Archives for the month of: January, 2015

Yesterday I was supposed to fly to Dallas, then drive to Waco to give a lecture tonight. The next night–Wednesday–I was to be the guest of honor at the gala of the Friends of Texas Public Schools. Originally I was going to start the trip today–Tuesday morning–but when I heard that the storm of the century was heading our way, I switched the flight to Monday, to be sure I would arrive in Dallas and not get grounded by the storm.

 

Before I left for the airport yesterday, I checked with American Airlines and made sure that the flight had left Dallas and was on its way to LaGuardia airport in New York City. It was, so the website showed. My flight from New York to Dallas was due to depart at 12:45 pm. I arrived at the airport about 11:30 am. By the time I got to LaGuardia Airport, I received a text message from AA telling me that the flight was delayed by two hours. I checked in, went to the Admirals Club on a day pass, posted a few blog posts, and read the paper. I tried to switch to an earlier flight, but they were full.

 

There was a slight air of panic in the airport, since so many flights had been canceled. Long lines of passengers were trying to find another flight because theirs had been canceled. Passengers heading to Miami learned that their flight had landed at Kennedy airport, and they had to find a way to get there because the airport buses were not running

 

The departure time for my flight kept changing, getting later. When I was standing in line at the desk to check in, at last, the gate agent announced that the flight had been unable to land at LaGuardia due to zero visibility and had been diverted to Boston, where it had landed. That was about 4 pm. I began thinking of giving up and going home. The storm was getting worse. I had to accept the fact that my flight was not there and would not be flying to Dallas. I left the secure area and went to look for a taxi. There were long lines at the taxi stand and no taxis–though one would come along every five minutes. I contacted the car service that brought me and asked if anyone was available to take me home. They found a driver willing to brave the storm and the icy roads, and he was on his way.

 

While waiting for him, I received a text message from AA that my flight was taking off at 5 pm from gate D8. What to do? I called the car service, explained the situation, and they agreed to keep the driver waiting while I found out if my flight was in fact taking off. I checked in again through security and went back to the D terminal. I went to gate D8, and no one was there. I found a gate agent, who said he didn’t know if the flight was coming back. A nearby passenger told me that the flight had landed at Kennedy. At that point, I gave up. I again exited the terminal, found the driver, and headed home. It took an hour and a half to get back, a trip that is usually 30 minutes. Not only was the traffic bumper-to-bumper, but cars were spinning out and some were completely stalled on the icy road.

 

When I finally got home, I checked the AA website and learned that my flight had been canceled. It landed at Kennedy, but went no further.

 

I was so looking forward to speaking at Baylor, seeing my old friend Wes Null, who was going to introduce me, and visiting Waco. It was 75 degrees and sunny in Waco. I deeply regret that I could not meet the leaders of Texas Pastors for Justice. I was very sorry I could not join the Friends of Texas Public Schools for their annual gala.

 

Stuff happens, as we all know. There is much worse that has happened to all of us. I just thought I would share my story of a really bad day at the airport. I was glad I brought a sandwich from home. That was the only thing that was good about my experience yesterday.

At some point during his first term as Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo was called “Governor 1%,” because so many of his policies seemed geared to helping Wall Street and the 1%.

 

In this post, high school teacher Arthur Goldstein points out that Governor Cuomo designated himself the lobbyist for students. But not, says Goldstein, for all students. Not for the student who arrived from another country last week. Not for the student with severe disabilities. Governor Cuomo became the lobbyist and cheerleader for the charter schools, which enroll 3% of the students in New York state. The strong affinity between hedge fund managers and charter schools makes it appear that charter students are a huge sector, but they are not. Just 3%. So Goldstein adds the 1% and the 3% of students in charters and determines that Cuomo is actually Governor 4%.

 

Goldstein writes:

 

Lately, there’s a lot of negative talk about Andrew Cuomo, what with his juvenile efforts to penalize teachers for not having supported his re-election. And let’s face it, most of us took that position simply because he hates us and everything we stand for. Cuomo seems to think think we should look past that and support him anyway.

 

A lot of people call Andrew Cuomo Governor 1%, because he represents the economic interests of only the very wealthy. But the governor has cast himself as a student lobbyist, and in that sense, he may also represent the 3% of NY students who attend charter schools.

 

Sure, you say, he doesn’t represent your students. He doesn’t represent your children. And the way he advocates for his own kids is by sending them to private schools. You don’t think Andrew Cuomo would send his kids to a Moskowitz school, do you? Who really wants their kids subject to endless test prep?…..

 

A friend who works in a building with a colocated Moskowitz Academy told me she saw a kid admonished for coughing. The teacher asked if the kid was dying, and said if he wasn’t, to just get back in line. This is an incredibly callous way to speak to a child, and any teacher who spoke to my kid like this would not welcome my reaction. In fact, Chancellor’s Regulation A-421 protects schoolchildren from verbal abuse. Of course, such protections don’t apply to charter school kids, who can be made to wear orange shirts, veritable dunce caps, for unwelcome behavior. There are no excuses, and basic human functions, like coughing, simply cannot be tolerated.

 

Moskowitz had a hotline to Joel Klein, and she clearly saw her needs as more important than those of public schools. Friends of mine tell me that attitude trickles down to even the students, who have no problem ridiculing the public school kids, even for their handicaps, and whose teachers may even look on as they do so. There is clearly a separate and unequal environment, and it’s bolstered by folks like Andrew Cuomo, who has no qualms about taking millions in contributions from charter supporters. They’re certainly getting their money’s worth.

 

 

Ever since Paul Tough popularized the idea of “grit” (e.g., determination, persistence) in his best-selling book How Children Succeed as the key ingredient in how children can succeed despite their circumstances, grit has entered educational discourse as a remedy for poverty. Character education, always an embedded staple in American education, went explicit. It was not enough to have a code of behavior or discipline, but it became a necessity in some schools to teach grit or character. KIPP, which was a major player in Tough’s book, became an exemplar for teaching “grit” to poor kids.

 

Jeff Snyder of Carleton College signed up to take a month-long online course with Dave Levin, the co-founder of KIPP to learn more about KIPP’s character education program. He was enthusiastic when he started but disillusioned by the time the course ended.

 

First, he asserts, despite the hoopla, no one really knows how to teach character or even grit.

 

Second, it may be impossible to teach character without any relationship to morality. The current approach, he writes, “unwittingly promotes an amoral and careerist “looking out for number one” point-of-view. Never before has character education been so completely untethered from morals, values, and ethics.” He suggests that fraudster Bernie Madoff had “grit,” he was certainly hard-working and persistent, but he lacked morality.

 

Third, this mode of education drastically constricts the overall purpose of education. Grit is supposed to facilitate college and career readiness. It is supposed to close the achievement gap. It is utilitarian. It drives towards certain goals and necessarily overlooks other goals of schooling. Snyder writes: “Gone are any traditional concerns with good and evil or citizenship and the commonweal. Gone, too, the impetus to bring youngsters into the fold of a community that is larger than themselves—a hopelessly outdated sentiment, according to the new character education evangelists. Virtue is no longer its own reward.”

Robert Cotto, Jr., an elected member of the Hartford (CT) board of education, says that the state could save millions of dollars by reducing testing. Annual testing has been a waste of money. Before No Child Left Behind, Connecticut tested children in grades 4, 6, 8, and 10. Now it tests every child in 3-8 every year.

“Reducing the tests that students take in each subject to only grades four, six, eight, and ten could save millions of dollars. The funds saved could help limit any budget cuts that will affect communities across the state, particularly for the most vulnerable children and families. Cutting testing in this way could also result in yearly savings of up to $9.5 million. That’s half of current state spending to administer the tests.

“At best, the evidence is mixed regarding the impact of spending more on testing and ratcheting up punishments. Here are some trends:

“Same data: With the exception of a few new features, the State reports and uses nearly the same type of test information today as it did more than a decade ago.

“Addition through subtraction: Increases in test results over the last decade didn’t happen until students with disabilities (mostly low-income, Black and Latino children) were removed from regular tests.

“Same disparities: The results of the “low-stakes,” sample-based National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) have shown high overall test results of children in Connecticut, but little diminishing of race and class-based disparities. This historical pattern remains even after more than a decade of increased testing and punishments.

“Collateral damage: Curriculum hours in Connecticut narrowed to focus on the tested subjects. Students spent more time taking and practicing for tests throughout the year, taking away time for instruction.

“The State now uses the test results to rate students, schools, districts, and teachers.

“This isn’t educational progress.”

What really matters, he writes, is support for students, families, and communities. That’s a far better investment than high-stakes bubble tests.

I received this email from a friend:

————————-

“Hey everyone! I’m looking for contributors for Teachers’ Lounge, a blog from PBS NewsHour by teachers on important topics in education:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/tag/teachers-lounge/

“This is a fairly new blog and we’re very flexible and open to pitches.
Generally, we’re interested in stories that have a national angle on timely
education issues.

“Feel free to let the educators in your life know about this–I’d love to
hear from them anytime! They can contact me directly at csegal@newshour.org.”


Corinne Segal

Editor, PBS NewsHour Extra

The U. S. Department of Education is forcing Maine to use junk science for teacher evaluations. The legislature enacted a teacher evaluation program, but it was not tough enough for the Feds, says Politico.

“MAINE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: Education officials in the Pine Tree State are warning that Maine could lose its No Child Left Behind waiver if the state legislature doesn’t take swift action to strengthen its teacher evaluations. The department has aligned itself with the feds in insisting that students’ performance on state assessments be a significant factor in teacher ratings. But the legislature has sided with teachers unions in demanding a more flexible framework. Its rules do call for evaluations to include measures of student learning. But those measures don’t have to incorporate state test scores. Instead, local committees made up mostly of teachers can come up with their own metrics (within certain parameters), such as students with disabilities’ progress toward IEP goals.

– That’s not good enough, Assistant Secretary Deborah Delisle told Maine officials in a letter late last year. After multiple conversations with Delisle’s team, state officials have drafted a bill that they say would meet federal expectations standards and save Maine’s waiver. But it’s far from clear that the legislature will go along. In a recent blog post, state Rep. Brian Hubbell, a Democrat, wrote that federal concerns “may be addressed more productively simply by clarifying Maine’s process.” Delisle’s letter: http://politico.pro/1yHOZpf.

“- Even as debate unfolds in Congress about repealing NCLB, Maine officials say they’re determined to renew their waiver to ensure stability for schools. “It puts departments like ours in a frustrating position when we know what the feds expect and spend months and even years putting aligned systems in place, only to have our legislature – often under great pressure from the teachers union – insist on watering those down in the 11th hour,” department spokeswoman Samantha Warren said.”

Parents and educators often ask, “What can we do to stop high-stakes testing and other fraudulent “reforms?” There is a clear answer: Organize. Resist. Band with others to let your school board and elected officials know that you will not collaborate with policies that are harmful to children and to public schools. Tell them you will not feed your child to the Machine that tests, ranks, and grades children for no purpose other than grading the teacher and generating data.

As a reader wrote yesterday, Néw Jersey is doing just that.

She writes:

“New Jersey is waking up and organizing against high stakes testing and other harmful policies of so-called ed reform.

“As reported by Save Our Schools NJ on its facebook page, at least 40 towns’ School Boards have recently passed humane opt-out/refusal policies, including:

“Bloomfield, Delran, Millburn, Montville, North Brunswick, Princeton, Robbinsville, Bernards Township, Black Horse Pike Regional, Bordentown Regional, Bueana Regional, Byram Township, Clinton Township, Delsea Regional High School District, East Hanover Township, East Windsor Regional, Elmwood Park, Evesham Township, Gloucester Township, Gloucester County Institute of Technology, Gloucester Coutny Special Services Schools, Little Egg Harbor, Livingston, Mahwah Township, Montville, Morris, Morris Hills Regional, Neptune Township, Pemeberton Township, Randolph, Somerset Hills, Southern Regional, Stafford Township, Sewdesboro, Township of Ocean, Union Township, Wall Townshhip, Washington Borough, Washington Township (Bergen), Woodbridge Township.

“Montclair NJ’s BOE is slated to vote on a humane opt policy Monday night, 1/26/15.

“(Parents should ask their districts about these directly, since districts may keep policies quiet so as not to inform parents as is reported here http://www.nj.com/education/2015/01/what_happens_if_nj_students_dont_take_the_parcc.html )

“Since Montclair Cares About Schools organized, a total of 14 towns have spontaneously organized their own “Cares About Schools” groups, including Highland Park, South Brunswick, RIdgewood, North Arlington, Florham Park, Nutley, East WIndsor, Verona, Manalapan-Englishtown, Dunellen, Howell, Millburn, Montville. Many of these groups are on facebook.

“Showings of ‘Standardized,’ the movie, and Take the PARCC events where community members can take sample PARCC tests and judge the tests for themselves, are popping up all over NJ. Some are sponsored by Cares About Groups, some by numerous other groups with their own names and styles, like Township of Union Park Advocacy Group.

“Statewide groups like Save Our Schools NJ and United Opt Out NJ have seen tremendous growth.

“Additional statewide sources like Speak up NJ http://www.speakupnj.org post addresses and contacts to write legislators and important links.

“Groups like PULSE and the Newark Students Union have been organizing in Newark, NJ to protest the mismanagement and lack of accountability of the state appointed superintendent Cami Anderson, and their concerns are being echoed by Mayor Ras Baraka and legislators who oversee public schools.

“And organizations in Patterson and Camden are raising their voices.

“I am sure there are countless groups organizing in NJ, not mentioned here.

“Name them. Share information.

“Find a group. Join it. Or Start one of your own.

“Speak out, be brave, refuse the tests, refuse to vote for anyone who advocates for policies harmful to public education and children. Organize.

“Organize. Organize.

“Keep going. And never, never give up.”

Proponents of school choice frequently claim that competition with charters (and vouchers) will cause public schools to improve as they fight for “customers.” That is the way it works in the business world, so it should work in education, so they say.

 

Here is a comment by a Florida teacher who explains what happens in the real world:

 

As a public school teacher, I am enraged at our situation in Florida. Just this year we lost more than 300 students to a local charter chain (the nearby Academica). Because of this they relocated 16 teachers, closed the third floor, and the library is closed for the students with no librarian. I called around to neighboring schools and the situation is just as bad at other schools. Now I am stuck in a room of 40 or so students in which 20% barely speak english and I have major behavioral problems that charters don’t have to deal with. How much longer can we stand for this? Has the democratic party abandoned its union interests? It is time for real “Systemic Reform” that works.

 

Read more about the for-profit Academica charter chain here, in a post by Jersey Jazzman.

Anya Kamenetz of NPR described a new study of choice in New Orleans that found that most parents picked schools based on proximity and extracurricular programs, not academics.

 

She wrote:

 

The charter school movement is built on the premise that increased competition among schools will sort the wheat from the chaff.

 

It seems self-evident that parents, empowered by choice, will vote with their feet for academically stronger schools. As the argument goes, the overall effect should be to improve equity as well: Lower-income parents won’t have to send their kids to an under-resourced and underperforming school just because it is the closest one to them geographically.

 

But an intriguing new study from the Education Research Alliance for New Orleans suggests that parent choice doesn’t always work that way. Parents, especially low-income parents, actually show strong preferences for other qualities like location and extracurriculars — preferences that can outweigh academics.

 

Mercedes Schneider, who has written frequently about New Orleans, took issue with a different aspect of the study, its claim that low-income families had greater access to high-performing schools, and that higher-performing schools moved into low-income neighborhoods following Hurricane Katrina.

 

She says that what the study calls progress is probably examples of “gaming the system” and recalculating what produces a higher letter grade for a school (links are found in the original post):

 

First, in their comparison of school performance scores pre-Katrina to post-Katrina, Harris is aware that the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) even awards some schools points for students whose scores are not proficient on state tests.

 

Consider this statement from the Harris/Larsen OneApp analysis:

 

After Katrina, the lowest-income families had greater access to schools with high test scores. School bus transportation systems expanded, average test scores increased across the city, and schools with higher test scores were more likely to locate near lower-income neighborhoods. Pre-Katrina public schools zoned for the highest-income neighborhoods were 1.3 letter grades higher than schools zoned for low-income neighborhoods; the difference between the lowest- and highest-income neighborhoods dropped to just a half letter grade considering the nearest schools after Katrina.

 

It seems that Harris and Larsen are equating higher school performance scores with higher test scores. As noted above, the LDOE incorporation of “bonus points” for non-proficient students boosted school performance scores, and RSD benefited from this practice.

 

Also, not sure how useful the above pre- to post-Katrina school grade comparison is given that there is no anchor. That is, the “closing if the letter grade gap” could mean that the highest letter grades have fallen. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the highest remained stationary while the lowest rose. Also, the highest-to-lowest income ratios are not necessarily the same pre-Katrina versus post-Katrina.

The degree to which the letter grade “gap closure” is an artifact of the post-Katrina mixture of income levels brought about by open enrollment remains unclear.

 

Moreover, school letter grades and performance scores serve as a fine example of high-stakes numbers easily gamed. Whereas Harris and Larsen re-scaled performance scores to compare pre-Katrina with post-Katrina school scoring outcomes, since 2011-12, the public has only “seen” the letters A B C D F and not the alterations in scoring that make those letters not directly comparable from one year to the next. Therefore, in 2011-12, a school with a D could have had a C in 2012-13 simply due to changes in calculation. However, the public “sees” the grade as “improved.” A deception.

 

Additionally, Harris and Larsen comment that “very-low-income families also have greater access to schools with high average test scores.” However, even with inflated school performance scores, most RSD schools continue to be rated as C, D, or F, the definition of a “failing school” by the original Louisiana voucher standard. The schools that have consistently been “high average test score” schools are those that were not taken over by the state post-Katrina and continue to be with the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB). General “access” to “higher average test score” schools might be “greater,” but it remains limited.

 

Next, Harris and Larsen note that “practical considerations” prevent parents from choosing higher-test-score schools. Indeed, it could be that so few A and B schools are available for parents to “choose,” especially given that many of these are selective-admissions schools, that the limited choice of a C school over a D school does not entice parents to choose to a greater degree based on academics.

 

 

Bloomberg News reports that early admissions favors the affluent, and many of the most desirable colleges are filling up a large proportion of their freshman class early.

 

Janet Lorin writes:

 

Top colleges are filling more of their classes in early-admissions programs that favor affluent families, placing another barrier before poorer students hoping to better themselves through higher education.

 

Families that need financial aid often wait for the regular round, which starts this month, so they can compare aid offers. Because early-decision programs require a binding commitment to one school in November and boost admissions chances, many slots are taken before lower-income students even apply.

 

At Northwestern and Duke, about half the spots for this fall’s freshman class are already spoken for. Ten years ago, the universities each took about a quarter through early admissions. Vanderbilt expects its class to be as much as 44 percent full by next month, compared with a third a decade ago.

 

“The scale is definitely tipped to the kids who have more behind them financially,” said Bruce Poch, former dean of admissions at Pomona College in Claremont, California. The trend of colleges filling up early “has gotten more extreme in recent years.”