Archives for the month of: April, 2015

A few months ago, John Merrow was having a fund-raising drive for his program, and I sent a check. He promptly returned it and said it was a conflict of interest for him to accept any funding from someone he might cover. I was impressed, right up to today, when John announced to the world that he has agreed to join the Board of Directors of Pearson, Inc. 

This is shocking news. Here is how he explains it:

It hasn’t been officially announced yet, but I want my friends to know that I will be joining the Board of Directors of Pearson Education. This was not an easy decision, and I know that some of my friends, particularly those on the left, will be angry with me. I ask you to withhold your judgment until you have finished reading this.

Pearson has been criticized, unjustly in my view, for putting profits ahead of children, but I have gotten to know some of Pearson’s leadership, and I can attest that they are caring parents who are devoted to their children. Recently I took one of my grandchildren to a polo match at the home of a Pearson executive. When my little girl fell and scraped her knee, our host attended to her every need. He could not have been more caring. Pearson hostile or indifferent to children? I don’t think so. I know better.

Pearson has gotten a lot of bad press, and I may have contributed to that with my reporting about the ‘Opt Out’ movement and its attacks on assessment. For example, when the Pearson Foundation was forced to shut down and fined $7.7 million for some questionable practices, the press coverage made it sound as if the Pearson Foundation had been guilty of child molestation. All it did was entertain some decision-makers in an effort to create a relaxed atmosphere where they could make important decisions about purchasing tests and other education products, perhaps from Pearson Education but also available from McGraw-Hill and other companies.

Why have I accepted Pearson’s invitation? Well, it’s not the money. Yes, it is true that I will receive something north of $100,000 per year plus stock options, but I publicly pledge that I will donate some of that largess to charity.

I am doing this because, frankly, I believe I can do more good from the inside than I can from outside

I guess his theory is that if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. Another sell-out. Especially troubling since he starts in his new position today, April 1. (Hint: April Fools’ Day. He fooled me.)

A letter from a reader about Governor Cuomo’s plan to “reform” education:

My name is Adam C. Bergstein; I am a tax-paying voter, a proud parent of a child in the NY public school system, and I also happen to teach in Queens, at Forest Hills HS. I would like to address my concerns regarding Andrew Cuomo’s blatant and intentional war that he has waged against public education. We need to have an honest discussion about the ramifications of his actions against the most vulnerable members in our society, children. If Andrew Cuomo’s draconian measures are ratified, the very root of American democracy, the great equalizer known as public education will be eradicated, and not just for months, or years, but for generations.

Here in NY, instead of Wayne’s World, we get Cuomo’s World, and this is what it will resemble: Every school shall, in essence, become a state-run testing center; where any notion of creativity will have been eliminated. Creativity will be replaced with test anxiety. Instead of relishing and anticipating school, children will despise learning, because their days will be filled with test-prep and more test-prep and very little else. The fact that Andrew Cuomo doesn’t care that his proposed changes will destroy everything good about an education, clearly spells out what he thinks about parents and schoolchildren throughout NY State.

Andrew Cuomo’s proposed changes not only disrespects the teachers and schools, it simultaneously disrespects the children and their parents. It disrespects them because it says a child does not deserve the right to learn the trumpet, or speak Italian, or take b/w photographs. It says your child is only good enough to bubble in answer sheets, day in and day out. Andrew Cuomo’s plan implies all children fit the same cookie-cutter mold, regardless of how they think, or act or express themselves. But here is what Andrew Cuomo does not seem to comprehend; children are not a one-size-fits-all model. It is their uniqueness and their passions and their interests that make them so special. However, all Andrew Cuomo’s plan does is reward uniformity while punishing creative thinking and individualism. His plan will use our tax dollars to support, fund and encourage the privatized, corporate test-prep culture. And that is just unacceptable.

Andrew Cuomo, a man who failed the bar four times, has no problem raising the bar so high, that it is our children’s future that is destined to fail. His high-stakes testing mentality is nothing more than a high-stakes bet against what our children need most, an environment that nurtures learning; in a safe, hospitable classroom.

His desire for power has emboldened him to use our children as pawns in his political game to control public education. He will blackmail already cash-strapped school districts, by holding their budgets hostage through the legislative process. And unfortunately, while he is morally bankrupt, it is our school system that will be left financially bankrupt.

From one parent to another, how does this man not comprehend the fact that children are not automatons, designed to run through one test maze after another. Students are not items to be placed within a ledger; they are not gains or losses on a balance sheet. They are not poker chips to be gambled with, but if Andrew Cuomo’s plans should be adopted, and implemented, that is exactly what the schoolchildren throughout NY State will become, a double-down and an ante up. His actions treat our children like cattle in feedlot. They’ll be measured, assessed, and then passed through the system with a number tag identifying them as a liability or an asset. My daughter and my students are not statistical calculations. They are not a number to be counted, so his friends can eventually privatize education and make our children part of a profit margin. My child and the millions of students throughout this state are not for sale and are not to be traded like a stock.

One example of how Andrew Cuomo’s plan will affect high schools, is the way students’ schedules are programmed. School administrators will have to make the painful decision to eliminate most electives, such as Art, Foreign Language, PE and Music, in order to create additional English and Math test prep classes. These cuts would simply be a result of how Andrew Cuomo tragically and erroneously misinterprets public education as nothing more than a game of test score percentages. Children, will become the collateral damage of the sacrifices that every school will be forced to make, just to appease Andrew Cuomo’s far reaching ignorance of what a public education is supposed to provide. What the children will gain by Andrew Cuomo’s plan is the importance of becoming another number, a drone to be counted and stacked and rated. What they will lose, is that opportunity to grow, think for themselves and become a bigger part of their community. This will all be done under the guise of reform. Sadly, we can see through his lie, and we know that he is desperately and woefully attempting to appear as a viable presidential candidate for 2016.

I’d like to tell you about S————-, J———-, N———, T———- and M———. These are teachers from my school that voluntarily and happily take on some of the most academically challenging students. They are the teachers who work with children who have special needs. These are students that are emotionally troubled, or have multiple learning disabilities, or are ELLs (or English Language Learners). These are the children that, in some instances, will show very little growth on a state mandated exam. Yet these teachers will fight, kick and claw to help their students excel, with absolutely no fear of a test score. However, I cannot say with certainty that these teachers will be so eager to take on those academically needy children. They may even be reluctant to teach these students, if they know it can lead to their dismissal and termination. And that is what Andrew Cuomo’s educational reform delivers, not results for children, not an environment that fosters learning, not a place where people love to be, but rather a state run institution that punishes those that love what they do, and punishes those that want to see their students thrive and grow. My very real fear is that this is what the educational landscape of NY State will transform into, should Andrew Cuomo’s plan become the law of the land.

On the other end of the spectrum, there is T———, J———, L——— and T———; they teach AP courses at my school. They share that same passion as the other teachers I mentioned; they too teach with an enthusiasm that can only be found in people who love what they do. They have some of the highest achieving students in our building. These are the students who take on additional coursework; the kids who yearn to excel; and who thrive under constant academic challenges. I also know they have taken on students who may not meet the criteria for an AP class, but they would sooner walk away from this profession then turn away a student who has a desire to learn. But, should Andrew Cuomo’s corrupt ideological philosophy become law, I don’t know if these teachers, who have mortgages, and families, will be so committed to take on students who can hurt and risk their job security.

That is why we need parents and teachers and elected officials and the schoolchildren to tell Andrew Cuomo to properly fund our schools, and leave public education to the professionals. Otherwise, all he will wind up doing is causing irrevocable intellectual harm; emotional and cognitive ruination and mental health damage to the children throughout this state.

Thank you,

Adam C. Bergstein

Vice President of Irresolute Empiricists

Very few parents are expected to opt out in Houston. The culture of testing is so deeply ingrained that few question why their children are subjected to weeks of preparation for bubble tests and for a school year dominated by the tests. Parents and children are afraid of hurting their teacher if they don’t take the tests.

The article goes into depth about the docility created by that culture in a state that claims a strong streak of individualism. Frankly it sounds like the education system creates sheep, not people capable of thinking for themselves.

Read this terrible story:

“A TEACHER at a Montrose elementary school is refusing to administer the test for the same reasons.

”Before moving to Houston I taught in a private school,” says the teacher, who asked that both she and her school not be named. When she first arrived in Houston, she says, she taught at an HISD school outside Montrose, and was horrified by her first glimpse of test culture.

“It was not teaching, it was not learning,” she says. “It created an abusive environment for everyone: children, teachers, administration.” She moved to her current teaching position in Montrose with the idea of eventually starting her own school, and was delighted by the humane environment she found. Until, that is, this February, when she had to administer the DLA, a STAAR length practice test required by the district.

”You have to understand: the school shuts down,” the teacher says. ”There is no teaching. There is no learning. I had to sit there and force fourth grade kids to take four-hour long tests, and do it the next day and the next day, and act to them like it was a totally normal thing. It made me feel like a hypocrite. I was implying to the kids that this is something I believe in.”

“Worse, she says, even when the testing is done a corrosive effect on learning continues.

“Once the testing was over last year, I thought, I’ll actually be able to teach my kids something,” the teacher remembers. “I passed out a story, we read it as a class, and the next day I passed out a quiz. One of my students raised her hand and said, ‘I don’t get it – isn’t there multiple choice?’ She didn’t know what to do when it wasn’t multiple choice and the answers weren’t provided. I don’t feel that my kids understood what learning was.”

“The teacher has decided to leave HISD at the end of this school year. But first, she told her principal, she was going to protest.

”All I will say is that my principal was as understanding as he or she could possibly be,” the teacher says. Instead of administering the exam, the teacher will take personal days during the testing period, offering volunteer enrichment education for students who are opting out.

“Like many parents, though, the teacher broods about the wellbeing of her colleagues. “Unfortunately I can’t make as public a statement as I want to,” she says. “Test culture is a culture of fear. Everybody is terrified. Nobody knows what the consequences of their actions are going to be.”

The mayoral election in Chicago on April 7 is a contest between big money and grassroots organizing.

 

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has raised nearly $20 million for his re-election campaign, while his challenger Jesus “Chuy” Garcia has raised some $3 million.

 

The latest big gift to Mayor Rahm comes from a hedge fund billionaire who has given him nearly $1 million. According to Huffington Post, Ken Griffin has supported Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and other prominent conservative Republicans.

 

Ken Griffin, CEO of the hedge fund Citadel, has donated nearly $1 million to pro-Emanuel groups in the last year, including $750,000 since March 2, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

 

Griffin has also contributed to Walker, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), and Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.). Schock, under fire for lavish spending, said on Tuesday that he would resign from Congress. Since last year, Griffin has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars American Crossroads, America Rising, the Republican National Committee and other conservative groups.

In North Carolina, a state senator has filed a bill requiring all professors to carry a heavy course load. It seems there’s no institution free of the heavy hand of government, when legislators grab the reins of power.

University spokesmen said such a provision would kill research and cause a flight of top talent from research universities.

Lindsay Wagner writes for NC Policy Watch:

“Senator Tom McInnis (R-Richmond) filed a bill last week that would require all UNC professors to teach no fewer than four courses a semester. It’s a move that, McInnis says, is an effort to make sure classes are not taught primarily by student assistants — but some are concerned it could hamper research and development at the state’s prestigious institutions of higher education….

University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill Professor Stephen Leonard, who teaches political science and is chair of the UNC system-wide Faculty Assembly, said the legislation is nothing more than an attempt to kill public higher education in North Carolina.

“I think it’s pretty simple,” said Leonard. “Talented faculty would start looking for work out of state, it would be hard to attract junior faculty coming out of graduate school, and it would be impossible to attract senior faculty who bring a lot of resources to our institutions.”

Leonard says the most problematic consequence of the proposed law would be that the discovery and production of knowledge would grind to a halt.

“Which I suppose is okay if you don’t want to cure cancer, fix infrastructure or make new discoveries about manufacturing processes,” said Leonard.

“SB 593 would tie professors’ salaries to their course loads—those teaching fewer than four courses each semester would earn less than their full salaries, determined on a pro-rata basis.

“The legislation also allows for the salary difference to be made up by an individual campus’ endowment, should they determine a professor should take on a lighter course load in order to conduct research – but Leonard says that’s an untenable scenario for most campuses…..

“The bill comes at a time when the state’s university system is undergoing considerable turmoil thanks to recent controversial decisions to raise tuition, close three academic centers and fire UNC’s widely-praised president, Tom Ross. The system has also been handed substantial budget cuts over the past five years by the state legislature, including a $400 million cut in 2011.”

– See more at: http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2015/03/31/bill-would-require-all-unc-professors-to-teach-heavy-course-load/#sthash.PFhDfrjE.dpuf

Read this article in the Boston Globe and ask yourself: “What’s the point of a college degree?”

The article assumes that one gets a degree to get a better job and make more money. It describes a program that is cheap and enables low-income students to get a degree, in large extent through online learning.

A couple of liberal arts professors complain that this bargain basement approach is not really a college education. Because they are poor, the students have no exposure to real education.

““The whole premise of College for America is bargain education,” says Amy Slaton, a Drexel University history professor who has been a vocal critic of the model. “Instead of saying, ‘We’re going to help everyone reach the best of the best,’ we’re saying, ‘Here’s the generic, no-frills version for you.’ It pegs the value of the education to what you’re able to pay, instead of helping everyone to achieve the richest, most varied education they can. Why aren’t we asking about how we can bring more classroom time, more expert teaching to everyone?”

Or another question:

Why aren’t we bringing down the cost of higher education with greater student aid? Why trick poor and minority students with a cheap substitute for a real college education? If having a degree matters most, just give out a generic degree that means nothing except you can say you have one. That’s cheaper still. There are so many fake universities these days, who will know the difference?

If we really cared about students and education, higher education would be free, at least in the public sector.

Governor Cuomo insisted on a teacher evaluation law that relies heavily on test scores. And he got it as part of budget negotiations. A teacher who is rated “ineffective” on the test scores cannot receive an effective rating no matter what his/her scores on observations and other measures. Test scores trump all. Here is a summary of the bill that passed last night.

It makes no sense for politicians to tell school leaders how to evaluate educators. The definition of a profession is that it is self-regulating. Teaching in Néw York will be closely regulated by the state. Local control will pass into history.

Carl Heastie, the leader of the State Assembly, controlled by Democrats, said the Assembly would pass the budget despite their discomfort with the education proposals. What matters most, he says, is an on-time budget.

Consider the elements that may NOT be included in teachers’ evaluations:

“6. PROHIBITED ELEMENTS. THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS SHALL NO LONGER BE ELIGIBLE TO BE USED IN ANY EVALUATION SUBCOMPONENT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION:

A. EVIDENCE OF STUDENT DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE DERIVED FROM LESSON PLANS, OTHER ARTIFACTS OF TEACHER PRACTICE, AND STUDENT PORTFOLIOS, EXCEPT FOR STUDENT PORTFOLIOS MEASURED BY A STATE-APPROVED RUBRIC WHERE PERMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT;

B. USE OF AN INSTRUMENT FOR PARENT OR STUDENT FEEDBACK;

C. USE OF PROFESSIONAL GOAL-SETTING AS EVIDENCE OF TEACHER OR PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS;

D. ANY DISTRICT OR REGIONALLY-DEVELOPED ASSESSMENT THAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT; AND

E. ANY GROWTH OR ACHIEVEMENT TARGET THAT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS AS SET FORTH IN REGULATIONS OF THE COMMISSIONER ADOPTED HERE- UNDER.”

In addition, future state aid is tied to districts’ compliance with the evaluation law, written by non-educators with no knowledge of research or practice:

NOTWITHSTANDING ANY INCONSISTENT PROVISION OF LAW, NO SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR AN APPORTIONMENT OF GENERAL SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS FROM THE FUNDS APPROPRIATED FOR THE 2015–2016 SCHOOL
YEAR AND ANY YEAR THEREAFTER IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT APPORTIONED TO SUCH SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE RESPECTIVE BASE YEAR UNLESS SUCH SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS SUBMITTED DOCUMENTATION THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONER
BY NOVEMBER FIFTEENTH, TWO THOUSAND FIFTEEN, OR BY SEPTEMBER FIRST OF
EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR, DEMONSTRATING THAT IT HAS FULLY IMPLEMENTED THE
STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING ANNUAL TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL EVALUATIONS OF TEACHERS AND PRINCIPALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRE-
MENTS OF THIS SECTION AND THE REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER.

Mark Naison of Fordham University writes:

When Democracy Died in the New York State Assembly

Something inside me died tonight in the New York State Assembly. Democratic legislator after Democratic legislator, some who claimed to be lifelong friends of public education, some who were once teachers themselves, caved in and voted for a bill that was going to add to the test burden on the already over tested children of the state, subject teachers to more scripting and more intimidation than they already had to endure and strip power away from principals and local school districts.

Many knew what they voted for was wrong. Many said so in their remarks. But they caved in and voted for a measure that was going to make the lives of their constituents miserable, our of fear, cowardice and a refusal to consider how their actions might look in the broad sweep of historical events

And their actions alerted me to something I had feared for some time. That the voices of ordinary citizens had become so smothered by the power of great wealth that all social policies were now held hostage to the pursuit of private gain. That political leaders, irrespective of political party, no longer felt a moral imperative to consider the “public good;” that they could pay lip service to that ideal in communicating with constituents, but when the chips were down, they would always vote for the interests of the rich and powerful.

I had used certain language, I once though loosely, to describe our current predicament. Words like “Oligarchy” and “Plutocracy.”

Tonight, I realized that those terms were rather precise descriptions of our current political arrangements

The interests of the children, the families, the teachers, the principals and the elected school board of our state were treated as impediments to a vision of educational transformation that handed power and funding over to private interests whose contributions filled the campaign coffers of officials of both parties. That such a give away of power and money took place in a Budget bill that included “ethics reform” made it all the more ironic

This was one of the most blatant displays of political cynicism and political corruption that I have seen in my lifetime.

It was quite literally sickening

I mourn for the children. I mourn for the teachers. I mourn for the principals. I mourn for the schools that will be closed; the school districts that will be taken into receivership.

And I mourn for the democratic spirit, which has disappeared from the political culture of the state and nation in which I live.

I will never accept this as the norm. I will never accommodate to cowardice and evil

And I will not be alone.

Parent groups in NYC are warning that some principals are threatening and misinforming parents.

This is city policy:

“New York City – Parents across the city are refusing to let their children take the annual state English Language Arts (ELA) and math tests administered to third through eighth graders, but some principals are standing in their way. Warning that opting out of the tests is either not allowed or will result in negative consequences – for the student, teachers or school – principals have left parents frustrated, fearful and confused about their rights. Although a parent guide released by the Department of Education (DOE) states, “If, after consulting with the principal, the parents still want to opt their child out of the exams, the principal should respect the parents’ decision and let them know that the school will work to the best of their ability to provide the child with an alternate educational activity (e.g., reading) during testing times,” some principals are either unaware of the policy or have decided to ignore it.”

Kevin Welner of the National Education Policy Center, which had been one of the most respected critics of corporate education reform, has announced its intention to cross over and join the reformers! This is terrible news for all those who counted on its ability to marshall first-rate scholars to debunk the claims and hoaxes of the “reform” movement.

Welner says that he is to doing it for the money. The big money, he claims, is with parents and teachers, not hedge fund managers or the Walton or Gates or Broad Foundations.

To quote the press release:

BOULDER, CO (April 1, 2015) – The National Education Policy Center today announced that it is changing its mission statement and renouncing the pursuit of strong, equitable public schools.

NEPC director Kevin Welner admitted that the whole enterprise had been a ruse, and that he and his colleagues were really only in it for the money and for the elation of constant policy victories.

The NEPC’s mission statement has been “to produce and disseminate high-quality, peer-reviewed research to inform education policy discussions. … guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence.”

Welner announced that the new mission statement would be “to promote policies that have a surface appeal, that are built on the whimsical magic of the free market, and that use schools to facilitate the reproduction of inequalities from generation to generation.” Research evidence, Welner added, would be created whenever necessary to prop up these goals.

“We know that by abandoning our past mission we’ll have to forgo the immense funding advantages that come from caring about high-quality evidence and equity and public schooling. But that was never really us. There comes a time when we must set aside our crass pursuit of financial support and dedicate ourselves to our true ideals. If this means trying to squeeze money from financially strapped hedge fund managers or ‘reform-focused’ foundations with tiny endowments, then that’s just what we will have to do,” said Welner.