Archives for the month of: August, 2014

EduShyster sat down with journalist Richard Whitmire to learn about his new book on Rocketship charters. Whitmire’s last book was an admiring portrait of Michelle Rhee.

EduShyster asked about John Danner, the founder of Rocketship, who decided to change the instructional model in only one year. He likes the idea of disruptive change. When asked about this, Whitmire said:

Whitmire: [Rocketship founder and then CEO] John Danner was the one who wanted to do it all in one year, which fits your Silicon Valley theme. His mindset was basically *who cares if people don’t want it? Within a year they’ll recover, everything will be fine and everyone will forget about it.* That turned out to be a very poor fit. But I see a lot of positives too. The way Rocketship was able to build their school buildings, and recruit, develop and promote talent was all very Silicon Valley-oriented and a lot of that turned out well. But obviously this particular change didn’t turn out well.

EduShyster: A Rocketship teacher you interviewed was critical of the decision to switch to huge open classrooms because *there wasn’t any research behind it.* But you almost get the sense that that was the point. Danner doesn’t seem to have had much use for either educational research or history.

Whitmire: Danner thought that educational research was second rate, that it was anecdotal, lessons-learned kind of stuff, and that any decent business would go out of business if it had to rely on the caliber of what we see in education research. It’s hard to argue with him about that. What that model change was supposed to pursue was Danner’s long-running theme of personalized learning, which goes back to his days in Nashville. So you could have one teacher working with a large class of 40 kids but in the same space you’ve got small groups broken out. In theory it was going to work but they couldn’t pull it off.

Danner is still working on the Next Big Thing. It involve Ed-Tech and disruption. And he is sure he has a winner this time.

In Louisiana, a judge turned back the appeal of 17 legislators who wanted to stop the implementation of Common Core and CC testing. The legislators claimed that the state had adopted this set of standards and tests without going through the proper procedures, including hearings. State Commissioner John White said that implementation would proceed. There are more legal challenges in the offing.

Reader Art Seagal comments on the latest, most destructive fads in American education–destructive because they are mandatory and do not permit teacher judgment or professionalism.

Seagal writes:

I just read a telling article in an alumni magazine all about one man’s (Clayton Christensen) business concept – “disruptive innovation”. Sadly, our nation’s children and teachers have become pawns in a corporate-centric world being constantly moved over the chessboard so that opponent’s kings can be check-mated. “Edupreneurs” .. you pick from a string of them – the latest being David Coleman – are trying to play Christensen’s concept (which really is a statement of the obvious put through marketing and given a “brand”) to become the KING – the last man standing – the American Idol – the Survivor – the Bachelorette – you name it and the corporate world is going to find that “ONE PROFIT MAKING IDEAL that is going to be ON TOP (henceforth profitable) rendering everything before it useless. This may work for products??? Think cell phone and landline. But it certainly is not working for the basics of humanity – our quest to learn. Just the mere attempt to try to be the “disruptive innovator” is destroying public education (well there is a lot more contributing to this destruction too like poverty and a failing democratic process on a national level).

I mentioned before.. this era of “guru-ization”. Ravitch totally nails it in this recent article with the revolving door of “next best” and “this way or the highway” style public education that has taken professional control from teachers totally away and put it into the hands of what I will say are wanna be “disruptive innovators”. I am thankful for her existence on a daily basis!!!

We need to bring back teacher control. Yes, teachers who constantly keep updated and read about various education ideas and actually pick and choose those components they professionally feel will merit use in their particular classrooms. When you get a program like Balanced Literacy developed by someone with a lot of ed experience but it suddenly becomes THE ONE PROGRAM in NYC… it serves not to benefit but to disenfranchise because it is expected (no demanded by authorities) to be implemented in a one-size-fits all kind of way. The business model has perpetuated “guruization” by dangling the potential for enormous profit off of “that one idea” that goes forcefully viral. Let’s keep these ideas but not let the corporate world co-opt them!

Coleman’s theories need a good looking at by people who actually have education (not testing experience). Teachers are perfectly capable of looking at his ideas and tossing out everything that does not work. But this is not how it works. They must follow ALL OF IT despite their experience telling them otherwise. Dare I say this but if teachers were allowed to choose from their readings what and how to implement various components of various education ideas… success might be a lot more prevalent. And yes, most teachers I work with WANT TO GO TO PD’s that are not PR brainwashing events but one’s of their choosing that actually help them in the classroom. One fabulous teacher I know, paid on her own dime (as we usually do when we want REAL PD’s) and could not talk enough about a “brain and the young child” conference she attended (led by a neurologist). Instead we are forced to attend conferences where non educators are trained specifically to teach educators and their bosses are getting heaps of money to inflict nonsense on these teachers. These trainers never can answer the nitty gritty real questions that teachers ask because they have not had the requisite classroom experience. And quite often they are charged with selling their company’s “brand”. The superintendents meanwhile get to “check off” that their county’s teachers have been provided “essential training” from their superintendent’s “check-list” that satisfies likely a govt entity that provides funding to their county! Junk food PD’s.


I feel sorry for our “down under” friends… their govt.’s willingness to follow the US public education model truly will put their nation’s most valuable (their young) “down and under”.

Paul Thomas says that events are moving swiftly, and we must move with them.

When the corporate reform movement started, educators were taken by surprise and treated like children. When did it start? Was it the accountability movement that began after “A Nation at Risk” in 1983? Was it the passage of No Child Left Behind in 2001? Or the election of Michael Bloomberg in 2001 and years of pointing to the New York City “miracle”? Or the appointment in 2007 of Michelle Rhee in 2007, who was the darling of the media? Or the arrival of Race to the Top, which was no better than NCLB? Or the firing of the staff in Central Falls, Rhode Island, and the release of “Waiting for Superman” in 2010?

Thomas writes:

“Most of those accountability years, I would classify as Phase 1, a period characterized by a political monopoly on both public discourse and policy addressing primarily public K-12 education.

“We are now in Phase 2, a time in which (in many ways aided by the rise in social media—Twitter, blogging, Facebook—and the alternative press—AlterNet and Truthout) teachers, professors, and educational scholars have begun to create a resistance to the political, media, and public commitments to recycling false charges of educational failure in order to continue the same failed approaches to education reform again and again.

“In Phase 1, educators were subjected to the role of the child; we were asked to be seen but not heard.

“In Phase 2, adolescence kicked in, and we quite frankly began to experiment with our rebellious selves. In many instances, we have been pitching a fit—a completely warranted tantrum, I believe, but a tantrum nonetheless.”

Now we are in Phase 3, says Thomas. In Phase 3, we shift to substance, not just putting out fires. We are the adults. The reformers may hold the reins of power but they are in retreat as it turns out that none of their ideas actually works.

He says: “In short, as I have argued about the Common Core debate, the resistance has reached a point when we must forefront rational and evidence-based alternatives to a crumbling education reform disaster.

“We must be the adults in the room, the calm in the storm. It won’t be easy, but it is time for the resistance to grow up and take our next step.”

I am all for Phase 3, but I am not sure who will be convinced by rational and evidence-based alternatives. We have always had the evidence. We have known–even the reformers have known–that their reforms are causing a disaster. They believe in disruption as a matter of principle. How do we persuade them to consider reason and evidence? I think that Phase 3 commences when parents and educators wake up and throw the rascals out of office. In state after state, they are attacking public education, teachers , and the principle of equality of educational opportunity. The best way to stop them is to vote them out.

This is hilarious! The Onion reports that Johnson & Johnson will produce a new baby shampoo called “Nothing But Tears,” guaranteed to make babies cry. This will toughen them up. In Valerie Strauss’s blog, “Nothing But Tears” is Common Core infused and endorsed by Emperor Bill Gates. “Because it’s never too early to grow the hell up! Guaranteed kindergarten ready! Extra grit!”

The Chicago Tribune’s poll of voters‘ views of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s school policies showed very low approval for the Mayor. The mayoral election is in February 2015, and it appears that education is Rahm’s weak spot. He favors charter schools and shut down nearly 50 public schools in one fell swoop, an act unprecedented in American history. He has fought bitterly with the Chicago Teachers Union over school funding. It is not working well for him politically, the poll shows.

“Asked about Emanuel’s handling of public schools, 65 percent disapproved, 26 percent approved and 10 percent had no opinion. The latest findings show a shift of 5 percentage points toward disapproval from a Tribune poll in May 2013 — just before a vote by the school board to shut nearly 50 public schools.

“While dissatisfaction with the mayor on education crossed racial lines, it was more intense among African-American voters. Critics contend black neighborhoods were disproportionately targeted for school closings. Fully 77 percent of black voters disapproved of Emanuel’s handling of the city’s schools while only 14 percent approved.”

“Among parents of children in Chicago Public Schools — about one-fifth of those taking part in the survey — nearly 4 out of 5 disapproved of the mayor’s handling of public education while only 19 percent approved. But even those without children in the public schools disapproved at a 62 percent rate, while only 27 percent approved.

“Emanuel’s approach on charters versus neighborhood schools was roundly criticized by voters: 72 percent disagreed with that approach, compared with 18 percent who agreed. African-American voters most severely opposed the policy — at 83 percent — while only 10 percent agreed with Emanuel. Nearly 8 in 10 parents of CPS children also were opposed, as well as 75 percent of female voters, 69 percent of men and 63 percent of whites.”

“Little more than 15 months ago, more than one-third of Chicago voters did not choose a side between Emanuel and the union. The latest poll finds that the bulk of those voters have opted to side with the union: 62 percent, up from 41 percent in May 2013. A total of 23 percent sided with Emanuel, up from 19 percent more than a year ago. Only 7 percent opted to choose neither the union nor the mayor in the new poll.”

The Tribune has been a vocal critic of the CTU. Friday afternoon is traditionally the time to release stories to get minimum attention.

The conclusion to be drawn from this poll is that Rahm is in big trouble because of his hostility to public schools and his devotion to privatization.

The long arm of the Gates Foundation reaches out to create a rating system for Common Core-aligned materials. Not content to have paid for the writing of the CCSS. the evaluation of the CCSS, the implementation of the CCSS, and the promotion of and advocacy for the CCSS, the foundation wants to take the next step to make sure no one uses anything less than stellar CCSS.

 

In politico.com today:

 

 

A ‘CONSUMER REPORTS’ FOR THE COMMON CORE: A new nonprofit funded with $3 million from the Gates Foundation and the Helmsley Charitable Trust launches today with plans to review textbooks and other instructional material for fidelity to the Common Core. EdReports.org will start by bringing in teams of classroom teachers to evaluate K-8 math materials. The curricula will be judged by how well it matches the Common Core and assesses student learning and by whether it offers teachers guidance in reaching children at all levels.The group will post its ratings online and invite response from the publishers. Up first: Pearson’s enVision Math, McGraw-Hill’s Everyday Math, Houghton Mifflin’s Go Math and more than a dozen other widely used curricula. EdReports will turn to high-school math and language arts in future years.

 

Paul Thomas writes that education policies now being decided by elected officials who don’t know that there is a research base, actual evidence that should be considered before acting. Some policies are popular despite the evidence about them, not because of it.

 

Thomas cites two policies, both promoted by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, that are popular these days despite the evidence: charter schools and third-grade retention.

 

The evidence about charter schools is that there are some with high scores, some with low scores, but on average they do not perform better than public schools, and they frequently perform much worse. They are not a  miracle cure. They divert money from the public schools, weakening them, to take a chance on a charter that may fold. Charters are also more segregated than public schools. Why not improve the schools we have rather than create a separate school system that is not better?

 

The third-grade retention policy is a simple idea: If students in third-grade can’t pass a third-grade reading test, they must be held back in third grade. Here too the evidence is strong. Thomas quotes a review of studies about the effects of third grade retention that shows that this policy yields little or no benefit to students and contributes ultimately to higher dropout rates.

 

Thomas encourages his own state of South Carolina to follow the example of Oklahoma, where parents and educators rose up to fight the third-grade retention policy. So determined were they that the legislature overwhelmingly voted to abolish the policy. Students who have not learned to read by the end of third grade need extra help, not a repetition of methods that didn’t work for them.

 

 

 

 

Yesterday, state officials were celebrating the latest test scores. English was flat; math was up a few points.

 

But stop the party!

 

It turns out that the passing mark was lowered.

 

 

Jeffrey Weiss and Matthew Haag report in the Dallas Morning News about a cheating scandal at one of Dallas’s top-rated schools:

“Umphrey Lee Elementary was recognized as one of the best schools in Dallas, based primarily on the students’ STAAR results. But Dallas ISD officials concluded that was a sham, a distinction propped up by teachers feeding students answers on most of the 2012-13 state assessment tests.
Five teachers and an instructional coach resigned while under investigation last October. And by the end of the school 2013-14 school year, the students’ STAAR results had plummeted, dropping the school from the state’s top rating to as low as they go.”

Campbell’s Law strikes again. When test scores are made the measure and the goal, they distort the very thing being measured and incentivize unethical behavior.

When will we ever learn?