Archives for category: Education Industry

This Los Angeles parent explains why parents are alarmed by the prospect that the new mayor Eric Garcetti might choose Thelma Melendez, one of Arne Duncan’s deputies as his advisor.

She writes:

“In making this appointment, the Mayor should follow his creed to lead by listening and consider first and foremost the concerns of public school parents, the only “special interest” group whose only concern is children. In so doing, he can resist appointing a staffer who will advance the so-called “reform agenda” which tends to view schools as business franchises in need of a quick corporate turn-around.

“Two-thirds of public school parents reject reform policies including an emphasis on standardized testing, closure of struggling schools, shifting resources from traditional schools to charters, narrowing curriculum, reducing teacher pay and benefits, and budget cutting. This was revealed in a national poll of public school parents (including those at charters). Conducted last month, it reflects the same views Angelenos have already demonstrated at the ballot box….

“Parents know the “reform agenda” itself needs reform. The highly political movement, largely funded by business plutocrats, has become as inflexible and oppositional as the unions it points to as the root of all educational evils. Parents are caught in the middle. We want reform, but reform that helps our children, not an imposed agenda that eviscerates neighborhood schools. Reform that aligns city resources to support and to strengthen local neighborhood schools along the Community Schools model makes sense. Mayor Garcetti succeeded at this kind of political leadership as a city councilman when he helped direct anti-poverty grant funds to Mount Washington Elementary School’s new community center and library.

“Taking a cue from both local elections and the overwhelming evidence from the recent parents’ survey, the mayor should appoint an education deputy who will support public schools. That means professional development over teacher bashing, improvement of neighborhood schools over increased competition, and broadening quality curriculum over teach-to-the-test.”

Supporters of public education in North Carolina are reeling as a result of the sustained assault by the Legislature in this session, but in comes a Gates-funded project to claim that defeats are actually victories and to lobby for merit pay.

The CAN idea is supported by hedge fund managers and Gates to promote charter schools, evaluating teachers by test scores, awarding higher pay to those whose students get higher test scores (merit pay).

CAN is closely aligned with the ALEC-style effort to privatize public education and to dismantle the profession of teaching.

Below is their triumphant letter, saluting the “victories” in the recent legislative session, where public schools and teachers were pummeled by extremist elements who control the Legislature.

Important to bear in mind that over the past century, merit pay has been tried again and again and again. It has never worked.

In recent years, it failed to produce results in New York City. It failed in Chicago. It failed in Nashville, where the bonus offered for higher scores was $15,000.

The Raj Chetty study cited below had nothing to do with merit pay. It established only that some teachers are able to produce higher test scores than others, and that students with higher test scores have slightly higher lifetime earnings. But there was no merit pay involved.

Here is what CAN said on its arrival in North Carolina, where the very future of public education hangs in the balance and where the Legislature is busily eradicating the profession of teaching and funding Teach for America while defunding the North Carolina Teaching Fellows:

 

A great teacher for every student.

That was our vision when CarolinaCAN launched its “Year of the Teacher” campaign—an effort to elevate the teaching profession through research-backed policy recommendations and, in turn, help our state recruit and keep great teachers. Because we know that’s the most important factor in schools to helping our students succeed—and it’s what all kids deserve.

At the heart of our campaign were three goals:

  • Giving teachers regular, meaningful evaluations that recognize excellence and provide them the feedback they need to improve their practice
  • Freeing districts from outdated salary schedules so they can invest meaningful financial awards in excellent teachers and other staffing priorities
  • Reforming “tenure” laws to award contracts based on excellence
How did we do? The short answer is that CarolinaCAN went three-for-three in our first legislative session: a proud feat for which we thank you—our partners and fellow advocates—and the lawmakers who supported much-needed reforms for the Tar Heel State.

To learn more about our policy wins, I encourage you to visit our website and read our blog series about North Carolina’s 2013 budget.

As always, the long answer is more complicated. These laws create a foundation of sound policy to build on—but we must build on them, to make them meaningful to teachers and enable local leaders to recognize excellence. As these and other policies from the 2013 budget go into effect in our schools, we need to make sure they’re carried out with integrity, in a way that’s best for kids.

Because right now, the landscape of North Carolina public schools remains dire. See for yourself by reading our inaugural State of North Carolina Public Education report.

Our work has just begun. Our dedication to North Carolina’s kids—and to great teachers—runs deep. And we’re busy planning already for the next legislative session, when CarolinaCAN will continue to champion smart solutions to tough problems.

I hope I can count on you to join us.

Sincerely,

 

Julie Kowal
Executive Director
CarolinaCAN
 
 
 

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/oct08/vol66/num02/When-Merit-Pay-Is-Worth-Pursuing.aspx

 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/23/does-teacher-merit-pay-work-a-new-study-says-yes/

This is not satire. It is real.

In a guest post for EduShyster, a hedge fund manager explains why Wall Street loves charters.

To them, the way to manage schools is to treat them like a stock portfolio. Keep the winners, dump the losers. Report the success of the winners, forget about the losers. It is a great formula.

The CREDO study has been cited as evidence that charters are getting better but the study notes that 8% had closed, thus removing some of the weakest charters.

He or she writes:

“In statistics, this is a textbook case of what is known technically as “survivorship bias”—otherwise known as “ignoring data that makes you look bad.” This statistical fallacy opens up enormous opportunities for people with flexible ethics and an entrepreneurial bent. It is a mainstay of the hedge fund industry, for instance. Hedge fund indices routinely appear to outperform simple, non-fee generating investment strategies like index funds by neglecting to include funds that closed down, and take funds out of the index whenever they stop reporting performance (hint: no fund fails to report good performance!).”

And then adds:

“The parallels to the emerging charter school paradigm are obvious. You start a lot of charters. Some do better than public schools, some do worse, but overall they underperform. You shut down the bad ones. Now repeat the analysis with the non-terrible ones. Improvement! Except that the students unfortunate enough to attend these terrible school don’t just disappear (we hope – let’s not give charter schools any ideas!). However, they do disappear from the CREDO study, and that seems to be good enough for the charter sector and its advocates to proclaim this a success story.”

I wonder if Wall Street will love charters less after the news of their dismal performance on the Common Core tests. What an embarrassment for a guy who wants to be a winner every day, then discovers he has been sitting on the board of a schools that did worse than the neighborhood public school.

Paul Horton teaches history at the University of Chicago lab School. He has been writing brilliant critiques of corporate reform. In this post, he reviews the history of efforts to make education rational, predictable, and measurable.

A few nuggets:

“Have you ever read Dr. Seuss’, The Butter-Battle Book? It made perfect sense to me, a Cold War military brat. The “boys in the backroom” were very smart. They were data whizzes and they invented computers that made them a lot smarter than everybody else. Both the “Yooks” and the “Zooks” believed that those “boys in the back room” could figure out solutions to every problem. But the biggest problem was that only human beings who could effectively communicate, not computers or data, could solve the world’s problems. “The boys in the backroom” were only doing what they were told: they were the smartest, but not the best communicators in town. None of those “boys” said, “making more weapons that can kill more people might not be the best way to go.” But everybody believed in them, almost religiously, to the brink of nuclear war. Slim Pickins didn’t bat an eye when he decided to ride his big A-bomb to victory.

“This might seem strange to you, but, from my very humble perspective, we might need another Dr. Seuss to write a book with a similar theme, but in a different setting. The question has become, what happens when the “boys in the backroom” take over after the “Yooks” and the “Zooks” have stopped threatening each other? What happens when one of the “boys in the backroom” becomes the richest guy in the world and decides that he wants to build “Gatopia”? What happens if he convinces many of the other richest guys that our country is doomed unless we completely tear down and rebuild the way that we teach our kids? And what happens when he and many of his very wealthy friends tell the red and blue politicians that he and his friends can make sure that they will not get campaign funding if they don’t support “Gatopia”?”

Gatopia “seeks to turn human beings into computers that are efficient and well behaved. Most importantly, computers do not ask questions or demand accountability: they do what they are told.”

Horton describes how he fell in love with learning and recognizes that Gatopia has no room for the experiences he had:

“Learning for me was about connecting with a human being. Learning was reflected in my ability to write something. I wanted to please my very demanding teachers, I wanted to conform to their expectations of excellence. I dreaded the conference to go over a paper that fell hopelessly below those standards, but respected my teachers for holding me to them.

I want my son to have teachers like I had, and I want the same for his kids. I do not want “the boys in the back room” telling me how my kid and grandkids should be educated. Sometimes the smartest people can’t think up the most important questions. Democracy requires citizens, and computers cannot produce citizens. Computers often mask deficits that we most need to develop. Data is not knowledge. We are in grave danger if we are tempted to believe that it is.”

In a brilliant essay in the Los Angeles Times, Susan Ochshorn says that the United States is squandering its future by not investing in the well-being of children.

Ochshorn, an advocate for early childhood education, cites an Urban Institute study showing that “federal spending on children fell by $2 billion from 2010 to 2011, the first dip in 30 years. The children’s share of the budget pie was reduced from 10.7% to 10.4%. By 2022, the children’s portion of the budget is expected to drop to 8% and their share of GDP is expected to drop from 2.5% to 1.9%, which will include significant cuts in early care and education. With the Census Bureau reporting nearly 25% of the nation’s children younger than age 6 in poverty, this is not good news.”

It is a cliche to say that “children are our future,” but it is actually true. Children are our future, and if we neglect their basic needs, we sacrifice the future.

Ochshorn writes: “We now know more than ever about how to nurture human capital, with eye-popping technology offering graphic evidence of the rapid pace and complexity of brain development in the first years of life. The bottom line is that kids need time for sensitive, stimulating interactions with adults to promote growth, resilience and mastery, the foundations for their healthy development and academic success. They need access to good healthcare and nutrition, and high-quality early learning settings, not to mention viable communities invested in their well-being.”

Her article cites numerous authoritative sources to demonstrate one basic fact: We are not investing in the well-being of children. Instead, we are spending more and more to test them and to hold their teachers accountable. This is not good social policy. This is criminal neglect.

 

This is one of the most powerful articles I have read in a long time.

Robert Putnam describes life in his home town of Port Clinton, Ohio, population 6,059, as he was growing up in the 50s.

Port Clinton was “ a passable embodiment of the American dream, a place that offered decent opportunity for the children of bankers and factory workers alike.”

But today, “wealthy kids park BMW convertibles in the Port Clinton High School lot next to decrepit “junkers” in which homeless classmates live. The American dream has morphed into a split-screen American nightmare. And the story of this small town, and the divergent destinies of its children, turns out to be sadly representative of America.

“Growing up, almost all my classmates lived with two parents in homes their parents owned and in neighborhoods where everyone knew everyone else’s first name. Some dads worked in the local auto-part factories or gypsum mines, while others, like my dad, were small businessmen. In that era of strong unions and full employment, few families experienced joblessness or serious economic insecurity. Very few P.C.H.S. students came from wealthy backgrounds, and those few made every effort to hide that fact.”

Putnam and his generation grew up in a healthy society, where opportunity was widely available and many did well in life. Nearly three-quarters got more education than their parents and succeeded economically as well.

But then manufacturing collapsed; jobs were outsourced. The social fabric of the community wore thin.

“The social impact of those economic hammer blows was initially cushioned by the family and community bonds that had been so strong in my youth. But as successive graduating P.C.H.S. classes entered an ever worsening local economy, the social fabric of the 1950s and 1960s was gradually shredded. Juvenile-delinquency rates began to skyrocket in the 1980s and were triple the national average by 2010. Not surprisingly, given falling wages and loosening norms, single-parent households in Ottawa County doubled from 10 percent in 1970 to 20 percent in 2010, while the divorce rate more than quadrupled. In Port Clinton itself, the epicenter of the local economic collapse in the 1980s, the rate of births out of wedlock quadrupled between 1978 and 1990, topping out at about 40 percent, nearly twice the race-adjusted national average (itself rising rapidly).

“Unlike working-class kids in the class of 1959, many of their counterparts in Port Clinton today are, despite toil and talent, locked into troubled, even hopeless lives.”

What is happening to our country?

Why are the bankers and the major corporations blaming teachers and public schools for problems they not only created but benefit from?

Why do they think that adoption of the Common Core standards or the privatization of public schools will heal the deep economic and social problems caused by the outsourcing of our manufacturing base and deep income inequality?

How many shell games will Americans fall for?

EduShyster is excited to see that Morgan Spurlock has discovered charter schools, which are training minority students to be busy every minute every day. Spurlock has a CNN program called “The Inside Man” where he sees how things really work.

When Spurlock decided to find out why our schools are “failing,” This is what he did:

“The Inside Man was off on a mission. First stop: Finland, where Spurlock joined a long and growing list of American visitors who descend on that country intent on learning nothing. Then it was time to find a school that takes every single one of the elements of the Finnish success story and either ignores them completely or does the precise opposite of what the Finns do. Welcome to Williamsburg Collegiate Charter School, where there is no magical 100% solution but rather one hundred, individual 1% solutions. Let’s take a look, shall we?”

What are the secrets of this charter?

“Williamsburg Prep’s “immersion approach” relies on key special sauce ingredients like tracking the speaker plus some nifty new flavors, including lots of hand clapping and snapping. Most importantly though, neither these students, nor their hands, are ever idle. And that’s key because it is a well known historical fact that idle hands do the Devil’s work. Also, in the jobs of the future, there will not be much downtime, if you know what I mean. In other words, Williamsburg Prep looks a lot like a school in Finland, if Finland was actually called SLANTland and instead of educating students, the Finnish teachers were training seals.”

To learn more about this miraculous school, read on.

A retired librarian spots a scam:

Reference: here is another blog that is relevant to the discussion.
“Apple’s iPad Textbooks Cost 5x More Than Print”
By Lee Wilson

—————————————-
Comment: I have watched the dismantling of the public library in my district. The newest “schemes” provide some kind of digital “books” that are only licensed for so many readers; once you go over that limit the fees are reapplied. I don’t have the specific details here but I have been watching carefully and have had several arguments with the director of the library and the IT director. All of the reference books have been removed from the shelves because “people can get that at home”.

I taught in a wealthy/affluent suburban (Greater Boston) district but I live in a city that is below the average on equity of resources so when I see what happens to the public library I predict what happens in the schools in these districts. If my library is the canary in the coal mine then I will want to stay out of their arena; I wish other teachers had this freedom but I have retired so i have more choices.

The market psychology is the “razor and the razorblade”…. give away the razor and you will have the client hooked. This actually happened about 1988; DEC gave our group a computer but then we were expected to be sales site for DEC in public schools.

When DEC closed they quickly moved some of their personnel into the fast track teacher education programs which they had every right to do I guess but they kept up the hype that these employees would make even better teachers than were typically in schools.

This comment was posted by a reader:

A HUMBLE OPINION ON THE CHANGING OF THE
GUARD

How will privatization of our school system over the presently run public school system be certain to have any effect on education let alone making education improve by having students achieve better grades? Is the hope to have education improved only because it is privatized? Is the hope to give people a choice in school variety? But we already have four choices in which school to send children: public school, Christian school, parochial school, and private public schools like Groton in Massachusetts. Maybe all that is certain with privatization is that one owner and manager, public education is dismissed and another owner and manager now runs the show, the profiteer. Now, who benefits for certain from this change of the guard of poor performing schools? The students? The teachers? The new owners?
Whether student learning will be bettered, whether ALL students, the present goal of NCLB, will improve is unknown for certain. If charter schools methods are so much better all that is necessary then would be for the public school to adopt same such methods. Who can say: is it possible student achievement can get worse with charter schools? Students learn their subjects through a teacher not who owns or manages or runs the educational system. Education should not be run as a business like management runs a business of selling and buying goods and services. Teachers and children are people, not commodities. In a way students are both employer and employee of their own business in their own education. Education is for them, not management to make a profit from. The teacher is the conduit, the aqueduct of bringing fresh water of learning for the student. Fire one teacher after privatization takes over and there is now no union there to help the dismissed person the class gets another teacher who may be worse yet and not better. So, fire and hire, fire and hire, like in private work places since charter schools have no unions; interesting fact.
It surely must be easier to gauge the effectiveness of say a machinist whose handiwork is an inanimate creation. The outcome of a machinist’s labor rests on 90% of the machinists’ competence and ability and 10% on the material used, that is whether the steel, iron etc, is flawed, etc. But to gauge effectiveness of one teacher with just one gauge, the test, when student class participation, seatwork, homework, or graded papers handed in of student’s answers to a video just viewed are other means of teacher evaluation for student achievement and progress, must surely be inaccurate. Why? Reason one: if a student gets a D on the test but does well with class participation, etc. the student can raise his score to a C or better. So the student achieves better than the test show’s she is. According to the test results, the teacher is poorly performing, along with his student, but the student herself, by her own effort and intelligence and with help from her teacher brought her grade up unknown to the test observer. The student has been an overall success unbeknown to the test observer (these tests include the regular classroom tests as well as those tests necessary for NCLB). Second reason: Because, apart from these other methods of evaluation the effectiveness of the teacher depends very much on the infinite variety of the personality, physical health, emotional health, of 20 or more human beings in the classroom, including the teacher’s own, as to whether pupils are listening to a lecture or are working on that written test. Such human qualities will determine much of the motivation of each student, and as such, in the words of that renown first and second century Roman professor and orator of public speaking, Quintilian, have “study and learning depend very much on the good will of the pupil,”(towards their classmates, education, their school, and their teacher) “a quality which can not be secured by compulsion,” and which was then and remains to this day a very big reason for the success or not of a student.
But with many, if not all unions weakened, or maybe some worse off, partly due to reaganism and globalism, and giving in to a successfully rapid and furious political and corporate abusiveness and assault to have the public blame union and teacher for total student failure, when in fact it is at least both participants to blame, the corporatists’ and political allies’ derision and the union and teachers defensive posturing, serves only to weaken education. Just how little or how much is less important then that some weakening occurs. And, with the general population down on education even before this abusiveness and also due to the billions going overseas for both wars and for foreign aid, many politicians of all parties ride this wave of popular discontent with education to the shoreline of and for their own political advantage.
Now, unless this is the primary intention of the political and corporate derision to weaken all but the classroom, where the real education exists and occurs and is insulated and protected, for the most part, by the noble teacher from the weakening of the system, then there is no good, or not enough good to condone the continued existence of the current group of reforms, is there?
I believe a successful attempt at privatizing any or all of the general welfare and public health and happiness is at best risky and at worst maybe illegal or even unconstitutional. Privatize social security, public schools or any other public function and where the government will seek to aid, equalize, and help retirees, etc, the private enterprisers will first need to determine the cost of helping and the need for securing a profit for themselves before considering promoting the public welfare and health and happiness. If a profit cannot be made, can profiteers be trusted to promote the public health and happiness which is a very important concept of our Enlightenment heritage? Profiteers will only promote the PUBLIC good once and foremost their own PRIVATE interests, made in profits, is promoted first, correct? The people’s trust and happiness should not be allowed to reside with people who will likely have a conflict of interest in promoting the general welfare. Once social security, public schools, health care, or any other public interest is privatized what will keep the profiteers, now the owners of that specific public interest from one day deciding that they now no longer want to own that public interest and either sell it to who knows who or downright just decide not to have it anymore?
And one last thing which should surely show the short-sightedness and poorly considered set of current reforms. Schools which continue to fail are ultimately closed down. The students of these closed schools now go to charter schools or to the schools which were closed when they were public schools and which now are reopened and managed by private enterprise. And now, like magic these children who were failing before will “poof” miraculously begin to achieve better, will now be a success for no other reason then because another manages the school. How much better will the programs, directives, etc. of the directors of a privately run school be, which will have no governmental restrictions, when the public schools now could likewise take the initiative if allowed by state and federal regulations to implement programs, no one knows. Why wait to privatize a school which will have little if any restrictions, when all that need be done today is lessen if not eliminate restrictions on our public schools so they can initiate programs on their own with no government interference and become more like the charter schools would be? Ludicrous.

How many times have we heard that the a Chicago Public Schools are broke? Isn’t that why CPS laid off thousands of teachers and closed 50 elementary schools?

But wait: this week, CPS gave a $20 million no-bid contract to a for-profit corporation called Supes Academy to train principals.

CPS Superintendent Barbara Byrd-Bennett worked for Supes Academy until April 2012.

“The size and the circumstances surrounding the contract have raised eyebrows among some outside observers. The contract with Wilmette-based Supes Academy is by far the largest no-bid contract awarded in at least the past three years, according to a Catalyst Chicago analysis of board documents. In addition, CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett worked for the company as a coach up until the time she came on board at CPS as a consultant.

“There’s also conflicting information about Byrd-Bennett’s involvement with another company owned by the same individuals who run the Supes Academy.

“Andy Shaw, president and CEO of the Better Government Association, says that a large, no-bid contract such as this one deserves scrutiny.”

Scrutiny? I’ll say. Chicago has several excellent institutions of higher education that could have done the same job for far less money. Was this a necessary expenditure at a time when the schools don’t have enough teachers and at being closed, allegedly to save money?