Archives for category: Education Industry

In the article in Sunday’s New York Times magazine about the introduction of Joel Klein/Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify tablet, Klein asserts that those who oppose his views on technology are ideological, not evidence-based.

Klein asserts that we can’t hope to compete with Korea and other nations with high test scores unless we put kids on his tablets.

But here is a contrary view, forwarded to me by Will Fitzhugh of The Concord Review.

It is an excerpt from Amanda Ripley’s new book, The Smartest Kids in the World:

 

...But the anecdotal evidence suggests that Americans waste an extraordinary 
amount of tax money on high-tech toys for teachers and students, most of which 
have no proven learning value whatsoever....“In most of the highest-performing 
systems, technology is remarkably absent from classrooms.”

ignore shiny objects 

Old-school can be good school. Eric’s high school in Busan, South Korea, had 
austere classrooms with bare-bones computer labs. Out front, kids played soccer 
on a dirt field. From certain angles, the place looked like an American school 
from the 1950s. Most of Kim’s classrooms in Finland looked the same way: rows of 
desks in front of a simple chalkboard or an old-fashioned white board, the kind 
that was not connected to anything but the wall. 

Tom’s school in Poland didn’t even have a cafeteria, let alone a 
state-of-the-art theater, like his public school back home in Pennsylvania. In 
his American school, every classroom had an interactive white board, the kind 
that had become ubiquitous in so many American schools. (In fact, when I visited 
Tom’s American high school in 2012, these boards were already being swapped for 
next-generation replacements.) None of the classrooms in his Polish school had 
interactive white boards. 

Little data exists to compare investments in technology across countries, 
unfortunately. But the anecdotal evidence suggests that Americans waste an 
extraordinary amount of tax money on high-tech toys for teachers and students, 
most of which have no proven learning value whatsoever. As in all other 
industries, computers are most helpful when they save time or money, by helping 
to sort out what kids know and who needs help. Conversely, giving kids 
expensive, individual wireless clickers so that they can vote in class would be 
unthinkable in most countries worldwide. (In most of the world, kids just raise 
their hands and that works out fine.) 

“In most of the highest-performing systems, technology is remarkably absent from 
classrooms,” Andreas Schleicher, the OECD international education guru, told me. 
“I have no explanation why that is the case, but it does seem that those systems 
place their efforts primarily on pedagogical practice rather than digital 
gadgets.” In the survey conducted for this book, seven out of ten international 
and American exchange students agreed that U.S. schools had more technology. Not 
one American student surveyed said there was significantly less technology in 
U.S. schools. The smartest countries prioritize teacher pay and equity 
(channeling more resources to the neediest students). When looking for a 
world-class education, remember that people always matter more than props.

Ripley, Amanda (2013-08-13). The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got 
That Way (pp. 214-215). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

Yesterday, the New York Times published an article about my forthcoming book that turned out to be a profile of me. The reporter, Motoko Rich, did a good job of describing me, my dog Mitzi, and the basic facts of my unusual philosophical and political journey over the past few decades.

The headline was wrong, however, and I know that reporters don’t write headlines. Whoever wrote it is out of touch. The headline said: “Loud Voice Fighting Tide of New Trend in Education.” I would have preferred an adjective other than “loud,” like “strong” or “persistent.” My megaphone is actually rather small, consisting of nothing more than my pen (actually, my computer). I don’t know how “loud” my computer is.

I also found objectionable the suggestion that I was fighting a “new trend.” In fact, I am fighting the status quo. When a policy is shared by the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Congress, most governors and state legislatures, ALEC, Jeb Bush, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the President of the United States, how can it be called “new”?

I wish the article had said that the book refutes every claim of the privatization movement; that it provides ample documentation to show that American education is not failing or declining; that it demonstrates that test scores for American students are at an all-time high; that high-school graduation rates are at an all-time high; that dropout rates are at a historic low; and that privatization of public education is bad for our democracy.

It turns out I was not the only one who harbored these concerns. Read The Daily Howler on this topic.

 

A great article in Politico.com by Stephanie Simon acknowledges that the primary election in New York City was a rejection of Bloomberg’s education policies of the past decade. The rejection of corporate reform in New York City has national implications, as NYC was held up as one of the “stars” of the privatization movement. Similarly, the election of the insurgent slate in Bridgeport, Connecticut, showed that the public was reclaiming public education from the corporate reform crew running the state.

While the Network for Public Education did not take a position in the New York City mayoral primary, I personally endorsed Bill de Blasio and wrote articles on Huffington Post supporting his candidacy. De Blasio is the candidate who is likeliest to reject Bloomberg’s intense focus on testing, closing schools, and giving special preference to charter schools. De Blasio issued a press release making it clear that if he is elected mayor, he will place a moratorium on any new charters until there was a process for including the voice of the local community and parents.

The Network for Public Education endorsed the insurgent slate in Bridgeport, and we think we gave them an extra boost to carry them to victory over the machine slate.

Please join the Network for Public Education and help us as we help the candidates for office, especially for local school boards, who want to strengthen our public schools, not privatize them.

Arthur Camins is director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey. When Camins read Paul Thomas’s latest commentary about the lack of evidence behind reform strategies, he wrote the following:

“Over the past several years I have read countless articles and books all saying basically the same thing: The foundations of current education reform – competition, reward, sanctions and consequential testing – are not supported by evidence. In fact, they are contraindicated. Their use as policy levers promotes competition rather than collaboration, teaching to the test rather than deeper sustainable learning and increased school segregation. Many have expressed incredulity that reform supporters ignore evidence. Maybe it is not so surprising.

I think there are two explanations.

The first is the power of ideological blinders and hubris or what I called in an earlier article, The Fog of the Education War. (http://www.arthurcamins.com/?p=36)

The second explanation is different goals and values. I, and many other critics of current reform strategies place high value on education for democratic participation and responsible citizenship, educational equity for all and deeper learning. We have argued that charter schools, merit pay and over-testing undermine those goals. Maybe “reformers” know this too, but do not object. Maybe they want different things. Maybe they accept inequality as a fact of life. And, some may be just out to make a buck.

The question is which road will we choose – improvement for all or just a few. (http://www.arthurcamins.com/?p=191)”

We hear repeatedly about the shortage of qualified
engineers and the need for more science, technology, and
mathematics majors. I am all for that. I would also like to see
more majors in the arts, philosophy, history, government,
literature, and world languages. This reader–who signs as
“Democracy”–offers thoughts about “the STEM crisis”–and examines
the role of Lockheed Martin’s Norman Augustine, who has been
outspoken on this and other educational subjects. (See his defense
of standardized
testing here.
). And more on “the STEM crisis” here.
But Augustine and the president of Cornell wrote an article
stressing the importance of the humanities and foreign languages
here,
while making a case for the Common Core. All seem to be about jobs
and national competitiveness, the aims of the day. . “Democracy”
writes: It seems that former Lockeed CEO Norm Augustine was invited
to tour Charlottesville-area public schools, where
he touted his brand of corporate “reform
” and lauded
schools for their STEM (science, technology, engineering, math)
focus, which goes under the rubric of “21st-century education.” As
CEO at Martin Marietta, Augustine brokered the merger of that
company with Lockheed to produce Lockheed Martin and got taxpayers
to subsidize nearly a billion dollars of the merger cost, including
tens of millions in bonuses for executives (Augustine netted over
$8 million). And then the merged company laid off thousands of
workers. The promised efficiencies and cost savings to the
government (and taxpayers) have yet to materialize. Lockheed Martin
is is now the largest of the big defense contractors, yet its
government contracts are hardly limited to weapons systems. While
Lockheed has broadened its services, it is dependent on the
government and the taxpayers for its profits. It’s also #1 on the ”
‘contractor misconduct’ database” which tracks contract abuse and
misconduct. Meanwhile, while Norm Augustine touts the need for more
STEM graduates (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) and STEM
teachers for public schools, Lockheed is laying off thousands of
engineers. Research studies show there is no STEM shortage, but
Augustine says (absurdly) that it’s critical to American economic
“competitiveness.” A 2004 RAND study “found no consistent and
convincing evidence that the federal government faces current or
impending shortages of STEM workers…there is little evidence of
such shortages in the past decade or on the horizon.” The RAND
study concluded “if the number of STEM positions or their
attractiveness is not also increasing” –– and both are not –– then
“measures to increase the number of STEM workers may create
surpluses, manifested in unemployment and underemployment.” A 2007
study by Lowell and Salzman found no STEM shortage (see:
http://www.urban.org/publications/411562.html ). Indeed, Lowell and
Salzman found that “the supply of S&E-qualified graduates
is large and ranks among the best internationally. Further, the
number of undergraduates completing S&E studies has grown,
and the number of S&E graduates remains high by historical
standards.” The “education system produces qualified graduates far
in excess of demand.” Lowell and Salzman concluded that “purported
labor market shortages for scientists and engineers are anecdotal
and also not supported by the available evidence…The assumption
that difficulties in hiring is just due to supply can have
counterproductive consequences: an increase in supply that leads to
high unemployment, lowered wages, and decline in working conditions
will have the long-term effect of weakening future supply.” Lowell
and Salzman noted that “available evidence indicates an ample
supply of students whose preparation and performance has been
increasing over the past decades.”

Rick Hess believes that a report on the Tony Bennett grade-fixing scandal exonerated him. But Indiana parents and friends of public schools don’t agree. Here they explain that no one understood the school grading system and that Bennett was voted out of office because of his policies, not his style.

Somehow I suspect we haven’t heard the end of this matter. Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Rick Hess believes that a report on the Tony Bennett grade-fixing scandal exonerated him. But Indiana parents and friends of public schools don’t agree. Here they explain that no one understood the school grading system and that Bennett was voted out of office because of his policies, not his style.

Somehow I suspect we haven’t heard the end of this matter. Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Wendy Lecker extends her analysis of reformer actions and policies and how they purposely do the opposite of what they say.

In part 1, she quoted Orwell’s definition of doublethink:

“To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality.”

— George Orwell, 1984

Orwell’s definition of “doublethink” explains Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s education reform strategy. His playbook consists of starving our neediest children of educational basics, while claiming he is “helping” them prepare for the 21st century.

In part 2, she quotes Orwell: “”War is peace. Slavery is freedom. Ignorance is strength.”

What reformers say and do are opposites:

Reformers say they want creativity and critical thinking as they impose more standardization and punish nonconformity. They say they don’t want teachers to teach to the test, but make the tests more consequential than ever.

Lecker writes:

“The Common Core’s roll-out intensifies the homogenized, test-focused approach to instruction. In one needy Connecticut district, children were handed identical “contracts” with the following expectations: “all children will grow by at least one level on the Common-Core aligned rubric each trimester;” and “all students will improve their reading levels by at least two years by the end of the school year.” The Common Core rubric and tests define learning.

“Regimentation is the reformers’ ideal of a teacher-student relationship. In his campaign to expand the charter school empire in Connecticut, Commissioner Pryor handed two public schools over to Jumoke/FUSE charter chain. The teacher attitude there is exemplified by this fifth grade teacher at Bridgeport’s Jumoke-controlled Dunbar school. Her opening line to her 10-year-old students was: “While I am teaching, I want to see you in ready position … feet flat on the floor, hands folded on the desk and eyes on me.” In the normal world, rapt attention is the result of engaging teaching. This teacher foists that responsibility on the child. The lesson here is: compliance above all. You need not be actually engaged — just act the part.

“Even superintendents are being whipped into compliance. Pryor handed down a ready-made Powerpoint with Common Core “talking points” that principals and teachers are to present at all school open houses.

“In a recent Orwellian twist, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan has issued “guidance” mandating that states cease the use of modified assessments. Thus, students with disabilities must now take the exact same tests as everyone else.

“Identical tests, identical goals, identical results and identical behavior may work with automatons. However, as Steve Nelson, director of New York’s Calhoun School, recently observed, real children are not standard. They develop at different rates and learn in different ways. If we seek to develop creative innovative thinkers who can thrive in the real world, we cannot park them in front of a computer to learn and practice disembodied skills, nor have them taught by automatons parroting scripted lessons.

“To suggest that these reforms are “good for our children” is the most Orwellian claim of all.”

The first part of her two-part series is here.

Paul Horton, who teaches history at the University of Chicago Lab School, wrote the following essay for this blog:

“Democracy and Education: Waiting for Gatopia?

“John Dewey arrived at the University of Chicago in the middle of the Pullman strike. He wrote his wife, still in Ann Arbor, that he had met a young man on the train who supported the strike very passionately: “I only talked with him for 10 or 15 minutes but when I got through my nerves were more thrilled than they had been for years; I felt as if I had better resign my job teaching and follow him around until I got a life. One lost all sense of the right or wrong of things in admiration of the absolute, almost fanatic, sincerity and earnestness, and in admiration of the magnificent combination that was going on. Simply as an aesthetic matter, I don’t believe the world has seen but a few times such a spectacle of magnificent, widespread union of men about a common interest as this strike business.” (quoted in Westbrook, 87). This sense of “magnificent, widespread union” represented the definition of Democracy to Dewey; it was the very core of his writing, work, and public advocacy.

“Later, after he had moved to Columbia University in New York, he had a major disagreement with a very articulate student, Randolph Bourne, about the media pressure to get involved in WWI. Bourne argued then and later in an unfinished essay entitled, “War is the Health of the State” that states thrived on war because war consolidated the state’s power and allowed it to repress any kind of dissent. Dewey was an outspoken advocate of American entry into World War I, but began to question his support after seeing several of his colleagues at Columbia fired for their outspoken opposition to the War. These serious doubts turned into deep regret when he saw that the Espionage Act was used to repress freedoms of speech and press. Respectable citizens, including many thoughtful journalists and political leaders like Eugene V. Debs were routinely thrown into jail. His serious doubts began to trouble him more deeply as he witnessed the Federal response to the postwar Red Scare of 1919, when many American citizens were deported without constitutional due process. He was so disturbed by all of this that he helped found the American Civil Liberties Union that sought to protect due process and other constitutional rights. (Ryan, 154-99)

“From the early 1920’s forward, Dewey became a vocal and articulate public spokes person for Democracy in all American institutions. He founded and led an AFT local at Columbia and often spoke at labor and AFT functions. He believed with every cell of his body that American Schools had to be the incubator of American Democracy. As the shadow of fascism descended over Europe, he became a fellow traveller with the United Front to defend the world from an ideology that had nothing but for contempt for Democracy or any notion of an open society. For Dewey, education that allowed the organic evolution of free speech and the discussion and respect for all points of view in the classroom inoculated American students from the threat of fascism.

“If he were alive today, Professor Dewey would be shocked by what he would see. In part, Dewey’s whole philosophy of Education was developed to countervail the corrosive influence of capitalism on communities and the gross economic power of giant corporations. He sought to defend individual growth and creativity and nurture the sense of public responsibility that was under assault from the pulverizing individualism of the dominant ideology of big business backed Social Darwinism.

“Dewey’s vision is now a major target of major foundations that are funding the push to privatize American Education. Major Wall Street investors and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Eli Broad Foundation, the Walton Foundation, and the Joyce Foundation, among others, are working together with the Obama Administration to destroy what is left of public education in this great country. Combined, these corporations control approximately 50 billion dollars in assests.

“I will not take the time here to unpack the strategic plan coordinated by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and three people within the Department of Education who have turn their strategic plan into a public policy called “The Race to the Top.” You should read Diane Ravitch’s new book to get a clear picture of how this has all been done very legally with the help of the best lawyers that money can buy, millions of dollars thrown at the Harvard Education Department, and with tens of millions of dollars to hire the best Madison Ave. Advertising and PR firms and the best web designers (go to “PARCC” or “Common Core” online). What you need to know is that none of the people behind this plan have any respect for public schools or public school teachers.

“Like Anthony Cody, I have been insulted several times by Secretary Duncan’s Press Secretary and friends of our president who are not open to any imput from experienced teachers. Indeed, I was the subject of a veiled threat from Mr. Duncan’s Press Secretary that I describe here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2013/04/paul_horton_of_common_core_con.html.

“In another case, a good friend of the President told me when I protested the Chicago School closings: “who do you think you are kidding, only 7 or 8 percent of those kids have a chance anyway.” Several weeks later when I raised the same subject again, he gave me the Democrats for Education Reform standard line that inner city schools failed because teachers have failed. He was not interested in hearing about poverty and resource starving of schools. I called him on this. The first quote sounded eerily like what Mr. Emanuel communicated to Chicago Teacher’s Union President, Karen Lewis, in a famously closed door, expletive filled meeting.

“What all friends of public teachers and public Education need to understand is that Mr. Duncan and the Obama administration listen to no one on this issue. What Republicans and Tea Party activists need to understand is that this is not about Government corruption, it is about the fact that when it comes to Education issues, we do not have a government. Governments must read and respond to petitions: our Education Department does not seek to communicate with any citizens except by tweeting inane idiocies about gadgets and enterprise. What we have is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsoring the overthrow of the public school system to bulldoze a path to sell billions of dollars of product. Other companies like Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill and Company, and Achieve, Inc. are just coming in behind the bulldozers.

“We must teach the rest of our society that democracy still matters in schools and everywhere else. The time for talking is over! We need to get into the streets and get arrested if necessary. Most importantly every one of us needs to call the same senator or congressman every day until NCLB and RTTT are dead, Arne Duncan does not have control over a penny, and all stimulus money that has yet to be distributed, is given by the Senate Appropriations Committee to the districts around the country that are the most underserved to rehire teachers and support staff. Not a penny should go to charter school construction, IT, administration, or hiring consultants from the Eli Broad Foundation, the Gates Foundation, or McKinsey. Not a penny should go to Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill or any form of standardized testing. All state superintendents who took trips from any Education vendor should resign, and no state should hire an administrator or superintendent at any level who does not have proper accredited certification and ten years of exemplary classroom teaching.

“Now is the time to preserve the legacy of John Dewey and teach the rest of the country about Democracy in Education or wait like sheep for Gatopia to numb us all!”

A letter from a teacher in Los Angeles about the decision to spend $1 billion to buy iPads.

“How could the bond oversight committee actually approve this deal when we (a specific school in LAUSD) still have classrooms with chalkboards, desks from the 1950s, an internet infrastructure that constantly lets us down – we can NEVER play video because there is never enough bandwidth, a library with a book collection that has an average copyright date of 1989, only 4 library books per pupil, 10 computers in the library with an average age of 2006, 48 students in a 10th grade English class, 45 students in a biology class, no art classes, no vocal music classes. What we could use instead of ipads is every classroom is a smart classroom, new desks that kids can actually fit into, multiple computer labs, a new, larger, tech friendly library with at least 14 books per pupil, art classes, wood shop, computer labs, the list goes on. What is going to happen is before the entire roll out of ipads, LAUSD is going to realize either by their own admission or a lawsuit that this experiment is not going to work. Also, voters within the boundaries of LAUSD are never going to vote for another bond measure. Therefore, this specific school will not be getting ipads nor new construction, new books, new desktop computers anytime soon.”