Archives for the month of: February, 2016

Audrey Amrein-Beardsley writes on her blog VAMboozled that Néw York teacher Sheri Lederman rejected a settlement offer from the state.

Lederman, a veteran teacher on Long Island, is suing the state to challenge the validity of VAM. Although she has long been recognized as a superstar teacher, she got a low rating. Her husband Bruce is a lawyer, who is litigating on her behalf.

The state offered to raise her rating if she would abandon the lawsuit. The state said that the teacher evaluation process will be changed, in some fashion, but the Ledermans rejected the offer because there is no certainty that VAM will disappear.

Amrein-Beardsley explains the situation and adds useful links.

This is a hilarious explanation of how charter schools succeed. If you might be offended, don’t watch.

 

If you want to see a hotly debated issue presented in graphic form, then take a peek. Only 2 minutes.

I received this comment recently in my email: 

“I haven’t really been sure about the hullabaloo centering on the Common Core until this year. What follows are some of my thoughts regarding my daughter’s AP English class. If what follows might be helpful for discussion in your blog, please use my story as you wish. I admire your work and am very thankful for your voice in education.
All the best!

My daughter is taking AP Language and Composition this year and I have been intrigued by the texts used in the class. It happens that I took the same class many decades ago. It amazes me how the reading lists differ from my class as compared to hers! I recall reading a lot of fiction. Her course seems to be almost exclusively non fiction. Has this AP course changed so much over the years that Camus and Miller, Wolf and Hawthorne are no longer useful? As I browsed syllabi for AP Language and Composition for recent years from other schools available on the internet, I came to realize that the difference in my daughter’s class has nothing to do with the decades that separate the instruction I received, compared to hers. What is different is the implementation of Common Core standards! Common Core wasn’t really real to me until now.
Take a look at what my daughter is reading during her first semester:

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebbecca Skloot
Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers by Mary Roach
Short pieces such as:

Fish Cheeks by Amy Tan
“How Fetal Tissue is Used in Medical Research” The Week
“Ten Benefits of Reading: Why You Should Read Every Day” by Lana Winter-Herbert for LifeHack.org
“The Ugly Truth About Beauty” by Dave Berry
“Fly the Partisan Skies” by David Brooks
This can be compared to reading lists from several schools I happened upon on the internet, all of which contained texts much closer to what I read so many years ago. This one offers a useful example:
AP English Language and Composition Syllabus 2014-2015 Darla Barnett Terry High School
First 18 weeks
Shea, Renee, Lawrence Scanlon and Robin Dissin Aufses. The Language of Composition: Reading, Writing, Rhetoric. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2013.

-Excerpts from 19th Century American Writers: The Transcendentalists
-Dead Poets Society
-Excerpts from Mark Twain’s writings
-Arthur Miller’s The Crucible
-Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter
– Zora Neale Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God
Other syllabi include works by Nabokov, Didion, Sontag, E. B. White, Frost, Emily Dickenson, names oh so familiar to me.
Why the difference for my daughter’s class? It turns out that the Skloot and Roach books have been adopted for Common Core as very important texts. They are “informational” and they are geared toward teaching science subjects while being useful for courses such as AP English Language and Composition. My daughter accepts their use for the course – the many kids who are interested in science and don’t really enjoy fiction that much are better served, she thinks, by these books than by the classical texts. However, I noticed that all the works are rather short in length. I asked her how much reading she does this year compared to her previous year’s English course. She replied, “Less, but it’s more in depth, unpleasant reading!” The unpleasantness refers to the fact that her major reading has to do with death, cadavers and a lot of science and politics that explore issues of death and cadavers. But, she can persevere through the course and she really likes her teacher!
Since the course my daughter is taking is focused upon “language” and “composition,” I am comfortable with the idea that she will learn all that she needs to learn using “informational” texts. This isn’t a literature course, after all. However, it must be acknowledged, I think, that the classical literature that served to lead young minds to process “language” and encourage “composition” is being sacrificed to Common Core “informational” texts. The fine minds that produced classical literature are not the influences that shape my daughter’s writing this year. Instead, science writers fill that role.
Common Core is changing education in fundamental ways and I only recently realized how that is the case, given my daughter’s experience. Is this good or bad? I don’t really know. But I do know that I picked up a copy of a short story, The Awakening, by Kate Chopin, one of the texts used in several of the online syllabi, for my daughter to read in her spare moments (she read it and really liked it!)! Something tells me that I will be visiting the library many more times in the coming school year to search out classical literature for my daughter’s spare time reading!”

In a guest column on EduShyster’s blog, student-teacher Mary Sypek describes her lesson with a class of fourth-graders. They are 26 children from 22 countries. She is teaching them about American government and the Constitution. Karin asks her, “Will Donald Trump deport me?”

 

What should she tell him?

Mike Klonsky posts a video of the Chicago Teachers Union march in Chicago.

 

Also a newspaper article showing that public opinion strongly supports the union over Rahm.

Lyndsey Layton of the Washington Post discovered one of our favorite bloggers at the 25th anniversary party of TFA.

Mild-mannered Gary Rubinstein kept his Superman outfit hidden as he threaded through the throng of reformers past and present. Michelle Rhee was there for a rare sighting, as was Eva Moskowitz for a not-rare sighting.

Gary is there to tell the truth. Tough job.

“Rubinstein said he will call out any examples of spinning or exaggeration he sees. One example – Rubinstein tweeted a photo of a graphic that was displayed at one workshop that showed the District of Columbia as the urban district with the largest gains in math and reading scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) from 2011 to 2015. Rubinstein tweeted that D.C.’s scores were so low that even after the gains, it still was the worst performing of the major urban districts.

“D.C. Schools Chancellor Kaya Henderson was a Teach for America Corps member in New York in 1992.

“I’m here to disrupt this,” said Rubinstein, 46, as he walked largely unnoticed around the cavernous Walter W. Washington Convention Center.

“Rubinstein says TFA exaggerates the success of its program and alumni while at the same time overemphasizing the role of teachers, contributing to a political climate that blames educators for the academic struggles of low-income children.

“TFA is so allied with this education reform, this ‘Waiting for Superman’ narrative, that it ignores other factors,” said Rubinstein, referring to the 2010 documentary that was critical of traditional public schools, and featured Rhee as she challenged tenure and other union protections for teachers. The film portrayed non-unionized charter schools as a salvation, and followed families as they tried to win admission through a lottery.

“The truth is, schools need more resources,” Rubinstein said. “If there’s a high poverty school, it needs way more resources – potentially break-the-bank resources. It needs smaller class sizes. I’m talking four (students) to one (teacher). But TFA doesn’t talk about that.”

Experienced journalist Sarah Karp here explains what sank the contract negotiations between the Chicago Public Schools and the Chicago Teachers Union.

 

“In the recent Chicago Public Schools contract offer, which now lingers in a sort of political purgatory, teachers were offered a pay raise, but there was a big catch: CPS educators would essentially be paying for the salary increase by sacrificing the most experienced members of their teaching force.

 

“An early-retirement buyout program was the linchpin of the Board of Education’s since-rejected offer – and it’s one of the main reasons why Chicago Teachers Union representatives voted down the deal, according to union officials.

 

“The board was offering $1,500 per year of service to teachers of retirement age and $750 to support staff to leave, according to the CTU. If at least 1,500 teachers and 700 other staffers took advantage of the buyout offer, the contract would stand, according to the CPS offer.

 

“But, if not enough employees signed up for early retirement, then CPS could reopen the contract – which union members feared would lead to layoffs.

 

“With that prospect looming and, among other things, the concern of a brain drain as experienced educators walked out the door, the CTU’s bargaining team of 40 union representatives voted down the deal unanimously on Monday.

 

“At a press conference on Tuesday, CTU President Karen Lewis said the union voted down the contract offer because, “No. 1 it would have pushed out 2,200 of our seasoned, experienced educators, disproportionately impacting African-American and Latino educators. It will lead to ballooning class sizes and the cuts the board proposed were solely out of our pockets.”

 

“Fifty-four percent of teachers with more than 20 years experience are black or Latino, whereas only 22 percent of new teachers are, according to a Better Government Association analysis of 2012 state data. New teachers make about $48,000 a year, while those with 20 years or more experience make an average of $88,000

If you open this link, you can see every state’s report card. This shows which states value their public schools. It shows which states resist privatization, which states finance their public schools adequately and equitably, which states encourage teacher professionalism, which states promote opportunity for all students.

 

Read about your state. It is on one page. Share it with your elected officials and school leaders.

 

The most important goal of the NPE report is to get the public and policymakers to understand what matters most in improving schools.

 

Our nation has pursued failed market-based policies for 15 years. It is time to do what works, based on evidence and experience.

John Abeigon, president of the Newark Teachers Union, wrote an article calling on the corporate charter chains to come clean about their finances and their practice of skimming the easiest-to-educate students, and to stop boasting about unverified results.

 

Abeigon writes:

 

“The time has come for New Jersey taxpayers to take a close look at corporate-sponsored charter schools in New Jersey. So-called school-choice advocates are pumping millions of dollars into political and advertising campaigns to protect the status quo when it involves the quasi-secret operations of privately managed charter schools in cities like Newark and elsewhere. The strike a wedge between Newark’s parents to draw the attention of taxpayers away from their financial shenanigans.

 

“The Newark Teachers Union has asked for more transparency in the management of corporate-backed charter schools. The Newark Public Schools have two monthly meetings where the school board and superintendent can be held accountable for the actions of their school. When was the last time the citizens of Newark were invited to a KIPP board meeting? What about Uncommon Schools?

 

Also, as these charters have grown, banks and corporations have developed ways, and found alternative credit routes, to provide capital to charter schools at favorable rates. What are these rates? And what are they funding? Have taxpayers and state legislators had an opportunity to review these credit applications?

 

Why are Newark’s corporate-run charters so afraid of transparency and democracy? Are Newark taxpayers allowed to run for election on a North Star Academy school board? Where are their financial statements? Where are their attendance reports? How are they spending taxpayer money? And why must the union be asking these questions?

 

“Second of all, corporate-charter advocates try to make the argument that Newark parents are “voting with their feet” and leaving public schools. But this is very misleading. Strong community schools like Dayton Street School were closed, forcing students from their communities. And still a vast majority of students elected to choose traditional public schools at their first option when they filled out their choices under One Newark.

 

“On top of that, the corporate charter industry throws millions of dollars into advertising their schools and broad claims of undocumented success. When was the last time you saw a billboard or TV commercial advertising your local traditional school? Or the many successful magnet high schools in Newark? There is no true choice here, just a financial tidal wave to push parents towards the corporate charter schools. They burn the village down, and then yell as loudly “This village has failed it’s citizens!”

 

“It is also very misleading when charters tout their successes without providing any evidence beyond their press release. As much as they promise “blind lotteries” are used to select their students, the numbers don’t hold up. Newark’s charter schools somehow manage to end up without the more challenging populations. They have far lower number of special ed, LEP, and poverty students.

 

“And as the charters expand, they continue to cream off select student groups, leaving the traditional schools with a more concentrated population of more challenging and more expensive students to educate — while draining away the very financial resources needed to provide these students with a quality education.

 

In contrast to the charters, the Newark Public Schools take students as they are:

 

“We educate all students, and we are proud of that. No matter what their IEP’s say. No matter what language their parents speak or if their parents are not involved in their lives. No matter if they are homeless or coming to school hungry every morning. That is what a Newark educator does, and shame on corporate-sponsored so-called school-choice advocates for denouncing that work for their financial and professional gain.

”

 

Abeigon concludes that if charters really are doing a good job, as they claim, they should open their doors and their books. They should share the secrets of their success, if it is real. Be transparent and be accountable to the public.

 

 

 

 

This weekend, Teach for America is celebrating its 25th anniversary. As befits an organization with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and assets,TFA is throwing itself a grand party at the vast Washington, D.C. convention center.

Some TFA alumni are not happy with the corporation. They criticize its role in privatizing public education, teaching children to conform, and undermining the teaching profession. The TFA propaganda machine does not welcome dissenters. It calls them “haters” and “traitor” and “enemies.”

Amber Kim is a TFA grad. She has grown critical. But, she insists, she is not a hater, and she refuses to be silenced or turned into an outcast.

She has organized a session at the TFA celebration for critical alumni, where they can convene, confer, and compare notes.

She writes:

“This February, though, at TFA’s 25th anniversary summit in Washington DC, I will be facilitating a sanctioned space for critics of TFA. The “Critics Not Haters” brunch will be held on Sunday, February 7 from 9 to 11am. All critical Summit participants are welcome to come and process their experiences at the Summit as well as critique TFA in general. This brunch came about after several deep conversations with TFA National staff. I requested space for all TFA alums, including critical alums, to collaborate and discuss perspectives that are important to them. This brunch is a space for TFA critics to build community, make connections, and hear numerous TFA counter-stories….

“It is important for me to state that I am very critical of how TFA has constructed, promoted, and empowered a very narrow, hegemonic definition of an “excellent education.” I am critical of the fact that TFA (often covertly) proclaims that an excellent education for all children is simply the content of the education that has historically been provided to and reserved for affluent, White children rather than an education that prepares students to challenge the deep injustices that undergird our society. I believe that TFA (covertly and overtly) pushes its corps members to deliver–unapologetically and uncritically–that kind of “rigorous,” “No Excuses” education to the students they serve while in TFA. Then, because of their (limited) experience in TFA, corps members go on to promote, teach in, lead, and create “No Excuses” schools (KIPP, STRIVE, Uncommon Schools, BES, etc.) where it is normal to hear “Voices off!” commanded or to see black and brown students marching in straight, silent lines to class. Schools where teachers are armed with their copies of Teach Like a Champion and equipped with robotic and patronizing “behavior narration” in order to improve test scores. Test score equity, though, is NOT equity when the means and methods used to achieve equal test scores are dehumanizing and rely on controlling the bodies, voices, and minds of other people’s children.

“TFA’s promotion of and alliance with these methods and No Excuses Charters (no matter how covert), however, is intentional and consistent. TFA tries to appear neutral and denies any formal connection, but the ties between TFA and the reform movement are evident and strong. TFA does not take any responsibility for the test-score obsessed, compliance-driven machine it has put in motion, nor does it own the harm that it does to students and the communities it purports to serve. So, yes, TFA makes me think critically. It makes me angry, makes me sad, makes me fight, makes me speak out, but it does not make me a hater.”