When I heard from Randy Hoover about his new website called “The Teacher-Advocate.com,” I asked him to write a post explaining his hopes and goals. I knew that he could describe it better than I could. Hoover spent 46 years as an educator.
Randy Hoover writes:
A Project to Reanimate Teacher Advocacy
(Teacher-Advocate.com)
Randy L. Hoover, PhD
Emeritus Professor, Youngstown State University
I began teaching in the late 60s, a political science major who never took an education course nor wanted anything to do with teaching or public schools but who fell into a 6th grade social studies teaching job in Madison, Ohio, on the shores of Lake Erie. I will omit the somewhat sordid details of how I got the job and simply say that within a few weeks of encountering my first middle school students, my life took a 180-degree turn for the better, and I never looked back, at least not until recently. To make a very long story very short, I taught public school social studies for twelve years, acquired a master’s degree, and then earned my doctorate specializing in teacher education at The Ohio State University and headed into a temporary one-year job at Youngstown State University that morphed into a 30-year stint.
I loved my profession dearly because it was my calling, but I despised the politicization that began to happen with Reagan’s A Nation at Risk, which later led to No Child Left Behind, followed by Race to the Top, as they became the hitching posts for the reformist, state-level, pseudo accountability systems across America. My early experience in Madison was a time when both NEA and AFT aggressively embraced the philosophy of teacher advocacy, as it was referred to. My induction into the union and its philosophy stand as my baptism into consciously embracing the value of America’s public schools and the legitimacy of their educators. It was a time when the prime directive of my union was teacher advocacy in the noble pursuit of intellectual empowerment and social justice for the children of our public schools.
Though I initially taught undergraduate courses at YSU, my professorial passion lay in teaching graduate studies, and my later years at YSU were spent entirely developing and teaching graduate courses for practicing teachers and administrators. I had always encouraged a sense of teacher and public school advocacy in my students, but as their thoughts and feelings about Ohio’s accountability system became their overwhelming professional concern, I worked diligently to give them more opportunity to learn the critical issues of reform mandates and especially the political realities that shape them.
With every new semester, my students expressed greater concern and more confusion about what was happening to them. They wanted to know why their professional worlds were being so drastically altered for the worse, why they were being singled out as a profession for demonization and ridicule by the media, the public, and both major political parties. Indeed, some of my students were even beginning to believe the rhetoric of reform. Sadly, the only explanations they had were the fragmented, shallow propaganda slogans the reformists were peddling to the media for public consumption. There was simply no reflective critique, no voices challenging No Child Left Behind and the cascading, anti-teacher, anti-public school mandates gushing from the Ohio legislature and the Ohio Department of Education that were inundating them.
For my students working in high-poverty schools, the isolation and alienation was palpable, with very good, dedicated teachers feeling demoralized and abandoned amid the very public, state-mandated accountability reports showing them to be professionally incompetent. Equally disturbing were those in the wealthier schools who were starting to become a bit smug because these same accountability reports portrayed them to be professionally excellent. Neither group understood that teachers in low-performing schools were no more the cause of low performance than those in high-performing schools were of performance success.
I became more and more concerned at how powerless and how far removed my graduate student educators were from even having a clue to the real nature and substance of the school reform mandates, especially in terms of their role as teachers in affecting achievement test outcomes. I tried my best to teach about the accountability mandates, especially the fallacies of the standardized tests as the vehicle for judging schools and their educators. As I did, one thing that became eminently clear was that our unions had failed entirely in educating their memberships as to what was happening. It was sad, but simple: our unions were now accommodating the politics and, to large degree, the mentality of the anti-teacher, anti-public school reform movement. The legacy of teacher advocacy I acquired back in my years in Madison was dead and the ideal of social justice for America’s children abandoned.
While mentally preparing to retire at the end of spring term 2013 after 46 years as an educator, I became starkly aware that teacher education, especially graduate teacher education, was also failing to address the fictions and fallacies of educational reform as well. My own experience and a lot of anecdotal evidence from my colleagues across the country made it clear that schools and colleges of education were just as culpable as were our unions in not providing our students the opportunity to learn the critique of education reform. Thus was born my vision of The Teacher Advocate project (Teacher-Advocate.com).
The Teacher Advocate project is designed to educate public school educators and others who seek a fair, valid, and credible education accountability system and to advance the ideals of intellectual empowerment and social justice through our public schools. The website offers a series of papers, commentaries, and links specifically identifying and addressing the critical issues necessary to understand why and how our test-driven educational accountability systems are replete with invalid metrics and false claims resulting in indefensible and grossly unfair high-stakes consequences for students, educators, and communities. The site is unique in that it is a one-stop source for acquiring most, if not all, the concepts and ideas needed to expose the pseudo accountability of the system and to expose the special interests that pseudo accountability serves.
The resources available in the project enable the reader to deconstruct the language, slogans, and especially the contrived metrics to show how the accountability systems violate both established scientific principles of psychometrics and nationally-accepted ethical standards for educational assessment and evaluation. The site brings together a variety of emerging concepts from different sources such as the false proxy, the metrics machine, and authentic vs. pseudo accountability to illuminate the fallacious arguments of the reform movement. The Teacher Advocate represents many themes, all focused on the principle that the claims, the ratings, and the conclusions that flow from the metrics of any educational accountability system must be demonstrably credible and warranted and also be absent of any political or corporate hidden agendas. The project is a personal reminder to me that being vigilant toward the well being of the public schools and especially their teachers is being vigilant toward social justice and the well being of our nation’s children. My vision is that if knowledge is power, then knowledge of the intricacies of the reformist accountability movement offered in The Teacher Advocate may empower us to become the advocates we must become if public schools and their teachers are to survive.
The Teacher Advocate
Teacher-Advocate.com
Randy might want to look at the new partial release of New York’s CC tests:
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/education/2014/08/06/state-releases-common-core-test-questions/13691775/
Early on, PBS’s John Merrow followed Rhee around with a documentary crew for two years, producing a dozen fawning PBS mini-documentaries about her reign as D.C. schools’ chancellor. Initially, Merrow was a “true believer” in Rhee, until he saw the light years later:
http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=6490
(CAPS are mine, Jack)
———————————————————
JOHN MERROW: “Some of the bloom came off the rose in March 2011 when USA Today reported on a rash of ‘wrong-to-right’ erasures on standardized tests and the Chancellor’s reluctance to investigate. With subsequent tightened test security, Rhee’s dramatic test scores gains have all but disappeared. Consider Aiton Elementary: The year before Ms. Rhee arrived, 18% of Aiton students scored proficient in math and 31% in reading. Scores soared to nearly 60% on her watch, but by 2012 both reading and math scores had plunged more than 40 percentile points.
“But it’s not just the test scores that have gone down. Six years after Michelle Rhee rode into town, THE (Washington, D.C.) PUBLIC SCHOOLS SEEM TO BE WORSE OFF BY ALMOST EVERY CONCEIVABLE MEASURE.
“For teachers, DCPS has become a revolving door. Half of all newly hired teachers (both rookies and experienced teachers) leave within two years; by contrast, the national average is understood to be between three and five years. Veterans haven’t stuck around either. After just two years of Rhee’s reforms, 33% of all teachers on the payroll departed; after 4 years, 52% left.
“It has been a revolving door for principals as well. Ms. Rhee appointed 91 principals in her three years as chancellor, 39 of whom no longer held those jobs in August 2010. Some chose to leave; others, on one-year contracts, were fired for not producing quickly enough. Several schools are reported to have had three principals in three years.
“Child psychiatrists have long known that, to succeed, children need stability. Because many of the District’s children face multiple stresses at home and in their neighborhoods, schools are often that rock. However, in Ms. Rhee’s tumultuous reign, thousands of students attended schools where teachers and principals were essentially interchangeable parts, a situation that must have contributed to the instability rather than alleviating it.”
———————————————————
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Once Merrow changed his tune and started producing a long-form documentary critical of Rhee, Rhee cut loose the leashes on her vicious attack dogs to tear Merrow’s flesh:
http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=7080
———————————————————
JOHN MERROW: “While we were actively investigating Rhee’s response to the erasures for a Frontline documentary, I found myself the victim of a carefully targeted smear campaign. A 10-page letter dated January 24, 2012 and sent to Frontline, the NewsHour, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, accuses me:
” — of “demonstrable and material misrepresentations of fact.”
” — of soliciting funds from “a wide swath of leaders in the education community including opponents of education reform and vocal critics of Michelle Rhee.”
” — of actively seeking “dirt” about Rhee and of hanging up on someone who praised Rhee.
” — of making “false allegations” about Rhee’s response to the widespread erasures.
“The letter, signed by a StudentsFirst Vice President, urges PBS not to broadcast my reporting and closes by noting that “we are discussing our options with our attorneys.”
“According to reliable sources inside StudentsFirst, Anita Dunn organized the carefully targeted smear campaign. Hoping to learn more about her work for Rhee and StudentsFirst, I have called Dunn’s office at least four times but have not been able to interview her. [9]
“Every one of the accusations in the StudentsFirst letter is false, as I painstakingly demonstrated to Frontline, the NewsHour, PBS and CPB. However, ‘The Big Lie’ technique is effective, as others before Dunn have proven, because I spent three weeks marshalling the evidence to refute the charges, three weeks that I could not spend investigating Rhee’s behavior in regards to the erasures.
“It is possible that I lost more than three weeks, because, even with the proof I supplied, I cannot say with certainty that none of the mud stuck. Is it possible that some who received the missive still have lingering doubts about my integrity? I hope not, of course, but I have no way of looking inside the minds of the letter’s recipients.”
————-
It was while researching this documentary, an insider gave Merrow the infamous memo proving that Rhee ignored evidence of administrators’ cheating. Rhee had been bragging about some short-term increases on tests, and the evidence of cheating would have totally discredited these gains… so she buried it.
It only took reading the first 3rd Grade passage called “Sugaring” to incite my anti-Pearson educational aggression! The questions are totally age inappropriate for content and length. In addition, the reading passage contained false information. For example, this statement:
“The best syrup to buy is the one you like the most. The darker the color, the stronger the flavor.”
Any nutritionalist in America (and most shoppers with common insight on food and nutrition will know that B Grade maple syrup contains more nutritional value and therefore would be the “best” choice.
The length and content of this reading passage is obviously designed to confuse, frustrate, and intimidate 8-9 year old 3rd graders. This material could not have been designed by anyone with knowledge of 3rd grade developmental benchmarks.
This is not a valid authentic assessment for children, and the release of this material only confirms what educators already know: Pearson tests are designed for children to fail in order to collect failure data to prove the public schools are failing.
Subjecting children to this crap and intimidation is psychological abuse and needs to banned.
……schools and colleges of education were just as culpable as were our unions in not providing our students the opportunity to learn the critique of education reform.
Thanks for launching this website and thanks to Diane and others for the amplified attention it is getting through the blog-o-sphere. I look forward to seeing the papers there and may have some to contribute.
There is ample evidence that large segments of higher education have been co-opted into forwarding the destruction of public education–and conspicuously schools and colleges of education that have been intimidated with threats of losing student eligibility for federal scholarships unless these schools are accredited via a thoroughly corporatized version of becoming a qualified teacher. Alternative “providers” such as Teach for America and for profit operations are eligible for accreditation.
I have also noted a general retreat from engagement in K-12 issues among higher education faculty who are doing what I have called navel gazing, others might call being ostriches. This is evident in endless parsing of post-post-post theories of deconstruction and such, and a studied ignorance of, and indifference to the econometric turn in education where the ultimate authorities on matters educational are economists, statisticians, and billionaires.
Efforts to secure a place for qualitative research remain important, but they cannot succeed without educators who are also sufficiently skilled in the techniques of data-mongering to offer up informed criticisms of policies based on the “presumed authority” of data. The versions of educational history that seem to be favored are romps through
epistemologies, a luxury of life in the ivory tower, but not nearly as informative and relevant to the perplexities of contemporary education as histories of policy formation, and the consequences of that process.
Dr. Hoover,
I am writing as, a devotee of Diane Ravitch, a new blogger (kaplanforkids.wordpress.com), a former Denver public schools board of Ed member, a native of Youngstown, Ohio, and most proudly, a daughter of the late Dr. Morris Slavin, Professor of History for many decades at YSU. I don’t know if you knew my dad, but he was instrumental in unionizing the faculty there and was a real advocate for the teaching profession among other things.
When I read Diane’s post just now, I wanted to reach out to you. Many ties that bind!
I will look forward to reading your website. If I can offer you examples of the failing reform in Denver, don’t hesitate to call or write. How nice to hear from a YSU professor.
Jeannie Slavin Kaplan
PS I tried reaching you on your website but was unable to do so, hence this comment.
Laura Chapman, you stated that, “…there is ample evidence that large segments of higher education have been co-opted into forwarding the destruction of public education–and conspicuously schools and colleges of education that have been intimidated with threats of losing student eligibility for federal scholarships unless these schools are accredited via a thoroughly corporatized version of becoming a qualified teacher. Alternative “providers” such as Teach for America and for profit operations are eligible for accreditation.
That statement bothers me. Laura, can you reference your position?
Look at the U. of Minn. faculty stand in the article, “Collective Statement Opposing TFA Partnership” http://notfaattheu.wordpress.com
Mark Naison, professor of African American Studies and History at Fordham University, said that he no longer allows TFA to recruit from his classroom …
There is a definite division between administration and professors. Professors develop the curriculum – not the administration. The professors evaluate each other. It is the professors that vote on tenure or dismissal. Administration excesses professors if they are doing something wrong or if the enrollment is low but not for their philosophy. As a group, professors are not going to dumb down standards to appease the administration or govt. The govt., as yet, does not control professors. The NCATE accreditation body is made up primarily of well qualified, ethical professors who won’t permit sub standards in our colleges and universities. Yes, it is the State Ed. Dept. that has to approve a new program but the people writing the new program know more about it than the people at the State Ed. Dept. The State Ed. Dept. stipulates how many credits for a degree but the faculty determine what courses are offered for those credits. The State Dept.’s control is very limited.
In NY state when the State Ed. Dept. changed the State Ed. laws they said that after a program was register by the State it had to be accredited. Three options were open to them: one was NCATE. TEAC or State Ed Dept. The State Ed. Dept. eliminated itself because they couldn’t do it; they couldn’t handle it – too overwhelmed. So it ended up being NCATE or TEAC which now have merged.
We must be vigilant. Once the politicians interfere with higher ed. – threatens to with hold financial support because govt. edicts aren’t followed. That is the time to sue the govt. That is the time when everyone should wake up and take action. When the govt. take control of our higher ed system we are doomed.
Randy, I have a problem with what you say of unions when you stated, “our unions were now accommodating the politics and, to large degree, the mentality of the anti-teacher, anti-public school reform movement. The legacy of teacher advocacy I acquired back in my years in Madison was dead and the ideal of social justice for America’s children abandoned….”
The mind set of union leaders may be very different from the mind set of the union members. Union members need to become self-informed – not via the union leaders. Give union members credit for being intelligent; they are not sheep led to slaughter. Members may need to take a stand against the union leaders if they are asked to go against their informed conscience. It wouldn’t surprise me if union leaders make deals with school administrators but that doesn’t mean that the members have to accept those deals. The problem is with the “Gag Rule” -afraid to speak out against the union leader and administrators for fear of their jobs. That is when the union members must join forces and defy both.
The mind set of union leaders is very different from the mind set of professors. Professors should reign supreme as regards the curriculum. Until now that has been the case – NCATE, the body that accredits the schools are primarily professors. If we can’t trust them who can we trust? We are in deep trouble if we let the govt. control our accreditation body.
I am looking forward to exploring this new website. Living in a high SES area where the teachers still feel a bit isolated from the excesses of corporate reform, I am frustrated on occasion by their ignorance, complacence and indifference. I realize that teaching can be all consuming and the work world seldom expands beyond the school walls (guilty), but none of us can afford to sit on the sidelines.
Professor DeFalco:
“We are in deep trouble if we let the govt. control our accreditation body.” Your conclusion powerfully acknowledges the consequence. What would be your solution or suggestion to disable the common core movement (=business tycoon brainwashes or damages American children’ joy of learning)?
It is always said than done in your statement “if union leaders make deals with school administrators but that doesn’t mean that the members have to accept those deals.” Please remember that educators are not afraid about losing their jobs, but rather losing their teaching licence, or their livelihood of teaching career for real.
Most of all, how do union members defy their union leader who is legally and democratically voted by their members? I guess that union members need to wait until next election! Yes, by then, most of them either retire or pick up other career.
If there is a true democracy, union leader will not be GAGAs (go along to get along) like the disaster of today CCSS in American Public Education. I fully respect for your confidence in placing your trust in the accreditation body. It is just a note to remind you about FDA which approves and disapproves low dose aspirin within 10 years, and much more about genetic modified foods like corn liquid syrup, margarine, all soy products…
We need to trust our own intuition, our conviction in humanity, and our own compassion to do good deed for our other fellows’ beings. Any corporation, government, and party who advocates against the welfare of all sentient beings, cannot be trusted regardless how rich, powerful, and knowledgeable it can be.
In conclusion, I wish that law makers are not for the rich, power, and greedy class. It is very sad to realize that democracy is just a superficial format that the old rich school/class creates to make educators like you to believe that you have the ultimate rights in decision-process making. Back2basic
“We are in deep trouble if we let the govt. control our accreditation body.” Your conclusion powerfully acknowledges the consequence. What would be your solution or suggestion to disable the common core movement (=business tycoon brainwashes or damages American children’ joy of learning)?
Back2Basic, I am not a professor but my husband was a Chair for over 20 years involved with registering courses with the State. He not only coordinated the dept.’s accreditation procedure going to D.C. to defend their “Brief” but he wrote many of the needed documents.
You ask, “What would be your solution or suggestion to disable the common core movement (=business tycoon brainwashes or damages American children’ joy of learning)?”
Keep doing what many people are doing as noted on Dr. Ravitch’s blog- people interacting and sharing ideas and information. We need to be vigilant in informing parents, speaking out at Board and Town meetings, marching, writing to our representatives, and vote out the politicians that support the CC. Because politicians ignored Professor Stotsky and Prof. Milgram we have the Common Core today. When you fire up Mama Bears, wheels start moving. It took just three women in Utah, three women in Oklahoma, Tenn…. to fire up the communities. Two women from Indiana caused an eventual withdrawal from the CC. Mama Bears won’t let their children be abused- states a woman on LI. Where ever I see/meet women with children, I get up on my pedestal. Only a few surprise me that they are unaware but usually the mothers have already been fired up and are encouraged to fight on. If nothing else they get the momentum to opt out.
Hi Mary:
Thank you for your precious time in clarifying and answering my question. I hope that all educators will unite to inform all parents, guardians, and students what is about the consequence behind all long hours of testings without fear of being reprimanded or of losing their teaching licences.
Please inform us, readers in this forum, whether those master minds behind CCSS are successfully invading the post education system? Thanks. May
advocacy is nice, ….action is better.
May,
A literacy professor responded, saying,
“…all faculty in the College of Education are expected to align their course syllabi to the Core standards… ”
But then it is up to the professor how far he/she takes the directives. CC is covered but while the professor covers/explains the Standards, at the same time can explain the problems with the CCSS.
It is up to the voters to get rid of all politicians that support the CCSS including Gov. Cuomo and his commissioner John King.