Archives for category: Kentucky
Newer Entries »

Kentucky: First to Adopt Common Core, Achievement Gap Widens

By dianeravitch
May 23, 2016 //
26

The Hechinger Report reviews what has happened in Kentucky, the first state to adopt the Common Core standards.

 

In the first year, test scores plummeted. They have started to inch up, but the achievement gap between white and black students has grown larger.

 

“Kentucky stepped into the national spotlight in 2010 when it became the first state to adopt the standards after the Obama administration offered federal money to help pay the costs. (Over 40 other states and the District of Columbia eventually adopted the Common Core.) On Kentucky’s previous state tests, tied to its old standards, over 70 percent of elementary school students scored at a level of “proficiency” or better in both reading and math. Once the state introduced the Common Core-aligned tests in the spring of 2012, that percentage dropped 28 points in reading (to 48 percent) and 33 points in math (to 40 percent), according to the Kentucky Department of Education. Middle and high school students’ scores also dropped.

 

“Of course, we knew that the tougher standards had to be followed up with extra attention to students who were behind,” said Sonja Brookins Santelises, vice president of K-12 policy at the Education Trust.

 

“Scores have been edging up ever since. By spring 2015, 54 percent of Kentucky elementary school students were proficient in the English language arts and 49 percent were proficient in math.

 

“Despite that improvement, within those numbers are hidden divisions that have existed for decades. Breaking the scores down shows that African-American students fare much worse than their white peers.

 

“In spring 2015, in the elementary grades, 33 percent of black students were proficient in reading, versus 58 percent of white students; in math, the breakdown was 31 percent to 52 percent, according to Kentucky Department of Education figures.

 

“And those gaps, in many cases, have widened, according to an analysis of state testing data by The Hechinger Report and the Courier-Journal.”

 

Education Trust, which has received many millions from the Gates Foundation, is one of the strongest supporters of the Common Core standards, which were funded by Gates. Since Education Trust has long been the leading exponent of the view that raising standards and making tests more rigorous would close the achievement gap, the situation in Kentucky is a bit awkward for them.

 

There is still no evidence, despite the billions spent on Common Core, that it raises achievement or closes gaps between races. Common sense would suggest that making tests harder would cause the kids who are already scoring low to score even lower. A student who can’t clear a four-foot bar is going to be in big trouble if you raise the bar to six feet.

 

But Common Core was never related to common sense. It was about a theory, which decreed that all students would one day be college-and-career-ready if school work was more rigorous. And this far, the theory is failing.

Categories Common Core, Corporate Reform, Education Reform, Kentucky, Testing

Kentucky: Stand Up for Your Public Schools, Don’t Allow Charters

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2015 //
6

Not long ago, I was in Kentucky to speak to local school boards and superintendents. The walls outside the Grand Ballroom were festooned with pictures, quilts, and murals made by students from different communities. I took many photos of beautiful student work. I left with a sense that Kentucky has strong and united communities.

But the corporate reform movement can’t stand the thought of any state that hasn’t unleashed the power of competition and free enterprise, sort of like bringing Walmart into town to compete with the local stores in Main Street. So the usual right-wing funded groups have been pushing charters, promising the innovation and results that no one else has gotten.

Every year, the Republican-controlled Senate votes a charter bill, and every year the Democratic-controlled House ignores it. But this year may be different because all of the candidates for governor say they favor charters. The Democrat says he will support charters as long as they don’t take funding from public schools. Where does he think their funding comes from?

He says:

Democrat Jack Conway said in an interview he supports the concept of charters as long as they don’t take funds away from public schools.

“If it’s a charter where bureaucracy is getting out of the way and allowing for innovation, and it’s transparent, and we’re not in the situation where we’re siphoning off public dollars, then yes, I’m in for more flexibility in the public school system,” Conway said.

He added that he wants to make sure for-profit charter school companies can’t “cherry pick” the best students, leaving an underclass in the rest of the public education system.

How can he make sure that for-profit charter school companies don’t cherry pick the best students? How can he make sure that nonprofit charter schools don’t cherry pick the best students? Why does he think he can figure this out when no other state has? He should learn about the experience of Pennsylvania, where charter schools are bankrupting community public schools. Or about the many financial scandals in Ohio, Michigan, and Florida.

Why not protect the community schools of Kentucky where everyone works together for the benefit of the children?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Reform, Kentucky

Kentucky History Teacher Challenges Nation’s Largest Equity Funds in Court

By dianeravitch
September 5, 2015 //
18

Here is a hero. Dr. Randy Weick, a high school history teacher in Kentucky with a degree from the London School of Economics, has filed a class action suit against some of the nation’s largest investment firms for the danger they have inflicted on the pensions of Kentucky teachers.

A columnist in Forbes writes that Wieck has taken on “the titans of private equity”:

Wieck has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court of the Western District of Kentucky claiming that mismanagement of the investments of the Kentucky Teachers Retirement Systems (KTRS) has resulted in the worst-funded state teacher plan in the U.S—forcing teachers to contribute more of their salaries (up from 9% to 13%).

Wieck has no lawyer—he’s representing himself—in a Herculean effort to save his own and other Kentucky teachers’ retirement.

You might expect that powerful, well-funded national and local public unions would rally behind Wieck to hold Wall Street accountable for undermining teachers’ retirement security. To date, in Kentucky and nationally, public sector labor organizations have been mighty reluctant—even when pressed—to recognize that how the money in a pension is managed is at least as important as how much goes into it and is paid out in benefits.

Labor should be embracing a new role—providing meaningful independent oversight of pension investments. Every public pension needs an outside Inspector General, in my opinion. Organized labor could and should make it happen.

Private Equity firms mentioned in the Wieck complaint include Blackstone, Carlyle and KKR. Excerpts from the case referring to Private Equity investments include:

“As late as 2007 KTRS had no alternative investment managers listed in their Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; by 2013 there were 31 alternative managers listed and KTRS continued to add alternative investments in 2014 and 2015—despite the filing of a lawsuit against another Kentucky State Pension plan challenging the legality of purchasing alternatives.”


“KTRS has failed in their fiduciary duty by selecting investments and investment managers not permitted by statute of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. KTRS has invested in high-risk alternative investments not appropriate for fiduciaries under the common law. Many of these alternative investment entities have not documented in their contracts that they adhere to investment ethics and disclosure rules as required by statute. KTRS Trustees have allowed numerous alternative investment managers to violate Kentucky state law on ethics and disclosure – which also constitutes violations of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. KTRS (in Fiscal Year 2014) admitted to paying $9.2 million to alternative investment managers in secret no-bid contracts. KTRS managers who have hired lobbyists in Frankfort include KKR, JP Morgan (Highbridge) and Blackstone – which has 16 listings on the executive branch lobbyist list (all affiliates and placement agents combined).”

Dr. Randy Weick joins this blog’s honor roll, fighting for all teachers in Kentucky.

Categories Honor Roll, Kentucky, Pensions

Teacher: Why Teacher Retention is Crucial and How to Reduce Teacher Churn

By dianeravitch
June 26, 2015 //
14

In an article in The Atlantic, Paul Barnwell describes how difficult it was for him when he was a new teacher assigned to a low-performing school.

 

In a span of three minutes, the group in room 204 had morphed from contained to out of control. Two boys were shooting dice in the back of the room, and as I instructed them to put their crumpled dollar bills away, several others took off their shoes and began tossing them around like footballs. Before I could react, one boy broke into my supply closet. He snatched handfuls of No. 2 pencils and highlighters and sprinted out of the room, slamming the door behind him.

 

He was 22 years old, and he was working in one of Kentucky’s most troubled, underperforming, and dysfunctional middle schools. He quit before Christmas. Eventually, he realized that the school needed experienced teachers and stability, but federal policy does not set a priority on either. In fact, NCLB and Race to the Top encourage churn, pretending to “fix” schools by firing principals and teachers and moving in new and often inexperienced teachers.

 

How can struggling schools attract experienced teachers? Combat pay has repeatedly failed; so has merit pay. The practice of tying teachers’ compensation to test scores will only make matters worse by incentivizing teachers to avoid the toughest schools.

 

He concludes:

 

I asked several of my public-school teaching colleagues from around the country—from New Hampshire to Washington—what it would take for them to voluntarily switch to the neediest schools in their regions. Julie Hiltz, an educator in Hillsborough County, Florida, with nearly 13 years of teaching experience, told me that the following would need to be in place: The ability to make local decisions, professional development designed and led in-house, more time for collaboration, and smaller class sizes, among other factors. Unfortunately, current guidelines for struggling schools under No Child Left Behind often disenfranchise administrators and staff.

 

Lauren Christensen, a social-studies teacher in the Waltham, Massachusetts, with six years of experience, currently works in a low-poverty school. I asked her if she’d voluntarily transfer to a high-poverty school in her area. “Maybe, she said, “but I would need to know that the whole school would be supported with a long-term commitment [from decision-makers]. I think the pressure of standard assessments and the stress put on educators to turn ‘failing’ schools around immediately might be too much to overcome.”

 

When I think back to my first year, I’m no longer bitter. I’m now completing my 11th year as a teacher; I mentor new educators and advocate for better support and working conditions. But unless those resources are in place, I wouldn’t voluntarily work in another struggling school.

 

 

Categories Kentucky, Merit pay, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Race to the Top, Teacher Evaluations, Teachers and Teaching

United Opt Out Gives Advice to Kentucky Parents

By dianeravitch
April 29, 2015 //
29

Parents in Kentucky who want to opt out have been warned that their children will face severe disciplinary consequences. Some have turned to United Opt Out for help.

This is what UOO says:

“The Kentucky Dept. of Education has stated that schools will not provide alternative activities during testing time. They have stated that students may be subject to discipline under school or district policies including the code of conduct or behavior. Some districts are stating that absences due to test refusal will be considered unexcused.

“Enough is enough. It is time to rise up and refuse these corporate high stakes tests as an act of civil disobedience which is necessary when children are being harmed via unjust laws.

“We emailed Mr. Todd Allen who is the Assistant General Counsel of the Kentucky Department of Education to get further clarification on the potential disciplinary actions.

“We asked:

“We at United Opt Out National have been receiving requests from Kentucky parents asking for support with opt out. We have been told that opt outs may result in disciplinary action. Could you clarify what “disciplinary actions” mean and give examples? We are also wondering, within school codes of conduct, is such disciplinary action for parent refusal of student testing listed – and if so, can you give an example?

“While we recognize that KY ed. statute states that students are required to test we also recognize that a child cannot be forced to test. A child can be given an opportunity to test and can refuse this opportunity with parental guidance. We will be creating a post to support KY parents with opt out/refusal of tests and would like clarification on potential disciplinary actions that might occur so that we can refer our parents to the best avenue of support and share accurate information with our media contacts in Kentucky.

“Mr. Allen responded:

“Thank you for your message. Codes of conduct, behavioral codes and discipline policies are established at the local district and school level. Therefore, parents should contact their individual district/school for any applicable disciplinary actions in the event a student refuses to participate in mandatory testing.

“Our recommendations (this is not legal advice, it is simply suggestions based on our experience with supporting parents across the nation with opt out/test refusal):

“Begin by emailing your opt out letter to your child’s principal and state that you are refusing the test for your child.

“If you plan to keep your child at school during testing time state that you will be sending your child with books and other activities during testing time. Get confirmation of where your child will be during testing time and make certain that your child is allowed to have the alternative activities with him or her in this location (some schools are keeping students in the testing room, others are finding other places for the opt out students). If you feel it is necessary, go to school with your child on the first testing day to physically observe that your opt out/refusal request has been accepted and that your child is in a safe place where he or she can engage in alternative activities.

“If you plan to keep your child at home during testing time state that you will expect these absences to be excused because there is no learning occurring in the school and your child has been denied a right to a public education during these testing days. State that if your child’s absence is counted as unexcused that you will recognize this as a violation of your First Amendment rights and your parental rights. State that you will be filing a civil rights complaint and that you will contact the media and an attorney. Also state that your child is not to be tested during makeup testing when your child returns to school.

“Request (or look it up online now) a copy of the behavior codes/disciplinary policy and ask for the exact code which states disciplinary action for a child as a result of a parent’s decision to refuse to allow a child to be tested. If they give you an exact code which does state a disciplinary action we recommend reporting this to social services and the police as a form of harassment and bullying and ask them to investigate this disciplinary policy. Contact your school board and your superintendent as well. Let the school know you are reporting this information and state that under no circumstances is your child to be disciplined for parent refusal of testing.

“If your child is indeed at school during testing time make sure your child has your parent refusal letter on his/her body at all times. Make certain that your child knows to hand the letter to anyone who attempts to place a test in front of the child. The letter must also state that if anyone attempts to test your child, your child is expected to call you, the parent or guardian, immediately. State that if your child is forced to test you will call the police, social services and the media. These high stakes corporate tests are educational malpractice. Our children are being forced to labor for the corporations in our public schools today. If we do not stop this test and punish system quickly, more children will be failed, more schools will be shut down and the cornerstone of our democracy, public schools, will soon be gone…..

“Ultimately, remember this – by refusing these tests, we are saving public schools, saving the teaching profession and reclaiming real learning for our children. Opt out/test refusal is just the first step in taking down corporate education reform. All children deserve a whole education in equitably funded public schools. Exercise your right to speak up, opt out and join the revolution that is occurring across the country. We stand with you.”

Read the post to learn how to file a civil rights complaint on behalf of your child.

Categories Kentucky, Opt Out, Standardized Testing

Peter Greene: Kentucky Flatly Bans Opt Out

By dianeravitch
April 15, 2015 //
46

Peter Greene reports that Kentucky absolutely prohibits opt outs from state tests. No parental choice whatever. The children belong to the state, and that is that.

Kentucky parents should organize and demonstrate civil disobedience. That’s the American way when oppressed.

Categories Kentucky, Opt Out, Parents

Why Kentucky Dropped the PARCC Test

By dianeravitch
June 21, 2014 //
24

When Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced he was withdrawing the state from the PARCC tests, he expressed concern about competitive bidding, among other things. He was not the only one to have this issue.

At the beginning of 2014, Kentucky decided to withdraw from the PARCC testing consortium. PARCC is one of two federally funded testing groups aligned to the Common Core.

Kentucky’s main decision for dropping PARCC was the absence of a competitive bidding process.

Read what the governor wrote. Kentucky state law requires a fair and equitable RFP process, and PARCC is welcome to submit a bid to the competitive process.

Categories Common Core, Kentucky, Testing

In Kentucky: A School Without Standardized Tests

By dianeravitch
June 10, 2014 //
14

Kentucky was the first state to implement the Common Core standards, and the first state to test them. The state has another distinction: It is one of the few states that has no charter schools. Communities in Kentucky are committed to their community public schools–so far.

Kentucky has a school that is very different from most other public schools: this school has no standardized testing.

Bate Middle School in Danville, Kentucky, decided to ditch the tests and to adopt performance assessments. As they searched the nation looking for a successful, they discovered New York City’s Performance Standards Consortium, which has been thriving without standardized tests for years. Students are expected to create projects to demonstrate what they have learned. This is the model that Bate selected, and it is working well.

98% of the staff voted to approve the new test-free plan. But the legislature was divided:

“A bill to allow Danville to skip the state tests unanimously passed the House in April of this year but was shot down in the Senate. The state Department of Education says discussions to find alternatives are ongoing. Regardless of what happens, the district will still give the ACT and its practice tests in 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th grades. (ACT scores are tied to scholarship money for public university students in Kentucky, and the nationally recognized test will help them benchmark student learning.)

“But the yearly grind of prepping for weeks for state tests is over for now. Swann says it’s making a big difference in what teachers do every day, especially in their ability to tailor instruction to each student’s needs and interests.”

Bate may have found a felicitous combination: the schools uses the Common Core standards, but not the Common Core tests.

Categories Common Core, Kentucky, Standardized Testing

Carol Burris: The Danger Done by “Fools with Tools”

By dianeravitch
April 30, 2014 //
58

Carol Burris here explains the deep, dark secret of standardized testing.

Whoever is in charge decides what the passing mark is. The passing mark is the “cut score.” Those in charge can decide to create a test that everyone passes because the cut score is so low and the questions so simple, or they can create a test that everyone fails. In fact, because of field testing, the test makers know with a high degree of precision how every question will “function,” that is, how hard or easy it is and how many students are likely to get it right or wrong.

As Burris shows, New York’s Commissioner John King aligned the Common Core tests with the SAT, knowing in advance that nearly 70% would not pass. That was his choice. Whatever his motive, he wanted a high failure rate. As King predicted, 69% failed. It was his choice.

Policymakers in Kentucky chose a more reasonable cut score and only about half their students failed.

Are students in Kentucky that much smarter than students in New York? No, but they may have smarter policymakers.

Knowing these shenanigans gives more reason to opt your children out of the state testing. The game is rigged against them.

.

Categories Common Core, Kentucky, New York, Testing
Newer Entries »