Archives for category: Texas

At the request of the author, this post was briefly taken down in order to obscure the name of the school and of one student.

Do students have the right not to be subjected to emotional and psychological abuse? If pressure and chronic stress raise test scores, are they acceptable?

A group of mental health professionals prepared the following report. It is long. It is painful to read. This is what many schools are doing to our children. They must be stopped. This borders on criminality. Wake up. It is happening in many states and communities.

Dear Diane,

This is very Orwellian, but we wanted you to know about it.

I have attached a copy of report that I and several other university and mental health professionals in Texas schools have prepared.

We would like to ask your help in bringing awareness to this problem.

Thank you,

Joyce Feilke, Counselor Austin Independent School District

 

15 October 2013

To: Senator Jane Nelson & Committee for Health & Human Services

From: Joyce Murdock Feilke, Counselor, Austin ISD

Re: Report of Psychological Abuse in An AISD Elementary School

Dear Senator Nelson & HHS Committee,

I am writing to report my observations of psychological abuse in a public elementary school in AISD. I am providing this report to your committee
as my professional responsibility and according to the Texas Family Code. The conditions and methods described in this report can be confirmed by mental health experts as factors which are known to contribute to mental illness and criminality when used for conditioning and shaping behavior in young children.

During the past 30 years as a school counselor, I have observed a steady decline in the elementary school environment. This decline has resulted from complex reasons, but primarily from the obsession with statewide testing and corrosive school politics. Children in most elementary schools of Texas are being forced to function in an environment of chronic stress. Chronic stress is known to change brain chemistry in children and can lead to mental illness. Many of these young children with genetic predisposition to autism and other neurological, sensory, and developmental delays are experiencing chronic traumatic stress and will suffer even greater psychological harm. The demands for high test performance ratings are causing these children to be exploited and experimented on as if they were caged mice in a science lab. They are being psychologically abused on a grand scale that will impact the mental health of future generations.

It is common knowledge among educators in Texas that punitive methods of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), which are known to cause psychological harm, are being used in many elementary schools across Texas to enhance test performance; however, I will focus my report on the one school where I have observed this psychological abuse – XXXXX Elementary school in Austin ISD.

XXXXXX Elementary School is a Title I School, which means it has a low socio economic population of minority students. Last May it received an
Exemplary performance rating on statewide testing as a result of a system that was implemented into the school over a three year period. That system, called The New 3 R’s, is said to mean: The Right Resources, The Right People, and The Right Systems.

The New 3 R’s System was designed by a former structural engineer who became a principal in AISD. He designed his own program of behavioral
engineering and experimented on the general elementary school population of minority students ages 4 – 11. It was a successful and efficient method of getting high performance on tests, and led to his school receiving an Exemplary performance rating on statewide testing and national recognition for his school. This high performance recognition led to the Austin ISD allowing another Title I school principal to implement the same New 3 R’s System. After the 2nd school implemented the program over three years and received an Exemplary rating on statewide testing, AISD allowed the principal to train other principals in Title I schools. AISD allowed this program to be implemented into Title I schools without adequate review by mental health experts who would have recognized the potential for psychological harm to young children.

The New 3 R’s System of behavioral engineering that AISD is celebrating and perpetuating uses the same methods of punitive classic conditioning that are known to enslave children for child labor and sex trafficking, and for obedience training for dogs and zoo animals. It is the same dysfunctional system that kept the black culture of the South submissive to oppression for the hundred years after the Civil War. It is the same dysfunctional system that led to the Nazi Regime in Germany prior to WWII. The New 3 R’s System has the same sophisticated dysfunctional dynamics and abuse of power that can be observed in every poisonous pedagogy that has ever woven its way through history. It can be observed in families, cults, and countries. It is efficient, and it does result in high performance, but at the expense of great psychological damage to its victims.

The use of punitive ABA methods for conditioning young children in a controlled environment is a violation of human rights. It is unethical,
immoral, and illegal. It is psychological abuse which research has shown to have high potential for mental illness and personality disorders that will manifest in young adulthood, but are known to have roots in childhood.

Positive methods of ABA are designed for use in specific educational settings by specialists with demonstrated expertise in the field of psychology and behavioral sciences. They are required to have certification by a regulatory board: Behavior Analysis Certification Board (BACB). ABA uses therapeutic methods of re-learning and management for autistic, disabled, and/or violent children with special needs, addictions, OCD, and other disabilities which may respond to positive ABA treatment. When ABA methods of punitive classical conditioning are used in a controlled environment on healthy young children whose brains are still developing, it can lead to permanent psychological damage. Those same methods can be observed in the dysfunctional dynamics of families with battered-person syndrome, and are sometimes known as mind control, or Stockholm syndrome.

What the New 3 R’s System calls good discipline, is actually punitive ABA. The signs of psychological abuse that I have observed from chronic stress in this system usually begin by age 6 – 8. The most common symptoms begin with signs of desensitization, anxiety, loss of imagination,
loss of spontaneity, loss of humor, regression, irritability, self injury, inability to concentrate, and dissociation. However, the most destructive effects of this psychological abuse will not manifest until the children reach their teenage years, or early adulthood. At that time, their conditioned emotional repression from victimization of institutional bullying and positive/negative ambivalent role modeling can lead to mental illness and criminality.

Children’s symptoms from chronic traumatic stress are the same symptoms as High Functioning Autism. It is the observation of this counselor, as well as a growing number of other mental health experts, that there is a relationship between the elementary school environment of chronic traumatic stress and the increase in psychiatric disorders that are known to co-occur with High Functioning Autism, especially anxiety, depression, mood disorders, and thought disorders. It is our believe that the elementary school environment of chronic traumatic stress is the environmental factor causing soaring rates of High Functioning Autism in children who have a neurological genetic predisposition to autism.

The elementary school environment of chronic traumatic stress is believed to be a cause of the increase in personality disorders, especially Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial Disorders, which often lead to criminality and violence. These disorders do not manifest until adulthood, but are known to have roots in early childhood, with symptoms beginning around age 5. These symptoms can be observed in children who have no emotions of empathy or guilt, no emotions of pleasure, imaginative play, spontaneity, or humor.

In addition, symptoms of complex chronic traumatic stress can result from entrapment in dual environments of institutional bullying and ambivalent role modeling at school, and also at home. The psychological damage can increase with a lack of positive behavior modeling from teacher/caregivers and a lack of social and emotional attachments to teacher/caregivers and peers. This entrapment from psychological abuse in their total environment, and expectations which the child can never fully meet, are thought to lead to Dissociative Disorder as well as personality disorders.

Mental health professionals categorize these disorders into the following types:

Antisocial Personality Disorder
Avoidant Personality Disorder
Borderline Personality Disorder
Dependent Personality Disorder
Histrionic Personality Disorder
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
ObessiveCompulsive Personality Disorder
Paranoid Personality Disorder
Schizoid Personality Disorder
Schizotypal Personality Disorder

In 2008 the rate of personality disorders in the US was estimated at 1 in 10, and described as a major public health concern requiring attention by
researchers and clinicians. It is estimated to have steadily increased during the last five years and an elementary school environment of chronic traumatic stress is highly suspect as a leading cause.

The following descriptions are methods of the New 3 R’s System that I have observed in use at XXXXXXXX Elementary during the past two years. These methods are recognized as having potential for psychological harm.

ABSOLUTE CONTROL IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT

Absolute teacher/caregiver dominance in a controlled environment using punitive classical conditioning to shape behavior through fear, humiliation, and shame are the hallmarks of the New 3 R’s System. This poisonous pedagogy has been demonstrated throughout history to produce efficiency in human systems and gain desired performance, but at the same time repressing vitality, creativity, and emotions in children. This extreme form of discipline takes away any opportunity for self directed learning or original thinking. It represses children’s individuality and independence. It causes them to feel helpless and dependent. It breaks a child’s spirit and represses their imagination. It prevents the development of higher level thinking skills. Research has shown this pedagogy to cause children to become obedient to abusive authority, self destructive, codependent, addictive, mentally ill, and have deviant behaviors. It is institutional bullying.

PUBLIC HUMILIATION IN THE CHILD’S COMMUNITY

Any child with unfinished homework on any given day is singled out in the cafeteria during their lunch, in front of their school community, as punishment for not having completed their work. This method of shaming and humiliating a child during their lunch, in front of their peers, teachers, mentors, school staff, parents, and others, is a method known to cause psychological harm to children. It causes scapegoating and social isolation, and causes a child to become labeled as an “offender”. Many of the younger children cry when forced to sit in isolation by themselves in front of everyone in the cafeteria. Some of their peers show signs of sympathy, while others make sarcastic comments or looks, and others fear the same could happen to them. Most of the children see the injustice, and feel helpless and sad for the victims. This method of humiliating children causes strong emotions of shame, anger, and resentment for both the victim and the bystanders. By using this method, teachers are modeling negative behavior of “bullying”, while presenting it to the child as “good discipline”.

The cognitive and emotional conflict from such ambivalent positive/negative role modeling from teacher/caregivers causes confusion and distorted thinking in young children. They do not have adequate coping mechanisms to process the strong emotions this victimization produces. This ambivalent role modeling by teacher/caregivers is sometimes called “crazy making” by psychologists. The child who is victim of this institutional bullying will try to save face in front of his peers by denying his strong emotions of shame, anger, resentment, and self pity. Both the child who is victim and the children who are bystanders will learn that cruelty and disrespect from teacher/caregivers is acceptable and normal. It teaches children to deny and repress their own strong emotions, while keeping up the positive appearance and expectations of the teacher/caregiver. This “splitting” or distorted thinking (separating cognitive and affective) is considered a defense mechanism leading to personality disorders and regression. It distorts perception of reality. This method of the New 3 R’s is strongly associated with psychological abuse causing Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial Personality Disorders.

Since children perceive themselves as they think others see them, this method of public humiliation and disrespect teaches them to devalue and disrespect themselves and their needs. It teaches them to fear and disrespect their teacher/caregivers, while at the same time working hard to gain their acceptance through their own performance and appearance of compliance. Teacher/caregivers who abuse their power and manipulate children’s emotions with this ambivalent method are demonstrating a lack of empathy and disregard for the dignity of the child. Teacher/caregivers who use this method are recognized as insensitive and cruel. They are modeling unhealthy behavior, while presenting it as positive discipline. They are teaching children to trust and depend on authorities who mistreat and disrespect them.

Since young children still have a developing brain and a fragile sense of self and identity, experiencing the strong emotions of victimization of institutional bullying over time will cause desensitization to cruelty and mistreatment that was modeled by teacher/caregivers. Years of this chronic psychological abuse can cause a child to become emotionally desensitized to the point of having no empathy for others who are mistreated. The child will be conditioned to perpetuate the same cruelty to themselves or others without guilt, since they learned this behavior to be normal and acceptable.

The child who suffered the most punishment with this method last year due to chronic homework problems, was also a victim of impoverished family circumstances. Her name is XXXX, and she is the oldest of five siblings. Her mother is intellectually handicapped. As a forth grader, XXXXX had assumed the role of parenting her younger siblings. They were a homeless family and had slept on the floor of a friend’s two room shed for two years. XXXXX spent time in cafeteria isolation on a regular basis. She was the victim of a cruel method which only increased her social isolation and
distrust for her teacher/caregiver, and enhanced her feelings of helplessness and worthlessness.

As counselor, my efforts to point out the harm in using this method and the psychological damage it could cause were ignored. I protested to both the
principal and the Social Emotional Learning Chairperson, and to higher AISD administration. The principal defended this method by calling it good discipline and one of her methods of success in the 3 R’s System.
Later, I was told by an AISD legal administrator to either support all the principal’s policies or leave. This punitive method of ABA illustrates callous disregard and professional ignorance by any administrator who would approve it to be used with young children and call it good discipline.

FRIDAY ASSESSMENTS

The discipline called Friday Assessments is a marathon of weekly testing sessions lasting up to four hours every Friday. This non stop testing begins at the start of the school day on Friday and lasts until lunch and up to four hours. This weekly four hour test is said to be a need to check student progress; however, it has all the characteristics of a simulated STAAR test, which last four hours. The children work in isolation behind triboards as they do during the STAAR for security. This disguised Simulated STAAR is mentally and physically exhausting for young children. It causes them to become desensitized and lethargic. While the purpose is apparently to condition them with test stamina for STAAR, it is robbing them of imagination and original thinking. This Simulated STAAR is an example of exploitation of children for the unrealistic demands of an administrator who lacks empathy for children and who does not understand their developmental needs. If the Friday Assessments were actually for the purpose of determining children’s weekly progress, then the children could be tested on different days for shorter periods of time. Four consecutive hours of testing every Friday for young children is not developmentally age appropriate or healthy, nor does it illustrate good professional judgement from an administrator. It is mental and physical cruelty. For children, it is torture.

NEW 3 R’S DAILY TIMED MATH DRILLS

The New 3 R’s uses morning math timed drills to start each day. These daily drills generate anxiety and set the pace for capturing absolute control of the child’s thinking and attention for the remainder of the day’s drill.
Many children develop anxiety disorders from being hurried on work that can be frustrating when they are not developmentally ready for excessive timed tasks. The chronic frustration of excessive tasks with limited time at an early age can lead to anxiety and somatic disorders, performance anxiety, fear of making mistakes, perfectionism, and self defeating behaviors. Such rigid regimens cause children to become passive and pressured. They lose the capacity for spontaneous imaginative play and a pleasure in intellectual discovery. This method of beginning each day with a regimen of anxiety, then holding children’s attention captive with absolute teacher dominated forced rote learning of test material for the rest of the day, resembles brainwashing. It creates feelings of helplessness and entrapment. Children are conditioned to shut down their own original thoughts and ideas and become a receptor for the teacher’s programming.

PUBLIC DISPLAY OF CHILDREN’S DAILY BEHAVIOR REPORT

Each child’s daily behavior report from the teacher is posted on the board for peers and others in the school to see. This is a punitive method of ABA for motivating children with fear and intimidation. This causes a child shame, anger, and resentment, as well as fear of additional punishment from home. This method serves as a threat throughout the day, and causes chronic stress and loss of trust in the teacher/caregiver. This method singles out a child for scapegoating by peers, and it conflicts with a child’s need for healthy attachment to the teacher/caregiver. This method of the New 3 R’s is a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

EXCESSIVE REWARD & PUNISHMENT FOR PERFORMANCE

The 3 R’s method of emphasis on performance rewards for young children neglects their most primary social and emotional developmental needs. Emphasis on performance rewards creates competition too early and hampers development of authentic self and identity. Young children perceive themselves as they think others see them; therefore, when only performance is rewarded with neglect of ongoing emotional validation, they begin to think of themselves as a test score, since that is what matters most to their teacher/caregiver. They will become conditioned to perform for their teacher/caregiver, while denying their own emotions and needs. Young children are not developmentally ready to have their performance depend on rewards/punishment since they have not yet learned coping skills for disappointment. They learn from behavior modeled by teacher/caregivers. When a young child sees others rewarded for performance while they are not, they are left with the strong emotions of sadness, jealousy, anger, resentment, and failure, which they are unable to process. The method of constant rewards for test performance reinforces negative emotions of winner/loser and competition for children too young to process the emotions. It does not allow children to learn intrinsic motivation.

MESSAGES OF MISTRUST AND INCOMPETENCE

There is intimidation and fear from constant surveillance, requiring children to carry a behavior checklist with them for all movement outside their contained classroom, such as library or lunch when supervised by someone other than their primary teacher/caregiver. This punitive method creates disrespect and lack of emotional attachment to the teacher/caregiver. It teaches children that the teacher/caregiver does not trust or believe in them to control their own behavior. The children will learn to think of themselves as incapable of controlling their own behavior without someone always monitoring it. It validates the teacher/caregiver’s mistrust and diminishes opportunity to learn self regulation and to function independently. It does not illustrate mutual respect. This method leads to paranoia and fear of making mistakes, as well as creating dependency and lack of opportunity for behavioral decision making.

THE RIGHT PEOPLE

The New 3 R’s uses a selective process for teachers and staff in order to
implement the program effectively into a school. There is a process of weeding out all teachers and staff who have objections to the methods of the system or who have recognition of the potential for psychological harm.
The Right People means that everyone on the faculty must agree with the principal and not express any opposition or disagreement to the methods.

The gradual selective process of the Right People begins with flight, fight, or freeze, which are the normal reactions to a threat of abuse of power.

FLIGHT: Those teachers who were not indoctrinated into the system by the end of the second year, either transferred, retired, or were terminated.

FIGHT: The school counselor is the only one left on the faculty at present who has continued to point out the psychological abuse in the system. The counselor filed two formal grievances of child mistreatment to AISD Human Resources last school year, but no changes were made in the system. At this time the counselor has experienced the full victimization of bullying by the principal and AISD higher administration: Threats, scapegoating, alienation of faculty, and retaliation continued until the counselor was forced to take leave on 17 September. The counselor filed an EEOC
grievance against AISD for retaliation on 17 September 2013, and is continuing to advocate for the children who are being exploited in an
environment of psychological abuse.

FREEZE: Teachers who remained in the school are desensitized and loyal
to the principal and the New 3 R’s System. They do not object to any of the punitive harmful methods nor do they empathize with the students. Teachers who function in chronic stress have similar symptoms as the students. They function in a “survive” mode rather than a “thrive” mode. They are robotic and scripted, emotionless, lack spontaneity and imagination, lack humor and flexibility. They are rigid and controlled. Their performance is measured by the test scores of their students, so they are dedicated to programming their students according to administrative directives. They obey orders without question. Many walk on eggshells for fear of making mistakes or displeasing the principal. They work very hard to keep up with the principal’s expectations and focus on their own performance. They are stern and demanding. They have lost the ability for imaginative play.

Summary:

The New 3 R’s System is a rigid system of behavioral engineering that uses punitive methods of ABA which are known to cause psychological harm to young children. Some of the methods are known to cause mental illness and criminality. The New 3 R’s is a sophisticated system of bullying.

AISD administrators allowed the New 3 R’s System to be used in elementary schools for the purpose of obtaining high performance ratings on statewide tests, but without adequate oversight of mental health experts who would have recognized the potential for psychological abuse.

AISD has allowed administrators to use punitive methods of ABA in violation of certification requirements and with methods known to cause
psychological damage to young children.

AISD administrators ignored the counselor’s reports of the New 3 R’s methods as being psychologically abusive to children, and retaliated against the counselor.

Children in Texas public elementary schools are entitled to have their mental and physical health protected by state law. There are currently
no agencies with adequate laws in place to protect the rights of these children.

I confess I have not followed all the twists and turns of the proposals to reauthorize the failed No Child Left Behind law. Almost everyone except its original sponsors agrees that it failed, yet Congress is locked into the same stale assumption that the federal government is supposed to find a magical formula to measure test scores and punish teachers, principals, and schools. Congress, in its wisdom, has forgotten that this school-level “accountability” didn’t exist until January 2002, when NCLB was signed into law by President George W. Bush. Having learned nothing from the failure of NCLB, they can’t now agree on what comes next.

In this story on Huffington Post, Joy Resmovits notes the irony that even Texas–yes, Texas–has asked for a waiver from the disastrous law that was foisted on the nation’s school by not only George W. Bush, and not only his advisers Margaret Spellings and Dandy Kress, but also Democrats George Miller of California and Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Now, everyone laughs at the idea that 100% of students were going to be proficient by 2014. What a dumb idea to set an impossible goal. And how cruel to fire teachers and close schools that could not reach an impossible goal.

But look at this:

“Under the waiver, Texas will no longer subscribe to the much-derided “Adequate Yearly Progress” system that measures school performance and requires all students to demonstrate proficiency in reading and math by the 2013-2014 school year. Instead, it will use a new accountability system that expects 100 percent of students to be proficient in reading and math by the 2019-2020 school year.”

What’s this? The Obama administration expects “100 percent of students to be proficient in reading and math by the 2019-2020 year”?

Here we go again.

No nation in the world has 100% proficiency. Doesn’t anyone in DC have a fresh idea? Like one that has some connection to common sense.

A reader sent the following comment. I can’t vouch for its authenticity but urge reporters in Dallas to do so:

 

A newly exposed DISD controversy involves claims that college readiness improved in 2012/13 under Mike Miles. This claim is on page 218 of the “Data Packet for 2013/14 Planning,” online at https://mydata.dallasisd.org/docs/CILT2014/DP1000.pdf . It shows the average ACT score as having gone from 17 to 18, numbers that for the first time in DISD history are rounded to whole numbers in all public reports for 2013. The more precise averages are 17.2 for 2012 and 17.6 for the 2013 ACT average.
On the same page 218, the normal average annual 17+% increase in minority students tested since 2007 suddenly decreased 23% from 2012 to 2013. The percentage of Black students taking the ACT decreased 20.9%, the Hispanic percentage decreased by 24%, but the White percentage increased 0.8%. It is obvious that any ACT improvement are only due to the 23% decrease in the minority student populations tested, populations that have a tragic history of low ACT scores.
Why has this significant decrease in minority students tested not been covered by the media? It has been known for over 3 months by DISD. It is setting back minority percentages tested over three years! It has not even been mentioned by DISD staff at any DISD Board meetings during these months.
Mike Miles came to Dallas with the advancements of ACT average scores being among his central claims to fame in Colorado. More and more it appears the 33% drop in senior enrollment in his Colorado District was a central factor in that gain. It now appears that DISD is already on the way to a 5% loss in senior class enrollment for the Class of 2014, the first such loss since 2006! Last years enrollment was a 30+ year record senior class enrollment!

The Texas Tribune is beginning a series of reports about how consultants and tutoring companies are ripping off millions of dollars in Texas, thanks to NCLB.

Race to the Top will empower many more scams and legitimate frauds, as companies proliferate that claim to know how to “turnaround” schools, how to train teachers, how to train leaders, how to do everything that schools should know how to do for themselves. And don’t forget the data portals! don’t forget the data mining! don’t forget the vendors!

This is the Age of the Golden Rip-Off, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Congress.

I can’t help but remember my own schooling. In retrospect, it seems like the kind of thing you now find only in private schools. There was a principal and an assistant principal. There was a guidance counselor to help you think about whether to go to college and where. There were teachers. There were no consultants. There was no data mining. There were no elaborate statistical schemes from headquarters on how to measure teacher quality. There was….human judgment. There were real people teaching children. How quaint!

No more of that. There is an industry to care, feed, and enrich with our taxpayer dollars.

I was interviewed by Jake Silverstein of the Texas Monthly and we talked
about testing, accountability, poverty, and what’s happening today. It is a very good interview, I think. He asked interesting questions.

 
Funny side note: my birth name was Silverstein but my parents
changed it to Silvers by the time I was in kindergarten. I don’t
think Jake and I are related because Silverstein was not my real family
name either. My grandfather had a different name, the story goes,
when he came from Europe as a young boy in 1858, but then he worked for a grocer in Georgia named Silverstein and took his name. Sounds crazy, but
that’s the story we were told by my father. Another story that I heard, which was confirmed by surviving family members, is that my grandfather ran the commissary on Henry Ford’s plantation in Georgia. But when Mr. Ford found out that he had a Jew on the property, he kicked my grandfather out. Then he opened a kosher butcher shop in the Savannah central market (who knew there were enough Jews in Savannah to support a kosher butcher shop?). Neither the shop nor the old market exists anymore. I never met my grandfather; he died long before I was born. But I digress.

After an internal investigation raised questions about the actions of Dallas Superintendent Mike Miles, the school board will have a closed meeting on September 30 to decide whether to discipline him. Miles is a graduate of the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy. Stay tuned.

Pearson has good lobbyists in Texas. Really really good lobbyists. A reader sent this comment:

“See page 19 TAMSA presentation: $1,178,723,689.00 funneled to Pearson in Texas for high-stakes testing nonsense since 2000.

Source: Center for Education, Rice University

Click to access 2013-01-13-tamsa_overview.pdf

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20130616-after-3-decades-texas-legislature-rolls-back-high-stakes-school-testing.ece

Jason Stanford has written a brilliant analysis of the efforts by state officials in Texas and California to cut back on unnecessary testing, and of Secretary Duncan’s rejection of both requests.

Just in terms of federalism, this situation shows how Washington has now taken control out of the hands of the states, which can no longer decide what is best for their students, even though they put up 90% of the funding.

In California, state officials want to drop the state tests so they can make the transition to Common Core testing, but Duncan said no. The California legislature voted to drop the state tests. This should lead to an interesting showdown between the state and the federal government. Someone might even remember the tenth amendment to the Constitution.

In Texas, state officials developed a plan to test the kids who needed testing and to reduce testing for the kids who don’t.

Stanford writes:

Meanwhile in Texas, the Department of Education rejected a common-sense reform in, of all places, Texas. Legislators and Gov. Rick Perry recognized that it wasn’t necessary to force every child to take every test every year to keep them on track. Under current law, a Texas schoolchild has to pass 17 tests to get to high school. This takes months out of the school year, costs millions of dollars, and produces data of dubious value.

For example, a child who passes a reading test one year is overwhelmingly likely to pass it the next year, according to data from the Texas Education Agency. The legislature asked for a federal waiver to let students who passed their state standardized tests in the 3rd and 5thgrades to skip the tests in the 4th, 6th and 7th grades. Teachers could focus on those kids who needed more help, students who had mastered the work would be freed up to learn new things, and taxpayers would save $13.4 million over two years.

This was a great example of government getting out of its own way, but there was a hitch. Because the Texas law conflicted with No Child Left Behind, Texas needed permission from the U.S. Department of Education to stop giving tests to kids who did not need them in order to produce data that told us nothing.

Unfortunately, Obama’s Education Department said no.

Gosh, when even Texas thinks there is too much testing, that should say something about how far we have wandered from common sense.

Paul Horton, who teaches history at the University of Chicago Lab School, wrote the following essay for this blog:

“Democracy and Education: Waiting for Gatopia?

“John Dewey arrived at the University of Chicago in the middle of the Pullman strike. He wrote his wife, still in Ann Arbor, that he had met a young man on the train who supported the strike very passionately: “I only talked with him for 10 or 15 minutes but when I got through my nerves were more thrilled than they had been for years; I felt as if I had better resign my job teaching and follow him around until I got a life. One lost all sense of the right or wrong of things in admiration of the absolute, almost fanatic, sincerity and earnestness, and in admiration of the magnificent combination that was going on. Simply as an aesthetic matter, I don’t believe the world has seen but a few times such a spectacle of magnificent, widespread union of men about a common interest as this strike business.” (quoted in Westbrook, 87). This sense of “magnificent, widespread union” represented the definition of Democracy to Dewey; it was the very core of his writing, work, and public advocacy.

“Later, after he had moved to Columbia University in New York, he had a major disagreement with a very articulate student, Randolph Bourne, about the media pressure to get involved in WWI. Bourne argued then and later in an unfinished essay entitled, “War is the Health of the State” that states thrived on war because war consolidated the state’s power and allowed it to repress any kind of dissent. Dewey was an outspoken advocate of American entry into World War I, but began to question his support after seeing several of his colleagues at Columbia fired for their outspoken opposition to the War. These serious doubts turned into deep regret when he saw that the Espionage Act was used to repress freedoms of speech and press. Respectable citizens, including many thoughtful journalists and political leaders like Eugene V. Debs were routinely thrown into jail. His serious doubts began to trouble him more deeply as he witnessed the Federal response to the postwar Red Scare of 1919, when many American citizens were deported without constitutional due process. He was so disturbed by all of this that he helped found the American Civil Liberties Union that sought to protect due process and other constitutional rights. (Ryan, 154-99)

“From the early 1920’s forward, Dewey became a vocal and articulate public spokes person for Democracy in all American institutions. He founded and led an AFT local at Columbia and often spoke at labor and AFT functions. He believed with every cell of his body that American Schools had to be the incubator of American Democracy. As the shadow of fascism descended over Europe, he became a fellow traveller with the United Front to defend the world from an ideology that had nothing but for contempt for Democracy or any notion of an open society. For Dewey, education that allowed the organic evolution of free speech and the discussion and respect for all points of view in the classroom inoculated American students from the threat of fascism.

“If he were alive today, Professor Dewey would be shocked by what he would see. In part, Dewey’s whole philosophy of Education was developed to countervail the corrosive influence of capitalism on communities and the gross economic power of giant corporations. He sought to defend individual growth and creativity and nurture the sense of public responsibility that was under assault from the pulverizing individualism of the dominant ideology of big business backed Social Darwinism.

“Dewey’s vision is now a major target of major foundations that are funding the push to privatize American Education. Major Wall Street investors and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Eli Broad Foundation, the Walton Foundation, and the Joyce Foundation, among others, are working together with the Obama Administration to destroy what is left of public education in this great country. Combined, these corporations control approximately 50 billion dollars in assests.

“I will not take the time here to unpack the strategic plan coordinated by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and three people within the Department of Education who have turn their strategic plan into a public policy called “The Race to the Top.” You should read Diane Ravitch’s new book to get a clear picture of how this has all been done very legally with the help of the best lawyers that money can buy, millions of dollars thrown at the Harvard Education Department, and with tens of millions of dollars to hire the best Madison Ave. Advertising and PR firms and the best web designers (go to “PARCC” or “Common Core” online). What you need to know is that none of the people behind this plan have any respect for public schools or public school teachers.

“Like Anthony Cody, I have been insulted several times by Secretary Duncan’s Press Secretary and friends of our president who are not open to any imput from experienced teachers. Indeed, I was the subject of a veiled threat from Mr. Duncan’s Press Secretary that I describe here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2013/04/paul_horton_of_common_core_con.html.

“In another case, a good friend of the President told me when I protested the Chicago School closings: “who do you think you are kidding, only 7 or 8 percent of those kids have a chance anyway.” Several weeks later when I raised the same subject again, he gave me the Democrats for Education Reform standard line that inner city schools failed because teachers have failed. He was not interested in hearing about poverty and resource starving of schools. I called him on this. The first quote sounded eerily like what Mr. Emanuel communicated to Chicago Teacher’s Union President, Karen Lewis, in a famously closed door, expletive filled meeting.

“What all friends of public teachers and public Education need to understand is that Mr. Duncan and the Obama administration listen to no one on this issue. What Republicans and Tea Party activists need to understand is that this is not about Government corruption, it is about the fact that when it comes to Education issues, we do not have a government. Governments must read and respond to petitions: our Education Department does not seek to communicate with any citizens except by tweeting inane idiocies about gadgets and enterprise. What we have is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsoring the overthrow of the public school system to bulldoze a path to sell billions of dollars of product. Other companies like Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill and Company, and Achieve, Inc. are just coming in behind the bulldozers.

“We must teach the rest of our society that democracy still matters in schools and everywhere else. The time for talking is over! We need to get into the streets and get arrested if necessary. Most importantly every one of us needs to call the same senator or congressman every day until NCLB and RTTT are dead, Arne Duncan does not have control over a penny, and all stimulus money that has yet to be distributed, is given by the Senate Appropriations Committee to the districts around the country that are the most underserved to rehire teachers and support staff. Not a penny should go to charter school construction, IT, administration, or hiring consultants from the Eli Broad Foundation, the Gates Foundation, or McKinsey. Not a penny should go to Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill or any form of standardized testing. All state superintendents who took trips from any Education vendor should resign, and no state should hire an administrator or superintendent at any level who does not have proper accredited certification and ten years of exemplary classroom teaching.

“Now is the time to preserve the legacy of John Dewey and teach the rest of the country about Democracy in Education or wait like sheep for Gatopia to numb us all!”

Education debates in D.C. and the media tend to be
dominated by what economists and think tanks say. What is needed
most and seldom heard is the voice of teachers. Here is a brilliant
new voice that should get as much air time as Bill Gates, Joel
Klein, and Arne Duncan. What are the chances? In
this article at Salon
, John Savage describes his
experience teaching at J.E. Pearce Middle School in Austin, Texas,
which the state education commissioner called “the worst school” in
the state. Why was it the worst school in Texas? Savage considers
the reformer thesis: Teachers with high expectations can work
miracles. This is the line from Michelle Rhee and Teach for
America. Savage quickly dashes that fantasy–or his experience
dashed it. He writes: “In the last decade a new species of
educational reformer has captured the public’s attention. Talk
show-friendly celebrities like former Washington, D.C., Schools
Chancellor Michelle Rhee, and award-winning movies like “Waiting
for Superman,” have gained fame by blaming teachers for the
achievement gap between poor students and middle-class students.
“The appeal of this educational axiom — ascribing student
achievement to teacher quality — is understandable. It suggests a
silver bullet solution: improve teaching and you improve test
scores, especially for poor students. And because test results
predict life outcomes — the likelihood of securing a job, getting
divorced, going to prison—better teaching can lift students from
poverty. Or so the thinking goes. “Some have called this narrative
the myth of magical teaching. We yearn to believe it. We yearn to
think that caring, hardworking teachers can change the world, or at
least their students’ lives. Like American Exceptionalism and
Horatio Alger stories, this supposition has become part of our
national mythology. As an idealistic young educator I, too, gladly
accepted the myth of the magical teacher as reality — that is,
before Pearce shattered my naïveté.” He discovered: “Here is the
hard truth about my experience: I didn’t have much of an impact.
Sure, I made a small part of the day more pleasant for some
students, but I didn’t change the course of any of my kids’ lives,
much less the nature of the school. A middle-class teacher coming
into a low-income school and helping poor students realize their
true potential makes for an excellent White Savior Film, but
“Dangerous Minds” isn’t real life. Real life at Pearce is
survival.” Reform after reform came and went: “We have poured money
into high-poverty schools, and we have replaced entire teaching
staffs, but to little avail. Teachers aren’t the problem, poverty
is. Moreover, segregating our poorest students in high-poverty
schools, as we often do, exacerbates the problem. “After parsing
fourth-grade math scores, education theorist Richard Khalenberg
concluded, “low-income students attending more affluent schools
scored almost two years ahead of low-income students in
high-poverty schools. Indeed, low-income students given a chance to
attend more affluent schools performed more than half a year
better, on average, than middle-income students who attend
high-poverty schools.” “If socioeconomic status is a primary driver
of academic performance, and if student achievement suffers in
high-poverty schools, why do we continue to organize schools in a
way that predetermines some for failure and then blame teachers?
“There are ways we can make education better for all students —
socioeconomic school integration, investing in early childhood
education, providing the wraparound services students need — but a
myopic focus on teacher quality won’t fundamentally improve
schools.”