Susan’s Choice: Will Seattle’s new interim school superintendent lead the district in the right direction? Or will it be business as usual behind a more friendly facade?

‘We must restore public trust,’ cited the Seattle School Board directors over and over again in March as they wrung their hands over the costly $1.8 million fraud scandal that rocked the district, and cast their vote to oust the superintendent they once blindly followed.

Dr. Susan Enfield, interim superintendent of Seattle Public Schools. Can she lead the district in a new direction?

The same night they voted to fire Maria Goodloe-Johnson and her CFO Don Kennedy, they voted in CAO Susan Enfield to the position of interim superintendent.

In her own statement that night, Enfield reiterated this mantra: “Our immediate priority is to restore public trust in Seattle Public Schools.”

As did School Board President Steve Sundquist: “The disturbing evidence of repeated violations of public trust requires swift action by the board. We are committed to insuring this never happens again,” said Seattle School Board President Steve Sundquist. -- Komo News March 2, 2011

One school board member dissented from the interim superintendent vote. Director Betty Patu was concerned that, as Goodloe-Johnson’s hire, Enfield was “tainted” by her association with the previous administration. Patu was not alone in this concern.

Enfield is also associated with “Hurricane” Vicki Philips (a phrase coined by the Willamette Week in 2007, and not meant as a compliment), who once headed the Portland School District where she imposed a whirlwind of controversial top-down ed reform change, and is now with the Gates Foundation, a major purveyor and financier of corporate-driven ed reforms. Enfield followed Phillips from Philadelphia to Portland and now both are in the same city again. Is Enfield a blind follower of corporate ed reform and its privatizing, standardizing, high-stakes testing agenda? Or is she her own person with her own vision for what comprises good education practices and priorities? Or at least practices that are grounded in sound research?

That’s what district observers and parents like myself are watching to see.

What’s really at stake here in all this talk of wooing public trust? Here’s what: Four school board directors’ reelection campaigns and a $231 million education levy (see SIDEBAR: The risky timing of the Families and Education Levy). And, of course, Enfield’s future with SPS. She has until January 2012 to prove herself worthy of removing the word “interim” from her title. That’s when the board says it will begin a national search for a permanent replacement.

So there is a lot of motivation to set things right in SPS. But is it happening? Can it happen, as long as most of the names in the John Stanford Center headquarters remain the same, and outside enterprises with their own agendas are influencing district policy?

In her nearly two months on the job, there are both signs of positive change in the district under Enfield’s leadership, and troubling indications of business as usual. Which will prevail?

Some positive signs of progress

Enfield has started to do some housecleaning at the JSCEE, with the removal of some staffers.  State audits of the school district have repeatedly found that Seattle’s central administration is bloated, one of the largest in the state for its district size. But superintendents have been reluctant to cut this fat and instead have taken their scalpels to our schools and teaching staff. Clearly the central office is the first place the superintendent should look for cost savings. Also, apparently one of the last $90,000 “Broad Residents,”Cordell Carter,  is on his way out too, reportedly leaving the district in August. It was never clear why the district needed to hire the expensive Broad trainees in the first place and what special skills they bring. In fact, one resigned in January after providing seriously incorrect data to the district (Seattle Schools data guy has resigned – a casualty of 17 Percent-Gate?). This leaves one more, Jessica DeBarros, at the central office.

Ethics commission. The state audit declared that Silas Potter’s Regional Small Business Development Program scandal was allowed to continue because of an existing “atmosphere of fear, intimidation and reprisal” at the central office that deterred whistle-blowers. In one of its first moves after ousting the superintendent, the school district partnered with the city’s Ethics and Elections Commission to provide a channel for district employee complaints to be made without reprisal. This was a smart and responsible move.

Communications. Enfield seems to be genuinely more open and affable than our previous superintendent, and some believe, even exhibits empathy towards parents and kids. If it sounds pathetic that this should stand out, this just illustrates how empathy-challenged and out of touch our previous superintendent was. Goodloe-Johnson set the bar pretty low on this one. Good and honest communication is essential to a well-functioning school district and yes, winning the trust of the community.

Troubling Signs of Business as Usual

Strategies 360. How many people does it take to hire one communications staffer in the Seattle Public School District? Apparently 30. The hiring of Lesley Rogers, a staffer from the controversial political marketing and communication firm Strategies 360, to head communications for the school district is not a good sign as far as regaining community trust. The fact that the district enlisted the input of 30 people to conduct this “national search” for what should have been a fairly straightforward hiring decision conducted by its own HR department demonstrates not only bad judgment but a waste of time and resources. Why was the job of communication director elevated to such importance so that a “national search” was (allegedly) conducted? It is also not reassuring to see who was included in this  committee — outside interests who have no business influencing the district’s hiring choices, like the Gates Foundation’s Kimberly Mitchell, and Sara Morris and George Griffin of the Alliance for Education or outside consulting firm Education First.

Knowing that Strategies 360/DMA Marketing have been the spinmeisters of choice of the Alliance for Education indicates that the Alliance continues to have undue and unelected influence on the district. It’s also a bit like putting Dick Cheney in charge of George W. Bush’s VP search committee, only to select himself.

Moreover, this choice implies that the district remains more focused on  its public image than on substance. As I have said before, if SPS merely did a good, honest job, it wouldn’t need to barricade itself against negative publicity.

Lastly, Strategies 360/DMA Marketing is already regarded with suspicion by those of us who did not take lightly the FERPA violation that took place in 2009 involving that firm. 360/DMA illegally used the private contact information of 10,000 Seattle Public schoolchildren and teachers to conduct a politically motivated push-poll on behalf of the Alliance for Education. SPS should distance itself from any operation that is willing to violate the privacy of children and public trust that way. (See Should the School District Be Allowed to Give Our Kids’ Phone numbers, Addresses and Photos to Every Tom, Dick and Pollster?)

MAP® allegiance. In a recent Questionland online Q&A segment, Interim Supt. Enfield stated her ongoing support for the costly, time-consuming,  and increasingly unpopular MAP® test. This is disappointing and short-sighted. The district has spent as much as $10 million implementing this questionable thrice-yearly assessment. Forty percent of SPS schools lose access to their school libraries for as much as three months of the year because of the test. This is an obvious element of Goodloe-Johnson’s “Strategic Plan” to cut. Valuable time and resources would immediately be returned to the students if MAP® were eliminated. The district also needs to stop misusing the test to evaluate teachers.

Impending RIFS? Teacher layoffs will be announced on May 15 is the rumor circulating at the moment. Meanwhile our schools are bursting at the seams and two more schools are slated to open in the fall. Why would the district layoff teachers? It makes no sense. Meanwhile, the district is also apparently under-reporting enrollment numbers for schools, thus providing false rationale for the RIFs. I can vouch for both of my children’s schools as being full to the rafters. Parents across the district are reporting the same. Why is SPS playing with false numbers again?

Teach for America. In the Questionland Q&A, Enfield didn’t fully answer an inquiry about the costs associated with the controversial plan to bring Teach for America, Inc. novices to Seattle’s schools, with only five week’s of training yet a $4,000/year per head of added fees for SPS. Last year Enfield supported this plan, which was part of Goodloe-Johnson agenda. Will she see the light and recognize that Seattle already has hundreds of fully credentialed and passionate teachers who would love to work in our schools?

Counselors on the chopping block. Will Enfield and the school board allow this to happen? Can they really find no money to save these crucial liaisons for our children? If not, then this is another example of the district mismanaging its resources and priorities.

Alliance for Education’s unelected influence. Interim Superintendent Enfield has to decide if she is going to be independent of the Alliance for Education and its Gates and Broad-funded corporate ed reform agenda, or  merely its puppet. Hiring someone from the Alliance’s favorite political marketing firm, and allowing the Alliance to sponsor her first public meet and greet sessions indicates that the Alliance remains one of  the behind the scenes, unelected forces in the Seattle Public School District. This is not a good sign for transparency or democracy.

What Susan Enfield can do to regain the trust of the public and voters

Stop using the MAP® test to evaluate teachers. It is not designed for that purpose — even the manufacturer states this. It is being misused in the name of “performance evaluations” and thus the district has effectively turned what was supposed to be a formative assessment tool into a high-stakes test. This is damaging to both teaching and learning. (See: MAP test manufacturer warns: MAP test should NOT be used to evaluate teachers. — So why is Seattle Public Schools doing just that?)

Cancel the MAP® outright. It is costly, time-consuming and unnecessary. (See 15 Reasons Why the Seattle School District Should Shelve the MAP® Test—ASAP)

Don’t RIF teachers.

Find a way to save the school counselors. Rather than spending millions of dollars on testing, the district should find the money to keep the counselors.

Audit the JSCEE. Conduct a complete audit of the district’s central office and administration. Assess the value and work of every single employee and truly pare this district’s bureaucracy down to a lean and efficient size.

Focus on substance, not image. Layoff five of the six or seven PR people the district has on staff and focus instead on doing the right thing, and not worrying about spinning straw into gold.

Reinstate autonomy. Return creative and administrative autonomy to the schools. Goodloe-Johnson attempted to centralize everything and suffocated everyone with her control. That is not conductive to good, creative and yes, innovative, education practices.

Replicate what works. Encourage schools throughout the district to replicate the successful Singapore Math program of Schmitz Park Elementary, and allow schools the freedom to develop successful curricula and practices.

Stop the churn. Let the teachers teach, let the kids learn. Bring some stability to our school district for a change.

– Sue p.

SIDEBAR: The risky timing of the Families and Education Levy

It’s a risky prospect for the city and district to be asking for twice as much money during a major recession, and a year after asking voters for three other education levies, as well as a year after a state audit that revealed gross mismanagement of district resources, and on the heels of a major financial and ethical scandal. But that’s what this year’s $231 million Families and Education Levy amounts to.

The levy has been referred to as a “lever” for  education “reform” by key backer, Councilmember Tim Burgess. Yet the district has just undergone nonstop churn under it last “ed reform” superintendent and has voted for three levies with lots of promises attached to them that have yet to be realized. Does SPS community really have the stomach for more “ed reform”?

The primary election is August 16,  the general is Nov. 8, 2011. Four school board positions and the levy will be on the ballot. I guess we’ll find out then.

–s. p.

Christina Community in Delaware Doubts Department of Education’s Decisions

People around the country are pushing back against the ed reform/privatization agenda.

Check out this video at:

Christina community doubts DE Dept. of Ed’s decisions

Board President John Young speaks out. Why didn’t the former Seattle School Board President Michael DeBell say this or any other of our school board members for that matter when our former Broad superintendent continued to manufacture these worthless agendas?

Dora

Christina community doubts DE Dept. of Ed’s decisions

By LeAnne Matlach of WDEL 1150 AM News

It’s a plan they chose, but members of the Christina School Board say the transformation plan for partnership-zone school, Glasgow High isn’t being executed as they thought.

Board president John Young spoke out at Tuesday night’s board meeting after several Glasgow teachers were relieved of their positions.

The transformation plan the board chose for the school required teachers to re-interview for their positions but Young says too much importance was placed on interviews.

“From what has been described to me thus far by effective teachers, it appears we have centered on the sole metric of a high-stakes interview process that was not executed to fidelity by either governing instrument, the MOU or the partnership plan,” he said.

Alison Kepner with the Delaware Department of Education says the Christina School Board were the ones who choose how the interview was going to work.

“They outlined in their Partnership Zone plan how the interview process would go and included the questions that would be asked,” she said. “So no one went into this interview not knowing what was going on.”

Teachers who were let go from Glasgow have the option to transfer to other schools in the district.

The Department of Education is currently studying what the regulatory and fiscal effects will be if Christina does not participate in Race to the Top and the Partnership Zone.

“There were about $11 million dollars in federal school reform dollars that were being targeted for Christina,” Kepner said.

Arbitrary & Capricious Math! Product placement for candy and other nonsense in our kids’ “inquiry-based” math textbooks

The sensible-math advocacy team of former math teacher Martha McLaren, parent DaZanne Porter and University of Washington Professor Cliff Mass have decided to call it quits on the legal front in their valiant quest to bring sound math to Seattle’s schoolchildren. But they have not given up the fight.

Today they issued a statement (posted below) declaring that they have decided they simply don’t have the means to pursue an appeal of the recent Washington State Court of Appeals decision that just overturned last year’s lower court decision about Seattle’s controversial high school math text adoption, which had been in their favor.

Some readers may recall that in 2009, the Seattle School Board was presented with the Discovering math text books for potential adoption — as well as 100s of pages of testimony and pleas from parents like myself not to adopt this flawed textbook. The San Diego School District had already tried it and dumped it. School Board Director Michael DeBell did his own research on the matter (let’s pause for a hallelujah, shall we?) and came to the same conclusion that the Where’s the Math? and Math Underground folks did: there were better, more solid options out there for our kids. Discovering and its “inquiry based” methods failed to give our students the sound mathematical foundations they needed to graduate with math confidence and be ready for college.

Did the school board listen? Of course not. They voted 4-3 in favor of adoption (citing some pretty ridiculous rationales that basically amounted to ‘the process was followed’ — Sundquist, and ‘My daughter and I were able to figure it out, so it seems okay to me’ — Carr).

So McLaren, Mass and Porter appealed the decision, and to almost everyone’s amazement, on February 2010, the King County Superior Court Judge Julie Spector agreed with them. (Judge rejects Seattle Schools math curriculum). Judge Spector famously declared the choice of Discovering “Arbitrary and capricious.” She told the board to reconsider. Well, instead, SPS decided to appeal that decision (more expense for everyone), and in March 2011, the Washington Court of Appeals overturned Spector’s decision.

McLaren et al  will now turn their focus to unseating the four school board members who voted for the flawed textbook: Sherry Carr, Steve Sundquist, Harium Martin-Morris, and Peter Maier, as well as Harium Martin-Morris, whose votes since this one, including support for the $800,000 STEM contract with New Technology Network, have not impressed the group. All four directors happen to be up for reelection this year. [CORRECTION: Martin-Morris joined Michael DeBell and then-School Board Director Mary Bass in opposing the textbook.  Then- Director Cheryl Chow provided the fourth pro-Discovering vote.- sp. NOTE: This paragraph has been updated to explain the inclusion of Director Martin-Morris in the school board renovation plans. -- sp.]

Martha, DaZanne and Cliff’s efforts have been greatly appreciated by parents like myself who want the best math text books possible for our kids, and whose children come home each day with bafflingly imprecise and verbose math questions like the ones I’ve collected below.

So in honor of this moment, and to illustrate why parents are not happy with these “inquiry-based” math texts, here are some of my favorite excerpts from the middle school version of this style of math book, including a candidate for the Most Idiotic Question in a Math Textbook, as well as a surprisingly flagrant product placement for name brand candy.

Can’t wait to see what nonsense the high school text books have in store for my kids! Gee, thanks, Seattle School Board and Washington State Court of Appeals!

CANDIDATE FOR THE MOST IDIOTIC QUESTION IN A MATH TEXTBOOK

4.2
C. Sam’s grandmother says that “a stitch in time saves nine.”
1. What do you think Sam’s grandmother means?
2. Sam’s grandmother takes 25 stitches in time. How many does she save?
(p. 52, “Comparing and Scaling — Ratio, Proportion, and Percent” CMP2 blue series)

Can you imagine an English language learner trying to make sense of this folksy nonsense disguised as math?– Or any modern kid who’s probably never heard of this expression? The language truly gets in the way of the math. Maddening.

CANDIDATE FOR MOST BLATANT EXAMPLE OF PRODUCT PLACEMENT INSIDE A MATH TEXT BOOK.

Sample pages from CMP (Connected Mathematics) middle school “inquiry based” math text book, published by Pearson/Prentice Hall

Name-brand candy being used to teach our kids math. Isn't there a law against this? Note how the text book encourages the student to have a "favorite color" of the product. What's really being taught here?

Mmm… how much did our school district pay this publisher for the honor of having math books advertise candy to our captive and impressionable kids? Couldn’t the same exercise have been done with buttons, tiddlywinks, or non-name brands?

CANDIDATE FOR MOST BIZARRE MATH TEXTBOOK QUESTION (see Q.15):

Sample page from CMP (Connected Mathematics) middle school "inquiry based" math text book

Note how wordy the question is, and the strange set up — someone soaked a bag of cookies in water to make the dough disappear, leaving only the chocolate chips so they could then be counted…? And does the second question really need the banal dialogue between the kid and lunchroom cook? (How quaint.What school has the money for an actual cook anymore?) Who writes this stuff?

Here’s who!  http://connectedmath.msu.edu/

Okay, here is Martha, DaZanne and Cliff’s statement. On behalf of parents like myself, THANK YOU three for your heroic efforts in pursuing sound math for our kids. – Sue p.

(p.s. I welcome more nominations for the Most Idiotic  or Most Bizarre Question in math text books.)

STATEMENT

4/26/11

We Will Not Appeal the Math Text Decision Reversal

We scored a stunning victory against the Seattle School Board on February 4, 2010, when Judge Julie Spector ruled the Board’s math text decision “arbitrary and capricious. We will not appeal the March 28^th reversal of that ruling by a three judge panel.

Judge Spector’s  original ruling, carefully and courageously taken, put a spotlight on the poor quality of decision making in the Seattle School District, and its impact on our students’ math success.   Since the adoption of the Discovering text, Seattle 10^th graders’ math scores have continued to decline, especially among minorities, making it clear that her appraisal, and our lawsuit, were based on real evidence.  The message in Judge Spector’s ruling is that the school board based its decision on pressure from administration, rather than evidence.

The tragedy of this particular wrong decision is that the Discovering texts are confusing and do not enhance solid, useful skill development in algebra and geometry.  Psychologists now acknowledge that “secondary,” conceptual knowledge, such as math skills, cannot be learned efficiently by the trial and error practices utilized in these texts. This kind of knowledge and skill is generally acquired  through a combination of examples, guided practice, independent practice, and mental effort. The teaching methods used in the Discovering texts are simply too random and inefficient for learning mathematics skills. Our students are being failed by a curriculum that leaves them discouraged and unable to do simple computations, much less master algebra and succeed in college level mathematics-based courses.

We were extremely heartened by Judge Spector’s extraordinary courage and integrity: She challenged the School Board and the district establishment by determining that the evidence did not support the adoption of the “Discovering” math texts.  We were further inspired by the outpouring of support from individuals all across the country and the personal stories we heard from families adversely affected by Seattle’s poor textbook choices. We hope that the increased public awareness aroused by our lawsuit will hasten the correction of this terribly mistaken adoption, as others across the district join us in advocating for significant improvement in math curriculum.

Our resources do not permit us to pursue this lawsuit against the deep pockets of the district. At this time, the  urgent task at hand is to elect knowledgeable individuals, willing to intelligently apply relevant data to improving the system, to replace four school board members who have repeatedly failed to make decisions derived from evidence: Sherry Carr, Harium Martin-Morris, Peter Maier, and Steve Sundquist.

 – Martha McLaren, on behalf of myself, DaZanne Porter, Cliff Mass

Here’s some more background info about the appellants and their case — Sue p.

Hearing Impending in High School Math Text Adoption Appeal.

Seattle, Washington – January 5, 2010 – A hearing is set for Monday,
Jan. 11, at 8:30 AM, in the King County Superior Courtroom of Judge Julie Spector, on the appeal of aSeattle School Board vote last May to adopt the Discovering Mathematics high school textbook series. The appellants contend that the school district acted arbitrarily and capriciously by voting 4 to 3 to
adopt a type of textbook associated with a widening achievement gap
between minority students and white students, and between low-income
students and other students.

The three plaintiffs – the mother of an African American 9th grader, a
former math teacher who is grandmother of a 5thgrader, and a professor
of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington, filed the
appeal based on their claim that, well before the May 6th vote, there was
an ample accumulation of evidence that the “reform” math curricula
favored by the district had helped to drive down WASL achievement
scores, especially for English language learners and other minorities.

Martha McLaren, grandmother of a 5thgrade student, declared, “Few people
understand what a catastrophe is unfolding in our schools due to this
misguided approach to teaching mathematics. It’s tragic for individual
students who grow up believing they are incompetent, and it’s ultimately
an immeasurable blow to society.

“I can’t afford the tutoring that wealthier parents can afford in order
for their children to learn the math skills they don’t learn in Seattle
Public Schools,” stated Ms. DaZanne Porter, mother of a Rainier Beach
High School Freshman.

Further describing the situation which has evoked a rising protest to
Seattle Schools’ math curriculum, UW atmospheric sciences professor and
co-plaintiff Cliff Mass describes giving a simple basic math skills exam
to his first year AS 101 students in the fall. They scored a class
average of 58%. In the January 2 Cliff Mass Weather Blog, he wrote, “If
many of our state’s beststudents are mathematically illiterate, as shown
by this exam, can you imagine what is happening to the others–those
going to community college or no college at all? … Quite simply, we
are failing our children and crippling their ability to participate in
an increasingly mathematical world.”

Attorney Keith Scully, of Gendler and Mann, LLP, is representing the
plaintiffs. He estimates the hearing will last about one hour, and
expects a decision from Judge Spector by the end of the month. For those
wishing to attend the hearing, the King County Courthouse is located at
516 Third Avenue, E-609 in Seattle.

Eli Broad’s Last Hurrah in Detroit?

Billionaires like Eli Broad seem to be willing to go to any length at this point to usurp their power over others when it comes to transforming public school systems into what they think is best for the rest of us.

Robert Bobb

I have been following Robert Bobb for the last year or so basically due to my amazement at the bravura that he has shown in carrying out the policies of the Broad Foundation. See Bob Bobb, The Sad Saga Continues and Bob Bobb, The Sad Saga Continues, Part 2. It seems that Bob Bobb is willing to go to any length to continue with his benefactor’s agenda to have a charter school in every district and municipality around this country.

Unfortunately, Eli Broad’s desire to reach his goal seems to be verging on the point of fanaticism with the push to get legislation through by way of Governor Snyder that now provides Emergency Financial Managers such as Bob Bobb with the power to ignore union contracts, undo local ordinances and dissolve city councils and school boards.

And as Bob Bobb’s disastrous tenure as Emergency Financial Manager comes to an end, he has decided to close 41 schools and open them all as charter schools or at least as many as possible. This does seem to be Eli Broad’s “Hail Mary pass” before Bobb’s time is up and he is sent to another school district by Broad to basically try to do the same, see Brizard and Chicago, Goodloe-Johnson and Newark, and even Bobb and DC, to get as many charter schools as possible into the Detroit school system. It is to the point now that Bob Bobb is doing all that he can to lure charter franchises, as many as possible, to set up shop in Detroit. The lengths some people will go to for money. If it wasn’t so pathetic, I could almost see some humor in envisioning Bob Bobb putting ads in the Privatization Times begging for corporate privateers to come to Detroit, stating that no start-up money is required and promising all the money one can grab from one of the nation’s most desperate urban centers. I can even imagine Eli Broad offering Bobb a sign-up bonus for every charter school operator that signs on, really.

Eli Broad has stepped over the line this time and for him there is no going back, that’s not his style. It is becoming obvious to many that his idea of reform at any cost is way beyond what even his backers envisioned. Mr. Broad’s ego has gotten the best of him and what might have been a vision for him has turned into a nightmare for others.

With his Broad graduates failing, one after the other, it’s just a matter of time before it all crumbles. Unfortunately by then, between Arne Duncan, Eli Broad and Bill Gates, billions of dollars and much goodwill will have been wasted and we will be back to where we were three years ago just a little bit wiser, far more organized and with a clear shared vision of what our schools should look like.

Dora

Parents Across America, Seattle Chapter Meeting

Parents as well as teachers and students are invited to join us for our spring meeting to introduce our organization, greet new members and discuss our plans for the remainder of the year.

The Noguchi Sculpture

We will be meeting on May 7th at 2:00 PM in Volunteer Park at the Noguchi Sculpture. From there we will decide where to sit and picnic.

Bring blankets and lawn chairs if you like and something to munch on and share if so desired.

This will be a good time to meet others, discuss what matters to us as parents, educators and students and enjoy the spring weather in Seattle.

Other Washington State chapters will be joining us as they can.

Family members and children are welcomed.

If you have any questions, please e-mail me at dora.taylor@gmail.com.

Dora

The Change of Our Blog Title to Seattle Education

Sue and I have been trying to figure out whether to drop the 2010 out of our blog title or not.

Neither of us ever thought that this blog would continue as long as it has or receive the attention that it has over the last two years.

I set up the blog as Seattle Education 2009 and Sue suggested 2010. I thought that the big push for ed reform in Seattle would be during 2009 and 2010 which was a correct assumption but also that it would be over one way or the other and we would both move on. As I stated in our original blog,

Our goal is to have an informed public on issues that affect us in Seattle as it relates to public school education.

That sounded simple enough. We and other parents knew that what was going on in other parts of the contry would probably be impacting us in Seattle. It was just a matter of time.

That was a correct assumption. It hit us but many of us were prepared and I think that the impact has been less damaging than it otherwise could have been.

There is still much to do to repair the damage that our Broad trained superintendent did but we are far more organized than before and feel far more empowered than ever in taking control of the education of our children.

State legislators around the county have been approached by Gates and Broad as well as other wealthy privateers who want nothing more than to make what money they can off of our children. It happened in our state but thankfully we were able to fend off the worst of it. Other states have not been as fortunate, particularly Michigan and Illinois.

Since starting this blog, Sue and I have joined with other activists around the country in sounding the alarm about the privatization of education and individuals that are waiting to cash in on the education of our children through endless testing, online teaching as a way to replace teachers, who are often referred to as “human capitol” by privateers , and who ed reformers consider way too expensive, and organizations like Teach for America which has received hundreds of millions of dollars to bring in untrained and untested recruits into schools in the most vulnerable communities so that charter schools can be provided with cheap, non-unionized labor.

There is still much to do, first in defending public education and keeping it public and in control of all by way of the democratic process rather than in the hands of a wealthy few who think that they know what is best for the rest of us or simply want to make a profit off of one of the last public sectors of our American society.

Beyond keeping the education of our children in control of parents, teachers and concerned citizens, we must develop in all schools programs that have proven to work and continue to battle for the public funding that our children deserve and need to have the best education possible to succeed in this world.

This should not be a nation where a bloated “defense” budget is more important to maintain than the education of our children or where the increase of the wealth of a few by extraordinary  tax breaks  should be more important than the success of all our children.

To do what needs to be done will take an ongoing commitment that I have chosen to make. Because of that, we have decided to simply title our blog “Seattle Education” because at this point we don’t know how long it will take to succeed at our goals of ensuring the best education for all of our children.

Dora

Seattle’s Fired Superintendent, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, on the short list for Newark School District’s top spot: Seattle says Huh??? — and Heads-up!

Seattle’s controversial and recently fired school superintendent, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, is a potential contender for school superintendent of Newark, reports the Newark Star Ledger   (“Newark schools superintendent search narrowed to 2 candidates, sources say” — April 21, 2011).

Those of us in Seattle’s Public School District who just experienced three and a half years of turmoil, scandal and fake data under our Broad Academy-trainee and her belligerent corporate agenda, have a few thoughts to share with Newark about this bit of surprising news.

This discussion, from Seattle’s highly informed and informative Save Seattle Schools Community Blog, pretty much cuts to the heart of the general sentiment here: Just Say No, Newark.

Fired Seattle School Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson - on her way to Newark?

First of all, it’s hard to fathom how somebody who just got fired from her last job would make it to the short list of candidates for the top job in another major urban school district. Especially someone who had established a reputation in her previous location of employ for an imperious disregard for the community, ethics and facts.

Goodloe-Johnson  came to Seattle from Charleston, S.C. in July 2007 and got her walking papers on March 2, 2011. If hired by Newark, that will be Goodloe-Johnson’s third superintendent’s position in four years. In Seattle we were glad to show her the door. But ideally, you would think that school districts should seek out a superintendent with competence and commitment to stay longer than just a few years. [UPDATE: This paragraph has been updated to reflect the correct termination date of Goodloe-Johnson as March 2 -- not March 4, as originally reported. --sp.]

(Apparently the other candidate is a former TFA-er, so it doesn’t sound like Newark is getting much of a choice beyond the revolving corporate ed reform clique).

As for that Tom Payzant fellow who has lately been conjuring up glowing remarks about Goodloe-Johnson and rewriting her history in Seattle, Newark may be interested to know that he is not merely a professor at Harvard but deeply connected to the Broad Foundation. Specifically, he is the  “Superintendent in Residence at the Broad Superintendents Academy” — the very enterprise that trained Goodloe-Johnson, and most likely helped her get her previous jobs and is trying to influence her chances in getting this one.

We at the Seattle Ed blog strongly recommend that the Newark schools community do a bit of reading about Goodloe-Johnson’s tenure and record in Seattle (and Charleston) before you make your choice. You may be able to save yourselves a lot of grief. To help you out, we’ve compiled a little reading list, below.

But first, a couple of things to know.

Though Goodloe-Johnson was apparently not directly involved in the fraud scandal  which brought her down (and lost our district at least $1.8 million and is currently under criminal investigation), she knew about the problem and failed to act on it and apparently kept the information from the school board.

And though our school board was cowed into firing her “without cause,” there were in fact numerous other potentially fireable offenses that she could have been called out for. The “Pottergate” fraud scandal was merely the final straw.

Goodloe-Johnson was also cited for an Ethics violation/Conflict of interest by the state auditor in 2010 for failing to disclose she was on the board of directors of test vendor Northwest Evaluation Association at the time Seattle purchased its MAP test product in a no-bid contract. (She was subsequently forced to step down from the NWEA board.) She was also cited by the auditor along with the school board for mismanaging district resources. And it was revealed that she threw a $7,000 party complete with carving station on the district credit card (which is not allowed), at the same time she was taking an axe to our kids’ schools and teaching staff,citing budget crisis. A lot of us thought that was pretty questionable judgment on her part, to say the least. More significantly, she earned a near-unanimous vote of No Confidence from our teachers and a number of our schools in 2010. And she helped perpetuate a false number which grossly under-reported our high school graduates’ college readiness. (This “data,” by the way, was produced by yet another person trained by the pervasive Broad Foundation.) She also only managed to achieve 4 out of 17 performance goals yet received a bonus, in a farcical  display of  “performance pay.”

In other words, there is in fact a long list of grievances concerning our former supt (see below).

Audience reacts to Seattle School Board's unanimous vote to fire Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson

It’s also important to note that Goodloe-Johnson was fired in a unanimous 7-0 vote by Seattle’s School Board. So by the time she left, our school board, our teachers and parents had no confidence in her. Her “Five Year Strategic Plan for Excellence” has been deemed costly and not showing the promised results and is currently being reconsidered by the school board. So it was a pretty unified community decision that it was time for Goodloe-Johnson to go.

In the end, even Goodloe-Johnson’s most loyal PR servant, the Seattle Times, called for her ouster:

Seattle school Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson should resign: The Seattle Times Editorial Board says it is time for the superintendent of the Seattle Public Schools, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, to go. – Seattle Times, Feb. 25, 2011

Oh and Newark, if you decide to pass on our former supt, don’t feel too bad: despite a financial deficit and overcrowded schools and severe cuts to our kids’ classrooms, our school board generously paid her a full year’s salary in severance to leave – that’s $264,000 plus $20,000 in retirement, and probably other perqs we parents aren’t even aware of. So if you decide not to hire her, you shouldn’t lose any sleep over it — she’ll be just fine financially.

———————————————————————————————–

Maria Goodloe-Johnson’s Turbulent Tenure in Seattle

(a reading list)

———————————————————————————————–

 Ten + Reasons Why the Seattle Public Schools Superintendent, Dr. Marie Goodloe-Johnson, Should Be Fired With Cause

The True Legacy of Seattle’s Fired (Broad Academy) Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson

The Superintendent’s Send-Off: Seattle School Board Fires Maria Goodloe-Johnson

 “Fear of Reprisal” – the Poisonous Culture in the Seattle School District under Supt. Goodloe-Johnson

Seattle School Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson’s ongoing conflicts of interest

 The End of the road for Seattle School Supt. Goodloe-Johnson?

Fraud Scandal Rocks Seattle’s School District; Many call for Superintendent to be Fired

BREAKING NEWS: Seattle School Board Poised to Fire (Broad-trained) Supt. Goodloe-Johnson and CFO Don Kennedy

Seattle Public Schools spending targeted in criminal probe: Seattle Public Schools spent up to $1.8 million on contract work that was never done or didn’t benefit the district, triggering a secret criminal investigation into allegations of financial fraud. At the same time, the School Board has launched a sweeping review of who should be held accountable, up to and including Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson.

Documents detail financial abuse in Seattle schools program: A former Seattle Public Schools manager ran a rogue contracting operation within district offices, replete with overbilling, ethics violations and intimidation of critics, according to documents released by the state Thursday.

Report: Early warnings kept from Seattle School Board

Seattle superintendent’s job at stake after blistering report – King 5 News

Seattle School Board debates future of superintendent amid financial scandal

Seattle TV Audience Gives Big Thumbs-Down to School Superintendent’s “Strategic Plan” (& Supt. Goodloe-Johnson Misses Another Public Forum)

Goodloe-Johnson ousted as Seattle schools chief

Why Do Teachers Hate Goodloe-Johnson?

The Truth Needle | False: Seattle Public Schools underestimated students’ college-readiness — The claim that only 17 percent of Seattle Public Schools graduates meet the entrance requirements for four-year colleges is not correct.

And just in case any parents, teachers or other members of the school community in Seattle would like to share their knowledge and impressions of Maria Goodloe-Johnson’s stewardship of Seattle Public Schools with the Newark Public Schools Advisory Board as they make their decision, here are their e-mail addresses:

Mr. Shavar Jeffries

Advisory Board Chairperson

SJeffries@nps.k12.nj.us

 Ms. Barbara King

Advisory Board Vice-Chairperson

baking@nps.k12.nj.us

Mr. Ivan Lamourt

Advisory Board Member

ILamourt@nps.k12.nj.us

Mr. Marques-Aquil Lewis

Advisory Board Member

MALewis@nps.k12.nj.us

 Ms. Eliana Pintor

Advisory Board Member

EPintor@nps.k12.nj.us

Mr. Juan Rivera

Advisory Board Member

JRivera@nps.k12.nj.us

Ms. Arelis Romero

Advisory Board Member

ARomero@nps.k12.nj.us

Ms. Shanique L. Davis-Speight

Advisory Board Member

sldavis@nps.k12.nj.us

Ms. Nakia J. White

Advisory Board Member

NJWhite@nps.k12.nj.us

 

Suliat Oyinda Olusyana

Student Board Member

 (Suliat doesn’t have a contact e-mail, but what a great idea to have a student representative on the school board! Something Seattle should consider.)

–Sue p.

Seattle School Board voted unanimously to fire Supt. Goodloe-Johnson in March 2011

Parents Across America: What Public School Parents Want in a New Federal Education Law

What Public School Parents Want in a New Federal Education Law
A Parents Across America Position Paper on the Reauthorization
of the Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
April, 2011

Introduction
“What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child,
that must the community want for all its children.
Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely;
acted upon, it destroys our democracy.”
John Dewey, The School and Social Progress

Public school parents are increasingly concerned that the current direction of education reform in this nation is dangerously eroding our children’s opportunity to realize their individual potential and experience an excellent, fulfilling education.

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has dramatically harmed our local schools with its overemphasis on high-stakes testing, narrowing of the curriculum, and punitive unfunded mandates that have been especially harmful to schools with high-needs student populations. What it has not done is improve achievement.

Unfortunately, these same destructive policies, and more, are featured in the Obama administration’s “Blueprint” for reauthorization of this law, despite the fact that they are not based on solid research or supported by most public school parents.

Our top federal officials seem to be too busy listening to venture philanthropists and corporate reformers to hear our concerns. We are offered dubious sales pitches for “merit pay,” more testing, and school privatization instead of thoughtful efforts at consensus-building around what actually works
in education.

As our lawmakers consider the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, (ESEA, aka NCLB), it is time they listened to those with the most at stake in education, the parents of the nation’s public school children. We know that some of our schools need help, but we also know
that there are approaches and strategies that are far more successful than those currently being promoted under NCLB and the “Blueprint.” It’s time we stop doing things that don’t work, and start doing more of the things that do work. We demand a responsible education law that will strengthen our nation’s public schools and provide a high-quality education for all of our children.

We look forward to a productive dialogue with Congress and other officials in the upcoming days and weeks regarding Parents Across America’s recommendations for ESEA/NCLB reauthorization.

Parents Across America opposes:

· Policies that use standardized test scores as the most important accountability measure for schools, teachers or students, and/or expand the use of standardized testing in our schools.
· Competition for federal funds; a quality education is not a race but a right.
· “Parent trigger” laws, vouchers, charter takeovers or other forms of school privatization that take resources from the schools attended by most students and put them into private hands, with less oversight.
· Limiting federally-mandated school improvement models to a narrow set of strategies, including charter schools and privatization, which are favored by corporate reformers but which have had little verified success.

A new ESEA/NCLB must include:
· Sufficient and equitable resources in all public schools, so that every child receives a high quality education.
· Improving schools rather than closing them, by means of evidence-based solutions backed by parents and other stakeholders.
· Less standardized testing and more reliable accountability and assessment practices.
· Programs that encourage the retention of professional, experienced teachers.
· A full range of parent involvement opportunities including a stronger parent voice in decision making at the school, district, state, and national levels.
· The right of parents to opt their children out of standardized tests.

Recommendations from Parents Across America for a new ESEA/NCLB
Specifically, we believe that ESEA/NCLB should be revised to include:

• Improved conditions and stronger support for schools

•  Resources and monitoring to insure that all children have a safe, attractive, healthy school environment with preK programs, full-day Kindergarten, small class sizes that allow teachers to provide individual attention, adequate opportunity for physical activity, socializing, and nutrition, and non-discriminatory, positive discipline procedures.

• Poverty and other challenging life conditions must also be addressed with additional funding for the extra help needed by at-risk children, such as early learning opportunities, summer school, and reduced class sizes of 18 or less.

•  Quality bilingual programs, adequate screening and services for special needs students; Congress must fulfill its promise of funding 40 percent of special education programs mandated under the IDEA Act.

•  Monitoring and enforcement of equitable distribution of educational resources.

•  Assurance of a rich, well-rounded curriculum so that all students receive full instruction in the arts, history, civics, science, foreign languages, health, and physical education with programs that relate to students’ own lives, cultures, and languages. These enriching subject areas bring schooling to life, but have been deemphasized or abandoned under NCLB’s narrow focus on those subjects measured by state standardized tests.

•  Charters and all other schools receiving public funds must be equally transparent and accountable in their spending, enrollment, discipline, transfer and other policies and practices, and be prevented from discriminating against special needs, homeless or low-income students, children of color or English-language learners, or any other protected class.

•  A requirement that programs used to support struggling schools must be research-based and supported by parents, teachers, and other members of the school community, who must be meaningfully involved in each step of the evaluation, planning, implementation, monitoring, and re-evaluation of these programs.

•  Flexibility in the choice of school improvement strategies based on school and community strengths and needs.

•  Support for development and expansion of programs that encourage and enable successful schools to collaborate and share what they have learned with comparable schools that are struggling. High-quality accountability measures and reliable assessments including true multiple measures

•  Use of multiple factors in the evaluation of schools, teachers and students. This should include a variety of evidence of learning gathered at different points in time, within and across subject areas. A major component of this evidence should be actual student work and assessments designed at the classroom level. Teacher peer review of classroom work, shared tasks/projects, and other collaborative strategies are superior to large-scale standardized tests in providing a check and balance on local assessments.

• Any evaluation system must have meaningful input from administrators, teachers and parents.

• Assessment transparency – require that all standardized tests be made public and available for review in a timely manner after they have been given.

•  Less standardized testing overall. Utilizing tests as diagnostic tools, not as a way to punish students, teachers and schools.

•  Right of parents to opt their child out of any standardized test.

• An end to strategies that blame teachers and school administrators for the challenges of at-risk students, including such unproven, harmful practices as using student test scores in teacher evaluation and tenure decisions, and firing and replacing teachers, principals, and other staff in schools with low test scores.

ESEA/NCLB should include:
· A full range of parent involvement opportunities including support for site-based school governance with significant parent representation and real, not just advisory, authority.
· The same parent involvement requirements for all schools including charter and any other schools receiving public funds.
· No child may be retained in grade without the parents’ permission.

Parents Across America (PAA) is a grassroots organization that connects parents and activists from across the U.S. to share ideas and work together on improving our nation’s public schools. We advocate for proven, progressive measures such as reducing class size and increasing parent involvement, and oppose high-stakes testing and corporate-style efforts to privatize our schools.

PAA is committed to bringing the voice of public school parents – and common sense – to local, state, and national education debates.

This document was prepared by Parents Across America and posted by:

Dora Taylor, Founding Member

House Bill 1443: Help Give One Last Push to Stop a Bad Bill

Because there was a last-minute amendment added to House Bill 1443 regarding basically tying student test scores to the firing of teachers during a time of layoff’s, several state representatives do not want to sign onto the flawed bill. This shows that we do have representatives who are working in our best interests and those of our children in Olympia and who cannot be swayed by lobbyists and corporate money.

A big thank you goes out to House Speaker Frank Chopp,  who is not afraid to admit that he is for the protection of unions, and is holding firm.

We are in the last days of this legislative session so it is vital to keep up the momentum and let these leaders know that we back them in support of an educational environment that is free of the burden of high stakes testing.

Please contact our House Majority Leader, Pat Sullivan:

pat.sullivan@leg.wa.gov

(360) 786-7858

and House Speaker Frank Chopp:

frank.chopp@leg.wa.gov

(360) 786-7920

And let them know where you stand.

Dora

Post Script:

Below is a description from an earlier post about House Bill 1443:

Getting back to Bill 1443, let’s start with Section 401, firing teachers based on student performance when a rif, a Reduction in Force, is required due to “revenue loss or enrollment decline.” This aspect of the bill was unsuccessful on two earlier attempts, see House Bill 1593 and Senate Bill 5667 and Senate Bill 5594. This is the wording of the proposed section:

When reductions in the workforce occur due to enrollment decline or revenue loss, the employment contracts of any certificated classroom teacher must be nonrenewed in the following manner within each particular certification or endorsement area. Certificated classroom teachers who received the lowest evaluation rating, as described in RCW 28A.405.100 must have their contracts nonrenewed first.

(2) The board of directors of each school district shall adopt a written policy governing procedures for the nonrenewal of employment contracts for certificated classroom teachers as provided for in subsection (1) of this section.

Teachers who receive the lowest evaluation ratings are to be fired. First question, does this mean that no matter what level of performance of all teachers, someone is going to be fired? Is this like a bell curve where someone will inevitably get an “F” and be fired? There is nothing in this bill that says otherwise. no matter what your “performance” really is, you will be fired if you are within a certain percentile. This of course leaves the door open for Teach for America recruits. Fortunately we have many, thousands in fact, of qualified professionals who have filed resumes with the state who would be able to step in. So then the concern is how will these teachers be evaluated.

That brings us to RCW 28A.405 which is noted above in terms of how a teacher is to be evaluated:

The four-level rating system used to evaluate the certificated classroom teacher must describe performance along a continuum that indicates the extent to which the criteria have been met or exceeded.  When student growth data, if available and relevant to the teacher and subject matter, is referenced in the evaluation process it must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. As used in this subsection, “student growth” means the change in student achievement between two points in time.

As used in this subsection, “student growth” means the change in student achievement between two points in time.

In Seattle “student growth” evaluation would mean the MAP test, a test that was not designed to evaluate a teacher’s performance as stated by Brad Bernatek and Jessica DeBarros who implemented the test in Seattle. The designer and vendor of the test, NWEA, has also stated that the MAP test should not be used to evaluate teachers.

This extremely destructive aspect of ed reform, not to mention the negative impact that it would have on our teachers, has now been couched in a bill with many layers. For that reason it should not pass, not unless these provisions are eliminated.

How to tell if your School District is infected by the Broad Virus

Chicago has just learned that it will inherit Rochester, New York’s controversial and unpopular school superintendent, Jean-Claude Brizard (Broad Superintendent’s Academy “Class of 2007″).

Those of us who have experienced the “leadership” of  L.A. billionaire Eli Broad’s corporate-trained superintendents send Chicago our condolences. We have been there, done that, with scars to show for it, and nothing in the way of real academic or positive gains for our schools and kids.

In fact, the Broad brand has been seriously tarnished lately, to the point where it really should be considered a liability rather than an asset. Here are just a few examples of Broad supts who have been ousted or left their districts in a cloud of controversy:  LaVonne Sheffield (Broad Superintendents Academy “Class of 2002″ – resigned), Rockford, Ill.;  Maria Goodloe-Johnson (Broad “Class of 2003″ - fired), Seattle, Wa.; Matthew H. Malone (Broad “Class of 2003″ – resigned) former superintendent of Swampscott, MA; Deborah Sims (Broad “Class of 2005″- resigned), Antioch, CA.

Meanwhile,  Detroit can’t seem to shake its power-hungry Emergency Financial Manager Bob Bobb (Broad Academy “Class of 2005″) whose illegal control of the Detroit School District was stopped in court, but has been recently ratified by a law signed by extremist Republican Governor Rick Snyder.

And now Brizard of Rochester is going to bring his brand of Broad magic to Chicago.

What’s striking is the similarity of the reigns of terror and error of these Broad ‘graduates.’ Disturbingly so, in fact. Many of the above earned No Confidence votes from their district’s teachers, and from parents too. All meted out a top-down dictatorial approach. Most alienated parents. Many closed schools. A number had questionable audits on their watch. More than one had false or questionable data to support their reforms. All commanded large salaries with perqs, while at the same time slashing services for kids and closing schools in the name of financial scarcity. A number of them avoided informing the elected school board of their plans or actively withheld information from them, effectively bypassing democracy.

Scandal, controversy, animosity followed them all, inevitably out the door.

If this trend continues,  Brizard’s tenure in Chicago will likely be short-lived too. But he still could do some serious damage while he’s there. So, heads-up, Chicago.

To help our fellow school districts throughout the nation, here is a guide to diagnose whether your school district has come under the influence of the Broad Foundation (and what you can do about it).

How to tell if your School District is Infected by the Broad Virus

Schools in your district are suddenly closed.

Even top-performing schools, alternative and schools for the gifted, are inexplicably and suddenly targeted for closure or mergers.

Repetition of the phrases “the achievement gap” and “closing the achievement gap” in district documents and public statements.

Repeated use of the terms “excellence” and “best practices” and “data-driven decisions.” (Coupled with a noted absence of any of the above.)

The production of “data” that is false or cherry-picked, and then used to justify reforms.

Power is centralized.

Decision-making is top down.

Local autonomy of schools is taken away.

Principals are treated like pawns by the superintendent, relocated, rewarded and punished at will.

Culture of fear of reprisal develops in which teachers, principals, staff, even parents feel afraid to speak up against the policies of the district or the superintendent.

Ballooning of the central office at the same time superintendent  makes painful cuts to schools and classrooms.

Sudden increase in number of paid outside consultants.

Increase in the number of public schools turned into privately-run charters.

Weak math text adopted (most likely Everyday Math). Possibly weak language arts too, or Writer’s Workshop. District pushes to standard the curriculum.

Superintendent attempts to sidestep labor laws and union contracts.

Teachers are no longer referred to as people, educators, colleagues, staff, or even “human resources,” but as “human capital.”

A (self-anointed, politically connected) group called NCTQ comes to town a few months before your teachers’ contract is up for negotiation and writes a Mad Libs evaluation of your districts’ teachers (for about $14,000) that reaches the predetermined conclusion that teachers are lazy and need merit pay. ["The (NAME OF CITY) School District has too many (NEGATIVE ADJ) teachers. Therefore they need a new (POSITIVE ADJ.) data-based evaluation system tied to test scores…”]

The district leadership declares that the single most significant problem in the district is suddenly: teachers!

Teachers are no longer expected to be creative, passionate, inspired, but merely “effective.”

Superintendent lays off teachers for questionable reasons.

Excessive amounts of testing introduced and imposed on your kids.

Teach for America, Inc., novices are suddenly brought into the district, despite no shortage of fully qualified teachers.

The district hires a number of “Broad Residents” at about $90,000 apiece, also trained by the Broad Foundation, who are placed in strategically important positions like overseeing the test that is used to evaluate teachers or school report cards. They in turn provide — or fabricate — data that support the superintendent’s ed reform agenda (factual accuracy not required).

Strange data appears that seems to contradict what you know (gut level) to be true about your own district.

There is a strange sense of sabotage going on.

Dolores Umbridge -- Broad Academy Class of ????

You start to feel you are trapped in the nightmarish Book Five of the Harry Potter series and the evilly vindictive Dolores Umbridge is running your school district. (Seek centaurs and Forbidden Forest immediately!)

Superintendent behaves as if s/he is beyond reproach.

Superintendent reads Blackberry (Goodloe-Johnson, also see comments ) or sends texts (Brizard, see comments) while parents and teachers are giving public testimony at school board meetings, blatantly ignoring public input.

A rash of Astroturf groups appear claiming to represent “the community” or “parents” and all advocate for the exact same corporate ed reforms that your superintendent supports — merit pay, standardized testing, charter schools, alternative credentialing for teachers. Of course, none of these are genuine grassroots community organizations.

Or, existing groups suddenly become fervidly in favor of teacher-bashing, merit pay or charter schools. Don’t be surprised to find that these groups may have received grant money from the corporate ed reform foundations like Gates or Broad.

The superintendent receives the highest salary ever paid to a superintendent in your town’s history (plus benefits and car allowance) – possibly more than your mayor or governor — and the community is told “that is the national, competitive rate for a city of this size.”

Your school board starts to show signs of Stockholm Syndrome. They vote in lockstep with the superintendent. Apparently lobotomized by periodic “school board retreat/Broad training” sessions headed by someone from Broad, your school board stops listening to parents and starts to treat them as the enemy. (If you still have a school board, that is — Broad ideally prefers no pesky democratically elected representatives to get in the way of their supts and agendas.)

Superintendent bypasses school board entirely and keeps them out of the loop on significant or all issues.

School board candidates receive unprecedented amounts of campaign money from business interests.

Annual superintendent evaluation is overseen by a fellow named Tom Payzant.

Stand for Children appears in town and claims to be grassroots. (It is actually based in Portland, Ore., and is funded by the Gates Foundation.) It may invite superintendent to be keynote speaker at a political fundraising event. It will likely lobby your state government for corporate ed reform laws.

Grants appear from the Broad and Gates foundations in support of the superintendent, and her/his “Strategic Plan.”

The Gates Foundation gives your district grants for technical things related to STEM and/or teacher “effectiveness” or studies on charter schools.

Local newspaper fails to report on much of this.

Local newspaper never mentions the words “Broad Foundation.”

Broad and Gates Foundations give money to local public radio stations which in turn become strangely silent about the presence and influence of the Broad and Gates Foundation in your school district.

 THE CURE for Broad Virus:

Parents.

Blogs.

Sharing information.

Vote your school board out of office.

Vote your mayor out of office if s/he is complicit.

Boycott or opt out of tests.

Go national.

Follow the money.

Question the data – especially if it’s produced by someone affiliated with the Broad or Gates Foundations or their favored consultants (McKinsey, Strategies 360, NCTQ, or their own strategically placed Broad Residents).

Alert the media again and again (they will ignore you at first).

Protest, stage rallies, circulate petitions.

Connect and daylight the dots.

– Sue p.

For more information on the Broad Foundation, see: A Parent Guide to the Broad Foundation’s training programs and education policies by Parents Across America.

(this post was updated from the original version, to add more information, 4/19/11 – sp.)