Archives for the year of: 2014

Leonie Haimson, CEO of Class Size Matters (and a dear friend), is voting YES on Proposition 3 in New York, the “Smart Schools Bond Act.”

 

I am voting no. I expect that the bulk of the money will be used to buy the devices and technology needed for Common Core testing. Leonie and I agree that bond money should not be used to buy devices that have a useful life of 3-4 years.

 

Leonie says that districts will be able to decide how they want to use the money. She believes New York City will use most of the money to build new schools and replace “temporary” trailers.

 

New York City schools, she points out, are badly overcrowded, and this new money would provide an opportunity to increase capacity and reduce class sizes.

 

She writes:

 

Each school district can use the revenue in the following ways:

 

· Purchasing educational technology equipment and facilities, such as interactive whiteboards, computer servers, desktop and laptop computers, tablets and high-speed broadband or wireless internet.
· Constructing and modernizing facilities to accommodate pre-kindergarten programs and replacing classroom trailers with permanent instructional space.
· Installing high-tech security features in school buildings.

 

While I and many other education advocates including Diane Ravitch are fervently opposed to using any bond revenue for the purchase of devices like laptops or tablets that have a useful lifetime of only a few years, as the interest on the bond act is repaid over twenty or thirty years, it is clear that districts will have the choice of how to use these funds and have a broad array of options.

 

New York City is due to receive about $780 million if Proposition 3 is approved. The Department of Education’s five year capital plan makes it clear that if the bond act passes, $490 million of city funds previously directed toward technology would now be diverted toward building more schools to alleviate overcrowding for smaller classes, creating 4,900 more seats, and the rest toward creating 2,100 seats for pre-kindergarten.

 

As the analysis in our report Space Crunch makes clear, the city’s school capital plan is badly underfunded as is. Though it will includes less than 40,000 additional seats if the Bond Act is approved – and even fewer if it isn’t – the real need is at least 100,000 seats, given existing overcrowding and projections of increased enrollment over the next five to ten years.

 

So, voters in New York. You can vote “yes,” as Leonie Haimson advises, if you believe that the money will be spent to add new classrooms and reduce class size. Or you can vote no, as I will, if you believe the money will end up paying for iPads, tablets, and other technology that will be obsolete long before the bonds are paid off. If the measure passes, I hope that Leonie is right.

A concerned parent activist in Indiana sent this message:

 

 

As election campaign promises are being made, carefully consider any candidate who claims he or she will “reward our best teachers.”
“Rewarding our best teachers” is a purposely deceptive claim. In fact, after replacing traditional pay scales with merit based schemes in 2011, State Republicans immediately reduced funds from the “Teacher Performance Awards”. Originally budgeted at $11 million, the Republican controlled house voted to reduce this fund 82%. Across the state teachers evaluated as effective have been told, “there is no money for ‘rewards’.”
Many teachers today earn less money than they did in 2011, yet the 2014 Indiana Republican Platform claims “Retaining and Attracting Young Talent” is a top priority. The state continues to lose some of its best and brightest teachers to other professions.Talented youth entering college are being told, “You do not want to go into education.”
This year’s election must be about education. Voting for legislators or senators who claim to “reward our best teachers” is to vote for a promise that has already been broken.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

In 2011, Senate Bill 0001 (SB0001) passed, eliminating teacher contracts and requiring what evolved into the RISE evaluation. Those who supported this idea claimed it would reward effective teachers. In reality, most teachers saw that their pay froze.

 

Once this plan was implemented, districts searched their coffers for funds in which to “reward” effective teachers but found them drained by these same state senators who also slashed educational funding.

 

In essence, SB0001 did just the opposite of what it was intended to do. More quality teachers have left the profession than ever before. Most teachers, even those who have been dubbed highly effective since this evaluation was put in place, find themselves making substantially less money than they did in 2011.

 

Further, school districts in financially struggling areas that needed support the most found themselves losing teachers to more affluent districts that could bolster their funds through referendums. SB 1, whether intentional or not, gives effective and highly effective teachers real cause to hesitate to seek challenging assignments—which, in the end, hurts students who need quality teaching the most.”

 

Finally, many politicians supporting this type of merit pay claim this election year they will focus dollars on the classroom. However, the RISE evaluation has created such red tape for schools that they have had to hire more administrators for this accountability or pull resources out of the classroom to manage.

 

Sadly, six senators who supported this measure and are up for reelection this year stand unopposed. That makes the four races where senators who supported SB0001 even more important. If you vote in one of the four senate districts below, please show your support for public education by voting for the challenger.

 

In State Senate District 47, Sen. Ronald Grooms voted for SB0001.
Vote challenger Chuck Freiberger

 

In State Senate District 45, Sen. James Smith voted for SB0001.
Vote challenger Julie Berry.

 

In State Senate District 41, Sen. Greg Walker voted for SB0001.
Vote challenger AndyTalarzyk.

 

In State Senate District 29, Sen. Michael Delph was absent, but supports policies like SB0001.
Vote Challenger J.D. Ford.

Karen Lewis, speaking to members of the Chicago Teachers Union by video, endorsed Jesus “Chuy” Garcia for Mayor. She also urged members to vote for Governor Pat Quinn, who is running against billionaire Bruce Rauner. Karen, who is recuperating from major surgery, was wearing a turban and speaking strongly. She looked beautiful.

The Network for Public Education has issued a BIG MONEY ALERT about efforts to swamp state and local school board races with outsize campaign contributions.

The ALERT focuses on a handful of races where corporate reformers are using their vast financial resources to win control. Many of the biggest donors are out-of-state and have no ties to the public schools other than a desire to promote charter schools, high-stakes testing, and test-based evaluations of teachers.

The race for state school superintendent in California has attracted the most corporate reform money. Marshall Tuck is the favorite of the billionaires and hedge fund managers. State superintendent Tom Torlakson is an educator with solid support among the state’s teachers and administrators. Torlakson is supported by teachers and their unions.

Tuck is the darling of the corporate ed-reform donors, having received such contributions as:

Eli Broad’s donation of $1,375,000;
Walton daughters and heirs, Alice and Carrie with $450,000 and $500,000 respectively;
Julian Robertson of the Robertson Foundation with $1,000,000;
Doris Fisher of the Donald and Doris Fisher Fund with $950,000;
Ex NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg contributed $250,000;
Houston billionaire and DFER friend John Arnold;
San Francisco venture capitalist and TFA Board member Arthur Rock.

If you know of other races where the big corporate money people are tilting the scales, please contact Robin Hiller, executive director of the Network for Public Education rhiller@voicesforeducation.org, or leave a comment here.

A Message to Néw Yorkers

NYC Kids PAC is a parent group formed to advocate for children’s issues.

Vote for Public Education on Election Day!

NYC Kids PAC enthusiastically endorses Howie Hawkins for Governor and Brian Jones as Lieutenant Governor on the Green Party Line.

Why?

Howie and Brian believe, as we do, that NYC kids deserve a quality education, including smaller classes and plenty of art, music and science. They believe our kids should not be over-tested nor be subjected to a rigid and flawed curriculum, tied to standards developed by people who have never taught. They believe that rather than turn our schools over to private corporations run by hedge-funders, our elected officials need to support and strengthen our public schools, the bedrock of our democracy.

In contrast, Governor Cuomo has failed our children, in almost every way. He slashed state aid for education, despite a court decision that found that our public schools underfunded. He pushed for more high-stakes testing, and for a teacher evaluation system based on test scores that will drive good teachers out of the profession. He has imposed a new requirement that any new charter school get space on demand, at city expense, while thousands of public school students sit in overcrowded classrooms, on waiting lists for Kindergarten, or in trailers.

Just this week, Cuomo said he was determined to “break” our public school system, which he called “one of the only remaining public monopolies.”

What about the police and fire departments or public health? Perhaps he is so intent on privatizing our public schools because some of his biggest donors run charter schools. He also condescended to parents by saying that the only reason we protested the flawed curriculum and exams is that we were manipulated by teachers, who got us “upset last year about this entire Common Core agenda.”

It’s time for someone to stand up for our kids and to start respecting parents. Howie Hawkins and Brian Jones will do just that, and we strongly urge you to go out and vote for them on Tuesday.

Our mailing address is:
NYC Kids PAC
1275 First Avenue, Suite 225
New York, NY 10065

Mercedes Schneider was rated a “highly effective” teacher. She received a bonus of $427. 76. She gave it to a friend who is raising an autistic child.

A fourth-grade teacher at Pierre Capdeau Charter School in Louisiana got a bonus of $43,000 for raising her students’ test scores by 88%. The bonus is about 75% of her annual salary. A kindergarten teacher got even larger gains but her bonus was only $4,086 because the kindergarten scores don’t count for the state rankings.

The school is rated a D by the state. Last year it was graded D-.

One of the issues on the ballot Tuesday
in New York will be a bond issue for $2 billion for technology for the schools.

 

I am all in favor of technology for the schools, but it should not be paid for by a bond issue, which will be repaid over many years, long after the technology has become obsolete. As we saw in Los Angeles, where the superintendent proposed to use construction bonds to buy iPads, this is a very bad idea.

 

The main purpose of this bond issue is to provide technology for Common Core testing. Some parents are already calling it the “PARCC bond issue,” with reference to the name of the Common Core test that will be delivered online.

 

Our schools–especially in urban districts–need more funding. They need smaller class sizes for children who are struggling. They need funding for arts teachers, social workers, and librarians. They need renovations.

 

If the Legislature wants to buy new technology–and they should–they should pay for it, not float a bond issue.

 

Bond issues should be used for construction and renovation, for costs that will last over many years, even decades, not for technology, which is fast-changing and must be replaced and serviced.

The Gallup Poll reports that three-quarters of teachers support common standards, a similar proportion oppose standardized online common assessments, while 89% oppose teacher evaluations based on student test scores.

Evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students is the most prominent initiative launched by Secretary Arne Duncan. The Gallup Poll shows that Duncan’s favorite “reform” is almost universally opposed by the nation’s teachers.

Hello, President Obama. Please pay attention.

For many years, North Carolina had a national reputation as the most progressive state in the South. Its leaders worked across party lines to increase educational opportunity and improve the schools. Now, however, the Governor and the Legislature are in a race to the bottom. Teachers’ salaries are near the bottom of the nation. The exodus of experienced teachers is at a historic high. The legislature has funded charters and vouchers, in an effort to defund and harm public schools.

Matt Caggia, a social studies teacher in Wake County, describes this bizarre situation, in which the legislature puts corporations first and students last.

For a comprehensive summary of the damage done to public education in North Carolina by its elected officials, read this article by Duke University economist Helen Ladd and her husband Edward Fiske, former education editor of the Néw York Times.

Parent activists in Seattle are wary of Proposition 1B, a proposal for “Preschool for All,” fearing that it means a scripted curriculum and standardized tests for tots.

They have learned that the money for the proposition is coming from hedge fund managers and corporations that have been mainstays of the charter school movement.

Parents worry that the Gates Foundation is behind the proposal and that it is a prelude to mayoral control, for-profit schools, and TFA. are they right? Read: 11 Reasons to oppose Prop 1B.

This Washington State preschool teacher explains why he will vote against Prop 1B.