Archives for category: U.S. Department of Education
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Wanted: Peer Reviewers for U.S. Department of Education Charter School Program

By dianeravitch
April 14, 2016 //
14

Yes, you can apply. Just don’t tell them you read this blog.

 

https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/charter-schools/charter-school-program-state-educational-agencies-sea/

 

What’s New

 
2016 PEER REVIEWERS

 

The Office of Innovation and Improvement is seeking individuals to serve as peer reviewers for the FY 2016 Charter Schools Program (CSP) State educational agency (SEA) grant competition. The CSP SEA program is a competitive grant program that enables SEAs to provide financial assistance, through subgrants to eligible applicants, for the planning, program design, and initial implementation of charter schools and for the dissemination of information about successful charter schools.

 

For FY 2016, Congress appropriated $333 million for the CSP. Approximately $160 million of these funds are available for new FY 2016 SEA grant awards through this competition.

 

We invite qualified individuals to apply to serve as grant application peer reviewers by completing the Peer Reviewer Application Form. A hard copy of the peer reviewer application can be found here [below].

 

Additional information can be found in the CSP SEA Call for Peer Reviewers. If you have questions about the peer review process and/or potential conflicts of interest please contact the SEA competition manager, Kathryn Meeley by email: Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov.

 

Program Description

 

The purpose of the CSP is to increase the national understanding of the charter school model by (1) expanding the number of high-quality charter schools available to students across the Nation by providing financial assistance for the planning, program design, and initial implementation of charter schools, and (2) by evaluating the effects of charter schools, including their effects on students, student academic achievement, staff and parents.

 

2016 CHARTER SCHOOLS PROGRAM STATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY GRANT COMPETITION

 

CALL FOR PEER REVIEWERS

 
CONTEXT: The U.S. Department of Education (Department), Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII), is seeking individuals to serve as peer reviewers for the FY 2016 Charter Schools Program (CSP) State educational agency (SEA) grant competition. The purpose of the CSP is to increase national understanding of the charter school model and to expand the number of high-quality charter schools available to students across the nation. The CSP SEA program is a competitive grant program that enables SEAs to provide financial assistance, through subgrants to eligible applicants, for the planning, program design, and initial implementation of charter schools and for the dissemination of information about successful charter schools.  For FY 2016, Congress appropriated $333 million for the CSP.  Approximately $160 million of these funds are available for new FY 2016 SEA grant awards through this competition.  We invite qualified individuals to apply to serve as grant application peer reviewers by completing the Peer Reviewer Application Form.

 

NOTE: Even if you applied to be a peer reviewer in the past, please complete the Peer Reviewer Application Form as directed below by 5:00 p.m. (EST) on Friday, April 15, 2016 to be considered for a peer reviewer position for the 2016 SEA competition.

 

WHO:  We are seeking peer reviewers from various professions and backgrounds with an understanding of the charter school sector and expertise in at least one of the following areas:  Charter School Authorizing and Accountability; Charter School Policy; Charter School Research and Evaluation; Charter School Development and Implementation; or Charter School Grant Administration.  Peer reviewers may have expertise in various geographies, including urban, suburban, rural, and tribal communities.

 

WHAT: Peer reviewers will independently read, score, and provide timely, well written comments for SEA grant applications submitted to the U.S. Department of Education under the CSP and travel to Washington, D.C., to participate in one week of in-person panel discussions.  

 

  • Availability: Reviewers for the CSP SEA competition will need to dedicate approximately 80 hours for the review process (40 hours will be needed to review all assigned applications, and another 40 hours will be needed to participate in the on-site application review). This time estimate includes participation in an orientation session by conference call prior to evaluating the applications, time for reading, scoring, developing comments, and discussing assigned applications.  While exact dates for the review have not yet been finalized, we expect it will be around the end of May through July, 2016. 
  • Where: Reviewers will read, score and develop comments from their location prior to traveling to Washington, D.C., to participate in one week of in-person panel discussions.
  • Tools: Each reviewer must have access to the Internet, a phone, a computer, a printer and have the ability to interact within the web environment.
  • Quality of review: Each reviewer must provide detailed, objective, constructive, timely and, well written reviews for each assigned application. These reviews will be used to recommend applications for funding. They will also be shared with each applicant and the comments regarding winning applicants will be made available to the general public following the reviews.

 

HONORARIUM: Reviewers will receive an honorarium of $200 per application for the satisfactory completion of the above requirements during the grant review schedule. A satisfactory review requires that each application is read, scored, and discussed.  The final, high-quality comments and corresponding scores will be reviewed and approved by a panel monitor prior to their final submission in the G5 system.  Travel costs for the onsite portion of the review will also be covered.

 

IF INTERESTED: If you would like to be considered as a peer reviewer, please click here and complete the Peer Reviewer Application Form.  After completing the form you will be prompted to send your resume and contact information via email with the subject heading “FY 2016 CSP SEA PEER REVIEWER” to the email address provided in the Peer Reviewer Application Form.  You must complete both steps by 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, April 15, 2016 to be considered as an FY 2016 CSP SEA peer reviewer. Please do not exceed the five-page limit for resumes.

 

G5 REGISTRATION: To serve as a reviewer you will need to register in G5.  If you would like take care of this process prior to being selected you can register at www.g5.gov.  For support with this process you may contact G5 at edcaps.user@ed.gov or call 1-888-336-8930.  *Please note that registering in G5 at this time does not guarantee that you will be selected as a reviewer. 

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Please remember that if your organization intends to apply for a grant under any CSP competitions, you may not be eligible to serve as a reviewer.  As a reviewer, you will have a conflict of interest if:

  • You helped prepare an application, regardless of financial interest in the success or failure of that application.
  • You have agreed to serve, or you have been offered a position, as an employee, advisor, or consultant on the project.
  • Your personal financial interest will be affected by the outcome of the competition, which would include any family members, employees or associates of the project applying for funding.

 

If you have any questions about the peer review process and/or potential conflicts of interest please contact the SEA competition manager, Kathryn Meeley by email: Kathryn.Meeley@ed.gov. 

 

NON-DISCRIMINATION: The Department solicits reviewers without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, age or disability.  The Department will provide reasonable accommodations for a qualified individual with a disability so that individual might participate in the peer reviewer application process.  If you require a reasonable accommodation to apply to participate in this review, please contact Kathryn Meeley by phone, (202) 453-6818 or email at kathryn.meeley@ed.gov  no later than 5:00 p.m. EST, Friday, April 8, 2016 to ensure we can facilitate the application process. 

 

PROGRAM INFORMATION: For more information about the Charter Schools Program State Educational Agency Grant Program, click here. 

Categories Charter Schools, U.S. Department of Education

Senator Lamar Alexander Gives John King a Stern Lecture

By dianeravitch
April 13, 2016 //
28

New Secretary of Education John King must have thought he could follow in the footsteps of his predecessor Arne Duncan and tell the states and districts what to do. Congress made it clear in the Every Student Succeeds Act that it was curtailing the Secretary’s power. King is now overseeing the drafting of new regulations to implement ESSA, and Senator Lamar Alexander–who led the effort to write ESSA–didn’t like what he saw. He gave King a strong reprimand at Senate hearings yesterday.

 

Here is a report from a Knoxville newspaper on some of their exchanges:

 

“U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander angrily accused the U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday of blatantly ignoring part of the new school reform law that Congress passed last year with overwhelming bipartisan support.

 

“In an unusual public scolding, Alexander told Education Secretary John B. King Jr. the department is not adhering to a key section of the law that relates to funding for low-income schools.

 

“Not only is what you’re doing against the law,” Alexander said during a Senate committee hearing, “the way you’re trying to do it is against another provision in the law.”
“King tried to assure Alexander the Education Department is not circumventing the law, but is merely proposing regulations to give guidance to states and local school districts. But Alexander was not convinced.

 

“I can read,” he said bluntly…..”

 

“At Tuesday’s hearing, Alexander accused the Department of Education of overstepping its authority and trying to work around a provision that says federal funding must be used to supplement state and local spending on education.

 

“Another section of the law requires comparable spending between Title I schools — those with large numbers of disadvantaged students — and schools that are not Title I.

 

The “comparability” provision has been in federal law since 1970, and Congress did not change it when the new school reform law passed last year.

 

“But Alexander charged the department is trying to implement new regulations that would require equal, not comparable, spending per pupil. He also accused the department of trying to dictate the methodology that local school districts must use when calculating whether funding between schools is comparable — a move he said is not allowed under the law.

 

“King disputed that. The department is not requiring any particular methodology, he said, but is simply trying to give schools the flexibility to measure the goal of comparable funding.
“How can you sit there and say that?” Alexander asked, arguing that the proposed regulations clearly dictate how states must go about measuring comparability.

 

“Alexander warned he would use “every power of Congress” to make sure the law is implemented the way it was written, even if it meant using the appropriations process to block the regulations or overturning them once they are final.

 

“If the department tries to force states to follow regulations that violate the law, “I’ll tell them to take you to court,” he said.”

 

As Peter Greene wrote, Senator Alexander took John King to the woodshed. Greene writes that Senator Alexander noted “that a December Politico story quoted Duncan saying that USED lawyers are smarter than the lawmakers. But “we in Congress are smart enough to anticipate your lawyers’ attempts to rewrite the law.””

 

 

Categories Duncan, Arne, Education Reform, Every Student Succeeds Act, U.S. Department of Education

Senate Approves John King, 49-40

By dianeravitch
March 14, 2016 //
64

Today, the US Senate voted to confirm John King as Secretary of Education by a vote of 49-40.

 

The only Democrat to vote no was New York Senator Gillibrand.

 

King was opposed by many New York parent groups because of his unwillingness to listen, his unyielding devotion to the Common Core, test-based teacher evaluation, high stakes testing for children, and the corporate reform agenda.

Categories Common Core, Corporate Reform, Education Reform, Standardized Testing, Teacher Evaluations, U.S. Department of Education, VAM (value-added modeling)

Ask Your Senator to Vote “No” on John King

By dianeravitch
March 13, 2016 //
8

Tomorrow the US Senate will vote on the appointment of John King as Secretary of Education. He failed as the Commissioner of Education in Néw York. His rapid adoption of Common Core and teacher evaluation based on test scores led to a massive parent opt out. He battled parents to impose his agenda. He is no different from Arne Duncan.

The Network for Public Education urges you to contact your senators and be heard.

Categories Network for Public Education, U.S. Department of Education

Mercedes Schneider: My Three Big Concerns about ESSA

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2016 //
7

Mercedes Schneider has read the new Every Student Succeeds Act, every word of it.

 

She has three major concerns:

 

First, the bill requires 95% participation in state tests. It is vague about parents’ rights to opt their children out of the test. States can ask for waivers, but this puts them, as she puts it, “at the mercy of” the Secretary of Education.

 

Second, she is worried about the security of data that the U.S. Department of Education collects. It has confidential data on every student and teacher. In a recent hearing, Congressmen mentioned that the Department’s data system had been hacked in the past. Why trust them now?

 

Third, ESSA is as charter-friendly as NCLB. Certainly, the Department is eager to shovel millions, hundreds of millions to charters. Mercedes cites the recent decision of ED to give $71 million to Ohio charters, even as the state’s charter industry was experienced a series of charter scandals. Clearly, the Department is good at talking standards, but its own standards are mighty low.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Data and Data Mining, Delaware, Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Privatization, Testing, U.S. Department of Education

Activists Urge Senate Not to Confirm John King as Secretary of Education

By dianeravitch
March 4, 2016 //
21

A letter signed by numerous parents, educators and scholars was sent to the US Senste, opposing John King for the post of Secretary of Education.

The signatories were especially concerned about King’s enthusiastic embrace of Common Core, his rushed and flawed rollout of CCSS, and his devotion to testing.

The letter was written primarily by Nikhil Goyal, a young man of 20 who has already written two books about education and spoken in many settings, about the need to transform education in fundamental ways. .

Categories Resistance, Testing, U.S. Department of Education

Long Island School Board Opposes John King’s Confirmation

By dianeravitch
February 24, 2016 //
5

The Patchogue-Medford school district on Long Island in New York adopted a resolution in opposition to the confirmation of John King as U.S. Secretary of Education.

“February 22, 2016

The Board of Education of the Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District would like to go on the record as opposing the confirmation of Dr. John B. King, Jr. as United States Secretary of Education. Dr. King formerly served as Commissioner of Education in the State of New York and based on this tenure in this position we have the following primary concerns:

 Dr. King was responsible for the implementation of the No Child Left Behind federal regulations and the introduction of the Common Core Standards in New York State. This was a total failure and caused countless problems in the field of education. All of his actions have now been reversed and/or under review by the Governor, New York State Legislature and the New York State Board of Regents. We are concerned that his failure to successfully implement these programs will now be repeated with a failure to implement the new Every Student Succeeds Act, a far more reaching education law for a much larger constituency.

 Dr. King was extremely unresponsive to the input of parents and educational professionals. We are concerned that this failure to consider the data and opinions provided by these groups will continue if he is confirmed as Secretary of Education.

 Dr. King has intimated that communities which have low participation levels in state assessments will be subject to an embargo of their federal funding. The lack of participation is the result of parental choice, which is clearly a constitutional right in our country, and are not under the control of local educational agencies. Regretfully our community, and those like it, rely very heavily on federal and state aid to run our district. We have a very large percentage of students who are new to our country and do not speak or read English. Many of our students receive free and/or reduced lunch, as well. We are concerned that this loss of funding, due to circumstances which we do not control, will compromise our ability to educate our students.

We cannot help but conclude that amplifying Dr. King’s abject failure as the leader of the educational establishment in New York State to the federal level is good for no one.

It is our recommendation that the President of the United States nominate, for our nation, a Secretary of Education who is proven leader in education, who has extensive public school experience, and proven success, as a both a teacher and administrator, who will be responsive to others, while being empathetic to the realistic needs of our nation’s students and working with the educational community.

Again, we urge you to oppose the nomination of Dr. John B. King, Jr. as Secretary of Education. We have included a very informative article by Dr. Carol Burris regarding Dr. King with this letter.

Please feel free to contact us with any questions or concerns. We appreciate your thoughtful consideration of our request.

Respectfully,

The Board of Education of the Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District

Categories Education Reform, U.S. Department of Education

Steven Singer: John King Says Stop Blaming Teachers, But Can You Believe Him?

By dianeravitch
February 23, 2016 //
29

Steven Singer was startled to read John King’s statement that teachers have been unfairly blamed for social ills and whatever students do. He notes that John King often blamed teachers himself when he was State Commissioner of Education in New York. Can we believe him now?

 

Singer writes:

 

Sometimes the messenger matters.

 

You wouldn’t expect Native Americans to believe an apology from Christopher Columbus.

 

You wouldn’t expect African Americans to believe an apology from David Duke.

 

So why the heck do the Democrats expect teachers to believe an apology from John King!?

 

The acting U.S. Secretary of Education is – himself – responsible for more attacks on public educators than almost anyone else.

 

In his former role as New York Chancellor of Education, he refused to fix a school system he was responsible for destroying all the while pointing his finger at teachers.

 

However, late last month in his new federal position, King gave a speech at a Philadelphia high school acknowledging the mistakes of the Obama administration in tying teachers’ evaluations to student test scores – a practice he was guilty of in New York….

 

I’m sorry, but this apology rings hollow to most educators. We know you. We know that your biggest qualification for your position in charge of the nation’s public school system is a three year stint teaching in a “no excuses” charter school with a high suspension rate.

 

As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

Actually, John King somehow seems like just the person to assure continuity in Arne Duncan’s policies.

 

 

Categories U.S. Department of Education

Carol Burris: Who Is John King and Why Was His Tenure in New York So Stormy and Controversial?

By dianeravitch
February 22, 2016 //
26

Carol Burris, who is now the executive director of the Network for Public Education, spent decades as a teacher and an administrator. She retired last year as principal of South Side High School in Rockville Center, New York. She helped to ignite the “principals’ revolt” against the state’s adoption of a test-based teacher and principal evaluation system; she and another Long Island principal, Sean Feeney, drafted a letter of protest that was eventually signed by nearly 5,000 principals across the state, about 40% of the total.

 

In this post, Burris explains what happened during John King’s time as State Commissioner of Education in New York, and how he alienated parents, teachers, and administrators. King was recently nominated by President Obama to serve as U.S. Secretary of Education.

 

Listening to others–especially parents and teachers–is not his strong point. More than anyone else, Duncan managed to ignite the massive opt out movement in New York last spring. He deserves credit for getting parents so riled up that one of every five eligible students refused the state tests, that is, about 220,000 children in grades 3 through 8.

 

Based on his record in New York, Burris predicts that we can expect more of the same from the Department of Education…or worse.

Categories New York, Opt Out, Parents, Resistance, Teacher Evaluations, U.S. Department of Education

John King’s Wife Hired by Bellwether Consultants

By dianeravitch
February 18, 2016 //
54

Melissa Steele King has excellent credentials. She is a graduate of elite Williams College in Massachusetts; she has a master’s degree in elementary education from Columbia Teachers College; and a doctorate from the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Now she is an associate partner at the reformy Bellwether Education Partners.

She is also the wife of Acting Secretary of Education John King.

Bellwether, co-founded by Andrew Rotherham, is a leading force in the corporate reform movement. Rotherham has been a columnist for TIME. Currently he is on the board of Campbell Brown’s THE 74.

Among its clients:

TN Achievement School District, National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, NewSchools Venture Fund, Rhode Island Department of Education, Stranahan Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, Stand for Children, CEE-Trust, Goodwill Education Initiatives, Harmony Public Schools (Gulen charter schools), TNTP, Rocketship Education (charter chain), KIPP, IDEA charter schools, The Mind Trust, Chiefs for Change, TeachPlus, and the Black Alliance for Education Options.

Here is a list that includes both funders and clients.

Categories Corporate Reform, U.S. Department of Education
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »