Archives for category: Network for Public Education

Peter Greene writes here on why the “reformers” will lose.

The subject of my speech at the NPE conference was “Why We Will Win.” I will post it when I find the link in a few minutes.

Peter notes that no one espouses the “reformer” agenda unless they are paid to do so.

On our side, as we saw at the NPE conference in Austin, everyone is a passionate and knowledgeable volunteer, unpaid and deeply concerned first and foremost about children and the future of our society and the survival of a basic public institution–our public schools.

When I read his post, I was reminded of a brief exchange I had with the reporter from the Wall Street Journal, who stopped by our conference for a few minutes, on her way to SXSW, which enlists every imaginable corporate sponsor, from Pearson to Amplify, to dozens of others.

We talked about the issue of money and profits. She said, to my shock, “There are people on both sides looking to make money.” I waved my hand across the room of education activists and said, Who here is making money? The teachers making $40,000 a year? The parents? Everyone here paid their own way, or we supplemented their expenses. We have no corporate sponsors. We have no union sponsors. Who is making money?” I am still waiting for an answer.

Oh, I did admit that Randi Weingarten gave us money. She joined as an individual member and paid $20.

At the conclusion of its first annual conference, the Network for Public Education announced a call for Congressional hearings on testing:

NPE Calls for Congressional Hearings – Full Text

March 2, 2014 NPE News

We are writing to request that the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee hold hearings to investigate the over-emphasis, misapplication, costs, and poor implementation of high-stakes standardized testing in the nation’s K-12 public schools.

Starting with No Child Left Behind legislation in 2001, which mandated standardized testing of every student in grades three through eight, many states have since rolled out testing in additional grades. This emphasis on testing has increased under policies of the Obama administration, such as Race to the Top and the NCLB waivers, that tie test scores to teacher and principal evaluations and school “turnarounds” and closures. There is a danger that tests now seem to have become the purpose of education, rather than a measure of education.

The tests were initiated to measure whether schools were delivering an education of high quality to every child. It makes sense to determine whether all students are achieving at a minimum level of proficiency in English and math, and standardized tests can help discern whether they are.

Our concern is that high-stakes testing in public schools has led to multiple unintended consequences that warrant federal scrutiny, including the following questions, among others.

Do the tests promote skills our children and our economy need? The most popular form of tests today are multiple-choice because they are easy and cheap to grade. But many educators and parents worry that teaching children how to take these tests doesn’t teach them how to think. The new standardized exams from the multi-state testing consortia do not appear to be significantly better, and will likely be scored by computers, which cannot gauge higher order thinking.. The challenges of the future and our nation’s economic success require the ability to solve and identify new problems, think creatively, and work collaboratively with others.

What is the purpose of these tests? Assessments should be used as diagnostic tools, to help teachers figure out where students are in their learning. But in most states, teachers are forbidden to see the actual test questions or provide feedback to students. Teachers do not see how their students answered specific test items and learn nothing about how their students are doing, other than a single score, which may arrive long after the student has left their classrooms. Thus, the tests have no diagnostic value for teachers or students, who do not have the opportunity to review and learn the material they got wrong.

How good are the tests? Problems with the actual content of tests have been extensively documented. There are numerous instances of flawed questions and design, including no right answer, more than one right answer, wording that is unclear or misleading, reading passages or problems that are developmentally inappropriate or contain product placements, test questions on material never taught, and items that border on bizarre, such as a famous example that asked students to read a passage about a race between a pineapple and a hare. Tests are not scientific instruments like barometers; they are commercial products that are subject to multiple errors.

Are tests being given to children who are too young? In many states, high-stakes standardized tests are required for even the youngest school children. In Chicago, for instance, Kindergarten students face four standardized tests two or three times a year and can spend up to a third of their time taking tests. Children of this age typically do not know how to read or even hold a pencil or use a keyboard. Subjecting 5-year-olds to a timed test is not only hopeless from a practical standpoint, but subject children to undue stress.

Are tests culturally biased? Every standardized test in the world is an accurate reflection of socioeconomic advantage and disadvantage. Thus, students from racial and ethnic-minorities, students with disabilities, and students of lower socioeconomic status tend to have lower scores than their more advantaged peers. Further, test results are often used as rationales for closing schools that serve low-income communities of color.

Are tests harmful to students with disabilities? Over the past few years, there have been numerous instances in which children with significant health situations, even undergoing life-saving procedures, were pressured to complete required tests – even from their hospital beds. Children with severe brain disorders have been compelled to take a state test. Recently in Florida, an eleven-your-old boy who was dying in hospice was expected to take a test. Such behavior defies common sense and common decency.

How has the frequency and quantity of testing increased? Testing is taking significant time away from instructional learning time. In Chicago, elementary school students take the REACH, the TRC, the MAP, the EXPLORE, the ISAT, and DIBELS every year. In North Carolina, third-grade students are tested in reading 36 times throughout the year – in addition to other standardized tests. Middle schools students in Pennsylvania may take over 20 standardized tests in a single school year. High school students in Florida can have their instruction disrupted 65 times out of 180 school days by testing. In New York, the time taken by state exams has increased by 128%. When so much time is devoted to testing instead of teaching, students have less time to learn.

Does testing harm teaching? Now that test scores are linked to principal and teacher evaluations in many states, teachers engage in more test prep because they are pressured and afraid, not because they think the assessments are educationally sound. Principals are nervous about their school’s scores. Many educators have admitted they are fearful of taking students on field trips, engaging them in independent projects, or spending time on untested subjects like science or history, art or music because it might take time away from test prep. As a result, the curriculum has narrowed and students have lost their opportunity for a well-rounded education.

How much money does it cost? It is difficult to calculate the entire costs of standardized testing – including the many classroom hours spent on test prep. But it is well known that nearly every state is spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to develop more high-stakes tests for students, and requiring local districts to spend hundreds of millions more to get their students ready to take them. In addition to the cost of the tests and the interim tests, there are added costs of new curriculum, textbooks, hardware, software, and bandwidth that new tests require. There are also opportunity costs when money allocated for testing supersedes other education expenditures, such as libraries, art and music programs, social workers and guidance counselors, and extra-curricular activities.

Are there conflicts of interest in testing policies? In many states, a company that has a multi-million dollar contract to create tests for the state is also the same company that profits from producing curriculum and test prep materials. In some states, a single testing company has been able to win a contract worth many millions of dollars by lobbying and engaging in backdoor influencing of public officials. In other states, school districts buy textbooks from the same company that makes the tests so their students have an advantage on the tests.

Was it legal for the U.S. Department of Education to fund two testing consortia for the Common Core State Standards? According to federal law and regulations, the U.S. Department of education is not allowed to supervise, direct, or control curriculum or instruction. Yet the funding of testing consortia directly intervenes in the curriculum or instruction of almost every public school in the nation, as the tests will determine what is taught and how it is taught.

We believe that every child in the United States deserves a sound education. Every child deserves a full curriculum in a school with adequate resources. We are deeply concerned that the current overemphasis on standardized testing is harming children, public schools, and our nation’s economic and civic future. It’s our conclusion that the over-emphasis, misapplication, costs, and poor implementation of high-stakes standardized tests may now warrant federal intervention. We urge you to pursue the questions we have raised.

Joe Bower, a school leader in Canada, joined us in Austin for the first national conference of the Network for Public Education.

Here are his reactions:

I spent the weekend in Austin, Texas at the first Network for Public Education (NPE) and it was fantastic. You can find my day 1 post here and my day 2 post here.

Here are 3 things I learned from The Network for Public Education Conference:

1. Relationships. I was so happy to get a chance to meet some very cool people that, until this weekend, I had only known as avatars on Twitter. Don’t get me wrong, I love social media — while social media can help connect people by removing the obstacles of time and place, it is no substitute for real life, face to face relationships. I was so happy to meet and spend time with Kirsten Hill, Adam Holman, Jose Vilson, Stephanie Cerda, Xian Barrett, Audrey Watters, Sabrina Stevens, Katie Osgood and Phil Cantor. We don’t have the money of Corporate School Reformers, but we are a real grassroots movement that is fuelled by authentic relationships.

I got to briefly meet Deb Meier, Anthony Cody, Diane Ravitch, and Chris Lehmann.

2. Assault on Public Education. As the token Canadian at the conference, I was struck by the raw emotion that dominated the conference — teachers are saddened and angered by the assault on public education lead by profiteers, politicians and privatizers.

The politics and problems killing American Education is complex, but here’s my Wikipedia version: For a long time, public schools in the United States had been a public good. Schools were about pupils. However, Corporate School Reform has become the status quo — public education is being bastardized into a private interest where schools are about profits.

Essentially Corporate School Reform is led by three foundations: Gates, Walton and Broad — who have allied with the Federal Government, effectively making the United States Department of Education an enemy of public education.

Common Core, high-stakes standardized tests and Teach for America are a money grab for Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. Democratically elected school boards are replaced with Charter CEOs who have absolutely no accountability to the public. Public schools who have a responsibility to take all children who show up are closed and turned into private charters with select admissions. The Charter school movement in the US is re-segregating America and rolling back whatever gains were made from Brown vs Board of Education. Experienced and educated teachers are fired in exchange for well-intentioned but grossly ill-prepared youngsters whose effectiveness have been grossly overstated. And without unions, teacher pay and pensions are slashed and burned and re-pocketed by Big Business. Public Education is being strangled to death by Corporate School Reformers who provide an opportunity-rich education for their own children while imposing other people’s children with schools that are marinated in acquiescence and testing.

The Corporate School Reform is a part of the Global Education Reform Movement which is built on a contradiction:
Use PISA scores to show that public education in the United States is failing but then implement market-based reforms that are almost entirely contradictory to the reforms and policies found in high achieving countries.

3. There is hope. The only thing necessary for destructive mandates and cancerous education policies to succeed is for good teachers, parents and students to say and do nothing. When distant authorities invoke their ignorance with the force of law, remember that your silence is read as assent — and at some point your silence is betrayal to those who do speak up and take action.

The Network for Public Education refuses to remain silent. NPE is the loud speaker for people who support public education. Rather than remain as individual pockets of resistance to Corporate School Reform and GERM, NPE is a way to organize and mobilize a movement that will save public education.

NPE concluded its first National Conference with a call for Congressional hearings to investigate the over-emphasis, misapplication, costs, and poor implementation of high-stakes standardized testing in the nation’s K-12 public schools. The consequence of all this is that testing has become the purpose of education, rather than a way of measuring education.

NPE is encouraging everyone, including Congress to ask some tough questions:

Do the tests promote skills our children and our economy need?
What is the purpose of these tests?
How good are the tests?
Are tests being given to children who are too young?
Are tests culturally biased?
Are tests harmful to students with disabilities?
How has the frequency and quantity of testing increased?
Does testing harm teaching?
How much money does it cost?
Are there conflicts of interest in testing policies?
Was it legal for the U.S. Department of Education to fund two testing consortia for the Common Core State Standards?
If Congress has the time, effort and resources to investigate baseball players using steroids, they can surely find the time, effort and resources to investigate the misuse and abuse of testing.

Guy Brandenburg writes here about the first conference of the Network for Public Education, just concluded in Austin, Texas.

Nearly 400 educators, parents, and activists met to brainstorm about how to roll back the corporate attack on public education.

It was huge, exciting, energizing, and the beginning of a new day.

The Network for Public Education national conference will meet in Austin, Texas, on Saturday and Sunday, March 1 and 2.

You can join us by livestream.

The direct link to the site hosting the livestream is here:

http://www.schoolhouselive.org/

The conference hashtag is #npeconference.

Nearly 400 activist parents, educators, legislators, and other supporters of public education from across the nation have registered to plan for the future.

For more information about speakers and panels, check here.

I will speak Sunday morning and explain “Why We Will Win.”

The Network for Public Education enthusiastically endorsed Ras Baraka for the position of mayor of Newark, New Jersey.

Baraka is an experienced teacher and administrator, now a city councilman, fighting school closings and privatization. He stands strong for the children and people of Newark, not for the Christie administration and hedge fund managers seeking to disassemble and privatize public education.

Here is his education statement.

Veteran journalist Bob Braun writes about the race here. He views the race as a test of whether Newark voters support Christie’s plan to close their public schools.

Expect big money to pour into Newark from Democrats for Education Reform, B4NJKids, and other hedge fund managers and deep pocket supporters of corporate reform (school closings, charters, high-stakes testing). For more about the supporters of “reform” in New Jersey, read here. Learn about the billionaire who has made school reform his favorite pastime.

The Network for Public Education has endorsed City Councilman Ras Baraka for Mayor of Newark, New Jersey. He is a career educator who opposes school closings and supports reduced class sizes and other research based strategies.

We are proud to support him and believe that his election will begin a movement to restore democracy to education in Newark, whose schools have been under state control for nearly 20 years.

Come to Austin on March 1&2 and meet the True Reformers!

All your favorite advocates for children, teachers, and public schools will gather in Austin to share ideas and learn from each other.

Join us!

Sign up here.

 

The Network for Public Education will holds its first annual conference at The University of Texas at Austin on March 1 & 2, 2014 – the weekend before the world famous South By Southwest EDU Festival. Diane Ravitch will deliver the keynote address and NPE Board members Anthony Cody, Leonie Haimson, Julian Vasquez Heilig and others will take part in the discussions.

All are welcome!

As we are finalizing our panels and speakers, we would like some input from our friends and allies about the issues that we should address at the conference. For the next few days, we will be collecting this information on the NPE website. If you would like to make a suggestion, fill out the form on the NPE website.
http://www.networkforpubliceducation.org/npe-national-conference-2014-suggestions/
More information about the NPE National Conference 2014 will be released in the coming days. In the meantime, make your travel plans as we hope to see you in Austin!

The Network for Public Education endorsed candidates who strongly support public education, oppose school closings, excessive testing, and privatization. Most of our candidates were underdogs, overwhelmingly outspent. Only Darcie Cimarusti ran unopposed. We are proud of all the candidates who stood up for kids against big corporate money and power. We congratulate them for their courage and tenacity.

Posted by Robert Perry
22 hours ago

The candidates endorsed by NPE are:

Lost Culver City School Board, CA
Claudia Vizcarra

El Rancho School Board, CA
Won José Lara

South Pasadena School Board, CA
Lost Suzie Abajian

Denver Public Schools Board of Education, CO
Lost Rosario C de Baca
Lost Michael Kiley
Lost Roger Kilgore
Lost Meg Schomp

Douglas County School Board, CO
Lost Bill Hodges
Lost Ronda Scholting

Bridgeport School Board, CT
Won Howard Gardner
Won Andre Baker
Won Dave Hennessey

Atlanta School Board, GA
Run Off Cynthia Briscoe Brown
Lost Ed Johnson
Run Off Mary Palmer
Lost Nisha Simama

Highland Park Board of Education, NJ
Won Darcie Cimarusti

State Assembly, NJ
Lost Marie Corfield

Centennial School District School Board, PA
Win Michael Hartline
Win Betty Huf
Win Jane Schrader Lynch

Tabernacle School Board, PA
Win John Bulina

Houston Board of Education, TX
Lost Anne Sung

Seattle School Board, WA
Won Sue Peters