Archives for category: New York City

The market-based reforms of the past dozen years have failed. Now they are the status quo, imposed on the nation by NCLB and Race to the Top, will hurt our nation’s children and undermine public education for all children.

The Bush-Obama policies are bad for children, ad for teachers, bad for principals, bad for schools, bad for the quality of education, and threaten the future of public education in the United States.

WARNING TO OTHER NATIONS: DO NOT COPY US.

The question is: Will the zealous reformers listen? Or will they continue their path of destruction.

The Broader Bolder Approach to Education reviewed the academic progress in the cities that aggressively adopted market reforms–New York City, D.C., and Chicago–and found that these districts UNDERPERFORMED in comparison to other urban districts.

The “reforms” imposed by Michelle Rhee, Michael Bloomberg, Joel Klein, and Arne Duncan actually harmed children who needed help the most. They are not “reform.” They are misguided, inappropriate interventions, like using an axe to butter your bread or shave.

Here are excerpts from the BBA report:

“Pressure from federal education policies such as Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind, bolstered by organized advocacy efforts, is making a popular set of market-oriented education “reforms” look more like the new status quo than real reform.

“Reformers assert that test-based teacher evaluation, increased school “choice” through expanded access to charter schools, and the closure of “failing” and underenrolled schools will boost falling student achievement and narrow longstanding race- and income-based achievement gaps. This report examines these assertions by assessing the impacts of these reforms in three large urban school districts: Washington, D.C., New York City, and Chicago. These districts were studied because all enjoy the benefit of mayoral control, produce reliable district-level test score data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and were led by vocal reformers who im- plemented versions of this agenda.

“KEY FINDINGS

“The reforms deliver few benefits and in some cases harm the students they purport to help, while drawing attention and resources away from policies with real promise to address poverty-related barriers to school success:

*Test scores increased less, and achievement gaps grew more, in “reform” cities than in other urban districts.

*Reported successes for targeted students evaporated upon closer examination.

*Test-based accountability prompted churn that thinned the ranks of experienced teachers, but not necessarily bad teachers.

*School closures did not send students to better schools or save school districts money.

*Charter schools further disrupted the districts while providing mixed benefits, particularly for the highest-needs students.

*Emphasis on the widely touted market-oriented reforms drew attention and resources from initiatives with greater promise.

*The reforms missed a critical factor driving achievement gaps: the influence of poverty on academic performance. Real, sustained change requires strategies that are more realistic, patient, and multipronged.

For the full report, please visit

boldapproach.org/rhetoric-trumps-reality

Come to PS 29 in NYC to hear the mayoral candidates:

Want to know where the Democratic primary candidates stand on education? Ask!

mayoral_postcardlittle

A forum on the future of public education
in NYC

with Democratic primary mayoral
candidates

Moderated by
Diane Ravitch

Thursday May 2nd
5:30-7:00 pm
PS 29 (425 Henry Street, Brooklyn)

What do 800,000+ New Yorkers have in common?

We are NYC public school parents.

And Parents Ask Questions.

Ask Your Question*

*Submit your question to
questions@parentvoicesny.org.

This event is being organized by ParentVoicesNY

Because we are the parents voting for our
kids’ future.

Pearson made scoring errors on tests for gifted programs in Néw York City.

13% of the students who qualified were wrongly rejected.

New York City is the only school district that uses a single exam to determine admissions to gifted programs. Because of differences in opportunity to learn, the children with the most advantages in life win the most places.

It is surprising that Dennis Walcott, once active in the civil rights movement, would defend this approach, which systematically discriminates against children with the fewest opportunities.

Remember the real civil rights movement? The one that fought for those with the least?

Not the ones who defend standardized testing. Not the ones who defend privilege tied to social class and wealth. They falsely claim to be fighting for civil rights. They are not. They fight for the status quo of inequality.

Aaron Pallas, a sociologist at Teachers College, is a sharp observer of educational issues.

In this article, he comments on a joint statement by the leaders of education in New York City and State, hailing the Common Core and the new Common Core tests. Their article appeared in the New York Daily News, where they proclaimed the advent of the new standards and the joy they are bringing back to learning. And now the new Common a core tests will let everyone know whether our none-year-olds are college-and-career-ready.

For most parents of young children, this is doubtless a burning issue, especially since no one can be sure what careers will exist 10 years from now.

What did they forget to say: the introduction of new tests means there is no trend line, no way of basing teacher evaluations on scores. Pallas writes, in part, supplying his own version of the text that wasn’t there:

“Because this year’s assessments are a completely different baseline than previous state assessments, it would be inappropriate to treat the difference between last year’s scores and this year’s scores as evidence of student growth in achievement. Therefore, we are suspending the use of student growth percentiles and value-added models to estimate teachers’ contributions to their students’ learning as a required element of the Annual Professional Performance Review of teachers and principals across New York state for at least one year.”

In the past few days, education officials in New York have made some breathtakingly hostile comments about children.

Merryl Tisch, the chancellor of the New York Board of Regents, responded to reports about test anxiety by saying that it was time to jump into the deep end. By that, she meant that it was time to throw these little children in grades 3-8 into the deep end, as I presume she will not be jumping in with them.

Dennis Walcott said with relish that it is time to rip the Band-aid off. Is that something that a caring adult does to a child?

Why the fierce urgency to inflict pain on children?

I am not suggesting that students should not take tests. Of course, they should take tests.

But before they are tested, they should have the opportunity to learn what will be tested. Their teachers should have the opportunity to learn what they are expected to teach.

The test should not fall out of the sky on unprepared students and teachers, like a scythe intended to mow them down.

Our state officials should be held accountable for rushing students, teachers, and schools into tests for which they have not been prepared.

And they should be ashamed by the rhetoric they use, in which they express indifference to children and a barely disguised glee about the harm they are inflicting by tossing kids into the deep end whether or not they know how to swim and, to add injury to injury, “ripping off the Band-aid.”

This is a classic case of what the noted psychoanalyst Elisabeth Young-Bruehl called childism.

Dennis Walcott and other city and state officials in New York announced that they expect test scores to fall by 30% this year because of the switch to the Common Core.

They keep saying, almost too gleefully, how hard the test is. (Reader, remember that the test is “hard” only because state officials decided to raise the passing mark.)

Walcott said, “It’s time to rip the Band-Aid off, and we have a responsibility to rip that Band-aid off.”

Readers, I have been trying to figure out what that statement means.

Clearly, the chancellor thought it was profound so he said it twice.

What is the Band-aid?

What wound is it protecting?

Why is it good to rip it off?

Doesn’t it inflict pain when you do that?

Why would the chancellor want to inflict pain on so many children?

I welcome your deconstruction of this deep exclamation.

Huffington Post reporter Joy Resmovits notes renewed calls for investigation of cheating under Rhee but then points out that the issue has been thoroughly investigated, at least to the satisfaction of Rhee, Henderson, Duncan, and the Huffington Post.

She notes the latest cheating “audit” by Alvarez & Marsal and even refers to the fiirm as auditors. But A&M is not an auditing firm. It has no experience investigating test security.

A&M is a high priced management consulting agency. It restructures bankrupt companies. It was hired to turnaround the St. Louis public schools. Its CEO took charge; he had previously run the clothing store Brooks Brothers. A&M collected $5 million and left after a year with the schools in worse shape.

The NYC Department of Education gave A&M a no-bid contract for $15.8 million to reorganize NYC school bus routes. Executives were paid $500 an hour plus per Diem. When their new schedule was implemented, it was a disaster, with thousands of kids stranded on the coldest day of the year.

And now DC hires them for “test security.”

Why not bring in the investigators who got to the bottom of the Atlanta mess? Real investigators, not a business restructuring team.

New York City just approved the ssle of $23 million in bonds for a charter run by a politically powerful Bronx family.

The story begins thus:

“The city approved a politically connected charter school — whose founder went to prison and principal was once accused of fixing grades — to issue up to $23 million in tax-exempt bonds to relocate to a former Bronx strip club.”

An earlier post noted that a very extraordinary 27-year-old named Andrew Buher had been named as Chief Operations Officer of the New York City public schools, where he will have a salary of $202,000.

Then a few people noted that he is part of the Education Pioneers, young people coming up through charter schools and other corporate reform groups. That is some powerful network.

Dennis Walcott, the chancellor of the Néw York City Department of Education, has announced the selection of Andrew Buher, age 27, to be Chief Operating Officer of the 1.1 million student school system.

Buher graduated from college in 2007. He came to wirk for the DOE in 2010. He started at $75,000 but soon doubled his salary to $152,000 as the chancellor’s chief of staff.

The salary for his new job is $202,000.

I am speechless.