Archives for the month of: January, 2016

This is a comment by a reader in Seattle who read the post about the State Senate’s 27-20 vote to offer public funding to charter schools, after the state’s highest court ruled that charters are not public schools. This is Bill Gates’ highest priority, ignoring a court decision to fund the schools equitably, which the legislature has not done.

 

 

“Before anyone decides it’s time to jump off Galloping Gertie, (which is really a lovely bridge here in my town) we can take heart that: 1) Republicans may have the state Senate but they don’t have the House. Won’t pass there and I suspect Chairman of the House, Frank Chopp, won’t let any similar legislation see the light of day on the floor. 2) Our Guv. ain’t gonna sign any charter legislation. No. Way. So the whole thing is an optics play going nowhere. Billy will throw more money, perhaps big, big, money at future Supreme Court races but right now Billy doesn’t have the votes there either. King County Superior Court Judge William Downing just ruled that Initiative 1366, another Tim Eyeman anti-tax measure, was unconstitutional and void. Schadenfreude Alert! Congratulations, Tim, on winning the quadfecta of unconstitutionality! Whee! Love ya Judge Downing!

 

 

“We’ve got some firewalls. We can be assured that all future district legislative seats will be big $$ races. I’m working with a small funding group building the bench on the hyperlocal level…county, city and school board races. This is happening in several places in Western Washington. Doing what we can..working the refs when we can. Some stealth, some bigger efforts. Lots of different players playing to keep the charter gazillionaires on the outside. It’s been self-evident we wouldn’t get the McCleary decision funded when our Guv. didn’t call legislators back to a special session last summer. As they say in the south, “Oh honey, bless your heart!” November’s election might shift things a bit…we’ll have to see.

 

 

“Gov. Jay Inslee will take the Guv’s mansion in the re-election. His opponent…who? Some guy named Bill Bryant, who has *no* name recognition outside of King County, home of the City of Seattle. Me to future doorbeller, “What did you say your name was? Aaand..who are you with? Wait, who is your candidate again? Hmmm…let me Bing that.” Bwaahahaha! Yeah, zilch. Not enough Republicans statewide to counter three counties that dominate elections west of the Cascade range.

 

 

“The bottom line is our State Constitution tells us funding K-12 public education is a paramount duty and the Supremes ruled against Billy’s charter initiative. They still don’t have a foothold anywhere in the state to steal a dime of public money and the opt-out movement is gonna show how much it’s grown in a couple of weeks. We’re ready to expose any OSPI candidate that’s a charter shill. Anyhoo…we’re ground zero and we hope you’ll follow our little state funding drama. Defense is strong….parents and families are fighting. Think rebel alliance. Washington State progressives and many conservatives who support public schools have some serious juice out here. We’re chipping away at it. Stay tuned. Hey Billy! I hope you like reading Diane’s comment section! We love ya Diane. Thank you for helping us keep at it. Dog. Bone. etc.”

Peter Greene examines the latest legislative assault on teachers in Alabama.Alabama seems to have joined a “race to the bottom” in its eagerness to demoralize anyone who teaches its children. If the legislature has its way, teaching will be a temp job, not a profession or a career.

 

He writes:

 

“Would you be willing to bet your entire teaching career that you will never have students who score low on the Big Standardized Test? Would you take the bet for a little bit more money?

 

“Alabama is hoping there are people who will take that bet, as their legislature rolls out the Rewarding Advancement in Instruction and Student Excellence Act– RAISE!! The actual intent of this bill is telegraphed by the fact that it has often been touted as a “tenure reform bill.” To read up on it, I suggest this piece, as well as the blog of Larry Lee, who has covered the act pretty thoroughly and includes many comments from affected parties.

 

“The bill is intended to tie teacher pay and teacher employment to student test results. There will be whole new state action to make up a list of possible evaluation tools for all teachers of untested subjects. There will be requirements for student growth. There will be an opportunity for some students and parents to evaluate teachers.

 

“The BS Test that will be used is the ACT Aspire, a pre-ACT manufactured by the ACT folks. Is it aligned in any way with Alabama’s standards? If it is, nobody seems to be saying so. But those test results will be the basis of pretty much everything?

 

“The big bet that I opened with– that’s the choice that RAISE presents teachers with. You can have a traditional tenure track or a performance track. The performance track is supposed to bring you the big bucks, with huge money on the table. The starting salary on this schedule must be $2,500 more than the lowest traditional starting schedule, so maybe not so huge in some districts. All you have to do is get your students to produce big time test scores– in fact, once your students aren’t producing those scores, your career is done. In other words, on this track, your job is literally only to prepare students for the test.

 

“On the traditional track (called the “grandfathered salary schedule”), you will still be judged by test scores. You’ll wait five years for tenure, and your tenure will be not protect you from low test scores– two bad years ago and your tenure is revoked, with another five year stretch before it can be re-instated. Also, your extra education will no longer make any difference in your pay. What did you think– that the state was going to hire you to stay smart about your field? No smarty pants extra degrees necessary in Alabama.

“Teachers hired before May of 2017 get a choice of which salary schedule to choose– but once they choose the performance schedule, they may not switch back. And if tenured teachers choose the performance track, they must give up tenure.

 

“Also, as just a fun side note, RAISE also boosts the Alabama Longitudinal Data System, a giant data mining and storage program which will make Big Brother proud.

 

“There are many reasons to hate this proposal, including but not limited to the way in which it reduces Alabama schools to nothing but test prep facilities. For teachers who aren’t directly prepping for the ACT, it will be a crap shoot as far as what test they’ll be prepping their students for. But all these tests will be tests that are given strictly to determine the pay and job standing of the teacher in the classroom.

 

“Clearly, Alabama has entered the Drive Teachers Out of the Classroom derby. After all, who would want to take a teaching job where you made some good-ish money for a couple of years but had no hope of maintaining an actual lifetime teaching career. I mean, who would want to get into a classroom, make some bucks, just teach to a test, and then get out before they were even thirty years old? Oh, wait.”

 

One guess.

 

 

This is the eighth in a series of exchanges about the new federal law, the Every Student Succeeds Act. I asked the questions, and David P. Cleary, chief if staff to Senator Lamar Alexander, answered them.

What is the role of the federal Department of Education and the Secretary in the new ESSA?

Short answer:

The role of the department under the new ESSA will be significantly scaled back from the role it has had under NCLB and the waivers. The Department still has a role in ensuring compliance with the law and monitoring state implementation of state plans, but the level of authority the Department has given itself over the past 14 years is significantly scaled back. But, it is important to remember that we are in a period of transition in moving to the new law, meaning the Department will have some authority from the old law and waivers that it can exercise until new state plans are in place.

Long Answer:

ESSA makes major changes in four areas: federal conditions on state accountability systems, peer review and secretarial approval of state plans, issuing regulations, and review of waivers.

First, ESSA significantly scaled back the federal footprint in the law by eliminating the original goal of all students being ‘proficient’ by 2013-2014, the Adequate Yearly Progress requirements, and the cascading sanctions that would go into effect of a school failed to meet state goals.

Second, the new law made significant changes to the peer review process and secretarial approval of state plans. Over the past 14 years, there has been too much secrecy about the approval process of state plans, and too much interference by the Department in reviewing and approving state plans. It is the role of the Department to determine whether the state plan meets the letter of the law—not whether the plans are ambitious or aggressive or exciting enough, or if the Secretary likes the state plan.

To take a couple examples: a state must show that it has an accountability system that will measure student achievement in all schools using the same measures and includes test scores, high school graduation rates, English language proficiency, and another indicator of school quality or student success. Academic indicators have to be a majority of the factors deciding school performance—but, other than that, how much those measures weigh, or count, in judging schools is not subject to negotiation with the peer reviewers or the Secretary. For example, if the peer reviewers really think that the state should weigh state tests at 43 percent instead of the state’s plan to weigh them at 38 percent, the peer reviewers can make that observation to the state, but neither they nor the Secretary can reject a plan because they don’t like the specific weights the state picks, so long as the state complies with the rest of the law’s requirements.

States can use whatever type of accountability system they want to identify and differentiate schools. Some will create a system involving A through F ranked schools, while other states will categorize schools as Excelling, Succeeding, Watch List, and 5 Percent schools. Others may go with Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Tin. The peer reviewers and Secretary cannot make a state change its system, or enforce a certain type of system.

Most importantly, ESSA made the entire federal review system a lot more transparent. Peer review comments and communications between states and the Department need to be made public, including on the Department’s website. Peer reviewer teams must be comprised of varied individuals that include practitioners and researchers, and states are given an opportunity for a hearing and a chance to revise a plan if the Secretary rejects a state plan for not meeting the law’s requirements. Imagine the showdown between a governor or chief state school officer defending their state plan to the Secretary and his staff. We think that the increased transparency will help states regain the upper hand. The Department’s power over the past 14 years has been both the requirements (and vagueness) of NCLB and the secrecy of peer review process. We’ve changed both in this new law.

Third, as explained elsewhere, ESSA has significantly changed the ability of the Secretary to issue regulations. The new law prohibits the Secretary from dictating or defining terms in a way this is inconsistent with or outside the scope of law, as intended by Congress. The new law also prevents the Secretary from mandating new activities by regulation, and even requires the Secretary to submit certain regulations, including those regarding standards or assessments, to Congress and the public before they become final to give Congress the opportunity to comment and review those regulations.

The best example of what would be prohibited is a requirement that states adopt a teacher evaluation system. Congress explicitly did not include a requirement for states to develop a teacher evaluation system in the law, so the Secretary cannot issue regulations imposing one on the states to get approval of state plans or waivers.

Fourth, ESSA ensures that if a state wants a waiver from the new version of the law, the Secretary cannot add new conditions as part of that review. Again, the teacher evaluation requirement is the best example of something we’ve prohibited. The Secretary is also prohibited from requiring the adoption of certain school turnaround or improvement efforts for any state seeking a waiver. For new waivers, the states can ask for a waiver and the Secretary is required to approve or deny the waiver on the merits of the waiver, not create new requirements that the state has to follow to get the waiver.

Last, it’s important to remember the transition period to the new law. It will take time for states to come up with new accountability systems and state plans. The effective date for accountability systems doesn’t kick in until the 2017-2018 school year to give states time to come up with new plans and transition out of old ones. We created the timeline as such to help prevent disruption for states.

Three years ago, Mercedes Schneider started her blog. Today it turned three. She reveals here how much money she has taken from unions and billionaires.

 

Her blog has been hugely successful, for a few reasons.

 

First of all, Mercedes is unusual because she is a classroom teacher in Louisiana with a Ph.D. in research methods and statistics. She left teaching in a university to teach high school kids because she enjoys it.

 

Second, Mercedes is a prodigious researcher, and she comes up with discoveries that others missed.

 

Third, she has her own voice. She is a character, a real southerner and Louisianan, and she has fashioned a style that combines her intellect, her colloquialisms, and her research.

 

Fourth, she is fearless. She will tackle her governor, her state superintendent, or the billionaire boys who are wreaking havoc with public education. She afflicts the comfortable, and comforts the afflicted.

 

Her books (she has written a new one every summer for the last three years) have been tremendous contributions to those wanting to understand the silent takeover of public education by corporate interests. The first was Chronicle of Echoes (a description of the corporate reform movement and its movers and shakers), the second was Common Core Dilemma (a history of the Common Core), and the third will be coming out soon, on the history and dangers of school choice.

 

Thank you, Mercedes. You are one of a kind.

 

 

 

 

I watched the PBS Newshour tonight and learned that the State Attorney General had selected a lawyer (with the ironic name of Flood) to get to the bottom of the scandal in Flint. In the discussion, Judy Woodruff said that Mr. Flood had contributed to the State Attorney General’s campaign, and the person she was interviewing said that Mr. Flood had also contributed to Governor Snyder’s campaign. However, Flood dismissed any possibility of a conflict of interest.

 

Will the state and the governor be sued? This article says that they are protected from litigation by a concept called “sovereign immunity.”

 

One environmental lawyer said, “They poisoned children.”

 

Not only that, state officials were warned repeatedly of the danger of the polluted water and ignored the warnings. If no one is held accountable, justice will not be served.

Seattle education activists are holding a contest and you can enter! 📚
It is a coloring contest.
It is about a very important court decision, the McCleary decision, in which the state’s highest court ordered the legislature to fully fund the public schools attended by 1,070,000 children. The legislature hasn’t acted.

 

However the state senate passed a bill to help Bill Gates’ charter schools, attended by about 800-900 children. He loves those charters so much he should pay for them and let the legislature do their duty to the state’s children.

http://www.king5.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/23/parents-raise-awareness-education-funding-through-coloring-contest/79216580/
More at https://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2016/01/18/the-color-of-money-mccleary-crime-scene-coloring-contest/.

Florida’s Democratic leader of the House is urging parents to opt their children out of testing. If other Democrats joined in, there would be a groundswell of support for opting out.

“Florida Rep. Mark Pafford, leader of the House Democrats, is urging parents to consider taking their children out of the annual spring Florida Standards Assessments.

“I hope every parent begins to take the time to understand how serious this issue is,” Pafford said at a recent press availability. “That their children are being subjected to tests that in the end don’t amount to much. That the data that comes from those tests are sometimes shared so late it doesn’t matter.

“And, frankly… you have to question the purpose of these tests, whether they’re being used in the best way for children in advancing the public education system, or whether, in fact, they’re being used to create a bastardized type of education system that’s dependent on the private sector.”


Ramon Griffin, whose article was the subject of the previous post, has written an open letter to teachers and other staff at no-excuses charter schools. He wants them to reflect on the psychological costs of certain practices and to seek to transform their schools.

 

 

Griffin writes:

 

 

“Two years ago, I wrote a blog post entitled *Colonizing the Black Natives: Reflections from a former New Orleans Charter School Dean of Students. I started the piece by asking if some charters’ practices were new forms of colonial hegemony. It is vital to add that while I was employed at the school, this thought never crossed my mind. My writings were taken by some charter management administrators and staff as an *attack* instead of an opportunity critically engage and refine, deconstruct and reconstruct practices that are doing more harm than good. This time around, I’m hoping to encourage teachers and staff at No Excuses charter schools to acknowledge what is transpiring in their schools so that we can begin to push back against these practices and transform our schools.

 

 

“I’ll start by offering a few examples of my own. When I chased young Black ladies to see if their nails were polished, or if they had added a different color streak to their hair, or when I followed young men to make sure that their hair wasn’t styled naturally, I could have been critically engaging my administrative peers on why these practices were the law at our school—and how exactly they contributed to getting students into and through college. When my school punished young people for not having items school leaders knew their families couldn’t afford, I could have been pushing back against policies that effectively punished students for being poor. When we pulled students out of their classrooms for countless hours for minor infractions even as we drilled them constantly on the importance of instruction time, we could have been taking our own advice. Or when we suspended students from school for numerous days, we could have been providing alternatives that disciplined them but kept them in school.”

 

 

 

 

 


This post, which appears on Julian Vasquez Heilig’s blog, gives an inside view of a New Orleans charter. It was written two years ago by Ramon Griffin,, the former dean of a New Orleans’ “no excuses” charter.

 

 

Griffin titled it: “Colonizing the Black Natives.”

 

 

He writes:

 

 

“Are some charters’ practices new forms of colonial hegemony? When examining current discipline policies and aligned behavioral norms within charter school spaces, postcolonial theory is useful because of the striking similarities between problematic socialization practices and the educational regimes of the uncivilized masses in colonized nations. A number of postcolonial theorists focus on multiple ways that oppressors dominate their subjects and maintain power over them. For example, while working as the Dean of Students for a charter school in New Orleans, it took me some time to realize that I had been enforcing rules and policies that stymied creativity, culture and student voice. Though some of my main duties involved ensuring the safety and security of all students and adults at the school, investigating student behavioral incidents and establishing a calm and positive school culture, I felt as if I was doing the opposite.

 

 

“My daily routine consisted of running around chasing young Black ladies to see if their nails were polished, or if they added a different color streak to their hair, or following young men to make sure that their hair wasn’t styled naturally as students were not able to wear their hair in uncombed afro styles. None of which had anything to do with teaching and learning, but administration was keen on making sure that before Black students entered the classroom that they looked “appropriate” for learning. As if students whose hair was natural or those whose parents could not afford a uniform tie could not achieve like others who possessed these items.

 

 

“Most times, teachers and administrators scolded Black students for their appearance before they even spoke in morning. If a student did not have the right shoes, they would be placed in a holding area until their parent could be reached. Sometimes, if their parent could not be reached, those students remained in that area the entire day and given detention. I have absolutely no problem with enforcing school rules or policies, but when schools penalize and prevent Black students from learning and engaging in the classroom because their parents do not have the resources or simply cannot afford the uniforms, I take issue with that and I voiced my displeasure many times….

 

 

“Most Black students with or exhibiting disabilities were pegged as outliers at the beginning of each school year; they were unfairly targeted by some teachers who had deficit attitudes sometimes before even meeting the students. Many times, these students were placed on a “special plan” where their parents had to pick them up early and work would be sent home with them to make it seem like they were learning something. However, the work was never turned in or even requested from teachers. If they were not sent home early, they were given detention. If their behavior was perceived as disruptive in detention, they were given some form of suspension. 98% of the students were Black, but if you happened to be a male and exhibited some form of disability, chances are that you were treated harsher, suspended numerous times and spent several hours a day outside of the learning environment. Many were even sent home for the year after taking the LEAP (Louisiana Educational Assessment Program) standardized tests and treated like throwaways.

 

 

“When we tried to implement response to intervention (RTI) with students who either possessed or exhibited disabilities, they were immediately moved from tier 1 to tier 3 and some were subsequently placed in special education even though this did not fit the needs of the student. The idea to segregate certain students considered (outliers) was due to administrative convenience and because most teachers perceived them as being unruly, troubled or just plain too academically deficient to be in class with the other students. This allowed teachers to not be held accountable for teaching all kids and prevented Black students from receiving valuable instruction time.

 

 

“Lastly, everything at the school was done in a militaristic/prison fashion. Students had to walk in lines everywhere they went, including to class and the cafeteria. The behavioral norms and expectations called for all students to stand in unison with their hands to their sides, facing forward, silent until given further instruction. The seemingly tightly coupled structure proved to be inefficient as students and teachers constantly bucked the system in search of breathing room. The systems and procedures seemingly did not care about the Black children and families they served. They were suffocating and meant to socialize students to think and act a certain way. In the beginning, we were teaching “structure,” but it evolved to resemble post-colonialism. Vasquez Heilig, Khalifa, and Tillman (2013) stated that “education was and still is used as a hegemonic form to monitor, sanction, and control civilized people.” Thus, postcolonial theory (Fanon, 1952, 1961; Memmi, 1965; Said, 1978) offers a critical framework through which urban educational policies and practices can be understood and critiqued (DeLeon, 2012; Shahjahan, 2011). They continue their analysis by stating that “at base, post-colonial theorists interrogate the relationship between the legitimized, conquering power and the vanquished subaltern, and ask questions about who defines subjectivities, such as knowledge, resistance, space, voice, or even thought.” Fanon (1961 ) argued, “Colonialism wants everything to come from it.” Essentially, colonizers delegitimize the knowledge, experience, and cultures of the colonized, and establish policy and practice that will always confirm the colonial status quo. In other words, it is important to note that postcolonial studies, though often thought of as relegated to a particular period, are actually also a reference to thoughts, practices, policies, and laws that impact marginalized Black bodies enrolled in charters during the current educational policy era.”

 

 

Vasquez Heilig, J., Khalifa, M., & Tillman, L. (2013). Why have NCLB and high-stakes reforms failed?: Reframing the discourse with a post-colonial lens. In K. Lomotey and R. Milner (Eds.), Handbook of Urban Education. New York: Routledge. (See the post: A Quandary for School Leaders: Equity, High-stakes Testing and Accountability)

 

Peter Greene borrows concepts from sports and business to explain what teachers should be and what reformers want them to be.

He writes about the transactional coach and the transformational coach.

The transactional coach wants to win. He views each of the players for their capacity to contribute to a winning game and season.

The transformational coach tries to bring out the best in every player. The goal is developing every player’s potential, not racking up points on the scoreboard.

He writes:

“Advocates of education reform have, intentionally or not, worked to redefine teachers as transactional coaches. We are supposed to be there just to get that good test score out of each kid. We should use test prep, rewards, threats– whatever works to get the student to make the right marks on the Big Standardized Test so that we can have that easily measured, numerically-coded win. Charter schools have the additional freedom to sort students based on which ones can best complete the transaction and which ones need to be benched. And since the transaction is a fairly simple, we have no shortage of ideas about how to have it broken into short, simple competency-based transactions that can be handled by a computer.

“Transactional coaching is simple, clear and can provide distinct short-term rewards. It is also narrow, shallow, and ultimately subordinates humanity and the value of individuals to an artificial and ultimately meaningless excuse for a life purpose. Transformational coaching is way to see the pursuit of athletic excellence as a means of pursuing human excellence and giving an athlete the tools to pursue whatever goals they might set for themselves. A transformational approach puts humanity at the center, setting goals that recognize higher values than the simple pursuits in front of us. A transactional approach sets up an artificial goal and holds it up as a god to be worshipped and pursued at the expense of any human beings who stand in the way. Can there be any doubt that education should be transformational?”

I don’t often disagree with Peter, but in this case, I think the King of Metaphor is not right. If he refers to a life coach, he makes an important point. If he refers to a sports coach or a business leader, the metaphor fails. The business wants to make a profit, and the CEO has to produce or be fired. In sports, every school or university wants a winning team, and they care more about the results, the scores, than human potential.

Teaching is not sports, not business. It is the profession of developing children into responsible young adults.