Archives for category: Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Julian Vasquez Heilig on a Bluebook of Educational Thinkers

By dianeravitch
April 13, 2024 //
61

Julian Vasquez Heilig, Provost at Western Michigan University and founding board member of the Network for Public Education , here reflects on his personal connection to a comprehensive new review of prominent thinkers in education—of which he is one!

He begins:

The upcoming Palgrave Handbook of Educational Thinkers evokes a deep sense of connection with the lineage of educators and thinkers who have sculpted the contours of educational discourse and practice from antiquity onward. The roster of thinkers, whose work spans the spectrum of educational thought and action, represents a mosaic of visions and voices that have collectively pushed the boundaries of what education can and should be…

Then the Table of Contents:

The list of these thinkers, as featured in the handbook, reads as a roll call of transformative influence and enduring legacy:

Section I. Antiquity to 1200 
1. Peter Abélard  
2. Aristotle  
3. Buddha  
4. Cicero  
5. Confucius

6. Horace  
7. Isocrates  
8. Plato  
9. Plutarch  
10. Pythagoras 
11. Seneca  
12. Socrates  
13. St. Augustine 

14. Thucydides  
15. Virgil  
16. Hipparchia 
17. Akka Mahadevi  
18. Gargi Vachaknavi 
19. Hypatia  
20. Hildegarde of Bingen 

Section II. 1200 – 1900


1. Rodolphus Agricola  
2. Louisa May Alcott  
3. Thomas Aquinas  
4. Matthew Arnold  
5. Robert Ascham  
6. Francis Bacon  
7. Louis Braille  
8. John Calvin  
9. John Amos Comenius  
10. Gabriel Compayre  
11. Charles Darwin  
12. Eugenio Maria De Hostos  
13. Michel de Montaigne  
14. Charles Dickens  
15. Thomas Elyot  
16. Ralph Waldo Emerson  
17. Desiderius Erasmus  
18. Johann Gotlieb Fichte  
19. August Herman Francke  
20. Benjamin Franklin  
21. Valentin Friedland  
22. Fredric Froebel  
23. Nikolai Frederick Grundtvig  
24. Francois Guizot  
25. Valentin Hauy  
26. Georg Wilhelm 
27. Johann Friedrick Herbart  
28. Thomas Jefferson  
29. Immanuel Kant  
30. Arthur F. Leah  
31. John Locke  
32. Ignatius Loyola  
33. Martin Luther 34. Horace Mann  
35. Phillip Melanchthon  
36. John Stuart Mill  
37. Richard Mulcaster  
38. John Henry Newman  
39. Friedrich Nietzsche  
40. Robert Owen 

41. Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi  
42. Wolfgang Ratke  
43. Charles Rollin 
44. Jean Jacques Rousseau  
45. John Ruskin  
46. Egerton Ryerson  
47. Herbert Spencer 48. Johannes Strum  
49. Juan Luis Vives  
50. Wilhelm Von Humboldt 
51. John Wesley  
52. Mary Wollstonecraft 

Section III. 1900 – 1970 

1. Jane Addams  
2. Hannah Arendt  
3. Margaret Bancroft  
4. Alfred Binet  
5. Benjamin Bloom  
6. Harry Broudy  
7. Jerome Bruner  
8. Martin Buber  
9. Cyril Lodovic Burt  
10. Noam Chomsky  
11. Lawrence A Cremin  
12. John Dewey  
13. Donalda Dickie  
14. WEB Dubois  
15. Emile Durkheim  
16. M.K. Gandhi  
17. Antonio Gramsci  
18. Kurt Hahn  
19. Martin Heidigger  
20. Susan Isaacs  
21. Emile Jaques-Dalcroze  
22. Anna Julia Haywood Cooper 23. Bel Kaufman  
24. 22. Helen Keller  
25. Clark Kerr  
26. Melanie Klein  
27. Janusz Korczak  
28. Charlotte Mason  
29. Maria Montessori  
30. A.S. Neill  
31. Michael Oakeshott  
32. Jean Piaget 
33. Carl Rogers  
34. Bertrand Russell  
35. Edward Said  
36. Joseph Schwab  
37. BF Skinner. 
38. Rudolf Steiner  
39. Rabindranath Tagore  
40. Ralph Winifrid Tyler  
41. Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky  
42. Booker T. Washington  
43. Max Weber 

43. Simone Weil  
44. Ludwig Wittgensten  
45. Jose Ortega Y Gasset  
46. Howard Zinn 

Section IV. 1970 – Current 

1. Cami Anderson  
2. Josh Angrist  
3. Michael W. Apple 
4. James A. Banks  
5. David C. Berliner  
6. Jo Boaler  
7. Derek Curtis Bok 
8. Pierre Bordieux  
9. Geoffrey Canada  
10. Raj Chetty  
11. David Coleman  
12. David Cooperrider 
13. Linda Darling-Hammond  
14. Edward De Bono  
15. Jeff Duncan-Andrade  
16. Angela Duckworth  
17. Nell K. Duke 
18. Greg J. Duncan 

19. Carol Dweck  
20. Richard Elmore  
21. Michel Foucaut  
22. Paulo Freire  
23. Howard Gardner  
24. Henry Giroux  
25. Gene V. Glass  
26. John I. Goodlad  
27. Bryan Goodwin  
28. Maxine Greene  
29. Erin Gruewell  
30. Eric Hanushek 
31. Shaun R. Harper  
32. Clara Hemphill  
33. Frederick Hess  
34. John Holt  
35. bell hooks  
36. Ivan Illich  
37. Baruti Kafele  
38. Salman Kahn  
39. Lawrence Kohlberg  
40. Gloria Ladson-Billings 

41. Zeus Leonardo  
42. Dennis Littky  
43. Bettina Love  
44. Angela Maiers  
45. Jane Roland Martin 
46. Robert J. Marzano  
47. Deborah Meier 
48. Rich Milner  
49. Sugata Mitra  
50. Michael Grahame Moore  
51. Richard J. Murnane  
52. Nel Noddings 
53. Pedro Noguera  
54. Martha Nussbaum  
55. Julius Nyrere  
56. Gary Orfield  
57. R.S. Peters  
58. Robert C. Pianta  
59. Diane Ravitch  
60. Sean F. Reardon  
61. Joeseph Renzulli  
62. Sir Ken Robinson  
63. Pasi Sahlberg  
64. Seymour B. Sarason  
65. Lee S. Schulman 
66. Jack Pl Shonkoff 
67. Theodore Sizer  
68. Robert E. Slavin  
69. Catherine Snow

70. William G. Tierney  
71. Carol A. Tomlinson  
72. Beverly Tatum  
73. Virginia Uribe  
74. Paul Wehman  
75. Daniel Willingham  
76. Patrick J. Wolf

 77. Yong Zhao  
78. Estela Bensimon  
79. Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot  
80. Adrianna Caesar

81. Julian Vasquez Heilig

Each name on this list represents a chapter in the ongoing story of educational evolution—a story marked by challenges, innovations, and insights that have, in their own unique ways, reshaped the landscape of learning and teaching.

He then goes on to discuss his personal relationship with several of those on the list, including David Berliner, Pierre Bourdieu, Linda Darling Hammond, Shaun R. Harper, Frederick Hess, bell hooks, Gloria Ladson-Billings, Bettina love, Pedro Noguera, Gary Orfield, me, and Sean Reardon.

Julian Vasquez Heilig and me!

Categories Education Reform, History

NEPC: There Is No “Science” in the “Science of Reading”

By dianeravitch
April 12, 2024 //
27

The National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado posted a summary of research about the current “Science of Reading” fad, which finds that the “science” is missing. SoR has turned into another “miracle cure” that is being imposed and mandated by legislatures, anticipating a dramatic result in which “no child is left behind.”

NEPC reports:

What’s scientific about the “science of reading?”

Not much, according to NEPC Fellow Elena Aydarova of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, as explained in a recent article published in the peer-refereed Harvard Educational Review. In fact, she warns that legislators are using science-of-reading legislation to distract from more serious approaches to addressing students’ needs.

Using an “anthropology of policy approach,” Aydarova zeroes in on legislative debates surrounding science of reading (SOR) reforms that have swept the nation in the past half decade. As of July 2022, 29 states and the District of Columbia had adopted this approach, Aydarova writes.

Aydarova closely examines Tennessee’s Literacy Success Act (LSA). She analyses videos of legislative meetings and debates, stakeholder interviews, and examinations of bills, policy reports, media coverage, and other documents associated with the LSA, which was passed in 2021.

This SOR bill was first introduced in 2020. As the bill underwent revisions, the phrase “science of reading” was substituted with “foundational literacy skills” to describe the same content: “Across contexts and artifacts produced by various actors, the meanings of ‘science of reading’ shifted and were frequently replaced with new signs, such as ‘foundational literacy skills,’ ‘phonics,’ and others.”

Aydarova finds little evidence that advocates, intermediaries, or legislators grounded their support in anything resembling scientific evidence. Instead, “science of reading” becomes a catch-all phrase representing a grab bag of priorities and beliefs: “[I]n advocates’ testimonies and in legislative deliberations, neuroscience as SOR’s foundational element was reduced to vague references to ‘brain’ and was often accompanied by casual excuses that speakers did not know what ‘it all’ meant.”

Motivations for supporting SOR reforms range from commercial to ideological. For instance, Aydarova notes that after the passage of The Literacy Success Act in 2021, nearly half of Tennessee’s school districts adopted curricula promoted by the Knowledge Matters Campaign. This campaign, supported by curriculum companies such as Amplify and wealthy backers such as the Charles Koch Foundation, added SOR wording to its marketing effort as the curriculum it had originally supported fell out of favor due to its association with Common Core State Standards, which had become politically unpopular in many states.

As the SOR bill reached the legislative floor, “science” was rarely mentioned.

“The link to science disappeared, and instead the sign shifted toward tradition rooted in these politicians’ own past experiences,” Aydarova writes. “During final deliberations, legislators shared that they knew phonics worked because they had learned to read with its help themselves.”

Concerningly, the bill’s supporters also positioned it as “a substitution for investing in communities and creating the safety nets that were necessary for families to climb out of poverty.”

For instance, legislators dismissed as “state over-reach” proposals that would have expanded access to early education or placed more social workers in schools in underserved communities. Yet they “emphasized the importance of proposing legislation to reform reading instruction to solve other social issues,” such as incarceration, impoverishment, and unemployment. Aydarova writes:

Based on artificial causality—poverty and imprisonment rates would decline if phonics was used for reading instruction—these reforms naturalized the widening socioeconomic inequities and depoliticized social conditions of precarity that contribute to growing prison populations. Through these material substitutions, the SOR legislation promised students and their communities freedom, and robbed them of it at the same time.

In the end, Aydarova finds that, “Science has little bearing on what is proposed or discussed, despite various policy actors’ claims to the contrary. Instead, SOR myths link tradition, curriculum products, and divestment from social safety nets.”

Categories Education Reform, Hoax, Literacy, Research, Tennessee

Michigan: State Board Passes Resolution to Put Charter Schools Under Same Rules as Public Schools

By dianeravitch
April 11, 2024 //
16

Michigan, under Republican control for years, has given free rein to charter schools and has long been overrun with unaccountable for-profit schools. But the Governor, Gretchen Whitney, is now a Democrat, and the elected State Board of Education is no longer controlled by Republicans. The State Board took a shocking step this week. It resolved that charter schools should be held to the same rules as public schools.

The State Board of Education approved a resolution during its meeting today calling for legislation to open charter schools to be treated more like public schools in the state of Michigan.

Mitchell ROBINSON’s resolution made the agenda and asked the state Legislature to create and pass laws that would put charter schools under the approval of the Michigan Department of Education and make them more transparent by opening them up to the Freedom of Information Act and Open Meetings Act.

The resolution also asked for legislation that would require charter schools to follow many of the same requirements as public schools, such as bidding for vendors, requirements that no child be excluded from enrolling, not refusing transfer students if space is open, require teachers and administrators to hold certificates, and mandate contracts for management organizations be published online.

“So charter schools are technically public schools, so they should be expected to follow regulations regarding transparency, as all publicly funded schools are,” Robinson said.

However, he said many charter schools are dominated by politically-motivated special interest groups, those looking to be education reformers, and “predatory for-profit organizations.”

He said he’s looked at the charter school system in Michigan and found that they make up one-third of all the local education agencies in the state and are not accountable to the communities.

“I see no evidence of innovation in this service sector,” he said.

He said the public school system struggles to adequately fund itself, not even adding the charter system that also pulls funding for the 363 schools across 285 districts.

“This is financially irresponsible,” he said.

The sole no vote against the resolution came from Tom McMILLIN, a Republican board member. 

He argued that charter schools fill in gaps in education and were already fully transparent with the public funding they received. 

“These charter schools give parents choices. They fill up for a reason,” McMillin said.

He said the teachers and administrators were already required to be certified.

“What this would do is simply force charter schools to not open, which is what some people want,” McMillin said.

Marshall BULLOCK II pointed to troubles with charter schools in the Detroit area closing without warning or opening in a struggling district that could have the “unintended consequence” of splitting a neighborhood.

“That is how you destroy a neighborhood,” Bullock said.

McMillin called it “perverse” to not give parents a choice and “force them, based on their zip code, to a failing school.” He placed the problem at the feet of the state superintendent.

Tiffany TILLEY asked that the board hear a presentation to look at what other states are doing in terms of charter schools.

“Michigan has become kind of like the Wild Wild West when it comes to charter schools,” Tilley said.

She said you can’t have “thousands” of charter schools with no transparency and continue to maintain a well-funded system, but putting a limit on the number of charters schools could help.

“We do need to change the laws and this has gone on for a very long time,” she said.

Now if only the Michigan legislature would ban for-profit charters! No public school operates for profit. The “profit” is inevitably taken from students and teachers. It’s wrong.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Michigan

New York Will Move Away from Teacher Evaluation Tied to Test Scores

By dianeravitch
April 8, 2024 //
48

Back in 2010, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan rolled out his Race to the Top program to reform American education. The U.S. Department of Education offered a total of $5 billion to states. To be eligible to compete for a part of the huge prize money, states had to agree to authorize charter schools, to adopt the Common Core (not yet finished), and to evaluate teachers based on the test scores of their students.

The requirement to change teacher evaluation was heated. Duncan scoffed at critics, saying they were trying to protect bad teachers and didn’t want to know the truth.

Debate over this methodology was heated.

I was part of a group of education scholars who denounced this method of evaluating teachers in 2010.

In 2012, three noted scholars claimed that teachers who raised test scores raised students’ lifetime incomes; President Obama cited this study, led by Harvard economist Raj Chetty, in his State of the Union address. It seemed to be settled wisdom that teachers who raised test scores were great, and teachers who did not should be ousted.

In 2014, the American Statistical Association warned about the danger of evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students. The ASA statement said that most studies of this method find that teachers account for 1-14% of the variation in test scores. The greatest opportunity for improvement, they said, was to be found in system-level changes.

The Gates Foundation poured hundreds of millions of dollars into districts willing to test value-added methodology, and eventually gave up. Teachers were demoralized, teachers avoided teaching in low-income districts. Overall improvements were hard to find.

Arne Duncan was a true believer, as was his successor, John King, and they never were willing to admit failure.

Teachers never liked VAM. They knew that it encouraged teaching to the test. They knew that teachers in affluent districts would get higher scores than those in less fortunate districts. Sometimes they sued and won. But in most states, teachers continued to be evaluated in part by their students’ scores.

But in New York state, the era of VAM is finished. Dr. Betty Rosa, the chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents, reached an agreement with Melinda Person, president of New York State United Teachers, to draft a new way of evaluating teachers that moves away from students’ standardized test scores.

New York state education leaders and the teachers’ union have announced an agreement to change how New York school teachers and principals are evaluated, and move away from the mandated reliance on standardized test scores.

State Education Department Commissioner Betty Rosa and New York State United Teachers President Melinda Person hand-delivered their drafted legislation Wednesday to lawmakers to create a new system that doesn’t use students’ test performance to penalize educators. The state teacher evaluation system, known as the Annual Professional Performance Review, or APPR, was modified in the 2015 budget to place a greater importance on scores.

“It’s connecting research to practice and developing strategies to ensure that teachers have the best tools and principals to make sure our young people are getting the best quality education,” Rosa told reporters Wednesday in the Legislative Office Building.

When NYSUT elected president Person last year, she said her first task was to change the teacher evaluation system, and state lawmakers said with confidence Wednesday it will happen this session.

The proposed law, which has not officially been introduced in the Legislature, would remove the requirement to base evaluations on high-stakes tests. School districts would have eight years to transition, but could make the changes faster than the required deadline.

Person argued it will support new teachers who are often burdened by the required paperwork under the current model.

“This would be a fair and a just system that would support them in becoming better educators, which is ultimately what they want to do anyway,” Person said.

The proposal was negotiated in agreement with state superintendents, principals, school boards, the PTA, Conference of Big 5 School Districts and other stakeholders. The issue has been contentious for union and education leaders for years, and both state Education Committee chairs in the Legislature said they’re thrilled with the agreement. 

“That’s such a nice thing in Albany,” said Senate Education chair Shelley Mayer, a Democrat from Yonkers. “Who can do that? Who gets agreement? It’s very hard around here.

“It takes a woman to do it,” Assembly Education chair Michael Benedetto replied with a smile.

Benedetto, a Bronx Democrat, was a classroom teacher for decades and recalled how feedback helps educators develop when done in the proper way.

“It’s like anything else — we want stability in our lives, we want to know where we’re going, how we’re going to be rated and what we’re going to be rated on, as a teacher, as a professional,” the assemblyman said.

Lawmakers will review the proposal and draft legislation in the coming weeks.

Remembering how strident were the supporters of VAM, it’s kind of wonderful to hear the collective sigh of relief in Albany as it fades away.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Education Reform, Failure, Gates Foundation, Bill Gates, Standardized Testing, Teacher Evaluations, VAM (value-added modeling)

Justin Parmenter: North Carolina Is Funding Indoctrination in Christian Nationalist Schools

By dianeravitch
April 7, 2024 //
17

The one type of school where you are sure to encounter indoctrination is a religious school. That is their purpose, their mission. Religious groups open schools to indoctrinate the young into the precepts of their religion.

Public schools do not indoctrinate. They enroll children of many religions, from many different ethnic heritages. They teach students the basics of democracy and citizenship. They teach them about the importance of voting. They teach them about the justice system.

Justin Parmenter, award-winning high school teacher in North Carolina, wrote on his blog that his state is funding schools that indoctrinate their students into the bigotry and ideology of white Christian nationalism.

He writes:

Shortly after he took over as North Carolina’s Lieutenant Governor in 2021, current Republican candidate for governor Mark Robinson launched a task force to root out indoctrination in our public schools.

Robinson claimed indoctrination was a widespread problem and set up an online portal to solicit complaints about educators from the public.  The majority of the submissions Robinson received were from people who took issue with his politically-motivated witch hunt and saw an opportunity to roast him over it.

As for the actual complaints about educators, Robinson published those online without substantiating a single one and didn’t bother to redact names of educators or worksites.  Those complaints were dominated by white racial resentment (remember, this was at the height of the fake outrage over critical race theory) and included suggestions such as canceling Black History Month and not talking so much about slavery because it’s “getting old.”

In terms of actual indoctrination unearthed, Robinson’s witch hunt was a complete nothing burger.

Fast forward a couple of years to North Carolina’s Republican-controlled General Assembly flipping a legislator, stealing a supermajority, then tripling funding for school vouchers.

With billions of dollars now on tap for North Carolina’s private schools, and 88.2% of those dollars going to religious schools, scrutiny is rising over exactly what our taxes are supporting.

Private schools are legally able to discriminate against children, and many of North Carolina’s Christian schools deny admissions to students based on religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or learning disabilities.

For example, Fayetteville Christian School, which pocketed nearly $2 million in voucher dollars this school year, expressly bans students who practice specific religions like Islam and Buddhism, and they also bar LGBTQ+ students–whom they brand “perverted”–from attending.

North Raleigh Christian Academy won’t accept children with IQs below 90 and will not serve students who require IEPs (a document which outlines how a school will provide support to children with disabilities).

If this public funding of widespread discriminatory school practices rubs you the wrong way, I have bad news for you.

It gets worse.

That harmful indoctrination Mark Robinson was howling about a couple years ago in his disingenuous attempt to generate political momentum?  Turns out it’s real.  It just isn’t happening in the traditional public schools Robinson was targeting.

The Daniel Christian Academy is a private school in Concord, NC.  This school has received public dollars through school vouchers every year since Republicans launched the controversial Opportunity Scholarship voucher program in 2014-15 for a grand total of $585,776.

Daniel Academy’s mission is to “raise the next generation of leaders who will transform the heart of our nation” by equipping students “to enter the Seven Mountains of Influence.”

The Seven Mountains of Influence (also referred to as the Seven Mountains of Dominion or the Seven Mountains Mandate) refers to seven areas of society:  religion, family, education, government, media, arts & entertainment, and business.  Dominionists who follow this doctrine believe that they are mandated by God to control all seven of society’s “mountains,” and that doing so will trigger the end times.

The Seven Mountains philosophy has been around since the 70s, but it came to prominence about ten years ago with the publication of Lance Wallnau’s book Invading Babylon:  The Seven Mountains Mandate.  Wallnau touts himself as a consultant who “inspires visions of tomorrow with the clarity of today—connecting ideas to action,” and his book teaches that dominionists must “understand [their] role in society” and “release God’s will in [their] sphere of influence.”

Wallnau does caution his followers that messaging about taking control over all seven areas of society on behalf of God might freak out non dominionists, saying in 2011 that “If you’re talking to a secular audience, you don’t talk about having dominion over them. This … language of takeover, it doesn’t actually help.”

Daniel Academy doesn’t use that kind of inflammatory rhetoric about dominionism in public, although it’s clear the Seven Mountains are behind their stated goal of raising “the next generation of leaders who will transform the heart of our nation.”

Nicole Barnes, Daniel Academy’s Dean of Administration & Spiritual Development, confirmed by email that Wallnau’s doctrine is at the center of its approach to the Seven Mountains, telling me “As a school we have taken the 7 Mountains of Influence, teaching by Lance Wallnau, and have broken it down for the students to comprehend.”

So why should North Carolinians care that their tax dollars are subsidizing this sort of indoctrination of children through private school vouchers?

I posed that question to Frederick Clarkson, a research analyst who has studied the confluence of politics and religion for more than three decades and lately has been focusing on the violent underbelly of Christian nationalists who want to achieve Christian dominion of the United States at all costs.  Here’s what Clarkson said:

North Carolina taxpayers should be concerned that they are helping to underwrite an academy for training children to become  warriors against not only the rights of others, but against democracy and its institutions.  The idea of the Seven Mountain Mandate is for Christians of the right sort to take dominion — which is to say power and influence — over the most important sectors of society. It is theocratic in orientation and its vision is forever. 

This is not something that is about liberals and conservatives . Most Christians including most evangelicals, Catholics, and mainline Protestants are deemed not just insufficiently Christian, but may be viewed as infested with demons, and standing in the way of the advancement of the Kingdom of God on Earth. And they will need to be dealt with.

Back in 2021, when Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson released his nothing burger of a report on indoctrination in public schools, he said it was his “attempt to stop the abuse of the teaching profession by a few who are using that profession to put undue pressure on young minds,” adding that students don’t come to school to be indoctrinated and “this is about ending that.”

Robinson recently won his primary race for governor and stands a decent chance of taking over North Carolina’s office next year.  Since North Carolina voters deserve a clear understanding of what our candidates stand for, now would be a great time for Robinson to reiterate that he believes the use of public dollars to support indoctrination is wrong, and that if schools want to influence students to be warriors for God fighting to control every facet of society–possibly taking out some demon-infested folks along the way–they need to do so on their own dime.

We’re waiting, Lieutenant Governor Robinson.

Categories Education Reform

What Conservative Justices Said about Roe v. Wade Under Oath at Their Hearings

By dianeravitch
April 6, 2024 //
11

Six conservative Supreme Court justices overruled Roe v. Wade, discrediting a decision that had been in force for half a century. Before the Dobbs decision, American women were able to get an abortion. Today one of every three American women lives in states where abortion has been banned.

Here is what the six Justices said about Roe v.Wade at their Senate confirmation hearings.

Categories Education Reform, Ethics, Extremism, Gender, Justice, Lies

Peter Greene: What “Science of Reading” Advocates Can Learn from the Common Core

By dianeravitch
April 5, 2024 //
58

Peter Greene, retired teacher, is a regular contributor to Forbes, where this article appeared. It’s heartening to know that a business publication is exposing its readers to a veteran teacher who knows what he is talking about.

In this article, he cautions champions of “the science of reading not to repeat the same mistakes as Common Core, our last overhyped educational panacea.

He writes:

Bills mandating the “Science of Reading” have been passing left and right across the nation.

While some, like the Pennsylvania bill that passed 201-0, provide gentle nudging and support, others, like Indiana’s law, provide strict mandates on what teaching techniques are required and which are forbidden. And that’s a bad idea.

America has seen this movie before.

A bipartisan collection of political leaders, concerned about improving America’s education system, came together to mandate certain education practices, based on the recommendations from advocates located far from actual classrooms. The result was a contentious and controversial mess that did not seem to actually make things a bit better.

That was Common Core. “Science of Reading” fans would do well to learn a few lessons.

Brand identity

Despite widespread discussion, Common Core meant many different things to many different people. The group that wrote the standards disbanded and did not stick around to answer questions (of which there were many). Common Core the brand was open to anyone’s interpretation. This left businesses free to claim their materials were “Common Core aligned” without fear of contradiction.

Likewise, there is no widespread agreement on what “Science of Reading” actually entails. Publishers can slap “Now with more Science of Reading” on materials and hit the marketplace.

Top down

 Tom Loveless pointed out in his excellent Common Core post mortem, pushing programs from the top down leads to implementation issues. Legislators can mandate traffic patterns from 100 miles up, but on the ground, folks have to navigate potholes, hills, valleys, other traffic, and everyday surprises. What look like stripes from far above may turn out to be a staircase…

Response time

Research can course correct quickly. Legislators cannot. Under No Child Left Behind, legislators tried to influence instruction by attaching high stakes to a big standardized test, with the goal that 100% of US students would score above average on that test by 2014. Legislators assured alarmed educators that the law would be rewritten before that unachievable goal came due. The law was rewritten in December of 2015.

Legislators deleted the original goal of 2014 as the date by which all students would magically score above average, but they left in place a harsh series of demands that were disruptive and demoralizing.

Open the link to read Peter’s analysis of ways to avoid making the same mistakes as Commin Core while pushing the goal of reaching new heights of literacy.

Categories Common Core, Education Reform, Literacy

RFK Jr. Says Biden Is a Bigger Threat to Democracy than Trump

By dianeravitch
April 4, 2024 //
21

Robert Kennedy Jr. is a crackpot who is running for President as a spoiler. His name may draw the votes of some disappointed Democrats. His penchant for conspiracy theories may draw some disaffected Trump voters. He has no chance of winning but he has an opportunity to drain away 15% or so of the votes.

His choice of Nicole Shanahan as his running mate guarantees him a sound financial footing. She is the ex-wife of Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, and is probably a billionaire. She is a lawyer but has no experience in politics or government.

The New York Times reported that Robert Kennedy said that Biden is a bigger threat to democracy than is Trump. That’s because the Biden administration has tried to persuade social media companies to eliminate misinformation, such as the false claims about the dangers of vaccines. Since Kennedy is a vaccine critic, he sees this campaign to combat misinformation as a direct threat to freedom of speech, far more dangerous to democracy than attempting a coup.

Mr. Kennedy’s stance drew fresh scrutiny this week after he said in an interview on CNN, “President Biden is a much worse threat to democracy, and the reason for that is President Biden is the first candidate in history, the first president in history that has used the federal agencies to censor political speech, to censor his opponent.” He repeated himself on Fox News on Tuesday, saying that a president like Mr. Biden was “a genuine threat to our democracy.”

The remarks by Mr. Kennedy, who carries the name but not the support of a storied Democratic family, were an escalation of his attacks on Mr. Biden and the Democratic Party — and he quickly backtracked, saying in an interview with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation on Tuesday night that he had been misunderstood. “What I said was that I could make this argument. I didn’t say definitively whether I believed one or the other was more dangerous to democracy. I did say that I don’t believe either of them are going to destroy democracy….”

But several scholars who have studied democratic governments and the ways they can backslide told The New York Times that it was nonsensical to suggest that social media moderation — which the Supreme Court seemed inclined to uphold as a legitimate goal of government — posed a greater threat than what Mr. Trump has done.

They pointed to his refusal to accept an election loss, his stoking of political violence, and his efforts to consolidate executive power and undermine public confidence in independent sources of information.

The two most fundamental tenets of democracy are that politicians “must always unambiguously accept the results of elections and must always unambiguously reject political violence,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard who co-wrote the book “How Democracies Die.” “I don’t think you’ll find a democracy expert in the world who will claim that the mild efforts to regulate social media in the United States are somehow equivalent or worse than an effort to overturn an election or the encouragement of political violence.”

Kennedys family members have endorsed Biden. RFK Jr. disgraces his family name. A man with a tragic family history. Sad.

Categories Democracy, Education Reform

California: Unions Complain That Arts Funding Is Misused

By dianeravitch
April 4, 2024 //
9

Howard Blume of the Los Angeles Times writes about union complaints that arts funding approved by voters is being misused.

Blume writes:

Powerful unions have joined forces with former Los Angeles schools Supt. Austin Beutner to call for state intervention to stop what they allege is the misuse of voter-approved funding to expand arts education in California.


In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials, Beutner and the unions claim that some school districts are taking funding, approved by voters in November 2022 to expand arts education, and are using it for other purposes. This year that funding totals $938 million.


The unions that signed the letter are California Teachers Assn., the largest state teachers union, and CFT, the other major statewide teachers union. Also signing the letter are the largest unions in the L.A. Unified School District: Local 99 of Service Employees International Union, which represents the greatest number of non-teaching school employees, and United Teachers Los Angeles, the second-largest teachers union local in the nation. Other unions include Teamsters Local 572, which also represents L.A. school district workers, and the teachers union for Oakland Unified.


“Some school districts in California are willfully violating the law by using the new funds provided by Prop. 28 to replace existing spending for arts education at schools,” the letter states.

Under the new law, the money must be used by schools to increase arts programs and each school can decide how best to add on to their programs. The arts windfall is drawn from the state’s general fund — at an amount equal to 1% of all money spent on schools serving students in transitional kindergarten through 12th grade. Thus the money is ongoing and will generally increase each year.

The letter lists no specific examples and does not name districts that are suspected by unions of being in violation of the law. Beutner said there is concern that whistleblowers could become targets for retaliation.


The unions and Beutner are calling on the state to require that districts certify within 30 days “that Prop. 28 funds have not been used to supplant any existing spending for arts education at any school.” In addition, the signatories want the state to require school districts to list “additional arts and music teachers” employed by each school district in the current school year and “how that compares” to the prior year.

Categories Arts Education, California, Cheating, Education Reform, Unions

What Did Trump and Biden Do on Easter Sunday?

By dianeravitch
April 1, 2024 //
21

Thanks to our friend Rick Charvet for sharing this very interesting clip from “Morning Joe,” in which Mika B. describes how Trump and Biden each spent Easter.

Trump apparently did not go to church and didn’t have much time for his family. Instead, he spent the day posting comments on his social media platform Truth Social. He posted 77 times. Seventy-seven times. He even posted notes from members of his cult likening him to Jesus.

In what ways is he like Jesus? Jesus was a teacher, a man beloved for his kindness, humility, compassion, and love for those in poverty, those in greatest need.

From Matthew:

Jesus told him, “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

But when the young man heard this, he went away sad, for he had many possessions.

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is very hard for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I’ll say it again—it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!

What did Biden do? He went to church with family.

Categories Biden, Billionaires, Education Reform, Religion, Trump
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »