From the Washington Post's Answer Sheet
By James Arnold
How wonderful it was when we were told that Georgia had won the second round of the Race to the Top sweepstakes. The application -- submitted by then-Gov. Sonny Perdue and his team and amended from the first application, which was almost but not quite good enough -- had been successful in conducting a survey that nobody remembered taking AND in meeting the U.S. Education Department guidelines. And our lucky state was about to receive $400 million dollars and a little change.
The first announcement made after the award was won declared that about $200 million – around half — was to be reserved for “administrative costs.” Most of the other money was to go to the 26 or so volunteer districts around the state that would pilot programs for the rest of Georgia school districts. Among these pilot programs were the Teacher Evaluation Measure and the Leader Evaluation Measure.
Both evaluation measures must, in accordance with the Race to the Top guidelines, tie a percentage of the evaluative scores to student academic achievement. How this was to be accomplished was left up to the Race to the Top recipients. Whether it was sound financial or educational practice was taken as a given, even without extant research supporting such a massive expenditure.
When I think of Race to the Top, an old television show comes to mind.
Those of us born near the middle of the previous century remember the early years of the television industry, and how the medium began almost as an entertainment afterthought and quickly grew into the intrusive social construct of today. Some early shows were precursors of the current fascination with reality TV.
One of these early reality shows was “ Queen For A Day ” hosted by Jack Bailey.It began as a popular radio show and in the early 50’s made the transition to television. Contestants told their pitiful stories of poverty, hard luck, physical ailments and family sorrows to live audiences that responded with applause as measured by the “applause meter.” Jack had the ability to ask each contestant questions guaranteed to bring tears to the eyes of every audience member.
Those with the saddest stories almost always got the most applause. The winner was chosen to receive whatever the prize package was for that day, usually washers and dryers and appliances donated by sponsors. The gifts, of course, were expected to change the lives of the winner from hopelessness and despair to instant happiness and fulfillment. The audiences and sponsors were left with the illusion that their applause and choices and contributions had helped to miraculously and vicariously change the world for the better. They didn’t, and those unlucky contestants whose stories were not pitiful enough to register at the top of the applause meter went back to their hopeless situations that were still, well, hopeless, and the winners enjoyed momentary celebrity status until they too were quickly relegated to yesterday’s news.
Race to the Top is marketed as a “solution” for states and districts in search of reform. The catch — as with all federal money — is the cash comes with strings that will continue the emphasis on high-stakes testing and the top-down management theories that were the basis of No Child Left Behind. The U.S. Education Department wants teacher evaluations tied to student test scores regardless of how it is done, and they want it done quickly.
Asked about the lack of research during a presentation to school administrators from Georgia, Education Department Assistant Superintendent Teresa MacCartney replied, “We are hoping the research will catch up with us in a few years.” I admire her optimism, but deplore the fact that $400 million will be spent on the development and integration of a teacher evaluation method with no evidence whatsoever to support a positive effect on student achievement. That’s not a string; it’s a rope.
In addition to the strings tied tightly to Race to the Top, these same requirements are tied to the waivers offered to states by the Education Department from No Child Left Behind. These waivers are based on the acceptance and implementation of a system to evaluate teachers on the basis of student progress on high stakes achievement tests. Those teachers who teach subjects where testing is not currently done will be evaluated on Student Learning Objectives. Look to Tennessee, New York and Hawaii to learn how effective this method has been and how teachers have reacted. It’s not very hard to imagine the same teacher backlash to a hastily devised, quickly implemented, poorly researched, do-it-because-we-know-what’s-good-for-you evaluation method in Georgia.
President Obama used the State of the Union address to deplore the fact that teachers are required to teach to the test, but his policies for Race to the Top and his NCLB waivers require teacher evaluations to be tied in part to student test scores on these same tests. He can’t have it both ways.
The Common Core standards will serve not to improve student achievement but to allow politicians to rank states and systems and schools in a gigantic expansion of what we currently see in the zip code effect. The effects of poverty and socio-economic factors on education will continue to be largely ignored in our infatuation with the belief that student achievement will improve through intensified measurement.
The “teach the test” and “test prep” and “testing pep rallies” environment will grow stronger through the implementation of annual growth measurements (annual growth = 100% - 2011 proficiency rate of first time test takers divided by 6) that will serve as almost insurmountable incentives for teachers to teach to the test, by the test and for the test.
Race to the Top is not an answer to the question of educational reform, but merely an expansion of the influence of corporate interests that are following the money inexplicably spent in a futile attempt to quantify the unquantifiable.
Like “Queen for a Day,” the aid offered to contestants is a by-product and not the reason for the program. Tests, we must remember, are developed, pushed and sold by testing companies with no vested interest in student achievement. They are marketed to bureaucrats and politicians looking for an easy fix to a complex problem, and serve little or no purpose beyond teaching our students to become experts in bubble- in testing methodology. They perpetuate the myth of the effectiveness of top-down bureaucratic leadership that doesn’t work for business and has never worked for education either. We continue to forget the reform in education must be led by teachers and educators from the local level up and not the other way around. The late House Speaker Tip O’Neill, for all his faults, got this one right; “All politics is local.”
He could have included education in that one, too. “Queen for a Day” was never meant to alleviate poverty or the desperate conditions of the contestants, just as Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind waivers are not meant to improve student achievement. Both are extensions of corporate intrusion and self interest.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/how-race-to-the-top-is-like-queen-for-a-day/2012/02/01/gIQAhup5iQ_blog.html?wprss=answer-sheet
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Florida's college tuition goes up and up and up
From Tampa Bay OnLine.com
by Lindsay Peterson
When Florida lawmakers proposed steadily increasing university tuition until it hit the national average, students and university officials went along because they saw the promise of a better education.
As expected, tuition jumped 15 percent year after year.
But the other side of the deal — smaller class sizes, expanded course offerings, shorter lines at the registrar's office — never materialized.
Students' "worst fears have been realized" as lawmakers imposed budget cuts along with tuition increases, said University of South Florida Provost Ralph Wilcox.
He sees the same thing happening this year, with the Florida House of Representatives proposing more tuition increases and university budget cuts.
The one difference is that Gov. Rick Scott has staked out a position against tuition increases. His 2012-13 budget would keep tuition flat, about $5,800 a year for a USF student, but keep university budgets flat, too.
It's an improvement over the House approach, but Scott's position raises a question, Wilcox said.
Are Floridians happy with the status quo?
"If students, families and employers are satisfied with the current levels of access and the quality of a university education in the state," Wilcox said, "then we could certainly get by with a continuation budget and no tuition increase."
But "we know a good number of students are moving out of the state" because they don't like what's happening at the public universities, he said. Once they're gone, they tend not to come back.
"These are our best and brightest."
For years, tuition in Florida was the lowest in the country. Then in 2009, the Legislature passed a bill that would allow Florida's public universities to increase tuition by up to 15 percent every year until it caught up with the national average.
State Rep. Will Weatherford, a Wesley Chapel Republican, sponsored the bill and said at the time, "Our universities are stretched; there is a brain drain taking place. … If we don't do something, we're going to be faced with a second-tier university system."
In each of the subsequent years, lawmakers increased tuition by 8 percent, leaving the universities the option to go up an additional 7 percent, to 15. They all did.
The increases didn't make up for the budget cuts, Wilcox said.
"We've tightened our belts" as enrollment hit an all-time high, Wilcox said.
Meanwhile, state education officials talk about the need for Florida's universities to do more to boost the state economy and compete with the best universities in the country.
"Efficiencies aren't going to get us there," he said.
One thing that Scott's proposal does is stop, for now, the shift of higher education costs to families.
Five years ago, students and their families paid about 25 percent of university teaching expenses and the state covered the rest. Now with tuition increases paired with state cuts, families are carrying more than 40 percent of the cost.
Some students are leaving the state, but some are leaving school altogether.
"I just can't make ends meet," said USF senior Corey Uhl.
He already has about $28,000 in debt, he said. He has a Bright Futures scholarship, but lawmakers steadily have reduced what it covers, from 75 percent of tuition to about half.
"I don't understand why we can't raise taxes somewhere a little bit and keep tuition low and keep all these amazing students in Florida," he said.
State Rep. Rick Kriseman, a Democrat from St. Petersburg, says it's a matter of choices.
"We keep hearing there's no money, there's no money," he said. "It's not true."
The state could raise up to $4 billion by closing loopholes, for instance, and collecting money that some online companies already owe, he said.
"But the leadership chooses not to do that."
The university system's reputation is on the line, he said.
Tuition remains comparatively low, so "it's the best deal there is. But it isn't going to be a great deal anymore if we keep creating larger classes and fail to retain top-quality professors."
The Legislature's credibility is on the line, Wilcox said.
Students are paying more and expect something for their money, he said.
Instead, they're getting the same — "and in some cases less."
http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2012/feb/02/tuition-hikes-wear-thin-ar-354060/?
by Lindsay Peterson
When Florida lawmakers proposed steadily increasing university tuition until it hit the national average, students and university officials went along because they saw the promise of a better education.
As expected, tuition jumped 15 percent year after year.
But the other side of the deal — smaller class sizes, expanded course offerings, shorter lines at the registrar's office — never materialized.
Students' "worst fears have been realized" as lawmakers imposed budget cuts along with tuition increases, said University of South Florida Provost Ralph Wilcox.
He sees the same thing happening this year, with the Florida House of Representatives proposing more tuition increases and university budget cuts.
The one difference is that Gov. Rick Scott has staked out a position against tuition increases. His 2012-13 budget would keep tuition flat, about $5,800 a year for a USF student, but keep university budgets flat, too.
It's an improvement over the House approach, but Scott's position raises a question, Wilcox said.
Are Floridians happy with the status quo?
"If students, families and employers are satisfied with the current levels of access and the quality of a university education in the state," Wilcox said, "then we could certainly get by with a continuation budget and no tuition increase."
But "we know a good number of students are moving out of the state" because they don't like what's happening at the public universities, he said. Once they're gone, they tend not to come back.
"These are our best and brightest."
For years, tuition in Florida was the lowest in the country. Then in 2009, the Legislature passed a bill that would allow Florida's public universities to increase tuition by up to 15 percent every year until it caught up with the national average.
State Rep. Will Weatherford, a Wesley Chapel Republican, sponsored the bill and said at the time, "Our universities are stretched; there is a brain drain taking place. … If we don't do something, we're going to be faced with a second-tier university system."
In each of the subsequent years, lawmakers increased tuition by 8 percent, leaving the universities the option to go up an additional 7 percent, to 15. They all did.
The increases didn't make up for the budget cuts, Wilcox said.
"We've tightened our belts" as enrollment hit an all-time high, Wilcox said.
Meanwhile, state education officials talk about the need for Florida's universities to do more to boost the state economy and compete with the best universities in the country.
"Efficiencies aren't going to get us there," he said.
One thing that Scott's proposal does is stop, for now, the shift of higher education costs to families.
Five years ago, students and their families paid about 25 percent of university teaching expenses and the state covered the rest. Now with tuition increases paired with state cuts, families are carrying more than 40 percent of the cost.
Some students are leaving the state, but some are leaving school altogether.
"I just can't make ends meet," said USF senior Corey Uhl.
He already has about $28,000 in debt, he said. He has a Bright Futures scholarship, but lawmakers steadily have reduced what it covers, from 75 percent of tuition to about half.
"I don't understand why we can't raise taxes somewhere a little bit and keep tuition low and keep all these amazing students in Florida," he said.
State Rep. Rick Kriseman, a Democrat from St. Petersburg, says it's a matter of choices.
"We keep hearing there's no money, there's no money," he said. "It's not true."
The state could raise up to $4 billion by closing loopholes, for instance, and collecting money that some online companies already owe, he said.
"But the leadership chooses not to do that."
The university system's reputation is on the line, he said.
Tuition remains comparatively low, so "it's the best deal there is. But it isn't going to be a great deal anymore if we keep creating larger classes and fail to retain top-quality professors."
The Legislature's credibility is on the line, Wilcox said.
Students are paying more and expect something for their money, he said.
Instead, they're getting the same — "and in some cases less."
http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2012/feb/02/tuition-hikes-wear-thin-ar-354060/?
The Times Union does the city a diservice
I had big britches as a boy. I would often try and join in adult conversations. I thought I knew it all. My grandmother who usually had some knitting on her lap after the first or second outrageous thing I said, would look at me and in her soothing voice say, you know it’s better to stay silent and let people think you are ignorant than open your mouth and confirm it. I always got her meaning, well until the next time anyways.
Let me offer the same advice to the Times Union’s editors, though it’s hard for me to be as polite and patient as my grandmother was, especially since through their dogged support of the quarter million dollar man on the river, Superintendent Pratt-Dannals, they are hurting the city and it’s children. If the editors are not going to educate themselves about what is going on in our schools then they should remain silent on the subject.
In an editorial about Jacksonville’s improved quality of life, the many things going on that we should be proud of, they wrote the following about education:
Besides the increased graduation rate, school safety incidents are down by 41 percent, the lowest rate in the 14 years.
Do the editors of the Times Union not read their own paper?!? Did they not see how the state ranked us fiftieth out of sixty-seven school districts? Did they not see how eight of our neighborhood high schools (we only have fourteen) were in the bottom 25 of the state including Jackson dead last at 404. That’s not the bottom quarter by the way, that’s the bottom 25!
How about the articles in recent weeks that question the under reporting of referrals, or expose how thousands of kids have used grade recovery to graduate. At the very least that’s anecdotal evidence suggesting our graduation rate and school safety incidents might not be what they are reported!
When the Times Union falls lockstep behind the superintendent and puts an everything is fine spin of Duval’s education system then they do the city and our children a disservice. They give the adults a false sense of security and they allow the kids to remain in a system that doesn’t value, discipline or rigor and ill prepares them for life.
The truth is we are in trouble and we need all hands on deck to claw our way out of it and if the Times Union’s editors aren’t going to assist then it’s time they stayed silent on the issue rather than continue to write about it and confirm what the rest of us know.
Let me offer the same advice to the Times Union’s editors, though it’s hard for me to be as polite and patient as my grandmother was, especially since through their dogged support of the quarter million dollar man on the river, Superintendent Pratt-Dannals, they are hurting the city and it’s children. If the editors are not going to educate themselves about what is going on in our schools then they should remain silent on the subject.
In an editorial about Jacksonville’s improved quality of life, the many things going on that we should be proud of, they wrote the following about education:
Besides the increased graduation rate, school safety incidents are down by 41 percent, the lowest rate in the 14 years.
Do the editors of the Times Union not read their own paper?!? Did they not see how the state ranked us fiftieth out of sixty-seven school districts? Did they not see how eight of our neighborhood high schools (we only have fourteen) were in the bottom 25 of the state including Jackson dead last at 404. That’s not the bottom quarter by the way, that’s the bottom 25!
How about the articles in recent weeks that question the under reporting of referrals, or expose how thousands of kids have used grade recovery to graduate. At the very least that’s anecdotal evidence suggesting our graduation rate and school safety incidents might not be what they are reported!
When the Times Union falls lockstep behind the superintendent and puts an everything is fine spin of Duval’s education system then they do the city and our children a disservice. They give the adults a false sense of security and they allow the kids to remain in a system that doesn’t value, discipline or rigor and ill prepares them for life.
The truth is we are in trouble and we need all hands on deck to claw our way out of it and if the Times Union’s editors aren’t going to assist then it’s time they stayed silent on the issue rather than continue to write about it and confirm what the rest of us know.
Florida's Budget, higher tuition, less road construction, lower payments to hospitals treating the poor, 73 million for corporations
From the Orlando Sentinel
by Aaron Deslatte
Florida House and Senate budget writers are crafting a $69 billion-plus spending plan that would deliver most of Gov. Rick Scott's top priorities, from tax incentives for corporations to Medicaid cuts and a $1.1 billion boost in classroom spending.
The state budget taking shape near the midpoint of the 60-day session would accomplish those goals by relying on higher tuition, less road construction, lower payments to hospitals treating the poor and fewer dollars for corporate breaks than the governor had requested.
Scott signaled this week that he didn't support higher tuition costs for college and university students, but the plans taking shape would rely on the automatic 15 percent "differential" tuition hikes that universities are allowed to impose.
The House budget cuts state funding for universities by 8.4 percent and relies on $245 million in tuition hikes to offset those cuts.
"A good many of [university presidents] have asked for this opportunity to raise tuition," said Higher Education Budget Chair Marlene O'Toole, R-The Villages. "It's the budget we got."
Scott has said he wanted to keep Florida's tuition rates lower than other states' as a competitive advantage and harked back to his own days as a self-financed college student. But he may not have much say in the decision.
House Appropriations Chair Denise Grimsley, R-Sebring, said Wednesday that the governor won't be able to veto the hikes because they aren't being implemented by a line item in the budget.
The $69.2 billion budget advanced by Grimsley's Appropriations Committee for the 2012-13 fiscal year would boost state spending on K-12 classrooms by an average of $141 per student. That partially restores a cut of more than $1.35 billion — or $585 per student — that lawmakers and Scott approved this year.
But most of the criticism Wednesday was directed at the House's plan to transfer $120 million out of a road-building trust fund and plans to shutter seven prisons. Representatives from Jefferson County — just east of Tallahassee — said closing a prison there would turn their community into a "ghost town."
"They are real people. They have real problems and real children. They lack at this point in time real opportunity," said Rep. Leonard Bembry, D-Greenville, before the committee defeated an amendment to restore $10 million for the prison.
At the same time, House Republicans have infused many of their own priorities into the spending plan.
For example, it includes $27 million to create a completely online university, a goal House Speaker-designate Will Weatherford asked the Florida Board of Governors to consider this month.
Senate budget leaders plan to roll out more details of their spending plans next week and predict they will look a lot like the House version.
Senate President Mike Haridopolos, R-Merritt Island, said Wednesday that his chamber would likely go in the same direction on tuition hikes.
"In this case, I hope that people recognize we have the fifth-lowest tuition in the country," he said.
But the Senate budget could differ in several areas.
Senate Pre-K-12 Education Budget Chairman David Simmons, R-Maitland, said he hoped the Senate could boost school spending by $1.3 billion — a nearly 4 percent increase.
"I am cautiously optimistic that we're going to exceed both the House's and governor's budgets," Simmons said.
But Haridopolos predicted it would be "tough" to fund Everglades and conservation land-buying programs at the level Scott had requested. The House included $35 million for Everglades but no money for the Florida Forever program.
The Senate is planning to adhere more closely to Scott's blueprint for Medicaid spending, particularly his proposal to start paying hospitals more similar rates for treatment they render to the nearly 3 million poor, sick and elderly people enrolled in the program.
"Paying for services in a more equitable way is where we need to go," said Senate Budget Chairman J.D. Alexander, R-Lake Wales.
Scott had recommended a nearly $2 billion cut to the $21 billion Medicaid system, financed largely by evening out rates for hospitals — which would impose deeper cuts in South Florida and some other urban markets.
The House imposes smaller cuts — $453 million to hospitals, nursing homes and HMOs — while boosting overall Medicaid spending to handle enrollment growth.
The House budget also gives Scott $73 million in tax incentives for corporations that pledge to create jobs, and an additional $100 million in tax cuts on corporate income and the purchase of machinery. Scott had requested a total of $230 million in business incentives.
adeslatte@tribune.com or 850-222-5564
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-house-budget-advances-20120201,0,47247.story
by Aaron Deslatte
Florida House and Senate budget writers are crafting a $69 billion-plus spending plan that would deliver most of Gov. Rick Scott's top priorities, from tax incentives for corporations to Medicaid cuts and a $1.1 billion boost in classroom spending.
The state budget taking shape near the midpoint of the 60-day session would accomplish those goals by relying on higher tuition, less road construction, lower payments to hospitals treating the poor and fewer dollars for corporate breaks than the governor had requested.
Scott signaled this week that he didn't support higher tuition costs for college and university students, but the plans taking shape would rely on the automatic 15 percent "differential" tuition hikes that universities are allowed to impose.
The House budget cuts state funding for universities by 8.4 percent and relies on $245 million in tuition hikes to offset those cuts.
"A good many of [university presidents] have asked for this opportunity to raise tuition," said Higher Education Budget Chair Marlene O'Toole, R-The Villages. "It's the budget we got."
Scott has said he wanted to keep Florida's tuition rates lower than other states' as a competitive advantage and harked back to his own days as a self-financed college student. But he may not have much say in the decision.
House Appropriations Chair Denise Grimsley, R-Sebring, said Wednesday that the governor won't be able to veto the hikes because they aren't being implemented by a line item in the budget.
The $69.2 billion budget advanced by Grimsley's Appropriations Committee for the 2012-13 fiscal year would boost state spending on K-12 classrooms by an average of $141 per student. That partially restores a cut of more than $1.35 billion — or $585 per student — that lawmakers and Scott approved this year.
But most of the criticism Wednesday was directed at the House's plan to transfer $120 million out of a road-building trust fund and plans to shutter seven prisons. Representatives from Jefferson County — just east of Tallahassee — said closing a prison there would turn their community into a "ghost town."
"They are real people. They have real problems and real children. They lack at this point in time real opportunity," said Rep. Leonard Bembry, D-Greenville, before the committee defeated an amendment to restore $10 million for the prison.
At the same time, House Republicans have infused many of their own priorities into the spending plan.
For example, it includes $27 million to create a completely online university, a goal House Speaker-designate Will Weatherford asked the Florida Board of Governors to consider this month.
Senate budget leaders plan to roll out more details of their spending plans next week and predict they will look a lot like the House version.
Senate President Mike Haridopolos, R-Merritt Island, said Wednesday that his chamber would likely go in the same direction on tuition hikes.
"In this case, I hope that people recognize we have the fifth-lowest tuition in the country," he said.
But the Senate budget could differ in several areas.
Senate Pre-K-12 Education Budget Chairman David Simmons, R-Maitland, said he hoped the Senate could boost school spending by $1.3 billion — a nearly 4 percent increase.
"I am cautiously optimistic that we're going to exceed both the House's and governor's budgets," Simmons said.
But Haridopolos predicted it would be "tough" to fund Everglades and conservation land-buying programs at the level Scott had requested. The House included $35 million for Everglades but no money for the Florida Forever program.
The Senate is planning to adhere more closely to Scott's blueprint for Medicaid spending, particularly his proposal to start paying hospitals more similar rates for treatment they render to the nearly 3 million poor, sick and elderly people enrolled in the program.
"Paying for services in a more equitable way is where we need to go," said Senate Budget Chairman J.D. Alexander, R-Lake Wales.
Scott had recommended a nearly $2 billion cut to the $21 billion Medicaid system, financed largely by evening out rates for hospitals — which would impose deeper cuts in South Florida and some other urban markets.
The House imposes smaller cuts — $453 million to hospitals, nursing homes and HMOs — while boosting overall Medicaid spending to handle enrollment growth.
The House budget also gives Scott $73 million in tax incentives for corporations that pledge to create jobs, and an additional $100 million in tax cuts on corporate income and the purchase of machinery. Scott had requested a total of $230 million in business incentives.
adeslatte@tribune.com or 850-222-5564
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-house-budget-advances-20120201,0,47247.story
Does the president not understand his own education policies
From Ed Week's Bridging Differences
by Diane Ravitch
I don't know about you, but I am growing convinced that President Barack Obama doesn't know what Race to the Top is. I don't think he really understands what his own administration is doing to education. In his State of the Union address last week, he said that he wanted teachers to "stop teaching to the test." He also said that teachers should teach with "creativity and passion." And he said that schools should reward the best teachers and replace those who weren't doing a good job. To "reward the best" and "fire the worst," states and districts are relying on test scores. The Race to the Top says they must.
Deconstruct this. Teachers would love to "stop teaching to the test," but Race to the Top makes test scores the measure of every teacher. If teachers take the President's advice (and they would love to!), their students might not get higher test scores every year, and teachers might be fired, and their schools might be closed.
Why does President Obama think that teachers can "stop teaching to the test" when their livelihood, their reputation, and the survival of their school depends on the outcome of those all-important standardized tests?
Funnily enough, President Obama said something similar last year during a town hall meeting. He said that his daughters, who attend the elite Sidwell Friends school, took a standardized test, and they didn't have any preparation for it. He said:
"Malia and Sasha, my two daughters, they just recently took a standardized test. But it wasn't a high-stakes test. It wasn't a test where they had to panic. I mean, they didn't even really know that they were going to take it ahead of time. They didn't study for it, they just went ahead and took it. And it was a tool to diagnose where they were strong, where they were weak, and what the teachers needed to emphasize.
"Too often, what we've been doing is using these tests to punish students or to, in some cases, punish schools. And so what we've said is let's find a test that everybody agrees makes sense; let's apply it in a less pressure-packed atmosphere; let's figure out whether we have to do it every year or whether we can do it maybe every several years; and let's make sure that that's not the only way we're judging whether a school is doing well."
Teachers must have been excited when they heard what the President said then because he showed that he really understood the dangers of high-stakes testing. He said:
"So what I want to do is—one thing I never want to see happen is schools that are just teaching to the test. Because then you're not learning about the world; you're not learning about different cultures, you're not learning about science, you're not learning about math. All you're learning about is how to fill out a little bubble on an exam and the little tricks that you need to do in order to take a test. And that's not going to make education interesting to you. And young people do well in stuff that they're interested in. They're not going to do as well if it's boring."
Teachers must have been jumping for joy when they heard this, because they know that states and districts have been reducing the time available for the arts, history, civics, physical education, everything other than the tests of reading and mathematics. That excellent teacher-blogger Anthony Cody pointed out in his review of his speech that the President was "blasting his own education policies."
Do you think that President Obama just doesn't understand that Race to the Top has encouraged states to double down on high-stakes testing? Maybe he doesn't realize that the strategies of his administration rely totally on test scores. Do you think no one from the U.S. Department of Education has explained that merit pay has been tried again and again and has never succeeded? Did anyone tell him about the Vanderbilt study of 2010, in which Nashville teachers were offered bonuses of $15,000? Did anyone tell him that those big bonuses didn't lead to higher test scores? Did anyone tell him about the New York City plan for school-wide bonuses, which cost the city $56 million, and produced no difference in test scores? Has anyone told him or First Lady Michelle Obama about the districts and states (like Florida) that may eliminate (or have eliminated) their requirement for physical education because more time is needed for test prep?
Do you think he understands that his Race to the Top program is demoralizing teachers across the nation? Does he know that teachers are not allowed to teach with creativity and passion because they might be fired for not following their district-mandated script?
He's a smart man. I can't believe that he really doesn't know that Race to the Top is no better, and in some ways is even worse, than No Child Left Behind. NCLB holds schools accountable; Race to the Top holds individual teachers accountable. Does he know that almost one of every three principals in the state of New York has signed a letter of protest against the test-based evaluations that Race to the Top imposes?
He wants the teacher-bashing to end, but I wonder if he knows that the worst teacher-bashing started because of his and Arne Duncan's rhetoric about firing teachers if their students got low test scores?
When I saw Linda Darling-Hammond last week in California, she gave me charts from the U.S. Department of Education's Schools and Staffing Survey which show that the modal years of teaching experience in 1987-88 was 15 (meaning that there were more teachers with 15 years of experience than any other group); in the latest published survey, 2007-08, the modal years of experience was one. That means that in 2008 there were more teachers in their first year of teaching than any other group. This is frightening. What sane nation would want to lose its experienced teachers and rely increasingly on newcomers?
Of course, teachers should be evaluated, but they should be evaluated by knowledgeable professionals—their supervisors and peers. Of course, incompetent teachers should be fired, but first they should have a chance to improve. If they can't improve, they don't belong in the classroom.
The irony of all this is that President Obama opposes high-stakes testing. He has now said so twice. Why does he endorse policies that require what he personally opposes?
The President also said that states could reduce the dropout rate by requiring students to stay in school until they are 18. Do you think students drop out because they aren't required by law to stay in school? I think the President should learn more about the reasons students leave before he proposes a law to force them to stay against their will. If he did, he might have better suggestions for lowering the dropout rate.
And one other thing. President Obama referred approvingly to the Chetty-Friedman-Rockoff study of value-added assessment and said that "good teachers" would produce lifetime gains of $250,000 per classroom. Did anyone tell him that if there are 25 students in a class and each of them works for 40 years, then each one will gain $250 a year? Now, I'm not putting down a gain of $250 a year (that's four or five times to fill your gas tank), and I certainly believe in the importance of good teachers. I don't think that doubling down even more on standardized tests in reading and math is the right way to identify good or great teachers. If we push more on that line of thinking, teaching to the test is a necessity, not a choice.
I just wish that the president would change course on Race to the Top. It's even more demoralizing for teachers and principals than NCLB. It emphasizes testing at every turn, and it will not allow anyone to "stop teaching to the test."
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2012/01/does_president_obama_know_what.html
by Diane Ravitch
I don't know about you, but I am growing convinced that President Barack Obama doesn't know what Race to the Top is. I don't think he really understands what his own administration is doing to education. In his State of the Union address last week, he said that he wanted teachers to "stop teaching to the test." He also said that teachers should teach with "creativity and passion." And he said that schools should reward the best teachers and replace those who weren't doing a good job. To "reward the best" and "fire the worst," states and districts are relying on test scores. The Race to the Top says they must.
Deconstruct this. Teachers would love to "stop teaching to the test," but Race to the Top makes test scores the measure of every teacher. If teachers take the President's advice (and they would love to!), their students might not get higher test scores every year, and teachers might be fired, and their schools might be closed.
Why does President Obama think that teachers can "stop teaching to the test" when their livelihood, their reputation, and the survival of their school depends on the outcome of those all-important standardized tests?
Funnily enough, President Obama said something similar last year during a town hall meeting. He said that his daughters, who attend the elite Sidwell Friends school, took a standardized test, and they didn't have any preparation for it. He said:
"Malia and Sasha, my two daughters, they just recently took a standardized test. But it wasn't a high-stakes test. It wasn't a test where they had to panic. I mean, they didn't even really know that they were going to take it ahead of time. They didn't study for it, they just went ahead and took it. And it was a tool to diagnose where they were strong, where they were weak, and what the teachers needed to emphasize.
"Too often, what we've been doing is using these tests to punish students or to, in some cases, punish schools. And so what we've said is let's find a test that everybody agrees makes sense; let's apply it in a less pressure-packed atmosphere; let's figure out whether we have to do it every year or whether we can do it maybe every several years; and let's make sure that that's not the only way we're judging whether a school is doing well."
Teachers must have been excited when they heard what the President said then because he showed that he really understood the dangers of high-stakes testing. He said:
"So what I want to do is—one thing I never want to see happen is schools that are just teaching to the test. Because then you're not learning about the world; you're not learning about different cultures, you're not learning about science, you're not learning about math. All you're learning about is how to fill out a little bubble on an exam and the little tricks that you need to do in order to take a test. And that's not going to make education interesting to you. And young people do well in stuff that they're interested in. They're not going to do as well if it's boring."
Teachers must have been jumping for joy when they heard this, because they know that states and districts have been reducing the time available for the arts, history, civics, physical education, everything other than the tests of reading and mathematics. That excellent teacher-blogger Anthony Cody pointed out in his review of his speech that the President was "blasting his own education policies."
Do you think that President Obama just doesn't understand that Race to the Top has encouraged states to double down on high-stakes testing? Maybe he doesn't realize that the strategies of his administration rely totally on test scores. Do you think no one from the U.S. Department of Education has explained that merit pay has been tried again and again and has never succeeded? Did anyone tell him about the Vanderbilt study of 2010, in which Nashville teachers were offered bonuses of $15,000? Did anyone tell him that those big bonuses didn't lead to higher test scores? Did anyone tell him about the New York City plan for school-wide bonuses, which cost the city $56 million, and produced no difference in test scores? Has anyone told him or First Lady Michelle Obama about the districts and states (like Florida) that may eliminate (or have eliminated) their requirement for physical education because more time is needed for test prep?
Do you think he understands that his Race to the Top program is demoralizing teachers across the nation? Does he know that teachers are not allowed to teach with creativity and passion because they might be fired for not following their district-mandated script?
He's a smart man. I can't believe that he really doesn't know that Race to the Top is no better, and in some ways is even worse, than No Child Left Behind. NCLB holds schools accountable; Race to the Top holds individual teachers accountable. Does he know that almost one of every three principals in the state of New York has signed a letter of protest against the test-based evaluations that Race to the Top imposes?
He wants the teacher-bashing to end, but I wonder if he knows that the worst teacher-bashing started because of his and Arne Duncan's rhetoric about firing teachers if their students got low test scores?
When I saw Linda Darling-Hammond last week in California, she gave me charts from the U.S. Department of Education's Schools and Staffing Survey which show that the modal years of teaching experience in 1987-88 was 15 (meaning that there were more teachers with 15 years of experience than any other group); in the latest published survey, 2007-08, the modal years of experience was one. That means that in 2008 there were more teachers in their first year of teaching than any other group. This is frightening. What sane nation would want to lose its experienced teachers and rely increasingly on newcomers?
Of course, teachers should be evaluated, but they should be evaluated by knowledgeable professionals—their supervisors and peers. Of course, incompetent teachers should be fired, but first they should have a chance to improve. If they can't improve, they don't belong in the classroom.
The irony of all this is that President Obama opposes high-stakes testing. He has now said so twice. Why does he endorse policies that require what he personally opposes?
The President also said that states could reduce the dropout rate by requiring students to stay in school until they are 18. Do you think students drop out because they aren't required by law to stay in school? I think the President should learn more about the reasons students leave before he proposes a law to force them to stay against their will. If he did, he might have better suggestions for lowering the dropout rate.
And one other thing. President Obama referred approvingly to the Chetty-Friedman-Rockoff study of value-added assessment and said that "good teachers" would produce lifetime gains of $250,000 per classroom. Did anyone tell him that if there are 25 students in a class and each of them works for 40 years, then each one will gain $250 a year? Now, I'm not putting down a gain of $250 a year (that's four or five times to fill your gas tank), and I certainly believe in the importance of good teachers. I don't think that doubling down even more on standardized tests in reading and math is the right way to identify good or great teachers. If we push more on that line of thinking, teaching to the test is a necessity, not a choice.
I just wish that the president would change course on Race to the Top. It's even more demoralizing for teachers and principals than NCLB. It emphasizes testing at every turn, and it will not allow anyone to "stop teaching to the test."
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2012/01/does_president_obama_know_what.html
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Should teachers at for profit schools get tax payer funded pensions
From Tampa Bay.coms gradebook
by Jeff Solocheck
To many, Florida looks like fertile grounds for charter school expansion. Lawmakers have been so friendly that a coalition of parent groups recently joined forces to protest one of the latest proposals, which they argue would take too much money away from the traditional public school system.
But even charter school operators have their concerns that the good times might not last.
Cheri Shannon, executive director of Florida's new Charter School Alliance, this week sent out an urgent call to action for supporters. She's worried that a recently proposed IRS regulation could make it near impossible for charters to find teachers. She writes in her alert:
"Presently, every single state that authorizes charter schools either requires or permits charter school participation in the state’s retirement system. Therefore, this regulation would negatively impact nearly all charter schools and charter school teachers in the country. All of these teachers will be forced to either leave their charter schools or lose their accrued pension wealth. Charter schools will have trouble recruiting and keeping veteran teachers, negatively affecting the movement as a whole.
"If these regulations are passed, more than 90% of our country’s charter school workforce will be affected. For this reason, we cannot allow these regulations to be adopted in their current form. Please assist us in preventing the adoption of these unfair regulations."
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/content/even-charter-schools-have-their-worries
by Jeff Solocheck
To many, Florida looks like fertile grounds for charter school expansion. Lawmakers have been so friendly that a coalition of parent groups recently joined forces to protest one of the latest proposals, which they argue would take too much money away from the traditional public school system.
But even charter school operators have their concerns that the good times might not last.
Cheri Shannon, executive director of Florida's new Charter School Alliance, this week sent out an urgent call to action for supporters. She's worried that a recently proposed IRS regulation could make it near impossible for charters to find teachers. She writes in her alert:
"Presently, every single state that authorizes charter schools either requires or permits charter school participation in the state’s retirement system. Therefore, this regulation would negatively impact nearly all charter schools and charter school teachers in the country. All of these teachers will be forced to either leave their charter schools or lose their accrued pension wealth. Charter schools will have trouble recruiting and keeping veteran teachers, negatively affecting the movement as a whole.
"If these regulations are passed, more than 90% of our country’s charter school workforce will be affected. For this reason, we cannot allow these regulations to be adopted in their current form. Please assist us in preventing the adoption of these unfair regulations."
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/content/even-charter-schools-have-their-worries
What does Fly with Tommy Hazouri?
When talking about magnet transportation Tommy Hazouri said, “That doesn’t fly with me anymore,” Hazouri said in response to Pratt-Dannals (he said the district didn’t have enough time to study the issue). Hazouri said he wouldn’t support the transportation moves without the district giving comprehensive thought to direction of the overall magnet system.
It made me wonder what does Fly with Tommy Hazouri.
The policy that allows the district to fire satisfactory teachers without a reason given.
The expansion of the KIPP School despite it was the worst performing school in Northeast Florida.
The bringing in of TFA teachers at 2400 dollars a pop despite the fact many local teachers can’t find positions.
The hiring of 3 more public relations people at a cost between 2 and 3
hundred thousand dollars.
Grade recovery which distorts graduation rates and kills rigor.
Cajoling teachers into passing kids without the skills they need, how else do so many arrive to high school without being able to read and do math at grade level.
Ignoring discipline, and if you believe the spin the district put out the
other day I have a bridge in Brooklyn I am letting go cheap
8 of our high schools being in the bottom 25 of the state, out of 404
The outsourcing of our kid’s education (four schools given away) and nearly two million dollars to an education management organization
I could go on but not only am I now depressed but that seems like way to much flying to me already.
I have met Tommy Hazouri and find him sincere and think he really does care but in the immortal words of Deon Sanders, “come on man.”
It made me wonder what does Fly with Tommy Hazouri.
The policy that allows the district to fire satisfactory teachers without a reason given.
The expansion of the KIPP School despite it was the worst performing school in Northeast Florida.
The bringing in of TFA teachers at 2400 dollars a pop despite the fact many local teachers can’t find positions.
The hiring of 3 more public relations people at a cost between 2 and 3
hundred thousand dollars.
Grade recovery which distorts graduation rates and kills rigor.
Cajoling teachers into passing kids without the skills they need, how else do so many arrive to high school without being able to read and do math at grade level.
Ignoring discipline, and if you believe the spin the district put out the
other day I have a bridge in Brooklyn I am letting go cheap
8 of our high schools being in the bottom 25 of the state, out of 404
The outsourcing of our kid’s education (four schools given away) and nearly two million dollars to an education management organization
I could go on but not only am I now depressed but that seems like way to much flying to me already.
I have met Tommy Hazouri and find him sincere and think he really does care but in the immortal words of Deon Sanders, “come on man.”
How can we believe anything the Duval County School Board says?
The Duval County School Board is looking to trim their budget. I find this very disingenuous after looking at several recent decisions on their part.
First they voted to invite over one hundred Teach for America teachers to Jacksonville. In case you didn’t know it TFA takes non education majors off of elite college campuses gives them a five week access course and then dumps them in the nations struggling schools, where they are supposed to stay for two years. Lets forget all the problems with this model and let’s forget how we have local teachers looking for jobs but how can we forget in these tough budget times that TFA is paid a 2400-dollar finders fee per teacher they send here. The school board says the funding provided to TFA comes through a grant but how is this different from a finder’s fee?
Then the School Board, without public discussion voted to hire three more public relations positions at a cost between two and three hundred thousand dollars. These people won’t be in the classroom, they won’t be providing instruction and the minimum salary they start out with will exceed but a healthy margin what a fifteenth year teacher gets. We could hire five art teachers for the same ammount of money and they would have a more important impact too.
I believe the county needs money. I am in the schools and I see the needs going unmet but how can I in good conscious support this boards search for funds in these trying times when they allocate what little money we have to above. How can I believe anything they say?
Chris Guerrieri
School Teacher
First they voted to invite over one hundred Teach for America teachers to Jacksonville. In case you didn’t know it TFA takes non education majors off of elite college campuses gives them a five week access course and then dumps them in the nations struggling schools, where they are supposed to stay for two years. Lets forget all the problems with this model and let’s forget how we have local teachers looking for jobs but how can we forget in these tough budget times that TFA is paid a 2400-dollar finders fee per teacher they send here. The school board says the funding provided to TFA comes through a grant but how is this different from a finder’s fee?
Then the School Board, without public discussion voted to hire three more public relations positions at a cost between two and three hundred thousand dollars. These people won’t be in the classroom, they won’t be providing instruction and the minimum salary they start out with will exceed but a healthy margin what a fifteenth year teacher gets. We could hire five art teachers for the same ammount of money and they would have a more important impact too.
I believe the county needs money. I am in the schools and I see the needs going unmet but how can I in good conscious support this boards search for funds in these trying times when they allocate what little money we have to above. How can I believe anything they say?
Chris Guerrieri
School Teacher
The future of education
From the Hufffington Post
by Timothy Slekar
Quick Reality Check! What will happen to all public schools in 2014 under the current NCLB regulations (100% proficiency in math and reading)? Answer: They will be declared failing and will be taken over by the state and sold to educational management organizations (EMOs). The staff and faculty will be fired and then rehired at a fraction of their original salaries. The EMOs will take over local control of public schools (no more locally elected school boards), and profit -- not education -- will be the goal of schools.
Since Michelle and I publicly announced our "opt-out" intentions for this school year, we have recently found out that parents and teachers are being misinformed -- the opt out movement is being sabotaged. Parents are now being told (by whom remains a mystery) that opting out of PSSAs in Pennsylvania will jeopardize their child's educational future. And teachers are being told (again by whom remains a mystery) that "opt outers" want to hurt the school and teachers.
Parents
Parents are being told that if they exercise their right to opt out of NCLB testing (PSSAs), their children will be placed in remedial sections the next school year. This claim is ludicrous because schools do not receive the results from the PSSAs until mid-fall the following year. Placements are done before school starts in August. Therefore it is impossible to use PSSA data to make placements. And, since we opted our son out last year, we know this is absolutely not true.
Also, parents are being told that the PSSA test, given to students in their junior year, is a graduation requirement. However, Pennsylvania specifically allows all parents the right to opt out of PSSAs. Directly from the PA Code,
If upon inspection of State assessments parents or guardians find the assessment in conflict with their religious belief and wish their students to be excused from the assessment, the right of the parents or guardians will not be denied upon written request to the applicable school district superintendent, charter school chief executive officer or AVTS director.
Please notice that this unambiguous statement does not make an exception for the PSSAs given in a student's junior year. This means that parents of juniors still have the right to opt out. The only thing that is required is that an alternative assessment must be given for the opt-out students in place of PSSA tests. As an educator, an "alternative assessment" sounds fantastic! Maybe students will get to engage in something and show pride, effort and commitment in what they have learned over the years?!
Teachers
Michelle and I also just found out that some of the teachers are being "educated" about the motives of the opt outers. According to this "education," opt outers' true intentions are selfish and we only want to hurt the school and teachers. I understand why there might be some confusion, however I have gone to great lengths to explain why opting out is not directed at the teachers, the school, or the community. Look here, here, here, here, or just Google my name. If you can find one piece that demonstrates that I am anything other than pro public schools and pro teacher please let me know.
Bigger Picture
Understanding "opt out" requires the ability to see this as a movement directed at the "education reformers" who are determined to dismantle the entire system of public education in America. The reform establishment treats students, teachers, and curriculum in ways that are harmful, unethical, and unprofessional. The reason we "opt out" is because our local schools (our schools) and teachers are not allowed to be responsive and change in the direction best suited for children and teachers.
Instead, "teachers are taught to shut up and 'teach,' as if they could do so in silence." Once this happens, teachers are no longer advocates for children. And, "when teachers cease to advocate, [they] cease to fulfill one of the most essential elements of teaching: the act of caring." - Eric Shieh
Therefore, opt out is not a negative reaction directed at local schools and teachers. It is a positive action in favor of local schools and teachers. It is an action directed at the true mechanisms and personalities that have dominated the discussions concerning teaching and learning -- corporate reformers. As far as I know United Opt Out is the only group advocating a movement in civil disobedience that demands an end to the current corporate-reform movement.
This is why opt out is pro child, pro teacher and pro public school. We want the end of punitive high stakes testing that labels children, teachers and schools as failures. We do not want our tax dollars going to the pockets of testing and data companies. We refuse to allow our community-based public school be labeled as "failing."
How is this bad for children? How is this bad for teachers?
I'd be more concerned by people that intend or stand to profit from the coming collapse of public schools. Blaming Opt Outers is a smoke screen.<
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-d-slekar/opt-out-chronicles-fighti_b_1244223.html
by Timothy Slekar
Quick Reality Check! What will happen to all public schools in 2014 under the current NCLB regulations (100% proficiency in math and reading)? Answer: They will be declared failing and will be taken over by the state and sold to educational management organizations (EMOs). The staff and faculty will be fired and then rehired at a fraction of their original salaries. The EMOs will take over local control of public schools (no more locally elected school boards), and profit -- not education -- will be the goal of schools.
Since Michelle and I publicly announced our "opt-out" intentions for this school year, we have recently found out that parents and teachers are being misinformed -- the opt out movement is being sabotaged. Parents are now being told (by whom remains a mystery) that opting out of PSSAs in Pennsylvania will jeopardize their child's educational future. And teachers are being told (again by whom remains a mystery) that "opt outers" want to hurt the school and teachers.
Parents
Parents are being told that if they exercise their right to opt out of NCLB testing (PSSAs), their children will be placed in remedial sections the next school year. This claim is ludicrous because schools do not receive the results from the PSSAs until mid-fall the following year. Placements are done before school starts in August. Therefore it is impossible to use PSSA data to make placements. And, since we opted our son out last year, we know this is absolutely not true.
Also, parents are being told that the PSSA test, given to students in their junior year, is a graduation requirement. However, Pennsylvania specifically allows all parents the right to opt out of PSSAs. Directly from the PA Code,
If upon inspection of State assessments parents or guardians find the assessment in conflict with their religious belief and wish their students to be excused from the assessment, the right of the parents or guardians will not be denied upon written request to the applicable school district superintendent, charter school chief executive officer or AVTS director.
Please notice that this unambiguous statement does not make an exception for the PSSAs given in a student's junior year. This means that parents of juniors still have the right to opt out. The only thing that is required is that an alternative assessment must be given for the opt-out students in place of PSSA tests. As an educator, an "alternative assessment" sounds fantastic! Maybe students will get to engage in something and show pride, effort and commitment in what they have learned over the years?!
Teachers
Michelle and I also just found out that some of the teachers are being "educated" about the motives of the opt outers. According to this "education," opt outers' true intentions are selfish and we only want to hurt the school and teachers. I understand why there might be some confusion, however I have gone to great lengths to explain why opting out is not directed at the teachers, the school, or the community. Look here, here, here, here, or just Google my name. If you can find one piece that demonstrates that I am anything other than pro public schools and pro teacher please let me know.
Bigger Picture
Understanding "opt out" requires the ability to see this as a movement directed at the "education reformers" who are determined to dismantle the entire system of public education in America. The reform establishment treats students, teachers, and curriculum in ways that are harmful, unethical, and unprofessional. The reason we "opt out" is because our local schools (our schools) and teachers are not allowed to be responsive and change in the direction best suited for children and teachers.
Instead, "teachers are taught to shut up and 'teach,' as if they could do so in silence." Once this happens, teachers are no longer advocates for children. And, "when teachers cease to advocate, [they] cease to fulfill one of the most essential elements of teaching: the act of caring." - Eric Shieh
Therefore, opt out is not a negative reaction directed at local schools and teachers. It is a positive action in favor of local schools and teachers. It is an action directed at the true mechanisms and personalities that have dominated the discussions concerning teaching and learning -- corporate reformers. As far as I know United Opt Out is the only group advocating a movement in civil disobedience that demands an end to the current corporate-reform movement.
This is why opt out is pro child, pro teacher and pro public school. We want the end of punitive high stakes testing that labels children, teachers and schools as failures. We do not want our tax dollars going to the pockets of testing and data companies. We refuse to allow our community-based public school be labeled as "failing."
How is this bad for children? How is this bad for teachers?
I'd be more concerned by people that intend or stand to profit from the coming collapse of public schools. Blaming Opt Outers is a smoke screen.<
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-d-slekar/opt-out-chronicles-fighti_b_1244223.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)