Archives for category: US Education

This article was published in 2007. David Gelernter, a brilliant computer scientist at Yale with strong conservative views, asked why we could not have a world without public schools.

Imagine every school run by private entrepreneurs, private managers, religious groups, whoever, whatever.

Or every student with a voucher.

Why have public education at all?

Sometimes it seems that this is the true goal of faux reformers today: a world of privatized schools, perhaps with a few public schools remaining as repositories for the students that no one wants. Sort of like New Orleans today.

I read this article when it appeared in 2007 and remember being astonished by its audacity. It basically suggests that democratic control of education is a failure, and that the private sector is superior.

Of course, this was before the collapse of the economy in 2008, caused entirely by deregulated private banks and greedy individuals. It takes a vigorous public sector to rein in the predatory greed of some institutions and individuals. Not every private institution is greedy or predatory, but why should we trust our children to the whim and competence of the private sector?

We now see private equity investors looking at the schools as opportunities to make money. This is alarming, because whatever profit they extract is money taken away from the education of children. And we know that they will aim to cut costs by increasing class sizes or using technology to reduce the number of teachers.

It bears mentioning that every nation with a high-performing education system has a strong public school system.

Public institutions are committed to equity. Private institutions seek excellence, but they operate in a market that is guaranteed to produce winners and losers, not equity. If markets produced equity, no one would ever lose money in the stock market and the market would only go up, never down.

Our challenge is to pursue the changes that strengthen our public schools and nurture both equity and excellence.

As it happens, we have ample evidence that neither charters nor vouchers have produced either equity or excellence.

Thanks to your letters, emails, comments, and tweets, I have been invited to appear on CNN on Saturday August 18.

Stay tuned for what I hope will be an informative interview.

And never lose hope.

Your voice matters.

Our millions of voices make a difference.

We will end this reign of error.

Diane

My article with the title above appeared on CNN.com.

They heard from you. They invited me to respond and this is the article I wrote.

I think that if we all speak up again and again and again and again, and tell the truth, supported by facts and experience, our voices will be heard.

Write letters to the editor, comment on blogs, speak up at public meetings, do what you can, when you can, where you can.

Your actions will encourage others.

And that is how a movement is built.

From the ground up.

Not with billions of dollars, but with millions of willing hands and hearts and minds.

I received the following description of the appearance of Michelle Rhee and her husband at the University of Hawaii, where they lectured on “Ethics and Education.”

Rhee paused briefly from her national campaign to raise $1 billion to remove teachers’ collective bargaining rights, to strip them of tenure and seniority, and to promote vouchers and charters, to share her wisdom about American education.

One may assume that the issue of the cheating scandals in the District of Columbia was not covered in this lecture. Nor did she likely mention that she is being sued in federal court for firing a whistleblower who wanted to reveal the cheating in his school.

The report says she was asked how to replicate her “successes” in D.C.  She probably did not mention that D.C. still has the largest achievement gaps (black-white, Hispanic-white) of any city tested by the federal government.

Read on.

On August 7, 2012 Michelle Rhee and Kevin Johnson spoke at a University of Hawaii event co-sponsored by the William S. Richardson School of Law, and the Shidler College of Business on the topic of “Ethics in Education”.We were as shocked as you are at the title of this event, which approaches a level of surreality that might have caused Andre Breton to do a double, or triple take. Although the event was not billed as a partisan promotion of a specific ideology there were no other presenters or perspectives. The only perspectives on educational ethics the audience of about 200 heard were those of Rhee and her husband, Sacramento Mayor and and former NBA athlete Kevin Johnson.As we entered the venue, there were notecards and pens for people to write questions on. We suspected immediately, and correctly, that this was a way to weed out questions the moderator did not want Rhee and Johnson to have to deal with. Sure enough, every single question asked at the end of the evening was either framed in a pro-Rhee way, or an anti-union way. For example: “How can one teacher make a difference in a system protected by the union?” And then there was: ” How can we do in Hawaii what was done in Washington D.C.?” The latter sent a shudder down our spines, but their answers even more so.

Rhee and Johnson noted that in Hawaii, there is only one school district for all public schools, which makes the political structure more conducive to “aggressive” reforms. They stated that since Hawaii is “at the back-end of reforms” one way to move to the front end would be for Hawaii’s Governor to invite Rhee’s “Students First” organization (as other states’ Republican Governors have done) to push through reforms.

Johnson noted that Hawaii has a strong presence of Teach For America (TFA) teachers, (big round of applause) which should translate into TFA school board members, principles, and political candidates at “every key position” where they could shape policy. TFA’s concentrated efforts in districts with high drop out rates have only exacerbated the teacher attrition rate in those struggling districts’ schools. TFA programs and their accompanying accelerated teacher preparation programs have received tremendous financial backing from anti-union foundations in Hawai’i. The majority of TFA candidates are not from Hawai’i but have a genuine desire to help the poor.

Imagine the political climate that manipulates their goal to add TFA experience to their resume, their genuine altruistic notion (and youthful naiveté) that a two year commitment in a poor community benefits a struggling school, and their willingness to undermine labor gains made by traditionally licensed teachers. This scenario positions TFA candidates as unknowing union-busters within a neoliberal framework. The Hawaii DOE has guaranteed 80 teaching jobs to TFA candidates, in addition to 32 more Special Education teaching jobs over the next two years. Local teacher candidates who are paying tuition and taking additional education courses in traditional teacher preparation programs at the University of Hawaii, Chaminade University, Brigham Young, Hawaii Pacific University have not been guaranteed jobs within the DOE system, and will be competing for the remaining positions.

Both Johnson and Rhee promoted the anti-union film “Waiting For Superman.” When Johnson asked how many in the audience had seen the film, only about 20 of 200 raised their hands. Rhee told the stories of children in the film trying to get into better schools, and how their parents struggled with this, to make the point that vouchers would have paid the needed tuition. This concern over parents’ powerlessness over their children’s educational options led to a promotion for another upcoming film, this one funded by the Walden Foundation (Walmart), called “Won’t Back Down.” This film deals with the “parent trigger” in which parents can step in to privatize a failing school (by NCLB standards) have the faculty fired and reapply for their positions en masse, or create some other type of charter. No mention was made of the fact that in Los Angeles, it could in reality end with the closure of the community school, nor that chain charter schools actively recruited parents to do this.

Sadly missing was any reference to the research that has determined that, although great teachers can make a difference in students lives, the “teacher effect” is a relatively small part of student achievement, rendering efforts to blame and punish teachers as the singular or main cause of low student achievement dubious at best, and transparently political at worst. (See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-ptsrdyxBE&fb_source=message) Rhee gave several examples of a “parent trigger” scenario. One was in Los Angeles, in which the parents were threatened with deportation, although she did not indicate how the teachers or unions would have been behind the threat.

In Sacramento, Johnson said there had been a 161 point gap in student achievement between Latino and Black versus White students. He said once the school was chartered the gap vanished, due largely to students, teachers, and parents signing a contract to turn a school around. We were not able to find the documentation of this incredible sounding turn around, but are open to seeing it. Johnson pointed to several factors for the success of his charter. Teachers could be called at 8 or 9pm to help with homework, and that every party was committed to helping students in any way possible. No one in the audience chafed at the idea of a teacher being on call during any and all of their waking hours, and many were nodding in approval at this idea.

Rhee also promoted the idea of teachers being assessed by how many extra-curricular unpaid “community contribution” hours they put in, for example, math tutoring after school, coaching a sports team, or other unpaid service after school hours. This would be combined with value added assessments utilizing standardized scores to determine how “effective” teachers are. Rhee explained that they had corrected for economic, social, and other aspects that could be factors in why some students did better than others, in order to leave these value added assessments as purely reflective of the effectiveness of teachers. It was never explained how this works, what research backs up their model, or what institutions or studies support their methods.

The moderator, Will Weinstein, who created the “ethics” series of which this presentation was a part, fawned over Rhee and Johnson all night long. His sarcasm was apparent whenever he asked a “tough” question of the couple. They obviously charmed him and the audience, made up seemingly of law and business students and faculty. This was apparent, when, after about an hour of their promoting union busting, attacks on collective bargaining, and their marveling and wonder at why Republican politicians seem so much more supportive and knowledgeable about their progressive school reforms, Weinstein jokingly asked them why they were “such right-wing conservatives” eliciting a ripple of knowing chuckles throughout the audience. They responded that they had been given a bum rap, with Michelle playing the victim of political Democrats who were in bed with unions.

This was a major theme of the evening, the obstruction that unions present to meaningful reform. Johnson gave a powerful telling of his work to convert Sacramento High from a public school a charter. He stated that the unions stepped in to oppose this, spending vast sums of money to fight against it. No context was given as to why, leaving the audience to assume it was because they opposed poor and minority children receiving a quality education. The flip side of the demonization of unions throughout the night was the way in which the actual results of Rhee’s programs were blatantly whitewashed, or barely addressed. No mention of a D.C. test cheating scandal, of the lackluster performances of charter schools, of the billionaires that back up Rhee’s attacks on teacher unions, of the lack of effective teacher training for TFA graduates (who are assumed to be better than the “bad” experienced public school teachers), and no mention of the corporate funding of the anti-union films they were promoting.

Rhee also promoted the corporate model of merit pay for the “best” (according to flawed assessment models) teachers, and punishment for the bottom-performing percentile. This corporate model known as “stack ranking” or “rank and yank” is a perfect example of how Rhee sees schools as indistinguishable from businesses. She and her husband both portrayed themselves as progressive liberals stating that charter schools needed to be heavily regulated and that failing charters needed to be closed. This qualification was obviously too little too late to establish any semblance of “balance” in their ideology.

For all their talk of accountability, no one thought to ask them who holds them accountable to prove their claims of miracles, turn-arounds, or the selfish agenda of kid hating unions whose one desire is lifetime tenure. If anyone wrote that question for them, it was not asked.

The night ended with one final anti-union joke when Johnson asked if they were out of time. Weinstein smugly responded that the Moderators Union had called and they had to wrap it up, audience applause.

The authors of this report-back are among the founders of a new annual event called LaborFest Hawaii, a celebration and examination of working class and labor history and current events, and a place where working people can assess present conditions to better organize. Our first event will focus on education with a screening of the Grassroots Education Movement made documentary “The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman.” This film is a counter-argument to Davis Guggenheim’s “Waiting for Superman” which targeted teacher unions and pushed privatization, charter schools, and the business model of education. Guggenheim advocates the same austerity-based, anti-union, anti-teacher, and ultimately anti-student reform regime championed by Michelle Rhee, Arne Duncan, Bill Gates, and others.

A reader comments, with more wisdom than anything now coming from the U.S. Department of Education. He also explains how to end the reign of error:

The flawed testing approach continues to be pushed without debate because open honest discussion, involving true experts in the fields of child development, education (and ed-research), and valid data gathering/application would reveal painful truths for those behind the brand of reform we are seeing.

Truth1: Increasing the amount of tests as a means of finding and firing bad teachers is a perversion of assessment in education. Assessments are tools for teachers to use in shaping instruction for their students’ individual needs, which vary between students and can change year to year. Once well-funded and empowered, schools identified and addressed these varying needs. Schools have been attacked and de-funded over time, leaving them less able to address the range of needs students have.  As the economy has further crippled average families, students come to school with more challenges, the attack on schools and the teaching profession has intensified.The intention of “reformers” to use assessment to attack the profession instead of inform it is undeniable  as teacher evals are based mostly on the test results-despite the fact that the brand new CCL standards haven’t been fully integrated with curriculum and the tests being used haven’t even reached final phase of development. Yet the identifying “bad” teachers using this amorphous data has been priority. Truth number one is that reform isn’t really about valid improvements to the education of children. It’s about: 1) control and redirection of public funds, 2) profits for a testing/charter industry that dominates the reform narrative, 3) intimidation of a profession with a long history of middle class empowerment and political activism.

Truth 2: The focus on schools and teachers as the source of educational ills is treating a symptom, not curing the disease. This isn’t a result of misguided naivete or ignorance, it is intentional. There is plenty of data linking economic hardship to family insecurity and disruption to lack of “school readiness” to final educational outcomes. Schools and teachers can work hard to maximize potential and help students surpass obstacles that might otherwise hold them back, but what if policymakers continue creating more obstacles? Well, they ARE creating those obstacles, and they know it. Unfortunately, as policymakers they currently have the power to not only create the obstacles-they also have the power to divert attention and shift the blame.

Truth number 3 is we need to take back our democracy. We can no longer be afraid to be politically active within our schools if we have to protect our students. We need to be heard, we need to vote, and we need as many doing it as we can possibly get.

I hesitate to inflict this interview on my readers. You trust me to inform you and even on occasion to make you laugh with a good satire or parody. I try to shield you from pain and double-speak.

But I must share this with you.

Here is the latest interview with the Secretary of Education. It begins with a stomach-turning but accurate admission that education is the one thing that President Obama and the teacher-bashing governor of New Jersey Chris Christie agree on. How’s that for a reassuring opening?

When asked why the evidence for the reforms he is pushing seems weak, Duncan replies it is because they are new and therefore don’t have a 50-year track record. Oh, please, they don’t have any track record at all, yet he is pushing these untested, invalid measures on schools across the nation. Of course, everyone wants great teachers and great principals and great schools, but nothing he is doing is producing those results.

The questioner gently asks why there were no “dramatic” improvements in New York City or Washington, D.C. or Chicago, where Duncan was in charge for eight years. The answer is so vague as to be indecipherable. Ten years of Duncan-style reform in New York City, six years in D.C., twelve years in Chicago, and nothing to show for it. Just have faith! Believe!

I can’t go on.

Maybe you can.

But isn’t it nice to know that Arne Duncan and Chris Christie and all the rightwing governors are on the same page about how to deal with teachers and principals and schools and education?

 

 

The writer of this article sent it to me today. It is a testimonial to a teacher who changed his life. As he says, there are millions of stories like this, and they are all true.

Do you have one to tell?

Bret Wooten: The Value Of Public Schools

Several months ago, we heard from a listener after a state legislator talked about the great potential in charter schools.  Bret Wooten felt more should be said about the great potential offered by traditional public schools.  Here’s his commentary.

I have a degree in industrial electronics, a U.S. patent, had my poetry published, managed thousands of people as the director of a billion dollar company, visited all 50 states and five countries. Now, I am a husband, father and small business owner.

Oh yeah, and I’m dumb.

At least that is the way I thought of myself until third grade. Where Mrs. Nickolas my teacher sat down in front of me and asked me to read a passage to her. I knew I could not read it. So, I hung my head and told her. “I was dumb and could not do it.” Her reaction was a quick hug. Then, she then looked me in the eyes and said, “We are going to fix that.” That year I was diagnosed with dyslexia and placed into a class that helped me learn to deal with this common disability. There is no cure or pill for this, and I am still a slow reader, often finding myself spelling much like the Chick-fil-A cows. However, I have no doubt that my third grade teacher changed my life that day.

When you think about the scale of what public education offers, it is truly amazing and something we should all be proud of. Beyond, the core class’s public schools offer sports of all kinds, music, arts, libraries, clubs, and numerous opportunities for advanced learner. Or the special education programs that millions of children benefit from. But all of these programs are endanger of being minimized or eliminated in Texas.

I have watched politicians and other unqualified people bash the public education system in this country as they ask schools to do more with less.

I never thought I would see the day when our education system would be treated as a pawn in politics and teachers would be faulted for executing the direction of those same politicians. But, the thing that I find most troubling is that some people are cheering them on. Knowing children will pay for their tax cuts through higher class sizes and less effective programs.

Our children are growing up in a globalized world. They are already in an intellectual war with. Countries like China are producing five times the engineering students that the U.S. did this past year. There has never been a time when we as parents can offer so much to our children. We have an intellectual infrastructure that is truly amazing. Think about the access to information an I-pad or smart phone brings to the mix and how items like these can compliment our existing education system. Tools like these get confused as replacements for teacher they should instead be thought of as tools for children to learn and compete on a global market.

Unlike politicians, teachers will be held responsible for these children. Unlike politicians, teachers will have to look children in the eyes every day knowing more could be done. How many kids like me will sit across the table from a teacher like Mrs. Nickolas in the next few years and nothing will happen – simply because of inadequate funding, poor leadership and no accountability at the state level. Because we let that happen.

These kids can be a productive part of society or a burden to it. I feel very fortunate to say I never really needed a hand out. But there was a time, in the third grade, I did need hand up and it was there; reaching out for me. Please, get informed and involved. I am one story; there are millions like me out there right now.

Bret Wooten is a small business owner from Lewisville.

Call or write CNN and tell them that their coverage of U.S. education is one-sided and misinformed.

While you are at it, tell CNN that their education “expert” is biased against teachers and unions and public education. That’s the unrenowned “Dr.” Steve Perry.

Thanks to Linda, a regular commenter, for this information:

CNN
One CNN Center, Box 105366, Atlanta, GA 30303-5366
Phone: 404-827-1500
Fax: 404-827-1906

Here is the CNN feedback site:

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/

A reader wrote this morning to complain about a biased and ill-informed CNN program.

Teachers, parents: When you see shows like this, call the network’s 800 number and tell them you want to complain. Be specific. Next time Rhee is on a program complaining about the “failure” of U.S. schools, tell the network to ask about the cheating scandals in D.C. and the achievement gaps in D.C.

They take notes. If they get hundred of calls, they listen:

This morning, CNN devoted two segments on how American education is failing compared to the rest of the world. Of course, Michelle Rhee was interviewed and the segment was completed one sided with no counter arguments presented. I wish they would have had you on to debunk Rhee’s false claims. I wrote the following complaint to CNN:
This morning 8/4/12 you had a completed one-sided story about US education which included Michelle Rhee. The entire premise of the segment is that the US is failing in education compared to the rest of the world. You even used a biased chart of nation rankings in education from the American Legislative Exchange Council or ALEC. Rhee, other corporate “reformers” like Bill Gates, and ALEC has one mission-to privatize public education. Rhee’s organization, Students First demonizes teachers and wants to set up more charter schools which perform in many cases no better than public schools. Rhee and other “reformers” never talk about how the US has one of the highest poverty rates of all the industrialized nations. Research indicates poverty has the greatest impact on student performance. So instead of dealing with poverty issues in America, Rhee looks to blame teachers and unions. Moreover, when controlling for poverty, the US ranks in the top 10 of nations in education. In fact American schools have been improving not failing. The National Assessment of Educational Progress shows steady gains in reading and larger gains in math over the years. Why doesn’t CNN act like a responsible news organization and do some actual research about education before having someone like Rhee on the air? Why not have someone to counter her false claims about education like Diane Ravitch? Shame on you CNN for not doing your homework!

Pasi Sahlberg is the brilliant Finnish educator who is trying to roll back the global tide of destructive education policies.

Sahlberg wrote an important book, Finnish Lessons, explaining how the Finnish education system was transformed in the past thirty years and became one of the top-performing nations in the world on PISA tests of reading, mathematics, and science.

Recently Sahlberg wrote an article summarizing his views on Valerie Strauss’s Answer Sheet blog in the Washington Post.

Sahlberg warns that there is now an infection sweeping the world which he calls GERM (the Global Education Reform Movement).

GERM is characterized by heavy emphasis on market-style reforms: testing, data, measurement of students and teachers, ranking, choice, competition.

Finland has resisted the GERM virus. Its students do not take standardized tests; they take tests made by their teachers, whose professional judgment and autonomy are deeply respected by all.

Finland has made sure that all its children are well cared for; less than 5 percent live in poverty. Our child poverty rate is close to 25 percent.

Finland became a high performer, he writes, not by seeking excellence but by seeking equity, by pursuing the goal of good schools for all.

All Finnish teachers must be well-educated in their subjects and in pedagogy, acquired at an academic university; all teachers must have a masters degree before they can teach. Interesting to note that, by contrast, a growing number of teachers in the U.S. are getting their credentials and degrees from online “universities.” Many states are lowering their requirements for teachers.

Here are the symptoms of GERM, described by Sahlberg:

The first symptom is more competition within education systems. Many reformers believe that the quality of education improves when schools compete against one another. In order to compete, schools need more autonomy, and with that autonomy comes the demand for accountability. School inspections, standardized testing of students, and evaluating teacher effectiveness are consequences of market-like competition in many school reforms today. Yet when schools compete against one another, they cooperate less.

The second symptom of GERM is increased school choice. It essentially positions parents as consumers empowering them to select schools for their children from several options and thereby promotes market-style competition into the system as schools seek to attract those parents. More than two-thirds of OECD countries have increased school choice opportunities for families with the perceptions that market mechanisms in education would allow equal access to high-quality schooling for all. Increasing numbers of charter schools in the United States, secondary school academies in England, free schools in Sweden and private schools in Australia are examples of expanding school choice policies. Yet according to the OECD, nations pursuing such choice have seen both a decline in academic results and an increase in school segregation.

The third sign of GERM is stronger accountability from schools and related standardized testing of students. Just as in the market place, many believe that holding teachers and schools accountable for students’ learning will lead to improved results. Today standardized test scores are the most common way of deciding whether schools are doing a good job. Teacher effectiveness that is measured using standardized tests is a related symptom of GERM. According to the Center for Public Education, standardized testing has increased teaching to the test, narrowed curricula to prioritize reading and mathematics, and distanced teaching from the art of pedagogy to mechanistic instruction.

We have a very bad case of GERM in the U.S. We are even exporting it to other countries, including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Our educational products and ideas should be quarantined at the border. We need medication to stop the virus within our own borders. Let’s recognize the “reform” movement for what it is: a bold effort to privatize public education and open it up for private investment. This is no “civil rights movement.” This is an attack on a basic democratic institution.