Archives for category: Common Core
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Joe Biden: Where Does He Stand on Race to the Top?

By dianeravitch
August 7, 2019 //
38

I have not endorsed a candidate, and I will vote for anyone nominated by the Democratic party to run against Trump. He is the worst, most ignorant, most unqualified president in our history, and we cannot have four more years of his vile policies.

I am expressing my views about the candidates in the Democratic primaries and will continue to do so.

I am not a one-issue voter but I sincerely hope that Democrats have a candidate who will reverse the ruinous education policies of the past four decades. Our nation has invested in standards, testing, accountability, and choice with nothing to show for it.

Many states today spend less on education than they did eleven years ago, and millions of teachers are not paid or respected as professionals. Many states cut taxes and cut their education budgets yet expanded privatization by charters and vouchers, diverting even more money away from the public schools that most students attend.

At the present moment, the leading candidate is Joe Biden.

Biden is a very likable guy, to be sure, who knows how to connect with regular people.

NPE Action has found nothing problematic in his donors or affiliations, no evidence that the billionaires or DFER are pulling the strings.

He has been in public life for many decades and has made some bad decisions and cast some bad votes in his past. He should come right out and say so.

Joe Biden is very proud that Barack Obama selected him as his Vice-President, and that the Obama-Biden ticket won twice, in 2008 and 2012.

I voted for them both times.

But I loathed Race to the Top, Obama’s education policy. Does Joe Biden?

Race to the Top failed by every measure.

States collectively spent billions of dollars to comply with its directives while failing to invest in students and teachers.

Because of RTTT, we got more privately managed charter schools; more high-stakes testing of students; evaluating teachers by test scores of their students; closing hundreds or even thousands of public schools because their test scores were low (almost all—maybe all—of them in impoverished communities of color); and Common Core standards.

None of these policies has been successful unless you are a believer in disruption for its own sake. The states that adopted Common Core spent billions of dollars on new tests, new textbooks, new computers, new teacher training, new everything. The charter schools open and close with regularity, introducing instability and scandal. Some of the few states that resisted Race to the Top and Common Core (like Nebraska) actually outperformed those that followed Duncan’s agenda.

The national upshot: NAEP scores have been flat from 2007-2017. If we were “racing to the Top,” we didn’t get there.

The very idea of a “race” implies a few winners and a lot of losers. This is the wrong concept to apply to K-12 education, where our goal should be to enable every student to find a path to a successful life.

I want to hear Joe Biden talk about Race to the Top.

I want to know how he feels about spending $440 million this year to fund corporate charter chains.

I know he has said that he opposes for-profit charters, but every candidate says that.

I want to hear him state clearly whether he embraces the Obama education policies or renounces them.

I want to hear what he will do to rebuild America’s public schools and restore their prestige as the gateways to opportunity.

He announced his plan at an AFT event in Houston. He has always been a friend of organized labor.

He is opposed to vouchers. He opposes DeVos and  Trump, like every other Democratic candidate. He wants to invest in pre-K and in low-income schools, all to the good.

But where does he stand on the central tenets of Race to the Top?

is he ready to lead us out of the maze in which federal education policy has been stuck since the Reagan years?

 

 

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Democrats, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Testing

Nancy Bailey: How Does Common Core Affect Reading Instruction?

By dianeravitch
July 16, 2019 //
34

 

Recently there has been a flurry of articles criticizing teachers and teacher educators for the way that reading is taught.

But, writes Nancy Bailey, none of them has looked at the effects of Common Core on reading instruction.

She wonders why the omission, why the indifference to the elephant in the room.

Categories Common Core, Education Reform, Teachers and Teaching

Ariel Sacks: Teach Whole Books or Excerpts?

By dianeravitch
July 8, 2019 //
63

 

Teacher Ariel Sacks notes two clashing trends in teaching literature:  teach whole books or excerpts.

The recent trend toward short texts seems to have come from the Common Core State Standards and accompanying standardized tests. As Peter Greene explains in a Forbes Magazine article, Common Core Testing and the Fracturing of Literature, “Both the standards and the tests are focused on ‘skills,’ with the idea that the business of reading a play or a story or any piece of text is not for the value of that text, but for the reading skills that one acquires and practices in the reading.” This limited focus on skills overlooks so much of what literature offers young people. But my issue with excerpts goes beyond the skills versus content debate, which has been going on many decades.

I question the choice to alter a novel’s form by excerpting it. This is partly on principle—the author didn’t intend for it to be read in bits. But more importantly, I believe reading excerpts puts students at a disadvantage in developing a love of reading and their skills in literary analysis.

The Whole Story Advantage

Literature is art. When we read a novel, we are reading an author’s artistic production, which was created intentionally in a specific form. The novel as a literary form asks readers to spend time living in a world and experiencing the story subjectively as it unfolds, detail by detail. Sure, the length can be prohibitive at times on a practical level; but fundamentally, the work of art begins at the beginning and ends at the end. Without the whole story, our experience is incomplete, and we really can’t know what the author is trying to convey with major gaps in our knowledge of the text.

I like to compare this to looking at a work of visual art—a painting, for example. Yes, we can study a corner of a painting, but we would almost never do so without first viewing the painting as a whole. Without seeing the whole, we miss out on the experience of the art as it was intended. And we are at a gross disadvantage in analyzing even the details we see in one corner, because we don’t know what purpose they serve in relation to the whole.

I agree with Sacks. A writer goes to great lengths to create a novel. Teaching only an excerpt does violence to the work and destroys love of literature.  Excerpting is butchery.

Categories Art, Common Core, Education Reform, Literature, Real Education

Bob Shepherd: This Is What a Generation of “Standards and Testing” Has Done to ELA Teaching

By dianeravitch
July 6, 2019 //
117

 

Bob Shepherd—teacher, author, textbook writer, assessment developer, etc.—posted the following here as a comment while discussing the negative effects ofCommon Core and other efforts to standardize the curriculum:

This is what an entire generation (20 years) of standards-and-high-stakes testing has done to the field of the English language arts. Department chairpersons now make comments like, “We don’t teach content in English, only skills.” Imagine a so-called “teacher of English” who knows nothing of and has not experienced, himself or herself, the value of having content knowledge of particular great authors and works in the literary canons of the world (British, American, European, Asian, African, etc); of literary techniques, structures, periods, and genres–their characteristics and historical development; of literary history; of the relations of literary history to the history of ideas and events; of prosody; of rhetoric; of approaches to literary works (i.e., the varieties of literary criticism and the methods of each); of syntax and semantics and phonology; of the elements of speech; of dialects; of literary archetypes; of the varieties of folk orature; and so on. Knowledge enables one to see what’s there. If I teach you about the varieties of grasses and other plants on your lawn, then it will not longer seem like an undifferentiated mass of green to you. You will see communities interacting. Let’s consider something that people typically think of as “a skill”–public speaking. If I’m serious about making you into a better public speaker, then I will teach you descriptive knowledge of the elements of speech–pitch, or intonation, and range; stress, or accent; length; rhythm; pace; volume; timbre; tone; articulation and enunciation; diction; respiration; facial expressions; eye contact; gestures; stance; proximity; silences and pauses; register; movement; dialect; dress; paralinguistic vocalization; body language; and resonance. And I will teach you procedural knowledge about how you can use that descriptive knowledge: If you vary the pitch of your voice, this produces melody, and your voice will be more attractive to listen to; most people vary their pitch a tiny bit around an average pitch that is too high; by lowering your average pitch and varying your pitch around that center, you can make your voice much more melodious to an audience. And so it is with each of these bits of descriptive knowledge–they make it possible to learn procedural knowledge that will empower you. But the person who does not possess that descriptive knowledge cannot use it to teach procedural knowledge. And so the student does not grow.

It would be an altogether good thing for the English language arts if people stopped using the term “skills” altogether and instead spoke in terms of “procedural knowledge,” for then they would have a clue that knowledge is key to being able to do things. The woodworker needs to have knowledge that there is something called grain and that it runs in a particular direction. If he or she knows this, then it becomes possible to plane a piece of wood to make it smooth–one works in the direction of the grain. Knowledge is KEY.

People who think that they are teaching “skills” in the absence of content, or knowledge, are totally confused. There is, for example, no general “finding the main idea skill” or “inferencing skill.” These are as fictional as were Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fairies. Let me give another example. One of the very few actual texts mentioned anywhere in the Common [sic] Core [sic] State [sic] Standards [sic] is Plato’s Allegory of the Cave from the Republic. Is one going to have any clue what this is about based on applying some general “finding the main idea” skill? Of course not. Understanding what’s going on there requires a lot of background knowledge about what Plato was concerned with and how he thought. Plato was highly influenced by Greek mathematics. He recognized that perfect forms, like a point or a triangle, don’t exist in the world but that they can be conceived of in the mind. In Greek, the word psyche meant both “mind” and “spirit.” The fact that people can conceive of perfection, of perfect forms, led him to think that there exists a separate spiritual world of perfect forms, of which the psyche partook, and that simply by thinking carefully enough, one could discover these perfect forms–the real meaning of “truth” and “virtue” and so on. If you are a student and know all that, then the allegory will make sense to you. Otherwise, good luck trying to apply your general finding the main idea “skill.” LMAO!

Categories Common Core, Testing

Peter Greene: The Writer Who Could Not Answer Standardized Test Questions About Her Poems

By dianeravitch
June 24, 2019 //
42

 

Peter Greene writes here about Sara Holbrook, a poet whose poems have been used on standardized tests.

Back in 2017, Holbrook wrote an essay for Huffington Post entitled, “I Can’t Answer These Texas Standardized Test Questions About My Own Poems.” The writer had discovered that two of her poems were part of the Texas STAAR state assessment tests, and she was a bit startled to discover that she was unable to answer some of the questions….

To approach any poem with the notion that each word has one and only one correct reading when language at its most rich involves shades and layers or meaning–what my old college writing professor called “the ambiguity that enriches”–is one way to stifle thinking in students. In many states, we are doing it in grades K through 12.
There are so many layers to Holbrook’s situation. The test manufacturers could have contacted her and talked to her about her poem (though Common Core architect David Coleman would argue that doing so was both unnecessary and undesirable), but they didn’t. So here we sit, in a bizarre universe where the test writer knows the “correct” answer for a question about a poem, but the person who wrote the poem does not. And at least Holbrook has the option of publicly saying, “Hey, wait a minute,” which is more than the deceased authors used for testing can do. But she was only able to do so because somebody risked punishment by sharing test materials with her. Particularly ironic is Mentoring Minds’ promise to build critical thinking skills in students, even as Holbrook, by taking reading, writing and speaking out to students in living, breathing, dynamic workshops, is doing far more to promote critical thinking than can be accomplished by challenging students to guess which one of four available answers an unseen test writer has deemed “correct.”

 

Categories Common Core, Education Reform, Literature, Standardized Testing

Mercedes Schneider: Bill Gates Has Been Spending Millions to Buy Influence for Years

By dianeravitch
June 18, 2019 //
43

 

Mercedes Schneider was a little surprised that Bill Gates is setting up a lobbying organization. Why should he? He has been shelling out millions to buy Influence with state and federal policy makers for years.

She writes:

Whereas the idea of Gates paying individuals to lobby to alter policy in line with his billionaire preferences, the public should realize that Gates already has an oversized influence on legislators and other elected and appointed officials.

For example, from 2002 to 2018, the Gates Foundation has paid the National Governors Association (NGA) $33.2M for Gates-approved initiatives, mostly affecting K12 education.

Shall we pretend that Gates’ steadily funding an association of state governors to promote Gates goals does not sway these governors? I think not.

From 2002 to 2018, Gates has also paid $122M to the state education superintendent organization, Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) on his K12 education preferences.

Both NGA and CCSSO were key organizations in promoting Common Core (see here and here, for example). Common Core is a Gates pet; he has been shelling out his billionaire bucks on it for years, even trying to tie it to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

Gates has even paid grants to the US Department of Education: $858M (2013 – 2016). Wrap your mind around that one.

But there’s more.

From 2013 to 2016, Gates paid $1.8M to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The largest grant ($1.2M in 2015) was “to support education of state policymakers.”

In 2009, Gates stood before them and, as National Conference for State Legislatures “co-chair,” he told them what he wanted, as excerpted below from my March 20, 2014 post, which also references my March 17, 2014, post about Gates dining with 80 senators:

On March 13, 2014, Bill Gates had dinner with 80 senators and other elected officials. Given his keynote the following day to members of the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), make no mistake that Gates used his time with the senators and other officials to push the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

However, Gates is more than CCSS. Gates is the entire spectrum of reforms, and he is more than willing to use his influence to promote his opinion of educational reform to those supposedly elected By the People.

The following text is an excerpt from Gates’ 2009, speech to the National Council of State Legislatures, which“co-chair” Gates offered as part of his complete speech on so-called education reform.

The entire speech is worth a sobering read.

Mercedes links to the Gates’ speech and quotes it.

Please open the link and read what he said in 2009.

Ten years later we know that every Gates Initiative in education has failed.

Testing, measuring teachers by test scores, closing public schools and replacing them with charters, Common Core, data-driven everything.

Do you think he knows it?

 

 

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Gates Foundation, Bill Gates, Privatization, Testing

Bill & Melinda Gates Launch a Political Lobbying Organization to Wield Greater Influence

By dianeravitch
June 17, 2019 //
180

 

Mr. and Mrs. Bill Gates apparently feel they are not winning enough battles in the court of public opinion, so they have created a lobbying organization to promote their ideas in Congress and state legislatures. 

Will the Gates lobby push for Common Core? For more high-stakes testing? For more federal funding for charter schools? For evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students? For more technology in the classroom?

These are but a few of Bill Gates’ failed education initiatives. Has he learned from failure or will he use his C4 lobby to push his failed ideas even more?

Bill and Melinda Gates have launched a lobbying organization to advocate for issues in health, education, and poverty, The Hill reported on Thursday.

The Gates Policy Initiative, which was announced on Thursday, will work with lawmakers on issues such as global health, global development, moving people from poverty to employment, and education for black, Latino, and rural students. The initiative, which will be a 501(c)(4) organization under the US tax code, is independent from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the billionaire couple’s philanthropic organization.

Rob Nabors, the director of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the former White House director of legislative affairs during the Obama administration, told The Hill that the Gates Policy Initiative would work in a bipartisan way.

In an article in The Hill, Rob Nabors said the new lobbying organization would reflect the work of the foundation.

Much of what they’ve learned running their foundation will help them through the process of establishing a lobbying shop.

“Probably the most important point for us is similar to the way Bill and Melinda have approached their philanthropic giving and other things that they do. They are interested in learning what works and what doesn’t work,” Nabors said.

He said that if they are not successful in a couple of years, they will “shutter the shop and figure out what else could potentially be done.”

“I think that experimental type of approach, that innovative type of approach, is both relatively unique in this space and embedded into the DNA that Bill and Melinda bring with them,” he said.

Nabors said that when he worked in the Obama White House, his job was often described as the White House chief lobbyist.

“I’m excited to get back into the mix of talking to people specifically about the work that they are doing every day, trying to put bills together that will make people’s lives better,” he said.

He added that Bill and Melinda Gates also bring a unique lens to a lobbying shop.

“They are very data-focused so a number of the types of issues that we will be exploring and the solutions that we are exploring are based on data that we collected from programs that we funded,” he added.

 

Categories Charter Schools, Common Core, Data and Data Mining, Disruption, Education Industry, Gates Foundation, Bill Gates, Ignorance, Online Education, Privatization, Testing, VAM (value-added modeling)

Yohuru Williams and Carol Burris: Where Do Democratic Candidates Stand on K-12 Education?

By dianeravitch
June 8, 2019 //
4

 

Yohuru Williams and Carol Burris assess the expressed views of the Democratic candidates—thus far—on K-12 education. 

One hopes that the other candidates will soon state or clarify their views about privatization, testing, funding, and other important issues that the president can change.

They should all be asked at town halls whether they will kill the federal Charter Schools Program slush fund, which is now $440 million a year and is being used by DeVos to expand corporate chains.

Categories Accountability, Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Testing

My New Book Was Just Announced!

By dianeravitch
May 30, 2019 //
67

I am very excited!

My new book was just announced!

The title is: SLAYING GOLIATH: The Impassioned Fight to Defeat the Privatization Movement and to Save America’s Public Schools. 

It will be published on January 14, 2020, by Knopf, the most prestigious publisher in America. The editor is the brilliant Victoria Wilson, who is also an author, having written the definitive biography of Barbara Stanwyck.

In Slaying Goliath, you will read about the heroes of the Resistance, those who stood up to Big Money and defeated disruption in their schools, their communities, their cities, their states.

It is a book of inspiration and hope.

It shows how determined citizens—parents, students, teachers, everyone—can stand up for democracy, can stand up to the billionaires, and win.

Please consider pre-ordering your copy so you can be sure to get the first edition.

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization, Resistance, Scandals Fraud and Hoaxes, School Choice, Testing, Vouchers

Joe Biden’s Education Plan

By dianeravitch
May 29, 2019 //
45

 

Former Vice President Joe Biden released his education plan yesterday. 

He pledges a dramatic increase in federal funding for education.

The plan is notable for what it does not say.

It does not say anything about the failed strategies of Race to the Top.

It does not say anything about charter schools, which was a major focus for the Obama-Duncan program. Will he repeal the failed federal Charter Schools Program or will he give his approval to continue funding corporate charter chains like KIPP, IDEA, and Success Academy?

It does not say anything about testing, nor does it say anything about revising the federal “Every Student Succeeds Act,” which mandates annual testing. Will Biden support the continuation of the ESSA law?

It does not say anything about evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students, which was a favorite Duncan policy. States bidding for Race to the Top billions changed their laws to adopt this punitive and wrong-headed policy. Will he oppose this practice or let it slide?

It makes no reference to the Common Core, which had the enthusiastic support of the Obama administration, which was legally prohibited from funding it, but which supplied $360 million to create two Common Core testing programs, PARCC and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. Is Biden for or against it.

In sum, I like everything he said. But I wonder about what he didn’t say. He ducked all the tough issues, most of which are the legacy of the Bush-Obama era, of which he was a part.

Biden clearly prefers to duck the contentious issues. I hope that they will be posed to him in town halls.

We need to know where he stands on all the issues that matter to students, parents, teachers, and schools.

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, Privatization, Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »