Archives for category: Teach for America
Newer Entries »

Julian Vasquez Heilig Gives a Lesson to Senator Harkin About TFA

By dianeravitch
January 21, 2014 //
16

This is a true story.

A mother who lives in Iowa wrote her Senator to complain about her daughter’s terrible experience in Teach for America. Her Senator is Tom Harkin, chairman of the Senate Committee responsible for education. The Senator sent her a response which she found unsatisfactory. She sent the Senator”s letter to me, and I asked Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig of the University of Texas to review the accuracy of the letter.
So, first comes the letter sent by Senator Harkin, then Dr. Heilig’s critique:

Mrs. XXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXX, IA
Dear XXXXXX:
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I always welcome the opportunity to hear from my fellow Iowans.
Let me first apologize for the extreme delay in responding to your concerns. As you can imagine, I receive a tremendous amount of mail, and on this occasion a processing error let to a number of letters being misdirected. For that, I sincerely apologize. Now, let me turn to the concerns you raised in your letter.
I was deeply sorry to hear about your daughter’s disappointing experience with Teach for America (TFA). Although TFA includes five weeks of rigorous training to prepare program participants for difficult and challenging placements, it would appear from your description of XXXX’s experience that her training was inadequate and the on-site support services in the New York region lacking.
Notwithstanding XXXXX’s unfortunate outcome, I have supported this program over the years as a model to address persistent socioeconomic achievement gaps in public education by recruiting highly qualified, dedicated recent graduates to teach in disadvantaged, low-income urban and rural districts. It has been my experience that the vast majority of TFA participants conclude their rotation positively, gain valuable teaching skills, and make a lasting impact on the students they teach. Indeed, recent public surveys indicate that nearly two-thirds of TFA participants remain as public school teachers beyond the two year commitment, and after five years nearly 15 percent remain at the same low-income school in which they began.
Despite this, I find it invaluable to hear feedback from constituents who have had first-hand experience with federally-supported programs like TFA. As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) and Chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds education initiatives like TFA, please know that I will remember XXXXX’s criticisms and suggestions when I consider future legislation or budget items related to this program.
Again, thank you for writing to me. I hope that XXXXX’s experience with TFA does not dull her passion for public service and civic engagement. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future about any issue that concerns you.

Sincerely,

Tom Harkin
United States Senator

Now what follows is the letter that Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig wrote, paraphrasing Tom Harkin’s constituent letter:

@ProfessorJVH on Assignment: Rewriting Tom Harkin’s Constituent Letter

Dear Constituent,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I always welcome the opportunity to hear from my fellow Iowans. Let me first apologize for the extreme delay in responding to your concerns. Honestly, I have been really busy here in D.C. To understand how busy I am, I refer you to an article by Stephanie Simon at Politico

Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, chair of the education appropriations subcommittee, led the push to use the bill reopening government and lifting the debt ceiling as a vehicle for renewing a provision that defines teachers still in training as “highly qualified” under federal law.

The renewal was opposed by a coalition of nearly 100 civil rights, union and educator associations. Members said they were stunned to see it in the budget bill, especially given that Congress has not yet received data it requested last year analyzing whether the novice teachers are disproportionately assigned to schools serving poor and minority children…

Teach for America, which relies on its teachers being certified as “highly qualified” to place them in classrooms across the country, has been a big supporter of renewing the definition. Spokeswoman Takirra Winfield declined to comment on TFA’s lobbying efforts or any last-minute push to get the renewal in the budget bill…

I have been very pleased with the impact of NCLB and the watering down of the high-quality teacher provision. Why? My support of a weak high-quality teacher definition has resulted in an explosion of under-qualified teachers entering the classroom across the nation. National data show that NCLB has exploded under-qualified individuals into schools— as about 133,000 teachers entered classrooms with limited training in the seventeen years before NCLB compared to 359,000 in the seven years after its introduction— a 270% increase. Typically, poor children are primarily taught by the under-qualified teachers— not children attending wealthy schools. Why would the wealthy allow their children to be taught by teachers that are under-qualified? That is a silly proposition. BTW You’re Welcome. (See Alternative certification and Teach For America: The search for high quality teachers)

Now, let me turn to the concerns you raised in your letter.

I was deeply sorry to hear about your daughter’s disappointing experience with Teach for America (TFA). I am very familiar and comfortable with TFA. For example, I have a history of hiring individuals from the TFA organization as my Senior Education Policy Advisor for K-12 Issues was an alumnus (she did actually have 6 months of teaching experience). We are also deeply indebted to TFA here on the Hill. Stephanie Simon reported that TFA has access to millions of dollars and the legislative process to directly influence Capitol Hill by paying for “education” staffers for congresspeople on the Education and Workforce committee. Which of my colleagues have accepted education staffers paid by TFA via a California billionaire? In case you are interested,

Tom Cole was included to be sure that TFA is a symbol of bi-partisanship.

Although TFA includes five weeks of summer training to prepare program participants for difficult and challenging placements, it would appear from your description of your daughters experience that her training was inadequate and the on-site support services in the New York region lacking (In case you didn’t know, I take off five weeks all the time in fact, in fact our work calendar in Washington was only 126 days in 2013). Now that you mention it, turns out that TFA alumni have recently published ideas for the reform of TFA and its summer institute in prominent media outlets such as the Harvard Crimson, Harvard Magazine, The Atlantic, and on education blogs.

I can understand your daughter’s unfortunate outcome, I have supported this program over the years as a model to address persistent socioeconomic achievement gaps in public education by recruiting highly qualified, dedicated recent graduates to teach in disadvantaged, low-income urban and rural districts. But it turns out, it is not as good as advertised. The practical question faced by most districts is whether TFA teachers do as well as or better than fully credentialed non-TFA teachers with whom those school districts aim to staff their schools. On this question, the predominance of peer-reviewed studies have indicated that, on average, the students of novice TFA teachers perform less well in reading and mathematics assessments than those of fully credentialed beginning teachers. Although the differences are small, TFA teachers do better if compared to other less-trained and inexperienced teachers. Again, the comparison group matters greatly. (See Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence)

TFA also has a turnover rate much higher than the national average for new teachers. TFA typically claims about 50-60% of their alums remain in the “education field.” This vague assertion avoids noting the much smaller percentage of TFA teachers that actually stay teaching in public education and the even smaller percentage of TFA teachers that stay in their initial placement. Independent peer-reviewed research published by Donaldson and Moore Johnson found that while the majority of TFA teachers leave their assignments after two years, 28% of TFA teachers do remain public school teachers after five years— compared to about 50% of non-TFA teachers. After seven years, only 5% are still teaching in their initial TFA placement. TFA will toss out all sorts of attrition statistics in casual conversation and in the media, but these are independent data.

I find it invaluable to hear feedback from constituents who have had first-hand experience with federally-supported programs like TFA (The feds give TFA tens of millions of dollars every year). As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) and Chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds education initiatives like TFA, please know that I will remember her criticisms and suggestions when I consider future legislation or budget items related to this program.

Maybe I might make an about-face on the high-quality teacher provision that I weakened and snuck into the budget bill to reopen the government. Or maybe I will reduce the tens of millions of dollars that are authorized for TFA from the federal government each year. Or maybe I will discourage colleagues and committees from accepting education staffers paid by a billionaire to do TFA’s bidding in the capitol. Or maybe not.

Again, thank you for writing to me. I hope that your daughter’s experience with TFA does not dull her passion for public service and civic engagement. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future about any issue that concerns you.

Sincerely,

Tom

United States Senator

Categories Education Reform, Teach for America

Breaking News: Outrage in Newark as Christie’s Superintendent Fires Principals for Opposing School Closings

By dianeravitch
January 18, 2014 //
157

On the very eve of the weekend celebrating the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Newark’s state-appointed superintendent showed the citizens of Newark that they have no votes and they have no voice when it comes to the fate of their schools.

The Newark public schools have been under state control since 1995.

Cami Anderson, the current Newark Superintendent is a former Teach for America teacher and a graduate of the unaccredited Broad Academy, which is known for advocating the closing of public schools and the handover of public schools to private management.

At a public hearing called by Newark Councilman Ras Baraka to discuss school closings,  the principals of several schools spoke against their closing.

Anderson fired them for daring to dissent.

Here Jersey Jazzman describes the situation. 

He quotes Councilman Baraka, who said:

“Today Cami Anderson indefinitely suspended four Newark principals: Tony Motley of Bragraw Avenue School, Grady James of Hawthorne Avenue School, Dorothy Handfield of Belmont-Runyon, and Deneen Washington of Maple Avenue. She suspended the four principals because they spoke at a public forum on Wednesday in opposition to Ms. Anderson’s widely criticized “One Newark” reorganization plan which includes closing or “repurposing” nearly one third of Newark’s public schools.

Ms. Anderson’s action in suspending the four principals is the last straw in a chain of inept, and horribly out-of-touch decisions. The people of Newark need to hear the views of those within the school system who disagree with Ms. Anderson. The four principals have a constitutional right to speak out. The Newark school district is not a military dictatorship, and Ms. Anderson is neither an army general nor a police chief. Her behavior must be governed by the principles of our democracy.

Whatever one thinks of Ms. Anderson’s political and educational ideology, she has proven time and again that she holds in contempt the opinions of the people of Newark. From the beginning, she has not consulted with Newark’s parents, community and political leaders, or professional educators on any significant decision. Most recently, she announced and began implementing her ” One Newark” reorganization plan on the people of Newark with no consultation and no advance notice. In doing this, she ignited a firestorm of opposition from outraged citizens.

Anthony Cody watched videos of the hearing and has extensive clips from the testimony of each of the principals.

He writes as follows:

New Jersey is making headlines this month as the bullying tactics of Governor Christie have gone beyond shouting down individual school teachers, which many in the media seemed to find amusing, and into the realm of political scandal as the “Bridgegate” emails came to light.

Now Newark, New Jersey, is exploding, thanks to the attempts at intimidation by Governor Christie’s hand-picked superintendent of schools, Cami Anderson. Anderson came to Newark after working in New York City schools. Before that, she was employed with New Leaders for New Schools and Teach For America. She was trained by the Broad Academy, which literally wrote the book on how to close schools.  

Journalist Bob Braun today carries a report on the decision by  Anderson to “indefinitely suspend”  five of Newark’s principals. Braun explains:

The “incident” was a community meeting at the Hopewell Baptist Church last Wednesday where (H.G. James) spoke, praising the efforts of his students, teachers and parents.

James was one of five principals indefinitely suspended in one day by Cami Anderson, Christie’s agent in Newark. The others were Tony Motley, Bragaw Avenue School; Dorothy Handfield, Belmont-Runyon School; Deneen Washington, Maple Avenue School, and Lisa Brown, Ivy Hill School.

Four of the principals…tried to answer questions from local residents  worried about what would happen to their children as Anderson moves toward a wholesale transfer of public school assets to the KIPP Schools, a charter organization that operates TEAM Academy Charter Schools. Questions Anderson wasn’t answering.

The plot thickens when we understand what these community forums were all about. These forums were convened by mayoral candidate Ras Baraka, to give the community a voice in response to planned school closures. A video shows the principals speaking to their community.

It is not clear whether four or five principals were indefinitely suspended. It is clear that Christie, Cerf, and Anderson intend to hand the children of Newark over to charter operators, regardless of the wishes of their parents and the community. And it is clear that any school employee who disagrees will be indefinitely suspended.

This is not the way democracy is supposed to work. Public schools belong to the public, not to state officials to use as their plaything. Public officials are supposed to serve the public, not dictate to them.

The state-controlled districts in New Jersey–all predominantly African-American–are being treated like subjugated territories, in which the residents have no say about the control or disposition of their schools.

I agree with Anthony Cody: The destruction of public education in New Jersey’s state-controlled districts–deliberate and knowing–is far worse than Bridgegate. One involved an abuse of political power, an act of spite on the part of Governor Christie’s closest staff. The other involves the deliberate destruction of democracy and public education. It should be an impeachable offense.

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Broad Foundation, Charter Schools, Closing schools, New Jersey, Teach for America

TFA’s Mighty Ambitions

By dianeravitch
January 17, 2014 //
14

Teach for America has created a spin-off called Leaders for Educational Excellence that quietly trains and supports the ambitions of former TFA and their ascent to positions of power.

Teach for America, through LEE, hopes to take charge of the reins of power in many districts, states, and the halls of Congress.

TFA, of course, is a mainstay of the corporate reform movement, supplying the ill-trained recruits to the charter chains like Rocketship and gaining elective positions by espousing the slogans of “reform.”

Electoral work amounts to less than a third of LEE’s budget, its officials say, but it has nevertheless fueled popular accounts of the organization, mostly critical. Such accounts accuse the group of supporting candidates who espouse a particular “corporate” brand of education policy focused on expanding charter schools and test-based accountability.

Critics point to prominent TFA alumni and LEE members, such as Bill Ferguson, a state senator in Maryland, who sponsored legislation that included an iteration of the “parent trigger.” That policy permits parents to turn over the management of schools to outside operators.

LEE officials contest such depictions.

“We do not exist to propagate policy,” said Mr. Buman.

And Stephen Sawchuck’s article in Education Week adds:

The connection to TFA also appears to have given LEE-backed candidates access to an informal network that can fuel spending. Campaign-finance records from the Nevada state board races, for instance, turn up some of the same donors who have contributed to other endeavors affiliated with so-called “reform” priorities, including charter school expansion and teacher evaluations linked to student test scores.

Those contributors include Alan Fournier, who helps finance the New Jersey chapter of StudentsFirst, the advocacy group founded by former District of Columbia Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee, and Charles Ledley, a donor to Democrats for Education Reform, a political action committee.

“There’s a strong network of people who are supportive of TFA alums, regardless of what their policy or visions are for the respective school systems,” Mr. Esteves said.

In essence, the issue boils down to one of self-selection: Even if LEE itself is politically neutral, it supports candidates who by definition must take policy stands. And those who reach out for its help may well favor a certain approach after being immersed in TFA’s philosophy, Mr. McGuinn of Drew University said.

It is doubtless sheer accident that TFA/LEE-supported candidates support charter schools, test-based evaluation, and the same policy prescriptions as Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst.

Hey, I live in Brooklyn. Anyone want to buy a world-famous bridge?

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization, Teach for America

Teachers with Training Wheels?

By dianeravitch
January 14, 2014 //
29

Levi B. Cavener is a special education teacher in Idaho. He recently wrote an article arguing that Teach for America recruits with five weeks of training should not be assigned to special education students. A spokesperson for TFA responded that it was okay because they would be getting the training while they taught.

Levi says that is like teaching with training wheels.

He writes:

It’s not ok for a doctor to tell you that s/he’s qualified to do the surgery because s/he will get training later.  Nobody wants to be the one lying on a table with a doctor who has only recently held a scalpel for the first time.

It’s not ok for a lawyer to represent you because he has great ambition to attend school and pass the BAR exam down the road. Nobody wants to stand in front of a judge with an attorney whose only experience in the courtroom is from watching episodes of Law & Order.

It’s certainly not ok for an individual to be placed at the head of a classroom full of our most vulnerable students because TFA training wheels are attached at the waist. Students and parents have a right to expect a highly qualified professional leading this classroom starting on the very first day of school, and a TFA employee does not fulfill this basic expectation.

 

Categories Idaho, Special Education, Teach for America

Julian Vasquez Heilig: Time to Look at Evidence About Teach for America

By dianeravitch
January 14, 2014 //
17

A new report by Julian Vasquez Heilig and Su Jin Jez reviews the evidence about the effectiveness of Teach for America.

Their study, published by the National Education Policy Center, “challenges the simplistic but widespread belief that TFA is a clear-cut success story. In fact, Heilig and Jez find that the best evidence shows TFA participants as a group are not meaningfully or consistently improving educational outcomes for the children they have taught.”

They find that:

Teach For America and other organizations have produced studies asserting benefits provided by TFA teachers. Those studies, however, have only rarely undergone peer review – the standard benchmark for quality research, Heilig and Jez observe. In contrast, the available peer reviewed research has produced a decidedly mixed picture. For example, the results attributed to TFA teachers varies both by their experience and certification level. The results also fluctuate depending on the types of teachers to whom the TFA teachers are compared; TFA teachers look relatively good when compared to other inexperienced, poorly trained teachers, but the results are more problematic when they are compared to fully prepared and experienced teachers, Heilig and Jez report.

Because of these differences, the question most frequently asked—Are TFA teachers “as good as” teachers who enter the profession through other routes?—is not the question we should be asking, Heilig and Jez contend. Whether one or the other group is better is “a question that cannot be answered unless we first identify which TFA and non-TFA teachers we’re asking about,” they write.

Even more important, “The lack of a statistically and practically significant impact should indicate to policymakers that TFA is likely not providing a meaningful reduction in disparities in educational outcomes, notwithstanding its explosive growth and popularity in the media,” according to Heilig and Jez. Moreover, despite its rapid growth, TFA remains a tiny fraction of the nation’s teaching corps; for every TFA teacher, there are 50,000 other teachers in the U.S., Heilig and Jez note, and the small numbers and small impact of TFA point to a needed “shift in thinking.”

“We should be trying to dramatically improve the quality of teaching,” write Heilig and Jez. “It is time to shift our focus from a program of mixed impact that, even if the benefits actually matched the rhetoric, would not move the needle on America’s educational quality due to the fact that only 0.002% of all teachers in the United States are Teach For America placements.”

In other words, those who seek long-term, systematic improvement of the teacher force in the United States will not find an answer in Teach for America. Their numbers are few, and not many remain in teaching.

Those who want real change must concentrate on improving the working conditions of teachers so that it is an attractive option for college graduates, and must focus on raising standards for entry into the profession as well as strengthening the quality of professional preparation and support for new teachers.

 

 

 

Categories Teach for America, Teachers and Teaching

Gary Rubinstein: An Open Letter to the New Leaders of TFA

By dianeravitch
January 9, 2014 //
15

Gary Rubinstein was one of the original members of Teach for America. He has been involved in TFA from the outset. However, he became a critical friend of TFA when he attended the corporate-funded 20th anniversary celebration, bringing together the leaders of the “reform movement” who were attacking the nation’s public schools and their teachers, closing public schools, and promoting charters. He saw a very different organization from the one he had joined two decades earlier. It had morphed into an arm of big business.

In this important post, he patiently explains to the new leaders of Teach for America why he strongly disagrees with the organization–beginning with their boasting about their results–and explains why they are on the wrong track.

He begins this way:

On February 12, 2013, founder and long time CEO of TFA, Wendy Kopp, stepped down. Two new co-CEOs were appointed, Elisa Villanueva-Beard and Matt Kramer. Elisa was a 1998 corps member and Matt had never taught. Both were working as very high administrative positions in TFA before this recent promotion.

I was pretty surprised by this announcement. I did not expect Wendy to ever not be the CEO of Teach For America. I was also puzzled that neither of the new co-CEOs were required to relocate to be near the national headquarters in New York City.

Over the past four months they have co-written three blog posts on the ‘Pass The Chalk’ site which had points of view that I definitely object to. The first was about a bogus study ‘proving’ that certain TFA teachers teach significantly more than their non-TFA counterparts (I analyzed that report here). The second was about a bogus interpretation of the recent NAEP gains ‘proving’ that corporate reform strategies are working (I wrote about NAEP ‘gains’ here). The third was about their support for the common core (Me and others have written a bunch about the problems with the common core).

Gary then writes an open letter to Matt and Elisa. It is a very strong letter, written by someone who understands Teach for America and knows its potential and its weaknesses. Gary has remained in teaching for many years and understands the challenges of teaching as Matt and Elisa do not.

Here are a few snippets: read the whole thing:

Based on what I’ve seen in this first year of your appointment, I am not encouraged that the issues I have with TFA are improving in any way. In your language and your writings I see the same kind of unsophisticated logic that I see in the rhetoric of people like Michelle Rhee and Steve Perry. Things about the ‘status quo’ and about the power of ‘raised expectations.’ As someone opposed to the kinds of strategies that Rhee and Perry promote, I know that my resistance has nothing to do with a desire to preserve the status quo, nor do I think that very many teachers have unreasonably low expectations for their students.

I have no particular attachment to the ‘status quo.’ But I’ve done a lot of research about what is now called ‘reform’ and I fight against it because I believe that it will, if permitted to gain momentum, make education in this country much worse. My prediction is that teachers will flee the profession even faster than they already do under the stress of the new brand of ‘accountability.’ And I’ve seen this start already in California where there are fewer teacher candidates to fill the vacancies. This will exacerbate if market-driven reform is not curbed. I think college students would be crazy to pursue teaching in this current anti-teacher climate. I’d wager that you are already seeing the effects of this, even among TFA corps members. A few years ago, the statistic was that 60% of TFA corps members taught for a third year. Recently I saw an article celebrating that South Carolina, I think, had about 40% stay for a third year. I believe that this is not going to be abnormal and you will see fewer TFAers stay beyond their two years. Teaching was already a pretty stressful job before the standardized test mania infected our schools. Now, for many, it is unbearable.

I do not believe in ‘low expectations.’ I also know that ‘high expectations’ is a very weak silver bullet. Expert teachers know how to set their expectations at an appropriate level to maximize student learning…

You recently penned a blog post in support of the controversial common core standards. Of course Randi Weingarten is one of the biggest common core cheerleaders in the country so it is not like you came out in favor of school closings, for instance. But still, it was interesting to me that you would take a side on this. What does it mean to be ‘for’ the common core? Does it mean that you wholeheartedly believe in the 7th grade math standard which states:

CCSS.Math.Content.7.NS.A.2a Understand that multiplication is extended from fractions to rational numbers by requiring that operations continue to satisfy the properties of operations, particularly the distributive property, leading to products such as (–1)(–1) = 1 and the rules for multiplying signed numbers. Interpret products of rational numbers by describing real-world contexts.

(Note: If you don’t know what they’re talking about, don’t worry. Most people don’t know that math majors in abstract algebra, during junior year of college, learn that rather than justifying that a negative times a negative is a positive, informally any number of ways, you learn that since -1 * 0 = 0, which means -1 * (-1+1) = 0 (since -1+1=0, additive inverse property) and then, by the distributive property (which says a * (b+c) = ab + ac) (-1) * (-1) + (-1)*1 = 0, but since 1 is the multiplicative identity, (-1)*(-1) – 1=0, but then if you add 1 to both sides, you get (-1)*(-1)=1, Q.E.D.)

Or do you just mean that you approve of school being more than just memorizing a bunch of shallow facts, but having opportunity for deep thought-provoking learning opportunities? If that’s what you mean, is is really necessary to spend billions of dollars on new textbooks and new ‘common core aligned’ assessments for this? Isn’t this the first thing we learned at the TFA institute (not you, Matt, but I’m sure you get the idea still), that we need to get kids to the higher levels of ‘Bloom’s Taxonomy’? Elisa, when you taught in Arizona did you not try to teach to a deep level because the common core had not been invented yet along with new assessments which would make sure you were accountable for getting your students to achieve that type of deep mastery of those standards?

One of my favorite sections of this long letter is where Gary suggests that TFA should adopt a value-added approach to its own organization and be prepared to shut down regions where there is high attrition of TFA recruits:

If you are so enamored with the strategies of Rhee, Daly, Huffman, White, and Anderson, why don’t you use them, yourself, in helping TFA maximize its own ‘value added’? This would be pretty easy to implement. First you would publish an annual A-F report card on the different TFA regions. One of the best metrics would be the ‘quit rate’ — the percent of corps members that quit before completing the two year commitment. Though the national average for all the regions is somewhere around 10%, there are some regions that have much higher quit rates. I believe that Kansas City and Detroit are two regions where around 25% of the corps members don’t complete their commitment. Regions like that would get an ‘F’ and after two ‘F’s or something, they would get shut down using the market-driven reform strategies. Then, for recruiters you could track the test scores of the students of the corps members that each recruiter recruits. Some recruiters will fare worse than others on this metric and those recruiters would be labeled ‘ineffective’ and fired. The various staff at the institutes could also be rated by tracking the test scores of the students of the corps members they trained. Basically, you would want to change the culture of TFA management to one which assumes that all TFA employees are lazy and don’t care about doing a good job and can only be motivated by the fear of being fired. If you admire the TFA leaders mentioned above so much, it would be hypocritical to not use their methods with your own employees.

Be sure to follow Gary Rubinstein. He is one of the wisest and smartest of all teacher-bloggers, and his views are always firmly rooted in evidence, which he supplies.

Categories Common Core, Education Reform, Teach for America, Teacher Evaluations

Julian Vasquez Heilig: A TFA Alumna Tells All to Julian

By dianeravitch
January 4, 2014 //
29

Julian Vasquez Heilig recounts the story of a graduate of his university who reported plans to enter Teach for America.

The University of Texas, he says, sends more students to TFA than any other university.

This young person was filled with idealism and hope about making a difference.

Two years later, Julian received a letter, which he reprints in this post.

She said she felt unprepared; she did not get adequate support from TFA; she was isolated; she felt shame; and ultimately, she felt burned out.

Why shame?

Shame has a terrible place in this organization. I never believed that shame would become a motivator in my Teach for America experience, but shame holds onto the necks of many Corps members. Placing young college graduates in some of the toughest teaching situations with 5 weeks of training has negative repercussions on the mind, body, and soul of Corps members. The message is “If only I were stronger, smarter and more capable, I could handle this. I would be able to save my students.” Unfortunately, TFA intentionally or unintentionally preys on this shame to push Corps members to their limits to create “incredible” classrooms and “transformative” lesson plans. Would these things be good for our students? Of course. Is shame a sustainable method for creating and keeping good teachers in the classroom? Absolutely not. It is defeating and draining.

 

 

Categories Teach for America

Ten Big Wins for Public Education in 2013

By dianeravitch
January 1, 2014 //
5

Owen Davis, writing for Alternet, lists ten big victories for public schools in 2013.

He begins:

“If what’s past is truly prologue, there’s a good chance 2013 will be remembered as the year the free-market education reform movement crested and began to subside. After a decade of gathering momentum, reform politics began to founder in the face of communities fighting for equitable and progressive public education. Within the year’s first weeks, a historic test boycott was underway, civil rights advocates confronted Arne Duncan on school closings, and thousands were marching in Texas to roll back reforms.

“Perhaps we should have sensed this coming: the Chicago Teachers Union strike in the fall of 2012 foreshadowed the education struggles that would take center stage in 2013. In addition to fair contract provisions, they called for a new course for public schools: well-rounded curriculum, fewer mandated tests, more nurses and social workers, an end to racially discriminatory disciplinary policies, and early childhood education, among other demands.

“The CTU’s chief victory lay in galvanizing public education advocates across the country around a vision for public education that took full form in 2013. At the same time, the year saw reform bulwarks like Teach for America and the Common Core standards suffer unprecedented shocks.”

The tide is turning. Corporate reform is not collapsing, not yet, but it is running into a firestorm of resistance. Rough sledding ahead for the corporate reformers as the public wakes up and parents organize to stop the theft of heir public schools and the joy of learning.

Categories Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Supporting public schools, Teach for America

EduShyster on John Arnold’s Hurt Feelings

By dianeravitch
November 19, 2013 //
19

EduShyster here recounts the sad tale of billionaire John Arnold, who apparently did not like my apology to him for a factual inaccuracy in an earlier post.

I made a factual error in a post on October 10. I said that he left Enron with $3 billion. That was an honest error on my part. I wrongly assumed that is where he became a billionaire. But he made his billions after he left Enron.

Imagine the scenario. I am in the hospital, concerned about blood clots and leaky heart valves, when my literary agent emails to say she just received an email from John Arnold’s lawyer, saying that I had defamed him. My literary agent is also a lawyer, and she advised me that since John Arnold is a public figure and since I did not act maliciously, he was unlikely to prevail in a court of law.

My immediate reaction was that I did not wish to engage in litigation with a billionaire, so–from my hospital bed–I wrote and posted an apology.

Arnold decided to give $100,000 to some organization dedicated to fact checking.

I have decided to give $100 to the American Civil Liberties Union to protect free speech in the United States.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Teach for America

Teach for America: Political Juggernaut for Privatization

By dianeravitch
October 21, 2013 //
49

Stephanie Simon has written a blockbuster article that describes how Teach for America has enlarged its goals.

It is no longer just an organization that trains young people to teach in low-income schools.

It is, as she puts it, “a political powerhouse” that is seizing control of education in district after district, state after state, funded by rightwing millionaires and billionaires.

The far-right, anti-union Walton Foundation is one of TFA’s biggest funders.

So is Arthur Rock, a San Francisco venture capitalist, who pays the salaries of TFA staffers who work in key offices of Congress, protecting the interest of TFA. Rock is a big supporter of vouchers.

Wherever there is advocacy for vouchers and charters, there you will find TFA.

And their numbers are growing, fueled by their vast treasury, and their ability to fool young people into thinking that they are “progressive,” when they have become the frontline soldiers of the far-right enemies of public education.

 

Categories Teach for America
Newer Entries »