Archives for the month of: January, 2019

Denis Smith writes here about a difficult assignment he set himself. What was one good thing about Donald Trump?

And then he found it!

Donald Trump has exploded the myth that schools should operate like businesses!

He writes:

The disaster that is Donald Trump provides lessons for those who have fostered the myth of a corporate elite class as a needed tonic for educational reform, a term coined to be as deliberately misleading as making those “failing” schools run like businesses.

Never mind that family income is one of the main determinants of student achievement and success in school and that “success” v “failure” is determined in part by zip code. The poverty in the thinking of so-called reformers and right-wing politicians eager to take over poor and struggling urban schools for privatization purposes is notable, encouraging predatory activity, not unlike that practiced by corporate raiders.

The CEO blusters and rants. He bosses people around. He fires them when he doesn’t like their looks or they are not subservient to him.

He changes his mind in a split second.

He bullies people.

He never shows kindness or compassion. He laughs at those he perceives to be weak.

That’s not exactly what Denis wrote. But it is what I learned from watching the Master of the Art of the Deal: Bully the other side. Threaten to walk out. Walk out. Ridicule the other guy. Belittle him or her.

Some deal!

Nancy E. Bailey warns here that Teach for America has been not only a disservice but a disaster for children in special education. They are not appropriately prepared to teach the children with the greatest needs.

She writes:

Since 1990, America has put many school children, usually poor, in classrooms with Teach for America Corps Members (CMs) who get five weeks of training. They’ve also placed novices in special education classrooms.

There’s no evidence that TFA CMs teach better than professional teachers, but today I focus on how TFA has failed k-12 students in special education.

The ultimate goal for TFA is not to create a teaching service to fill the need for a teaching shortage, as advertised. Their objective is to privatize public education and end the teaching profession…

In Matthew A. M. Thomas’s 2018 study “‘Good Intentions Can Only Get You So Far’: Critical Reflections From Teach For America Corps Members Placed in Special Education,” we learn that TFA CMs receive minimal preparation to work with students with a variety of disabilities.

They lack the groundwork of a professional teacher in the following areas:

Inclusive Pedagogy. They don’t learn how to help students adjust in general classrooms

Diagnostic Tools. They don’t understand the kinds of diagnostic assessment to pinpoint academic and social difficulties.

Instructional Strategies. They aren’t sure how to teach students with disabilities.

Self-Contained Classrooms. They can’t manage a classroom with students who have disabilities.

Upholding Federal and State Requirements. They know little about IDEA and its mandates.

Writing IEPs. They don’t understand the logistics of how to plan with staff, parents, and students, to carry out objectives, and evaluate outcomes.

Legal and Liability Issues. They lack a basic understanding concerning what is and is not acceptable while working with students.

Assisting With Critical Transitions. Helping students with disabilities make positive transitions from school to college or career, for example, is not something TFA do well.

TFA training is mysterious, but it seems to center around instructional texts and “boot camp” instruction that takes place within five weeks.

CMs are cultishly inducted into the core. They work with other TFA CMs, and practice on students in summer school. They write lesson plans and make teaching materials while they learn about TFA and its mission.

Thomas found that many TFA CMs don’t want a special education placement, but the TFA organization places them in those spots anyway, especially if they check “interested” on the application form. Compare that to well-prepared, career teachers who choose teaching and special education as a vocation, a calling that is a personal challenge and commitment.

Bailey adds:

TFA alum Penny Schwinn became known in Texas for trying to give a special education no-bid contract to another TFA alum, Richard Nyankori’s (see Mercedes Schneider’s Deutsch29, SPEDx: State SPED Data in the Hands of a Former TFAer?), for-profit data mining company known as SPEDx. I could no longer find SPEDx online. Fortunately, parents caught it and the plan was foiled, despite Texans losing $2.2 million of the $4.4 million that was supposed to go to the company. Schwinn is also a graduate of The Broad Academy.

Schwinn was hired by Mike Morath, the commissioner of education for the Texas Education Agency. Eyes are on Texas for the harmful privatization reforms. Morath is a software developer and investor. It is well-known that he is transforming the TEA with TFA alums.

Texas is seen as a Lonestar Turnaround State by TFA.

The other TFA alum I’d like to highlight is Louisiana’s John White who is state superintendent. White likes to brag about the success of New Orleans’ controversial charter schools. But that city has failed its special education students for years.

Until the American public becomes aware of how public education has been infiltrated by this group, we will continue to see Teach for America badly influence how students learn, and that is especially unsettling when it concerns our most vulnerable students.

Please read the full post.

It is alarming that the neediest students are given the least qualified teachers.

Peter Greene nails it again, in this brilliant article that appeared in Forbes, which is typically read by people in the business world.

He begins:

Teachers don’t want to strike.

Teacher strikes happen because teachers believe they are out of alternatives. There has never been a union meeting in which members said, “The board says they’re willing to talk, and we trust them to do so in good faith, but we think we should strike instead.” Teachers strike because they face issues that can’t be ignored and a board that won’t sit down to help solve those issues. Even then, teachers strike reluctantly. Strikes don’t happen because the most active, cranky members are ready to walk, and strikes don’t happen because local, state or national leaders convince the rest of the members to walk. Strikes happen when school district leadership convinces the most strike-averse teachers that they are out of options.

That’s what makes the L.A. strike, like the statewide strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Arizona, Colorado and Washington, so extraordinary. If you have not worked in union leadership, I’m not sure you can imagine just how difficult it is to push that many teachers to undergo the stress, uncertainty and trouble of a strike. No union leadership could do it without the assistance of the local school district’s board and administration, or the politicians overseeing education on the state level…

But in L.A. (and West Virginia and Oklahoma and the other #REDforED states) there is a new factor.

In my two strikes, and in virtually all strikes of the past, we could make one assumption safely–that as much as we disagreed about the means, everyone wanted, in their own way, to see the public school district remain healthy and whole.

This is no longer a safe assumption on the local, state or national level.

LAUSD Superintendent Austin Beutner came to the job with no background in education. This is no longer unusual in large districts, nor in state school leadership positions. Increasingly the agenda of many people taking positions of authority over public education is to dismantle public education and replace it with a network of private charter schools, a process often accelerated by starving public schools for funding in order to manufacture a crisis. And lest we forget, current secretary of education Betsy DeVos once declared that public schools are a “dead end.” Beutner’s comment to a reporter regarding the strike was “There are ways to educate kids that don’t rely on a physical body.” Teachers are not necessary.

L.A. schools particularly feel this privatization push. Eli Broad has long been a wealthy advocate of approaching education as business, and through Great Public Schools Now, announced in 2016 a bold plan to move half of Los Angeles students into charter schools. Currently charters have enrolled one in five of LA students. Last fall, charter school advocates poured millions of dollars into LAUSD board elections in order to install a charter-favoring majority on the board.

Teachers in many school districts and many states across the country find themselves in the unusual position of working in an institution led by people who want to see that institution fail. Back in the day, teacher strikes were about how best to keep a school district healthy, but these modern walkouts are about the very idea that public schools should be kept healthy at all. UTLA demands for smaller classes, more support staff, safer schools, community schools, and charter school oversight are not about making their working conditions a little better, but about keeping public education alive and healthy.

Teachers across the country are dealing with the problems created by systematic underfunding of public schools and a systematic devaluing of the teaching profession by leaders who believe that public education should be swept aside to make room for a system of private free market education. Of all the reactions to this, the #REDforEd movement and the wave of strikes are actually the good news, because these are the teachers who intend to stay and fight for the future of public education and the students it serves. When those walkouts are settled, the teachers will return to the classroom. The bad news? The oft-noted teacher “shortage,” is really a slow motion walkout of teachers who will never return to the profession at all.

The teachers of Los Angeles are striking for the survival of public education and for the teaching profession.

Which side are you on?

Glenn Sacks, a high school teacher, read Arne Duncan’s editorial blast at the UTLA teachers’ strike and concluded that the former Secretary of Education really knows nothing about conditions of teaching in the Los Angeles public schools.

Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan Slams LA Teachers for Strike 

Sacks begins:

“The closer we get to a strike, the more pressure is put on us to call it off. In a recent article in The Hill, pro-charter/anti-union former Education secretary Arne Duncan criticizes United Teachers of Los Angeles, citing the Los Angeles Unified School District’s alleged financial problems. Yet the neutral, state-appointed factfinder on the dispute contradicts many of LAUSD’s (and Duncan’s) claims.

“For example, Duncan tells us LAUSD “is headed toward insolvency in about two years if nothing changes…It simply does not have the money to fund UTLA’s demands.” But arbitrator David A. Weinberg, the Neutral Chair of the California Public Employment Relations Board fact-finding panel, while noting the challenges LAUSD faces, found that the District’s reserves skyrocketed from $500 million in 2013-2014 to $1.8 billion in 2017-2018. Three years ago LAUSD projected that their 2018-2019 reserve would be only $100 million—it’s actually $1.98 billion. We’ve heard these alarming claims for many years–for LAUSD, the sky is always falling, but somehow it never falls.

“Duncan tells us LAUSD “has an average of 26 students per class. Of the 10 largest school districts in California, only one has a smaller average class size than Los Angeles.” These numbers are disputed by UTLA. Moreover, even if 26 is correct on paper, Duncan should know that student-to-teacher ratios count special education and other specialized teachers who normally have much smaller classes than regular classroom teachers. Class sizes are significantly larger than standard student-teacher ratios indicate.

“At my high school, for example, we have over 30 academic classes with 41 or more students, including nine English/writing classes with as many as 49 students, and three AP classes with 46 or more students. One English teacher has well over 206 students—41+ per class. A US Government teacher has 52 students in his AP government class. Writing is a key component of both classes—the sizes make it is impossible for these teachers to properly review and help students with their essays.”

Duncan makes clear that he sides with management and against UTLA. Betsy DeVos and Duncan are on the same side. Why are we not surprised.

From the United Teachers of Los Angeles:


MEDIA ADVISORY
Contact: Anna Bakalis, 213-305-9654
Kim Turner, 213-305-9316

UTLA Strike Press Advisory

* United Teachers Los Angeles, the nation’s second-largest teacher union local, with more than 33,000 members and thousands more supporters, is poised to lead one of the largest teacher union strikes in the nation’s history, beginning Monday.

* For planning purposes only. Times subject to change, will update media as needed with new info.

* UTLA will provide daily strike updates and briefings which will preview actions for the next day.

* UTLA will stream most events live on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

SUNDAY, JANUARY 13
• 4 PM PRE-STRIKE NEWS CONFERENCE
Where: UTLA building, 3303 Wilshire Blvd, LA 90010.
What: UTLA Strike update and planning
Who: Alex Caputo Pearl (UTLA President), Arlene Inouye (Bargaining Chair), and UTLA leaders, joined by parents, students and supporters
MONDAY, JANUARY 14
• 7:30 am: PICKETING & NEWS CONFERENCE
Where: John Marshall High School, 3939 Tracy St, Los Angeles, CA 90027
Who: Alex Caputo Pearl (UTLA President) and officers
Randi Weingarten (AFT President)
Lily Eskelson-Garcia (NEA President)
Arlene Inouye (UTLA Officer and Bargaining Chair)
VISUALS: Teachers, parents, students and supporters picketing with homemade signs
• 10:30 am: RALLY & MARCH
Where: City Hall to LAUSD headquarters
Start: Grand Park, Spring St. in front of City Hall, downtown LA
End: LAUSD headquarters, 333 S. Beaudry
• 2:30-3:30: PICKETING (media availability)
Where: Marianna Elementary School
Who: Teachers, parents and students
VISUALS: Picketing with homemade signs

• 5 pm: NEWS CONFERENCE
Where: UTLA building, 3303 Wilshire Blvd, LA 90010.
Who: UTLA leaders, students, parents and supporters
What: UTLA will give an update on the day’s developments and plan for the next day

For more information, go to the following:

https://wearepublicschools.org

https://www.instagram.com/utlanow/
https://www.facebook.com/UTLAnow/

In 2011, the Texas government cut $5.4 billion from the budget for public schools; thousands of teachers were laid off. (If you open the links, you will see that the NPR report says the budget cut was “over $4 billion” and describes the devastating impact on schools, but the actual figure was $5.4 billion in cuts.) In the seven years then, the state has restored some of that deep cut, but the enrollment in the schools has far outstripped any increases in the budget.

The state created a commission to study school finance, which recently issued its report. Its most controversial recommendation is “outcomes-based funding.” Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, reviews that report today at Valerie Strauss’s “The Answer Sheet” in the Washington Post, based on a careful review of the evidence about “outcomes-based funding.”

Burris begins:

Texas has a problem. After years of inadequately and inequitably funding its public schools, the chickens have come home to roost. Texas now ranks 46th in the country in fourth-grade National Assessment of Educational Progress reading proficiency, dropping from its previous dismal rank of 41 in 2015. For several years there has also been discontent around the college readiness of its high school students.

The Texas decline should come as no surprise. For nearly a decade, the state has decreased its funding for schools, making an inequitable school funding system even more unequal. The rapid expansion of charter schools has further drained public schools of funds.

Texas public schools have two revenue streams — the local property tax and state funding. State funding is supposed to make the system more equitable — closing the gap between districts that are property poor and property rich. Texas itself is not a poor state and yet state funding has steadily decreased.

Last fall, UT News estimated the decline in state revenue to schools to be close to 12.6 percent per pupil between 2008 to 2017, despite a 13.7 percent increase in student enrollment.

In order to address the problem, the Texas Commission for Public School Finance was created. Last month it issued its final report, “Funding for Impact: Funding for Students Who Need it the Most.” As its title notes, the commission concluded that school funding should be redesigned to provide “equitable funding for students who need it the most.” This is critical in a state where nearly 40 percent of all households are supported by single moms living in poverty.

There are some good things in the report. The commission acknowledged that poverty matters and preschool should be expanded. It also proposed the usual ineffective and harmful ideas like evaluating teachers by test scores and merit pay.

But perhaps the most startling feature of the report is its recommendation to use outcomes-based funding as a critical component of the school funding system. Outcomes-based education funding is highly controversial. It is ineffective and can make inequities worse. And this Texas version, which is especially bad, will result in the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer with funding going to students who need it the least, not the most.

What is outcomes-based funding in education?

Outcomes-based funding, also known as performance-based funding, is based on the belief that if schools are paid for performance, better outcomes will result. It carries with it the unspoken assumption that somehow teachers and principals are “slackers” and have far more control of how students perform on tests than they are willing to admit. The foremost Florida legislative advocate of performance funding was described as believing this: “[Y]ou could get performance altered by money. If you put a pot of money out there, people would change their behavior in order to chase that money.”

Read about how the trustees of the Florida Virtual School responded to an auditor who was tasked with investigating its former general counsel. When she reported to the trustees, they made clear that they didn’t care what she found, interrupted her, and dismissed her findings out of hand.

This suggests that the Florida Virtual School should be investigated. It has 200,000 students across the state. How much money is it collecting from taxpayers? Where is the money going? How many students graduate? What is the quality of education delivered online? Do taxpayers care? Will Governor Ron DeSantis initiate an investigation?

Can pigs fly?

Mitchell Robinson, professor of music education at Michigan State University, saw an article that he found alarming.

The article to which he objects appeared in GQ (Gentlemen’s Quarterly).

The article begins:

As Pam cracks the door to the front office, her hand creeps to the gun strapped at her hip. She’s in her 40s, with dark-rimmed glasses and a ponytail poking through the back of a baseball cap. At five foot six, she is not an imposing presence, but then again, what kindergarten teacher is?

She peers inside and sees a parent—Mr. Brown, who she’d heard was locked in a custody dispute with his ex-wife—shouting at Betsy, the school secretary, something about how he wants to see his son. And then he takes out a pistol of his own and holds it right up to her head.

Pam is lucky; Mr. Brown doesn’t notice her. She draws, her elbows locking out as her eyes settle between the sights. But in the split second before her index finger depresses the trigger, she hesitates. I have to try, right?

“FREEZE!” she shouts.

BANG.

Mr. Brown murders Betsy and swings the barrel toward Pam, cursing.

BANG.

Pam sends a bullet into him, and he staggers back; a second round to his chest, and he crumples to the ground. She exhales, unsure what to do next, standing over two lifeless bodies when there could have been one.

Just another day at school for a busy kindergarten teacher.

Robinson’s response:

If you’re a teacher who reads all of this and thinks, “Well, that’s not me. I’m different. I’ve had a gun for years. I’m a hunter, and a responsible gun owner. I’m all about gun safety. I was in the military. I just want to protect my students and colleagues”, then you are precisely the kind of person who should never be permitted to have a loaded weapon in a school. You’re exactly the sort of person that shouldn’t be allowed to carry a deadly weapon into a room full of children looking at you as someone who cares about their learning, and their well-being.

If you really and truly believe that the best way for you to protect your students is with a gun, then please quit your job immediately, enroll in a police academy, get properly trained and prepared to use a weapon in live-action situations–not by a 1 day “professional development seminar,” like we pretend to train and prepare teachers to do all sorts of things we don’t really value enough to do the right way (like “blood borne pathogens training,” and “sexual harassment prevention training,” and “court-mandated reporter training.” ProTip for Teachers: if the PD session you’re sitting through has the word “training” in its title, no one in the Central Office really cares if you actually learn how to do the thing you’re being trained on–it was either an unfunded mandate from the state education department and/or legislature, or your superintendent thought it would “look good” if parents and other school budget voters saw teachers were being given that training.)–and get out of the classroom.

Having worked for nearly two years in the federal bureaucracy, I have learned to decipher government documents (most of the time).

But this one, written under the name of New York Commissioner of Education MaryEllen Elia, is the worst tripe I have ever encountered.

I don’t understand it but it doesn’t sound good.

It sounds threatening and ominous. I hear the sound of punishment. Missing is any sign of hope or support.

Please let me know if you know what the plan is here.

Scholars Preston C. Green III, Bruce D. Baker, Joseph O. Oluwole, and Julie F. Mead published this article comparing charter schools to subprime mortgages in the University of Richmond Law Review. It appeared in 2016, but it grows more apparent by the day that its warning was prescient. The similarities are striking.

The more authorizers in a state, the less attention is paid to quality. The authorizers have a profit motive to multiply charter schools because they collect a percent of the take. The authors discuss the predatory practices used to lure students to charter schools and the inevitable fraud and embezzlement associated with lack of regulation.

My favorite example of the way that Education Management Organizations profit from charter school rentals:

With respect to fiscal stewardship, charter school boards have the responsibility to ensure that their schools spend market value for the renting of facilities.108 For-profit EMOs have sought to enhance their revenues by charging exorbitant fees for these arrangements.109

For example, the Detroit Free Press reported that the National Heritage Academies (―NHA‖) charged each of its fourteen schools more than $1 million in rent per year.110 The Free Press review of the 2012–13 audits of more than fifty other charter schools run by other for-profit EMOs revealed that only seven charter schools spent more than $500,000 in rent. By contrast, all but one of NHA‘s schools spent more than $500,000 in rent.111 The newspaper also reported that NHA collected $380 million in rent, including nearly $42 million in 2013–14, since the company began running charter schools in 1995.112

The authors may or may not know that National Heritage Academies is owned by J.C. Huizenga, a family friend of the DeVos clan, based in Grand Rapids, affiliated with ALEC and other rightwing groups, and a multimillionaire from his other business interests.

The authors describe how a “bubble” happens, how certain populations are targeted, how they clamor to get in to what appears to be a good deal, then stampede out when the bubble bursts. This may be happening now in urban African American communities. The question that is not addressed is how to restore and rebuild a stable public school system that has been destroyed by predatory charters.

This article is worth your time.