Archives for the month of: April, 2015

Gary Rubinstein–math teacher, blogger, author, ex-TFA turned TFA critic–has been writing a series of letters to reformers, asking friendly but pointed questions. The first letters went to reformers he knows, the second to reformers he does not know. This letter to Arne Duncan is in the second group.

It is one of Gary’s best. He has done extensive research into Arne’s life as a Harvard College basketball star. He has studied the team’s record as well as that of other teams. He knows about the team coach. He knows that Arne was a great player but the team had a losing record.

Gary writes:

“To illustrate the issues with the accountability metrics that have been the trademark of your tenure, I’ve applied them to something you know intimately, your senior year Harvard basketball team, the 1986-1987 Harvard Cagers. Were the 1986-1987 Cagers a ‘failing’ team? Was Coach Peter Roby an ‘ineffective’ coach? Were you and Keith Webster ‘ineffective’ co-captains? It all depends on which metrics you use.”

“Your last place finish 9 and 17 record is just one way to judge your efforts. Some would use it as the sole metric and declare this a ‘losing’ season. But if you just look at points scored, you didn’t do so badly with 2152, which was pretty close to the 1972 Harvard record of 2221 points at that time. So if we look at just offense, the team was not failing. But you also gave up 2169 points, which is not so good defensively, though only 17 points less than how many points you scored. The ‘average’ game that season, you lost 82.8 to 83.4. Doesn’t sound so bad when measured that way.

“But what if Roby was judged on your performance of just one day? Well, it depended, then, on what day. The ‘86-‘87 Cagers were streaky. You started off 0 and 3, all away games. Then the next ten games you went 7 and 3 bringing your record to 7 and 6. The last two wins were against Penn and Princeton on January 9th and January 10th 1987, who finished respectively 1st and 2nd in the Ivy League that year.”

Gary even includes video footage of the historic match between Harvard and Penn.

He adds:

“How would you react if the President appointed a Secretary of Physical Education who had never played sports or coached sports? And what if this person declared that our lackluster performance in the World Cup soccer tournament is evidence that our physical education system in this country is horribly broken? And what if he made the argument that he has identified the problem as the weakness of one of our most popular games, your beloved basketball?…..

“Secretary Duncan, time is running out for you. It’s like that game against Penn on January 9th, 1987. There are only a few minutes left and you are down big. Teachers are fleeing the profession and there is soon, I believe, to be a teacher shortage as new candidates will avoid the profession for the same reason that the older teachers are leaving. Standardized testing is out of control. How much money is this country paying Pearson each year? How much time, energy, and resources are being spent on testing? Your legacy is not looking good from my view. But it is not too late. Please can you rise to the occasion as you did that time you scored 14 points in three minutes to force overtime with Penn? Please captain Duncan, would you muster up the will to lead a final charge and again turn an almost hopeless situation into one of the great comeback finishes of all time.”

Peter Greene lives in Pennsylvania, where the previous governor, Tom Corbett, and the Republican-controlled Legislature did their best to encourage corporate reform and to destroy public education. Corbett welcomed for-profit cyber-charters and every other kind of charter, and he slashed the budget for public education. The result can be seen starkly in Philadelphia, where many public schools have been replaced by charters, and the remaining public schools are stripped of programs, resources, and services.

 

Here he explains that it is not just urban districts like Philadelphia and York that are being cut down by “reformers,” but not-very-wealthy rural districts like the one he teaches in. People blame their local school boards, but even the most fiscally responsible local boards are falling victim to decisions made by the legislature.

 

He writes:

 

The closing of schools is rampant in my part of PA, and we aren’t alone. We’re a region of not-very-wealthy rural districts, but not-very-wealthy urban districts like Philly and York have also cut schools like a machete in a bamboo forest.

 

It is not a matter of declining student population, and it is not a matter of districts falling on tough times. It’s a widespread financial crisis, and it’s manufactured.

 

How to manufacture a statewide financial crisis.

 

Cut state funding. This puts the making-up-the-difference pressure on local taxpayers.

 

Take a ton of money away from public schools and give it to charters.

 

Create a huge pension funding crisis. This is its own kind of challenge, but the quick explanation is this– pre-2008, invest in really awesome stuff, and when that all tanks and districts suddenly have huge payments to make up, tell the districts they can just wait till later and hope for magic financial fairies to fix it. It is now later, there are no fairies, and a small district with an $18 million budget is looking at pension payments that go up $500K every year.

 

Oh, and pass a law that says districts can’t raise taxes more than a smidge in any given year….

 

The end result?

 

School districts are looking down the barrel of million-plus-dollar deficits. The two deficits for which I have now been a power point audience can both be entirely explained by the formula:

 

Charter Payments + Pension Payments + Other Tiny Obscure Cuts = District Deficit

 

In other words, a district that had a fiscally responsible year last year, that didn’t do anything crazy or odd or unusual and just left everything alone when planning for this year– that district is still facing huge deficits in their current budgeting cycle, unrelated to any choices that they made in managing their own local district.

 

Funny, last time I looked, it was states that have the primary responsibility in their constitutions for maintaining a “thorough and efficiency” (or some variation thereof) system of public education. But the legislators are passing mandates that shift the burden to local districts and sitting by while public schools are closed.

 

Is this part of a plan to privatize public education? What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

International test scores have been used by reformers like Arne Duncan, Jeb Bush, Joel Klein, and Michelle Rhee as a fear tactic. During the 2016 presidential campaign, you will surely hear much wailing and gnashing of the teeth about how our scores on international tests are undermining our global competitiveness and economic growth.

 

Horsefeathers!

 

Here is a post that I wrote in 2013; I updated it. It explains why those international test scores don’t matter, except to tell us that if we really wanted to raise them, we would reduce poverty. Let me say that again: if we reduced poverty, we would have higher scores on international tests.

 

“The news reports say that the test scores of American students on the latest PISA test are “stagnant,” “lagging,” “flat,” etc.

 

The U.S. Department of Education would have us believe–yet again–that we are in an unprecedented crisis and that we must double down on the test-and-punish strategies of the past dozen years.

 

The myth persists that once our nation led the world on international tests, but we have fallen from that exalted position in recent years.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

Here is the background history that you need to know to interpret the PISA score release, as well as Secretary Duncan’s calculated effort to whip up national hysteria about our standing in the international league tables.

 

The U.S. has NEVER been first in the world, nor even near the top, on international tests.

 

Over the past half century, our students have typically scored at or near the median, or even in the bottom quartile. And yet during this same period, we grew to be one of the most powerful economies in the world. How could that be?

 

International testing began in the mid-1960s with a test of mathematics. The First International Mathematics Study tested 13-year-olds and high-school seniors in 12 nations. American 13-year-olds scored significantly lower than students in nine other countries and ahead of students in only one. On a test given only to students currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students scored last, behind those in the 11 other nations. On a test given to seniors not currently enrolled in a math class, the U.S. students again scored last.

 

The First International Science Study was given in the late 1960s and early 1970s to 10-year-olds, 14-year-olds, and seniors. The 10-year-olds did well, scoring behind only the Japanese; the 14-year-olds were about average. Among students in the senior year of high school, Americans scored last of eleven school systems.

 

In the Second International Mathematics Study (1981-82), students in 15 systems were tested. The students were 13-year-olds and seniors. The younger group of U.S. students placed at or near the median on most tests. The American seniors placed at or near the bottom on almost every test. The “average Japanese students achieved higher than the top 5% of the U.S. students in college preparatory mathematics” and “the algebra achievement of our most able students (the top 1%) was lower than that of the top 1% of any other country.” (The quote is from Curtis C. McKnight and others, The Underachieving Curriculum: Assessing U.S. Mathematics from an International Perspective, pp. 17, 26-27). I summarized the international assessments from the mid-1960s to the early 1990s in a book called National Standards in American Education: A Citizen’s Guide (Brookings, 1995).

 

The point worth noting here is that U.S. students have never been top performers on the international tests. We are doing about the same now on PISA as we have done for the past half century.

 

Does it matter?

 

In my last book, Reign of Error, I quote extensively from a brilliant article by Keith Baker, called “Are International Tests Worth Anything?,” which was published by Phi Delta Kappan in October 2007. Baker, who worked for many years as a researcher at the U.S. Department of Education, had the ingenious idea to investigate what happened to the 12 nations that took the First International Mathematics test in 1964. He looked at the per capita gross domestic product of those nations and found that “the higher a nation’s test score 40 years ago, the worse its economic performance on this measure of national wealth–the opposite of what the Chicken Littles raising the alarm over the poor test scores of U.S. children claimed would happen.” He found no relationship between a nation’s economic productivity and its test scores. Nor did the test scores bear any relationship to quality of life or democratic institutions. And when it came to creativity, the U.S. “clobbered the world,” with more patents per million people than any other nation.

 

Baker wrote that a certain level of educational achievement may be “a platform for launching national success, but once that platform is reached, other factors become more important than further gains in test scores. Indeed, once the platform is reached, it may be bad policy to pursue further gains in test scores because focusing on the scores diverts attention, effort, and resources away from other factors that are more important determinants of national success.” What has mattered most for the economic, cultural, and technological success of the U.S., he says, is a certain “spirit,” which he defines as “ambition, inquisitiveness, independence, and perhaps most important, the absence of a fixation on testing and test scores.”

 

Baker’s conclusion was that “standings in the league tables of international tests are worthless.”

 

I agree with Baker. The more we focus on tests, the more we kill creativity, ingenuity, and the ability to think differently. Students who think differently get lower scores. The more we focus on tests, the more we reward conformity and compliance, getting the right answer.

 

Thirty-two years ago, a federal report called “A Nation at Risk” warned that we were in desperate trouble because of the poor academic performance of our students. The report was written by a distinguished commission, appointed by the Secretary of Education. The commission pointed to those dreadful international test scores and complained that “on 19 academic tests American students were never first or second and, in comparison with other industrialized nations, were last seven times.” With such terrible outcomes, the commission said, “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.” Yet we are still here, apparently the world’s most dominant economy. We still are a “Nation and a people.” What were they thinking? Go figure.

 

Despite having been proved wrong for the past half century, the Bad News Industry is in full cry, armed with the PISA scores, expressing alarm, fright, fear, and warnings of imminent economic decline and collapse.

 

Never do they explain how it was possible for the U.S. to score so poorly on international tests again and again over the past half century and yet still emerge as the world’s leading economy, with the world’s most vibrant culture, and a highly productive workforce.

 

From my vantage point as a historian, here is my takeaway from the PISA scores:

 

Lesson 1: If they mean anything at all, the PISA scores show the failure of the past thirteen years of public policy in the United States. The billions invested in testing, test prep, and accountability have not raised test scores or our nation’s relative standing on the league tables. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top are manifest failures at accomplishing their singular goal of higher test scores.

 

Lesson 2: The PISA scores burst the bubble of the alleged “Florida miracle” touted by Jeb Bush. Florida was one of three states–Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Florida–that participated in the PISA testing. Massachusetts did very well, typically scoring above the OECD average and the US average, as you might expect of the nation’s highest performing state on NAEP. Connecticut also did well. But Florida did not do well at all. It turns out that the highly touted “Florida model” of testing, accountability, and choice was not competitive, if you are inclined to take the scores seriously. In math, Florida performed below the OECD average and below the U.S. average. In science, Florida performed below the OECD average and at the U.S. average. In reading, Massachusetts and Connecticut performed above both the OECD and U.S. average, but Florida performed at average for both.

 

Lesson 3: Improving the quality of life for the nearly one-quarter of students who live in poverty–and the 51% who live in low-income families– would improve their academic performance. If we had less poverty, we would have higher test scores.

 

Lesson 4: We measure only what can be measured. We measure whether students can pick the right answer to a test question. But what we cannot measure matters more. The scores tell us nothing about students’ imagination, their drive, their ability to ask good questions, their insight, their inventiveness, their creativity. If we continue the policies of the Bush and Obama administrations in education, we will not only NOT get higher scores (the Asian nations are so much better at this than we are), but we will crush the very qualities that have given our nation its edge as a cultivator of new talent and new ideas for many years.

 

The fact is that during the past 13 years of high-stakes testing, American scores on the PISA exam have not budged at all. If anything, they have slipped a few points. Test and punish failed! No Child Left Behind failed! Race to the Top failed! Who shall we hold accountable? George W. Bush? His advisor Sandy Kress? Secretary of Education Rod Paige and Margaret Spellings? Barack Obama? Arne Duncan? Congress? They forced states and districts to spend billions of dollars on testing, and all of this testing didn’t move the needle on the PISA tests. What if those billions had been spent instead to reduce class sizes? To provide health clinics for schools in poor communities? To create jobs? We need a new approach, and sadly, our policymakers continue to push the same failed ideas. The fact is that we have intolerably high levels of child poverty, and children who are poor register the lowest test scores. There is a simple but obvious formula: Reducing poverty will lift test scores.

 

Higher test scores should not be our national goal. Healthy, imaginative, curious children should be. Rather than focusing on test scores, I prefer to bet on the creative, can-do spirit of the American people, on its character, persistence, ambition, hard work, and big dreams, none of which are ever measured or can be measured by standardized tests like PISA.

This budget bill includes very detailed provisions that determine how teachers and principals in New York state should be evaluated. Needless to say, it was written by non-educators. Have any of them ever evaluated a teacher? Doubtful. Some of the details of implementation will be turned over to the State Education Department or the Board of Regents, but some features are clear: No teacher can be rated effective if he or she is rated ineffective on student performance (test scores).   The state will require that every teacher be evaluated by an independent person who does not work in the school. How many thousands of evaluators will be hired? What will it cost? Who will pay? No one knows. It is not in the budget. What value is the opinion of someone who observes a teacher or principal for an hour or a few minutes?   This is a bill that is written to oust teachers. It reeks of disrespect. It shows Governor Cuomo’s rage against the people who work with children in public schools every day. This bill is his payback to the teachers’ unions for not endorsing his re-election after he declared himself the lobbyist for charter students (3% of the state’s enrollment). Ironically (or not), many outraged teachers are blaming their union leaders for not fighting this bill. To be sure, it would not have passed without the votes of Assembly Democrats, many of whom said they were voting for it “with a heavy heart.” Just how heavy their hearts were cannot be measured, sort of like trying to measure true learning and true education.   Enrollments in teacher education programs are collapsing, in New York and across the nation. Those who enter teaching today are either woefully uninformed of the politicians’ hostility towards them or are prepared to fight a long battle for their children and their profession.   What kind of society makes war on its teachers?

The ever perceptive Peter Greene watched the Cuomo Teacher-Demolition Derby from afar and found it a disgraceful spectacle. 

He couldn’t decide which was worse: Cuomo’s lust to crush the teachers, who stood by watching him coming with an axe in hand, or the Assembly Democrats, who wailed that they voted for Cuomo’s plan with a heavy heart but did it anyway. As someone tweeted earlier today, “Probably they had a heavy heart because they had no spine.”

Greene writes, for starters:

This has truly been the most bizarre thing I have ever seen. An unpopular proposal that guts teaching as a profession and kicks public education in the teeth, sails through the NY legislature.

Yes, “sails through.” There’s nothing else to call a budget that is approved 92-54.

NY Democrats tried to make it look like less of a total victory-in-a-walk for public education opponent Andrew Cuomo by making sad pouty faces and issuing various meaningless mouth noises while going ahead and voting for the damn thing. “Ohh, woes and sadderations,” they cried as they took turns walking to the podium to give Cuomo exactly the tools he wanted for helping to put an end to teaching as a profession in New York state.

I am not sure what Democrats hoped to accomplish by taking to the podium and twitter to say how deeply, tragically burdened they were. I mean, I guess you’d like to know that people who club baby seals feel a little bit bad about it, but it really doesn’t make a lot of difference to the baby seal, who is in fact still dead.

Maybe the lesson here is that the craziest person in the room controls the conversation. The person who’s willing to ram the car right into the sheer rock face gets to navigate the trip, and Cuomo has displayed repeatedly that he really doesn’t care what has to be smashed up. If the world isn’t going to go on his way, it doesn’t need to go on for anybody.

But if teachers needed reason #2,416 to understand that Democrats simply aren’t friends to public education, there it was, biting its quivering lip and sniffling, “I feel really bad about this” as it tied up education and fired it out of a cannon so that it could land directly under a bus that had been dropped off the Empire State Building.

Hell, even Campbell Brown must be a little gobsmacked, as Cuomo’s budgetary bludgeoning of tenure and job security rules has made her lawsuit unnecessary. The Big Standardized Tests results will continue their reign of teacher evaluation, dropping random and baseless scores onto the heads of New York educators like the feces of so many flying pigs. And all new teachers need to do to get their (soon-to-be-meaningless) tenure is get the random VAM dice to throw up snake-eyes four times in a row. Meanwhile, school districts can go out back to the magic money trees to find the financing for hiring the “outside evaluators” who will provide the cherry on top of the VAM sauce.

The message from Atlanta: Don’t cheat. Never. Don’t erase answers. Don’t do anything to violate professional ethics, no matter how you may be threatened or offered bribes (merit pay, bonuses) by higher-ups.

Eleven of twelve Atlanta educators were convicted of racketeering. One was acquitted. Others who were indicted made plea bargains. Superintendent Beverly Hall, who was accused of rewarding principals and teachers who got high scores and punishing those who could not raise scores, died a few weeks ago; her terminal illness prevented her from ever going to trial.

A reader asked me to contrast Atlanta with Washington, D.C., where an investigation by USA Today uncovered widespread cheating, as well as evidence of many erasures changing answers from wrong to right. The difference is that the Governor of Atlanta put together a serious investigative team and broke open the scandal. In Washington, D.C., the investigation was limited and cursory. The cheating happened, during Michelle Rhee’s tenure in office, but no one was ever held accountable.

The bottom line: don’t cheat and don’t permit students to cheat. Period.

Earlier today, John Merrow announced that he was joining the Board of Directors of Pearson. His post was filled with so much silliness that it should have been apparent that he was joking, although many (including me) were taken in by his subtlety. John just sent the following message:

….effective at 12:01 AM tonight. That’s April 2nd, meaning April Fools Day is officially over. I confess that I enjoyed serving Pearson and hope I had some impact on its corporate culture.

I was not on the Board long enough for my stock options to vest, and I hadn’t gotten around to filling out the withholding forms for compensation, so I guess my day of toil was voluntary, a charitable donation. I checked with my accountant to see if I could claim it as a deduction, but apparently Pearson is not a non-profit organization. (I was misinformed.)

John

John Merrow
Education Correspondent,
PBS NewsHour, and President,
Learning Matters, Inc.
212.725.7000 x104

Very likely no one was more surprised by John’s announcement this morning than the real Pearson Board of Directors.

I should also take this opportunity to make sure you know that Governor Cuomo did not veto his budget bill and did not apologize to educators for insulting them.

And the National Education Policy Center did not switch sides and join the reformers; its press release was an April Fool’s joke.

Just in case you were wondering.

The New York Daily News reports that Karen Magee of the New York State United Teachers fought Cuomo’s toxic budget to the end, but that Michael Mulgrew of the United Federation of Teachers did not.

 

According to the Daily News:

 

City teachers union president Michael Mulgrew angered NYSUT after he put out a statement Sunday night — before the education bill was even in print — claiming victory in beating back some of Cuomo’s more strident proposals, sources said.

 

While NYSUT President Karen Magee urged lawmakers to reject the measures, city lawmakers said they were told by Mulgrew’s team that voting for the package would not be held against them.

 

Magee has come out in favor of parents opting out of the state tests to protest their misuse. Will Mulgrew?

The new interim superintendent in Montclair, New Jersey, released the Opt Out numbers: 39% opted out in grades 3-11. That is a stupendous number and a victory for the parents who rejected the PARCC sham.

The story was posted an hour ago at NorthJersey.com: “Montclair School District Releases PARCC Opt Out Numbers” (for some unknown reason, I can’t get a link, but google and you will find the story).

Out of a total of 4,623 students in the district registered to take test in grades 3-11, 1,795 refused, or 38.8 percent.

What the amounts also show is that the percentage of students who were opted-out by their parents, with some exceptions, rose as the grade levels got higher.

According to the information provided by the district, 3,170 students across the district in grades 3-8 registered, with 968 refusing to take the test. The number of students who were opted out is 30.5 percent.

In grades 9 through 11, 1,453 students registered, with 827 not taking the test, or 56.9 percent opting out.

The highest percentage of students not taking the PARCC tests were juniors at Montclair High School. About 66.5 percent or 319 out of 480 students opted out.

The lowest percentage was in the third grade level at Watchung School, with only one student opting out of the 76 registered, or 1.3 percent.

Governor Andrew Cuomo shocked the press corps and the Legislature when he promptly vetoed the budget that he had lobbied so hard to get passed. He said that he didn’t realize that his education proposals lacked any basis in research or experience, nor did he know that they would outrage the state’s parents and educators.

When asked why he had taken this radical step, he said he was reading his Tweets during his lunch hour and discovered that no one liked what he had done. He didn’t want to make every parent and educator in the state angry, he said, and so he decided to veto his own legislation. He noted that there was a precedent for this action; he pointed out that last year he pledged not to evaluate teachers on the scores of the Common Core tests, since the tests were new and few teachers had had time to learn them. But he vetoed that proposal, his own.

The Governor said that his willingness to veto his own proposals demonstrated his flexibility and willingness to listen to the views of the public. “Having an on-time budget,” he said, “was far less important than doing the right thing.”

He also pledged to return the millions of dollars he has collected from hedge fund managers, because he wants to be remembered as “the students’ lobbyist,” not “the charter school students’ lobbyist.”

As his press conference concluded, he promised to shave his head bald as penance for his initial bad judgment.

Happy April 1, a day when surprising things happen, even if they aren’t true.