Adam Bessie (writer) and Erik Thurman (artist) have created a graphic essay that explains in a series of drawings the consequences of school choice and how it affected students with disabilities in New Orleans. Their graphic essay is especially pertinent at a time when the U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is an evangelist for school choice and indifferent to the consequences.
I recommend that you see it. It illustrates the adage that a picture is worth 1,000 words.
NAPLAN is Australia’s national system of tests. The acronym stands for “National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy,” a series of tests focused on basic skills administered annually to Australian students. It was introduced in 2008, in large part because of American influence and the pressure of international tests like PISA and TIMSS.
But since the adoption of NAPLAN, Australia has declined in the rankings.
One of the most persistent of NAPLAN critics is Phil Cullen, who has a blog called The Treehorn Express.
His latest post is “Maintaining Mediocrity”
MAINTAINING MEDIOCRITY
“It’s not the kind of education system that one envisages for the 21st Century. Schooling in Australia has lost its way.”
Clearly, Australia has reached the stage that its polically-controlled schooling system is satisfied with maintaining a level of schooling that is statistically [i.e. bits that can be measuered] mid-way. In preparing our future citizens for a world that no longer exists, we are not doing a very good job of it. It uses a testing system to see how well it is going; and pretends that the use of this one device will motivate pupils to try harder so that Australia will be amongst the top of the class in international tests such and PISA and TIMMSS {Maths}. We used to be up there amongst the first half-dozen in the PISA results but we are seriously moving back down on the list of the 72 countries that participate, well behind most Asian and European countries and a few obscure others as well. We started to slide down the rankings from 2000, as Managerialism established itself in government and schooling operations…… and seriously increased the rate of slide following the introduction of NAPLAN in 2008.
There must be….there is…. something wrong! Very wrong.
Both Managerialism and Naplanism are products of neo-liberal, big-corp., alt-right ideologies that have taken control of schooling, more dedicated to ‘control’ than to ‘schooling’. NAPLAN is its weapon of control and it impairs rather than improves schooling as such. How come?
Australia uses NAPLAN testing as a motivator and an evaluator. It controls the system. In failing as a motivator, it has provided clear evidence as to why the system is now “failing and getting worse” on PISA international rankings.
The most recent tests results have provided clear evidence as to the reasons for our failure. There are messages.
There is a root cause that is so obvious. By using the well-known stress-ridden naplan testing techniques that are well-documented, we are teaching Australian children to hate maths and science and reading and literature with a passion that previous pupils have never possessed. NAPLAN is a thoroughly nasty brute. Instead of trying to introduce children to these really beautiful and magic subjects with an enthusiasm that their normal learning talents desire, we simply turn up the pressure and make things worse. Of course it means that our nation’s progress on all industrial, intellectual and entrepreneurial fronts will be limited in the future; and we don’t seem to care. It’s all more of the same.
At this time of the year NAPLAN preparation dominates the schooling landscape. The wholesome, holistic curriculum is shelved, time-tables are adjusted, homework is test-based and unexciting, parents panic and each child’s mental compass gets screwed.
It’s not the kind of education system that we once envisaged for the 21st Century. Schooling in Australia has lost its way.
Some countries have got it right by thinking. THINKING! Our system is a simplistic, worn-out New York model, based on a Bronx mentality that believes that fear is the best learning motivator known to the island of Manhattan and its satellites. especially Australia. Schools are forced to maintain it. You’d have to wonder why, wouldn’t you?
And by the way, Scott. Costing millions and millions each year, it’s a bad debt…..a very bad debt.
We seem to be struck with it.
C’est la vie
This posting comes from Phil Cullen in Australia, whose blog is The Treehorn Express. You will see some familiar names, like Rupert Murdoch, who is a media baron in Australia, and Joel Klein, who was Murdoch’s favorite education expert. As Phil Cullen explains on his blog: Treehorn is the hero of an easy-to-read children’s book: “The Shrinking of Treehorn” by Florence Heidi Parry. It clearly illustrates the disregard that adults demonstrate towards children at school. Treehorn’s principal and his teacher, even his parents give him ‘short shrift’.
NAPLAN is Australia’s national assessment, inspired by American influence. The acronym stands for National Assessment Program–Literacy and Numeracy. It is offered in years 3, 5, 7, and 9.
Hey, Phil, Australian students are fortunate. American students are tested every year in EVERY grade from 3-8 and also once in high school. Be glad you didn’t get the full dose of NCLB-Race to the Top Standardized Testing Obsession.
IT’S NAPLAN TIME
Bring out the law book.
[An essay from a Manager’s diary]
On Tuesday, May 9 NAPLAN testing will hit all Australian Children’s Factories with a ferocity that cyclone Debbie could never match. The level of destruction to Australia’s learning capital will be vast and there is no way that anyone can compensate nor be compensated for the damage. Once the natural desire to learn has been decimated, reconstruction becomes a long-long-long term effort. It’s been happening for nine years now and all of Australia must know of the damage it is causing. If we don’t, we soon will.
The sooner we get rid of it, the better. From the start of this Menticide Epidemic in 2008, when powerful political creatures arranged for the systematic destruction of Australia’s school learning culture for the sake of their pals’ financial profit, we have endured a system of schooling that brings no credit to any one of us. Our testucation nerds have instituted a schooling program that guarantees paralysis of the intellect from the first day of school, where, in some states, kids are tested before they start. We have been abusing our children’s keenness to learn with merciless abandon. Only the love and compassion of the everyday classroom teacher maintains any semblance of progress these days, but their super-efforts can never compensate adequately for the nastiness of the testucating end of town. The present generation of school attenders may never recover and the ‘fat little men will simply sit there and grin’, as Alice predicted.
This year, some testucators will be searching for modest ways to make the tests easier, in the manner that many of us reformed-testing-freaks used to do to make tests harder. The public is supposed to believe that NAPLAN is good for its children and this can only be done if the scores get better. They were shocking in 2016. Manipulation can be part of the game. For instance, there used to be statistical data available that listed which tables were more difficult than others……9+7 is much more difficult to remember than 8+4, for instance. This ‘level of difficulty’ applies to all kinds of testable items, whether it be in Maths, Science or Grammar. Teachers know this. Some are easier to handle than others for some reason. In that earlier era of testucation, we test freaks had to eat crow eventually; and reform our attitude to schooling.
If there is anything more dangerous to a country’s future than testucators, it’s an elite politician who has ‘fallen for ‘ a special kind of testucator. Julia has confessed to describing Joel Klein as her ‘pin-up boy’. You let him fool-ya, Julia, didn’tya?. Despite the appearance of her office wall on behalf of her corporatocracy who paid for Joel’s trip down under and whose photos probably adorned the rest of her wall, she envisaged a system of millions of classrooms where little Aussie darlings would sit still each day working assiduously at tables and spelling and sums and grammar and practice tests and related bumfuzzle with zest and ‘heils’ for their ultimate success at PISA. Her cuckservative fopdoodlers, those compliant conservatives whom she had cuckolded and paddocked in the bozone layer of confusion early in the piece, then attached their own fictile associations to her apron strings to strengthen their political anti-child animus. The Australian Primary Principals Association was easily moulded into one of hers; and the whole schadenfreude business was in place to her great satisfaction; and to Kevin’s, who had told her to do it; and to BSU; and to NYCity’s finances; and to Rupert; and to Amplify and co-test-manufacturers and tablet-program producers who continue to ridicule the young and sneer at their declining mental distress.
As Sir Wally said : “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive.
In Orwellian terms, cynics now comment that NAPLAN is a kind of political prolefeed that keeps the proles [proletariat] in their place in case they became too knowledgeable; which is what it is doing. However, this was not her ladyship’s intention. She is of Labor background…just doing as she was told by the big end of town….a disposition maintained by present day Labor.
POLITICS
Treehorn has conducted a crusade for kids for some years now. It has been a daily effort and the longer it has gone, the more it is clear that the NAPLAN tragedy can be regarded as an exercise in politics rather than a reform in education. Clearly UBS, the world’s largest banking enterprise controls schooling in Australia and has done so from the outset. Its control over political behaviour is monstrous. In political terms, its history of school CONTROL is pretty clear., but largely overlooked or ignored.
1. Circa 2008, UBS instructed Kevin Rudd that it wanted something done about schooling.
2. Panicky Kevin instructed his Minister for Education to do something.
3. Minister Julia Gillard headed straight for the USA [not Finland, Singapore, New Zealand or other countries that had progressive, high achievement schooling ‘going for them’ at the time], where, after reporting to Rupert Murdoch before attending a Carnegie Foundation party, she met the controversial boss of a large New York school district, who sweet-talked her into a belief in his scheme; which was based heavily on fear….[fear of failure and disgrace for kids, fear of loss of job for teachers, fear of closure of school for parents]…and she was enthralled. It was a pure and simple FEAR-based scheme.; nothing to do with real achievement-oriented, progressive learning as in Finland and places that developed kids’ love for learning. It meant POWER. She fell for his charm. He became her ‘pin-up’ boy and, following Julia’s liaison with UBS, he and wife Nicole received a free trip down under at UBS expense where he spoke only with UBS connections. [He later called them ‘education officials’.] His Immenseness spoke of ‘enacting tranformational change’ to the UBS audience in Melbourne; of ‘reporting and grading systems’ to the chosen audience at the Press Club in Canberra and about ‘relationships between businesses and schools’ at a UBS dinner in Sydney before concluding that Australia had “…a lot of understandable concern about putting together an accountability system and transparency.”
4. So….Julia and Joel and the UBS installed his scheme. This meant that state system initiatives had to be taken over and controlled, but that was a piece of cake for our future P.M. We now have Kleinism as our national schooling system well controlled by UBS and its New York connections, who, incidentally, are making billions in the U.S. and anticipate making more in Australia following the surge in the use of tablets in Aussie schools. Their testing programs, curriculum program, learning games are ripe for the using, and the whole project is now turning to gold.
5. Psychometrics only were appointed to conduct a rigorous testing program through an organisation called ACARA. The ‘C’ stands for Curriculum, even though teaching experts were banned from appointment at the test centre.. UBS was on its way to total command.
6. In her public acknowledgment of the power of kleinism and its mightiness, which she spruiked at the special UBS dinner for Joel Klein in November 2008, Julia Gillard sought approval from her political superordinates for her scheme, quoted Rupert Murdoch who said that “thousands of children are being betrayed ” and, he added, there is “a gap between those who are getting an education and those who are not.” Strange words.
7. She thanked the large companies like Freehills and Corrs Chambers Westgarth for their support “…to the development of the program and their pro-bono contributions.” and encouraged others to consult their boards to contribute to the “partnership of leading employers.” She was in with Flynn having persuaded all the big boys that this scheme meant educational improvement. All her scheme [party?] needed was more money.
8. The Labor Party, Liberal Party and Greens all took note and decided never to examine the context of NAPLAN, its effects on schooling nor on the mental health of children [which became quite startling by 2011], nor the connection to ‘the establishment’. The Libs conducted a couple of fizzer Senate inquiries which used-up time and paper and delayed any serious examination of NAPLAN as an educational device. Not one political party has shown any interest in the plight of kids at school during the past decade nor bothered to question what is going on. They seem to be too afraid. NAPLAN has yet to be used as an election issue, which is what it should be. If any party uses it, it’s bound to be a boomer…and its banning of Naplan a clear winner….but the forces of evil…
9. The Australian Education Union voted unanimously at its January, 2010 Conference to ban NAPLAN, then suddenly changed its mind….no reason given…..and the barber kept on shaving.
10, The government took over the control of the once-doggedly-determined professional society, the Australian Primary Principals’ Association and some like organisations in case they remembered their duty of care to kids and returned to their ethical principals.
11. The Murdoch and Fairfax Press, believing that discretion is the better part of valour, have never conducted any serious ‘investigative surveys’ of the NAPLAN EFFECT ON SCHOOLING. They’d need to be brave, wouldn’t they? Even the ABC has been super-cautious as have respected journos who were once open and forthright. Things are very tight and totally controlled.
This unified pro-NAPLAN force is much too formidable for any care-for-kids campaign. Australia is stuck with a mediocre system trailing other countries by a country mile. The cock-up with its present operations does not provide parents with any promise for a reasonable future. You will know so many of them being regularly actioned…..
LAWS OF MANAGEMENT
In management terms, NAPLAN has had an obvious Cobra Effect or Rat Effect [aka Rule of Perverse Intentions] on Australia’s schooling system “…which occurs when an attempted solution to a problem makes the problem worse as a type of unintended consequence. The term is used to illustrate the causes of incorrect stimulation in economy and politics.”
Principals associations, usually seen as the protectors of Child Rights, school standards and professional ethics were the first to fold and to illustrate, by their reactions to the reality behind known, unwarranted laws of management as applied to educational administration. These laws [see below] became unwarranted and unnnecessary replacements for the basic administration of schools that enhance the conditions of freedom and dignity for children.
Campbell’s Law clearly applies to the NAPLAN disaster and has been noticeably ignored since the outset….
The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making,
the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be
to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.
[Use of tutoring shops, extra homework, post-school classes are instances of cheating the system and corrupting the results.]
as was the Settlage Definition of a test score also ignored……’
“A mark or score on a blanket test represents an inadequate judgement
by a biased, inexperienced and variable non-schooling judge,
of the extent to which an undefined level of mastery of unknown proportions
of an inadequate amount of material has been completed
under tense conditions that render the outcomes useless.
[Indeed! How can distant testing ever replace shared evaluation at the point of learning?]
That’s NAPLAN testing. It’s the wonder of the age that it has lasted as long as it has. The efforts of the mythmakers and their low-level, coercive, politico-totalitarian forms of control seem to have convinced a gullible public that its diagnostic credentials magically turn NAPLAN into a learning motivator and, at a cost of millions of dollars annually, kids will get smarter, quicker It is a downright furphy. Such measures of control get what they deserve: low levels of response that are just formal, bordering on rejection. The low level of teacher enthusiasm and pupil dislike for the subjects combine to produce the weak results that the hyper-political scheme deserves. Insecurity and uncertainty ensure the exposure of established credos of management…
1. Eichmann’s Plea. We do as we are told without regard to humane requirements.
2. McGregor’s Theory. Theory X is better than Theory Y. Fear, mistrust, deceit and a punitive atmosphere motivates operators better than does humanity and trust and normal ethical behaviour.
3. Stockholm Syndrome. An irrational psychological alliance [e.g. A.G.P.P.A] between captor and captured, leads to total capitulation of ethical principles by the captured.
4. Hawthorne Effect. Behaviour and mental attitudes alter, depending on the level of personal interest taken.
5. Goodharts Law. When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a measure.
6. Streisand Effect. Attempting to hide important information, like parents’ right to say ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to testing, sometimes has unintended consequences by increasing the number who will say ‘No’.
6. The New Stupid. A condition that occurs when excessive data, expensively gathered, is misused to draw conclusions that entice powerful politicians to make erroneous decisions.
7. The Boondoogle Effect. Doing useless, wasteful or trivial work as a consequence of The New Stupid; like wasting time on excessive practice, teaching to tests, neglecting a wholesome, holistic curriculum.
Observers of the NAPLAN debacle have noted many instances of each of these laws and their effects in action during the past few years.
The busy presence of these laws and the dark history of Australian schooling over the past decade, surely indicate that NAPLAN has nothing to do with schooling or the learning business. It is a gross, ugly political gimmick and the forces that support it are much too powerful for sad little children….like Treehorn.
Susan Dynarski of University of Michigan wrote an article in The New York Times about the trillion dollars of outstanding debt for college loans, and the Trump administration’s regulatory decisions that will help and protect the lending industry, not the students.
As the saying goes, elections have consequences. Hillary Clinton adopted Bernie Sanders’ pledge to make higher education free for students whose family income was less than $125,000. Trump offered nothing, and DeVos made clear in her confirmation hearings that she was not at all concerned about students who were burdened by crushing debt.
So the consequence of the 2016 elections is that Betsy DeVos is rolling back efforts by the Obama administration to regulate the businesses that make student loans and protect students from predatory practices. She is also making it harder for students to apply for student aid by removing access to an online program created for that purpose.
But that’s not all.
Access to income-based repayment programs is more important than ever because of a separate Trump administration rollback of protections for borrowers. Now, those who fall behind on their payments are subject to much larger penalties.
The Obama administration had limited the ability of loan companies to impose punitive fees on borrowers who were in default. Before the Obama rules went into effect, borrowers could be required to pay back as much as 16 percent of their loan balance before they were allowed to enroll in an income-based program. On March 16, Ms. DeVos issued a directive that allows loan companies to again charge these fees.
If the Education Department fails to protect and assist borrowers, where can they turn for help? During the Obama administration, other agencies stepped in to monitor the behavior of the loan servicers and banks. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in particular, appointed a student loan “czar,” who has collected thousands of complaints from borrowers and has published an annual report on student loans.
In a recent letter, a group of academics urged that the consumer bureau go further by collecting loan-level data on repayment, delinquency and default just as it does in monitoring the mortgage industry. I have suggested the same, in a previous column.
The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have made the consumer bureau a target. They aim to strip the agency of its oversight authority and independence. As it stands now, the Federal Reserve funds the consumer bureau, which buffers it from political pressure. If the bureau is hamstrung, borrowers will have lost a powerful watchdog.
It is puzzling that Ms. DeVos has consistently said that government should be held accountable for the quality of the services it delivers to students, yet the Education Department has in short order made loan companies less accountable to both the government and to borrowers.
This is unfortunate. Dismantling the regulation of loan companies isn’t likely to unleash an innovative, private market that will improve services for borrowers, who have been assigned to a loan company and can’t shift to a better one. There is therefore no market discipline that will drive the bad companies out of business.
Deregulation, in this case, simply leaves borrowers at the mercy of an unaccountable corporate bureaucracy.
That seems to be the goal of Trump and DeVos. They know exactly what they are doing. They are acting on behalf of the industry, not students.
I just heard from Lori Kirkpatrick, the school board candidate in Dallas who pledged to oppose privatization and end the insulting programs that rate, rank, reward and punish teachers. She is a parent of a child in the DISD.
The election was last Saturday. Last night, she sent a blast email to supporters saying that the final tally showed her 14 votes shy of reaching the 50% mark that she needed for a win. 14 votes!
She is heading for a runoff.
Her election will shift the majority on the Dallas school board and empower people who want to help students, teachers, and schools instead of ranking, rating, and punishing them.
Help her in any way that you can. If you are in Dallas, volunteer. If not, send a contribution of any size.
You can bet the Dallas Morning News will support her opponent, a businessman whose children are in private schools.
She needs our help!
Her website is https://www.kirkpatrick4disd.com
Well, we knew this was coming. Scott Pruitt, in charge of the Environmental Protection Agency, has dismissed at least five members of a major scientific review board.
The Environmental Protection Agency has dismissed at least five members of a major scientific review board, the latest signal of what critics call a campaign by the Trump administration to shrink the agency’s regulatory reach by reducing the role of academic research.
A spokesman for the E.P.A. administrator, Scott Pruitt, said he would consider replacing the academic scientists with representatives from industries whose pollution the agency is supposed to regulate, as part of the wide net it plans to cast. “The administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community,” said the spokesman, J. P. Freire.
The dismissals on Friday came about six weeks after the House passed a bill aimed at changing the composition of another E.P.A. scientific review board to include more representation from the corporate world.
President Trump has directed Mr. Pruitt to radically remake the E.P.A., pushing for deep cuts in its budget — including a 40 percent reduction for its main scientific branch — and instructing him to roll back major Obama-era regulations on climate change and clean water protection. In recent weeks, the agency has removed some scientific data on climate change from its websites, and Mr. Pruitt has publicly questioned the established science of human-caused climate change.
From Sandy Stenoff of Opt Out Florida:
We are “all hands on deck” in Florida and would greatly appreciate all the help we can get. Please feel free to share this e-mail.
Dear Public Education allies,
Florida’s 2.8 million public school children need your help now.
Both the Budget and HB 7069, the Conforming bill, which contains an inappropriate number of policies and barely vetted concepts, will face an up/down vote in both the House and the Senate Monday afternoon.
We are fighting a monumental disaster of a bill in Florida. Please help in any way that you can. It is a dire situation. We are not exaggerating. There have been any number of bills in Florida this session purporting to mandate “fewer better tests.” A lot of dirty strategic and technical maneuverings on the part of the reformers has finally resulted in HB7069 a massive charter bill, the worst we have ever seen.
From two Florida superintendents on the direction of these mandates:
URGENT ACTION
Kathleen Oropeza of Fund Education Now has prepared these action alerts for easy sharing – explaining the meat of the bills. These links are critical to share as they will take folks to the action to reach the legislators.
http://bit.ly/2pSGNEZ
Tell the Senate to Vote NO on HB 7069 – The Worst List of Education Policies Ever
If you are writing your own message about HB 7069, here’s a link directly to the Take Action portion so they can send personalized letters http://bit.ly/2qDZIo0: Senators; Vote NO on the Conforming Bill/HB 7069
We will be tweeting with hashtags
#StopHB7069
#Vote4PublicEd
#forthechildren
Legislator contacts:
http://m.flsenate.gov/about/contact
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/myrepresentative.aspx
Public schools won’t win this fight without you.
Thank you for your help and support.
Sincerely,
Sandy Stenoff
The Opt Out Florida Network
#OptOut for a PublicEdRevolution
“…standardized tests are not like the weather, something to which we must resign ourselves. . . .
They are not a force of nature, but a force of politics- and political decisions can be questioned, challenged, and ultimately reversed.
Teachers, parents, and students can turn their frustration into action and successfully turn back the testing juggernaut in order to create classrooms that focus on learning.”
Alfie Kohn – The Case Against Standardized Testing, 2000
On Apr 24, 2017, at 1:34 PM, Monty Neill wrote:
Hi everyone.
Testing season is well under way or ended in many places. So, how goes opting out? Are there other local efforts that you are involved in that you can share with us?
Thanks,
Monty
—
Monty Neill, Ed.D.; Executive Director, FairTest; P.O. Box 300204, Jamaica Plain, MA 02130; 617-477-9792; http://www.fairtest.org; Donate to FairTest: https://donatenow.networkforgood.org/fairtest
The Washington Post reports that Trump questioned whether an important funding source for Historically Black Colleges and Universities is constitutional.
“In February, President Trump invited leaders from historically black colleges and universities to the White House, a move they hoped signaled his support for the institutions and showed an effort to give them more clout in his administration. But critics had a more cynical description of the Oval Office meeting: a photo op.
“Those naysayers got more ammunition Friday after the White House released a signing statement connected to the recently approved federal funding measure. Tucked away in the last paragraph, the White House announced that it would treat a program that helps HBCUs get low-cost construction loans “in a manner consistent with the (Constitutional) requirement to afford equal protection of the laws.”
“People in higher education circles worried that the statement meant that the president was planning to get rid of a capital financing program that helps historically black colleges repair, renovate and build new facilities. Congress approved the program in 1992 after finding that “HBCUs often face significant challenges in accessing traditional funding resources at reasonable rates,” according to the Education Department.”
This raises many questions.
What about Trump’s pledge to be supportive of African Americans?
What will Betsy DeVos say about this when she speaks at an HBCU in a few days and receives an honorary degree?
What does Donald Trump know about the Constitution?
Has he ever read it?
In the 2012 and 2013 legislative sessions, Jeb Bush, Michelle Rhee and allies in the privatization movement tried to get a parent trigger law through the Florida legislature but met a solid wall of parent resistance. Now the same forces are gathering for another run at privatizing the Sunshine State’s public schools. The method is to declare not just F schools eligible for charter takeover, but D and F schools; to get more such “failing” schools by raising the bar on the testing. Voila! A bigger market for the charter industry!
Does it sound familiar: legislating the privatization of “failing” public schools? This time, it seems like they have merely removed the parents from the “parent trigger.” And, by removing the option of a district managed turnaround option, this bill will force persistently low performing schools to close or become privatized. Like the previous “parent trigger”, this bill is about pushing a political agenda and little else. And the House has set aside $200 million education tax dollars to further this agenda.
Should it matter that when the House Education Committeeworkshopped strategies to “Close the Opportunity Gap”, the only invited speakers were from charter networks (KIPP, Uncommon and GreatHearts)? Should it matter that the House PreK-12 Innovation Subcommittee only scheduled charter chains to speak during its workshop addressing “innovative” ways to close the achievement gap (Basis, Achievement First,IDEA, SEED)? Why not hear about successful district managed turnaround plans?
Should it matter that House Speaker Richard Corcoran, who has made this bill a House priority, is married to a lawyer who founded a successful Pasco County’ Classical Preparatory (charter) School which is planning an expansion?
Should it matter that Rep. Manny Diaz Jr, who has been an outspoken proponent of this legislation (claiming “it is our moral responsibility to make this move and provide this option for our kids”), is employed by Florida’s largest charter chain, Academica?
Should it matter that the Florida Department of Education has repeated raised the bar and changed the School Grades calculations, which has potentially masked improvements and/or achievement of students in these so-called “failing” schools? In 2015, Commissioner Pam Stewart celebrated Florida ranking 7th in the nation in student achievement and reported that students in Florida who receive free and reduced lunches outperform those who receive free and reduced lunches in all other states. Is it possible these schools may have made significant gains that are unappreciated by the current accountability system?
Should it matter that school grades can be shown to be a reflection of the socioeconomic status of the student body? Researchers have been able to predict school grades based on US census data alone…
Should it matter that the FSA was never evaluated for fairness, reliability or validity for at risk sub populations of students, including low socioeconomic level, minorities and English Language Learners, the very kinds of students overrepresented in these chronically underperforming schools?
And finally, should it matter that charter schools do not get better academic results than public schools and often perform worse? Sometime, charters appear to do better because they can control the types of students they choose to serve. And THIS may explain why, even when Speaker Corcoran is dangling $200 million under their noses, successful charter networks appear to be uninterested in becoming Florida’s “Schools of Hope”.
Laura Chapman writes here about “computer-based education” and who profits from it.
“Frankly, the scariest for-profit ventures are the tech companies that hope to replace teachers and schools with their “scalable” models.” Diane Ravitch.
Yes. Computer-based Education (CBE) is being marketed as personalized when it is exactly the opposite. Legislators in Ohio and elsewhere are counting on CBE to produce a radical reduction in brick and mortar schools and the need for educators who have college degrees and professional credentials.
CBE is part of the reason that we states are trying to install student-based budgets as the norm for schools and districts. Accountants are dissecting a district’s budget so costs can be allocated to specific schools, then to courses and grade levels in the school, including each teacher’s salary with benefit package, and the estimated cost of educating an individual student to a specific standard of mastery, given the student’s SES characteristics and the like. These estimates would take into account local revenues, the value of federal and state funds (usually less than 12% each), and so forth. The aim is to lay claim to CBE as the “best bang for the buck” while pointing to a system that “objectively” monitors student mastery of pre-determined content (delivered by computers).
Here are two maps that show the rapid uptake of CBE as if it is the new panacea for education. Look beyond the maps for excellent research on how CBE is being marketed.
Hoping to escape Competency-Based Education? Looks like Wyoming is your only option.
Here you will find amazing and disturbing stats and graphic illustrations of some interlocking initiatives, all designed to have a rapid and “collective impact” on the educational landscape. https://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2017/05/02/knowledgeworks-the-every-student-succeeds-act-essa-and-the-push-for-competency-based-learning/
The Gates Foundation is investing in a program that would train adults to serve as “providers” of CBE, therby eliminating the need for state certification to teach. In fact the whole CBE movement is aimed at “deschooling” education. That requires demonizing place-based brick and mortar schools and grade-by-grade instruction as part of the antiquated lock-step factory model.
The International Association for K–12 Online Learning (iNACOL) aims to expand access to online formats for learning, with mobile phone access for some programs. See especially their publications calling for “innovation zones” that would provide for “competency-based, personalized learning” free of brick and mortar schools.
“Policy makers establish innovation zone authority or programs through legislation or rule-making to catalyze the development of new learning models. The innovation zone authority provides increased flexibility for a state to waive certain regulations and requirements for schools and systems beginning to plan, design and implement personalized, competency-based education models. Innovation zones offer state education policy waivers in order to support practitioners in the process of developing and implementing new learning models. As practitioners implement their models, any rules or regulations that impede the model development are brought to light and can be addressed through waivers in a state, which has provided such innovation zones. This shifts the role of the state agency from one of compliance enforcement to support in enabling new model development to occur in districts.”
iNACOL lists the states with favorable legislation: Arkansas, Colorado, Kentucky, Mississippi, and New York. INACOL is supported by the The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Nellie Mae Education Foundation, and The Walton Family Foundation. http://www.inacol.org/resource/innovation-zones-creating-policy-flexibility-for-personalized-learning/
The work of iNACOL is closely connected with the National Repository of Online Content (NROC). NROC Project is a non-profit network focused on “college & career readiness.” It is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Hewlett Foundation, and NROC institutional members. Members provide multi-media content and applications to websites like HippoCampus (six sources of online content in Math, Science, Social Studies, English and Religion) and EdReady (math to prepare for commonly used placement exams, such as AccuPlacer, Compass, SAT, and ACT). Membership in NROC keeps costs low for institutions, and free for individuals. NROC operates under the umbrella of The Monterey Institute for Technology and Education (MITE), a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation founded in 2003. MITE is staffed by three people. Taken as a group, they have worked for McGraw-Hill Education, CTB/McGraw-Hill, Harcourt Brace, in addition to having experience in corporate training, media, and financial management. MITE has received $16.2 million from the Gates foundation.
Although it is wise to keep attention focussed on the damage to public education being done by charter schools, vouchers, and the standardized testing requirements in ESSA, I think the larger threat to public education is CBE. Venture capitalists are investing in educational management systems and apps galore. KnowledgeWorks.org markets CBE as teacher-free, learner-centered education organized by playlists of “opportunities for learning” with for-hire “sherpas” to guide students on “learning journeys.”
So far, there is very little discussion of the Trump/Republican roll-back of privacy regulations that once applied to internet service providers. There is little discussion of the prospect that this administration may eliminate the principle of net-neutrality in delivering content. The former means that student privacy (already thin and fragile as a moth’s wing in school contracts) is open to confabulation by personal/parental choices of products and services. The latter means that the speed and cost of internet services, including the e-rate program for schools, may become strictly market-based–supported by ads or other pay-to-play schemes.
CBE promoters see education organized in an ecological landscape with informal learning centers (for working parents), abundant on-line resources; opportunities for learning via community organizations such as art museums, libraries, parks, zoos, courts; and local businesses/workplaces.
Each of these providers of education would offer a badge or credential symbolic of learning. The badges or credentials are “stackable” so students who may verify their competencies as needed in seeking a job or advanced education. There is not much talk about the actual costs of CBE, the shelf life of hardware, the quality of on-line instructional materials, and unlimited possibilities for commercial exploitation of children and their parents. Choice through vouchers and CBE are perfect partners for creating the illusion that all children can and will have access to the best education in the world and completely personalized.
Diane Ravitch's blog 