Archives for category: California

The United Teachers of Los Angeles has steadfastly refused to allow its members to be evaluated by the test scores of their students. Unlike the district leadership, UTLA understands that scholars have found that value-added assessment is inaccurate, invalid and unstable. By this method, excellent teachers may be labeled “ineffective,” and poor teachers who teach to the test may be labeled “effective.”

Despite intense pressure by the Los Angeles Unified School District leadership and the federal government, UTLA has insisted that its members should be evaluated by evidence-based methods, not by “value-added assessment” that has not been proven to work anywhere.

UTLA refused to sign off on the district’s request for $40 million in Race to the Top funding, which would have subjected its members to value-added assessment.

UTLA recognizes that accepting $40 million for RTTT would eventually cost the district hundreds of millions of dollars to comply with the federal government’s mandates. This has been the experience of other districts, where teachers have been laid off and class sizes have increased solely because of compliance with RTTT requirements.

Because it has remained true to principle, because it insists on evidence-based evaluation, because it insists on honest accounting for the public’s dollars, UTLA is a hero of public education and joins the honor roll.

A charter school in Sacramento abruptly closed its doors, locked out the students, and called it quits.

The charter operator said the space could only handle 75 students, but he had enrolled 400.

The parents were not happy. They said the school had collected $2 million or so.

They were puzzled.

So am I.

Hey, that’s the free market. Stores come and go.

Stuff happens.

Go shop somewhere else, consumers.

It’s happening in local school board races around the nation.

Out-of-state money is pouring in to capture seats on local school boards.

The money comes from billionaires like Michael Bloomberg and Reed Hastings, owner of Netflix, and Alice Walton of the Walmart family. They fund candidates who support privatization of public education. Their resources overwhelm local candidates.

The first high-profile race to attract big money was last year in Denver, when large amounts of money arrived from businessmen with no previous interest in school board races, targeted to defeat Emily Sirota, a Denver mom. Sirota threatened control by hard-line privatizers.

Earlier this year, millions of dollars were spent by out-of-state donors to hand control of the Louisiana state school board to Governor Jindal, so he could pursue his privatization plans.

In Washington State, the charter referendum is financed by a handful of billionaires, some local, like Bill Gates, some not, like Alice Walton of Arkansas.

In Georgia, the charter referendum is funded almost entirely by out-of-state donors like Walton of Arkansas.

Now in little Los Altos, California, out-of-state money is targeting a charter school critic with negative ads. The school board member had raised questions about a charter school serving some of the wealthiest residents of the district.

The privatization movement may not have a popular base, but it is adept at marshaling big money to buy support and elections. The only way to stop them is to build an informed public.

With all the national publicity about the world’s first parent trigger in Adelanto, California, you would think someone might have noticed that the new charter is not the first charter in this town.

Only a little more than a year ago, the Adelanto Charter Academy had to close because of multiple operational and fiscal problems. The biggest problem was that the operators of the charter were involved in questionable self-dealing.

As the local newspaper put it, “The Sentinel has learned that much of the academy’s academic imperative was suborned to the mercenary intent of those involved at the school, shortchanging the educational mission.

“While charter schools are by law non-profit entities, it appears that those involved with the school in some cases formed for-profit companies that were devoted to providing the charter academy with materials, ranging from furniture to computers to visual aids to books to writing materials that were sold at inflated prices.”

It gets worse. Read the article.

How soon we forget.

So now, with the votes of only 50 parents in a school enrolling more than 600 children, the charter idea gets another run in Adelanto.

This came from a retired California teacher:

“Won’t Back Down” is loosely based on the Parent Trigger Law in California, which has only been tried twice. Neither attempt was successful. The law was created on a drawing board and has no basis in prior experience or knowledge.

Would you support the Parent Trigger Law if:

• You discovered it was designed to hasten the destruction of public education and replace it with privatized for-profit corporations?
• You discovered privatization (i.e. handing over a school to privately run charter school entities) has already created a two-tiered educational system that has greatly increased racial and economic segregation?
• You discovered that the law first passed in California without any trial or pilot program to test the process and its possible outcomes?
• You discovered that this law therefore has no evidence of success?
• You discovered that Florida soundly defeated a similar law because parent groups rallied against it?
• You discovered that the Parent Trigger idea was hatched in Los Angeles by Parent Revolution, an organization created by the large charter group, Green Dot Schools?
• You discovered that Parent Revolution is led by an attorney, not an educator?
• You discovered that Parent Revolution’s paid solicitors go door to door targeting neighborhoods with high rates of immigrant/non-English speaking parents whom they barrage with publicity and promises?
• You discovered that the Parent Trigger Law is a model legislation being pushed by the American Legislative Exchange Counsel (ALEC), which promotes privatization and de-professionalizing the teaching profession?
• You discovered that charter and voucher schools, on average, underperform traditional public schools?
• You discovered that charter schools have been known to prevent low performers from applying, counsel them out during the school year, require large donations from parents, or cheat during standardized testing?
• You discovered that charter schools service a much lower percentage of special education and English language learners than traditional public schools?
• You discovered that a high percentage of students at charter schools require remediation when entering college?
• Last, you discovered that a large number of parents targeted in California’s first two Parent Trigger takeovers tried to rescind their signatures once they understood that they may ultimately have less control over their school?

Remember that the LA Times created a firestorm in 2010 when it created value added ratings for teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District and released the names and ratings of thousands of teachers. Arne Duncan said it was a good idea, but many researchers warned that the ratings were volatile, inaccurate, and unstable. And others saw a violation of confidentiality as well as ethical issues. In the aftermath, a teacher named Roberto Riguelas committed suicide, and his family said he was depressed to see what he thought was an unfair rating of his work.

New York City released the teacher ratings earlier this year, and again there were many complaints about inaccuracy. This time, Bill Gates published an op-Ed opposing the practice on grounds that it makes it impossible for supervisors to counsel teachers when their ratings are published.

Be all that as it may, the Los Angeles Times is now suing LAUSD for access to teachers’ names so they can release their ratings again.

I am still trying to understand what the newspaper thinks it is accomplishing, what purpose is served other than selling papers.

At Desert Trails Elementary School in Adelanto, California, the “parent trigger” law is taking effect after court battles.

Parents who asked to take their name off the petition to hand their school off to a charter chain were told by a judge that they were not allowed to remove their names.

Now, it turns out, only parents who signed the petition in favor of a charter will be allowed to participate in choosing the charter operator. The others have no voice.

And, hmm, the parent who has been most vocal, will not be a parent in the school when the charter takes over.

Desert Trails is overwhelmingly populated by children who are low-income and English-language learners.

Below are charters that want to run Desert Trails.

This will be interesting to watch over the next few years.

Desert Trails API

http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?allcds=36675876111918

LaVerne API

http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?allcds=36750440118059

Norton Space(run by the Lewis Center)

http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/Acnt2012/2012GrowthSch.aspx?allcds=12629016007983

The California Legislature passed a bill to reduce the importance of test scores in calculating school quality, and Governor Jerry Brown signed it into law. Until now, the Academic Performance Index was based 100% on test scores. Now it will count for 60%.

Hope, hope, hope that future legislation will reduce it to 25%.

TO:     Interested Parties

From:  AFT President Randi Weingarten

Date:   August 28, 2012

RE:      “Won’t Back Down”

 

 __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

One can’t help but be moved by the characters and story portrayed in Walden Media’s film “Won’t Back Down.” The film is successful in driving home the sense of urgency parents and educators feel to do everything they can to provide the best possible education for their children. That is abundantly evident in this film—it’s what I hear as I visit schools across the country, and it’s what I heard when I sat down with parent and community groups from across the country last week.

We share that pain and frustration. And we firmly believe that every public school should be a school where every parent would want to send his or her child and where every teacher would want to teach. Unfortunately, using the most blatant stereotypes and caricatures I have ever seen—even worse than those in “Waiting for ‘Superman’”—the film affixes blame on the wrong culprit: America’s teachers unions.

As a former public school teacher and president of the American Federation of Teachers, I have spent my entire adult life working on behalf of children and teachers. After viewing this film, I can tell you that if I had taught at that school, and if I were a member of that union, I would have joined the characters played by Maggie Gyllenhaal and Viola Davis. I would have led the effort to mobilize parents and teachers to turn around that school myself.

I don’t recognize the teachers portrayed in this movie, and I don’t recognize that union. The teachers I know are women and men who have devoted their lives to helping children learn and grow and reach their full potential. These women and men come in early, stay late to mentor and tutor students, coach sports teams, advise the student council, work through lunch breaks, purchase school supplies using money from their own pockets, and spend their evenings planning lessons, grading papers and talking to parents. Yet their efforts, and the care with which they approach their work, are nowhere to be seen in this film.

This movie could have been a great opportunity to bring parents and teachers together to launch a national movement focused on real teacher and parent collaboration to help all children. Instead, this fictional portrayal, which makes the unions the culprit for all of the problems facing our schools, is divisive and demoralizes millions of great teachers. America’s teachers are already being asked to do more with less—budgets have been slashed, 300,000 teachers have been laid off since the start of the recession, class sizes have spiked, and more and more children are falling into poverty. And teachers are being demonized, marginalized and shamed by politicians and elites who want to undermine and dismiss their reform efforts.

Parent engagement is essential to ensuring children thrive in the classroom. The power of partnerships between parents, teachers and the community is at the heart of school change.

But instead of focusing on real parent empowerment and how communities can come together to help all children succeed, “Won’t Back Down” offers parents a false choice—you’re either for students or for teachers, you can either live with a low-performing school or take dramatic, disruptive action to shut a school down.

Real parent engagement means establishing meaningful ways for parents to be real partners in their children’s public education from the beginning—not just when a school is failing. The goal should be to never let a school get to that point. Parents are actually calling for real investments in their neighborhood public schools and that should be our collective focus. 

Across the country, AFT teachers and leaders are partnering with parents and community groups to create real parent engagement that strengthens schools and neighborhoods:

  • In the South Bronx, the Community Collaborative to Improve District 9 Schools (CC9) partnered with the United Federation of Teachers on a school reform agenda focused on teacher quality, school leadership and family-school partnerships. Through the partnership, teachers participated in neighborhood walks to visit with the families of their students. And they established the lead teacher program, which allowed experienced teachers to provide mentoring and guidance to newer and struggling teachers. CC9 members were involved in hiring the lead teachers.
     
  • In Minnesota, AFT affiliates negotiated the Parent-Teacher Home Visit Project into their contract, training teachers to visit their students’ families to establish bonds with parents outside of the school environment and help parents support their children’s learning. And the AFT’s affiliate in St. Paul surveyed parents to get their concerns and thoughts about their schools, and then incorporated the results into their contract negotiations. 
     
  • In Connecticut, the AFT helped create a law that provided an avenue for parents to become involved in their children’s schools. The 2011 law requires that certain low-performing schools create School Governance Councils to develop parental involvement policies and make recommendations on administrator hiring and, ultimately, on the school improvement plan. School councils are composed of parents, teachers and community members, with parents having a majority. This year, Connecticut’s new education reform law requires the creation of such councils in every low-performing school in the state.
     
  • In Cincinnati and elsewhere, AFT locals are working to mitigate the impact that poverty and other out-of-school factors have on students by offering wraparound services, including health and mental health services, meal programs, tutoring, counseling and after-school programs. Many of the services offered in Cincinnati schools were based on survey responses from neighborhood parents on what was needed for children and the neighborhood.
     
  • The AFT is leading a coalition of businesses, community groups, parents and educators to completely transform the educational and economic opportunities available to children and families in McDowell County, W.Va.
     
  • The AFT worked with a British corporation to develop a digital filing cabinet of lesson plans and resources for teachers called Share My Lesson. It’s an online community for teachers to share their best ideas and collaborate with one another.  

Sadly, this film chooses to ignore these success stories and the many others happening across the county. Instead, it promotes the deceptively named “parent trigger” laws, which are marketed as parent-empowerment laws. Actually, these laws deny both parents and teachers a voice in improving schools and helping children, by using parents to give control of our schools over to for-profit corporations. Parent trigger laws are being pushed by organizations like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which Walden Media owner and oil billionaire Philip Anschutz helps fund.

The film advances a policy that in reality limits teacher and parent voices, the very voices that are celebrated and empowered in the movie.
 
In real life, there have been only two attempts to pull the parent trigger. One never made it to the approval process. In Adelanto, Calif., where the trigger petition is still in progress, many parents report feeling deceived by the for-profit charter-backed organizers who came in to gather petitions. They actually sued to take their signatures back when they found out they were being used to give their school away to a charter company.

Confusing the matter even further, those supporting the parent trigger asked the court to rule that once a signature was on a petition, it could not be rescinded. The court ruled in their favor, stating that the parent trigger law did not allow for rescinded signatures. But just this month, the Adelanto school board rejected the parent trigger proponents’ call for a charter operator and instead instituted numerous reforms including the formation of a community advisory council, an extended school day and improved technology, among other reforms. In both situations, the use of the parent trigger law has been disruptive and divided the school community. 
 
That’s one reason why a Florida parent coalition representing half a million parents joined with the Florida PTA and others to oppose parent trigger legislation when the bill was proposed there last year. They knew from the California parents’ experience that it would put all the power in the hands of for-profit companies, not public school parents.

It must be pointed out that the film contains several egregiously misleading scenes with the sole purpose of undermining people’s confidence in public education, public school teachers and teachers unions.
 
The film advances the “bad teacher” narrative through the character of Deborah. This teacher barks at students from her desk, uses her cell phone in class, refuses to let students use the restroom, puts children in a closet as a disciplinary measure and resists all reform efforts, yet miraculously remains employed at the school. She tells parents that she refuses to stay after school hours to help her students, and Davis’ character in the film asserts that union rules prohibit teachers from working past 3 p.m., an egregious lie. I know of no contract or local union that would ever prevent a teacher from remaining after school to help a student or do the work necessary to help children.

Let’s be clear—this teacher, or any teacher who engages in such deplorable actions against children, should be fired for this outrageous behavior.
 
The film features the union leader sharing a quote that anti-public education ideologues and right-wing politicians often attribute to former AFT president Albert Shanker: “When schoolchildren start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of schoolchildren.” Despite the frequency with which corporate interests claim Shanker said this, a review of news reports, speeches, and interviews with Shanker’s aides and biographers, and even an analysis by the Washington Post, failed to find any person or report that could corroborate the statement. 

This is not the only time the movie resorts to falsehoods and anti-union stereotypes. Viola Davis’ character tells other teachers that the new school they create cannot be unionized because the union would restrict their ability to implement reforms that help kids. This is a false—unions are democratic organizations made up of individual educators, and collective bargaining is the process by which individuals come together to make things better. Many examples demonstrate that far from blocking reform efforts, unions fight for the things children need to thrive in school, like safe classrooms and smaller class sizes. And unions empower educators to win the tools and voice they need to help children.

Half of all teachers in the United States do not have collective bargaining contracts. The reality is that the states with the highest union density—states such as Maryland, Massachusetts and Minnesota—are the states that lead the nation in student achievement. And a recent Education Sector survey of teachers made clear that America’s teachers—both union and nonunion—recognize the importance of unions in strengthening the teaching profession and our public schools.
 
Though deeply unfortunate, it is also unsurprising that “Won’t Back Down” is such a false and misleading depiction of teachers and unions. Anschutz’s business partner is on record saying that he intends to use Walden Media (which also produced the equally misleading “Waiting for ‘Superman’”), as way for him to promote their values.
 
A look at the organizations in which Anschutz invests makes those values crystal clear. He has funded 20 organizations, including ALEC, Americans for Prosperity and the National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation. All of these groups operate against the public interest in favor of corporate interests, and all of them actively oppose collective bargaining rights and other benefits for workers. Anschutz has also invested millions in anti-gay and extreme religious-right organizations such as the Promise Keepers, whose founder declared that “homosexuality is an abomination against almighty God,” and organizations affiliated with Focus on the Family. 
 
The last thing that the country and the debate over public education reform needs is another movie that maligns teachers, caricatures teachers unions and misleads the American public about what is happening in public education today. Children deserve great schools. That’s how we build great communities. And real public education reform comes from teachers, parents and communities working together to help all kids thrive.

I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues further. To learn more about what AFT members are doing to help all children succeed, contact Marcus Mrowka at 202-531-0689 or mmrowka@aft.org.

 

That’s the title of an excellent new article by Kristina Rizga in Mother Jones.

Rizga spent a year embedded at Mission High School in San Francisco and got to know some of the students and teachers well.

According to the federal government, Mission High School is a “failing” school.

Rizga got there expecting to see “noisy classrooms, hallway fights, and disgruntled staff. Instead I found a welcoming place that many students and staff called “family.” After a few weeks of talking to students, I failed to find a single one who didn’t like the school, and most of the parents I met were happy too. Mission’s student and parent satisfaction surveys rank among the highest in San Francisco.

She found a “failing” school where the majority of the 925 students are Latino or African-American or Asian-American, a school where 72% of the students are poor. She also discovered that 84% of the graduating class went on to college, higher than the district average.

But it is a failing school!

Of course, the feds would love to close the school and do a “turnaround.” But the principal, relatively new to his job, the teachers, and the students don’t want to lose their job.

If you need convincing that NCLB is a disaster for our schools, and that the “turnaround” demands of Race to the Top are equally harmful, you will enjoy this article.

It is the wisest in-depth journalism that I have seen on education issues in recent memory.