Yesterday Georgians voted for state superintendent of schools. The Network for Public Education endosed Valarie Wilson, a former school board member from Decatur. After surveying all the candidates, NPE concluded that Wilson would be a strong leader for public schools and children.
In a crowded field, Wilson finished first with 32%, and will be in a runoff with the runner-up, who received 26% and supports the choice-loving conservative establishment. Choice in the South promotes segregation.
Over the years, we have seen a steady dumbing down of American culture, especially in the mass media. Whether newspapers, radio, or television, we have lost many of our well-educated, cultured, well-informed thinkers. Often they have been replaced by shock jocks, ranting talk show hosts, and an entire cable channel devoted to trashing liberals, liberal social programs, and labor unions.
I miss Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and dozens of other smart journalists who brought more than their opinions to their journalism. Bill Moyers is one of that breed. We need more.
Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots. I used to see a lot of this in rightwing think tanks, where people seized gleefully on every negative statistic to prove what a bad country this is; how horrible our public schools are; how dumb our teachers are; how we are doomed. Michelle Rhee’s advertisements often make me think she really hates this country, that no one is smart enough or good enough for her. .
All of this is a long-winded way of disassociating myself from Glen Beck’s screed against Common Core and public education. It is called “Conform: Exposing the Truth about Common Core and Public Education.”
Here is a review by Hilary Tone of Media Matters that gives you an idea of how false and hysterical this book is. It is clear that Beck did not read “Reign of Error.” I won’t be reviewing “Conform.” I am not interested in reading or writing about crazy rightwing attacks on our great American tradition of public education or on our nation.
In the same vein as the one now being mined by Glenn Beck is a video about a Florida legislator denouncing the Common Core because it will make all children gay. Seriously.
This is crazy stuff, and it makes it difficult if not impossible to have a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of the Common Core. The Common Core is not wicked, evil, or dangerous, nor are those who wrote it.
Perhaps my critique of Common Core is too sophisticated for those who want simplistic answers. I don’t condemn those who want to use Common Core. I don’t think they are wrong or unAmerican. If they like it, they should use it.
My advice to states that want to use it, who think it is better than what they do now, is this:
1. Convene your best classroom teachers and review CCSS. Fix whatever needs fixing. Recognize that not all students learn at the same pace. Leave time for play in K-3.
2. Do not use the federally funded tests. Do not spend billions on hardware and software for testing. Let teachers write their own tests. Use standardized tests sparingly, like a state-level NAEP, to establish trends, not to label or rank children and teachers.
3. Do not use results of CC to produce ratings to “measure” teacher quality. Study after study, report after report warns that this is a very bad idea that will harm the quality of education by focusing too much on standardized tests, narrowing the curriculum, and forcing teachers to teach to the tests.
4. Do not let your judgement be clouded by people who make hysterical claims about the standards or those who wrote them.
NEWS RELEASE
FOR EMBARGOED RELEASE CONTACT: Stephanie Gadlin
Midnight, May 21, 2014 312/329-6250
New CTU report analyzes massive public school closings on one-year anniversary
“Twelve Months Later: The Impact of School Closings in Chicago” examines myriad of CPS’s Broken Promises
CHICAGO—The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) released today a report on the state of Chicago Public Schools (CPS) one year after the Board of Education (BOE) voted to close 49 elementary schools and one high school program, the largest, one-time school closing action in U.S. history and a decision made in the wake of massive opposition and protests throughout the city of Chicago.
The study, titled “Twelve Months Later: The Impact of School Closings in Chicago,” looks at what happened as a result of the mass school closings of 2013, and answers such questions as: Were CPS promises for receiving schools kept? How much money was saved? Did resources increase at affected schools? Have services increased for special education students at consolidated schools.
On May 22, 2013, Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s handpicked BOE shuttered 50 neighborhood school communities, “turned around” five schools and co-located 17 others. Faced with widespread opposition to this action, CPS promised hundreds of millions of dollars in capital improvements and transition supports for schools receiving students from closed schools. CTU examination of the evidence has found, however, that promises made to receiving schools were hollow in many cases and only partially fulfilled in others. Among the findings:
· Receiving schools are still disproportionately under-resourced compared to other elementary schools.
· Students were moved to schools with libraries, but funds weren’t available to hire librarians. Just 38% of receiving schools have librarians on staff, whereas across CPS, 55% of elementary schools have librarians.
· Computer labs were upgraded at receiving schools but only one-fifth of these schools have technology teachers.
· CPS touted iPads for all receiving-school students, but included few related professional learning opportunities for teachers.
· CPS spent millions on large-scale programmatic changes at 30 elementary schools, but the success and continued funding of STEM and IB programs remain to be seen.
“Shuttering our schools was touted as a hard and difficult choice by the mayor and the Board, but this was the easy, draconian choice,” said CTU President Karen GJ Lewis. “Parents, teachers, and the public demanded resources and supports for these education communities. Sadly, by making promises that remain unfulfilled, these schools and the students they serve have been dealt yet another blow—from failed policy to broken promises.”
For this report, the CTU interviewed teachers from seven of the receiving schools to gather information about the fulfilment of CPS promises. Additionally, researchers reviewed CPS material on the school closures, operating and capital budget documents, position files, vacancy reports, class size data, and other public data.
###
Mercedes Schneider here reviews the transcript of a board meeting of Pearson in April 2014. Anyone can read the transcript but is allowed to quote only 400 words. That was Mercedes’ challenge.
What struck her was that Pearson’s business plan is heavily tied to adoption of CCSS. In this case, contrary to the assurances of Bill Gates, national standardization promotes monopolization, not competition.
What struck me was that the leaders of this behemoth, now taking control of large sectors of American education, had nothing to say about education. The discussion, not surprisingly, was all about profits and business strategy. Who decided to outsource American education?
Peter Greene has determined that some people in the world of education are serious and some are very silly.
Serious people understand that words have consequences. They seek some congruity between their reality, their values, and their goals.
Greene identifies a number of people who are very silly. For example:
“The Hedgemasters backing the charter movement are not serious people. Charters are investment opportunities and educational rhetoric is just ad copy. They are no more serious about finding real educational solutions than General Mills is serious about researching what the most healthy breakfast would really include.
“The Data Overlords are not serious people. Or rather, they’re not serious about education. They are serious about data collection, but it really makes no difference to them whether the education delivered is good or not, just as long as it’s all tagged and bagged.
“The Systems and Government pushers are not serious people. They are sure that if they can get total control of the whole system, it will work the way they imagine it will, and they do not want to be distracted by any evidence to the contrary. The pursuit of excellence should never be derailed by facts, or by the puny lesser humans who get in the way.
“The corporate profiteers are not serious people. When Pearson believes their main problem is bad PR, they show such a disconnect from life on this planet that they cannot be taken as serious people.”
Why have so many silly people taken control of a very serious and important enterprise?
Reader Laura H. Chapman has a provocative critique of the way that money and power has compromised some education leaders. If she looked at the list of prominent education organizations (like ASCD) that have accepted millions from the Gates Foundation to promote Common Core, she would find lots more sludge.
She comments:
Unfortunately this take-over has been aided and abetted by the sludge and compromised integrity of professional organizations that should have an interest in public education. Sludge means slow response to the cascading demand for rating schemes based on flawed metrics. Compromised integrity refers to conflicts of interest and lack of due diligence in looking at federal gift horses in the mouth.
Sludge. Why on earth did the American Statistical Association wait so long to assert that so-called VAM should not be used to judge individual teachers, when that practice began two decades ago and is still promoted by federal policies? http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf
##
Integrity. Why do so-called professionals in education operate in an environment where conflicts of interest no longer matter? One of the directors of Pearson International, serving since 2004, and still serving in 2013 is Susan Fuhrman, president of Teachers College at Columbia University and former head of the National Academy of Education. In 2009 for compensation from Pearson was about $100,000. http://www.pearson.com/content/dam/pearson-corporate/files/cosec/pearson_RA-2009.pdf P. 73
http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2013/06/12/letter-teachers-college-students-slam-tc-president-susan-fuhrman
##
Integrity. Sharon P. Robinson, President of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) representing 800 programs has served on the board of the scandal-ridden for-profit Corinthian Colleges franchise since 2011. The scandals and lawsuits continue. Why is she still in that President of AACTE with compensation at $340,000 in 2012? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/davidhalperin/head-of-teachers-college_b_5078769.html
##
Conflicts of Interest? Why was AACTE so eager to sign on to the professional teacher assessment called edPTA, developed by Stanford scholars. Who in AACTE looked this gift horse from Stanford in the mouth? Why did the Stanford and AACTE outsource the marketing and distribution of edPTA to Pearson for online scoring of teacher candidates? Can either of these non-profit creators/endorsers of edPTA explain the Pearson price point— minimally $300 per student teacher—with Pearson’s free-lance scorers paid $70 per assessment? Where can I find a peer-review of the claims about reliability and validity packaged with this whole scheme?
##
Gift Horses. Vanderbilt University has had multi-year grants from USDE to promote pay-for-performance even though research (including their own) has long shown these schemes do not improve school performance or the culture of most workplaces http://www.epi.org/publication/books-teachers_performance_pay_and_accountability/ https://my.vanderbilt.edu/performanceincentives/files/2012/09/Executive-Summary-Final-Report-Experimental-Evidence-from-the-Project-on-Incentives-in-Teaching-2012.pdf p. 6
##
Sludge in Slow Motion. Among many others, Linda Darling-Hammond agreed to consult on the SMARTER tests for the CCSS. I wish she had declined and been the able critic and public intellectual speaking against Arne’s “must test em right now” agenda. Now, according to EdWeek, she sees that “good intentions” are not enough. Among other complications, some foreseeable, are these. The tests must have a price point schools can afford. Short and simple means lower costs, but also non-trivial compromises in validity, reliability, as well as coverage of the CCSS. The on-line plumbing for the tests is not present in all schools. Tests have to be reasonably short. There are limits on the number of days that schools can reserve for these tests and mind-bending issues in scheduling up to six hours of tests—about half of the time originally thought to be necessary for respectable coverage and reliability. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/04/23/29cc-promises.h33.html
####
Enough.
This letter came from Stuart Egan, one of North Carolina’s National Board Certified Teachers. The state has more NBCTs than any other, and almost the lowest salaries of any state. Egan responded to Senator David Curtis’s letter brushing off science tea her Sarah Wiles.
Stuart Egan writes:
I am a high school teacher from Winston-Salem / Forsyth County Schools.
On Monday, May 12, I read an article on WUNC’s website that published a letter (response) written by Sen. David Curtis to a young teacher in the Charlotte area. It can be found on the following link: http://wunc.org/post/teacher-email-legislators-draws-harsh-reply#.U3F64LlKCEE.email. It deserves a public response.
Dear Senator Curtis,
I have given your email response to Ms. Sarah Wiles’s letter entitled “I am embarrassed to confess: I am a teacher” much thought, and I am embarrassed that you represent our state with such an attitude as was displayed. You are right: Teachers do have an incredible influence on students, However, your response only highlighted the uninformed, and, quite frankly, pompous stance that many in the NC legislature have adopted toward public education.
It is obvious that you were blessed to have great teachers in your life to enable you to achieve all that you talk about on your website, davidcurtisforncsenate.com. Think of all those teachers who helped you in elementary school, middle school, high school, undergraduate school and medical school. Clearly, they instilled in you a love of learning that has carried you throughout your life. Your life also seems to center around your faith, which probably was influenced by Sunday school teachers, pastors who went to schools and seminaries, and by the teachings of the greatest of teachers – Jesus Christ.
My concern is that your North Carolina constituents are “picking up on your (negative) attitude” toward the teaching profession. Since you naturally want the support of teachers in the next election cycle, here are my suggestions for what you could investigate and consider. I simply took your original itemized remarks from your “imaginary conversation with a private sector employer” and responded to them.
1. “You (Ms. Wiles) expect to make a lot more than you made as a teacher because everyone knows how poorly compensated teachers are.” Of course any teacher who makes a move to the private sector would expect more monetary compensation. Almost every other profession that requires a similar level of education and training as the teaching profession makes more monetarily than a teacher.
2. “You expect at least eight weeks paid vacation per year because that is what the taxpayers of North Carolina gave you back when you were a poorly compensated teacher.” You mistake eight weeks of vacation with what is actually unemployment. Teachers have 10-month contracts. What you call “vacation” is actually unpaid time that is spent getting renewed certification, professional development, or advanced degrees—all of which are paid with teachers’ own money that gets taxed by the state. Until recently, the only way teachers can get a pay increase is to fund their own advanced education. But even that is no longer the case because of a crusade led by Pat McCrory and Thom Tillis to eliminate advanced-degree pay increases. Would you expect those who get their MBAs or MDs to forego the expected increase in salary? Of course not. Yet many of NC’s legislators seem appalled that teachers would expect the same.
3. “You expect a defined contribution retirement plan that will guarantee you about $35,000 per year for life after working 30 years even if you live to be 104 years old.” It is ironic that you talk about retirement plans for teachers, especially to younger professionals in education. Our retirement is tied to our salary. By law, we have to pay into the system. And don’t misunderstand me; I am grateful to have that. But when my pay stays frozen, my contribution to retirement stays frozen as well. As prices climb and as inflation exerts its influence, what I may get decades down the road probably will not support me and my family. Considering my age, I may not have the Social Security benefits that you will enjoy. In fact, the way it works now is that I pay into a system that will benefit you before I see any return in my own life. It is also ironic that you, too, will receive retirement pay from the state as a legislator, but have much more say about your state pension than I get with mine. If you need reminding, simply reference the following article:http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/02/26/1884711/amid-retirements-state-lawmakers.html.
4. “Your potential employer may tell you that he has heard that most North Carolina workers make less than the national average because we are a low cost-of-living- state, private sector workers making 87% of the national average and teachers making 85% of the national average.” You imply that low teacher salaries are justifiable because of low cost-of-living expenses; however, that logic does not hold water unless you can prove that the cost of living has frozen in North Carolina. It would help to study the relationship of consumer indexes and teacher salaries for NC and the surrounding states. Furthermore, if you want to attract more industry and business to North Carolina, you need to convince companies that their employees’ families will have a good education system and a quality of life based on their productivity and company success instead of the state’s cost of living.
5. “The teachers union has convinced parents that teachers are grossly undercompensated based on a flawed teachers union survey of teacher pay. “ Where is a teacher union in North Carolina? Are you referring to NCAE? That’s not a union; that’s an association. If you want to see how a teachers’ union works, go to Chicago and New York City. Now, those are unions.
Whether you are in Denver, NC, or Denver, CO, you need to understand investing in teacher pay is not to quench some thirst for greed. It is needed to keep the best and most experienced teachers here in North Carolina, teaching our students because those students are the biggest investment we have. Many of them go on to be successful private sector employers. Your website devotes a great deal of space explaining the importance you place on family-centered values. I think the vast majority of NC families believe their children – who are the future of this state – are valuable enough to make teacher pay attractive to the best educators, regardless of the cost of living.
And last, whether you intended it or not, the tone in your response to Ms. Wiles came across as condescending and patronizing. It was not a tone or attitude you would want to witness in a classroom, and it certainly is not an attitude North Carolinians want to witness in their legislators.
Sincerely,
Stuart A. Egan, MAEd., Ed. S., NBCT
West Forsyth High School English Teacher
10-month employee, 12-month educator
Sarah Wiles, a science teacher in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools with six years experience and a master’s degree, sent an email to every member of the North Carolina General Assembly with the subject line: “I am embarrassed to confess: I am a teacher.”
This was her email:
“From: Sarah Wiles
“Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 6:47 PM
“Every year there is a debate on teacher compensation. This is only exacerbates during election years. However, nothing happens. As a sixth year teacher, I have only seen a pay increase once (and then again after plunging myself into debt by earning my Masters in Education). I have attended rallies, joined NCAE, petitioned, and worn red (or blue and white, or whatever color of the rainbow I was required to wear to “show my support’). Nothing ever changes, except my wardrobe. So, that brings me to this one request: leave me alone.
“I am so tired of being lied to about how important I am and how valuable I am. I am also sick and tired of politicians making my profession the center of attention and paying it lip-service by visiting a school, kneeling next to a child, shaking my hand and thanking me, telling the nightly news that I deserve a raise, and then proceeding to speak through the budget that I am not worth it. If you aren’t going to do anything, and you know nothing will change, just leave me alone. I would rather be ignored than disrespected.
“And on the topic of disrespect, our salary is disrespectful. I tutor my own students for free four days a week after school until I have to go to my next job. I tutor outside of school for pay about fifteen hours a week, and that includes weekends. I also babysit. And I manage pools and teach pool operator classes. And, I currently have an application for summer school being reviewed. I get home at eight pm, spend a half an hour with my husband, answer parent emails, fall asleep, and am back at work at seven am the next morning. I have come very accustomed to being disrespected. My students know that no one cares about education because they frequently ask me why I ever made the decision to become a teacher. Honestly, I am running out of answers. Do not misunderstand or misconstrue what I am saying as apathy for my students (I love them more than most adults), but I can no longer defend that North Carolina cares about education because they are not willing to pay for it. It’s a lie and everyone knows it.
“I know that you all will continue talking about how important teachers are and weaving those wonderful words that tax payers love to hear from the people who are “leading” them that make them believe that it isn’t all about the bottom line and that you care about their kids and the public education system. But, I am calling your bluff. If you continue to do nothing even though you can do something, you should be ashamed. I am embarrassed for you. I am embarrassed by you. And, save for my students, I am embarrassed by being a teacher in North Carolina, the doormat of society.”
Sarah Wiles, M.A.Ed.”
She received a response from Senator David Curtis of Denver, North Carolina, which was copied to every other legislator. Note that he addressed her by her first name, which struck me as condescending.
He wrote:
From: Sen. David Curtis
“Date: May 12, 2014 at 9:46:57
“Dear Sarah,
“I have given your e-mail titled “I am embarrassed to confess: I am a teacher” some thought, and these are my ideas. A teacher has an incredible influence on students–for good or for bad. My teachers, coaches, and Boy Scout leaders had a great influence on my decision to go to college which was not a family tradition. My concern is that your students are picking up on your attitude toward the teaching profession. Since you naturally do not want to remain in a profession of which you are ashamed, here are my suggestions for what you should tell your potential new private sector employer:
“1. You expect to make a lot more than you made as a teacher because everyone knows how poorly compensated teachers are.
“2. You expect at least eight weeks paid vacation per year because that is what the taxpayers of North Carolina gave you back when you were a poorly compensated teacher
“3. You expect a defined contribution retirement plan that will guarantee you about $35,000 per year for life after working 30 years even if you live to be 104 years old. Your employer will need to put about $16,000 per year into your retirement plan each year combined with your $2,000 contribution for the next 30 years to achieve this benefit. If he objects, explain to him that a judge has ruled that the taxpayers of North Carolina must provide this benefit to every public school teacher. Surely your new employer wants to give better benefits than the benefits you received as a poorly compensated teacher.
“4. Your potential employer may tell you that he has heard that most North Carolina workers make less than the national average because we are a low cost-of-living- state, private sector workers making 87% of the national average and teachers making 85% of the national average. Tell him that may be true, but to keep that confidential because the teachers union has convinced parents that teachers are grossly undercompensated based on a flawed teachers union survey of teacher pay.
“I support the teacher pay raise but am very concerned that the teachers union has successfully presented to the public a deceptive view of total teacher compensation that is simply not consistent with the facts.
“Sincerely,
“Senator David Curtis”
A letter written by State University of Albany’s Heinz Dieter Meyer and educator Katie Zahedi protested the negative effects of PISA on education goals because of its emphasis on standardized tests and international competition. The letter has been translated into many languages and collected hundreds of signatures from scholars and educators around the world.
The letter was addressed to Andreas Schleicher of OECD, who is director of PISA.
If you wish to sign the letter, it is here.
Dr. Schleicher responded promptly to the letter, saying it was based on “false claims,” and that it has not caused “short term fixes,” as a way for nations to raise their national rankings. Of course, some Americans would say that No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top was driven by the goal of international competition. On this ground, both programs were failures, leading to more testing, more measures to rank and rate students, teachers, and schools.
Since it is impossible to get a unified response from the many who have signed it, Dr. Meyer has invited signatories to submit their own responses, which he will make available on a website.
For now, the best available response to Dr. Schleicher is an article (part of a series) about how PISA has harmed education reform in the nations of East Asia, the putative “winners” of the PISA contest. Zhao calls his series “”How does PISA Put the World at Risk?”
Zhao says if he were a conspiracy theorist, he would think that PISA is a western plot to keep China trapped in an antiquated system, and unable to try the education reforms that would usher in a new era of creativity and entrepreneurship.
“He writes:
“Such a citizenry is urgently needed for China’s successful transition from a labor-intensive economy to one that relies on innovation, a transition China must make for its future development. The Chinese exam-oriented education has long been recognized as the culprit for limiting China’s capacity for producing creative and diverse talents. Just as China’s education reforms began to touch the core of its traditional education—the gaokao or College Entrance Exam and the wide use of testing at all levels of education, PISA announced that the Chinese education is the best in the world. And the exam system, including the gaokao, is glorified as a major contributor to China’s success, making it difficult for the Chinese to continue the battle against testing.”
He writes further:
“If I expanded the conspiracy theory, I could say that PISA is a plot to disrupt all Eastern Asian countries’ serious efforts to develop an education system that cultivates confident, creative, diverse, and happy students. For example, PISA “played a role in the decision to reverse, at least in part, the yutori reform launched at the beginning of the decade,” writes a 2011 OECD document[2]. Yutori kyoiku (roughly translated “relaxed education” or education with some freedom) was a major education reform movement started in the 1980s in Japan. “The yutori reform was based on an emerging consensus that the school system was too rigid and that a new approach was needed to encourage creativity,” observes the OECD document[3]. The major changes included reduction in school days and a 30% cut in the school curriculum. “In addition, the government relaxed grading practices and introduced “integrated learning classes” without textbooks in an effort to help students think independently and reduce the importance of rote learning” [4]. The changes were announced in 1998 and implemented in 2002. “The ultimate desire was to instill in students ‘a zest for learning.’”[5]
“In 2003, Japan’s PISA rankings fell, resulting in a public panic over Japan’s decline in international academic standing. Opponents of the yutori reform seized the moment and blamed the reform for the decline. In response, Japan decided to water down the previous reforms with increase in required topics in standard academic subjects, increase time devoted to these subjects, and introducing national standardized testing in math and Japanese for the first time in 2007.
“Putting someone on a pedestal is an effective way to ensure he does not veer far from his previous behaviors because any deviation could tarnish the bestowed honor. The Chinese call such actions pengsha or “killing with flattery.” Pengsha derives from a story recorded almost 2,000 years ago: A nobleman rides on a beautiful horse and wins great praises from admiring onlookers. Enjoying the flattery, the nobleman keeps on riding till the horse dies from exhaustion.
“PISA has certainly successfully put a number of East Asian education systems on a pedestal and thus constrained their ability and desire to make drastic changes. But they need drastic changes if they wish to truly cultivate the kind of talents needed to become innovative societies that rival the West because the authoritarian East Asian education model leaves little room for creative and unorthodox individuals to pursue their passion, question the authority, and develop their strengths, although it is extremely effective in homogenizing individuals, enforcing compliance, and hence producing great test scores.
“PISA’s claims about progress East Asian education systems have made over the years can further convince them to keep riding their horses. It gives them the illusion that they are moving forward, in the right direction, because their PISA rankings keep going up. But in reality, East Asian education systems have never “risen,” as PISA often claims. They have always been great test takers. Singapore, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong scored extremely well on international tests succ as TIMSS prior to the birth of PISA. Shanghai did not participate in these studies but if it did, it would have scored well.
Ultimately, Yong Zhao abandons the conspiracy theory because PISA does even more harm to the western nations than to the east.
He concludes:
“By attracting poor, developing countries into a senseless academic race, PISA wastes precious resources of these countries. While the 182,000 euros (about US$250,000) participation fee[6] and millions of dollars implementation costs may not be much for developed nations, it can be a huge burden for developing countries. More important, the money can buy a lot more meaningful education resources—pencils, for example—than humiliating PISA rankings or policy advice that cannot be implemented.
“PISA is a good servant but a bad master,” wrote Finnish education scholar Pasi Sahlberg, author of the Finnish Lesson: What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland. Pasi is, as always, wise and generous, but in my mind, PISA is a servant that has turned into a bad master, perhaps by design. As it commands the world to race to fix the old paradigm and forgo opportunities to invent a new one, it puts the entire world at risk.”
My hope is that thousands and thousands of educators add their names to the letter of protest against the false values promoted by PISA.
The studies of value-added measurement keep on coming, and the findings usually show what an utterly absurd idea it to think that teacher quality can be judged by student test scores. In a just world, Arne Duncan would be held accountable for the stupid and harmful theories he has imposed on the nation’s public schools. The U.S. Department of Education has become a malignant force in American education. I cannot think of any time in our nation’s history when public schools and teachers were literally endangered by the mandates coming from Washington, D.C., where the leadership is wholly ignorant of federalism.
This story in Education Week summarizes the latest batch of studies of VAM. some researchers, having made this their area of specialization, continue to prod in hopes of good news.
But look at this:
“In a study that appears in the current issue of the American Educational Research Journal, Noelle A. Paufler and Audrey Amrein-Beardsley, a doctoral candidate and an associate professor at Arizona State University, respectively, conclude that elementary school students are not randomly distributed into classrooms. That finding is significant because random distribution of students is a technical assumption that underlies some value-added models.
“Even when value-added models do account for nonrandom classroom assignment, they typically fail to consider behavior, personality, and other factors that profoundly influenced the classroom-assignment decisions of the 378 Arizona principals surveyed. That, too, can bias value-added results.
“Perhaps most provocative of all are the preliminary results of a study that uses value-added modeling to assess teacher effects on a trait they could not plausibly change, namely, their students’ heights. The results of that study, led by Marianne P. Bitler, an economics professor at the University of California, Irvine, have been presented at multiple academic conferences this year.
The authors found that teachers’ one-year “effects” on student height were nearly as large as their effects upon reading and math. The researchers did not find any correlation between the “value” that teachers “added” to height and the value they added to reading and math. In addition, unlike the reading and math results, which demonstrated some consistency from one year to the next, the height outcomes were not stable over time. The authors suggested that the different properties of the two models offered “some comfort.” Nevertheless, they advised caution.”
So, let’s get this right: teachers’ effects on students’ height were nearly as large as their effect on reading and math.
Perhaps Arne can just arrange to have all teachers fired (except for TFA), close every school (except “no-excuses” charter schools), and turnaround the whole country.
Diane Ravitch's blog 