Archives for the month of: March, 2014

The New York Daily News reports that pro-charter advocacy groups spent $3.6 million on attack ads against Mayor Bill de Blasio’s decision to deny 3 charter applications to Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy charter chain (while approving 5 of her other applications). They spent these millions while claiming that they could not afford to pay the city rent for use of public space. Current state legislation says the charters “shall pay rent,” not “may pay rent.” De Blasio was acting on behalf of the 94% of students in overcrowded classrooms and overcrowded schools, while Eva’s schools are handsomely funded. She and her supporters believe that the high test scores the students obtain gives them the right to push handicapped children out of their classrooms and schools. Of course, the high test scores are obtained by excluding children with disabilities, taking half as many English language learners, and getting rid of kids with low scores before the testing begins.

The de Blasio administration was completely unprepared for this barrage of attack ads. The mayor never called a  press conference to refute the wild charges against his administration. He appeared on “Morning Joe,” where the talk show hosts battered him with hostile questions. There was no advertising campaign to explain that no one was being “evicted” from the two schools that had not yet opened, or that the one school that was denied the right to expand inside a public school building would have required the eviction of children who are severely disabled.

This note came from Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters:

Charter school lobby spent $3.6m in 3 wks on TV attack ads/claims charters can’t afford rent http://shar.es/RBFWo

This group is funded by the Walton Foundation; Marc Sternberg at DOE made sure Eva got all these co-locations just days before he left for the Walton Foundation.  Watch out other cities and states; this is what you face once you open the floodgates to charters.  They will attack for every dollar and inch of space in your schools.

 

The Tennessee Mama Bears did some research. They wanted to know who was giving all those “likes” to the StudentsFirst Facebook page.

Here is what they found. It is hilarious. 

Check out the graphics.

 

STUDENTSFIRST’S “LIKES” ON FACE BOOK: PATHETIC POPULARITY CONTEST

03/18/2014
 
Picture

 
Momma Bears has often wondered about the gullible people who fall for the StudentsFirst sales pitch.  StudentsFirst is an underhanded, astroturf organization funded by corporate billionaires (HERE and HERE).  How on earth do they have over 75,000 “likes” on Facebook?  The people commenting on their posts obviously don’t agree with them (read them when you need a laugh, it is pretty funny).  They rarely get any “likes” at all on their posts despite having 75,000 “members” on their facebook page.

Well, we found the answer…  those gullible people were really not people at all!!!   

StudentsFirst’s Facebook “likes” were bought from Bangladesh!!!   

Only days before Arne Duncan hailed North Carolina as one of the stars of the Race to the Top, Bill McDiarmid, dean of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, warned that public education was in dire peril in the state. 

Although North Carolina was once renowned as the most forward-looking state in the south, known for fundings its schools and for promoting statewide early childhood education under previous governors, the current governor and legislature seem determined to obliterate the common schools of North Carolina. The mantra of the legislature–echoing Arne Duncan, Bill Gates, Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, and the rest of the false reformers, is that “our schools are broken.”

Their solution: charters and vouchers; Teach for America; flunking third graders who don’t pass a reading test, and other punitive actions. At the same time, they enacted generous corporate tax breaks. The shift of public funds away from public schools to the private sector will exacerbate racial segregation. When the radical extremists took control of the legislature, they made sure to gerrymander their own districts to maintain a majority.

McDiarmid writes:

Concerns about the direction of education in the state are widely shared. Researchers at UNC-Wilmington recently conducted a poll of 2,350 state residents. They found that 94 percent of the respondents believe that education is now headed in the wrong direction in the state. Large majorities disagreed with recent policy decisions: 85 percent disapprove of vouchers for students to attend private schools; 81 percent believe that the state should provide scholarships to talented high school students to attract them to teaching via the Teaching Fellows Program; 96 percent disagree with cutting the salary incentive for teachers to pursue master’s degrees; and 75 percent disagree with eliminating tenure. In sum, probably a very significant majority of North Carolinians disagrees with the current policy direction.

The bad news for those concerned about where we are headed is that a number of key folks in the General Assembly are in “safe seats.” This tends to make legislators less responsive to the concerns of the public. These lawmakers are highly unlikely to be turned out this fall — or perhaps for several elections to come. In 2010, the Republican majority in the Legislature controlled redistricting. They were able to create for themselves election districts that virtually ensured their re-elections and the dominance of their party throughout the decade. Certainly, a number of these folks in the majority are open to conversation and debate about educational policy and attend to non-partisan research. Some who hold key leadership posts appear committed, however, to an agenda intent on replacing public schools with private schools.

Equally discouraging are the changes to the tax code. The majority passed legislation rolling back corporate and individual taxes. A flat 5.8 percent tax on incomes replaced the almost century-old graduated tax schedule. The cost to the state of these changes? Over $1 billion annually. At this rate, North Carolina is well on its way to meeting Grover Norquist’s goal of shrinking the size of government to “where it can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.” As the largest expenditure category in the state budget, education is already fighting for air.

Absent from much of the debate about the move toward privatization is attention to the role of public schooling in a democratic society. Our schools trace their origins back to 19th century public school advocates. Recognizing that an educated citizenry is essential to maintaining a democracy, they believed that mixing of children from all social classes in free “common schools” would lead to a stronger sense of shared civic purpose.

Due to persistent residential segregation, North Carolina failed to achieve the goal of schools where all our children – regardless of social class, race, or family circumstances – learn together. Yet, for many children, school remains the one place where they rub shoulders with others who differ from themselves socially, linguistically, and culturally. Like it or not, they must learn to get along with these “others” – arguably a critical attitude in a diverse democratic society such as ours.

In a recent post on the Shanker Blog, researcher Matt Di Carlo chastises those “reformers” who expect transformational results from educational interventions.

“A recent report from the U.S. Department of Education presented a summary of three recent studies of the differences in the effectiveness of teaching provided advantaged and disadvantaged students (with the former defined in terms of value-added scores, and the latter in terms of subsidized lunch eligibility). The brief characterizes the results of these reports in an accessible manner – that the difference in estimated teaching effectiveness between advantaged and disadvantaged students varied quite widely between districts, but overall is about four percent of the achievement gap in reading and 2-3 percent in math.

“Some observers were not impressed. They wondered why so-called reformers are alienating teachers and hurting students in order to address a mere 2-4 percent improvement in the achievement gap.

“Just to be clear, the 2-4 percent figures describe the gap (and remember that it varies). Whether it can be narrowed or closed – e.g., by improving working conditions or offering incentives or some other means – is a separate issue. Nevertheless, let’s put aside all the substantive aspects surrounding these studies, and the issue of the distribution of teacher quality, and discuss this 2-4 percent thing, as it illustrates what I believe is the among the most important tensions underlying education policy today: Our collective failure to have a reasonable debate about expectations and the power of education policy.”

“Reformers” often boast about miraculous results but those results usually turn out to be the result of skimming, creaming, intensive test prep, or other kinds of manipulation of data. Real change is slow and incremental. Everyone know that but “reformers.”

Gerri K. Songer of the Illinois Township High School, District 214, conducted a Lexile analysis of the PARCC assessment and what she found was very alarming. The reading levels embedded in the assessment are absurdly high. Many young people will fail the PARCC test because it is developmentally inappropriate for high school students.

What exactly is the point of writing a test at a level that large numbers of students are guaranteed to fail? What will be the consequences for their teachers, who will be rated ineffective based on a test that is not written for high school students? As Songer writes: “Efforts can be made by educators to raise the level of reading comprehension, yet there is not much teachers can do to change the natural development of the human brain.” If she is right in her analysis, then PARCC is not only developmentally inappropriate but is designed to fail large numbers of students who will not be able to graduate, to go to college, or to enter a career.

PARCC: A Bar Set Too High
By: Gerri K. Songer, Education Chair – Illinois Township High School District 214
The current state of education is a multi-faceted issue that tends to initiate accusations of blame rather than the generation of solutions. With the rollout of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), I find myself pondering over which category applies to education legislation. For years, the ACT has been the standardized assessment measure used in Illinois. There is much criticism regarding its validity, its effect on college entrance opportunities for students, and more recently, its effect on teacher evaluation. Many students are not able to meet the criteria established by College Readiness Standards for a variety of different reasons. This ‘presumed’ underachievement has resulted in teachers becoming the target for public animosity. I assert that the problem warrants a solution that first begins by examining the assessment.
According to GAINS Education Group, the average Lexile score, a measure used to evaluate text complexity, of text used in the ACT assessment is 1140L, which means students must read at an independent reading level of 1240L in order to comprehend the majority of text utilized in the assessment. If students cannot comprehend the text, then they cannot possibly respond with accuracy even if they are capable of demonstrating the skill being assessed. This would be the equivalent of taking a test in a foreign language. Today, there is no mandatory Lexile testing performed in schools across the country, but based on 23 years of experience working with high school students, I contend that it is very likely many students, particularly those in less affluent areas, do not read at 1240L.
If this is the case with ACT, then what is the average Lexile used by PARCC? After spending much time trying to find an answer to no avail, I analyzed the text of the ELA/Literacy sample items available on the PARCC website.
What I found was that these samples ranged in Lexile from 730-2140L. The sample passages were written at the following Lexiles: 11130L, 1220L, 1370L. To independently read the most complex of these passages, students will need to read at 1470L by April of their junior year.
The following is a list of some of the sample items analyzed:
A Lexile analyzer is available at www.lexile.com to confirm these findings.
The Green Reading Framework provides a chart that shows what this means in terms of instruction.
The framework utilizes three sequences of instruction based on high school entrance reading levels. Please note that in Sequence 2 (Average), to score between 28-32 pts.(CRS), students need to read at an independent reading level of 1275L, yet students following the Common Core sequence would only be reading between 970-1120L. This would in no way be appropriate if the average Lexile used on the PARCC assessment far exceeds this score band with an independent reading level of 1470L.
I also have concerns regarding the developmental appropriateness of the PARCC assessment. The frontal lobe of the brain is not fully developed in human beings until after age twenty. The frontal lobe is the part of the brain that is concerned with reasoning, planning, parts of speech and movement (motor cortex), emotions, and problem-solving. I contend that many students are not yet developmentally able to meet the cognitive requirements necessary to perform complex, multi-step tasks at the level of sophistication in text such as that inherent in the sample items produced by PARCC. I am not at all surprised that the first round of PARCC assessment results show a significant drop in student achievement. Efforts can be made by educators to raise the level of reading comprehension, yet there is not much teachers can do to change the natural development of the human brain.
Steve Cordogan, Director of Research and Evaluation at Township High School District 214 in Illinois, feels, “There are good uses for standardized testing that would provide better validity.” For example, the ACT does not provide valid results since there are not enough questions to validate the scores generated. What can really be inferred from two points growth? He explained that this could simply mean a student answered a couple more questions correctly. The only portions of the ACT assessment that do produce “somewhat” valid results are the math and English sections. Yet, he feels that PARCC may not necessarily be the answer either since it could be testing at a level that is unrealistic for students.
Career readiness information from MetaMetrix shows the following:
LEXILES AND LIFELONG READING:
Federal Tax Form 1260L
Aetna Health Care Discount Form 1360L
GM Protection Plan 1150L
Medical Insurance Benefit Package 1280L
Application for Student Loan 1270L
CD-DVD Player Instructions 1080L
Installing Child Safety Seat 1170L
Microsoft Windows User Manual 1150L
Drivers’ Manual 1220L
READING IN THE WORKPLACE:
Labor 1000L
Service 1050L
Construction 1080L
Craftsman 1100L
Clerk 1110L
Foreman 1200L
Secretary 1250L
Sales 1270L
Supervisor 1270L
Nurse 1310L
Executive 1320L
Teacher 1340L
Accountant 1400L
Scientist 1450L
LEXILE SCORES NEEDED FOR:
Education (11–12) 1130L
Work 1260L
Community College 1295L
University 1395L
Unless the majority of our students plan to become scientists immediately upon graduation, there is no career-related reason to support a target reading comprehension level of 1470L such as that needed to comprehend the sample passages available on the PARCC website. The sample questions would require an independent reading level as high as 2240L.
Also, note that complex text is used when companies prefer that citizens do not receive money in which they may be entitled (Aetna Health Care Discount Form 1360L), and more simplistic text is used when companies want information to be accessible to their patrons (CD-DVD Player Instructions 1080L, Installing Child Safety Seat 1170L). Therefore, it may be more socially responsible to teach students how to effectively and clearly articulate information using a vocabulary that is accessible to the vast majority of the public. Isn’t that what newspapers do?
I question if intelligence can truly be measured by how well students can weed through detailed and complex information. Wouldn’t students actually demonstrate a greater level of intellect if they could speak, read, and write in an organized manner using a vocabulary with which most people in the country can understand? Could PARCC assessment actually turn out to be the instrument used to manifest the resurrection of Babylon – a land of confusion?
In addition to my concern for students, I am very troubled regarding the potential effects this assessment may have on educators. The current teacher evaluation mandated by the state is extremely subjective. I went through the training myself, and I would find it highly unlikely that a cross-section of evaluators could possibly produce the same evaluation results.
In 2016, standardized assessment is to be included as part of a teacher’s evaluation. Teacher evaluation, when combined with PARCC assessment results, equals a potentially grim future for educators. Teachers with over 6-8 years of experience will encounter a significant financial loss if their employment is terminated. Standard practice is that credit be given to new hires for only 6-8 years experience, depending upon the district. Teachers with over 20 years of experience will find that not only their salaries will be devastated (I estimated over a $200,000 loss by the time they could retire from the district in which I am currently employed), but their pension (which may likely already be negatively impacted by current legislation) will also be reduced by over one third of what they had planned for, with very little time to make additional provision. Finally, there are currently no severance packages offered in the public sector, so teachers could find themselves in an extremely bad place within a very short span of time.
If legislators are truly interested in finding solutions for educators, my recommendation is that they more closely examine the problem and respectfully include educators in the decision-making process. Many minds united can solve enormous challenges. Yet, what I see brewing in legislation pertaining to public education today is tragically disturbing. What I am witnessing is top down authoritarian, or Machiavellian, rule through ill-planned, uninformed legislative-making bodies that are looking through the magnifying lens of meticulous detail while missing the big picture that is glaring directly at them. What made Lincoln one of the most successful leaders in the history of this country is that he made an effort to spend time out on the front line. He talked with those of lowest rank and made sure they had what they needed to be successful. He built his people up, rather than tore them down. He offered them strength, rather than left them weak.

Peter Greene noticed in his scan of reports from Arne Duncan that Duncan singled out the super stars of his Race to the Top.

Most surprising of all was that North Carolina won a gold star for improving the teaching profession.

To call this startling is an understatement.

Don’t take my word for it: Read what Duke University Professor Helen Ladd and former New York Times education editor Edward Fiske wrote about the appalling attacks on teachers and on public education in recent years in North Carolina.

Teachers are bailing out of North Carolina because salaries are so low and have not increased since 2008.

The legislature has passed law after law stripping teachers of any and all rights and privileges.

Teachers can no longer get a raise for earning an advanced degree (just shows you what the legislature thinks of education).

The legislature killed off its successful North Carolina Teaching Fellows, which produced well-prepared teachers who made a career of teaching, yet found $5-6 million to bring in Teach for America, guaranteed not to stay in teaching.

North Carolina has one of the worst climates for teachers in the United States, and it has gotten progressively worse over the past three years since hard-right Republicans took control of the legislature and the governorship.

What exactly did Arne find admirable about teaching conditions in North Carolina?

Was he misinformed or does he approve of the war against teachers by the state’s extremists in the legislature and its governor?

The bottom line is that Race to the Top was a waste of $5 billion that might have been used for the arts, for reducing class sizes in needy schools, for opening health clinics, for doing what was actually needed by students and teachers and communities. It could have been a national competition to reward the districts that produced actionable plans for racial integration. Instead, it piled on more testing, demoralized teachers and principals, added tons of paperwork, and rewarded consultants, entrepreneurs, and snake-oil salesmen.

Florida Republicans are rushing through a voucher bill with no accountability for state tests. Even with state tests, it would be a terrible bill as its purpose is to destroy public education.

One leading voucher advocate bluntly told an audience in California that the game plan was to sell the bill as being a benefit to poor minority kids. Of course, that’s a scam. The main goal is to break public education, crush the unions, and fund every backwoods church school where kids can learn 17th century STEM skills.

Critics say it will divert up to $1 billion from community public schools.

Florida is rapidly racing to the bottom. Will Arne Duncan speak out to stop this unconstitutional diversion of public funds to religious schools? Will President Obama?

 

The Chicago Teachers Union is getting politically active on behalf of public education and teachers. It supported candidates who oppose school closings and privatization via charters. Note the lessons: The last one is: “This ain’t Wisconsin.”

 

NEWS RELEASE

IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                   CONTACT:   Stephanie Gadlin

March 19, 2014                                                                                                                            312-329-6250

 

 

LESSONS LEARNED IN PRIMARY 2014

Incumbents seeking to erode retirement security in Chicago had better beware

 

CHICAGO – Throughout this primary season, the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) has been a strong and vocal advocate for voters on the South and West Sides of Chicago—many of whom have been most impacted by the foolishness of education deformers and pension thieves. It is time to stand up to the predatory corporate and political interests that seek to threaten the economic security of thousands of workers. Incumbents seeking to steal our retirement security, beware.

“The Chicago Teachers Union expressed people power this electoral cycle,” said CTU President Karen Lewis.  “We were most successful in creating a platform of educational justice and retirement security that was expressed by our endorsed candidates.  Representative-elect Will Guzzardi amplified our calls for an elected, representative school board, a moratorium on school closings and an end to charter proliferation.

“With our continued support and his ability to turn the issues we’ve long championed into a successful political campaign, he was able to take down the Berrios machine and strike a blow to the top-down political tradition of the Northwest Side,” she said.

While the 26th District race remains contested, it is clear that voters on the South Side have soundly rejected State Rep. Christian “Crown” Mitchell’s anti-working families’ platform. This contest, more than any other this Primary season, exposes the racial and economic fault lines for 2015.

School closings, the campaign for an elected, representative school board and retirement security are important issues that matter well beyond downtown Chicago. It is also clear that education deformers, such as Democrats for Education Reform, Stand For Children, Lester Crown and the We Mean Business PAC will continue to spend millions of dollars to influence Illinois public policy and purchase the loyalty of politicians too compromised to stand up for their constituents.

The only way an incumbent like Mitchell was able to—possibly—squeak by a relatively unknown community leader like Jay Travis was by pandering to predominantly white wards through scare tactics and misinformation about imaginary tax increases. Travis, on the other hand, was able to secure the support of working families that want well-resourced neighborhood schools, retirement security and the right to self-determination thru an elected representative school board. It is also telling that despite having virtually no support beyond parents, students and working class people such as teachers, social workers, secretaries, lunchroom workers, janitors, firefighters, police officers and hospital workers, Travis showed impressive gains against a well-financed incumbent backed by the mayor, the Illinois Speaker of the House, the Cook County Board President, two U.S. congressmen, various aldermen, preachers and other paid political operatives.

Tuesday was only Round One in the 26th District. The die has been cast and the electorate has been energized. The CTU will continue to be dogmatic, clear and protective of publicly funded public education and retirement security. Because of our collective effort, Rep. Christian “Crown” Mitchell has been exposed as a puppet of the oligarchy who gave him nearly a half-million dollars in 2012 and a million dollars in 2014 to secure his pension vote. He continues to accept donations from a group that advocates for the shuttering of neighborhood schools and uses those funds to benefit charter operations and the businesses they run.

LESSONS LEARNED

  • ·         LESSON ONE: The CTU also provided organizers and financial resources that helped secure the Will Guzzardi victory over Toni Berrios in the 39th Legislative District. The CTU’s campaigns echoed strongly in Guzzardi’s winning education platform of saving neighborhood schools and stopping pension theft. It has been more than a decade since a union-supported candidate unseated an incumbent in a primary.

 

  • ·         LESSON TWO: While pollsters and key influencers were predicting a Christian ‘Crown’ Mitchell 10-point–to 12-point blowout in the 26th Legislative District, CTU’s candidate Jay Travis trounced the incumbent in in the 4th Ward (where his political sponsors have the most influence) and she is within just over 400 votes of victory—this despite widespread incidents of intimidation and interference with the democratic process.

 

  • ·         LESSON THREE: The CTU sent a clear message: We will not sit by idly while threats are made to steal the retirement security of our members. The Union has turned nearly 30,000 members into a vast political army that is prepared to educate the public, work precincts, donate money and go to the polls on Election Day.

 

  • ·         LESSON FOUR: There is nothing dead about organized labor. With pundits and pollsters projecting a magnificent landslide for Republican charter booster Bruce Rauner, Kirk Dillard—backed by labor—came within two points of defeating him for the nomination. His near-loss shows that Rauner is an out-of-touch, right-wing billionaire who would put the wealthy, corporations and his special interest buddies ahead of the priorities of Illinois families—job creation and a stronger middle class.

 

  • ·         LESSON FIVE: The CTU extended its influence to Champaign, Illinois, where Carol Ammons has claimed victory in the 103rd Legislative District. Ammons will make equitable access to public education and pension protection pillars of her race in the fall against Republican Kristin Williamson of Urbana. She is also a strong supporter of Fair Tax and drug policy reform.

 

  • ·         LESSON SIX: Parents, teachers and voters in the 26th Ward soundly rejected a massive effort by the school district to convert Ames Middle School into an unnecessary military academy. This victory happened despite tactics used by Ald. Roberto Maldonado, which included mailings, persistent robo-calls, and having students dressed as Marines canvass door to door.

 

  • ·         LESSON SEVEN: The CTU gained valuable field experience, involved hundreds of members in field operations, increased the number of members donating political contributions, and intends to use these increased capacities in future contests. Through the Chicagoans for Economic Security PAC, working families will organize, pool their resources and actively participate in campaigns to defeat the status quo.

 

  • ·         LESSON EIGHT: This ain’t Wisconsin.

 

###

The Chicago Teachers Union represents 30,000 teachers and educational support personnel working in the Chicago Public Schools, and by extension, the more than 400,000 students and families they serve. The CTU is an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers and the Illinois Federation of Teachers and is the third largest teachers local in the United States and the largest local union in Illinois. For more information please visit CTU’s website at www.ctunet.com.

SG:oteg-743-tr

 

In a post called “This Is You Brain on TFA,” Jersey Jazzman scrutinizes an article written by Cami Anderson about her moral courage.

He writes:

“I often get the sense that something happens to the brains of people who do their two years or less at Teach For America and then, rather than continue to teach, go on to “stay in education” as “leaders.” Maybe their self-granted halos are a little too tight.”

Cami Anderson is the superintendent of Newark, appointed by Chris Christie. Her “One Newark” plan will lead to the layoff of hundreds of veteran teachers, most of whom will likely be black. They are likely to be replaced by TFA, whose friends at Goldman Sachs are building new housing for them called “Teachers’ Village” so that the young TFA teachers will have good housing in Newark and live with their peers.

Jersey Jazzman wonders describes what Anderson has done in Newark:

“Apparently, the following acts are exemplars of moral courage:

“Requesting that the state overturn a recent tenure law that was negotiated in good faith by the Newark Teachers Union — a law that seems to be working out well across the rest of the state.

“Implementing a school restructuring plan that disproportionately targets teachers of color, even though there is scant little evidence that plan will do a thing to help student achievement.

“Walking out on a mother because you, and you alone, have decided what is and is not appropriate speech for people who are advocating for their children.

“Suspending principals for daring to exercise their first amendment rights.

“Throwing PTO presidents out of schools and suspending staff because you don’t like what they say on the phone when they’re in the bathroom.

“Reneging on teacher compensation deals that were suspicious to begin with.

“Taking a bow at the biggest speech of the year for your boss, who has said explicitly he does not care about the opinions of those citizens of Newark who dare to disagree with him.

“According to them both, not heeding the summons of the chair of the state’s most important legislative committee on schools, and not answering the emails of the elected representative of your school board.

“All of these acts are so selfless, so noble, so righteous indeed that they deserve a public self-lauding — one where the author can tell us all about her lonely, arduous crusade at her extremely elite college to get more money for her crew team so she could fly to her meets rather than drive.”

To follow the links, read the post:

http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2014/03/this-is-your-brain-on-tfa.html#sthash.3ooqJtld.dpuf

A fascinating article in Education Week describes a verbal tiff between the Council of Chief State School Officers and the leaders of the two major teachers’ unions.

The Chiefs, as they are known, are the state superintendents. CCSSO received at least $32 million from the Gates Foundation to “write” and advocate for the Common Core, and no matter how much parents and teachers complain and demand revisions, the Chiefs “won’t back down.” They made their certainty and intransigence clear to the union leaders.

The AFT and the NEA also were paid millions by Gates to promote the Common Core, but the unions have members and both Randi and Dennis have vocally criticized the implementation of the Common Core. In some states, the rollout has been nothing short of disastrous.

Randi Weingarten was unusually outspoken in criticizing the rush to impose the Common Core, and she warned the Chiefs that the standards were in serious jeopardy. The article makes clear that while Randi is listening to teachers, the Chiefs are not. Their attitude on full display was “full steam ahead, the critics are wrong, there is nothing but anecdote on their side.” You would think they might have reflected just a bit on the terrible results of Common Core testing in New York, where only 3% of English language learners passed the tests, only 5% of children with disabilities, only 16-17% of African American and Hispanic students, and only 31% of all students.

The advocates of Common Core claim that the new standards teach critical thinking and reflection, but there was no evidence of either critical thinking or reflection from the CCSSO or the other organizations paid to promote the standards.

Andrew Ujifusa writes:

“Anxiety over the Common Core State Standards was on full display Tuesday during the Council of Chief State School Officers’ annual legislative conference. Leaders of the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, the nation’s two largest teacher unions, squabbled with state K-12 chiefs over how teachers and the general public perceive the standards, and how well they are being implemented in classrooms.”

Weingarten told those present that they do not understand how angry many parents and educators are. During the discussion, Weingarten “said that in cases like New York state, the poor rollout of the common core had led to “immobilization” among teachers and a distrust that those in positions of authority knew how to do the job right.

“Weingarten added that she expects that many of her members would call for outright opposition to the standards during the AFT’s summer convention, even though both the AFT and NEA support the standards and Weingarten said she wouldn’t back away from the common core.

“On the subject of transitioning to the common core, Weingarten told the chiefs, “The field doesn’t trust the people in this room to have their backs.”

“During the same discussion, NEA President Dennis Van Roekel, while he said the union remained squarely behind the standards themselves, also expressed concern that teachers were not getting enough time to learn the standards themselves, to find common-core aligned curricular materials, and to talk to parents as well as each other.

“Those remarks triggered an irritated response from Massachusetts K-12 chief Mitchell D. Chester, who said that the two national unions seemed to be “condoning” strident and vocal common-core foes “at the peril of those [teachers] who are moving things ahead,” an accusation Weingarten denied……

“Weingarten responded that attacking her for being the messenger of concerns about the standards missed the point, telling the state chiefs, “People think we are doing terrible things to them, parents and teachers alike.”

Kati Haycock of Education Trust defended the Common Core. The Gates Foundation paid Education Trust $2,039,526 to advocate for the Common Core.

Michael Cohen of Achieve, which helped to write the standards, strongly defended them.

Gates has paid many millions to Achieve to write and promote the Common Core:

“Gates money also flowed to Achieve, Inc.; prior to June 2009, Achieve received $23.5 million in Gates funding. Another $13.2 million followed after CCSS creation, with $9.3 million devoted to “building strategic alliances” for CCSS promotion:

“June 2012

Purpose: to strengthen and expand the ADP Network, provide
more support to states for CCSS implementation, and build strategic national
and statewide alliances by engaging directly with key stakeholders
Amount: $9,297,699”