Archives for category: Corporate Reformers

A reader offered the following comments on the relationship between Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and the Broad Foundation:

“There is no way Duncan limited testing when he was in Chicago because it would have impeded the corporate education reform agenda.

Arne Duncan was on the board of the Broad Foundation while he was the leader of Chicago schools. The modus operandi of Broad Foundation is deception. It is the method of implementing the Broad Foundations anti-democratic agenda.

On Page 10 of the 2009/2010 Broad Foundation Annual Report http://tinyurl.com/6w5sps2
it says:

“Prior to becoming U.S. secretary of education, Arne Duncan was CEO of Chicago Public Schools, where he hosted 23 Broad Residents. Duncan now has five Broad Residents and alumni working with him in the U.S. Department of Education.”

On Page 35 of the same annual report it says:

“The election of President Barack Obama and his appointment of Arne Duncan, former CEO of Chicago Public Schools, as the U.S. secretary of education, marked the pinnacle of hope for our work in education reform. In many ways, we feel the stars have finally aligned.

With an agenda that echoes our decade of investments—charter schools, performance pay for teachers, accountability, expanded learning time and national standards—the Obama administration is poised to cultivate and bring to fruition the seeds we and other reformers have planted.”

Over protests by teachers and students, the Rhode Island state board of education gave state Commissioner of Education Deborah Gist a two-year contract extension.

Teachers objected to Gist’s top-down management style. Students opposed Gist’s insistence on using a standardized test as a requirement for graduation. Gist had the support of Governor Lincoln Chafee, Secretary of Education Duncan, and the business community.

Gist is a member of Jeb Bush’s ultra-conservative Chiefs for Change, which supports test-based accountability, charters, vouchers, and other market-based strategies.

This is an unbelievable story. I first learned about the Catherine Ferguson Academy from the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC. It is (or was) a school for pregnant girls in Detroit, with an innovative curriculum, for example, the girls learned to garden and tend farm animals and engage in projects and activities.

But the future of the school was in doubt because of the city’s financial crisis. Someone, perhaps the financial manager, decided to “save” the school by turning it over to a charter operator.

Next chapter: the school is now a harsh, tightly disciplined “no excuses” school where the girls get an inferior education. The students are now suing the city of Detroit and the charter operator, called Blanche Kelso Bruce Academy, for giving them a substandard education.

Listen to this from their egalitarian complaint:

“The defendants have terminated many state mandated courses, done away with all classes, ordered teachers not to teach classes, failed to employ certified teachers in math, physical education computing, health education and music and stamped an additional badge of inferiority on these girls through unjustly casting their entire school as a strict discipline academy for students with serious criminal and discipline problems, and have failed even to provide a student code of conduct, leaving all students subject to arbitrary discipline.”

And:

“There are no certified teachers in foreign language, physical education or computer science at the Catherine Ferguson Academy. In addition, according to the suit, “CFA students were told that none of their math work for the school year would be given credit because BKBA laid off the two certified math teachers. Since then, an uncertified math teacher has been assigned to ‘teach’ math and has received all students’ work and graded it.”

What a disgrace!

Calling Rachel Maddow! The girls of Catherine Ferguson Academy need you!

Paul Thomas analyzes the latest plan to save the D.C. Public schools, this one prepared by a law firm on behalf of City Councilmember David Catania. Thomas finds that it is just as innovative, perhaps even more innovative, than past innovations. On the other hand, it might be somewhat less innovative than past innovations. But what is clear is that it uses all the same tools, the same carrots and sticks, as past innovations. At least, the Councilman says, he is trying. That’s innovative too. Or is it?

President Obama will unveil his technology plan for American education today in Mooresville, North Carolina.

Joy Resmovits reports on Huffington Post:

“President Barack Obama imagines a country where teachers know what’s happening in their students’ brains.

“He wants “teachers to have an ability to assess learning hour by hour and day by day,” a senior White House official said Wednesday. “That vision … is really not possible with the connectivity we have today.”

“That’s why on Thursday Obama will speak at a school in Mooresville, N.C., to unveil an initiative that aims to give 99 percent of America’s public schools high-speed connectivity over the next five years.”

Mooresville has won national attention because it provided laptop computers to every student in fourth grade and above, and its graduation rate shot up. The superintendent says there were other reasons for the increased graduation rate.

A few things about North Carolina: the Democratic Party held its 2012 National Convention there. It is a right-to-work state. The state spending on public education is 48th in the nation. Teachers’ salaries are 46th in the nation. Legislation introduced this spring by the president pro tem of the state senate would strip teachers of all tenure rights. At the same time that the legislature is attacking the pay and tenure of career educators, it allocated $6 million to hire inexperienced Teach for America teachers. The legislature also plans to expand the number of charters, free of conflict of interest regulations, free of diversity requirements, and free to hire uncertified teachers.

Technology is a wonderful thing, and all schools should be connected to the Internet.

But I would respectfully suggest to President Obama that there are far larger issues he should tackle right now, like defending the very existence of a teaching profession, defending academic freedom of educators, supporting the nation’s public schools, resisting privatization, and helping states provide equality of educational opportunity, with enough resources to meet the essential needs of students.

Here is an article written for business people.

It is called “8 Surefire Ways to Demotivate Your Employees.”

It appears on the website of the National Federation of Independent Business.

Read it and think how these principles apply to the corporate education reform movement.

Corporate reformers seem to practice every one of these rules and they are accomplishing their goal.

An earlier post today described the devastating budget cuts to public education by Pennsylvania’s Governor Tom Corbett. Districts across the state are laying off staff, cutting librarians, teachers of the arts, and school nurses and guidance counselors. No city has been harder hit than Philadelphia, which has been under state control for over a decade. The following commentary was written by Ken Derstine, a retired teacher in Philadelphia.

Ken writes:

Philadelphia’s Democratic Mayor Nutter’s role in these events should be noted. Nutter, currently the President of U.S. Conference of Mayors http://www.usmayors.org/about/orgleaders.asp,
is Mayor of a city whose public schools are in crisis. After ten years of starvation budgets to build up charter schools http://tinyurl.com/kphmwmm, last week the School Reform Commission passed a Doomsday budget which will devastate an already struggling School District cutting school staff to only a principal and classroom teachers.

It is in this situation that Nutter on Tuesday held a special press conference in Harrisburg with charter school operators to lobby for Corbett to fund schools….so that Philadelphia can expand charter seats! His only prescription for the struggling public schools has been that there must be “shared sacrifice” in the new contract of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers starting September 1st, with wage and benefit concessions of $133 million.

Nutter is hoping to capitalize on Corbett’s ALEC inspired agenda of privatization of public schools. The Philadelphia School District was taken over by the state in December, 2001. The School Reform Commission which runs the District has brought in the Philadelphia School Partnership and Boston Consulting Group to oversee the privatization of public schools. In FY09, charters were 15% of the District budget. In FY14 they will be 30% of the budget.

The charter management companies have come into conflict with the SRC over the last few months. The SRC in March called a moratorium of expanded charters at this time because of the budget crisis. A number of charters defied this moratorium and enrolled students even though it violated the contractual enrollment caps in their charter. When the SRC refused to pay for this over enrollment, the charter companies went to Corbett’s Secretary of Education and he took the money out of state funds that had been approved for the Philadelphia School District. It is in this situation that Mayor Nutter is in Harrisburg lobbying for more money for charter schools. 21 charters want 15,000 new seats which the District estimates would increase charter costs to about $110 million annually.

Those hoping that a Senate rewrite of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (now known as No Child Left Behind) would recognize the damage of the past 12 years of federally-mandated high-stakes testing will be disappointed by the Senate Democrats’ proposal, says FAIRTEST. The new proposal completely ignores the grassroots rebellion by parents, geachers, students, and local school boards against the punitive misuse of testing.

Here is the FAIRTEST statement:

FairTest
National Center for Fair & Open Testing
for further information:
Dr. Monty Neill (617) 477-9792
or Bob Schaeffer (239) 395-6773

for immediate release, Tuesday, June 4, 2013

U.S. SENATE EDUCATION BILL FAILS TO REVERSE “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND” DAMAGE;
IGNORES MESSAGE FROM CONSTITUENTS’ RESISTANCE TO HIGH-STAKES TESTING;
GRASSROOTS BOYCOTTS, OPT-OUTS AND RESOLUTIONS SAY, “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH”

Education legislation unveiled in the U.S. Senate today is “grossly inadequate to undo the damage of the ‘No Child Left Behind’ (NCLB) test-and-punish era,” according to the country’s leading assessment reform organization. “Rather than embracing policies that would improve learning and teaching, the bill drafted by Senate Education Committee Chair Tom Harkin (D – Iowa) follows the counterproductive path of the Obama-Duncan administration,” explained Dr. Monty Neill, Executive Director of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest). “It also ignores the growing grassroots movement against high-stakes standardized exams.”

Among the weaknesses in the Senate proposal cited by FairTest:

– This bill maintains NCLB’s testing requirements, which have failed to fulfill the law’s fundamental promises of higher overall achievement and smaller gaps between racial groups.
– Even more testing will be required because states seeking Title II funds will have to include student test scores in teacher evaluation.
– Focusing sanctions on the lowest-scoring schools will lift the worst punishments from most suburban communities while leaving low-income, minority neighborhoods at continued risk.

“The bill House Republicans are developing is no better,” Neill continued. “They may turn sanctions over to the states. But they have no plan for the federal government to provide the support necessary to build stronger schools in low-income communities. They, too, seek to coerce states into judging teachers based on student test scores.”

Neill concluded, “Instead of pursuing ‘more of the same’ failed policies, policy-makers need to listen to their constituents. It is time to replace high-stakes testing schemes with assessment systems that help improve educational quality and equity.”

Arthur Camins is director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey.

In this excellent article, he notes that the advocates of the status quo are those who are in power and who impose high-stakes testing and privatization on districts and states. Oddly enough, the leaders of the status quo dismiss critics by calling them “defenders of the status quo.”

Camins suggests that real reform would be very different from the current evidence-free status quo.

He argues that: “the pillars of current education reform are more likely to preserve rather than change the status quo. Further, there are alternative policies that are more likely to mediate educational inequity, creating real rather than illusory movement. None of the pillars of reform will address either of these conditions at scale. Instead, they merely give some students a competitive advantage. Even if reforms redistribute these benefits or slightly alter the size of the advantaged group, they are still essentially maintaining the status quo, creating the illusion of movement, without fundamental change.”

One of the pillars of the “status quo reformers” is a devout belief in charters. Camins says this is not real reform: “Current policies that fund increasing numbers of charter schools is not a game-changer because there is no evidence that high-quality charters are a scalable strategy. Some argue that they should be part of a solution. However, since they only serve the few based on comparative advantage, this is in the end a cynical idea- a solution for the lucky few. Others argue that they are the solution. These folks see results-driven competition as a means to weed out ineffective schools through closings. This implies continual disruption in the lives of the disadvantaged children they are meant to serve. Rather than forward movement, it is an exacerbation of current conditions. The publicity around the limited number of effective charter schools creates the illusion of improvement for a few, while everything else stands still. Finally, since the evidence is mounting that charter schools are increasing rather than deceasing class and racial segregation, they are supporting not disrupting the status quo.”

The other pillar of the “status quo reforms” is high-stakes testing. This too is not real reform. “In reality, these reforms preserve rather than challenge the status quo because they do not address the fundamental causes of educational inequity. They preserve the core idea that competition rather than collaboration is the lever for fundamental change. Competition for rewards is only effective for short-term superficial goals while undermining the collaboration necessary for long-term improvement. Since teacher isolation is too often a feature of current school culture, a competitive reward system will only makes this situation worse. Again, we have the illusion of movement while leaving things in place. As many have argued, fostering intrinsic motivation is the only sure strategy for deep sustainable change.”

What would real reform look like? To begin with, it would address the root causes of poor academic performance. Camins says that “A focus on improving the collective culture of schools, rather than individual teachers, has far greater potential for substantive progress.” He has ten specific approaches that would lead to real reform and would liberate students and teachers from the punitive status quo. Read the article.

.

Anthony Cody gets stronger and sharper with every column he writes.

In this post, he explains how the best defense is a good offense.

He shows how critics of NCLB were tricked in 2008, then tricked again by Race to the Top.

It’s time to stop collaborating with those who want to destroy public education, he says.

It’s time to recognize, he writes, that Common Core is old wine in new bottles. Instead of getting rid of the testing and accountability dragnet, we will be ensnared in it even more deeply.

He writes,

“The Common Core could be called a “High Tech Rehabilitation of High Stakes Tests.” The major goal of the project has been to overcome objections to data-driven school reform, by offering standards and tests that are so new and different that we will not mind having our schools driven by them. They are heavily supported by a coalition of corporate entities that stand to make billions from the privatization of education. If we cannot mount a coherent counterproposal, we will be stuck objecting piecemeal to the worst elements of this regime, just as we did with NCLB. This may give us some small victories, but the entire project will remain intact.”

What would a good offense look like? The first step, as he puts it, is to “discredit bogus claims and false solutions,” as we do here regularly, like the stories about the miracle schools where 100% of the students graduate and go to college (except for those that don’t), or the miracle claims for mayoral control (but forget about D.C. and Cleveland), or the phony claims about privatization and inexperienced teachers.

What else? Read his post.