Archives for the month of: February, 2015

Writing in Huffington Post, historian and teacher John Thompson reviews the dismal failure of high-stakes testing and the inability of its advocates to face reality.

 

He deplores our current testing regime, which has cost billions of dollars and produced little of value to anyone:

 

The obvious problem is that Duncan, with the assistance of the Gates Foundation, has already coerced states into changing their laws. By now, I bet, most states would love to toss value-added evaluations into the ash can of history. What lawmakers need is a fig leaf to allow them to undo a rash mistake without getting blamed for having leaped before they looked into the merits of using test score growth to evaluate educators.

 

The bigger problem, I suspect, is that it would be hard to create a fig leaf huge enough to provide cover for Arne Duncan and Bill Gates, the architects of the sham which is vams for teacher evaluations. Whether or not it was Gates behind the scenes pressuring him to do so, it was Duncan who coerced states into linking the individual teachers’ test score outcomes and their evaluations. He’s not likely to admit to the foolishness of this overreach.

 

But we Democrats should not simply lay the blame on Duncan and Gates. To a greater or lesser degree aren’t we all guilty of trying to look tough so that Republicans can’t paint us a liberal wimps?

 

And that leads to another thought experiment. What if we abandoned the blame game of the last 15 years? What if reformers who say that hate the use of tests to punish agreed to stop using tests to punish? What if we worked for a real civil rights movement of the 21st century? What if we dared to say out loud that Americans should invest in schools where all children get the education that they need and deserve?

Joey J. Cohen is principal of an elementary school in the Patchogue-Medford district in Long Island, New York, an area where parents are up in arms against high-stakes testing.

 

He wrote the following article and posted it on a school administrators’ blog. For a principal to speak out so forcefully about the misguided policies of the Governor and the Chancellor of the state Board of Regents takes guts. I am happy to place Joey J. Cohen on the blog’s honor roll for supporting public education, as well as the dedicated men and women who educate our nation’s children.

 

Misguided Direction
An Opinion Piece
By Joey J. Cohen, Ed.D., Principal – Patchogue-Medford School District
The future of education is not just in jeopardy with the current political climate set forth by Governor Cuomo, Chancellor Tisch and former Commissioner King, it is decidedly bleak. I have spent nearly twenty years in education, currently as an elementary principal, holding several post-secondary degrees including a Doctorate in Educational Leadership with a dissertation that focused on strategies to support students with disabilities. As a current practitioner, living with the mandates that exist in today’s classrooms, my experience and research in the field affords me greater perspective than the aforementioned policymakers responsible for the laws they so haphazardly implement. The flaws in education are not the result of the hardworking educators; it is the ignorant policymakers who are pushing the educational train directly toward derailment.

 
Governor Cuomo has succeeded in making public education, specifically teachers and principals, public enemy number one. As an educator and strong advocate for students, I am deeply troubled when I hear the Governor suggest that he cares about students, while teachers are only interested in protecting their jobs. The Governor’s constant rhetoric is nothing more than a political smoking gun designed to incite the public by placing blame on someone other than himself or his political allies who are only interested in advancing their own agendas. The State’s push for increased standardized assessments through partnerships with multimillion-dollar conglomerates such as Pearson provides no meaningful information to teachers, it only serves as a poorly constructed barometer to rank teachers, principals, schools and districts.

 
The reality is that the pressure of these high stakes exams continues to elevate student anxiety and withdrawal. A system predicated on punitive outcomes fosters fear and anxiety amongst administrators and teachers, which ultimately filters down to children. It is much like an anxious golfer who grips the club too tightly in an attempt to produce a better shot, yet the results fall far short of the intended goal. Teachers, administrators and students cannot operate in a culture of fear and expect optimal results. At the local level, we are left to address the emotional distress, and the unintended consequences of these high stakes exams, which actually takes additional time away from instruction in order to address the increased anxiety. I have witnessed students shut down and cry at the level of disproportional cognitive ability needed to succeed at these assessments considering their age. Students with disabilities and English Language Learners are at a particular disadvantage, and it is only due to caring teachers and administrators that these students still come to school motivated to learn. However, if the tide does not change soon, more students will turn their backs on education.

 
Since our schools across the state and nation are under such intense scrutiny to show better test results, some schools and districts have allowed standardized tests to hijack sound curriculum by placing too much emphasis on test preparation. The business of test making and creating instructional support materials aligned to the Common Core Exams has become a 1.7 billion dollar business with the two largest vendors being Pearson Education based in New York and McGraw-Hill Education, also in New York, (A., Ujifusa, Education Week, November 2012). With that kind of revenue, there is a great deal at stake, and one must question the rationale for subjecting students to these new reforms, as well as the continued emphasis on high stakes testing for all students in grades 3-8.

 
Governor Cuomo’s 2015 Opportunity Agenda clearly delineates that he did not get what he wanted from the stranglehold he put on districts by threatening to withhold the Race to the Top funds some years ago, so he is upping the ante. The Governor’s new proposal offers school funding at a 4.8% increase (1.1 billion dollars) if his reform agenda is accepted, in contrast to a sharply reduced 1.7% increase (377 million dollars) if it is not. His new proposal mandates 50% of a teacher’s APPR composite score be based on Common Core Standardized Assessments and 50% based on teacher evaluations, thereby eliminating the previously agreed upon local assessment. The Governor and those at the State Education Department continue to live in denial by discounting district and school disproportionality related to language barriers, cognitive disabilities, parental support, poverty or any other factor when evaluating teachers and principals. Those charged with enacting the laws continue to purport that the tortoise can beat the hare merely because you want him to be faster. There continues to be little to no regard for cognitive, developmental, linguistic or physical ability when enacting ridiculous laws that expect all students to take the same assessments and meet with the same success.

 
While many of our students come to school with all the love and support from home necessary to promote learning, many of our students come with great need. Some come without any knowledge of the language, some come with cognitive disabilities, some come with physical disabilities, some come from poverty, and some come from single family homes or abusive relationships. When a student walks into one of our public schools they are provided with security, emotional support and each and every child is nurtured and guided by a teacher who cares for their social and academic growth beyond any and all extrinsic factors. That can never be measured in any standardized test!

 
Our policymakers suggest that educators were never held accountable, evaluated with integrity and/or provided with constructive feedback, which necessitated APPR. In my nearly twenty year career, I have always been evaluated or evaluated my staff using a combination of formal and informal observations leading to dialogue that fostered increased student outcomes and elevated professional growth. Unfortunately, under the current APPR system and the ever-changing proverbial finish line to determine student mastery results are difficult, if not impossible, to compare. This, combined with the detrimental practice of labeling teachers and principals, has led to a system of distrust that fosters both student and teacher anxiety instead of collaboration and growth.

 
Since APPR was founded, it eludes me that the only members of a school system that are held to the state mandated evaluations are teachers and principals. This premise assumes that principals and teachers are given carte blanche to make every decision related to school operations, budgeting and instruction. The fact of the matter is that many decisions are relegated to other stakeholders, which significantly influences student outcomes. The decisions that impact our schools are collective ones that begin with the State Education Department. But, let us only hold the principals and teachers responsible.

 
We need only look at the rollout of the Common Core as well as the NYS ELA and Math Modules to see where the problem began. Imagine the rating the former Commissioner, Chancellor Tisch or Governor Cuomo would have received based on the pathetic and dysfunctional rollout of these materials, all while ignoring the tremendous voice of concern from teachers, administrators, parents and students. Or perhaps we should evaluate them on the roughly 30% proficiency rate across the state. Instead of giving our former Commissioner a “developing” or “ineffective” rating, we promoted him to one of highest positions in the Department of Education. Talk about hypocrisy!

 
The reality is that the current and proposed APPR reform agenda is a flawed, completely misguided system that does not work. Top down reforms will continue to breed fear, distrust, anxiety and compliance, not ingenuity, which will do little or nothing to advance our schools. John Maxwell, author of 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, asserts that leaders transform change by forming meaningful relationships, building trust, having skill in the field, consider timing and morale, and the most critical component…having followers. Those responsible for contriving these misguided reforms have failed to listen to the people vested in improving our schools, namely teachers, administrators, parents and students, and subsequently, there are few, if any, followers.

 
Let us be silent no longer. Let us work together to change the laws and design a system that is founded on mutual collaboration from all the stakeholders leading to trust and professional growth, stemming from our collective wisdom, as practiced in the most successful professions and organizations.

I sent this to each Senate Committee member:

 

 

Dear Sen. xxxx
I am a TN educator and I’d like to ask that you consider some facts about public education reform in TN generally and the proliferation of charter schools in particular.

 

The testing & accountability measures in TN were written by ALEC and by for-profit entities that have an interest in privatizing public education.

 

The value-added model (TN version is TVASS), marketed as an indicator of teacher quality, is junk science according to the American Statistical Association and by a majority of independent researchers: The lit review is here:

 

http://vamboozled.com/recommended-reading/value-added-models/

 

How can an education system improve if Congress allows junk science to dictate the direction of our education system? Test scores are designed to sort & rank. Testing is not learning- it’s a tool that teachers know when & how to use. Congress doesn’t dictate to any other profession how to use the tools of their profession. Why should teaching be any different?

 

All around the country VAM & standardized test scores are being misused to close schools, disperse, destabilize poor communities, sort out high needs (e.g. expensive children in SPED or at-risk) and privatize. The Dept of Education is now promoting VAM junk-science for colleges of Education.

 

Accountability has been in short supply for TN’s charter authorizer Achievement School District (ASD) and for outside consultants sucking up our tax dollars for invalid teacher evaluations and useless standardized tests(e.g., TEAM/TAP was developed by convicted felon Michael Milken & his brother and has no valid research line to support it’s claims)

 

Here are some persistent problems with charter schools & education privatizaion that deserve greater accountability and compliance.

 

1. Increased Segregation

 

• The vast majority of high-poverty charters fail due to racial & socio-economic segregation. The high-poverty model has not met with success at a national level.

 

• The most comprehensive study of charter schools completed to date found that only 17% of charter schools outperformed comparable traditional pubic schools.83% of public schools are better than charters. New Orleans Charter Schools have the lowest ACT scores in the country.

 

• Many families now believe- as do virtually all leading colleges & universities- that racial, ethnic, & income diversity enriches classrooms.

 

• The main problem with American schools in not their teachers or their unions, but poverty & economic segregation.

 

Reference:

 

Kahlenberg (2013). From all walks of life: New hopes for school integration. American Educator. Winter 2012-2013, pp. 2 – 40.

 

2. Sanctioned Discrimination or Whose Choice?

 

• The first choice of most parents is to send their child to a high-quality neighborhood school; it is unclear how this bill supports that choice. In fact, we have seen how the rapid expansion of the charter sector has undermined neighborhood schools, drawing resources from them and at the same time expecting them to serve our most at-risk students. –

 

• Charters take public money yet have the legal status of private schools.

 

• Charter organizations have gone to court to protect themselves from educating & retaining ALL children.

 

• Charters discriminate against children with disabilities, children who do not test well, or who do not fit into inflexible discipline policies. Such children may be admitted to bolster enrollment but are expelled or counseled out after BEP funds are distributed, Public schools lose $6,000/child and face class overloads near testing time.

 

• Charters advertise ‘choice’ but overwhelmingly exclude parent voice.

 

• Parents have no legal recourse to challenge harmful charter school practices. Charters may legally ignore the key aspect of parent involvement: school level decision- making.

 

• Parents and the public are consistently misled about the community desires for a charter school. Charter waitlists cannot be confirmed and many records are slipshod.

 

• In New Orleans where all public schools have disappeared, the most difficult to teach children have been abandoned.

 

References:

Green, P. C., III, Baker, B. D., & Oluwole, J. O. (2013) Having it both ways: How charter schools try to obtain funding of public schools and the autonomy of private schools. Emory Law Journal, Vol. 63.303.

 

Parents Across America (PAA) http://parentsacrossamerica.org/parents-america-hr2218-%e2%80%9cempowering-parents-quality-charter-schools-act%e2%80%9d/#sthash.Ch0TKntq.dpuf

 

Welner, K. G. & Miron, G., (2014). Wait,wait. Don’t mislead me! Nine reasons to be skeptical about charter waitlist numbers. National Education Policy Center, University of Colorado, Boulder. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/charter-waitlists

 

Gabor, A. (2013) The great charter tryout. The Investigative Fund. http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/investigations/politicsandgovernment/1848/

 

What we support:

 

More community schools just like the highly successful Pond Gap in Knoxviile, TN.

 

To improve the schools we have, rather than shutting down or turning around traditional schools to make way for more charter schools.

 

All charter schools to have neighborhood boundaries and accept all children from within those boundaries whose parents choose to enroll their child at the charter school. Charter school enrollment processes should be consistent with and as simple as those of neighborhood public schools.

 

Charter schools should be held accountable for their enrollment, discipline, transfer, and other practices.

 

Charter schools and all other schools receiving public funds must be equally transparent and accountable to the public.

 

Finally, TN has a shameful 45% child poverty rate. My state has one of the highest rates of low wage & minimum wage jobs in the country. Our public schools in TN need resources- not privatization- to compensate for failed political & economic policies.

 

Thank-you for your work & consideration,

 

 

Joan Grim

The Boston Globe interviewed early childhood education expert Nancy Carlsson-Paige about the changing nature of kindergarten. C-P told the writer Joanne Weiss that five-year-old children learn through play, not flash cards and drill. They are hard-wired to learn through play. The Common Core expects that children will learn to read in kindergarten, but C-P says that goal is developmentally inappropriate. An organization she helped found, “Defending the Early Years,” reviewed the research and could find no support for the Common Core claim that children in kindergarten should learn to read. There is time for that in first and second grades.

 

Weiss followed that interview by talking to State Commissioner Mitchell Chester in Massachusetts, who said that his concern for poor and minority students led him to believe that they should learn to read in kindergarten. It is a matter of civil rights. But reformers have become skilled at invoking “civil rights” for whatever they choose to do. If it is not right for children, it is not right for poor and minority children. Don’t you think?

A tweet by Jason Stanford, political journalist in Texas:

JasonStanford ‏@JasStanford

Why is it OK with some politicians to opt your kids out from getting vaccinated but not if you don’t want them taking a standardized test?

Jia Lee is a Teacher of Conscience. She teaches special education at the Earth School in Néw York City. She refused to administer the state tests to her students. She was invited to testify before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

Lee calls on other teachers to become Teachers of Conscience.

Here is an interview with Jia Lee.

Here is a video of her excellent testimony to the HELP Committee. It was created by filmmaker Michael Elliott.

““Remember that fear is natural, but there is greater fear in knowing what will happen if we don’t take a stand.”

– Jia Lee

Stephen Dyer, former legislator in Ohio, casts a critical eye at Governor John Kasich’s budget.

The governor says the dumistricts willing to tax themselves more will get more, and those who don’t, won’t. Dyer points out that the state courts have ruled four times that the state has the constitutional obligation to fund education.

He says even if funding is equitable, it is not sufficient to be adequate. And that’s not fair.

The Onion thought it was hilarious when it published a satirical article about online classes for preschoolers. A make-believe author of a make-believe report from the U.S. Department of Education said: “With access to their Show-And-Tell message boards, recess timers, and live webcams of class turtle tanks, most toddlers are finding that they can receive the same experience of traditional preschooling from the comfort of their parents’ living room or home office. In addition, most cited the ability to listen to their teacher’s recordings of story time at their own pace as a significant benefit of choosing an online nursery school.” 

 

But now reality has overtaken satire, in less than four months. There really is a company offering virtual preschool, promising to get toddlers ready for the Common Core. The advertising plays to parents’ fears that their children won’t be ready for kindergarten.

 

Benjamin Herold of Education Week spoke to early childhood experts, who expressed skepticism about putting little children in front of a computer.

 

Valerie Strauss is suitably alarmed by the prospect of marketing computer-based activities to the parents of little children. Some of the materials are prepared for little ones from 18 months to three years old.

 

But, she notes:

 

It also offers material for 4-year-olds, who the Web site says will turn into 5-year-old kindergartners expected to learn material aligned to the Common Core State Standards (which, incidentally call for kids to read in kindergarten). So 4 years old is almost too late to start getting prepared for the academic sweatshop that is kindergarten. The Web site says:

 

“The preparation needs to start when your child is 4, if not earlier. VINCI Virtual School provides you with a ready-to-go curriculum to make your time more effective, with the structured lessons and with the focus on building literacy and math skills while broaden knowledge on science.”

 

It should be noted that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity have recommended that children under the age of 2 get no screen time. None. Not from TV, the Internet or smart devices.

 

And, presumably, not from virtual preschool.

 

 

 

Peter Greene read an NPR article about Jason Zimba, one of the principal writers of the Common Core math standards, and he uses it to dig deep into what Zimba understands about the rocky reception of the Common Core. Zimba wrote them, with the assistance of William McCallum and Phil Daro. They don’t really get the reason for the resistance to them.

 

Referring to the article, Greene writes:

 

We do get the inspiring story of Zimba and McCallum working long hours, slaving over the standards in the garage (just like Bill Gates starting Microsoft). She notes again that he was human, with a life and a family and a day job, spiced up with a story of some colleague telling him to stop texting about standards stuff while his second daughter was being born.

 

And yet, despite their good intentions and hard work, there is so much pushback against the standards. They created something really good, but the implementation is not working out as they expected.

 

Yes, the problem is that we didn’t build a powerful enough bomb. If we built a bigger bomb, then it would be used the correct way.

 

It is hard not to see these guys as hopelessly naive about How Things Work, about the implications of the work they were doing. I sympathize in part– when he claims that publishers are mucking up the works by using CCSS to market any old crap lying around the warehouse, I don’t disagree, but at the same time, dude, what did you think they were going to do with the bomb once you had finished building it?? You may have thought you were building an instrument of peace and wisdom and growth, but you should have paid better attention to the people who were signing your checks and collecting your work, because this is exactly what they wanted it for.

 

All three are trying to fix it. McCallum has some little start-up you’ve never heard of to make math apps. Daro is writing a complete math curriculum for Pearson, presumably because, you know, the politics and business are not his problem. Zimba’s trying to work on it, too. None of them seem to see their own hand in the mess that is now choking public education. Granted, I see all of these characters through the smudgy lens of various journalists, but I keep feeling as if Coleman knows exactly what he’s doing, but The Other Guys don’t really get it. They don’t see the battlefield because they are only focused on the bomb.

 

Zimba does not pick up the lesson that he now realizes that he was wrong back when he thought the standards would fix everything, so maybe he’s wrong again now that he thinks national curriculum is the answer. And he doesn’t seem to have any sense of the moral or ethical implications of trying to rewrite the education system for everybody part time in his garage– did nobody at any point say, “Gee, for a project this massive, maybe there’s a better way and other people who should be involved.” While he seems to lack the strutting ballsiness of Coleman, he still must have the hubris required to think, “Yeah, I could write the math guidelines for every student in the country.”

 

 

Please feel free to email elected representatives in the Indiana legislature if you agree that testing has become the monster that ate education. Does it make sense for children in third and fourth grade to sit for 19-20 hours of testing?

Required testing time:

SAT-3 hours 45 minutes
ACT-3 hours 30 minutes
Indiana BAR-13 hours

ISTEP- 3rd grade:18 hours
4th grade:20 hours 10 minutes
5th grade:19 hours 42 minutes
6th grade:19 hours 55 minutes

To: Sue Errington , Rhonda Rhoades , Jeff Thompson , Jim Lucas , Lloyd Arnold , Vernon Smith , Robert Behning , Edward Clere , Woody Burton , Tony Cook , Dale Devon

, William Fine , Justin Moed , Terri Austin , Senator Earline Rogers , Mrvan , Senator Jean Leising , Senator Carlin Yoder , Chip Perfect , Dennis Kruse , Senator Scott Schneider , Senator Pete Miller , Senator Jeff Ratz , Senator Mark Stoops , Amanda Jim Banks , Eric Bassler , Greg Walker , goodinterry@netscape.net, Senator Tomes , Senator Alting , Brent Waltz , Senator Brent Steele , Eric Koch , Sean Eberhart , “judmcmillin@yahoo.com” , Randy Truitt , Gregory Porter , Tom Dermody , Governor’s Office , Head , Kenley , Speaker Brian Bosma , Dave Frizzel
Subject: This year’s ISTEP

Required testing time:

SAT-3 hours 45 minutes
ACT-3 hours 30 minutes
Indiana BAR-13 hours

ISTEP- 3rd grade:18 hours
4th grade:20 hours 10 minutes
5th grade:19 hours 42 minutes
6th grade:19 hours 55 minutes

In what universe does this seem even remotely to be a good idea?