Archives for the year of: 2014

Levi Cavener, a teacher of special education in Idaho, learned that Idaho will give the Common Core test SBAC) to tenth graders even though it includes eleventh grade content.

“However, I was shocked during this exchange when the Director told me that the decision was due to the fact the state was worried students wouldn’t take the test seriously, and they didn’t want their data set tainted…because, you know, then the results wouldn’t be valid.

“Here is the Director’s response to my question of the logic in giving 10th graders the SBAC instead of 11th graders:

[The director said “Grade 11 is optional this year as your juniors have already met graduation requirements with the old ISATs and might not take the new tests seriously if they were used for accountability.”
Well, that’s convenient. I’m glad the State Department can cherry-pick the students who take the SBAC “seriously” and which students will not; I’m sure they will give that same privilege to teachers…oh..err…I guess not.]

See, here’s why my jaw was left open: The Director of Assessment admitted, rightfully and logically, that if students won’t take the test seriously, then there is no point in assessing them because the data will be invalid. And, if that’s true, let’s not assess those kidos because it would be a total waste of time and resources, not to mention the fact that the data would be completely invalid.

Thus, it would be logical to conclude that if the data is not accurate, then the SDE surely wouldn’t want to tie those scores to something as significant as a teacher’s livelihood.

Oh wait…they want to do exactly that? Shucks!

According to the the Idaho State Department of Education’s recent Tiered Licensure recommendations, SBAC data will be tied directly to a teacher’s certification, employment, and compensation.

Yet, If the Dept. of Ed admits SBAC data isn’t accurate, then what in the world are they doing on insisting that the data be tied to a teacher’s certification, employment, and compensation?

The insistence of tying data that is admittedly invalid is synonymous to tying a fortune cookie to real-world events. I don’t know about you, but my lucky numbers haven’t hit the lottery; what a scam!”

The test is more than eight hours long.

Writes Levi, “Isn’t it logical to conclude that at some point that kidos decide they would rather go outside to recess rather than reading closely on a difficult text passage or spending more time editing a written response? When the kido makes that decision, do we hold the teacher responsible for the invalid data?”

And what about special education kids? “Let’s compound that scenario for special education teachers who work with a population of students qualifying for a special education eligibility under categories of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders, Emotional Disturbances, and Autism Spectrum diagnosis.

“Yup, I’m sure these students will always take the multi-day SBAC with the utmost earnestness; it’s not like the very behaviors they demonstrated to qualify for special education services to begin with would impede their ability to complete the SBAC with total validity of the results?”

Which is the most powerful player behind the scenes in corporate reform?

This article says, without doubt, McKinsey.

Where did David Coleman, architect of the Common Core standards, get his start: McKinsey.

Which firm pushes the narrative of a “crisis in education”: McKinsey.

Which firm believes that Big Data will solve all problems? McKinsey.

Look behind the screen, behind the curtain: McKinsey.

Mercedes Schneider decided to analyze how the conservative journal “Ednext” gauges public opinion about one of its favorite reforms, charter schools.

She reviews the wording of the questions asked over several years.

She notes that Ednext never mentions charter school scandals, which are a hot topic in states like Michigan, Ohio, and Forida.

“There’s a lot of unregulated money to be made in “school choice”– so much so that the FBI is conducting investigations nationwide on criminal behavior rampant in America’s charter schools.

“That the gross negligence of states to regulate “choice” has yielded fertile ground for criminal activity appears to have escaped any survey question posed by EdNext.

“The hidden component of “choice” is the systematic dissolution of the traditional, local-school-board-run public school system. Indeed, EdNext is a corporate-reform-promoting nest that is especially fond of defunding traditional public education via under-regulated charter schools.”

She wonders about the wording of the questions:

“He never addresses charter scandals at all. Imagine if he had asked this version of his charter question:

“As you may know, many states permit the formation of charter schools, which are publicly funded but are not managed by the local school board and are exempt from many state regulations. Charter schools are prone to scandal, as evidenced by a recent nationwide, FBI investigation. Do you support or oppose the formation of charter schools?

“I’m thinking the “completely oppose” category would suddenly become rather popular.”

Schneider suggests a way to improve the poll:

“If Peterson and his EdNext followers really wanted to know what charter school parents think of “choice”– and the degree to which “choice” is “forced choice”– they could ask in their survey. They could ask charter parents why they do not “completely support” their “chosen” schools.

“They could also ask charter parents what exactly has them “somewhat supporting” or “neither supporting nor opposing” their “choice” schools.

“The opinions of the general public on charter schools are not as telling as the opinions of those actually utilizing the charter schools.

“But it appears that EdNext minds are already made up. Charter schools are good–and there will be no asking for potentially contradictory specifics from those who actually *choose* them.

“And certainly no questions connecting charters and the FBI. I mean, that would be really bad for charter “choice.”

I was interviewed by Tavis Smiley a few minutes ago for a show that is airing tonight. Los Angeles Superintendent John Deasy follows me. I whack the Vergara decision, he praises it.

Tavis and I talked about Vergara, Race to the Top, the “reform” movement, and why there is so much blaming of teachers for all the ills of society. I gave it my all. It was my first media gig since my knee accident last spring. Working on the blog, listening to readers from across the nation keeps me in tip-top shape, mentally if not physically

I enjoy talking to Tavis Smiley. He asks good questions, and he is very simpatico.

Check your local PBS station.

Chiara, a frequent commenter, sent the following summary of the Common Core fight in Ohio:

“Meanwhile, the Common Core fight in Ohio continues. It’s the Tea party lawmakers versus the Republican lawmakers.

“I have no idea why either group cares at all what is taught in Ohio public schools, because of both parties had their wish, there wouldn’t be any public schools at all.

“I’m flattered by all this sudden concern, but since the second this political battle is over they’ll be returning to either bashing public schools or selling them, I don’t care which side “wins”. I’m rooting for injuries.”

Politico.com reports on Rhode Island governor’s race.

Teachers favor Clay Pell, whose grandfather established the Pell grant program. Pell opposes standardized testing as a graduation requirement.

The other candidates are Providence Mayor Angel Taveras, who supported the mass firing of teachers and charter schools. He was endorsed by DFER. And Gina Raimondo, who “is reviled by public-sector workers because she pushed cuts to their retirement benefits in an effort to stabilize the state pension system.

Stephanie Simon breaks down the three-way race: http://politico.pro/1tDh0ge.

My view: vote for Pell. RI has suffered enough disruption at the hands of corporate reformers.

Katie Osgood warns not to celebrate Teach for America’s drive to recruit more corps members of color.

Here are some of her reasons:

“TFA has a direct tie to the overall reduction in teachers of color in schools. The black middle class is shrinking, and TFA’s anti-union stance and its attacks on the teaching profession are inextricably linked. Current education policies-which TFA aggressively promotes-are forcing far more black educators OUT of the classroom than TFA could ever put back in. Many black educators site the worsening working conditions, the loss of job protections which disproportionately affect African American teachers, and the effects of neoliberal edreform policies around school closings, turnarounds, and charter proliferation as reasons why many are leaving/being forced to leave the profession. TFA spouts the virtues of teachers of color out of one side of their mouth while they spit on veteran black educators out of the other. This loss of black educators was perhaps most dramatically seen in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina when TFA helped illegally displace thousands of veteran black educators-most from the communities where they teach.” Go to the article to see the links.

“TFA exacerbates inequalities for students of color. TFA novices begin their meager two years with less than 20 hours of practice in front of children, even for students with special needs. Regardless of the racial/socio-economic background of their novices, TFA is offering our neediest kids uncertified, underprepared, short-term novices in lieu of professional educators.”

TFA itself has an “elitist, white, middle-class normative culture.”

“TFA practices disaster capitalism which is devastating communities of color. Teach For America is supported and funded by the very forces which caused the financial crisis throwing many families of color into foreclosure, bankruptcy, even homelessness, which refuse to pay workers fair wages thereby growing poverty, and are increasing inequality today. When your largest funders are companies like Walmart, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs, you do not get to pretend to speak for the oppressed and disenfranchised.”

She adds:

“On a personal note, I recently returned to the Chicago Public Schools and now teach in a school on Chicago’s southside where over 90% of the teachers are African American women. These veteran black educators have gone through the chaos of school closings, many grew up in and still live in the community offering a wealth of knowlege, and are some of the most amazing teachers I have ever met. We also have one TFA teacher. While a lovely young lady and a person of color, she comes from out of state, is new to Chicago, is not trained for the special education position she was placed in, and is there because the last TFAer left after his two years were up. This is not a solution.”

Audrey Amrein-Beardsley posted a guest blog by a rising star in the Academy, Jimmy Scherrer of North Carolina State University, who previously taught in LAUSD.

Scherrer wrote:

“As someone who works with students in poverty [see also a recent article Scherrer wrote in the highly esteemed, peer-reviewed Educational Researcher], I am deeply troubled by the use of status measures—the raw scores of standardized assessments—for accountability purposes. The relationship between SES and standardized assessment scores is well known. Thus, using status measures for accountability purposes incentivizes teachers to work in the most advantaged schools.

“So, I am pleased with the increasing number of accountability systems that are moving away from status measures. In their place, systems seem to be favoring value-added estimates. In theory, this is a significant improvement. However, the manner in which the models are currently being used and how the estimates are currently being interpreted is intellectually criminal. The models’ limitations are obvious. But, as a learning scientist, what’s most alarming is the increasing use of the estimates generated by value-added models as a proxy for “effective” teaching…..”

“Typically, research studies on teaching and learning are framed using one of three perspectives: the behaviorist, the cognitivist, and the situative. Each perspective is associated with a different grain size. The behaviorist perspective focuses on basic skills, such as arithmetic. The cognitivist perspective focuses on conceptual understanding, such as making connections between addition and multiplication. The situative perspective focuses on practices, such as the ability to make and test conjectures. Effective teaching includes providing opportunities for students to strengthen each focus. However, traditional standardized assessments mainly contain questions that are crafted from a behaviorist perspective. The conceptual understanding that is highlighted in the cognitivist perspective and the participation in practices that is highlighted in the situative perspective are not captured on traditional standardized assessments. Thus, the only valid inference that can be made from a value-added estimate is about a teacher’s ability to teach the basic skills and knowledge associated with the behaviorist perspective.”

This, he writes, is “intellectually criminal” and “intellectually lazy.”

Tell it! VAM is Junk Science.

Plunderbund reports on the disputes between the school board and the teachers in Reynoldburg, Ohio.

The district gets high ratings from the state, even though poverty has steadily increased in the student body and nearly half the students live in poverty. Yet despite these accomplishments, the school board has not kept pace with teachers’ salaries and is now making a divisive contract offer.

Plunderbund writes:

“Reynoldsburg has consistently performed among the top school districts in Ohio, and over the past four years has shown continued improvement based on reporting by the Ohio Department of Education. In 2010, the district received a rating of “Effective”. In the three succeeding years, the district advanced to receive ratings of “Excellent”, then “Excellent with Distinction”, and then received a grade of “A” on the state’s new report card last year. In all three of those years, the district met 100% of the state’s performance indicators.

“Even more impressive, the teachers in Reynoldsburg have accomplished this feat with a changing student population – specifically an increase in the number of students living in poverty of over 10% (from 37.6% to 47.9%). With socioeconomic status being a huge factor in student achievement, such gains on state indicators simply cannot be ignored.

“Instead of recognizing these accomplishments on the part of the teaching staff, the Reynoldsburg School Board has chosen to engage in negotiation tactics designed to divide the teaching staff, implying that a great disparity exists among the teaching ranks. The performance of the district as a whole contradicts that notion.”

Nonetheless the school board is trying to drive a wedge among teachers by changing health benefits based on marital status.

“If Reynoldsburg truly wants to recruit good teachers and retain the excellent teachers they already have (as evidenced by the district’s improving performance), then the School Board should quit messing around and seriously reflect on how their actions are driving away experienced teachers. Instead of eliminating benefits packages that, by their own admission, most other districts have in place, they should retain the benefits for married teachers so that young, talented unmarried teachers don’t feel the need to seek employment in a district that has a better benefits package. That’s part of retaining teachers in a competitive environment, especially when the salary schedule is so similar.

“And regarding the salary schedule, they should seek to increase it across the board, but especially for the large number of teachers with Master’s degrees who should be most tempted to look to competing districts that will pay them more for that extra experience (that may also help pay off the student loans required to obtain the degree).

“The Reynoldsburg School Board thinks it is being innovative and forward thinking in trying to attract and retain teachers, but their misguided information, deceptive marketing, and lack of understanding of the “competitive teaching marketplace” has them driving a wedge between the excellent teachers that they already have employed in the district and instead is driving their best teachers away.

“Instead of playing games, the Reynoldsburg School Board should listen to the teachers who are leading the way in improving the district’s overall performance. While School Board members come and go, it’s the teachers who will be there for decades, continuing to have a positive influence on the lives of the children and families of Reynoldsburg.”

Bob Hardt, NY 1’s editorial director, wrote that Cuomo should grow up and act like a Governor, not a bully.

He was especially appalled by Cuomo’s behavior at the Labor Day parade, where he refused to shake Teachout’s hand and no matter how hard she tried to reach across to do so, Cuomo was surrounded by other officials and bodyguards determined to prevent a face-to-face encounter, or Heaven forbid, a handshake.

What the event showed is that Teachout has courage and dignity–she kept smiling no matter how many times she was pushed away–and Cuomo showed he is afraid of her. No class.

Hardt wrote:

Life really is like high school – it’s just that the stakes keep getting bigger.

After unsuccessfully going to court to try to stop tomorrow’s Democratic primary from happening, Governor Cuomo and his running mate, Kathy Hochul, pulled off their best King and Queen of the Prom behavior this weekend, pretending that their opponents, Zephyr Teachout and Tim Wu, didn’t exist. Hochul got downright weird at the Labor Day parade in Manhattan on Saturday, when she literally turned her back on Teachout when she tried to shake her hand.

It was a symbolic moment that perfectly captured Cuomo’s response to dissatisfaction in the liberal wing of his party by just pretending that it isn’t there. After the primary, the governor plans on wooing (or is it Wu-ing?) those voters back when he faces the Republican-Conservative bugaboo of Rob Astorino in November.

But it’s not really smart or courageous by the governor to ignore members of his party who think he gave public employees the short end of the stick or want him to ban hydrofracking. Teachout and Wu aren’t the standard tinfoil-helmet-wearing minor candidates as much as Cuomo and Hochul want them to be. They’ve received numerous endorsements and are getting traction across the state. Why not explain why you think their ideas are out of step with the state rather than hide from them?

After The New York Times’ devastating article on the governor’s behavior surrounding his anti-corruption commission in which Cuomo’s team appeared thuggish, maybe it’s smart not for top Cuomo aide Joe Percoco not to look like he’s going to tackle Teachout at this weekend’s parade.

Bullying your way through the primary china shop will get you a messy win – but it’s not the most artful way to go through politics. There’s nothing wrong with explaining yourself to voters in forums like debates or at least mentioning your opponent by name.

With Primary Day approaching tomorrow, it’s time for both Andrew Cuomo and Kathy Hochul to stay after school.