Archives for category: Massachusetts
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Anthony Cody: Should Teachers Endorse Candidates Who Are Not Sure Which Side They Are On?

By dianeravitch
October 24, 2017 //
37

Anthony Cody writes here about the political power of teachers and how it should be used.

Cody reports on a discussion between Barbara Madeloni of the Massachusetts Teachers Association and Eric Heins of the California Teachers Association at the Network for Public Education Conference last week in Oakland.

Barbara Madeloni believes in the importance of building a movement. It was that movement, working closely with parents that defeated a referendum to expand charter schools in the state last fall.

In California, the powerful California Teachers Association just gave its endorsement for governor to Gavin Newsom, even though he refused to take a position as between the charter lobby and public schools and couldn’t say whether he was for or against teachers.

This is what Newsom said some weeks earlier, in a public appearance:

“I’m not interested in the stale and raging debate about which side, which camp you’re on – are you with the charter people, are you anti-charter, are you with the teachers, are you anti-teacher. I’ve been hearing that damn debate for ten damn years. With all due respect, I got four kids. I have an eight year old, second grade. I have a five, three and a one year old. I’m not gonna wait around until they’ve all graduated to resolve whether Eli Broad was right or whether or not the CTA was wrong. I’m not interested in that debate. I’m interested in shaping a different conversation around a 21st century education system that brings people together, that could shape public opinion, not just here in the state, but could shape an agenda more broadly across the country, particularly in a time of Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump. We need that kind of leadership.”

With views like these, will Newsom remember that he was endorsed by the CTA? Will he care? Is he unsure whether he is for or against teachers? How can anyone who cares about education be against teachers? How can they be bored and indifferent to galloping privatization? It is views like these that laid the groundwork for Betsy DeVos.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Massachusetts, Privatization, Teachers, Unions

Andrea Gabor: The Dark Money That Underwrote the Charter Campaign in Massachusetts

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2017 //
13

Andrea Gabor writes here about the dark money campaign to persuade voters in Massachusetts to lift the cap on charter schools last November. The dark money came pouring in, but suffered a crushing defeat when voters weighed in. Andrea worked closely with Peggy Wiesenberg, a Massachusetts attorney and parent of three public-school graduates. Peggy wrote to tell me that KIPP is planning to open two new charters in Lynn, Massachusetts, despite the fact that the people of Lynn don’t want more charter schools. Governor Baker, a Republican, has added two new charter supporters to the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education; one is a board member of KIPP, the other is a Harvard scholar funded by the Walton Family Foundation:

KIPP plans to expand in Massachusetts by adding two schools in Lynn per a pending request to increase enrollment by 1,014 seats (up from 1,586 in Lynn). The Mass. Board of Elementary and Secondary Education will take up that request in Feb 2018.
See”Charter Amendment Requests Pending BESE Action (Grades, or Maximum Enrollment, or Change to Charter Region)” http://www.doe.mass.edu/news/news.aspx?id=24563

One of the two new BESE members appointed by Gov Baker is on the Board of Trustees of KIPP MA; the other Martin West whose scholarly work has been funded by the Walton Family Foundation.

But, back to the new post by Andrea Gabor:

The New York-based Families for Excellent Schools added about a third of the $45 million spent to push charter schools. Pro-public education advocates spent nearly $16 million.

“Voters defeated Question 2 by a stunning 62-to-38 margin–an endorsement of Massachusetts public schools, which are rated number one in the nation. But not for lack of efforts by organizations like FESA, which allowed a slew of wealthy contributors to hide their identities and their sizeable contributions in support of the referendum. In some cases individuals contributed twice: Once through a ballot committee that was required, by law, to publish names of contributors, and a second substantially greater contribution, in some cases millions more, via FESA.

“At the top of the list of FESA’s secret donors were public officials in the Massachusetts government. Governor Charlie Baker was a leading proponent of Question 2 and backed efforts to impose charter schools in towns, like Brockton, where there was widespread local opposition.

“Normally, nonprofits organized under IRS Code 501(3), such as Families for Excellent Schools (FES), don’t have to reveal the names of donors so long as they are not engaging in political activity. And ordinarily, their affiliated social-welfare nonprofits, organized under IRS Code 501(c)(4), such as FESA, can have some political involvement in electoral politics and keep donors secret, so long as this is not their primary activity. However, if the organization is a vehicle for receiving contributions for a ballot campaign, then the voting public is entitled to know the names of each contributor and the amount donated before the election.”

FES was fined more than $400,000, the largest fine ever imposed by the state for a campaign finance violation.

Here are some of the big donors:

“The campaign-finance disposition agreement has revealed other backers of Question 2 who used FESA contributions to hide the full value of their donations in support of the charter-school referendum including:

“Paul Sagan, Chair of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, who contributed $496,000 on August 4 and 5 in addition to his previously disclosed contribution of $100,000 on August 10, 2016.

“Seth Klarman, Investment Manager of the Baupost Group LLC, contributed $3 million within six months of the election in addition to his previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015.

“Jonathan Jacobson, Managing Director Highfields Capital Management LP, contributed $2 million in August and October. That’s in addition to the previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015 by his wife Joanna, Managing Partner of Strategic Grant Partners, another dark money vehicle, according to Professor Maurice Cunningham of UMass Boston…

“Josh Bekenstein, a Bain Capital investor, and his wife Anita, a private philanthropist, each contributed $750,000 in August and $500,000 on October 2016 for a combined total of $1.5 million, in addition to Josh’s previously disclosed contribution of $40,000 in September 2015.

“Chuck L. Longfield, Founder of Target Analytics and Chief Scientist at Blackbaud, funneled $650,000 to FESA under the name “Chuck Longfield,” in addition to a previously disclosed contribution of $100,000 under the name “Charles Longfield” on August 2016 and $1,000 in November 2015. [The OCPF filings have a discrepancy in the house number associated with Longfield’s contributions—in all likelihood a typographical error.] Longfield went on WBUR radio on October 31, 2016 to explain why he gave $100,000 in support of raising the cap on charter schools, never mentioning the exponentially larger contribution that he made through FESA to lift the cap.

“Martin Mannion, Managing Director of Summit Partners, contributed $100,000 to FESA between August and October 2016 in addition to a disclosed campaign contribution of $30,000 in October 2016.

“Alice Walton contributed $750,000 to FESA on November 2016 in addition to her previously disclosed contribution of $710,000 to Yes On 2, another campaign committee, in July.

“The Boston Globe reports that in addition to paying the fine, and revealing its donors, the group also “agreed with the IRS to dissolve itself, and Families for Excellent Schools, its umbrella group, agreed not to fund-raise or engage in any election-related activity in Massachusetts for four years.”

Gabor says that New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman may look into the “Families for Excellent Schools,” a political group of millionaires and billionaires with no purpose other than to destroy and privatize public schools.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Massachusetts

Maurice Cunningham: What is DFER and Why Are They Polling about Teacher Pay in Massachusetts?

By dianeravitch
September 16, 2017 //
75

Maurice Cunningham is a professor of political science in the University of Massachusetts who has become very interested in “dark money.” He doesn’t write about education policy per se, but he keeps raising uncomfortable but necessary questions about who is funding attacks on public schools, teachers, and unions.

In this post, he wondered why DFER (Democrats for Education Reform) released a poll showing that the public is opposed to raising the pay of teachers who are in the “excess pool.”

He searched the DFER website and could not find the poll or the methods or the questions.

He writes:

How were the questions worded? The story describes the teachers as being in the “excess pool’ — educators who lost their positions because of poor performance or job cuts, or who principals don’t want to hire — now working as co-teachers or in other positions.” But did the question ask if respondents favored “unwanted teachers” to get paid? Or did they favor teachers in the “excess pool” to get paid? Or something else? You’d likely get different responses based on the wording. And the question would need to explain what those terms meant. The “unwanted teachers” are working after all, and what if they aren’t wanted because of inept or misguided administrators? That’s why they have a union to protect them in the first place.

The School Committee is set to vote on a contract negotiated between the city and the Boston Teachers Union in which all teachers including those in the excess pool would get a raise. DFER MA State Director Liam Kerr says that voters “When presented with the facts” don’t want the excess pool teachers to get the raise. But voters weren’t presented with these facts because the contract was just finalized and the poll was conducted in May. And to go back to the nature of the questions asked, “the facts” presented were selected by DFER MA.

Which leads to a larger problem: as Neil Postman argued years ago in Amusing Ourselves to Death, poll respondents often have a limited understanding of the topic being presented to them. From the depths of my ignorance of the topic of the excess pool, I’ll confess I don’t understand the nuances of the issue or the practical application.

That leads us back to taking DFER MA’s word on this. What (or Who)? Is DFER? We don’t know, because it is a dark money front that hides its contributors. Sure the organization is represented in Massachusetts by Mr. Kerr, but he’s an agent. Who are the principals? In other words, show me the money. Who is putting up the money for the political activities of DFER MA? Maybe they are selfless do-gooders too shy to make their names know. But until DFER Ma comes clean about who really controls its political operations (hint: it is hedge fund money, probably from New York), there is every reason to regard their pronouncements with deep skepticism.

We know that DFER is hedge fund money. What we don’t know is their end game. They are zealously pro-charter. They are anti-union. Their board members are very rich. Why are they worried that somewhere a teacher might get a raise of $5,000 when that is the kind of money they spend on a good dinner?

Categories Boston, Dark Money, Democrats for Education Reform, Massachusetts, Teacher Pay, Unions

Maurice Cunningham: Massachusetts Drove “Families for Excellent Schools” Out of the State

By dianeravitch
September 13, 2017 //
14

When I learned that the phony “Families for Excellent Schools” was forced to pay a hefty fine by state officials in Massachusetts, I invited Maurice T. Cunningham to write about it. New Yorkers are familiar with this billionaire-funded group from the time when it made a $6 million television buy to thwart Mayor de Blasio’s plan to establish accountability for charter schools. FES, pretending to be the voice of poor black and brown families, suddenly appeared with bulging pockets to shower millions on TV advertising and politicians, not what one would expect from “families” who live in poverty. As a result of their efforts, charters in New York City got the right to co-locate in public school buildings with no rent ever, and if they preferred a private space, the city was obliged to pay for it. What was certain was that not a one of the billionaires behind FES was planning to send any of their children to charter schools or public schools in New York City.

During the campaign in Massachusetts last fall, Professor Cunningham wrote about the dark money pouring in to influence the Question 2 referendum. Despite the money, opponents of charter expansion lost.

This is what Professor Cunningham wrote:

Families for Excellent Schools Driven Out of Business in Massachusetts

Maurice T. Cunningham

Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts at Boston

Families for Excellent Schools, the hedge funded bully of school privatization, has not only been exposed but driven out of business in Massachusetts.

Last year FES was leading the campaign, through its ballot committee Great Schools Massachusetts, to pass a referendum that would expand the number of possible charter schools in the state. Not only was GSM overwhelmed at the November election by teachers unions, but FES’s wild spending attracted the attention of the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance. This past week OCPF released a Disposition Agreement with FES that found that the group had violated Massachusetts campaign finance laws. FES acted as a political committee without registering with OCPF, and channeled over $15 million from donors “without disclosing the contributors, and by providing funds to the GSM Committee in a manner intended to disguise the true source of the contributions.” (OCPF press release here).

The consequences for FES: OCPF levied its largest fine in history, over $426,000, being the total amount of cash on hand for FES and its political arm Families for Excellent Schools-Advocacy. FESA agreed to dissolve its social welfare group status with the Internal Revenue Service. FES Inc. agreed to forego political activities in Massachusetts for four years.

Not only did OCPF release its Disposition Agreement it also required OCPF to divulge the donors it had promised to hide, and their contributions. FES’s list of funders was eye-popping. Boston hedge fund titan Seth Klarman of Baupost LLC was in for $3.3 million. Bain’s Joshua Bekenstein and his wife chipped in with $2.5 million. Jonathon Jacobson of Highfields Capital Management was good for $2 million. Other contributors came from Adage Capital Management, Summit Partners, and Par Capital Management. Alice Walton of the WalMart fortune kicked in $750,000.

Each of those powerful individuals was promised by FES that their identities would be kept secret, hidden behind the Internal Revenue Code rules for 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. Except this time, it didn’t work. OCPF conducted a thorough investigation and exposed FES for what it is: a dark money political operation.

The Disposition Agreement should be studied across the country and state regulatory agencies pressed to follow its teachings. There is absolutely no reason why citizens should not be informed about who is spending millions to influence their vote. It’s shameful and the dark money train must be derailed if we are not to descend into a plutocracy. OCPF’s action is great news for Massachusetts and great news for democracy.

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Education Industry, Massachusetts, Privatization

Massachusetts: State Fines Dark Money Group $426,000 in Charter Battle

By dianeravitch
September 12, 2017 //
82

In November 2016, the state of Massachusetts held a referendum about whether to expand the number of charters in the state. Millions of dollars were spent on both sides, but the pro-charter groups spent twice as much as the anti-charter groups (mostly funded by teachers’ unions).

Much of the large pro-charter funding was bundled by a group called Families for Excellebt Schools. The names of many individual donors were not released. That’s called “dark money.” It enables the group to pretend to be worried families, eager to enroll their chilren in charter schools, when they are actually billionaires and millionaires who want to promote privatization. One member of the group is billionaire Alice Walton of Arkansas. Another is the chairman of the state board in Massachusetts, who offered nearly $500,000 to undermine public education in a state where he is in control.

FES pulled the same shenanigans in New York, pumping millions into a campaign to persuade the legislature to shower charters with perks and public space and money. But it didn’t work in the Bay State.

Families for Excellent Schools has been ordered to pay a fine of $426,500 for violating campaign finance laws in the state.

“An advocacy organization that gave more than $15 million to a Massachusetts ballot campaign to lift the cap on charter schools has agreed to pay $426,500 to settle allegations of campaign finance violations.

“The Office of Campaign and Political Finance alleged that Families for Excellent Schools contributed money to the ballot campaign in a way that was designed to hide the identity of its donors. The organization denies any wrongdoing.

“This is the largest settlement ever collected by Massachusetts’ Office of Campaign and Political Finance.

“Massachusetts voters deserve to know the identity of all those who attempt to influence them before Election Day,” said Office of Campaign and Political Finance Director Michael Sullivan in a press release. “Complete and accurate disclosure of campaign activity is the goal of OCPF and the cornerstone of the campaign finance law.”

“Families for Excellent Schools is a New York-based advocacy group, which gave $15.3 million to Great Schools Massachusetts, the ballot committee promoting a question in 2016 that would have lifted the cap on charter schools. The question failed at the polls.”

Indeed, the question failed overwhelmingly at the polls.

Families for Excellent Schools agreed not to engage in any election-related activities in the state for four years.

The fine is Penny ante for a group like FES, but it is satisfying to see them get caught hiding the names of donors.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Education Industry, Education Reform, Fraud, Funding, Massachusetts, Privatization

Emily Talmage: The Fight Against the Invasion of the EdTech Entrepreneurs

By dianeravitch
June 23, 2017 //
32

Emily Talmage describes the fight against the edtech industry in New England. The resolutions passed by the Massachusetts Teachers Association are a landmark in teachers’ efforts to block privatization, data mining, and replacement of teachers by machines. Most of the pressure to capitulate, she says, emanate from the Nellie Mae Foundation.

The odd fact about the drive to promote blended learning is that the evidence base is non-existent.

The successes in Massachusetts show that an awakened public and teaching profession can beat the powerful forces of the edtech industry.

Categories Maine, Massachusetts, Teachers and Teaching, Technology

Thank You, Massachusetts Teachers Association, for Standing Up to Profiteers!

By dianeravitch
June 17, 2017 //
60

The Massachusetts Teachers Association rejected the for-profit promotion of Depersonalized Learning! MTA delegates also adopted a resolution calling for full funding of public schools.

Massachusetts is the highest performing state in the nation on NAEP tests, yet the rightwingers on the state board keep trying to shove corporate reform on their successful public schools and teachers.

Thank you, MTA and your valiant leader, Barbara Madeloni.

Madeloni wrote the following to the MTA membership:

“The Annual Meeting of Delegates, which is the highest decision-making body in the MTA, convened on May 19 and 20 to discuss, debate and vote on policy. In this e-mail, I highlight several of the New Business Items that were approved by the delegates. You can read all of those NBIs here in the members’ area of the MTA website. (First-time users will need the number on their MTA membership cards to log in.) The votes of the Annual Meeting delegates reinforce the membership’s commitment to defending public education and building union power to bring about the schools our communities deserve.

“Personalized Learning: The New Threat to Public Education

NBIs #6, #12 and #13 address the threat posed by the state’s promotion of computer-based “personalized learning” strategies, including one through a program called MAPLE/LearnLaunch. This overview is long, but well worth watching. It explains the real dangers of handing over our schools and students to corporate education technology entities.

“Teaching and learning are deeply human activities. We cannot let ed tech companies depersonalize learning or make education a technocratic endeavor. We must assert the centrality of face-to-face relationships – community – and our professional knowledge and autonomy as essential to public education.

“NBI #6 asserts that the MTA opposes DESE’s MAPLE/LearnLaunch partnership and calls for the MTA to create a web page to “share strategies to combat the harmful effects of unvalidated ed tech products on our students, and to defend teachers’ professional judgment and standards against interference by business interests.”

“NBI #12 calls for a web page dedicated to informing members about the threat to public education posed by privatization, including but not limited to personalized learning programs. This connects to our existing page on State Takeovers/Privatization and encompasses the many forms that privatization is taking in preK-12 and higher education. (Important note: The current page includes a link to a form where members in Level 4 and 5 schools are asked to report on their experiences. Please take a few minutes to fill this out if you are in one of those schools.)

“NBI #13 calls for the MTA to update its 2016 report, Threat to Public Education Now Centers on Massachusetts, to include a section on corporate support for personalized learning.

“Hold the Commonwealth Accountable: Fully Fund Our Public Schools

“NBIs #9 and #10 call for the MTA to prepare to file a lawsuit against the governor and Legislature if they fail to address the school funding shortfall identified by the nonpartisan Foundation Budget Review Commission. The commission determined that public schools are underfunded by at least $1 billion a year. NBI #10 says that in the event a lawsuit must be filed, it should seek to end the state’s punitive accountability system until and unless the schools are fully funded. Moved by retiring Springfield Education Association President Tim Collins, these two NBIs represent one way the MTA is responding to the failure of the Commonwealth to abide by its Constitution and “cherish” our public schools.

“On a related note, the City of Brockton recently set aside $100,000 toward funding a similar education lawsuit, and officials in Worcester are also discussing the issue.”

Categories Corporate Reform, For-Profit, Fraud, Massachusetts, Technology

Jennifer Berkshire: The Massachusetts Charter School That Banned Black Hair Braids Backs Down

By dianeravitch
May 24, 2017 //
15

Jennifer Berkshire reviews here the recent uproar created by Mystic Valley Regional Charter School’s policy of banning certain black hair styles. This is known as #braidgate.

The charter has many problems. It does not listen to its “customers.” It has been the source of numerous complaints from parents, teachers, and students. Usually, it ignores the complaints, because..it can.

Berkshire recites some of the more notorious recent controversies. And also the kinds of complaints that come up again and again.

But Mystic Valley is the largest charter school with the longest waiting list in the state. Does anyone care if it punishes children harshly? Does anyone care about the complaints of exclusionary admissions? Does anyone care that a teacher was fired $6,000 when he said he would not return the next year?

In this brave new world, high test scores excuse all kinds of behaviors, including racism.

Categories Charter Schools, Discipline, Massachusetts, Racism

Massachusetts: More than $43 Million Spent Last Fall in Losing Effort to Expand Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
May 20, 2017 //
6

The battle over Question 2 in Massachusetts was overshadowed by the national election, but it was an important bellwether in the fight against privatization.

The amount of money spent was phenomenal. The usual billionaire suspects put up most of the money to promote the measure and the teachers’ union, spending the dues collected from individual teachers who work daily in the classrooms of the state, put up most of the money to resist increased privatization of public schools.

The ballot measure was defeated overwhelmingly, by 62-38. The only districts to approve it were affluent districts that would unlikely to have any charters, and the districts that voted against it most heavily were those that already had charters and saw the drain on their budgets.

An Associated Press review of donations to school choice ballot questions and candidates found that spending on the 2016 question — which would have let Massachusetts add up to a dozen new or expanded charter schools each year outside of existing caps — topped $43 million.

Of the nine school choice-related ballot questions put before voters across the country since 2000, that level of spending was second only a 2000 ballot question in California, which would have established school vouchers.

Spending on the California question neared $63 million.

Both the Massachusetts and the California question failed. In Massachusetts, more than six in 10 voters rejected the proposal.

Those supporting the Massachusetts question included a handful of big money donors who rank among the top 48 individuals or married couples who gave at least $100,000 from 2000 to 2016 to support statewide ballot measures advocating for the creation or expansion of charter schools or taxpayer-funded scholarships that can be used for private school tuition for students in kindergarten through high school, according to the AP review.

Some of those top money donors to last year’s ballot question hailed from out-of-state including: Alice Walton, of Arizona, a member of Wal-Mart’s Walton family, who gave $740,000; Bloomberg founder and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who contributed $490,000; and John Douglas Arnold, of Texas, a Centaurus Advisors hedge fund manager and former Enron trader, who gave $250,000.

The top 48 donor list also includes Massachusetts residents who supported the 2016 charter school question, including: Edward Shapiro, a Wellesley resident and partner at Par Capital Management, who gave $225,000; Bradley Bloom, a Wellesley resident and co-founder of Berkshire Partners, who gave $150,000; and Ray Stata, a Dover resident and Analog Devices founder, who contributed $125,000.

All told, supporters poured nearly $27 million into trying to persuade Massachusetts voters to support the initiative. The opposition, funded largely by teachers unions, spent more than $16 million fighting the question.

The group spending the most to support the question — the New York City-based Families for Excellent Schools — contributed more than $17 million. The group has refused to say who is funding them.

New Yorkers are familiar with “Families for Excellent Schools.” This is the group that spent millions on television advertising to attack Mayor Bill de Blasio when he tried to rein in Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy schools. The New York Times reported that the group consists of wealthy Wall Street moguls. These “families” for “excellent schools” are rich white men who live in places like Greenwich, Connecticut, and other affluent suburbs, who have probably never set foot in a public school.

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Massachusetts

Christine Langhoff: The Corporate Reformers Are in Control of Massachusetts Public Schools

By dianeravitch
May 1, 2017 //
11

Christine Langhoff teaches in Massachusetts and is a member of the Network for Public Education.

She writes:


Massachusetts public education is being run by a cabal of reformsters, many of them affiliated with a local thinkster tank, The Pioneer Institute. Jim Peyser, state Secretary of Education, is a former director of The NewSchools Venture Fund, having run the Pioneer Institute from 1993-2000. Gov. Weld named him as undersecretary of education in 1995, shortly after the introduction of charters to the state, for which Peyser was – and is – an advocate. In charge of higher education is perennial gadfly Chris Gabrieli, failed gubernatorial candidate, who has developed no fewer than three reformy edu-businesses. (Time on Learning – extended day and year no extra pay; TransformEd – measuring grit and feelings; and Empower Schools, which seeks to destroy union contracts and impose a “third way” in urban districts – so far 3 and counting). So, to use the local dialect, all of them are wicked reformy.

Things have not been going so well for Chester. He signed on as chairman of PARCC, but that boat sank under the weight of the Common Core. This past November, when he thought the charter cap would be lifted and privatization could proceed apace, that too went down to an ignominious 2-1 defeat, in the process awakening parents and taxpayers to the charter scam. He has lately signed on to be a Chief for Change. Reformsters, unlike teachers, don’t need tenure because they have sinecures.

I think this latest peevish salvo stems from Chester’s frustration at being unable to simply sign executive orders and command the world as he would have it. Recently, after testimony from Lisa Guisbond of Citizens for Public Schools, he was forced to revise a punitive policy for students opting out:

“On the related issue of state testing, I thought you should know that some teachers are being given these instructions for handling students whose parents have chosen to opt them out:

‘When a student opts out they will remain in the classroom, listen as the test directions are being read and given the test. If after 15 minutes the student doesn’t write anything down, then, and only then, may the teacher remove the test.’

A 4th grade teacher shared her reaction:

‘This is public shaming, will cause emotional harm, and is a travesty to the precious relationship between teachers and students. Remember we cannot say anything except the scripted words on the test document or we are threatened with job termination, legal and or criminal action.’

So we have a fourth grader embarrassed and crying and a teacher who could lose his or her job for consoling the child. The teacher must ignore this child in need and say nothing.

I trust that these instructions are in error, and that your humane instructions from last year, Commissioner Chester, that students should not be pressured or punished for opting out, remain in place. I urge you to communicate this to the field.”

Delay and Revise MA ESSA Plan to Help, Not Harm, Struggling Schools

At the April 18 board meeting, one of the topics under discussion was the use of the scores from this year’s round of testing. Chester proposed to have 2017 scores included in the average for determining school levels. That was nearly unanimously rejected by the Board due to the use of several variants of tests in the past three years. Previously, it had been agreed that schools would be “held harmless” during the transition to a new test.

A recess was called, during which time Secretary Peyser expressed his belief that if the 2017 scores were not included, teachers would deliberately have students tank the exams so that they could increase scores in future years. In other words,he believes teachers across the state would INTENTIONALLY have thousands of children do poorly on tests in order to create a low baseline. NB: At the time of the discussion, we were already halfway through the testing period.

These people have no respect for the work teachers do. They do not believe we have any integrity. They do not treat us as professionals. It is indeed shameful.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, Massachusetts, Students, Teachers and Teaching
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »