The Time magazine article of Dec 8, 2008 on Michelle Rhee, Chancellor of DC public schools destroys the credibility of the Teacher's Unions ability to protect their members.
This article, focusing on the actions of the new DC schools chancellor (Rhee), points out the fact that Rhee has been able to fire nearly 300 teachers in the past year. The article gives no data on any personnel reviews, and no apparent reasons given other than nebulous notions of weak or poor performance. In fact, the indication from the article is that Rhee herself decides who stays and who goes. (Just my impression from the article.)
Rhee's ideas stem from her personal crusade to put 'better' teachers in classrooms across the country. This coming from a deep seated idea that 'strong' teachers can better meet the needs of the students in their care. While this idea is not new, it has never actually proven to be a significant factor in education quality.
The problem for the teachers unions is that she is making it happen, and the unions are apparently impotent to stop the process.
I am of several minds about this. On one hand, I really like seeing the unions squeal like stuck pigs because someone finally has the...uhm...guts...yeah, guts...to challenge them on this issue in their seat of power. Seeing this happen in DC is just...delicious.
On the other hand, Rhee is acting on a personal fixed idea that is not going to produce any results and is going to cause far more chaos and turmoil that will have real (negative) impact upon the school system in the long run. When the results are not forthcoming, Ms. Rhee is going to be acquainted with the administrative version of a lynching. (Read the article and it leaves the impression that Ms. Rhee pisses off friends and foes alike.) Don't get me wrong, there may be some positive results for a year or perhaps two, with small improvements, but it won't last. It won't last because teachers are not the problem with education quality. (But that is a subject for another post.)
Mass firings without clear reasoning creates a state of fear, and fear is not a good motivator in the long run. Though Ms Rhee wants to implement incentives for high performance, it is not occurring. There is no support structure and/or policy innovation to guide the remaining staff on how to be 'strong' teachers, thus her policies leave behind a wake of confusion and turmoil for all remaining teachers. It is that confusion which will paralyze the teachers, and eventually the entire system. What will teachers do throughout the year to make certain their students' test scores improve (so they will retain their jobs)? Can we evermore be certain of the truth in any report coming from an organization where the average worker could lose his/her job on a whim?
When you cannot define what a good and strong teacher is, or cannot train the teachers to acquire the skills/abilities which would make a 'strong' teacher, set the organization up to fail by demanding it happen. Ms. Rhee thinks she knows, but she is mistaken. That mistake will cost the DC schools and students dearly.
Perhaps before someone granted her unlimited power over the DC schools they should have checked the track record of all the teachers she promoted and got hired through her organization the New Teacher Project. Of course, no one thought of that...
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Are Teachers being Demonized?
AFT president Randi Weingarten in a recent speech lamented the notion that Teachers are being ‘demonized’ and blamed for the poor performance of the public schools. In checking the source of these statements referred to by Bob Hebert in a recent NY Times op ed, I found that Ms. Weingarten’s words could be found in political speeches aimed at demonizing republican candidate for president, John McCain. It is obvious that Mr. Hebert wrote his piece to further promote this notion of teachers under some social stigma.
The trouble is that the notion is false, though perhaps not undeserving.
Are teachers to blame for anything regarding the state of public education? The current reality is a great dichotomy: public education is nearly reviled in every state of the nation, yet the actual education providers, teachers, are still voted raises (by the public) continually, even in the worst school districts in the nation. At a time when public opinion of the school system is terrible, the public shows remarkable support for the teachers, and are easily swayed to support them despite all evidence which shows them undeserving.
So where is this idea of teachers being demonized coming from? Why, from the PR department of the teacher’s union. Public support for teachers is historically strong, and the unions are attempting to play off that support by creating a false notion that teachers are under attack. (Absurd, but true.)
The truth is that teachers are not being blamed for the poor quality of education in the schools, even though they are the primary givers of education; Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Hebert’s assertions are pure politics. Over the years all evidence of poor performance and substandard delivery has been excused. Teachers have never in the past, nor in the present, been held accountable for the all too real failure of the public schools.
From the above you may think that I am one who thinks teachers are to blame for the state of public education. You would be wrong.
What I believe is that the teachers are put into a terrible situation by the management of the schools and school districts which cause them to violate their training on a daily basis. It is the constant pressure from school management to forgo real teaching standards which place the teachers in a position to choose between their careers and the well being of their students.
There is no question the public schools do not meet the needs of today’s society. But this is less the result of teacher competence than the fact that the organization and operation of the schools prevents real education from occurring.
Sadly, the teachers are caught in the middle, with no real power to affect any change.
The trouble is that the notion is false, though perhaps not undeserving.
Are teachers to blame for anything regarding the state of public education? The current reality is a great dichotomy: public education is nearly reviled in every state of the nation, yet the actual education providers, teachers, are still voted raises (by the public) continually, even in the worst school districts in the nation. At a time when public opinion of the school system is terrible, the public shows remarkable support for the teachers, and are easily swayed to support them despite all evidence which shows them undeserving.
So where is this idea of teachers being demonized coming from? Why, from the PR department of the teacher’s union. Public support for teachers is historically strong, and the unions are attempting to play off that support by creating a false notion that teachers are under attack. (Absurd, but true.)
The truth is that teachers are not being blamed for the poor quality of education in the schools, even though they are the primary givers of education; Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Hebert’s assertions are pure politics. Over the years all evidence of poor performance and substandard delivery has been excused. Teachers have never in the past, nor in the present, been held accountable for the all too real failure of the public schools.
From the above you may think that I am one who thinks teachers are to blame for the state of public education. You would be wrong.
What I believe is that the teachers are put into a terrible situation by the management of the schools and school districts which cause them to violate their training on a daily basis. It is the constant pressure from school management to forgo real teaching standards which place the teachers in a position to choose between their careers and the well being of their students.
There is no question the public schools do not meet the needs of today’s society. But this is less the result of teacher competence than the fact that the organization and operation of the schools prevents real education from occurring.
Sadly, the teachers are caught in the middle, with no real power to affect any change.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Why Are more Schools facing NCLB Sanctions?
More Schools Facing Sanctions Under NCLB Data on adequate yearly progress show that 1 in 5 public schools are in some stage of penalties under the federal law. By David J. Hoff
Almost 30,000 schools in the United States failed to make adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act in the 2007-08 school year. For states with comparable data for the 2006-07 school year, the number of such schools increased by 28 percent.
Half those schools missed their achievement goals for two or more years, putting almost one in five of the nation’s public schools in some stage of a federally mandated process designed to improve student achievement. The number facing sanctions represents a 13 percent increase for states with comparable data over the 2006-07 school year.
Of those falling short of their academic-achievement goals, 3,559 schools—4 percent of all schools rated based on their progress—are facing the law’s more serious interventions in the current school year. That’s double the number that were in that... (The full story was released online 19 Dec 08 at Edweek.org)
The report above regarding the number of schools failing to meet AYP is just forerunner of reports to come.
Why? Simple; the states had to set up scheduled performance increases as part of the AYP system. The ultimate goal being that all schools are to achieve 100% student proficiency on the core subjects of reading and math by the year 2014. The situation facing the schools at this point is that the easy part of the schedule is over and more schools will start to fall behind as the standards grow in difficulty.
What few people know is the fact that the AYP standards for most states were initially set so low that most of the schools could meet AYP without any difficulty, without effort. As the standards increase and surpass the ability of the schools to meet the targets, more schools will fall into the failing category.
Thus each year the standards go up, more schools will fail to meet AYP. This is not because the standards are too difficult, it is simply because the schools are not capable of delivering any semblance of a quality education. This is why the education establishment objects to NCLB.
Think about it.
Almost 30,000 schools in the United States failed to make adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act in the 2007-08 school year. For states with comparable data for the 2006-07 school year, the number of such schools increased by 28 percent.
Half those schools missed their achievement goals for two or more years, putting almost one in five of the nation’s public schools in some stage of a federally mandated process designed to improve student achievement. The number facing sanctions represents a 13 percent increase for states with comparable data over the 2006-07 school year.
Of those falling short of their academic-achievement goals, 3,559 schools—4 percent of all schools rated based on their progress—are facing the law’s more serious interventions in the current school year. That’s double the number that were in that... (The full story was released online 19 Dec 08 at Edweek.org)
The report above regarding the number of schools failing to meet AYP is just forerunner of reports to come.
Why? Simple; the states had to set up scheduled performance increases as part of the AYP system. The ultimate goal being that all schools are to achieve 100% student proficiency on the core subjects of reading and math by the year 2014. The situation facing the schools at this point is that the easy part of the schedule is over and more schools will start to fall behind as the standards grow in difficulty.
What few people know is the fact that the AYP standards for most states were initially set so low that most of the schools could meet AYP without any difficulty, without effort. As the standards increase and surpass the ability of the schools to meet the targets, more schools will fall into the failing category.
Thus each year the standards go up, more schools will fail to meet AYP. This is not because the standards are too difficult, it is simply because the schools are not capable of delivering any semblance of a quality education. This is why the education establishment objects to NCLB.
Think about it.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
How the media helps to doom our kids to poor education
In the Las Vegas schools of Clark County School District it was just reported that the percentage of high school seniors (in the Clark County district) who passed the math proficiency test fell to just 22 percent. The reporter starts the opening paragraph with 'At first glance, the report looks like more bad news...'
Uhm, excuse me...'looks' like bad news? As in...you are about to tell me why there is good news in the fact that only slightly over 1 of 5 Seniors could pass a Multiple Choice Test based on Eighth Grade material?
Please check out the full story here: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/dec/30/pass-rate-falls-students-taking-key-test-seniors/
In the story the reporter divulges critical facts, and then totally ignores what those facts mean.
1. The tests are based on eighth grade material;
2. These students have taken the test at least twice before (10th and 11th grades);
3. The students having failed the tests previously were known by the district to have failed and needed remedial attention (for at least two years);
4. The State of Nevada has been instructed by the Federal Dept of Education to revise the exam to include high school level material.
Data not included in the report:
5. These tests are largely Multiple Choice, making them one of the easiest test types to pass because the correct answer is always included;
6. The score needed to pass the test is only 60%; the equivalent of a D-.
What it means is simply this: Of the CCSD Seniors still needing to pass the math proficiency test, a test for which the answers are visible, and the schools had 5 years to train the material; only 22% could manage at least a barely passing grade. Is there a better, more complete, definition of incompetence?
This indicates a staggering level of district-wide incompetence that is frankly mind-boggling. Yet the reporter listens to a couple district and State officials explain it all away. 'Yes, (one can almost hear these officials reflecting) this 'concerns us' but with current fiscal crisis and budget cut to education, well of course student progress suffers.' (Ok, this is my own rendition of what they actually said, but how many times have we heard such drivel from educrats?)
What the reporter ignores is that these students have, or rather should have, learned and mastered the material Five (5) years ago when they finished the eighth grade. There was no economic crisis 5, 4, 3, or even 2 years ago. So why all of a sudden does some minor cut-back have an impact? The fact is that the schools failed to teach the material year in and year out. The students were reviewed on several occasions and found to be failing, and the schools did NOTHING about it.
And there is not one indication from the district that they are in any way responsible for this situation.
Not only are they not responsible, but we are to excuse the failings of inept schools because there are minor cuts in funding? Only the most empty-headed of reporters could print this story with a straight face. Or, perhaps she is being paid by the school district to publish these puff pieces and excuse their failings? (I have followed this reporter's work for several years and she does this type of thing constantly) What it amounts to is misleading the public into a false sense of security. If the public does not know the truth (and they don't) then they will not understand the depth of betrayal by the schools. And thus will not demand the reform truly needed, which current management cannot deliver. This reporter certainly never challenges the district on the facts.
What you should understand and never forget is the fact that test scores measure not only how well the students are learning the material, but how well the schools are delivering it. The Clark County school district is a disaster not unlike the Titanic, and reporters like this are the cruise directors telling the passengers, 'everything is all right, the Captain has it under control. The bump you felt wasn't an iceberg...'
Examine any number of education reporters' reports. You will find this same sort of 'excuse everything' mentality when dealing with the schools and school districts at the local level. This occurs in virtually every city and state, and if you are not wise to it, you too will be hoodwinked by the powder puff league of reporting.
God save us from idiots with a barrel of ink.
Uhm, excuse me...'looks' like bad news? As in...you are about to tell me why there is good news in the fact that only slightly over 1 of 5 Seniors could pass a Multiple Choice Test based on Eighth Grade material?
Please check out the full story here: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/dec/30/pass-rate-falls-students-taking-key-test-seniors/
In the story the reporter divulges critical facts, and then totally ignores what those facts mean.
1. The tests are based on eighth grade material;
2. These students have taken the test at least twice before (10th and 11th grades);
3. The students having failed the tests previously were known by the district to have failed and needed remedial attention (for at least two years);
4. The State of Nevada has been instructed by the Federal Dept of Education to revise the exam to include high school level material.
Data not included in the report:
5. These tests are largely Multiple Choice, making them one of the easiest test types to pass because the correct answer is always included;
6. The score needed to pass the test is only 60%; the equivalent of a D-.
What it means is simply this: Of the CCSD Seniors still needing to pass the math proficiency test, a test for which the answers are visible, and the schools had 5 years to train the material; only 22% could manage at least a barely passing grade. Is there a better, more complete, definition of incompetence?
This indicates a staggering level of district-wide incompetence that is frankly mind-boggling. Yet the reporter listens to a couple district and State officials explain it all away. 'Yes, (one can almost hear these officials reflecting) this 'concerns us' but with current fiscal crisis and budget cut to education, well of course student progress suffers.' (Ok, this is my own rendition of what they actually said, but how many times have we heard such drivel from educrats?)
What the reporter ignores is that these students have, or rather should have, learned and mastered the material Five (5) years ago when they finished the eighth grade. There was no economic crisis 5, 4, 3, or even 2 years ago. So why all of a sudden does some minor cut-back have an impact? The fact is that the schools failed to teach the material year in and year out. The students were reviewed on several occasions and found to be failing, and the schools did NOTHING about it.
And there is not one indication from the district that they are in any way responsible for this situation.
Not only are they not responsible, but we are to excuse the failings of inept schools because there are minor cuts in funding? Only the most empty-headed of reporters could print this story with a straight face. Or, perhaps she is being paid by the school district to publish these puff pieces and excuse their failings? (I have followed this reporter's work for several years and she does this type of thing constantly) What it amounts to is misleading the public into a false sense of security. If the public does not know the truth (and they don't) then they will not understand the depth of betrayal by the schools. And thus will not demand the reform truly needed, which current management cannot deliver. This reporter certainly never challenges the district on the facts.
What you should understand and never forget is the fact that test scores measure not only how well the students are learning the material, but how well the schools are delivering it. The Clark County school district is a disaster not unlike the Titanic, and reporters like this are the cruise directors telling the passengers, 'everything is all right, the Captain has it under control. The bump you felt wasn't an iceberg...'
Examine any number of education reporters' reports. You will find this same sort of 'excuse everything' mentality when dealing with the schools and school districts at the local level. This occurs in virtually every city and state, and if you are not wise to it, you too will be hoodwinked by the powder puff league of reporting.
God save us from idiots with a barrel of ink.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Charter Schools Black Eye
The public school supporters are cheering; charter schools were just delivered a black eye. Over the weekend a multi-part story ran in the Philadelphia Enquirer about financial irregularities of the charter school program in Pennsylvania. The full story can be seen here: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/education/20081228
The story itself is typical of human action regarding the pursuit of money, and not one you would be surprised over. There are innumerable stories of corruption involving public funds in every sector of human endeavor.
The real interest in this story is going to be its impact upon the school reform movement. There is already a turf war from the public school point of view, because charter schools intrusion has drained, in some areas, significant funds from their coffers. Pennsylvania has had the loosest regulatory laws regarding charter schools, and that is certain to end, but if the public schools have their way, they will gain the ability to shut those schools down for similar infractions in the future.
This blog is not making any moral, ethical, or legal judgement in whatever case is brought about against any of the charter schools under scrutiny in this report. There is insufficient data in the report to determine any legal matter. It is the PR damage 'fallout' of the story which calls to question the operation of the schools at this time.
Throughout the week I suggest you bounce around to various education related blogs to see how the story is viewed. Initial reaction from the public school supporters is a good amount of cheering, though there is nothing to cheer about. Charter school supporters are silent, but there is nothing to be silent about either.
Education has become more about money for adults than it is about education of our youth, and that is true at all levels in all areas. The reactions to this story will prove it so, and were we an ethical people we would be shamed.
Alas, we are not.
The story itself is typical of human action regarding the pursuit of money, and not one you would be surprised over. There are innumerable stories of corruption involving public funds in every sector of human endeavor.
The real interest in this story is going to be its impact upon the school reform movement. There is already a turf war from the public school point of view, because charter schools intrusion has drained, in some areas, significant funds from their coffers. Pennsylvania has had the loosest regulatory laws regarding charter schools, and that is certain to end, but if the public schools have their way, they will gain the ability to shut those schools down for similar infractions in the future.
This blog is not making any moral, ethical, or legal judgement in whatever case is brought about against any of the charter schools under scrutiny in this report. There is insufficient data in the report to determine any legal matter. It is the PR damage 'fallout' of the story which calls to question the operation of the schools at this time.
Throughout the week I suggest you bounce around to various education related blogs to see how the story is viewed. Initial reaction from the public school supporters is a good amount of cheering, though there is nothing to cheer about. Charter school supporters are silent, but there is nothing to be silent about either.
Education has become more about money for adults than it is about education of our youth, and that is true at all levels in all areas. The reactions to this story will prove it so, and were we an ethical people we would be shamed.
Alas, we are not.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Weighing in on Duncan
There is a great deal of news and blog posts on various sites about President Elect Obama's choice for Education Sec, Arne Duncan, as if the Ed Sec is of any real importance.
People, please relax. The Sec Ed is a largely ceremonial post, its not like the Dept of Education has any real effect upon the outcomes of public education. Whomever Obama chooses, that person's personality and/or qualifications for the position are far less important than the politics involved.
Rather than asking whether so and so is going to make a good appointee, you should be asking how politics is going to effect the near future of the education establishment. President Elect Obama is a Democrat, and is beholden to the national Teacher unions which are big supporters of the Democrat party. The teacher unions very much expect repayment for their support of the Democrat candidates in the recent election.
What do the teacher unions want? Top of the list is repeal or total dilution of NCLB.
Other factors? Oh yes, Democrats have control of both houses of Congress, meaning the road is pretty clear if leadership chooses to travel it.
Any new Sec Ed is going to have the job of enabling legislation to repeal/dilute NCLB, or he is going to be the man who has to explain to the unions why they aren't going to get the support expected from the new administration. Either way it is a PR job that is not going to be much fun.
And if you really care about education progress, you will focus on the basics of education and resolving the problems of delivery, rather than wasting time worrying what politicians are going to do in the arena. After all, there is only one group less successful than public education...and you don't really expect good results from politicians, do you?
Whatever you think about Mr. Duncan, he is going to be doing exactly what the Administration wants on the major issues. So, who cares?
People, please relax. The Sec Ed is a largely ceremonial post, its not like the Dept of Education has any real effect upon the outcomes of public education. Whomever Obama chooses, that person's personality and/or qualifications for the position are far less important than the politics involved.
Rather than asking whether so and so is going to make a good appointee, you should be asking how politics is going to effect the near future of the education establishment. President Elect Obama is a Democrat, and is beholden to the national Teacher unions which are big supporters of the Democrat party. The teacher unions very much expect repayment for their support of the Democrat candidates in the recent election.
What do the teacher unions want? Top of the list is repeal or total dilution of NCLB.
Other factors? Oh yes, Democrats have control of both houses of Congress, meaning the road is pretty clear if leadership chooses to travel it.
Any new Sec Ed is going to have the job of enabling legislation to repeal/dilute NCLB, or he is going to be the man who has to explain to the unions why they aren't going to get the support expected from the new administration. Either way it is a PR job that is not going to be much fun.
And if you really care about education progress, you will focus on the basics of education and resolving the problems of delivery, rather than wasting time worrying what politicians are going to do in the arena. After all, there is only one group less successful than public education...and you don't really expect good results from politicians, do you?
Whatever you think about Mr. Duncan, he is going to be doing exactly what the Administration wants on the major issues. So, who cares?
The Reality of Public Education
There is no question that the American Public Education system is in trouble. Decades of statistical evidence shows a consistenly poor level of results. The only questions unresolved are why the problem exists, and how to solve it.
The purpose of this blog is to solve the problems of public education. One of the biggest jobs in this effort is to examine the thoughts about and policies proposed for the system. The simplicity of this is that we must evaluate every position thoroughly becuase our track record is so poor.
Media reports are filled with false or misleading information about the public education effort, and such reports are as harmful to education as the poor quality itself.
Comments and conversation on issues are always welcome.
Time to play...;)
The purpose of this blog is to solve the problems of public education. One of the biggest jobs in this effort is to examine the thoughts about and policies proposed for the system. The simplicity of this is that we must evaluate every position thoroughly becuase our track record is so poor.
Media reports are filled with false or misleading information about the public education effort, and such reports are as harmful to education as the poor quality itself.
Comments and conversation on issues are always welcome.
Time to play...;)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)