Archives for the month of: October, 2016
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

NPE Action Endorses Montana Governor Steve Bullock for Re-Election

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
5

The Network for Public Education Action Fund enthusiastically endorses Governor Steve Bullock for re-election.

Governor Bullock is a parent of children in public schools, and he understands the importance of public education in a democracy.

“Paul Horton, a history teacher and public school activist [in Chicago], had this to say about Governor Bullock. “I was visiting a friend in Bozeman, Montana this summer and was invited to a talk given by Steve Bullock, the current governor of Montana who is running against a Koch funded candidate who supports education privatization. What I heard was heartening for someone from a city where privatization is dictated by an unelected school board. Gov. Bullock pledged that he would fight for public education at all levels and continue to work to increase investment in public schools and programs. Steve Bullock is a candidate teachers, parents, and students can trust. He believes in public education and continued 100% investment in public schools.

“Steve explained to us why his support for public education is so strong. “As the father of three children who attend public school, I know firsthand that what goes on in our schools is very important to families around the state. As Governor, I also know that having a great system of public education is the foundation for building and nurturing a thriving economy. Throughout my career, both as a private attorney and in public service, I have fought to ensure that we have great public schools in Montana. As Governor, I have made record investments in public education, vetoed measures that would have otherwise diverted funds away from or weakened our public schools, and used my position to elevate and support the innovative work happening in classrooms all across Montana.”

“Steve describes his resistance to privatization as follows, “Montana does not authorize public money to go to any private charter schools. I have and will continue to oppose any efforts to do so. Montana rule does allow public school districts, under the authority of the local school board, to apply for “public charter” status. This provision gives public schools additional flexibility to innovate and implement new strategies to improve student outcomes, but maintains accountability and transparency with the locally-elected school board and the Board of Public Education. Public resources should be used to support our outstanding public schools, which are open to all students, with any kind of need. I respect and will protect the rights of parents to choose to educate their children in non-public schools. I will not, however, support legislation that subsidizes that choice with public resources.”

“Steve will face his opponent, businessman, Greg Gianforte, who supports choice and vouchers on November 8.”

Keep Montana public schools strong. Don’t let billionaire bucks undermine democracy!

Vote to re-elect Steve Bullock!

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Networkfor Public Education Action Fund, Privatization, Supporting public schools

Christopher Martell: Why I Will Vote No on Question 2 in Massachusetts

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
11

Christopher Martell, a professor of social studies education at Boston University, wrote a thoughtful explanation of why he would note NO on Question 2 in November. Question 2 would allow the state to open 12 new charter schools every year forever.

Christopher Martell gives five reasons for his decision.

Here the first three reasons:

“This is not a post about the merits of charter schools. Just like their public school peers, some charter schools provide an excellent education, while others are failing their students. The reality is that charter school students perform equal or worse on standardized tests than their peers in the public schools. In Boston, while charter school students perform better on state standardized tests, their public school peers are more likely to graduate college. Overall, Massachusetts has the nation’s best public education system, which is something we should be very proud of, but also something we must carefully protect.

“Instead, this post is focused specifically on the upcoming Ballot Question 2 in Massachusetts. If this question passes, it would remove the current statewide cap on charter schools and allow up to 12 new Massachusetts charter schools every year. If it does not pass, the state legislature will continue to decide how many new charter schools can open in the future. Considering all of the negative consequences of the ballot question at hand, I am using this post to discuss the five reasons why I will be voting NO on Question 2 during this November’s election.

“1. This ballot question will decrease funding for traditional public schools. Despite the “Yes on 1” campaign’s claims in television commercials that voting yes will result in “more funding for public education,” there is no evidence that this is true, especially since communities continue to receive less state educational aid. Even the ballot question’s most vocal supporter, Governor Charlie Baker has stated that Questions 2 will not change the current school funding formula. Currently, more than $450 million is being drawn from public school districts and with an increase of 12 charter schools per year (which according to this ballot question can happen indefinitely), it could cost local school districts close to $1 billion by the end of the decade.

“While charter schools are approved by the state, their funding comes largely from charter school tuition reimbursements from public school districts (see here, for more on charter school funding). Boston had a $158 million charter school tuition assessment, which was 5% of the entire city budget. If this question passes, it could lead to almost all of Boston’s state education aid being diverted to charter schools. Moreover, there are other costs that local districts incur related to charter schools, including transportation. Last year, Boston spent $12 million on charter school busing, while the district has been dramatically cutting its own students’ transportation (middle school students now use public transportation instead of buses and the school assignment policy was changed so more students would attend schools closer to their homes. Boston charter schools also get first pick of school start times).

“2. This ballot question will contribute to growing educational inequity in Massachusetts. In Massachusetts (and nationwide), there is strong evidence that charter schools do not serve all students. They typically have higher student attrition rates (which some attribute to charter schools “pushing” or consulting out students) than public school districts. They serve smaller numbers of English language learners and special needs students. They are more likely to use “no excuses” discipline procedures that can be harmful to children (to understand what this looks like, consider this in-district charter school in Boston or these two charter schools in New York). They are also contributing to an alarming trend of racial resegregation in schools nationwide. It makes sense to correct these inequities before any major expansion of charter schools occurs in Massachusetts.

“3. This is about privatizing public education. This ballot question is being pushed by well-funded special interest groups (who do not have to reveal their donors and many are from outside Massachusetts with no previous advocacy work for public education), who would like to see more private entities running public schools. Many of these special interest groups are supported by wealthy families (who do not typically have children in the public schools) and investors (who profit from investments in charter school companies and other attempts to privatize public education). If you believe that public education is essential for democracy, then this should raise serious concerns.”

Categories Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Funding, Massachusetts

This is a Classic: The American Statistical Association Statement on Value-Added Measurement

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
21

When this statement first appeared in 2014, I said at the time that it should be on the bulletin board of every public school.

The American Statistical Association explains here why the evaluations of individual teachers should not be based on their students’ test scores.

Here is an excerpt. Read the whole statement, which is only 8 pages long:

It is unknown how full implementation of an accountability system incorporating test-based indicators, such as those derived from VAMs, will affect the actions and dispositions of teachers, principals and other educators. Perceptions of transparency, fairness and credibility will be crucial in determining the degree of success of the system as a whole in achieving its goals of improving the quality of teaching. Given the unpredictability of such complex interacting forces, it is difficult to anticipate how the education system as a whole will be affected and how the educator labor market will respond. We know from experience with other quality improvement undertakings that changes in evaluation strategy have unintended consequences. A decision to use VAMs for teacher evaluations might change the way the tests are viewed and lead to changes in the school environment. For example, more classroom time might be spent on test preparation and on specific content from the test at the exclusion of content that may lead to better long-term learning gains or motivation for students. Certain schools may be hard to staff if there is a perception that it is harder for teachers to achieve good VAM scores when working in them. Overreliance on VAM scores may foster a competitive environment, discouraging collaboration and efforts to improve the educational system as a whole.

Research on VAMs has been fairly consistent that aspects of educational effectiveness that are measurable and within teacher control represent a small part of the total variation in student test scores or growth; most estimates in the literature attribute between 1% and 14% of the total variability to teachers. This is not saying that teachers have little effect on students, but that variation among teachers accounts for a small part of the variation in scores. The majority of the variation in test scores is attributable to factors outside of the teacher’s control such as student and family background, poverty, curriculum, and unmeasured influences.

The VAM scores themselves have large standard errors, even when calculated using several years of data. These large standard errors make rankings unstable, even under the best scenarios for modeling. Combining VAMs across multiple years decreases the standard error of VAM scores. Multiple years of data, however, do not help problems caused when a model systematically undervalues teachers who work in specific contexts or with specific types of students, since that systematic undervaluation would be present in every year of data.

Despite the warning from ASA, which has no special interest and does not represent teachers or public school administrators, many states continue to use this method (called VAM, or value-added measurement or value-added modeling).

States were coerced into adopting this unproven method by the U.S. Department of Education, which said that states had to adopt it if they wanted to be eligible to compete for nearly $5 billion in federal funds in 2009, as every state was undergoing a budget crisis caused by the economic meltdown of fall 2008.

Many states adopted it, and it has not had positive effects in any state.

In Colorado and New York, among others, VAM scores count for as much as 50% of teachers’ evaluation.

A state court in New York ruled this method “arbitrary and capricious” when challenged by fourth grade teacher Sheri Lederman and her lawyer-husband Bruce Lederman.

Some states assign VAM scores to teachers based on students they never taught in subjects they don’t teach.

This is an example of federal and state policy that has no basis in evidence and that has harmed the lives of many teachers. It very likely has caused teachers to leave the profession and contributed to teacher shortages.

Categories Race to the Top, Teacher Evaluations, VAM (value-added modeling)

Ken Futernick: Can Education Fix Our Politics?

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
7

Ken Futernick wrote this post for the Harvard Press blog. Ken is a researcher who believes that collaboration is better than competition.

I first encountered Ken’s work when I read his superb paper: “Incompetent Teachers or Dysfunctional a Systems?” I urge you to read it too. He makes it clear that the billion-dollar-hunt for the “bad teacher” is not productive. And we know now that it is not.

He writes:


It’s time for those of us in education to revisit an old question: what’s our purpose? Some would say it’s to pass on what we know to the next generation.

That makes sense, provided we like what we’re passing on.

It’s hard to imagine that many Americans would want their children to inherit today’s toxic politics or to emulate the politicians who lie to the public, ignore science, peddle bigotry, and eschew civil discourse.

Not surprisingly, some students are doing just that. Last February, for instance, students attending a championship basketball game at Andrean High School in Indiana mimicked a popular presidential candidate, chanting, “build a wall” at their opponents from Bishop Noll Institute, whose students are mostly Latino.

And why wouldn’t we expect students to reject climate change, evolution, the use of vaccines, or science itself when some of their leaders do the same?

The point is that educators must be discerning about what we pass on. As the American philosopher John Dewey wrote one hundred years ago, “Every society gets encumbered with what is trivial, with dead wood from the past, and with what is positively perverse…. As a society becomes more enlightened, it realizes that it is responsible not to transmit and conserve the whole of its existing achievements, but only such as make for a better future society.”

Enlightened schools do this by updating their curricula with relevant, useful content and by cultivating values like equity, critical analysis, and civil discourse. In addition to academics, they promote social, emotional, and moral development. They confront bullying and racism, teaching students to resolve their differences respectfully. They teach the value of facts and demand that students support their opinions with reasons and evidence—even when politicians don’t.

These schools aren’t engaged in partisan politics. The values they’re teaching don’t belong to political parties—they’re fundamental values of a democracy, which is why all public schools in America should foster them.

Enlightened educators also model good leadership. As I show in my book, The Courage to Collaborate: The Case for Labor-Management Partnerships in Education, a growing number of school boards, administrators, and teacher unions are working as partners, rather than as adversaries. They still disagree, sometimes vehemently, but they manage their disputes through trust, collaboration, and civil dialogue. Without the acrimony, the name-calling, and the gridlock, these educators are able to innovate, solve problems, and cultivate good teaching and powerful learning. Isn’t this the type of leadership we want students to learn?

Categories Education Reform, Politics, Students, Teachers and Teaching

Nashville: Stand for Children, Charter Candidates Face Massive Fines for Campaign Spending

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
5

The pro-charter political group called Stand for Children and four pro-charter candidates face potential fines up to $685,000.

“The Tennessee Registry of Election Finance on Tuesday sent a show cause letter to Stand for Children and candidates Miranda Christy, Thom Druffel, Jane Grimes Meneely and Jackson Miller.

“The violations relate to the candidates coordinating with Stand for Children and its two political action committees to find campaign workers. The coordination, first reported by The Tennessean, stemmed from an email between Stand for Children’s political director, Dan O’Donnell, and the executive director of the Martha O’Bryan Center, a nonprofit group that operates two charter schools.

“I am appalled at the money that was put into this race,” said school board member Jill Speering, who easily defeated Grimes Meneely despite being dramatically outraised. “It’s going to be interesting to see what the findings are and what kind of action is taken.”

“According to the ethics bureau’s board of directors, that coordination caused the four candidates to eclipse campaign contribution limits. Each campaign is subject to a fine equal to 115 percent of the difference between the contribution cap of $7,600 and the amount of the unreported political help provided by Stand for Children. That comes out to about $70,000 in potential fines per campaign, and Stand for Children’s political action committee is subject to the same potential fine for each infraction.

“The campaigns also are subject to $10,000 fines for incorrectly reporting contributions in their disclosure reports. According to the letter, each candidate reported incorrect figures on the second quarter and the pre-primary disclosures, which means each is subject to up to $20,000 in total fines. In total, the two Stand for Children political groups and the four candidates could face up to $685,164.38 in fines. A hearing is set for Oct. 12.”

Categories Charter Schools, Nashville, Stand for Children

Will the Billionaires Destroy Public Education?

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
23

This link will take you to the opening pages of the revised “Death and Life of the Great American Dchool System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education.” The book was originally published in 2010. It became a surprise national bestseller.

The publisher at Basic Books, Lara Heimert, invited me to lunch a year ago and made an unusual offer. She said that I could revise the book any way I wanted. This was an extraordinary offer. Publishers usually warn you not to add or subtract unless you keep the line count exactly the same. They want to avoid the expense of resetting the entire book. But I was offered the opportunity to change, add, delete as I wished. It was an offer I could not refuse.

The two big changes I made were these:

I removed my long-standing support for national standards and tests in light of the Common Core debacle.

Second, I revised my estimation of the 1983 report, “A Nation at Risk,” which gave rise to the myth that American education was broken.

I hope you will take the time to read this new edition. It reflects much of what I have learned from YOU on this blog over the past four years.

Diane

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Poverty, Privatization, Race to the Top, Testing

Mercedes Schneider: Pennsylvania Rejects Phony Relay “Graduate School of Education”

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2016 //
10

https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2016/10/03/relay-grad-school-of-ed-operation-rejected-in-pennsylvania/

The phony Relay Graduate School of Education” has received authorization from several state willing to make a mockery of graduate study in education. Few, if any, of the “faculty” have doctorates. Relay consists of charter teachers giving faux master’s degrees to other charter teachers, without a library,nwithout scholars, without research. Lest we forget, “scholars” are little children, not people who have devoted their lives to study of a field.

Mercedes Scheider reports good news. Pennsylvania said “scram” to Relay. No phony graduate schools wanted. Beat it. You are not wanted in the Keystone State. Those of us who worked years for our degrees say, “Thank you, Pennsylvania!”

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Education Reform, Pennsylvania, Privatization

If you Live in New Hampshire, Don’t Vote for Kelly Ayotte

By dianeravitch
October 4, 2016 //
25

Senator Kelly Ayotte was asked whether Donald Trump was a role model. She replied, “Absolutely.”

How can anyone say yjis about a racist, a misogynist, a xenophobic, a bully, a braggart, a man who boasts that he doesn’t pay taxes?

Don’t vote for her.

Media Contact:
George Strout
Communications Director
603-224-7751 x308, 603-867-3104 Cell
gstrout@nhnea.org
http://www.neanh.org

New Hampshire Educators to Ayotte: Trump is No Role Model

During tonight’s U.S. Senate debate, Senator Kelly Ayotte was asked whether children should look up to Donald Trump as a role model.

“Absolutely,” Ayotte answered.

New Hampshire educators have a different response: ABSOLUTELY NOT.

“As educators, we teach our kids that kindness, collaboration, and cooperation are important in school and in life,” said Karen Ladd, Sanborn Regional High School Art Teacher. “Donald Trump is teaching our children the wrong lessons: he has consistently denigrated women, wants to ban Muslims from coming to the country, and mocks people with disabilities. His hate-filled rhetoric is setting a dangerous example for our children.”

Since Trump entered the race for president last year, educators have witnessed a steady increase in bullying and harassing behavior that mirrors his words and actions on the campaign trail. Ayotte’s supporting Trump as a role model shows a lack of judgement and should cause great concern for New Hampshire voters.

Anne McQuade, an ELL teacher in the city of Manchester, who has taught at the elementary, middle and high school levels and works closely with refugee and immigrant students says that Trump’s rhetoric has caused her students great anxiety and fear.

“My students fear they will be deported, separated from family members, and sent back to the war torn countries they left because their loved ones were in danger,” said McQuade. “Students should not be thinking about being deported or discriminated against. They should be thinking about their math homework and science essays,”

When asked to recall specific conversations and questions her concerned students have asked, McQuade provided the following examples:

A student from Mexico stood in front of my desk with watery eyes and asked, “Miss, is it true if Donald Trump is elected President of the United States, my family will be kicked out of America?” and “Do you think they will take my Dad away? He brings food home and I don’t know what we will do without him.”

An Iraqi student, who is Muslim, told me that when she got off her bus, a man yelled, “Go home terrorist. You shouldn’t be in this country.”

A Somalian student said, “Why does Donald Trump hate all refugees and immigrants? Does he even know what is happening in my country right now?!”

A girl from the Dominican Republic and a girl from Mexico were talking in my class and the girl from the Dominican Republic said, “I wonder if Donald Trump will kick Dominicans out?” The young lady from Mexico replied, “No, you’re safe, he doesn’t want to build a wall in your country, only mine. My abuela (grandmother) won’t be able to visit me. I’m sad!”

“Throughout her time in office, Maggie Hassan has consistently stood up for students, educators, and their families,” said NEA-NH President Scott McGilvray. “Maggie Hassan understands we need a leader as a President, not someone whose words would land them in the principal’s office.”

About NEA-New Hampshire

NEA-New Hampshire is the largest union of public employees in the state. Founded in 1854, the New Hampshire State Teachers Association became one of the “founding ten” state education associations that formed the National Education Association in 1857. Known today as NEA-NH, and comprised of more than 17,000 members, our mission to advocate for the children of New Hampshire and public school employees, and to promote lifelong learning, remains true after more than 150 years. Our members are public school employees in all stages of their careers, including classroom teachers and other certified professionals, staff and instructors at public higher education institutions, students preparing for a teaching career, education support personnel and those retired from the profession.
George Strout | NEA-NH | 603-224-7751 | gstrout@nhnea.org |

NEA New Hampshire, 9 South Spring Street, Concord, NH
Sent by gstrout@nhnea.org in collaboration with
Constant Contact
Try it free today

Categories New Hampshire, Trump

Georgia: DeKalb Superintendent Steve Green Calls Out State Takeover as a Hoax

By dianeravitch
October 4, 2016 //
8

When most of his peers were silent about the governor’s dreadful plan for state takeovers, one school superintendent Steve Green of DeKalb County spoke out. He is a hero of public education. He joins the honor roll of this blog.

Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia is working hard to promote his constitutional amendment to allow the state to take over public schools with low test scores and turn them into charter schools. He calls this an “Opportunity School District,” modeled on the Achievement School District in Tennesssee, which failed to meet its goals. The OSD is an ALEC-inspired ploy to privatize public schools and gut local control.

Do you believe that right wing politicians like Nathan Deal can be trusted with the lives of Georgia’s most vulnerable children? If you do, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.

One superintendent has spoken out loud and clear about the Governor’s misguided plan: Steve Green of DeKalb County. Green lived through a similar battle in Kansas City. He knows that the state doesn’t have a plan or an idea about how to help low-scoring schools.

He writes:


I have said it before, and I’ll say it again now: I am opposed to any state takeover of local schools no matter what it is called.

For me, the state of Georgia’s effort to take control of 26 DeKalb County schools … and schools elsewhere … is déjà vu all over again.

When I became superintendent of the Kansas City (Missouri) Public Schools in 2011, my team and I found ourselves in a desperate fight for survival and for control of public education. An appointed Missouri state employee was attempting to take over the school system under a conspiratorial smokescreen – by creating a special statewide district for low-performing schools.

Sound familiar?

In Georgia, the state wants control of schools it has stigmatized as “failing,” based on standardized testing. This takeover effort comes despite strong evidence that standardized tests can’t fairly take into account … or accurately measure … the extreme complexity of teaching and learning in a district like DeKalb County, with 135 schools and 102,000 students from 180 nations and with 144 languages.

We fought … and won … the battle to keep schools in Kansas City under control of parents and professional educators and out of the hands of politicians. I am probably the only school superintendent in the state of Georgia to lead a system through this unique experience. Key members of today’s DeKalb schools leadership team also worked beside me in Kansas City. These academic professionals are battle-tested in holding onto local control of schools.

Striking parallels can be seen between the struggle in Missouri and ours in Georgia.

The real issue in Kansas City involved powerful, ambitious officials exploiting a political situation rather than working with local school systems to address root causes of underachievement and provide what schools needed to succeed.

It was ruthless aggression – like predator and prey. A rapacious state political system wanted to take over the weakest, most vulnerable schools.

Georgia feels painfully similar. We see racial, socio-economic, and political parallels. The names are different, and the titles of the people who want to take over are different, but the goal is still the same – seize local control of public education….

As Green and fellow citizens fought the state takeover, they knew the stakes were high:

“We’d seen the failed results of state takeovers of local schools in New Orleans and Memphis. (After being unable to take over schools in Kansas City, the Missouri commissioner did manage to take over the school system in nearby Normandy. That state-controlled education experiment failed miserably – students performed more poorly under the state regimen than under local control.) It was also abundantly clear to us that too much power and secrecy concentrated in the hands of a detached, uninformed, faceless state bureaucracy would ultimately fail students, schools, and society.”

Green and his team created an effective plan to improve the Kansas City schools:

Progress came by design – our team made strategic, systematic, intentional, student-by-student improvements. The key? We built a foundation of trust and a sense of purpose among parents, school leaders, teachers, and the community.

Here in DeKalb, our own progress in just two years using this same model has already earned national and international attention. Of the specific 26 DeKalb schools targeted for takeover, 15 are within five points of the 60-point threshold. Ten others need more intensive support, and we’ve launched strong remedial measures. In all schools, we’re laser-focused on the classroom experience, where any lasting improvement in education must start.

There are no quick fixes, no short cuts. Turning around schools takes deep, hard, intimate work. It means fighting poverty and all that it brings. It means helping new arrivals to our country anchor lives and hopes to our communities and country. It means giving special needs and pre-school students and others among our most vulnerable the schooling, security, and stability that allows them to be their best.

That’s the kind of work going on right now with our most challenged schools and at others all through our system.

We stand for something in DeKalb County – education with rigor, relevance, and relationships. Our goal is nothing less than to be recognized nationally for academic excellence and for world-class service to kids, caregivers, and communities.

In my opinion, you’ll look far and wide before you find a politician in Georgia who goes to bed at night and gets out of bed in the morning with this same ambitious goal.

In DeKalb, we have 15,000 teachers and staff who work 365 days a year to reach our goal of excellence. We are professional educators … not predatory politicians.

Who do you want teaching and looking out for our children?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Georgia, Privatization

Will the Next President Bring Home Trillions in Unpaid Taxes?

By dianeravitch
October 4, 2016 //
83

I confess I have been really annoyed by Donald Trump’s tax evasion schemes. I know it’s legal to avoid paying federal taxes for 18 years. But it does seem right or ethical. Is it just working stiffs who pay for the military, highways, border protection, customs, parks, veterans’ care, and a million other things? How can he be. Genius if he lost nearly $1 billion on deals gone bad?

It turns out that other big corporations are hiding their profits overseas to avoid taxes. We could have world class schools in every neighborhood if these scofflaws paid their taxes.

Which candidate will revise the tax code? These companies should pay their paces or get out of Ameriva. Go libe where your tax shelter is. Stop pretending you are good citizens. You are frauds.

Categories Accountability
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »