Archives for category: Texas

A teacher sent the following comment in a discussion about why teachers are demoralized. In Dallas, a 29-year-old TFA alum, with two years of teaching experience, has been put in charge of teacher recruitment:

A much better thing to publicize is the recent appointment of a TFA alumni to be the new Chief Talent Officer (HR manager I believe in OldSpeak) for DISD. This individual, responsible for reforming how Dallas ISD hires teachers and retains them, has spent a grand total of 2 years teach middle school social studies. He’s a poster child for the TFA philosophy of Teach For Two Years and then move up into administration and policy. And yet this man is supposed to know what a great teacher looks like on paper and in person and in the classroom and hire them for DISD?

I wonder how many of the new hires will look like him.

Relevant news stories:

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20120522-teach-for-america-exec-to-be-disds-chief-talent-officer.ece

http://educationblog.dallasnews.com/2012/10/dallas-isd-chief-charles-glover-on-restructuring-the-human-resources-department.html/

Note how he dodges the questions in the second news stories.

I hope that Sandy Kress reads this article about what happened in El Paso.

When I was in Austin, Texas, a few days ago, Kress wrote an article in the local newspaper extolling the virtues of No Child Left Behind. He boasted of dramatic test score increases since 1992 (ten years before NCLB was signed into law).

Since I am a well-known critic of that law, it may or may not have been coincidence that the article appeared on the day that I was scheduled to speak to the state’s school board members and administrators.

Sandy Kress was one of the architects of NCLB; he is currently a lobbyist for the testing giant Pearson. He was not identified as such in the newspaper.

The scandal in El Paso is shocking. Administrators pushed kids out of school to protect their test scores. In the instance described in the article, three brothers were told to drop out.

Here is an excerpt:

“In the short term, the strategy worked. Test scores improved at eight of 11 high schools. The district’s overall rating improved from “academically acceptable” in 2005 to “recognized” in 2010 – the second-highest rating possible.

“But the achievements came amid startling enrollment declines for sophomores.

“Austin High School, for instance, had 615 freshmen in 2005, but that number had dropped 40 percent by the time accountability tests were given the following school year. With the next batch of 571 freshmen, only about half were still enrolled by the time the tests were administered.

“Students with bad grades, low attendance or limited English proficiency would be held in the ninth grade and then promoted to the 11th grade. Or if they were old enough, they might be told to seek other options such as attending a charter school or obtaining their GED elsewhere. Many of them had recently transferred from nearby Juarez, Mexico.

“The whole idea, said former state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, was to make those students ‘disappear’ so they would not be counted among the students who were tested.”

Should we celebrate cheating and gaming the system? Should we give bonuses to those who cheat and don’t get caught? Do we want more of this?

NCLB is a disaster. It should be repealed before more lives are damaged. High-stakes testing is warping education.

This is part 2 of my interview by Abby Rappaport of the American Prospect. This came at the end of a long day in Austin, after I gave two speeches, one in the morning to the Texas School Boards Association and Texas Association of School Administrators, and another in the afternoon to parents and teachers. I was too tired to choose my words. I said what I think.

In part 1 of the interview, we talked about testing and accountability.

I just concluded an amazing visit to Austin.

I love going back to Texas. It’s my native state. I am a graduate of the Houston public schools. I like the sounds of Texas voices. I like the twang, the earthiness. These are the accents I grew up with.

I like meeting with racially integrated groups. I attended segregated schools in Houston. I’m proud that public education led the way in creating a racially diverse society, a society where people of all colors interact as equals.

I like the friendliness and openness, the lack of pretense and stuffiness that characterizes Texans. I have lived most of my life in New York City, but my heart belongs to this crazy state.

I arrived on Saturday and was met by Sara Stevenson, the tireless librarian at O’Henry Middle School, who has written many opinion pieces and letters to the editor in support of public education. Sara brought me to my hotel, where I met Karen Miller, a vigorous parent leader from Cypress-Fairbanks, who frequently sends me links to important news articles about corporate raiders of public education. It’s people like Sara and Karen who are the front-line combat troops defending our public schools, and they do it out of a fierce devotion to the common good, a sentiment that corporate reformers don’t understand. People like Sara and Karen are our secret weapons.

After an hour of rest (tweeting and blogging), I met two of the “fighting professors” of the University of Texas, Angela Valenzuela and Carolyn Heinrich. These scholars have been warning about the inequity of high-stakes testing for years, and their careful work will eventually turn the tide against the high-stakes mania. (By coincidence–or not–Sandy Kress, the architect of NCLB and now a lobbyist for Pearson, had an opinion piece in the local newspaper extolling the success of NCLB. He and Margaret Spellings may be the last two living defenders of that failed law.)

Saturday night, I had dinner with about forty superintendents from across the state who told me how frustrated they are with high stakes testing, how much time is wasted every year. A group of them have been working for several years on what they call their “visioning project.” Working with Phil Schlechty, they’ve been trying to dream up the kind of education they want for the children in their districts.

Last year, the Legislature passed a law allowing 20 districts to opt out of the state accountability system, which gets more onerous every year. The legislators just keep piling on more and more tests. The superintendents plan to use their autonomy to reinvent accountability and reduce the burden of testing.

Phil Schlechty gave a passionate five-minute talk about how our idea of democracy depends on the connection between the community and its public schools. He warned that if we lose public education, our democracy will be at risk. Phil also talked about his grandson, who made a video for school on “the value of doing nothing. The value of lying on your back and looking at clouds. The value of watching a caterpillar crawl on a branch. The value of counting the leaves on a tree.” Beautiful.

On Sunday morning, I spoke to a general session of the annual convention of the Texas School Boards Association and the Texas Association of School Administrators. More than 800 school boards have passed resolutions against high-stakes testing. I encouraged them to stand strong and to carry their righteous protest to the next level.

I asked, What if an entire district said to the state, we are not giving the tests this year? If the whole district says no, they can’t stop you. What if many districts opt out? If everyone does it, they can’t punish you. They-the legislators and other officials–will have to pay attention. They will have to stop and think of better ways to monitor the progress of education.

There is power in saying “no.” The more people say it, the more powerful it is. Texans have a long history of independence. Texans don’t like to be bullied. I would love to see a bunch of districts try it.

Sunday afternoon, I spoke to an enthusiastic crowd of parents and teachers at Eastside Memorial High School. The district has already promised to give the high school to a charter chain, and the community is furious. They didn’t ask for a charter, and they don’t want to lose their school. They are angry about the way the Broad-trained superintendent of the Austin Independent School District insisted on giving their local elementary school to the same charter chain, over the loud objection of the parents and local community. AISD was not responding to local demand (most of the local students abandoned the school when the charter opened last month). The locals are still angry, and they intend to hold onto the high school if they can.

Austin has several activist groups that are working to stop the encroachment of privately managed charters into the district. They are mobilized to elect school board members in November who will support community sentiment in favor of public schools.

Sunday night I went for Texas barbecue with local parent leaders.

Monday morning, I met with legislative staff to discuss the big issues in Texas. One is funding: the state cut $5.4 billion from the schools in the past two years. Another is the growth of online for-profit charter schools, which take public dollars with minimal accountability and poor results.

I ended my visit with an interview by Evan Smith before a live audience, on his PBS show “Overheard.” Wonderful audience, great questions, a good opportunity to address issues that are important to Texas and the nation.

I had a wonderful time in Austin, experienced a whirlwind of activity, and enjoyed the chance to meet so many people who care about children and our future.

Diane

I spent the last three days in Austin and had a great time. I’ll write about it on the flight home. I’m sitting on the JetBlue flight and the doors will close in 3 minutes.

Thought you might want to see this interview with me and Evan Smith. Only 24 minutes.

I take it back. I posted this as the doors were closing. When I landed, I learned that the link didn’t work. I wrote the producer and found out that it won’t go live until October 18, when the show airs. At that time, I’ll post the link and make sure it works.

Texas brought No Child Left Behind to the nation.

Remember that candidate George W. Bush said that Texas had figured out how to fix the schools. He said test every child every year, post the results, reward the schools where scores go up, humiliate those where scores go down. And, wow, a miracle: the scores go up, up, up; the achievement gap closes; graduation rates go up. Win-win-win-win.

Except it didn’t happen. And now the whole country is stuck with a testing regime that is sucking the life out of education.

This report from Texas describes a growing revolution against testing. The schools are up in arms: 77% of the school boards enrolling 86% of all Texas students have passed a resolution opposing high-stakes testing. The Houston superintendent said that 65 days (out of 180) are consumed by testing.

Now a group known as “Moms Against Drunk Testing” has joined the fray. They are mad as hell and they are not going to take it anymore. Last year, the state cut the school budget by $5.4 billion, while handing a fat contract to Pearson for $468 million. Meanwhile the state wants more and more and more testing.

(A few hours after this post appeared, I received the following message: So glad we have support around the country! Our real name is TAMSA (Texans Advocating for Meaningful Student Assessment) and we have a facebook page and a website. Please “like us” and “join in” on our website! The more members and “likers” we have, the stronger we will be in the upcoming legislative session.

website: http://tamsatx.org/
facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tamsatx
)

Go, Texas, go! If the testing vampire is slain, the whole facade of faux reform collapses. No test scores, no merit pay, no evaluation by test scores, no closing schools by scores.

Don’t mess with Texas!

I am speaking on Sunday morning to a joint convention of the Texas School Boards Association and the Texas Association of School Administrators at the Austin Convention Center.

On Sunday from 2-4, I am meeting with parents and teachers to talk about the kind of stuff we discuss on this blog. Eastside Memorial High School. Y’all come!

This parent supports the professors at the University of Texas, whose patient work is paying off. More than half the school boards in Texas have passed resolutions against high stakes testing, and the head of the state workforce commission just denounced it.

Thanks for their scholarship and courage!

The parent writes:

I love my alma mater, the University of Texas at Austin. This fine institution boasts the likes of Walter Stroup:

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20120811-texas-standardized-tests-a-poor-measure-of-what-students-learned-ut-austin-professor-says.ece

Carolyn Heinrich:

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/insight/standardized-tests-with-high-stakes-are-bad-for-2230088.html?cxtype=rss_ece_frontpage

Julian Vasquez Heilig:

http://cloakinginequity.com/

And Angela Valenzuela:

http://www.forumforeducation.org/conveners/angela-valenzuela

I believe that there are many more fine and distinguished professors at UT who “support the profession of teaching”. Conducting research and reporting the harmful effects of high-stakes/standardized testing is vitally important. Why aren’t more parents receiving this information?

Here is an article written by a Texas businessman and former legislator complaining that young people in Texas are woefully underprepared for college or the workplace.

The answer: more testing and accountability.

He fails to note that Texas has been pushing that testing and accountability thing for at least 20 years. Remember Ross Perot? Remember the Texas miracle? The whole country is stuck with NCLB because of all the “Texas Brags” that turned out to be all hat and no cattle.

Some people say that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get different results.

I’d say that the definition of ideology is doing the same thing over and over again without regard to evidence or experience.

When your method fails, and fails, and fails, and fails, don’t blame the kids. Blame the method.

Sorry, once again, I forgot to add the link to the article. It’s here now. Please read it.

Tom Pauken is not only the Texas Workforce Commissioner, he is a prominent member of the Texas Republican party.

Read what he says about NCLB.

He says that labeling schools by test scores based on formulas written in Washington, D.C., and Austin is a sort of “abstract intellectualism” that doesn’t work.

He says there are lots of good jobs that go begging because young people aren’t prepared for them.

Here is his testimony to the state legislature.

His only error is in assuming that the demand for high-stakes testing prepares students for college.

It doesn’t. To prepare well for college, you need far more than the ability to answer bubble-test questions. You need to be well read, able to write well, able to think for yourself, able to figure out complex problems, know a goodly amount of history.

None of these things matter for NCLB–or for that matter, for the Race to the Top.

Both NCLB and RTTT are “abstract intellectualism” at their worst.

Sara Stevenson, librarian at O. Henry Middle School in Austin, Texas, is a tenacious, fearless writer of letters and articles about education. She has been the kind of stand-up leader that every community and every school needs. Here is her latest.

                       The Texas GOP and Pro-Choice in Education

“If a students feels, a family feels they need a better opportunity,
they should have that right,” he said. “And especially, students with
disabilities and autism, to be trapped in a school that can’t help you
get over a disability, is a sin. And we’re going to stand up for that
community.” He received sustained applause.

Dallas Morning News, August 30

When I read the quotation above, I realize that Senator Dan Patrick and I live in different universes.  First of all, children with autism and disabilities are well served in public education. In fact, the Special Education laws and lobbies are the most powerful in public education. By law, we must serve every child who enters our school, nomatter what her disabilities.  Many students with special needs have one-on-ones. These are trained adults who accompany the special needs child daily from class to class. These employees are expensive, but they are necessary and the right thing to do. I can’t imagine a private school would want to take on the additional cost of hiring a one-on-one for a special needs child when the proposed voucher covers less than $6000 of tuition per year.

Proponents for school choice pitch their arguments as a way for the
poor and disabled to have the same choices the rich have in choosing
the right school for their children, to save students from “failing”
schools. Due to NCLB, students in failing schools already have choice.
When their school fails to make adequate yearly progress, they may
transfer to any passing school in the district.  I know because my
school received seventy sudden students a week before school began,
even though we are at full capacity and closed to transfers. This law
strains the passing schools by causing overcrowding and drains
struggling schools of its most involved students and families, making
it that much harder to pass the following year as standards rise.

The resurrection of the voucher issue is extremely troubling. While
the proponents talk about vouchers as “the Civil Rights issue of our
day,” I suspect it’s merely a cover for families, who already send
their children to private and parochial schools, to get a tax break.
Furthermore, the data supporting voucher schools is thin. Recently,
Matthew Chingos and Paul Peterson advocated vouchers in the Wall
Street Journal, pointing to a long-term study (1997-2011) which shows
a higher percentage of students who accepted vouchers enrolled in
college than those who applied but didn’t receive them, particularly
among African-American students. However, when looking at the data
more closely, the study reveals that these African-American students
enrolling in college were more likely to be only children and more
likely to have at least one college-educated parent.

Still, it’s interesting that Chingos and Peterson chose to use the
measure of college enrollment rates.  Why didn’t they argue that the
voucher students attending private schools have higher test scores
than their peers left behind? Perhaps it’s because the Milwaukee
voucher system, which has been in place for over twenty years, and the
DC voucher program show no significant difference in test scores
between the two groups.

Texas, the land of Friday Night Lights, the state where 10% of the
nation’s public school students attend school, does not need a private
school voucher system. We need to invest in our current public schools
and lower the student/teacher ratio so that it matches the ratio in
private schools. Calling for private school vouchers at a time of
drastic public education budget cuts is a non-starter.