First up, the teachers and students in Tucson. If you haven’t been following this story, I would recommend that you begin by watching Debating Tucson School District’s Book Ban After Suspension of Mexican American Studies Program on Democracy Now.

This story has a history to it. To read about it in detail, check out Save Ethnic Studies.org and read about an action that was taken last year by students at a school board meeting when the board members were to vote on making the ethnic studies classes basically non-credit courses.

The powers that be thought that all they had to do was ban a few books and close the Ethnic Studies program in Tucson and that would be the end of it. They just dusted their hands off and went home. Because of  their actions, which were so severe, the story has gained national attention. They have found themselves in the eye of the storm and they’re not handling things very well.

In this clip, Cholla High School students staged a walkout to protest the Mexican American Studies (MAS) ban. As they arrived at Tucson Unified School District  headquarters this is what  the Ethnic Studies supervisor Lupita Garcia had to say:

For the most recent information on this struggle for a people to maintain their ethnic identity, check out the Common Dreams article Students Step Up Tucson Walkouts. Here is an excerpt:

In recent days, administrators and board members have issued a series of conflicting and inaccurate statements and carried out the extreme actions of confiscating books in front of children. Last week, a recently hired assistant superintendent from Texas made a troubling call for the deeply rooted Tucson students–many of whom trace their ancestors to the town founders– to “go to Mexico” to study their history.

To find out about actions around the country regarding the banishment of the Ethnic Studies program in Tucson, see Arizona Unbound: National Actions on Mexican American Studies Banishment.

Never a dull moment in the world of education.

Now on to Chicago. In the last Weekly Update I had mentioned Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel’s rent a preacher scam. Well that story got legs as well.

As I like to say, Rahm got bus(ted) on this one. There’s even a photo of the bus that was used to take the hired “counter-protestors” to a hearing regarding a school closing from the St. Stephens church in Chicago!

From Mike Klonsky’s post Rahm’s Army:

Scott and other recruits say they didn’t realize until the last minute that they were supposed to support school closings. One said he was promised $50 to speak at a rally “for schools,” but was stiffed $25 after Watkins complained he had publicly revealed at the hearing he was “compensated” for speaking. Many of the recruits end up switching sides and join the community protests in speaking out against the closings. Others earn their money by trying to start a brawl and disrupt the legitimate protests.

And now there is to be a probe regarding this action. According to the Chicago Sun Times:

The Chicago Public Schools inspector general said Wednesday he is investigating reports that bused protesters were paid to carry signs or read scripts at school closing hearings.

News of the probe came as Mayor Rahm Emanuel sloughed off questions about whether the practice was appropriate.

Meanwhile, Ald. Robert Fioretti (2nd) blasted “paid protesters” he said showed up on three buses at Jan. 6 hearings on whether to phase out Crane High School. He urged Chicago Public School officials to omit their comments from the hearing’s record.

Their appearance was “embarrassing” and “subverts our public process … wherever the money came from,” Fioretti said during the school board’s monthly meeting.

We’ll see where that goes. Stay tuned.

It reminds me of last year when the Seattle school board was to vote on an ed-reform issue and the League of Education Voters (LEV) or was it (Stand for Children?) brought over students from Bellevue, Youth Ambassadors, donned them in orange shirts and had them waving signs during the hearing. I asked one of the students after the hearing what school he was from and why he was there. He told me that some LEV reps (not his words) had brought over students from Bellevue. He was there to support education. He had no idea what the issue was about. His heart was in the right place but LEV’s wasn’t. That they used children to further their cause is reprehensible and speaks volumes to where that organization has gone in our state.

Speaking of Stand for Children, check out Education Radio for an in-depth look at the organization, Stand for Children or Stand for Profit. Here is a description of this broadcast:

We hear stories from two Massachusetts school committee members who were former Stand members, but who left when they saw a significant shift in Stand’s approach: Roger Garberg (Gloucester) and Tracy O’Connell Novick (Worcester). We hear from the president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, Paul Toner, on a controversial ballot initiative that Stand is pushing in the state. We also share a clip of Jonah Edelman, Stand co-founder and CEO, candidly speaking at the Aspen Institute about Stand’s true agenda to destroy the power of teachers unions. Then, we talked with the president of the Chicago Teachers Union, Karen Lewis, about her reaction to this clip and to Stand for Children.

Speaking of organizations, I discovered what looks to be a great one, ParentPrep.  It was developed by the Washington State Office of the Education Ombudsman (OEO), a small office that does a lot for so many students and parents in need, to assist parents in finding their voice when advocating for their children. And no, it does not receive Gates, Broad or Walton money. Just taxpayer dollars.

Again, I will leave  you with Chris Hedges, a person who always helps me take a step back to see the big picture. This is a three-hour interview with the author and activist on BookTV where he discusses his nine books that have been published as well as a brief description of his tenth book. This is a good weekend watch.

I received so much information in response to my query about teacher evaluations based on test scores that I decided to provide the information in three posts. The first post can be found at Washington State Bill Proposals HB 2427/SB 6203 and HB 2451: Teacher evaluations based on test scores. Parents around the country respond with their own experiences.

In this post, we will look at what researchers have to say on the subject.

Lisa-Darling Hammond at Stanford University responded to my query with a paper titled Getting Teacher Evaluation Right: A Background Paper for Policy Makers which she had researched and written along with Audrey Amrein-Beardsley at Arizona State University, Edward H. Haertel at Stanford University and Jesse Rothstein at the University of California, Berkeley. The Executive Summary states:

Consensus that current teacher evaluation systems often do little to help teachers improve or to support personnel decision making has led to a range of new approaches to teacher evaluation. This brief looks at the available research about teacher evaluation strategies and their impacts on teaching and learning.

Prominent among these new approaches are value-added models (VAM) for examining changes in student test scores over time. These models control for prior scores and some student characteristics known to be related to achievement when looking at score gains. When linked to individual teachers, they are sometimes promoted as measuring teacher ―effectiveness.

Drawing this conclusion, however, assumes that student learning is measured well by a given test, is influenced by the teacher alone, and is independent of other aspects of the classroom context.

Because these assumptions are problematic, researchers have documented problems with value-added models as measures of teachers‘ effectiveness. These include the facts that:

1. Value-Added Models of Teacher Effectiveness Are Highly Unstable: Teachers‘ ratings differ substantially from class to class and from year to year, as well as from one test to the next.

2. Teachers’ Value-Added Ratings Are Significantly Affected by Differences in the Students Who Are Assigned to Them: Even when models try to control for prior achievement and student demographic variables, teachers are advantaged or disadvantaged based on the students they teach. In particular, teachers with large numbers of new English learners and others with special needs have been found to show lower gains than the same teachers when they are teaching other students.

3. Value-Added Ratings Cannot Disentangle the Many Influences on Student Progress: Many other home, school, and student factors influence student learning gains, and these matter more than the individual teacher in explaining changes in scores.

Other tools have been found to be more stable. Some have been found both to predict teacher effectiveness and to help improve teachers’ practice. These include:

• Performance assessments for licensure and advanced certification that are based on professional teaching standards, such as National Board Certification and beginning teacher performance assessments in states like California and Connecticut.

• On-the-job evaluation tools that include structured observations, classroom artifacts, analysis of student learning, and frequent feedback based on professional standards.

In addition to the use of well-grounded instruments, research has found benefits of systems that recognize teacher collaboration, which supports greater student learning.

Finally, systems are found to be more effective when they ensure that evaluators are well-trained, evaluation and feedback are frequent, mentoring and coaching are available, and processes, such as Peer Assistance and Review systems, are in place to support due process and timely decision making by an appropriate body.

And an excerpt from the final summary:

With respect to value-added measures of student achievement tied to individual teachers, current research suggests that high-stakes, individual-level decisions, as well as comparisons across highly dissimilar schools or student populations, should be avoided. Valid interpretations require aggregate-level data and should ensure that background factors, including overall classroom.

And this from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) Problems with the Use of
Student Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers, an excerpt from the summary:

While those who evaluate teachers could take student test scores over time into account, they should be fully aware of their limitations, and such scores should be only one element among many considered in teacher profiles.

Some states are now considering plans that would give as much as 50% of the weight in teacher evaluation and compensation decisions to scores on existing poor-quality tests of basic skills in math and reading. Based on the evidence we have reviewed above, we consider this unwise.

If the quality, coverage, and design of standardized tests

were to improve, some concerns would be addressed, but the serious problems of attribution and nonrandom assignment of students, as well as the practical problems described above, would still argue for serious limits on the use of test scores for teacher evaluation.

And in the Review of “Learning About Teaching” by Jesse Rothstein for the National Education Policy Center (NEPC):

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s “Measures of Effective Teaching” (MET) Project seeks to validate the use of a teacher’s estimated “value-added”—computed from the year-on-year test score gains of her students—as a measure of teaching effectiveness. Using data from six school districts, the initial report examines correlations between student survey responses and value-added scores computed both from state tests and from higher-order tests of conceptual understanding. The study finds that the measures are related, but only modestly. The report interprets this as support for the use of value-added as the basis for teacher evaluations. This conclusion is unsupported, as the data in fact indicate that a teachers’ value-added for the state test is not strongly related to her effectiveness in a broader sense. Most notably, value-added for state assessments is correlated 0.5 or less with that for the alternative assessments, meaning that many teachers whose value-added for one test is low are in fact quite effective when judged by the other. As there is every reason to think that the problems with value-added measures apparent in the MET data would be worse in a high-stakes environment, the MET results are sobering about the value of student achievement data as a significant component of teacher evaluations.

I will end this look at research and policy papers with two personal views.

First from a bookstore owner,  Picture Books No Longer a Staple for Children:

The economic downturn is certainly a major factor, but many in the industry see an additional reason for the slump. Parents have begun pressing their kindergartners and first graders to leave the picture book behind and move on to more text-heavy chapter books. Publishers cite pressures from parents who are mindful of increasingly rigorous standardized testing in schools.

“Parents are saying, ‘My kid doesn’t need books with pictures anymore,’ ” said Justin Chanda, the publisher of Simon & Schuster Books for Young Readers. “There’s a real push with parents and schools to have kids start reading big-kid books earlier. We’ve accelerated the graduation rate out of picture books.”

And from a teacher’s point of view in, Why I Will Not Teach to the Test, to follow is an excerpt:

In the midst of controversy surrounding “value added” teacher assessment, which flared recently following the Los Angeles Times’ public teacher rankings, the real issue is often overlooked: The state tests being used to evaluate student progress—and, in turn, the effectiveness of teachers—virtually ensure mediocrity.

Consider the following California 10th-grade-history standard: “Relate the moral and ethical principles in ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, in Judaism, and in Christianity to the development of Western political thought.” How long do you think it would take to teach this standard before a classroom of 16-year-olds reached a thorough understanding? Weeks? Months? Consider another social studies standard: “Compare and contrast the Glorious Revolution of England, the American Revolution, and the French Revolution and their enduring effects worldwide on the political expectations for self-government and individual liberty.” How much time for this unit? A semester? A year? I am sure that history teachers would love to have the opportunity to delve deeply into these standards, but the state test does not permit deeper instruction. Why? Because these two standards come from a much longer list of standards that will be measured on the exam. Teachers in California know the results of this exam may now be used as a factor in their evaluations, so they are forced to accelerate their instruction into “sprint and cover” mode.

My highest priority is to design lessons that enable my kids to think critically and to give them the skills they will need to live productive lives. I want my students to grow up to be problem-solvers, not test-takers. I want them to be innovators, not automatons.

What harm comes from a sprint-and-cover approach? A study published in the journal Science Education in December 2008 looked at two sets of high school science students. One set “sprinted”; the other set had teachers who slowed down, went deeper, and did not cover as much material. The results? The first group of students actually scored higher on the state tests at the end of the year. This is not surprising, as their teachers covered more of the test material. I am sure it made their parents, teachers, and administrators happy. What is more interesting, however, is that the students who learned through the slower, in-depth approach actually earned higher grades once they made it to college. This, too, is not surprising. These students were taught to think critically.

Dora

New Parents Group Supports Innovation in Schools

Parents Across America Tacoma (PAAT), a community group dedicated to strengthening our public education system, will hold its first public meeting on Wednesday, February 15, 2011. The meeting will take place at Kings Books, 218 St. Helens Ave, Tacoma, 98402.  Doors will open at 6:30pm, followed by a presentation and discussion.  An overview of the group’s mission and information on proposed education legislation will be shared.  PAAT’s priorities include: supporting Tacoma schools and building on our successes, encouraging data-proven innovation, and ensuring a just and equitable distribution of resources for all Tacoma students. The evening will focus on answering questions and discussing ways community members can get involved.

This year, charter school legislation has moved front and center in the state legislature.  This important topic deserves immediate public attention and deliberation.  PAAT believes that innovation can be achieved within our schools without inviting the risks that accompany charters.   Tacoma’s public schools have been leading the way with innovative programs which are the envy of many other districts in this state.   PAAT believes Tacoma can build on these successes and become a model for other school districts.

PAAT will provide a forum for South Sound parents, education advocates and community members who feel disillusioned with current education reform debates.  “All across the country I see the parent’s voice getting lost in this sweeping tide of education reform,” says public school parent Catherine Feeney, “we don’t need corporations coming in and telling us what is best for our kids.  WE know what is best for our kids, so why isn’t anyone asking us?” Sandi Strong explains “For the last several years, I had been looking for a group to join that is working to support and improve our public schools. I was recruited by one that came to town a few years ago claiming they were grassroots. I was excited to join, but found they were a top-down organization focused on national issues and on bringing products and services to our state. This was not what I was looking for.”

PAAT is an autonomous affiliate of Parents Across America, a nationwide network of parent-led organizations dedicated to supporting and strengthening America’s schools.  For more information about Parents Across America Tacoma, visit http://paatacoma.org.

Congratulations Tacoma.

Dora

• HB 2427/SB 6203 would make student growth data a significant factor in the evaluation process and would allow for student input (for teachers) or building input (for principals) to be included. OSPI would be required to establish common components of the teacher evaluation systems for school districts to use in the 2013-14 school year. Beginning September 1, 2014, any employee who received an unsatisfactory under the old system or the lowest rating under the new system in two consecutive years would revert to provisional status. By this date, districts would be required to update policies and collective bargaining agreements to consider performance evaluations before other factors, such as seniority, when making reductions in force decisions due to enrollment decline or loss of revenue, or for recall decisions.
• HB 2451 does not address the entire evaluation process, but would change only school district policies and collective bargaining agreements to provide that contracts of classroom teachers who received comparatively lower evaluation ratings would be nonrenewed before contracts of classroom teachers who received comparatively higher evaluation ratings. The bill would apply to new contracts after the effective date of the bill and on collective bargaining agreements renewed or extended after the effective date.

The Washington State Senate had hearings on the Senate bill yesterday and it will be heard in the House today at 6:00 PM.

There are many issues with these bills. This is referred to as high stakes testing, when a significant factor of the evaluation of a teacher is based on student test scores and it creates many unfortunate situations that do not lead to a better education for children.

I have asked parents around the country through the Parents Across America network who have had experiences with this type of evaluation system to share their thoughts and opinions on what this bill proposes. This is a long post because these parents had much to share but bear with me. It’s worth reading all of the responses. This is what they had to say.

From a parent in New York:

The New York Principal APPR Paper has resources on linking teacher evaluations to standardized test scores. It is the background information on the New York  principals opposition to the new teacher evaluation system.

Here is the introduction:

In May 2010, the New York State Legislature—in an effort to secure federal Race to the Top funds—approved an amendment to Educational Law 3012-c regarding the Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) of teachers and principals. The new law states that beginning September 2011, all teachers and principals will receive a number from 0-100 to rate their performance. Part of that number (ranging from 20% to 40%) will be derived from how well students perform on standardized tests. At first glance, using test scores might seem like a reasonable approach to accountability. As designed, however, these regulations carry unintended negative consequences for our schools and students that simply cannot be ignored.

Our paper describes in clear detail why everyone should be concerned about these changes, and we provide recommendations for moving forward in a manner that is best for our students and schools.

Beyond demanding standardized tests in every subject, there is a great deal of error built into using tests to evaluate teachers. Jesse Rothstein found that, I believe, a 40-50% error rate. See: Review of Learning About Teaching by the National Education Policy Center. This website also has Briggs and Domingue’s report finding similar errors. Sean Corcoran at New York University has also found that using standardized test scores is about as reliable as a coin toss.

And, although these plans claim that they will not only use test scores, it is the test scores, the rigid number, that will end up being the only factor considered. As Bruce Baker, an ed professor at Rutgers said, “it may be 50% of the protocol, but it will drive 100% of the decision.” See Follow-up on Fire First, Ask Questions Later. Baker has very thoughtful comments on the newest Harvard study that got so much press and why that study cannot be translated into personnel policies for teachers.

From a parent in North Carolina:

There are lots of reasons, but I’ll focus on one: testing madness. If the evaluation requires that every teacher have “student growth data,” and that data will impact conditions of employment, then districts will have to institute a standardized test for every child in every subject in every grade (including kindergarten and first grade) in order to obtain that data. Our fearless leaders tried that in Charlotte and it was a disaster both politically and educationally.

From a parent in Florida:

First, Florida’s law is much stricter. Effective last July every new Florida teacher is placed on a ONE YEAR contract which must be renewed each year based upon their evaluation ‘scores’ which comprise their student’s standardized test score (50% of the evaluation) and principal evaluation.

Effective 2014, every teacher in Florida must either convert to the one year contract method or accept the fact that they will never get another raise again. (Note: The Florida Teacher’s Union is in court over this right now.) Also effective last year, no teacher is paid more for a Master’s Degree! (I kid you not!)

Here are some bullet points as to why WA shouldn’t evaluate teacher by test scores.

1) Expense, expense, expense.

It is fiscally irresponsible. Millions of dollars will be wasted on “standardized test” creation, on test grading, on teacher training, on new hardware, new servers, new software, AND on inevitable lawsuits over this DATA that was collected. Lawsuits from all sides involved– from teacher’s unions, from teachers AND from parents. That’s happening already in states that are amassing this data and allowing access to it either online or in newspapers.

All of this siphons our much-needed tax dollars from the Arts, from Music programs, from precious public school programs like Pre-K learning, after school activities and programs, etc. As in the case of Florida, these mandates are quite literally bankrupting the school districts. They need to see what they are enacting and the impact it will have on local dollars. It also begs the question why in the world is the State Legislature even crafting education policies at this level?

2) Teachers are forced to teach to the test

The very child teachers try to reach — the difficult-to-teach child, the child who struggles, the developmentally delayed child, the learning disabled child — is abandoned by implementing evaluations by student’s test scores. No one will have the time to coax potential from a shy, troubled, hungry, sick, struggling student. The impassioned teacher will vanish altogether and be replaced by data-driven, robotic teachers on a solo mission. That mission? To improve their evaluations so they can keep their jobs. I believe it does take a village to raise a child. That village dissipates with this process of evaluating teachers by student’s test scores.

(Btw, the legislature won’t care about what I’m about to write — but, we’re also creating a generation — perhaps two generations — of data driven, highly competitive, non-collegial type young people. Statistics will mean everything to this generation. )

3) Finland does not have Teacher Evaluations by Student Test Scores

Seriously– for data driven type people, they always want to know who is doing better than the US. The top performing academic nation in the world is Finland and they have NO standardized tests at all. We should model our teacher evaluation plan after theirs. Read Pasi Sahlberg’s new book Finnish Lessons.

Hold off making this decision until the WA Dept of Ed and the WA Legislative Committee over Education research what is happening in Finland.

4) Evaluating Teachers by Student Test Scores will damage student-teacher relationships

Teachers will look at students at what the students can contribute to their evaluation. If they are too high risk, the teacher won’t want that child and will take actions to get that child out of their classroom. We will abandon our most at risk children. Sad, but true. When your livelihood, your salary, your colleagues, your school depend upon your evaluation and the test scores for that one test, that one day, you will do what it takes to get the score you need to survive.

5) Tell WA Legislature to focus on ALL the cheating scandals around the nation.

Survival of the Fittest. Does the State of Washington want this embarrassment too. Look what it does to the children. — Our teachers, our school, our principal, our superintendent cheated. That is something that will stay with these children forever.

On Teaching to the Test

A side note, I visited Florida Elementary Schools last week and spoke to over 80 teachers in total, observed over 30 classrooms, spoke with Principals, Assistant Principals, “Teacher of the Year,” and even little cherubs.

There wasn’t one classroom I entered that a 4, 5, 6, 7 year-old wasn’t banished to the computer to improve their “Scores.” (yes, 4 yr olds too). Teachers who formerly worked as a “village” told me they need to improve their student’s scores. All of the focus is on the brave 3rd grade teachers. Their students’ performances on the dreaded FCAT (standardized test) fell on their shoulders. I was told being a 3rd grade teacher was a revolving door. If their “performance” wasn’t good one year, they were gone the next. In Florida, if a 3rd grade student does not do well on FCAT they are held back BY LAW. Of course, the school’s ability to keep above the “Intervene” or “Low Performing School” status depends heavily on that 3rd grade FCAT and that 3rd grade teacher. Needless to say, who the heck wants to be a 3rd grade teacher anywhere in Florida these days? You have to be a masochist or a daredevil to agree to take that job.

I asked four teachers on their 15 min lunch break: “How much time will you spend studying for FCAT now?” They said in near unison, “100% of our time between now and the time of the test.” When’s the test? APRIL. 100% of the time will be spent teaching to the test.

From a parent in Colorado:

In Colorado, it would be a different story if one of the measures were the English proficiency exam, substituted for the reading/writing portions of our CSAP. As it is, these high-stakes decisions are being made with skewed data that does not include how rapidly and how well our ELL’s get to proficiency.

From a parent in Seattle:

Here is what I have learned recently about alignment of Writer’s Workshop and State of Washington’s standardized writing assessment.

The state has a writing assessment in 4th grade and 7th grade. Both assessments evaluate the student’s ability to construct, on demand, a five-paragraph essay having the following structure: Paragraph 1 is a statement of a theme, thesis, or “big idea” (to use WW jargon). Paragraph 5 is the concluding, wrap-up paragraph. Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4, each provide support. Each of these paragraphs 2-4 have a different emphasis.

Student’s are given a single topic on the state test, examples can be found on the OSPI website, and in 3rd grade might be, e.g., “Describe your school playground, and what you like and dislike about it.” and must produce a 5-paragraph essay on this topic. The test is graded subjectively. The student can get a maximum of 6 points: Four points can be earned for style and structure; up to two points can be earned for conventions. The writing test does not require that students demonstrate proficiency in any particular convention, or any specific knowledge in the areas of conventions, spelling, vocabulary. The scoring system indicates that ability to structure a 5-paragraph essay on demand is given more importance than having an essay free of errors related to conventions.

The Writer’s Workshop curriculum has a 200 page manual that teaches the five-paragraph essay. This is the manual on the “personal essay.” The manual, authored by Lucy Caulkins, is marked for grades 3 through five. The curriculum calls for the teacher to teach the “personal narrative” unit prior to teaching the “personal essays” unit. The two units take much of the school year to cover. What is happening in Seattle Public Schools is that students are getting the exact same curriculum from grades 3 through 7. The same teaching manual (i.e., the “Grades 3-5″ manuals for the personal essay and the personal narrative) is being used for FIVE SUCCESSIVE YEARS. Our kids are having to repeat a curriculum FIVE YEARS IN A ROW. This curriculum gives almost no attention to conventions. The Grades 3-5 personal essay manual has only one mention of grammar in the first 50 pages of the book. The manual has many examples of student work; very few are free of severe conventional errors (most contain sentence fragments, for example). The author never comments on these errors, and never directs the teacher to address these errors. The focus of the book is on the structure of the essay, and enriching the writing. According to this book, no topic is too trivial to become a theme: Lucy Caulkins states that even “the skin on the inside of the elbow” is worthy as a topic of a themed 5-paragraph essay.

Why is Seattle Public Schools subjecting its students to five years of repetition of this impoverished curriculum? Because the state tests students on the 5-paragraph essay in grades 4 and 7. The teaching of the 5 paragraph essay starts in grade 3, so by the time of the grade 4 assessment, students have had the curriculum twice. By the taking of the 7th grade assessment, students will have had five repetitions of a curriculum that is designed to prepare them to do be able write a 5-paragraph personal-opinion essays on very mundane topics.

There are other serious problems with WW, but this provides a clear example from Seattle Public Schools of what can happen when curriculum becomes narrowed to what is assessed on a particular test.

From a parent in California:

The real reason why the tests should be opposed is that they do not allow for “academic growth” no matter what the teacher does since they’re designed to fit all responses under the “Bell Curve”.

And from this parent in Seattle, me:

The reasons that I am opposed to what I term the high stakes testing of our students include:

• The amount of additional stress and pressure that is placed on students when they understand what is at stake might include the firing of a well-loved teacher;

• The additional time that teachers would feel they need to spend teaching to the test;

• The test preparation would take over with an emphasis on memorization rather than creative, critical and analytical thinking;

• The way that it would “reign in” teachers from exploring different options and methods of teaching that would not fit within a time-table based on testing schedules.

I would recommend listening to Audit Culture, Teacher Evaluation and the Pillaging of Public Education on Education Radio. Of the people interviewed, one is a principal who was one of the authors of the New York Principal APPR Paper that was mentioned earlier in this post. There is, by the way, a reference to one of our founding members in New York, Leonie Haimson, and her blog NYC Public School Parents during this conversation.

Please contact our state representatives and let them know that this is not what we want for our children and their schools.

The Washington State Senate Committee on Early Learning and K-12 Education:

Chair

Rosemary.McAuliffe@leg.wa.gov

Vice Chair

Christine.Rolfes@leg.wa.gov

Committee Members

Steve.Litzow@leg.wa.gov

Tracey.Eide@leg.wa.gov

joe.fain@leg.wa.gov

Nick.Harper@leg.wa.gov

andy.hill@leg.wa.gov

Steve.Hobbs@leg.wa.gov

king.curtis@leg.wa.gov

sharon.nelson@leg.wa.gov

Rodney.Tom@leg.wa.gov

On the house side, the Committee on Education contact information is:

santos.sharontomiko@leg.wa.gov

kristine.lytton@leg.wa.gov

fred.finn@leg.wa.gov

andy.billig@leg.wa.gov

sam.hunt@leg.wa.gov

connie.ladenburg@leg.wa.gov

maxwell.marcie@leg.wa.gov

john.mccoy@leg.wa.gov

probst.tim@leg.wa.gov

And for the Republican representatives, you can call Julia Kwon and leave a message, 360.786.7292.

Dora

Part 2 in this series can be found at Part 2: Washington State Bill Proposals HB 2427/SB 6203 and HB 2451: Teacher evaluations based on test scores: The studies.

Hi educators,

We are parents of children at Seattle Public Schools who are concerned
about the defunding and privatization of our schools. As you decide
whether to approve the MOU on “Creative Approach Schools,” we have a
few points we hope you will consider.

• Many of the provisions in the contract that protect you as teachers
also help our kids. Broad waivers of the contract means that things
like class size could be impacted.

• The option of “public/private partnerships” could include
contracting out the running of a school to an education management
organization (EMO), and EMOs have a poor record. According to the
National Education Policy Center, schools run by EMO’s make AYP less
often than regular public schools. For instance, the Partnership for
Los Angeles Schools has less than 8% of its schools making AYP.

• The “compacts” that are listed as an option for “Creative Approach
Schools” are especially troubling. They violate the spirit of the law
that says public schools must be free and open to all. With compacts,
if parents or students do not live up to school expectations, they can
be expelled. In other states, schools have expelled students for minor
infractions. This especially impacts kids with special needs that
result in behavior difficulties.

• In Denver, exemptions to the contract have led to teachers at
“Innovation Schools” working on year-to-year contracts. This has
resulted in their being less experienced. We want qualified teachers
at our schools. We value your experience and expertise.

Overall, some of the wording in the MOU is too broad, sweeping, and
vague. It appears to make teachers vulnerable to unspecified loss of
protections, which could in turn create a less stable learning
environment for our children. This is especially concerning in an age
of cost-cutting.

In closing, we see the well-being of teachers as directly linked to
the well-being of our children. Furthermore, although the media has
been bashing teachers, parents don’t agree. A recent study
commissioned by the Seattle School Board showed that 91% of families
in Seattle Public Schools support our teachers.

Respectfully,
Parents Across America Seattle

Update:

The MOU passed. We’ll see what comes of it.

If we revisit this in the future, I hope it won’t be one of those “I told you so’s”.

Due to 2011 budgets cuts to education in the state of Washington, Seattle School District SEA employees, the teachers, are on furlough for 1⁄2 day today. After students are dismissed, teachers will be leaving their classrooms and showing their disapproval of these budget cuts by demonstrating in different locations of Seattle. Parents and students are encouraged to join. The more people participate, the louder our voice will be to the public, the media, and the legislators that cutting education funding must not be an option, especially since the Washington State Supreme Court just decided, once again, that the legislature is in fact not fulfilling its paramount duty: to adequately fund public education.

Students, parents, educators and concerned citizens are all invited to show support for public schools today.

1. Wear “RED for PUBLIC ED”.

2. Meet at 1 p.m. at one of the sites listed below. Bring your thought-provoking signs and your cell phones. Please go to the site that is nearest or easiest to access from your school. Bring your school spirit!

• SW Fauntleroy and SW Alaska “the junction” in West Seattle. There are lots of businesses along Fauntleroy and Alaska that have parking lots: QFC, Jefferson Square, Bank of America. On street parking in front of the bowling alley.
• NW Market St. and 15^th Ave. NW in Ballard. Parking lots in businesses along 15^th and you can always go on up to Ballard H.S. at NW 65^th and 15^th and walk back down the 5 or 6 blocks.
• NE 45^th St, Sandpoint Way NE and NE 45^th Pl “five corners” at the southeast corner of University Village where NE 45^th St ends and Sandpoint Way NE begins. Lots of parking in University Village.
• Rainier Ave. S and MLK, Jr. Way S near the light rail stop and the pedestrian overpass, within sight of Franklin H.S. Parking 4 or 5 blocks north at the Lowe’s parking lot or at the Amazon parking structure or on the street.
• NE Northgate Way and 1^st Ave. NE at the Northwest corner of Northgate mall near the freeway and the freeway on ramps. Parking in the mall parking lots.
• Broadway E and E Pine St right at the southern tip of the Seattle Central Community College campus. Parking is most difficult here: on the east side of Cal Anderson Park (2 blocks east) or in the paid parking garage at Harvard and Pine (one block west).

3.  At 2 p.m. everyone sends pictures and messages to legislators: NOT AT WORK: AMPLY FUND PUBLIC EDUCATION.

This just in:

A photo of teachers at Ballard High School. Go Ballard!

Please send more as you receive them.

Pinehurst K-8

Dora

And here is an excerpt from an article in the Wall Street journal by Diane Ravitch Why I Changed My Mind About School Reform:

When charter schools started in the early 1990s, their supporters promised that they would unleash a new era of innovation and effectiveness. Now there are some 5,000 charter schools, which serve about 3% of the nation’s students, and the Obama administration is pushing for many more.

But the promise has not been fulfilled. Most studies of charter schools acknowledge that they vary widely in quality. The only major national evaluation of charter schools was carried out by Stanford economist Margaret Raymond and funded by pro-charter foundations. Her group found that compared to regular public schools, 17% of charters got higher test scores, 46% had gains that were no different than their public counterparts, and 37% were significantly worse.

Charter evaluations frequently note that as compared to neighboring public schools, charters enroll smaller proportions of students whose English is limited and students with disabilities. The students who are hardest to educate are left to regular public schools, which makes comparisons between the two sectors unfair. The higher graduation rate posted by charters often reflects the fact that they are able to “counsel out” the lowest performing students; many charters have very high attrition rates (in some, 50%-60% of those who start fall away). Those who survive do well, but this is not a model for public education, which must educate all children.

An excellent interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez speaking to Dr. Ravitch regarding No Child Left Behind and charter schools was on Democracy Now last year titled Leading Education Scholar Diane Ravitch: No Child Left Behind Has Left US Schools with Legacy of “Institutionalized Fraud”.

The best source of information on charter schools can be found in the book that Diane Ravitch wrote titled The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education which I would recommend reading.

Dora

You can watch the testimony at TVW.

Many parents, teachers and other concerned citizens were not able to get to Olympia, some couldn’t even get out of their driveways or to the main roads. For those who could not participate but want to be a part of the political and democratic process, now is the time to contact the education committee members in both the State House and Senate regarding the charter school bill.

Each representative has staff who will receive your phone calls and make a note of what you have said and maintain a tally of who is for and who is against the bills. E-mails are also an effective way to let your opinion be known. To follow is a list of committee members in the House and Senate. Let them know where you stand on charter schools. They do want to hear from you.

The Washington State Senate Committee on Early Learning and K-12 Education

Chair

Rosemary.McAuliffe@leg.wa.gov

Vice Chair

Christine.Rolfes@leg.wa.gov

Committee Members

Steve.Litzow@leg.wa.gov

Tracey.Eide@leg.wa.gov

joe.fain@leg.wa.gov

Nick.Harper@leg.wa.gov

andy.hill@leg.wa.gov

Steve.Hobbs@leg.wa.gov

king.curtis@leg.wa.gov

sharon.nelson@leg.wa.gov

Rodney.Tom@leg.wa.gov

On the House side, the committee on education contact information is:

santos.sharontomiko@leg.wa.gov

kristine.lytton@leg.wa.gov

fred.finn@leg.wa.gov

andy.billig@leg.wa.gov

sam.hunt@leg.wa.gov

connie.ladenburg@leg.wa.gov

maxwell.marcie@leg.wa.gov

john.mccoy@leg.wa.gov

probst.tim@leg.wa.gov

For the Republicans on the House Education Committee, you can call Julia Kwon and leave a message, 360.786.7292.

Let’s make sure that these bills go no farther than committee review and a “No” vote.

Education Radio

On another note, someone sent me a link to Education Radio and specifically to a program titled Audit Culture, Teacher Evaluation and the Pillaging of Public Education. This is an introduction to this program episode:

In this weeks’ program we look at the attempt by education reformers to impose value added measures on teacher evaluation as an example of how neoliberal forces have used the economic crisis to blackmail schools into practices that do not serve teaching and learning, but do serve the corporate profiteers as they work to privatize public education and limit the goals of education to vocational training for corporate hegemony. These processes constrict possibilities for educational experiences that are critical, relational and transformative. We see that in naming these processes and taking risks both individually and collectively we can begin to speak back to and overcome these forces.

In this program we speak with Sean Feeney, principal from Long Island New York, about the stance he and other principals have taken against the imposition of value added measures in the new Annual Professional Performance Review in New York State. We also speak with Celia Oyler, professor of education at Teachers College Columbia University, and Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union, about the impact of value added measures on teacher education and the corporate powers behind these measures.

It’s a very thoughtful conversation on the issue of teacher evaluations. At the end of the program you can hear Diane Ravitch when she spoke at the SOS March and Rally meeting. Check it out.

Dora

A lot has been going on in the last two weeks nationally and I am now just getting caught up.

There is a lot going on in the state of Washington with Stand for Children, et al, trying to do an end run around the people by going directly to the state legislators to attempt to privatize our educational system. It worked in Wisconsin, as Jonah Edelman with Stand for Children proudly proclaimed in the video of him at the Aspen Institute so of course it will work in Washington, right? Well, that’s what he said would happen. He said that our state was next.

We’ll see. Stay tuned

In the meantime some very interesting events have been occurring around the country. One that I have to lead with today because it is so outrageous is Rahm Emanuel’s sleazy tactics in Chicago called the “Rent-a-Preacher scheme”.

From Substance News, Rahm’s bullying exposed:

In a reversal of fortunes, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s bullying and union busting tactics have been not only uncovered but challenged by state officials on the Illinois Educational Facilities Task Force and in other contexts. As a result of the January 6, 2012 hearings on the proposed closings of nine Chicago public schools, it was established again by evidence and eyewitness testimony is that Rahm Emmanuel push to turn over pubic schools to private operators is using text book union busting schemes to get what he wants, including paying poor people to carry signs and “protest” on behalf of his policies and proposals.

The most disturbing revelations of Chicago’s Millionaire Mayor One Percent was the use of paid outside agitators to hold signs, march, and speak in favor of closing public schools and Board of Education officials forging documents to push out homeless students from one school. All of the revelations have come out since New Year’s Day, although many of the details had previously been published in Substance, some as early as last summer, when Substance first exposed what is now widely known as Rahm’s “Rent A Preacher” scheme.

And while we’re on the subject of outrageous actions, check this out. From NYC Public School Parents website, Regents agree to give NY student data to limited corporation run by Gates and operated by Murdoch’s Wireless Gen

This week, the Wall St Journal reported that the NY Board of Regents approved the state’s sharing of student and teacher information with a new national data base, to be funded by the Gates  Foundation, and designed by News Corp’s Wireless Generation.
All this confidential student and teacher data will be held by a private limited corporation, called the Shared Learning Collaborative LLC, with even less accountability,  which in July was awarded $76.5 million   by the Gates Foundation, to be spent over 7 months.  According to an earlier NYT story,  $44 million of this funding will go straight into the pockets of Wireless Generation, owned by Murdoch’s News Corp and run by Joel Klein.

Something very similar to this occurred within the Seattle Public School District two years ago when our former Broad-trained superintendent, Dr. Goodloe-Johnson, agreed to divulge personal student information to Strategies 360, a firm that had previously set up a faux roots organization, Our Schools Coalition, that popped up just before the teacher’s negotiations whipping up support for merit pay and high stakes testing. This figment of 360′s imagination disappeared soon after the contract had been agreed upon between the teachers and the superintendent. See Should the School District be Allowed to Give Out Our Kid’s Phone numbers, Addresses and Photo’s to Every Tom, Dick and Pollster?

Parents, be careful about what you sign and always ensure that your child’s information remains confidential.

This article, America’s Teachers See Growing Poverty Up Close, is a great read and brings us all back to reality, a place that folks like Rahm need to find:

ne of the things I’ve discovered in recent years is that when it comes to education policy, the last people asked for input are America’s teachers. We have a President who holds an “education summit” that includes the nation’s top business leaders and foundation heads, but no teachers; we have billionaires lobbying to privatize education and break teachers unions; we have an organization that purports to work for educational equity that encourages its recruits to leave teaching after two years because they can influence policy more by moving into other, more prestigious careers, rather than spending a lifetime as a “mere teacher.”

The results are plain to see. After ten years of No Child Left Behind, three years of Race to the Top, and twenty years of Teach for America, we have seen no change in the global standing of America’s schools and no reduction in the test score gap between racially and economically disadvantaged groups and the rest of the population.

But we lose something more than an opportunity to improve our schools by excluding teacher’s voices – we lose a chance to understand the human impact of poverty and economic distress, not only those locked in inner-generational poverty, but those made newly poor by the economic crisis. Students bring the wounds of poverty into their classrooms every day, in ways that break teachers hearts, keep them up at nights, and make the accountability protocols based on test scores that “education reformers” are now imposing seem totally divorced from reality.

On the “good news” front, California Governor Jerry Brown, after getting rid of the privatizers on the California State Board of Education soon after being sworn in, gave his state of the state address two days ago and this is what he said:

Next, I want to say something about our schools. They consume more tax dollars than any other government activity and rightly so as they have a profound effect on our future. Since everyone goes to school, everyone thinks they know something about education and in a sense they do. But that doesn’t stop experts and academics and foundation consultants from offering their ideas — usually labeled reform and regularly changing at ten year intervals–on how to get kids learning more and better. It is salutary and even edifying that so much interest is shown in the next generation. Nevertheless, in a state with six million students, 300,000 teachers, deep economic divisions and a hundred different languages, some humility is called for.

In that spirit, I offer these thoughts. First, responsibility must be clearly delineated between the various levels of power that have a stake in our educational system. What most needs to be avoided is concentrating more and more decision-making at the federal or state level. For better or worse, we depend on elected school boards and the principals and the teachers they hire. To me that means, we should set broad goals and have a good accountability system, leaving the real work to those closest to the students. Yes, we should demand continuous improvement in meeting our state standards but we should not impose excessive or detailed mandates.

To read Anthony Cody’s take on Governor Brown’s address see Jerry Brown: My Hunch is that Principals and Teachers Know the Most.

I came across this school on Friday and wanted to share this video with you of a “Small School in the Big Apple”. It reminds me of the Nova Project in Seattle.

I will once again leave you with an essay by Chris Hedges Why the United States is Destroying Its Education System. Below is an excerpt.

A nation that destroys its systems of education, degrades its public information, guts its public libraries and turns its airwaves into vehicles for cheap, mindless amusement becomes deaf, dumb and blind. It prizes test scores above critical thinking and literacy. It celebrates rote vocational training and the singular, amoral skill of making money. It churns out stunted human products, lacking the capacity and vocabulary to challenge the assumptions and structures of the corporate state. It funnels them into a caste system of drones and systems managers. It transforms a democratic state into a feudal system of corporate masters and serfs.

Dora

Sponsored by United Opt Out National.

April Fools!
No Child Left Behind – Fool Me Once.
Race to the Top – We Won’t be Fooled Again.

Join us.  In solidarity with Occupy Movements everywhere.

Join United Opt Out National & #OCCUPYDOE in Washington D.C.

It is time to end Wall Street Occupation of Education.

We asked – they said NO.  We wrote – they said NO.  We sent them research – they said NO.  We say NO.  We opt out. We will put a screeching halt to corporate education by saying NO to the test.

We will occupy the Department of Education in DC from March 30^th to April 2^nd.  On-going planning can be found at our Facebook Occupy the DOE page.

It’s time to put the public back in public education. Occupy the DOE and show them who education REALLY BELONGS to.

This is a statement by United Opt Out National about the Occupy DOE day.

On March 30th to April 2nd, 2012, the grassroots education reform organization United Opt Out National (http://unitedoptout.com/) will be holding an event in Washington, DC called Occupy the DOE. As a collection of teacher educators, K-12 teachers, and parents from around the country, we ask for your participation and support.

For more than a decade, the reform narrative in education has been dominated by test-based accountability, competition, and punishment. Large foundations and other corporate entities have propagated market-based principles like school choice, pay-for-performance, and for-profit management of schools. Consequently, large amounts of private wealth go towards influencing legislators and other public officials to dismantle public education, ultimately in favor of a private system that can be run for profit.

The key lever is the vaunted score on high-stakes state standardized tests, used to justify a slew of controversial decisions. As a result of ten years of this kind of reform, we are experiencing schools just as segregated by race and social class as they were in the 1950s. We in the United States are also experiencing a teaching profession that is constantly undermined and under attack. The culture of punishment and competition created under No Child Left Behind and now Race to the Top has proven to be a massive failure. Yet, private entities still push for test-based accountability measures despite near-universal opposition from educators and the pile of evidence against it.

In order to grind this failed reform climate to a screeching halt, we at United Opt Out National feel that an ultimate act of civil disobedience is all that we have left. We therefore call upon educators, leaders, parents, and students across our vast public education system to withhold the data by opting out of their state’s standardized tests. If policy-makers, legislators, and other officials cannot make responsible decisions based on quantitative data, and if they refuse to appreciate evidence to the contrary, then the only arrow left in our quiver is to simply refuse to hand over the data.

We at United Opt Out National certainly understand the potential consequences of refusing state standardized tests. We appreciate the reluctance of teachers and administrators to engage in an opt-out measure. Various state departments of education and their officials falsely claim that parents do not have the legal right to opt-out, that their refusal to concede to the tests will unfairly punish their children and their schools. While officials might be able to fire teachers, they cannot fire parents. If school systems wish to continue their obsession with test scores, then they must also be prepared to offer alternatives for the growing wave of parents who see test preparation violating their consciences and robbing their children of meaningful educational experiences.

Our Occupy the DOE event will include numerous teach-ins, social events, and actions in protest against test-based and corporate driven education reforms. In preservation of a free and equitable public education, and to support a new direction in education reform, we ask that you strongly consider participating in our event. If you would like any other information, feel free to contact any one of our administrators through our site at http://unitedoptout.com/, which provides direct links to our myriad social media accounts, endorsements, readings, and other documentation.

This is United Opt Out National’s mission statement:

Members of this site are parents, educators, students and social activists who are dedicated to the elimination of high stakes testing in public education. We use this site to collaborate, exchange ideas, support one another, share information and initiate collective local and national actions to end the reign of fear and terror promoted by the high stakes testing agenda.

We believe that high stakes testing is destructive to ALL children, educators, communities, the quality of instruction in classrooms, equity in schooling, and the democratic principles which underlie the purposes of public education. We believe that a quality public education is a basic human right for all children, one which must remain in the hands of our communities and out of the hands of big business, corporate reformers and politicians. If we are to save, and transform, public education into spaces where ALL children have an opportunity to flourish, grow, question, challenge, think and be prepared as democratic citizens, we must begin with the fight to end the high stakes testing movement.

What we do:

We have two basic platforms: Our website is designed for people to access documents, templates, forms, and other vital state and federal information, and our Facebook which is dedicated to providing ongoing avenues for grass-roots collective actions. Here you will find opportunities not only to share and learn but to ACT. We invite anyone to propose actions for the group to take in addition to the ones organized by the FB administrators.

For additional information, check out their website.

And this is a comment that was made on the Teach Occupy Wall Street Facebook page by Mark Naison.

Hypocrisy Not Democracy

How does it feel to live in a country where the people making education policy, the Barack Obama’s, Arne Duncan’s, Bill Gates’, and Michael Bloomberg’s, send their children to private schools where classes are capped at 15, where there are no standardized tests, where teachers’ creativity is honored and there is plenty of art, music, science and sports, but want YOUR children to sit at a desk all day preparing for standardized tests, taught by teachers who work in terror of losing their jobs, in schools where art music and sports are cut to make room for a testing? If you think this unfair, if you think it is wrong, if you think it is hypocritical, then join parents, teachers, students and concerned citizens at “Occupy the DOE” in Washington DC March 30-April 2! It’s time to stand up for democratic education and fight off the bogus “education reform movement” which wants to create a two tier education system that reserves creative thinking for the children of the wealthy while condemning the vast majority of American children to a regime of rote learning.

Dora