the Broad Foundation, the Dell Foundation, the Arnold Foundation, the Helmsley Foundation, the Fisher Foundation, and many more.

“Reformers” close community public schools, fire teachers and principals, insist on tests that most students fail, and create constant disruption. Eventually the public realizes that they must choose a charter school or voucher school because there is no neighborhood school or its best students have been lured away by charters.

What’s going on?

Brett Dickerson explains that there is a carefully orchestrated plan to liquidate public education.

He writes:

“Plans are under way for investment corporations to execute the biggest conversion – some call it theft – of public schools property in U.S. history.

“That is not hyperbole. Investment bankers themselves estimate that their taking over public schools is going to result in hundreds of billions of dollars in profit, if they can pull it off….

“There are very clear plans being made for just such a thing.

“The plan has been and still is to execute the complete conversion or liquidation of public schools property built up at taxpayer expense for generations.

“It involves raiding pensions that have been hard-won from years of legislative work by teachers and their unions. I reported on ideas being floated in Oklahoma along these lines in this piece that I did for Red Dirt Report earlier this year.

“It will all be done through the control of legislatures that have been mostly compliant with lobbying efforts due to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision that allowed huge corporate money, mostly unidentified, to flow into elections. The Andre Agassi Foundation is just one of many who have worked this angle for their own return on investment….

“Offer to buy out a profitable company that has little or no debt.

“Silence the work force by tricking them into thinking life will be better with the new owners.

“Once the purchase is complete, fire the workforce.

“Liquidate the pension fund.

“Liquidate the company for the cash value of its paid-for property.

“Leave the host community in financial ruins.”