Archives for category: Tennessee

A few days ago, I wrote a post about the determination of North Carolina’s Tea-Party dominated legislature to allow charters, including for-profit ones, to take over low-scoring schools, a proposal modeled on Tennessee’s Achievement School District. My post was a refutation of an editorial in the Charlotte Observer, which endorsed the idea of using the ASD as a model for North Carolina. My post was titled “North Carolina: Yes, Let’s Copy a Failed Experiment.” Pamela Grundy, a public school champion in North Carolina, also complained to the newspaper and proposed that NC should try reducing class sizes.

 

The author of the editorial, Peter St. Onge, is associate editor of the editorial pages. He didn’t like my post at all. He says that the Tennessee ASD has not failed; it hasn’t had enough time. This follows on a Vanderbilt report about the ASD that concluded the program had “little or no effect” on student achievement. (Here is the link to the report.) NPR summarized the finding of the Vanderbilt study thus:

 

While there were some changes year-to-year — up and down — there was no statistical improvement on the whole, certainly not enough to catapult these low-performing schools into some of the state’s best, which was the lofty goal.

 

St. Onge says the Vanderbilt study didn’t say the experiment failed, it just hasn’t succeeded yet. That is true. The Vanderbilt study did not propose closing down the ASD; it said reform takes years. But please recall that Chris Barbic, who led the ASD, said he could turn around the lowest-performing schools in five years and make them among the state’s highest-performing schools. Clearly that will not happen. Of course, a child attends an elementary school for only four-six years, so they can’t wait ten years. So if we take the original promise of the ASD, it will fail to reach its goal of turning low-performing schools into high-performing schools in five years.

 

One of the lead researchers in the Vanderbilt study, Professor Gary Henry, was in North Carolina this week, where he spoke to a public policy forum. The legislature happened to be holding hearings on the NC version of ASD, but Professor Henry was not invited to testify. Why didn’t the legislature want to hear from him? He told the forum that the model sponsored by the public schools, called the iZone, had significant improvements, but the ASD did not. He said the study was based on only three years of data, so cautioned not to jump to conclusions.

 

So, yes, Peter St. Onge is right. It is too soon to declare the ASD a failure. But it is certainly not a success. Usually, when you look to copy a model tried elsewhere, you copy a successful model. Why should the state of North Carolina copy a model that has thus far shown little to no significant effects and has not shown success? A track record like that of the ASD does not lend itself to being called “a model.” A model for what? For throwing millions into an experiment that alienates parents and communities and after three years has little to no effect on student achievement?

 

When Chris Barbic resigned as leader of the ASD, following a heart attack, he made a statement boasting about gains that included this interesting observation:

 

Let’s just be real: achieving results in neighborhood schools is harder than in a choice environment. I have seen this firsthand at YES Prep and now as the superintendent of the ASD. As a charter school founder, I did my fair share of chest pounding over great results. I’ve learned that getting these same results in a zoned neighborhood school environment is much harder.

 

This is a sage observation. A brand new charter school can choose its students. Even with a lottery, the families are applying and informed and motivated. That is very different from taking over a neighborhood school, where parents resent that their school was “taken over” by outsiders without their consent. Charter schools have been notoriously unsuccessful at taking over neighborhood schools. KIPP, for example, took over Cole Middle School in Denver, and abandoned it a few years later. KIPP claimed it couldn’t find “the right leader,” but the reality is what Barbic said. It is much harder to take over an existing school than to start a new charter.

 

The Charlotte Observer, or more accurately, Mr. St. Onge, scorns those he calls “public education advocates” as if all those in favor of the model in which the public is responsible for the education of all children are self-interested and impervious to evidence. I think it is fair to say that in the North Carolina climate, those who promote charters are self-interested and impervious to evidence. The charter operators are in many cases operating for-profit, which is certainly not the motive of public education advocates. Those who claim that the ASD is a worthy model for North Carolina, despite its lack of success, are impervious to evidence.

 

If you can’t call the ASD a failure, you surely can’t call it a success. As the subtitle of the editorial states, “Judging Should Be Based on What Works.” We agree. Children should not be subjected to experiments that do not have a track record of success. Do what works, based on evidence and experience. Reduce class sizes where there is concentrated poverty and segregation; recognize that poverty and segregation are root causes of poor school performance and act to address root causes; make sure there are school nurses and social workers; make sure there is a library; hire experienced teachers, with school aides. Add classes in the arts. Give poor children what all parents want for their children. If you want to see the research base, read my book “Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools.” Or closer to home, call Helen F. Ladd at Duke University and get her advice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NC Policy Watch reports that legislation is advancing that would permit for-profit charter operators to take over the state’s lowest-performing schools, the great majority of them in low-income minority communities. The models for the takeover is the Tennessee Achievement School District, the Michigan Educational Achievement Authority, and the elimination of public schools in New Orleans. However, sponsors of the legislation say that the North Carolina would be the same only different. It would be done the North Carolina way.

 

N.C. Rep. Rob Bryan, the Republican from Mecklenburg County who chairs the committee and the leading proponent for achievement school districts in the legislature, said that the districts—pioneered, to mixed results in states like Louisiana, Michigan and Tennessee—could be phased into North Carolina as soon as the 2017-2018 academic year.

 

“We are neither Tennessee, nor are we New Orleans,” said Bryan. “But what I’m looking to do here is do what’s right for North Carolina.”

 

Bryan authored a much-discussed draft of legislation last year that would have funneled five of the state’s lowest-performing elementary schools into the state-controlled achievement districts as a pilot program, although the notion did not gain any significant traction during the General Assembly’s long budget debates last summer.

 

The draft Bryan unveiled Wednesday had few differences from last year’s prospective bill, potentially ceding the power to hire and fire teachers and administrators to private, for-profit charter leaders. Pilot schools would be placed into a special state-run district, with a superintendent chosen by the State Board of Education who would have the power to negotiate operation contracts with private companies, effectively seizing control from local school boards.

 

The charter operators would be expected to help turn around academic performance in the schools.

 

As N.C. Policy Watch reported last year, lobbying for the movement was financed by Oregon millionaire and conservative private school backer John Bryan (no relation to Rep. Rob Bryan).

 

One of the researchers at Vanderbilt who studied the Tennessee ASD model and found it ineffective was in town to speak to a public education group about his study, but the legislative committee did not invite him to address them about what his group learned.

 

The state superintendent said that the public schools should lead any turnaround effort; the Tennessee study from Vanderbilt showed that the iZone schools, created and led by the public schools, outperformed the ASD charter schools:

 

“I believe that the taxpayers of North Carolina would get a better return on their investments by going with a model that has proven positive results,” North Carolina Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson told N.C. Policy Watch Tuesday.

 

To Atkinson, that means pursuing public school-led initiatives, offering low-performing schools greater support, access to preschool programs and more flexible calendar years.

 

As Atkinson points out, students in low-performing schools can lose two to three months of reading development during traditional schools’ summer break.

 

“We have to address these root causes or we’ll continue to have these conversations 10 years from now,” said Atkinson.

 

And then there was a startling statement, startling because it was plain common sense, which has been in rare supply since 2010 in North Carolina:

 

Meanwhile, Rep. Ed Hanes Jr., a Democrat from Forsyth County, blasted state officials during Wednesday’s committee meeting for failing to do enough to address the societal and economic causes of low-performing schools.

 

As Barbour pointed out Wednesday, low-performing schools in the state are disproportionately serving low-income and minority children.

 

“It sounds like a lot of talk,” said Hanes. “It sounds like we don’t really dig into what the real issues are. … And it sounds to me like we really don’t care a whole lot about poor people.”

Despite the documented failure of the Tennessee Achievement District, the Charlotte Observer thinks it is worth a try to copy the same model in North Carolina. In Tennessee, the ASD was created to take over neighborhood public schools that rated in the lowest 5% in the state based on test scores and give them to charter operators. Within five years, starting in 2012, those charter schools would rank in the top 25% in the state. But the ASD schools are not on track to show any improvement.

 

Gary Rubinstein demonstrated that four of the original six schools in the ASD remained in the bottom 5%, while the other two are in the bottom 6%.

 

A recent Vanderbilt study concluded that the ASD schools were ineffective, although they held out hope that they might get better over time.

 

Ron Zimmer of Vanderbilt said the study showed that the district’s own innovative public schools outperformed the charters:

 

Zimmer’s team, which was asked by the state to keep tabs on progress from the outset, zoomed in on test data more closely than the typical measures of “below basic” and “proficient.” While there were some changes year-to-year — up and down — there was no statistical improvement on the whole, certainly not enough to catapult these low-performing schools into some of the state’s best, which was the lofty goal.

 

“It may be a little disappointing to those who were advocating for the Achievement School District that we haven’t seen better results at this point,” Zimmer says.

 

The Vanderbilt researchers found more encouraging results with the turnaround efforts known as iZones led by local districts in Memphis and Nashville.

 

Chalkbeat Tennessee stressed that if the state wants real improvement, it should look to the iZone model run by the Shelby County public schools.

 

Days before the Tennessee Achievement School District is to announce whether it will take over five more Memphis schools next year, Vanderbilt has released a study suggesting the city’s low-performing schools would be better off in Shelby County Schools’ Innovation Zone.
The study, released Tuesday, shows that iZone schools have sizeable positive effects on student test scores, while the ASD’s effects are marginal. That means that students at ASD schools are performing mostly at the same low levels they likely would have had their school not been taken over by the state-run school turnaround district.

 

A little over a year ago, two Metro Nashville school board members complained that the ASD (which now manages 27 charter schools) wanted to take over one of Nashville’s high-performing public schools as a way of boosting ASD’s lackluster performance. Parents were outraged, as they were in many of the other takeover schools.

 

While the charter movement is allegedly predicated on parental “choice,” that choice seems to vanish when appointed ASD officials decide to impose a charter school on a community. The ASD is pushing forward despite protests by parents, teachers, community members, a variety of elected officials from the community (including current and former school board members), and even the MNPS Director of Schools.

 

Why, under these circumstances, would the ASD insist upon a hostile takeover of Neely’s Bend when other local schools clearly require more attention? The answer is simple: The ASD is trying to save itself. It has cherry-picked a school to boost its own dismal performance. This is a prime example of a government bureaucracy attempting to justify its own existence.

 

Although originally conceived as something very different, the ASD has become a way for state officials to hand over neighborhood schools to charter operators. This has not proven to be an effective solution. Despite higher per pupil expenditures (the exact amount has not been revealed), the ASD is underperforming. In Memphis, where nearly all ASD schools are located, district-operated schools outpace ASD schools, and, in fact, the ASD overall showed negative growth in every single subject area in 2014.

 

The ASD did take over Neely’s Bend, and just last month the Black Caucus in the Legislature called for a halt to ASD expansion because of community opposition and no results.

 

Why should North Carolina adopt a model that has shown no results? What is it about failure that the Charlotte Observer editorial board likes? Why not adopt proven practices that strengthen public schools–like reducing class size, adding a health clinic– instead of handing them over to privately operated charters?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One of the celebrated feats of the corporate reform movement is Tennessee’s Achievement School District. It was launched by then-State Commissioner Kevin Huffman as the way to increase the performance of the state’s lowest performing schools. Huffman recruited Chris Barbic, founder of the Yes Prep charter chain to run ASD. Barbic said that ASD would take the 5% of the state’s lowest performing schools, and in five years, these schools would be in the state’s top 25%.

 

It didn’t happen. Barbic resigned. Gary Rubinstein reviewed state data and learned that the six original schools in the ASD made no improvement. A Vanderbilt study said the same.

 

Now state legislators are introducing legislation  to close the ASD.

 

A number of other states, such as Georgia, are opening their own ASD. What sensible person would use failure as a model?

 

ASD is another setback for corporate reform. None of the reform ideas has succeeded. Their only “achievement ” is to introduce disruption. Nothing good comes of it.

The Shelby County school board encompasses the schools of Memphis and the schools of Shelby County. A number of its schools were plunked into the Achievement School District, where they were given to a charter operator. Despite grandiose promises of lifting the lowest performing schools into the top 25%, it hasn’t happened. Achievement in the ASD has stalled.

 

The ASD is one of the Crown Jewels of the reform movement, based on its belief that charter schools are a magical solution that turns low-scoring students into scholars.

 

The school board of Shelby County has called for a moratorium on any expansion of the ASD.

 

 

As readers of this blog know, I am not in the Kevin Huffman fan club. Unlike him, I don’t believe in free market solutions to education, nor do I care for the teacher evaluations that have been pioneered and continued in Tennessee over the past 20 years (without, be it noted, vaulting Tennessee to the top of the nation).

 

But I am a fan of this terrific article by Kevin Huffman. Huffman tells the story, in graphic detail, about how he tried to close down the lowest performing school in the state and got outsmarted year after year by the lobbyists for the national corporation that owns the Tennessee Virtual Academy: K12, Inc. That corporation, launched by Michael and Lowell Milken, is the biggest purveyor of online education; it operates for profit. It is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The last time I checked, the CEO was paid $5 million a year. K12 has been criticized repeatedly in studies of its performance but it shrugs off evaluations and keeps going. Recently, CREDO released a study that concluded that students in online charter schools lost ground: 72 days in reading, and 180 days in math. That is, a student who studied math for a year lost the equivalent of a full year of instruction, i.e., learned nothing.

 

Huffman notes that the school ranked dead last in the state in its first year. It showed no gains or tiny gains in every succeeding year. He tried to close it but each time was outfoxed by the lobbyists. He showed them the data, they said it wasn’t true. He offered to give them suggestions about how to improve their performance, but K12 sent lobbyists to meet with him, not educators.

 

Despite his attempts to close the school, it was still in operation when he left office. He reached the conclusion that for-profits are a bad fit in the school marketplace; we agree. If the charter industry is ever to clean up its house, it must distance itself from the for-profit corporations that give charters a bad name.

 

Huffman concludes:

 

This past summer, the state released the school results from the 2014-15 school year. The Tennessee Virtual Academy earned a Level 1 in growth for the fourth year in a row. It clocked in at #1312 out of 1368 elementary and middle schools in the state. It is no longer the most improved lousy school in Tennessee. It is just plain lousy. It is, over a four-year time, arguably the worst school in Tennessee.
K12 Inc. lives on in Tennessee. The Tennessee Virtual Academy opened its online doors again in August. State officials tell me that they aren’t thinking about other legal steps. After all, if and when the school fails again this year, they will close it down.
I will believe it when I see it.

 

The K12 saga raises a lot of difficult questions for me. Is it possible for a for-profit company to run schools? Our very best charters all over the country are non-profits, and I see little evidence of for-profits succeeding in the school management business. I may be platform-agnostic, but the data is telling a compelling story on this one.
How do we encourage innovation while still holding the bar on quality? The virtual school concept almost certainly has a place in the future of American education. But how long should an “innovative” school be allowed to fail?
What is the responsibility of the state as a regulatory enterprise, even in a choice environment? None of the parents signing up for TNVA were forced into the school — it is a school of choice.
And yet, the “marketplace” fails when we are not able to ensure that parents know that the school they are choosing has a running track record of failure. Clearly, there is a critical regulatory role, and we cannot simply assume that an unfettered choice environment will automatically lead to good outcomes.
In theory, K12, Inc’s stock should be hammered by its terrible performance in Tennessee, but it’s actually up in 2015. And why wouldn’t it be? The corporate shareholders aren’t looking for student results — they are looking for K12 to expand and grow and add more students.
Nobody asks me for stock advice, but I say: Buy! Buy K12 Inc.! It is the rarest of breeds — a company utterly impervious to failure. It fails again and again, and yet it lives and breathes!
No doubt, I will have ample opportunity to talk about this with their lobbyists at my next education conference.

 

 

Gary Rubinstein has been watching the Achievement School District in Tennessee since it started with lofty promises. Its leader Chris Barbic gathered the lowest scoring schools in the state and pledged that he would raise them from the bottom 5% to the top 25% within five years.

 

As Gary earlier documented, the first cohort of six schools were still very low performing after four years. Four were still in the bottom 5%, and two had advanced to the bottom 6%. Barbic resigned.

 

His replacement, Malika Anderson, arrived and began by boasting about the success of the ASD.

 

“In her letter introducing herself, Anderson shows that she has been briefed about how to spin their data. She writes:

 

“After only three years, we’re excited to say that half of all Priority Schools in the state are now receiving some form of significant intervention. The bar for the bottom 5% has increased nearly 10 points—over a 50% increase—and students in Priority Schools are growing 4 times faster than their statewide peers.”

 

Gary demonstrates the value of mathematics in analyzing and debunking spin:

 

“Since they cannot deny that their schools are still in the bottom 5%, they say that ‘the bar for the bottom 5% has increased by nearly 10 points — over a 50% increase.’ So what this means is that there is some metric, I think it is called the School Success Rate or SSR. It is calculated every year for every school, but only released every four years or so. So the bottom 5% school evidently used to score only 20 ‘points’ on this metric and now they’ve gone up by 10 ‘points’ to 30, which is a 50% increase. But apparently the other schools that were not in the bottom 5% have also increased by 10 points so that the bottom 5% schools have not overtaken anyone as they were supposed to. Also there’s this stat that students in priority schools are ‘growing 4 times faster than their statewide peers.’ Basically this means that there is some metric on which the statewide peers got a very low growth number, something very close to zero. And when you multiply something very close to zero by four you still get something very close to zero. It’s like if I go on a diet and lose one pound, I lost four times as much as a person who lost just a quarter of a pound. It is meaningless to talk about comparing growth rates this way when both numbers are so low.”

The Momma Bears of Tennessee see a disaster coming. It is called TNReady, the new online test that is confusing, requires keyboard skills that many children lack, and is certain to label their children as failing.

 

Momma Bears are a group of anonymous parents who are fierce protectors of their children, just like bears.

 

What can they do?

 

They can protest and demonstrate in their legislators’ offices.

 

They can insist that the legislators take the tests and publish their scores.

 

They can build and organize a massive opt out movement, as New York parents did. No matter how much school officials warn of punishments to come, opt out. The more students opt out, the more school officials will cringe and back away. The punishments will never materialize unless only a handful opt out. Get 20% to opt out, as in New York, and the Mamma Bears and their cubs win.

 

OPT OUT! It is  your most powerful tool. You have the right and the power to defend your children. Use it!

 

The Momma Bears took sample questions from the test and concluded that they were NOT ready for use. The tests are a mess.

 

Some of our Momma Bears bloggers spent a precious Saturday taking the sample TNREADY tests and trying to get answers. Here is what we observed on the Sample TNREADY computerized tests:
Difficult to read passages: A tiny 4-inch scroll window to read long passages of text. This requires good mouse skills and eye tracking. (see pic below) Students with knowledge of how to expand the reading pane using the little tab in the middle, and collapse it again to get to the test questions, will fare better. This format isn’t like any of the internet sites or reading apps that most children are accustomed to; they will need to be taught how to navigate those tools for the sole purpose of taking this test.
Tiny window for the test questions: It was barely large enough to show all the answer options, and not large enough to show the “RESET/UNDO” buttons at the bottom of the question unless the student scrolled lower. See the photo below to understand how students are supposed to write an entire essay response in a text box that is about 4″ square. Typing, mind you, which elementary students aren’t fluent in doing; their hands aren’t even large enough to reach all the keys properly. So, they will be hunting and pecking letter keys to write an essay in a box the size of a cell phone screen.
Distracting numbers on ELA test: Bold paragraph numbers along the left margin of the text passages.
4 Quite distracting
5 if you’re trying
6 to read something.
7 Isn’t it?

Blogger T.C. Weber, aka “Dad Gone Wild,” writes about the many refugees and immigrants already in Tennessee, in his son’s school.

“It’s funny. As I read all the comments about Syrian refugee children and their potential arrival in the United States over the next couple months, I marvel at people’s opinions and their lack of knowledge. I have a unique perspective because my children both attend a school where there is a high population of English Learners and children in poverty. It also serves a large population of refugees. Refugees that arrive from all over the world, places with terrorist organization every bit as active as those in Syria, just without the headlines.

There are students at my kids’ school who, just last year, lived in fear of violence. Some of them might have been carrying rifles themselves; after all, they arrived from war-torn countries like Somalia and Nigeria were the recruitment of children as soldiers is an established practice. The possibility also exists that their parents may have been complicit in acts that you or I would find reprehensible. Last year, an older boy from Africa woke his mother by pouring hot coffee on her as she slept, but now he is a student here. Yet somehow we’ve welcomed them all and done our best to educate them with remarkably few incidents due to the dedicated professionals who interact with these children every day. In Nashville those professionals are among the best in the country and the districts plan among the boldest

.

“Yesterday, I read to my son’s kindergarten class. A class made up of children with names I couldn’t even begin to spell, yet their names roll off my son’s tongue like Mark or John would roll off mine. I look at these children, and I just marvel at the breadth of experience that my son is privy to because of them. We read I Am Helen Keller, and while I won’t say they paid rapt attention – they are kindergartners, after all – I think the message resonated. And when I read Stick and Stone, they laughed aloud. These are children like any other children and I got as much from them as they could ever get from me….

“Reading and math is important, but what good is that knowledge if a child has no ability to interact with their peers? The world is changing rapidly. Our children will not be able to function in silos. Their peers will be Egyptians, Chinese, Mexican, Thai, Somalian, French, and yes, Syrian. What that future actually looks like will depend a great deal upon the skills that our children develop now. Why would we not provide them a safe place to hone those skills in their formative years?…

“If you look at a list of so-called failing schools, you’ll notice something interesting. None of those schools are in wealthy neighborhoods, and the majority of them have either a high concentration of students from high poverty, high English learners, or both. This can be traced directly back to how we test those new to the country. In Tennessee, every student is tested and if the student has been in the country for a year, their test counts against the school and against the teacher. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that if you can barely speak the language and your parents are still trying to navigate the system, you are not going to produce spectacular test results.

What that translates to is a heavy focus on getting these children ready to test. In a wealthier school, you don’t have to be as relentless because children are having lessons reinforced at home. Whereas children who are English learners have parents who may be working two jobs and trying to acclimate on their own. Teachers are under a constant barrage in high EL schools to prepare children to test. There is no time to explore other interests, children may be exposed to the same subjects as children at wealthier schools but exploration seldom goes as deep. Wealthier schools also have the luxury of forming parent organizations that are capable of raising tens of thousands of dollars to offset the cost of required technology for these state tests. In a high EL/poverty school these organizations are virtually non-existent. It makes a difference.

There is also the fore mentioned challenge of language. Many of these children arrive at these schools not speaking a bit of English. Both of my children sit next to kids who don’t speak English at all. In my son’s class, one was distraught every morning and would cry for his mother. Peter would come comfort him and help him get his breakfast. The child has slowly become acclimated, and I can’t help but think my son played a part in it. Peter learned a lesson about what it means to be different and alone and how kindness can change the picture. His classmate learned that even if you find that you are alone and different, there are friends waiting to be made. I think this lesson is every bit as important as the grade level they are reading on….

“This year, I have been working on trying to get legislation passed that will allow for us to get a more accurate view of how our schools are performing. I am proposing that we don’t include the test scores for EL children until they are either English proficient or have been in the country for 5 years. This aligns with current research and only makes sense. Unless of course we are trying to use those scores to demonstrate failures instead of success.

I recently met with representatives from the Tennessee Department of Education on this matter and was very encouraged by their response. They recognize the need to differentiate and are open to finding methods to establish a policy that gives our EL students room to breathe, but still holds people accountable. Though as an aside here, the majority of teachers I know hold themselves to a greater level of accountability than the State could ever apply. That said, I’m encouraged by the DOE’s receptiveness. We are supposed to meet again after the first of the year, and I really appreciate their willingness to collaborate. It is evidence that Commissioner McQueen may be truly changing the culture at the Tennessee Department of Education….

“We need to continue to pursue strong English Learner policies and provide safe learning places for all children. We have teachers and administrators in place that know these students needs and the best ways and means to address those needs. The experiences and knowledge of these administrators and teachers needs to be utilized to drive policy that will better enable our schools to serve all children. I also encourage you to volunteer in a high needs schools, or in any school. It’s one social experience that will change your life.”

Have you noticed that national commissions and panels of “experts” often have no working teachers? Consequently, there is a lot of grumbling about the lack of “teacher voice” in decisions affecting the classroom. Now a group of teachers has decided to do something about it instead of just grumbling.

 

They created a new organization called CAPE (Coalition Advocating for Public Education). They attend board meetings and represent the teacher voice. Silent no more! What if teachers did this in every school district? This is an example of the power of organized voices. They don’t need to sign up every teacher in Nashville. They just need a few teachers who are dedicated, articulated, and fearless. And they need to follow through. They will make a difference.

 

Here is their inaugural press release from last week:
Nine teachers will be using their teacher voices to speak before the Metro Nashville Public Schools board of education on Tuesday, Nov. 10. Their topic will be the impact of high-stakes testing on their classrooms.
The teachers are a part of a campaign recently launched by the Middle Tennessee Coalition Advocating for Public Education (CAPE).
“When you tell teachers to ‘use their teacher voice’, it means to speak loudly and clearly, with the kind of authority that brings immediate order to a chaotic classroom,” said Amanda Kail, an English as a second language teacher at Margaret Allen Middle Prep and one of the founders of CAPE. “As teachers, we deal with the consequences of chaos brought into our profession by the so-called reform movement. Many people are talking about the best way to fix schools, but our policy-makers need to remember that we are the experts in education, and it is time to voice that expertise for our profession, our students, and our communities.”
The coalition was started by a handful of public school teachers and regional organizations who advocate for public schools, teachers, and students. CAPE is planning to recruit more teachers to speak at the school board meetings every month. They are also planning other events, such as a panel exploring the impact of “Zero Tolerance Discipline” on November 17.