Archives for category: Teachers and Teaching

Sheri Lederman’s victory over New York’s “arbitrary and capricious” evaluation system was national news. Contrary to speculation in the media, teachers’ unions did not do the research for the Ledermans. He was referred to experts by me and Carol Burris, and the expert witnesses referred him to others who had conducted research.

 

 

The following letter went to all members of AFT:

 

 

Randi Weingarten wrote:

 

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the State of New York sided with educators in the fight against VAM (value-added modeling), calling an algorithm-based teacher evaluation “arbitrary and capricious.”

 

Long Island fourth-grade teacher and union member Sheri Lederman bravely took on the state’s VAM-based evaluations with a straightforward argument: Using a black-box formula to evaluate and punish teachers is, simply put, wrong.

 

The court agreed. We urge every teacher in the country to read an excellent article about what this case means for our profession.

 

In Sheri’s case, the judge based his decision upon, among other things, (1) “convincing and detailed evidence of bias against teachers at both ends of the spectrum,” (2) lack of any explanation for statistically significant swings in Sheri’s evaluations when her student scores were similar year after year, and (3) that grading teachers on a predetermined “curve” that required an arbitrary number of teachers to fail and limited the number of highly effective teachers had no rational justification. Therefore, the judge threw out Sheri’s faulty evaluation.

 

Sheri and her lawyer husband brought in some of the top experts in the country to dismantle this flawed system. The Ledermans corresponded with one of the leading proponents of VAM and obtained a concession that VAM scores “may be too high one year, too low in another.” In a remarkable email exchange, which was submitted to the court, this renowned VAM proponent acknowledged that test scores are themselves imperfect measures of student achievement and as a result “any given VAM observation may be higher or lower than a teacher’s true performance.”

 

Teachers and our unions have been saying it for years: VAM is unreliable, unstable and unfair. In state after state, that’s proven true.

 

And, like Sheri did in New York, the AFT is working to discredit VAM across the country.

 

When the unions brought a case in New Mexico, a judge ordered a preliminary injunction based on our evidence, preventing the state from using its VAM-based evaluations for high-stakes purposes until it can prove that the system is fair.

 

In Houston, another case brought by a group of courageous teachers with the AFT’s support will be heard this summer.

 

Here’s the simple truth that VAM proponents and the test-and-punish crowd just can’t seem to get: Classroom learning can’t be boiled down to a number.

 

Learning is highly qualitative, and full of things that can’t be measured with a test score or an algorithm. Reducing student achievement and the contribution educators make to a formula grossly misunderstands the learning process.

 

The ruling in Sheri’s case can now be cited in litigation all over the country. The tide is turning. In New York, the evaluation system is already being rebuilt from the ground up, and politicians who originally pushed VAM testing are walking it back. In other states, the Every Student Succeeds Act is creating the leeway for educators, parents and legislators to work together to create evaluation systems designed to support education, not to punish educators.

 

And in places where the test-and-punish crowd is still pushing wrong-headed evaluation systems, your union is fighting in the courts, in the statehouses and in the court of public opinion to make sure educators are treated with respect and students are given a fair chance.

 

The AFT is deeply committed to fighting back against unfair, punitive measures that hurt teachers and students and fighting for resources that our educators need. The AFT thanks Sheri for her efforts, which will benefit teachers throughout the country. Sheri is proud to be a member of the union, which is fighting this battle. VAM—used for individual teacher evaluations—is a sham. We will continue to fight until it’s discredited everywhere.

 

In unity,

 
Randi Weingarten
and
Sheri Lederman

 

 

The Center for Education Policy released the results of a survey of nationally representative sample of teachers, which probed their feelings about their profession and the demands made on them today.

 

The survey sought to “learn their views on the teaching profession, state standards and assessments, testing, and teacher evaluations. The report, Listen to Us: Teacher Views and Voices, summarizes these survey findings, including responses indicating that public school teachers are concerned and frustrated with shifting policies, over emphasis on student testing, and their lack of voice in decision-making.”

 

Readers of this blog will not be surprised that teachers feel burdened by mandates from the district, the state, and federal officials. They feel excluded from decision-making. They feel too much time is spent on testing. They don’t mind testing, but they think there are too many of them. They wish they had smaller classes. They teach because they like to help children learn.

 

But it must seem that an awful lot of politicians, bureaucrats, and consultants get in their way as they try to do their job. Is this a statement of the obvious?

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

 

See more at: http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=1456#sthash.sJESMtqQ.dpuf

This week was for some years Teacher Appreciation Week. Now, thanks to President Obama, it is also Charter Appreciation Week. I earlier reported that the latter replaced the former. I was wrong.

 

Peter Greene analyzes the two proclamations and notices a different tone in each.

 
“There’s something to be learned about this administration’s feelings about both charters and teachers from looking at these two proclamations, so let’s do that. Spoiler alert: there will be no pleasant surprises forthcoming.
“Here’s the first line from one of the proclamations. See if you can guess which one:

 

“Our Nation has always been guided by the belief that all young people should be free to dream as big and boldly as they want, and that with hard work and determination, they can turn their dreams into realities.

 

“That would be the opening sentence from the proclamation in praise of charter schools.

 

“The proclamation is laudatory, leaving one with the impression that charter schools are the whole education show. Schools are awesome, and “we celebrate the role of high-quality charter schools” in achieving this awesomeness. Also, “we honor the dedicated professionals across America who make this calling their life’s work by serving in charter schools.”

 

“Charter schools “play an important role in our country’s education system” and work in our underserved communities where they can “ignite imagination and nourish the minds of America’s young people” while finding new ways to do the education thing. Obama reinforces the notion that charters experiment and find new ways to help underperforming schools (though we must close them when they don’t do well). This language continues. “Forefront of innovation.”

 

“Also, “different ways of engaging students” including personalized instruction, technology and rigorous/college-level coursework. This administration has supported charters big-time because Obama has remained committed to “ensuring all of our Nation’s students have the tools and skills they need to get ahead.” All of which leads me to wonder A) what he thinks public schools are doing and B) if he knows that charters don’t serve all students and actually sap the resources for many other students still in public schools.”

 

Where did he get the idea that charter teachers dedicate their lives to this work? TFA?

 

What do you think he said about public school teachers?

 

John Richard Schrock is a professor at Emporia State University in Kansas, where he teaches science and prepares science teachers.

 
———————————————————————————————————————————————-
Virtual Unreality

 
Headlines have declared that this spring has seen the breakthrough in “virtual reality” (VR) media. Facebook released the Oculus Rift headset on March 28. Right behind it was the HTC Vive and the SONY PlayStation VR.
The hype behind VR is that it creates an “immersive environment” similar to the real world. First pitched in the 1990s—VR was poor quality and an immediate failure. But this new technology has Goldman Sachs predicting the VR industry will become bigger than television in the next ten years.

 
The new VR systems provide goggles with high definition resolution and a flicker speed far beyond what the human eye can detect. This is combined with movement sensors that detect head tilt and give the wearer the impression that they are in a real visual environment. Stereo headphones provide directional sound. A person wearing this head mounted display can “look around” and believe that they are in an artificial world.

 
More advanced “haptic” systems add the senses of smell and touch, the later through wired gloves or other devices. The goal is to convince the user of their “telexistence” or “telepresence.” So far, all of these expensive headsets also require expensive and specialized personal computers.

 
The industry hype that these “virtual worlds” possess all of the qualities of real world interactions has not been lost on the educational futurists who can hardly wait to have the first school on their block to brag about having this advanced technology.
Unfortunately, this simulation technology is worse than useless. Besides being orders of magnitude more expensive than genuine learning experiences, it lacks three important properties that real experiences have: true interaction, test-truthfulness, and real consequences. We know this because computer simulations invaded our classrooms as soon as personal computers became commonplace.

 
They all claim to be “interactive.” This was printed on the label of every simulation from 8-inch floppy discs to current thumb drives and cloud-based media. But the “interaction” of typing a keyboard or clicking a mouse to crossbreed fruit flies is nothing like actually handling the real flies (and having most of them drown in banana culture). And while we may lift our kids into the “seat” of a video-arcade “racing car,” we certainly know not to accept this performance as readiness to drive a real car.

 
Only the real world provides “test truthfulness.” Cross a hundred generations of fruit flies with dominant and recessive traits in simulation and the 3-to-1 ratio comes out textbook perfect. Not so in the real world. The value of real labs and other real experiences is that there is variation from the norm. Sure you can “program in” the variation; but the students’ know that variation was scripted as well. The real world is not scripted.

 
“Real consequences” are vital to learning in the real world. Even the student who flunks out of high school is careful to drive on the right side of the road. Why? To not stay in the lane is to face the real consequences of crashing. Get “killed” in a videogame or VR simulation and you just quit and walk away.

 
We can blindfold students for a day and tell them that this is what it is like to be blind. But it is not! At the end of the day the student can remove the blindfold. The blind person cannot.
Woody Allen once said: “I hate reality, but it’s still the best place to get a good steak.”

 
Reality is also be best place to get a good education.

Does our society value teachers? By objective evidence, you may say no. After all, teachers are not paid as well as lawyers or doctors. And we can’t ignore the fact that quite a few legislatures have passed laws to remove teachers’ due process rights or to tie teacher pay to student test scores. Indeed, the Obama administration has forced this noxious idea on most states as a condition of getting Race to the Top funding.

 

Consequently, many teachers suffered the humiliation of getting a rating based on student scores,then seeing their rating posted in public. That happened in Los Angeles, and one teacher–Rigoberto Ruelas–committed suicide. That happened in Néw York City, at the in sustenance of media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and the teacher with the city’s worst rating was featured on the front page of Mr. Murdoch’s tabloid. But as it turned out, the “worst teacher” was a very fine teacher of immigrant students who cycled in and out of her class all year. And, sadly, Arne Duncan praised the act of creating and published these lists of teacher ratings.

 

We can be grateful that Race to the Top is defunct, but its worst effects linger on. The charter industry expanded at the behest of RTTT, leaving behind a voracious sector that absorbs limited education dollars but evades accountability or transparency.

 

Evaluation by test scores has been debunked time and again, yet it continues because the state laws are still on the books. And many states continue to pursue ways of limiting teacher pay, increasing class size, or otherwise manipulating the conditions of teaching without improving them.

 

What does it mean to appreciate teachers? It means respecting their professionalism. It means turning to teachers as experts on their work, not to people who study teaching or think about teaching.

 

John Ewing, who heads Math for America, makes this point in this good article. He writes about the many times he participates in conferences about how to improve teaching, but no teachers are I cited to participate. He counts the number of times major journalists write articles about teaching and schools but never interview a teacher. How many teachers were included on the panel that wrote the Common Core? The typical news story about education includes quotes from the same think tank experts, even though few have ever taught.

 

Ewing writes:

 

“When it comes to talking or writing about education, we do not view teachers as experts. We do not trust them as professionals. Can you imagine an engineering conference without engineers as speakers? Can you imagine a science article with no input from scientists? Or a report on some breakthrough in medicine without a quote from a doctor? We treat the profession of teaching differently from all others.

 

“The teaching profession needs two things in order to thrive—respect and trust. The two go together. You can say nice words and be grateful to teachers, but if you do not trust them as professionals, you are not showing them respect. Trust means giving teachers (appropriate) autonomy in their classrooms, but it also means giving them influence over policy—real influence, not a few token teachers on some committee—and it means giving them control over their own professional growth. We need to stop fixing teachers and create environments in which teachers themselves fix their own profession. We need to trust them to do so.”

 

Lynn Stoddard, a retired educator, writes about the damage done by trying to standardize what is inherently non-standard: a human being.

 

His solution: Let teachers teach. Encourage them to recognize and magnify individual differences. Standardization doesn’t work for unique human beings, which each of us is.

 

He writes:

 

Perhaps the largest damage to our culture is the countless people who have died with their music still in them because they attended schools devoted to standardizing students. An eighth-grade boy in Farmington composed music for full orchestra, with 29 instruments — brass, woodwinds, percussion and strings — a piece that was so good it was chosen to be played at the State Music Educators Conference. Sadly, he did not go on to become another phenomenal composer like Mozart or Andrew Lloyd Webber, because he had to spend so much time with higher math and other required subjects.

 

What would American culture be like if teachers had been respected and trusted enough to determine the learning needs of each student and help him or her develop unique talents and use them to benefit society? What would have happened if, instead of trying to make students fit a standardized curriculum, teachers had helped students magnify their positive differences?

 

We can get some answers from the only teachers who are now allowed to personalize education: athletics coaches and arts teachers. These teachers see benefit in letting students try out for positions on the athletic team or for a part in the school musical. Coaches understand why sprinters should not be required to throw the shot put, or weightlifters to high jump. Choir teachers understand why high tenors cannot sing the bass part.

 

Let teachers teach, and let every child attain his or her full potential.

 

 

 

The Upper Darby, Pennsylvania, school board gave a $30,000 contract to a consulting firm for advice. The advice was to turn a certain number of elementary school teachers into “at-large” teachers in their school. This would make them into floaters, permanent subs.

 

Guess what? Teachers are furious. They will lose their classrooms.

 

A special meeting of the Upper Darby School Board Thursday night to discuss the educational specifications committee turned into a standing room only plea to keep teachers in their classrooms.

 

Purple T-shirts with “Let us Teach” filled the board room at the high school as teachers let the board know that they want to teach in their own classrooms and not be designated floaters throughout the district under proposed new elementary school schedules.

 

These schedules, made up by the consulting firm District Management Council for $30,000, are slated to be presented to the public on Monday night, but teachers who have seen or heard about the schedules are against an alleged idea of having five teachers being “at-large” in schools.

 

“I cannot see myself going back to being a teacher-at-large,” said Primos Elementary teacher Kristina McBrearty, “which, to me, is a glorified building sub. I want a classroom, that’s where I want to be, that’s where I’m going to make the difference.”

 

Somebody better start coming up with ideas about how to help teachers, how to retain teachers, how to make teachers feel appreciated.

 

How can we have better education if we drive away our teachers?

Whitney Tilson received many comments on our dialogue. Many were positive. Others were not.

 

Here is a comment he received from a teacher who is disgusted with the attacks on the profession. She plans to leave. I showed her comment to a veteran teacher in NYC, who found them offensive to teachers like him who make a career of teaching. What he took from her comment was, “what does that make me? Lazy? Incompetent? Uncreative?”

 

I hope Whitney and his readers and fellow reformers learn from her comment. She is their ideal teacher, an Ivy League graduate, the “best and the brightest.” When even their favorites say “Enough is enough,” they should listen. The reform attacks on teachers–the test-based evaluations, the paperwork, the BS rubrics, the data-driven analytics, the litigious efforts to eliminate all job protections– are crippling teacher recruitment and retention.

 

 

She wrote to Tilson’s blog:

 
“So glad that you opened dialogue with her and acknowledged the nuances of the union challenge.

“You powerful rich people who have so much say over our daily lives scare the crap out of us teachers who have so little say over our own lives. =)

“It’s nice to hear you sound a bit more nuanced and respectful in your language.

“As a teacher who will probably quit soon, I just would add that the harder we make teaching and the more disrespectful we are to teachers, the more we lower the bar for what standard we hold teachers to. If ed reformers’ language about teachers and ideas about teachers continue to make more people like me quit (I’m a Yale grad, and I know of at least 6 Stanford grads and one other Yale grad who are all leaving the classroom at the end of this year), the only people who stay will be people who have little ambition, don’t really care, aren’t very creative, and don’t mind the constant indignities or the pervasive denial throughout the whole system. No offense, but you’re not going to make awesome teachers out of them. You need us.

“And this is an indictment of the WHOLE system, not public, not charter. Because let’s be honest: the public v. charter debate is just a giant distraction from the fact that we have a segregated school system and no one is doing anything about it. The only reason we have charter schools is because white people are so relieved they don’t have to integrate their kids with the poor kids of color… what white person wouldn’t support charter? It’s separate but equal! (Please forgive the sarcasm. But no one seems to be talking about the real issue any more).

Sincerely,

 

XXXXXXXXX

“A disillusioned, intelligent, innovative, caring, competent, and excellent urban public school teacher who is not going to last much longer”

 

 

Ferial Pearson is a college instructor in Omaha and a former teacher in the public schools who has embarked on a mission of kindness. In this newspaper article, she wrote a letter to the teachers of Omaha to thank them for their hard work and their many successes. The letter got a lot of buzz in Nebraska and on social media because some politicians have been bad-mouthing the public schools, as part of their cpaign for vouchers.

Change the name of the city and state and the letter would sound right in every district.

***

Dear Omaha Public School teachers,

I see you. I see your work. I know you are doing innovative, creative, pedagogically sound things. I know how much you care about your students and how hard you love them. I know this because I’ve been in dozens and dozens of your schools in the past three years and have been blown away by your talents, skills and resilience. I know because I taught at Omaha South High School for 10 years and Ralston High for two, and I lived it. I know because I have now taught more than a hundred of you in my classes at the College of Education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha over the past six years.

We have laughed and cried together about our work and our students. You have been brave and vulnerable in sharing your struggles and insecurities, and we have grown, so much, together. I know because I go to IncluCity Camp with your students and hear about how much they are learning and how much they look up to you. Are there some bad eggs? Absolutely. But the good ones outshine the bad. By far.

On Monday, I read about an Omaha South High student from Mexico who was accepted to Harvard. Two years ago, while observing a practicum student at Omaha North High, I met an African American student who was trying to decide between two Ivy League schools that he had been accepted to, one of which his brother was already attending. I have seen my own students go to Yale, the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Creighton, University of Nebraska at Omaha, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, and many, many other schools.

Some have doctorates, others are Licensed Mental Health Care Professionals, teachers with graduate degrees, social workers, social justice advocates, rock star chefs, phenomenal mechanics, welders, professional artists, utility line workers, day care providers, professors, lawyers, medical doctors, writers, business owners, professional musicians, fashion designers, funeral directors, athletes, mentors, and the list goes on. I could tag them all here, but you’d be reading until next year.

These are students of different races, abilities, backgrounds, sexual orientations, genders, and nationalities. Last week, I met a young man who now works Centris Credit Union, thanks to the innovative work of staff at Omaha South High who collaborated with Wells Fargo to open a branch in the school so that kids could do actual banking and that provided him with a direct line to his career today. I remember the Packasso Project, the brainchild of Fairouz Bishara and the Art Department at Omaha South High School getting talented artists off the streets and giving them legitimate canvasses and artist mentors from across the community. There are stories like this in almost every school in this city.

So, dear OPS teachers, when the education reformers tell you that you are failing at your job based on test scores, or that your schools are “bad” or “failing” please tell them the stories of your students. Never stop bragging about your students. Tell them that the ones don’t make it aren’t suffering from an achievement gap; they are suffering from an opportunity gap and that is something that the community needs to help us with.

We do what we can with what we’ve got, and when the soil is fertile and the sun shines and there is enough water, our seeds thrive and bloom into gorgeous blossoms. Sometimes, we plant a seed in a child, but that child is in dry and barren soil, is traumatized, and doesn’t know when it will rain next, and so we nurture them as best we can. They may get that sunshine and rain and food years after we let them go and we’ll never see the fruits of our labor, but they come back, sometimes, and they show us their flowers. Some never do, and that’s sad, and we do our best anyway.

Tell the education reformers that rather than taking our resources away to try and do better than us in a different place with our kids, whom we love, that there are already great things happening here, and we could use those resources to become even better. We are not perfect, but we are doing great things and willing to improve. Tell them to work with us to care about the whole child. To help us get those children their sunshine and soil and food and water. We’ll take care of their brains and hearts if the community will help us take care of their bodies as well.

Thank you for doing what you do and being who you are. You are my heroes.

(Note: This goes for ALL my public school teacher friends, not just in Omaha, and to the paraprofessionals and custodians and administrators and media specialists and cafeteria workers and office assistants and..and…)

Sincerely,

Ferial Pearson

Julian Vasquez Heilig recorded this podcast at the Network for Public Education in Raleigh. I was part of the discussion. This podcast was blocked twice on iTunes. I hope it is working now. Let me know if you can’t open it.