Archives for the month of: May, 2014

A reader sent me this story with this comment: “Bizarro world.”

First Lady Michelle Obama promotes arts education because the arts raise test scores.

The administration said 35 schools would get federal turnaround funding for the arts because early evidence shows that the arts lead to higher math and reading scores.

Time to stop and think. The Bush-Obama high-stakes testing policies have diminished resources, staff, equipment and time for the arts.

The purpose of the arts is not to raise test scores but to express and develop our talents, to enhance our lives, to give us the joy of experience and skill in music and the other arts.

Arts are not a path to picking the right bubble on a standardized test. They are far more valuable than that. The self-discipline required in the arts, the joy of performance is sufficient unto itself.

Arthur H. Camins, the Director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ, sharply critiques current education and social policy. He writes in this post that we have given up efforts to reduce poverty and segregation, policies that would produce the greatest number of young people.

Instead, our nation’s leaders are prepared to divert billions into more testing and Common Core, which is unlikely to reduce inequality.

Camins writes:

“If answers on Common Core assessment questions require supporting evidence, it is only fair that evidence-based reasoning should be an expected feature of public education policy. Apparently such consistency is not required when it comes to political decisions. Sadly, too many policy makers seem more committed to enabling profiteering from the results of poverty than ending it. The testing industry is an excellent example. Education policies sanction and encourage multi-billion dollar testing and test preparation corporations that enable destructive punishment and rewards for educators, gaming the system and sorting of students for competitive access to an increasingly unaffordable post secondary system that perpetuates inequity. State and federal education policies support costly, overly stressful and time consuming high-stakes testing in order to verify and detect small differences within the very large socio-economic disparities we already know exist.”

“Well-designed large-scale assessments can contribute evidence for institutional and program level judgments about quality. However, we do not need to test every student every year for this purpose. Less costly sampling can accomplish this goal. I am not opposed to qualifying exams- if they validly and reliably measure qualities that are directly applicable to their purpose without bias. However, imagine if we shifted the balance of our assessment attention from the summative to the formative. Then we could focus more on becoming better at interpreting daily data from regular class work and use that evidence to help students move their own learning forward. Imagine what else we could accomplish if we spent a significant percentage of our current K-12 and college admission testing expenditures on actually mediating poverty instead of measuring its inevitable effect. Imagine the educational and economic benefit if we invested in putting people to work rebuilding our cities, roads, bridges, schools and parks. Imagine if we put people to work building affordable housing instead of luxury high rises. Imagine the boost to personal spending and the related savings in social service spending if a living wage and full employment prevailed. Imagine the learning benefit to children if their families did not have to worry about health, food and shelter. Imagine if our tax policies favored the common good over wealth accumulation for the 1%ers.

“Such investments are far more logical than the current over-investment in testing and compliance regimes. Education, race and poverty are inextricably intertwined. Let’s do everything we can to improve teaching and learning. More students learning to use evidence to support arguments would be terrific. But, if we want to do something about poverty we need to ensure good jobs at fair wages for the parents of our students. That is where evidence and logical thinking lead.”

$’Way back in the early days of the charter movement, its advocates were certain that these deregulated schools would not only produce better results but they would cost less. Central office bureaucracies wasted resources that could be directed to the classroom. Taxpayers would see significant savings. Win-win-win.

Over time, however, charters leaders changed their tune. They wanted exactly the same public funding as public schools. In some instances, with the help of rich boards, they received more money than public schools.

Recently, the University of Arkansas School Choice Demomstration Project issued a report alleging that charter schools were shortchanged.

Bruce Baker says no.

Contact:
Bruce Baker, (732) 932-7496, x8232, bruce.baker@gse.rutgers.edu
Dan Quinn, (517) 203-2940, dquinn@greatlakescenter.org

Review of Charter School Funding Report Finds Major Flaws

Policymakers should ignore highly flawed report seeking more taxpayer funds for charter schools

EAST LANSING, Mich. (May 20 2014) – A report from the University of Arkansas Department of Education Reform (DER) proclaims large and growing school funding inequities between school district and charter school revenues. The report contends that charter schools are severely disadvantaged relative to traditional local public schools in terms of the revenue they receive. A new academic review of the report finds the report to be of little use for informing public policy and illustrates the problem of attempting to compare “all revenues” between local public district and charter schools.

Bruce Baker, Rutgers University, reviewed the report for the Think Twice think tank review project, published by the National Education Policy Center (NEPC) with funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.

The report, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, written by Meagan Batdorff, Larry Maloney, Jay F. May, Sheree T. Speakman, Patrick J. Wolf, and Albert Cheng, was published by the School Choice Demonstration Project at the University of Arkansas.

The authors of the report claim large and growing inequities between district funding provided through state, local, federal and other sources and charter school revenues from those same sources, even after accounting for differences in student needs.

In his review, Baker finds that the report has one overarching flaw that invalidates all of its findings and conclusions, “the report displays complete lack of understanding of intergovernmental fiscal relationships, which results in the blatantly erroneous assignment of ‘revenues’ between charters and district schools.” Baker further states that the report ignores district funding that passes through district schools to charter schools in most states.

The report also has several smaller shortcomings: (1) it suffers from alarmingly vague documentation; and (2) the report constructs entirely inappropriate comparisons of student population characteristics.

In his review, Baker applies concrete numbers to three jurisdictions and finds miscalculations coupled with other inaccuracies.

The serious flaws in the Charter School Funding report invalidate its conclusions and any subsequent return-on-investment comparisons claiming they’re a better deal because they receive less funding and yet perform as well if not better than traditional public schools.

In conclusion, Baker says “The Charter Funding report reviewed herein fails to meet either the most basic standards of data quality and comparability or methodological rigor. It is therefore unwise to use it to inform charter school policy.”

Find Bruce Baker’s review on the Great Lakes Center website:

Home

Find Charter Funding: Inequity Expands on the web:
http://www.uaedreform.org/charter-funding-inequity-expands/

Think Twice, a project of the National Education Policy Center (NEPC), provides the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. The project is made possible with support from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.

This review is also found on the NEPC website:
http://nepc.colorado.edu

– ### –

The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform.

Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: http://www.greatlakescenter.org.

-/
__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Francesco Portelos, tenured teacher in Néw York City, was just exonerated after a suspension that lasted 826 days. The Néw York City Department of Education tried to fire him, but he refused to leave. Nearly $1 million was spent in this long ordeal. Just recently, Portelos won, was exonerated, given a $10,000 fine for some minor offense, and restored to his classroom. No, wait, he was not restored to his classsropm; he is being rotated from class to class, without an assignment.

Here is the latest:

Subject: Big news from NYC Educator Exile. A Big Score for Teacher Tenure!
From: mrportelos@gmail.com
To: daughtersofbukowski@gmail.com

Good afternoon fellow educators,

Just sharing exciting news here in NYC. After the NYC DOE tried so hard to fire me for over two years, after 826 days they found out they failed. This is why tenure is important. Let the corporate reformers know. Thanks for your support!

DOE vs Portelos Termination Verdict Is In 826 Days After They Took Aim to Fire.

http://wp.me/p31ecs-YI

Francesco A. Portelos
Parent
Educator
IS 49 UFT Chapter Leader
EducatorFightsBack.org
DTOE.org

“In the end, we will not remember the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” -Martin Luther King Jr.
Yu

The City Council sparred with the state-appointed School Reform Commission about how and whether the Philadelphia schools would get enough funding to open in September. Under the current budget, another 1,000 staff may be laid off, and class size will soar over 40.

Neither Governor Corbett NPR the legislature appears willing to help the district, even though they have a constitutional duty to do so.

State leaders are consumed with maintains corporate tax cuts, not saving the children of Pennsylvania.

Rick Cohen admired an article in The Néw Yorker about Cory Booker and Chris Christie’s grand plan to overhaul the schools of Newark, which inspired Cohen to write his own reflections. Cohen has written an informative article about the fate of Mark Zuckerberg’s $100 million gift to Newark. Originally the money was supposed to transform Newark into an all-charter district, a model for the nation. Things didn’t work out as planned, though many hands shared in the largesse. Eventually, the main protagonists moved on. Cory Booker won a senate seat. Chris Christie got distracted by traffic problems. Cami Anderson, Christie’s choice to run the district, comes off as the only “reformer” with any sense. Now, with the election of Ras Baraka as mayor, the prospects for Newark’s transformation seem to have diminished.

Gary Rubinstein, a math teacher, plays the role of the heretic and wonders whether students need more than 5th or 6th grade math unless they plan to be math majors.

His answers: no, maybe, no.

He writes:

“‘No’ because as a Math teacher and a Math lover, I do think that the ‘importance’ of Math is overstated. Like Music and Art, Mathematics is one of the most amazing creations (discoveries?) of mankind and, yes, there are aspects of it — even aspects of the horrible curriculum that has evolved in this country over the past 200 years — which truly expand the mind the way any great piece of Music or Art would.

“But ‘No,’ it isn’t really that ‘important’ in the sense that people could get by in life very well with only knowing up to around 5th grade Math. Come on. Am I the kid who doesn’t know it’s taboo to point out the obvious when the Emperor has no clothes?

“Even for future engineers and even Mathematicians, I think that people who truly love math and who demonstrate an aptitude for it, they should be offered higher math as electives in middle and high school and they would be in great shape to pursue it in college if it were needed for their degree or career.

“But knowing Math, like Algebra, for example, isn’t really something anyone ‘needs’ for college the way that people would ‘need’ to be able to read.”

Or do they?

Watch as Gary debates himself on a matter of great importance.

Laura Chapman writes:

Unfortunately, this next generation of teachers is not just subject to manipulation by Teach for America.

The new EdTPA (Teacher Performance Assessment) is one of the new gatekeepers for entry into teaching. EdTPA was designed by scholars at Stanford. It has been rubber-stamped by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE). AACTE represents 800 teacher education programs..

EdTPA is aligned with the CCSS. It honors direct instruction made evident in video snippets of teaching and plans that prospective teachers submit for scoring. Scoring has been outsourced to Pearson who charges a minimum of $300 per test, while paying $70 per hour to raters of the tests. In early 2014, edTPA was being used in 511 educator preparation programs in 34 states and the District of Columbia. CCSS plus training for direct instruction over authentic education will not just fade away. http://edtpa.aacte.org/about-edtpa

States can use edTAP scores for teacher licensure. Teacher education programs can use the scores for state and national accreditations.

The edTPA scores of graduates, and gains in students’ scores that they produce on the job will now be used to rate the “effectiveness” of teacher education programs. In other words, Obama+Duncan’s flawed K-12 policies are being foisted on teacher education. The Gates’ desire to track student test scores produced by graduates of teacher education programs in on track for becoming the new normal. Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/barack-obama-arne-duncan-teacher-training-education-106013.html#ixzz2zwfJdsRs

it is hard to be optimistic. In addition to EdTPA, other tests for teacher certification require knowledge of the CCSS (e.g. Praxis http://www.ets.org/praxis/ccss). Other certifications of teacher education programs are no less troubling.

For example, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), approved new standards for teacher education in August, 2013. CAEP is a new entity merging NCATE, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education and TEAC the Teacher Education Accreditation Council. In 2013, the merged organizations had accredited over 860 programs. CAEP standards must still be approved by USDE and appear to have been written for that purpose.

The standards from CAEP illustrate how hard it is to bury bad policies, and overcome horrific language about education.

Programs that prepare teachers are now called “providers.” Teachers who graduate are now called “completers.” The CAEP standards rely on 110 uses of the term “impact” to describe what teacher education and teachers are supposed to do. (Ask Diane what “impact” meant for her knee, or consider how ‘impacted” sardines may feel in a can).

Here is CAEP’s Standard 1.4 for teacher education: “Providers ensure that completers demonstrate skills and commitment that afford all P-12 students access to rigorous college-and career-ready standards (e.g., Next Generation Science Standards, National Career Readiness Certificate, Common Core State Standards).” http://caepnet.org/accreditation/standards/standard1/

CAEP Standard 4.1: “The provider documents, using multiple measures, that program completers contribute to an expected level of student-learning growth. Multiple measures shall include all available growth measures (including value-added measures, student-growth percentiles, and student learning and development objectives) required by the state for its teachers and available to educator preparation providers, other state-supported P-12 impact measures, and any other measures employed by the provider.” http://caepnet.org/accreditation/standards/standard4/ This standard is absurd. It requires the use of “measures” that are known to be invalid and unreliable.

CAEP Standard 5.4: “Measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision-making related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction.” http://caepnet.org/accreditation/standards/standard5/

Clearly, the demolition derby on K-12 is expanding to damage the independent voice of faculty in higher education, especially those most directly responsible for teacher education.

The “provider” language signals that alternative paths to teachers preparation are being honored. The 42 member “commission” charged with developing CAEP’s standards was dominated by high-level administrators in education and entrepreneurs who appear to be totally unaware of (or indifferent to) the meaning of due-diligence in developing standards. They ignored sound scholarship that should have informed their work, including extensive peer-reviewed criticisms of the CCSS, value-added and related “growth” measures, as well as all the well-document flaws in industrial strength management strategies from mid-century last.

Damn the torpedos, ignore the evidence, full steam ahead.

Pearson administers a new teacher certification program called edTPA. The acronym stands for Teacher Performance Assessment. Student teachers must pay $300 to be evaluated and tested.

In this article, Alan Singer explains why education faculty and their students reject edTPA.

Although some states are delaying implementation, Arne Duncan is forging ahead to make this process a national requirement.

Singer says his students don’t like edPTA:

“Although it is being used to evaluate student teachers for certification, the TPA in edTPA stands for Teacher Performance Assessment. Student teachers in my seminar suggested a better title would is “Torturous Preposterous Abomination,” although “Toxic Pearson Affliction” was a close runner-up in the voting.

“All of my students passed the edTPA evaluation, including some who I felt were weak. In one case, two student teachers that handed in very similar packages received significantly different scores, which calls into account the reliability of the evaluations.

“Statewide, the passing rate was 83%. One graduate student summed up the way the class felt about the procedure. “The whole process took time away from preparing in advance for future lessons . . . It really just added unneeded stress.”

When Singer testified before an Assembly Committee, he said:

“Did Mike Trout learn to play baseball by writing a fifty to eighty page report explaining how he planned to play baseball, discussing the theories behind the playing of baseball, assessing a video of his playing of baseball, and explaining his plans to improve his playing of baseball?

“Did Pablo Picasso learn to paint by writing a fifty to eighty page report explaining how he planned to paint, discussing the theories behind painting, assessing a video of his painting a picture, and explaining his plans to improve his painting?

“Did you learn to drive a car by writing a fifty to eighty page report explaining how you planned to drive a car, discussing the theories behind driving a car, assessing a video of your driving a car, and explaining your plans to improve your driving?

“Of course the answer in all three cases is a resounding “NO!” You learn to play baseball, paint a picture, or drive a car by playing baseball, painting pictures, and driving cars, not by writing about it.

“Yet Stanford University, Pearson, and New York State are trying to sell the public that you learn to teach, not by teaching, but by writing about it. They also want you to believe that they have perfected a magically algorithm that allows them to quickly, easily, and cheaply assess the writing package and accompanying video and instantly determine who if qualified to teach our children. Maybe they plan to sell the algorithm to Major League Baseball next.

“New York State is currently one of only two states that proposes to use edTPA to determine teacher certification. Not only should New York State postpone the implementation of edTPA, but it should withdraw from the Pearson, SCALE, Stanford project. edTPA distracts student teachers from the learning they must do on how to connect ideas to young people and undermines their preparation as teachers. Instead of learning to teach, they spend the first seven weeks of student teaching preparing their edTPA portfolios and learning to pass the test. Based on preliminary results on the first round of edTPA, most of our student teachers are pretty good at passing tests, so edTPA actually measured nothing.”

The most outspoken opponent of edTPA to date was Barbara Madeloni, a professor at the University of Massachusetts. After she won national attention for her resistance to outsourcing her job to Pearson, she was fired. As Michael Winerip wrote in the New York Times in 2012:

“Under the system being piloted, a for-profit education company hired by the state, like Pearson, would decide licensure based on two 10-minute videos that student teachers submit, as well as their score on a 40-page take-home test.”

“This is something complex and we don’t like seeing it taken out of human hands,” Ms. Madeloni said to me at the time.

“By protesting, she said, “We are putting a stick in the gears.” A total of 67 out of her 68 student teachers refused to submit their videos or take the test during last year’s trial run.

“On May 6, the article appeared in The Times; on May 24, she received a letter saying her contract would not be renewed for the 2013 year.”

Just a few weeks ago, Madeloni was elected president of the 110,000-member Massachusetts Teacher Association.

The times, they are a’changing. Maybe.

A first-grade student died in a Philadelphia school whose nurse was not on duty because of budget cuts.

The child was given CPR and sent by ambulance to a hospital, where he died.

In a story by Daniel Denvir, nurse Amy Smigiel said:

“There is no net for the staff or the children,” she says. “There’s no requirement to have any kind of medical team. It’s my job as the nurse to make sure there’s an emergency plan, and basically it is 911…The equipment isn’t there, nothing is there for them.”

“Smigiel works at Jackson only on Thursdays and every other Friday. Until five years ago, Smigiel says that she was present at Jackson every single day. Smigiel says that she has worked at Jackson for 12 years, and worked for 15 years prior in an emergency room…..

“Philadelphia public schools have long lacked necessary funding, but recent cuts by Gov. Tom Corbett have sent the District into an increasingly dire fiscal crises. As of last fall, there were 179 nurses working in public, private and parochial schools, down from 289 in 2011. In September, sixth-grader Laporshia Massey died of what her father described as an asthma attack after falling sick while no nurse was on duty at Bryant Elementary School. The death caused an outcry against school budget cuts, and Corbett soon released $45 million for the District that had been withheld on the condition of teachers union concessions. Corbett denied that the funding was related to Massey’s death.”

How many more children will die before the Governor and the Legislature are held accountable? Who will press criminal charges against those who endanger the lives of children? Isn’t that what accountability is all about? The officials with the power to safeguard the lives of these children abandoned them. Surely the preservation of lives is more important than test scores and budget savings.