Archives for the year of: 2015

From his earliest days on the job, Arne Duncan has said the same thing over and over: somebody dummies down standards, and we have lying to our kids. They are not as bright as they think they are, or as their moms think they are. They are dumb! They are really really dumb!

Jersey Jazzman goes through an analysis of cut scores and bell curves here. Put on your thinking caps and read it.

Then ask yourself why Arne has such a low opinion of teachers and children. Why is he happy that the new tests have been rigged to produce high failure rates?

Now we know the outcome of the reformers’ campaign to put a “great teacher” in every classroom (or at least a great computer). They unleashed their teacher-bashing campaign in 2010 with the release of “Waiting for Superman.” They told us our schools were overrun with bad teachers, and we could cure that by firing the bottonm 5-10% every year, based on test scores. Add “Superman” to Arne Duncan’s mandate to tie teacher evaluation to test scores and his constant refrain that teachers are lying to students by not telling them they are failures; and the Los Angeles Times publication of teacher ratings based on student test scores, applauded by Arne (“What’s there to hide?”); and the mass firing of teachers in Central Falls, Rhode Island (applauded by both Duncan and I ama); and the teacher-bashing by Michelle Rhee, which won her cover stories on TIME and Newsweek; and NBC’s “Education Nation”; Bill Gates advocating that great teachers should have larger classes and defining great with VAM; and state legislatures removing tenure, collective bargaining, funding the agency for inexperienced teachers, TFA; removing salary bumps for experience and education: and guess what happens? not a great teacher in every classroom, but a national teacher shortage!

Why would anyone want to be a teacher to join the ranks of the unrespected, the underpaid, and to become the targets of so many powerful people, a strange coalition of billionaires and yahoos?

Here is the latest from Politico:

“TRYING TO FIND TEACHERS: The number of teacher licenses issued each year in Indiana dropped by a third over the last five years. About 3,800 licenses were issued during the 2014-15 school year – down 21 percent from the previous year, according to state data [http://bit.ly/1WlEx0F ] released on Thursday. The numbers reflect a nationwide trend: Many states are struggling with teacher shortages. Teacher pay is dismal. Fewer students are enrolling in teacher preparation programs, drawn to better-paying jobs as the U.S. continues to climb out of the recession. During the 2008-09 school year, more than 719,000 students nationwide were enrolled in teacher prep programs. By 2012-13, that number fell to about 500,000. And some say [http://bit.ly/1R42HtL] that fights over academic standards, tenure and testing are driving teachers away.

“- States and districts are coping in a number of ways. Oklahoma is resorting to emergency measures, for example. The Oklahoma Board of Education has approved 842 emergency teaching certificates since July – compared to 825 emergency teaching certificates total over the last four years, the Tulsa World reports [http://bit.ly/1NPIN5u]. The emergency certificates allow people to work as teachers who don’t have the qualifications usually required. Oklahoma state education chief Joy Hofmeister told [http://politi.co/1QBLzKY ] Morning Education earlier this month that she’s working to build pathways for emergency-certified teachers to get full certification. She also wants the state legislature to tackle teacher compensation this legislative session. The state announced [http://bit.ly/1NXi3BJ] Thursday that it’s forming a task force to tackle the shortage.

“- Oregon’s schools and districts are recruiting professionals without education backgrounds through alternative route licenses, the Associated Press reports [http://bit.ly/1iOV8Mk ]. More than 2,200 Oregon students completed teacher preparation programs in 2008-09, compared to nearly 1,700 in 2012-13.”

The upshot: states will have to lower standards to have enough teachers. A strange strategy for improving education!

At Governor Andrew Cuomo’s insistence, New York has compiled a list of the state’s low-performing schools that have been given an ultimatum: improve significantly in one or two years or go into “receivership.”

in this post, Buffalo board member Dr. Barbara Nevergold describes State Commissioner MaryEllen Elia’s intense interest in Buffalo schools. She has visited Buffalo twice and held numerous meetings her second time. She was especially interested in two schools: Burgard and South Park High Schools.

Dr. Nevergold writes:

“The Commissioner was blunt regarding her assessment of the situation at Burgard and South Park High Schools. She came armed with data regarding teacher effectiveness ratings and student performance as measured by standardized tests. Wasting no time, she told Burgard and South Park staffs that she discerned a “disconnect” between these two measures. She said that while the majority of teachers, in both schools, were evaluated as effective or highly effective, student achievement was not correspondingly ranked. In other words, students with effective teachers are expected to receive test scores that mirror their teachers’ ratings. How did they explain this discrepancy, she queried? The staff members were hard pressed to respond. Her assertion about this disconnect and her question left no doubt that the Commissioner believes that there is a “connect” between these two measures. Although, not a subject for in-depth discussion, the pointed attention given this issue communicated the Commissioner’s support for the hotly contested teacher evaluation system pushed by the Governor and the Legislature.”

Clearly, the Commissioner believes that there is a direct connection between student test scores and teacher ratings. In this, she mirrors Governor Cuomo’s (uninformed) views.

Not everyone agrees with Elia. Buffalo teacher Sean Crowley hits her upside the head for trusting test scores as measures of teacher quality. He criticizes her for blaming teachers who persevere in two of the state’s toughest schools, where teachers have been attacked by students.

Crowley writes:

“Her contempt for the dedicated teachers at South Park and Burgard couldn’t be any more obvious. I spent my first 5 years teaching at Burgard and the day I broke up a knife fight in a hallway during lunchtime I went home and wrote out my request for a transfer. The knife wielder has since been incarcerated for a fatal knife attack during a home invasion. He stands a chance of being paroled next month too by the way. I accepted a position for the following year at South Park the school where a security guard had been shot by a student in a hallway a few months earlier. I guess I was using the lightning can’t strike twice in the same spot logic. MaryEllen Elia’s fuzzy homecoming stories about Sweet Home don’t cut it when you talk about the environment of these two schools. And what’s really amazing about them both is the number of hard core dedicated teachers you’ll find at Burgard and South Park shaking off the adversity coming to work, handling everything that gets thrown at them. And yes things like staplers, chairs and books are among the items thrown at them.

“MaryEllen Elia has Buffalo in her sights. She has no time for the realities of the communities that produce so many kids who don’t do well on standardized tests. She has no insight or compassion or respect for the teachers who spend their days with kids from unbearably adversarial homes and neighborhoods. She doesn’t want to hear it. She has no place in her head or her heart for this data. In Elia’s head these teachers don’t deserve to be rated anything above ineffective if their students don’t score well on tests that are purposely created to be too difficult in order to create the illusion of bad teaching and failure. She is sticking to her script. We all know the endgame of her script is to fire as many teachers as possible and weaken teacher’s unions enough that the forces of privatization can be sent in to “save the day.” They won’t of course but that’s not really the objective here anyway.”

situation and the dissension on the board. Although she doesn’t mention it, Carl Paladino is a member of the school board; not only did he run against Cuomo in his first race for governor, but he is a charter school owner and real estate developer. Conflict of interest?

Dr. Nevergold writes:

“The designation of 25 Buffalo schools as “persistently struggling” or “struggling” by the New York State Education Department is the most recent decision that has a major consequence for the District. The District has one year with the 5 schools identified as “persistently struggling” and 2 years with the remaining 20 to demonstrate progress. During this period, the Superintendent has been named the Receiver for these schools. In this role, he has broad powers to institute changes, including staff, curricula and schedule. However, if NYSED determines that the changes are not significant than the Commissioner will appoint an outside receiver to run these schools. The Receivership Law gives the Superintendent the discretion to make decisions about these schools without the approval of the Board. And while some individuals believe that the Superintendent will use this power to totally circumvent the Board, I don’t believe that it would be prudent or in the best interests of these schools for him to act as a solo entity. However, this is a discussion that must take place so all parties are clear on the future direction regarding these 25 schools. The Board has the responsibility to ensure there is clarity.”

New Commissioner MaryEllen Elia has promised to crackdown on the Buffalo schools. This will be a test case of her skills and leadership.

Does anyone believe that “persistently struggling” schools can be turned around in one year? Common sense suggests that genuine change would require additional staff and resources, intensive tutoring, wraparound services, and other investments. Or a school could kick out the lowest scoring kids and claim a pretend victory.

The Albert Shanker Institute studied teacher diversity in nine important cities: Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.

What they learned was that the proportion of black teachers had declined, in some cities dramatically over the past decade.

All of these cities–to a greater or lesser degree–have been targets of corporate reform.

The black share of teachers’ positions declined by 1% in Boston’s charter sector, 24% in New Orleans, nearly 28% in Washington, D.C.

Is there a principle here? The more corporate reform, the fewer black teachers?

State Superintendent MaryEllen Elia said Néw York would stick with Common Core, no matter that public opinion does not support it.

A Siena College poll found that 64% of Néw York voters either oppose Common Core or thinks it has made no difference.

She also said, ““The United States used to lead the world educationally, but we’ve fallen to the middle of the pack. Our students are lagging behind, and the global economy is growing more competitive every day.”

Actually, that’s not true. The U.S. never led the world on test scores. When the first international tests were given in the 1960s, the U.S. students came in last. Yet over the next 50 years, our nation surpassed the other 11 nations that took the same test by every measure: economic productivity, technological innovation, military might, creativity, and democratic institutions. The test scores of 15-year-olds do not predict our future. The policies of our government, the decisions of corporations to outsource jobs, our treatment of our children and communities matter more.

When I met Commissioner Ekia, I have her a copy of “Reign of Error,” which explains this in greater detail. Obviously she hasn’t had time to read it.

Given the debacle of the Gates teacher evaluation in Hillsborough County, where Elia was superintendent until January, she should rethink her views.

EduShyster reports that three of the city’s leading law firms have filed a lawsuit to overturn the state’s cap on the number of charter schools.

The irony is that they are suing the state and the state board of education, which are led by charter advocates.

She writes:

So our defendants in a case alleging that the charter cap is a violation of students’ civil rights also happen to be wildly pro proponents of lifting said cap. Are there any other ways in which this case is in fact the opposite of what it purports to be? Funny you should ask…It turns out that the case has nothing to with individual rights period—it’s actually a separation of powers case that will hinge on the concept of *justiciability.* I will tell you no more about this now as we have officially stumbled onto a terrain in which I am *needs improvement.* But suffice it to say that this is yet another reason for the decided lack of enthusiasm that beshrouds this case. You see, our white-shod friends have accidentally raised a topic that our proponent-defendants would prefer to eschew: the increasingly unequal state of school funding in Massachusetts, and the role that charter schools play in exacerbating that inequality, especially in poor districts.

Remember the line about charter schools saving poor kids from failing schools? Here is the irony. Massachusetts is the highest performing state in the nation. As more charter schools are opened, more school districts will lose students and resources.

The Bay State–or at least its current leaders–seem determined to create a fiscal crisis for underfunded districts and a two-tier system of schools with public funds. One free to choose its students, the other required to enroll all students.

Parent activist Karen Wolfe reported that public magnet schools far outperformed privtately managed charter on the recent state tests.

The report released by Cortines said:

““While overall results indicate that independent charter schools scored higher on these tests than traditional LAUSD schools, it also highlights the stellar performance of our magnet schools, which out-performed charter schools at all grade levels,” Cortines wrote.

“In English Language Arts, 65% of magnets scored higher than the state average compared with 34% of independent charters. On the Math assessment, 56% of magnets scored higher than the state average, more than twice what the charters scored.

“This report proves what many public education advocates have always known: the diversity of our public schools is an asset, not something to avoid.

“Charter school parents often choose charters because class sizes are smaller and the school community is similar to their own. But this report turns that choice on its head.

“The performance of our magnets demonstrates how academic innovation can serve minority students and those from underserved communities who are seeking a nontraditional education. While the primary function of our magnets is to ensure ethnic diversity at schools districtwide, the 198 magnet programs and schools also provide a community of learning for students at all economic levels.” Cortines said.”

Whenever anyone dares to challenge the corporate reformers’ ideas, whenever anyone points out that all their plans have come to nought, when anyone says that they are demoralizing teachers and promoting privatization, they will inevitably get the reply:

“Do you have a better idea?”

This is a curious response because it could apply in any number of dreadful situations: Suppose someone is pounding someone on the head with a rock, and you say “stop!” Would they answer, “Do you have a better idea?” Suppose a train is headed for a cliff, and you urge the engineer to change course; would he answer, “Do you have a better idea?”

Well, Peter Greene has better ideas. (So do I; read “Reign of Error,” which responds to that question.) Peter is a high school teacher in Pennsylvania who apparently reads everything and writes faster than anyone else on the planet.

He begins:

As much time as I spend writing about what I think people get wrong, it’s important to keep some focus on what I want to see done right. So let’s look at the major issues in education these days and consider what the positive outcome would be in a perfect world, and what would be a hopeful outcome in the real world.

SCHOOL CHOICE

Turning schools into a competitive marketplace is toxic for education. It does not drive improvement and, as currently practiced, it does not empower parents, but instead more commonly disempowers them.

In a Perfect World…

Choice pushers like to say that no child should be trapped in a failing school just because of her zip code. I say that no child should have to leave her neighborhood just to find a decent school. People don’t want choice; they want good schools.

So in my perfect world, every child is able to attend a great school in his own neighborhood, with his neighbors, near where his family lives. Every school receives the funding and support it needs to be excellent.

In this world…

No more building a well-funded, well-supported school as an excuse to abandon the school already existing school. If we must have choice, let it be between excellent schools with, perhaps different focuses, or with the goal of improving a city and community through creating a diverse learning community.

But all schools must be fully funded and fully supported. No more “Well, a thousand students are trapped in this failing school, so we’re going to invest millions of dollars in creating a great school for 100 of them.”

He has a good idea about standardized testing:

BIG STANDARDIZED TESTING

In a perfect world…

It just stops. It’s done. We don’t do it, at all, ever. Period, full stop.

In this world…

The BS Tests are uncoupled from any stakes at all. They don’t affect student standings or promotion. They aren’t used to evaluate teachers or to rank schools or to affect anybody’s professional future. “But how will we hold teachers and schools accountable?” someone cries out. Here’s the truth that some folks just refuse to see– the BS Tests do not hold anybody accountable for anything except test scores, and they do so at a cost to the real goals that most real humans expect from their teachers and their schools.

And once you do all of that, the market pressure is on test manufacturers to come up with tests that are actually useful, and not junk.

He offers other good ideas of what public education should look like. Read it and offer your own ideas.

Last year, Hampshire College in Massachusetts decided that it would no longer require either the SAT or the ACT for admission. This made Hampshire different from the 800+ colleges that are “test-optional,” where students may or may not submit their scores on college admission examinations. Hampshire College was founded in 1970 as an alternative private liberal arts college that was free to experiment with its curriculum; it relies on portfolios of work, rather than distribution requirements; it relies on narrative evaluations rather than grades and GPA. It is one of the top colleges in the nation in terms of the proportion of its graduates who continue to graduate school.

President Jonathan Lash wrote:


You won’t find our college in the U.S. News & Word Report “Best Colleges” rankings released this month. Last year Hampshire College decided not to accept SAT/ACT test scores from high school applicants seeking admission. That got us kicked off the rankings, disqualified us, per U.S. News rankings criteria. That’s OK with us.

We completely dropped standardized tests from our application as part of our new mission-driven admissions strategy, distinct from the “test-optional” policy that hundreds of colleges now follow. If we reduce education to the outcomes of a test, the only incentive for schools and students to innovate is in the form of improving test-taking and scores. Teaching to a test becomes stifling for teachers and students, far from the inspiring, adaptive education which most benefits students. Our greatly accelerating world needs graduates who are trained to address tough situations with innovation, ingenuity, entrepreneurship, and a capacity for mobilizing collaboration and cooperation.

We weighed other factors in our decision:

· Standardized test scores do not predict a student’s success at our college

· SATs/ACTs are strongly biased against low-income students and students of color, at a time when diversity is critical to our mission

· We surveyed our students and learned not one of them had considered rankings when choosing to apply to colleges; instead they most cared about a college’s mission

· Some good students are bad test takers, particularly under stress, such as when a test may grant or deny college entry; Multiple-choice tests don’t reveal much about a student

· We’ve developed much better, fairer ways to assess students who will thrive at our college.

In our admissions, we review an applicant’s whole academic and lived experience. We consider an applicant’s ability to present themselves in essays and interviews, review their recommendations from mentors, and assess factors such as their community engagement and entrepreneurism. And yes, we look closely at high school academic records, though in an unconventional manner. We look for an overarching narrative that shows motivation, discipline, and the capacity for self-reflection. We look at grade point average (GPA) as a measure of performance over a range of courses and time, distinct from a one-test-on-one-day SAT/ACT score. A student’s consistent “A” grades may be coupled with evidence of curiosity and learning across disciplines, as well as leadership in civic or social causes. Another student may have overcome obstacles through determination, demonstrating promise of success in a demanding program. Strong high school graduates demonstrate purpose, a passion for authenticity, and commitment to positive change.

We’re seeing remarkable admissions results since disregarding standardized test scores:

· Our yield, the percentage of students who accepted our invitation to enroll, rose in a single year from 18% to 26%, an amazing turnaround

· The quantity of applications went down but the quality went up, likely because we made it harder to apply, asking for more essays; Our applicants collectively were more motivated, mature, disciplined and consistent in their high school years than past applicants

· Class diversity increased to 31% students of color, the most diverse in our history, up from 21% two years ago

· The percentage of students who are the first-generation from their family to attend college rose from 10% to 18% in this year’s class.

Our “No SAT/ACT policy” has also changed us in ways deeper than data and demographics: Not once did we sit in an Admissions committee meeting and “wish we had a test score.” Without the scores, every other detail of the student’s application became more vivid. Their academic record over four years, letters of recommendation, essays, in-person interviews, and the optional creative supplements gave us a more complete portrait than we had seen before. Applicants gave more attention to their applications including the optional components, putting us in a much better position to predict their likelihood of success here.

This move away from test scores and disqualification from the US News rankings has allowed us to innovate in ways we could not before. In other words, we are free to innovate rather than compromise our mission to satisfy rankings criteria:
-We no longer chase volumes of applications to superficially inflate our “selectivity” and game the US News rankings. We no longer have to worry that any applicant will “lower our average SAT/ACT scores” and thus lower our US News ranking. Instead we choose quality over quantity and focus attention and resources on each applicant and their full portfolio.

-At college fairs and information sessions, we don’t spend time answering high school families’ questions about our ranking and test score “cut-offs.” Instead we have conversations about the things that matter: What does our unique academic program look like and what qualities does a student need to be successful at it?

-An unexpected benefit: this shift has saved us significant time and operational expense. Having a smaller but more targeted, engaged, passionate, and robust applicant pool, we are able to streamline our resources.

How can US News rankings reliably measure college quality when their data-points focus primarily on the high school performance of the incoming class in such terms as GPA, SAT/ACT, class rank, and selectivity? These measures have nothing to do with the college’s results, except perhaps in the college’s aptitude for marketing and recruiting. Tests and rankings incentivize schools to conform to test performance and rankings criteria, at the expense of mission and innovation.

Our shift to a mission-driven approach to admissions is right for Hampshire College and the right thing to do. We fail students if we reduce them to a standardized test number tied more to their financial status than achievement. We fail students by perpetuating the myth that high standardized test scores signal “better” students. We are in the top one percent of colleges nationwide in the percentage of our undergraduate alumni who go on earn advanced degrees – this on the strength of an education where we assess their capabilities narratively, and where we never, not once, subject them to a numerical or letter grade on a test or course.

At Hampshire College, we face the same financial challenges as many colleges. But these challenges provide an opportunity to think about who we are and what matters to us. We can not lose sight of our mission while seeking revenues or chasing rankings. We are committed to remaining disqualified from the US News rankings. We’re done with standardized testing, the SAT, and ACT.

– Jonathan Lash, President of Hampshire College, is also a Director of World Resources Institute, a DC-based environmental think tank, where he previously served as president. Jonathan is an widely recognized environmental leader who chaired President Bill Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development and was the State of Vermont’s Environmental Secretary and Commissioner. He holds a law degree and master’s degree in education from Catholic University of America and a bachelor’s from Harvard College.

The latest Siena poll reports that most Néw Yorkers like the idea of a $15 per hour minimum wage. But not many like Common Core.

“The Siena poll shows that 40 percent of voters say the implementation of Common Core worsened public education, and 24 percent said the implementation had no meaningful effect. Only 19 percent said the implementation improved education.
A plurality of voters (38 percent) also called the standards too demanding. Twenty percent said they aren’t good enough, and 23 percent said they’re just right.

“The regional divide here isn’t much of a surprise either: Those in the suburbs and upstate are more critical of the standards in this poll than those in New York City are. Recall that the highest percentages of state test opt-outs in April were from outside the five boroughs.”