Showing posts with label education reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education reform. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Protecting teachers who refuse to give standardized tests.

In the past year we have seen a number of parental groups, student groups and teacher groups opt out of, or refuse to administer, standardized tests. While controversial, in some instances we see this as something that is protecting children and enhancing their education. Check out this article that covers what NEA and AFT think about teachers refusing to administer standardized tests and how they will defend them! 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/10/06/unions-say-they-will-back-teachers-who-refuse-to-administer-mandated-standardized-tests-to-students/

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Friday, January 31, 2014

Md. superintendents criticize implementation of school reforms

By Valerie Strauss, January 30 at 4:33 pm "Nearly all of the superintendents of Maryland school districts have signed a statement that criticizes federal and state education officials for forcing them to implement several major reforms, including the Common Core State Standards, on what they say is an unrealistic timetable...." Click here to read the full story.

Gates Foundation Gets It Right This Time

Vicki Phillips is the Director of Education at the Gates Foundation, and a key decision-maker in the Foundation's education reform agenda; helping to guide the hundreds of millions of dollars the Foundation invests in education reform. Phillips recently posted a commentary on the Common Core that calls for caution before attaching high-stakes to the new standards and evaluation systems. She said:

  • "The key principle is giving teachers and students time to adjust to new expectations before they face serious consequences for not meeting them" 
  •   "Teachers should benefit from the insights that come out of the evaluation systems as soon as they are available, but districts should ensure that there is a baseline and several years of data before using these systems to make personnel decisions" 
  •  "...test scores shouldn't be used to make consequential decisions, such as whether students should graduate, until we are sure we understand how to interpret the results". 
  •  "...no new schools should be singled out (as needing improvement) based on new assessments until teachers have had a few years to get used to the new ways of working". 

 It's not often that teachers, parents, and the big ed reform foundations like Gates all agree. Let's hope the Maryland State Department of Education is listening.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

BOE Supports Call for MSA waiver

Montgomery school board backs bills to skip standardized tests set for spring in Maryland - because the tests no longer align with the new common core curriculum being taught. Read the story in the Washington Post. Congratulations to the Montgomery County Board of Education for this act in support of sanity - and to the many Montgomery County state legislators who are supporting this proposal. Discussions are also underway in Annapolis over the Maryland State Department of Education's plans for a federal ESEA waiver that attempts to mandate high stakes testing through 2017 and beyond. To communicate with your legislators about this issue, you can find their contact information here. Stay informed by signing up for the Maryland State Education Association (MSEA)'s online legislative updates here.

Monday, December 09, 2013

How Important are International Test Score Comparisons?

Every year when international test score comparisons are released, the press runs stories bemoaning the state of education in America. How important are these comparisons? See what Diana Ravitch has to say about them in this clear-thinking analysis on Huffington Post.

Monday, November 04, 2013

Why we must be politically active

With Election Day coming up tomorrow, we are reminded of the constant battles being waged around the country to strip workers of the rights to organize and bargain collectively. We are reminded that there are groups out there who spend millions of dollars on board of education campaigns far away from where they live in an attempt to take private control of  public schools.

Tea Party zealots, the Koch Brothers and Michelle Rhee are continuously attacking the commitment of public school employees and doing everything they can to eradicate our collective voice. Take a look at the articles below. They are prime examples of this.

But there is hope. Our union brothers and sisters and educators in arms are winning battles, while portions of the public are starting to see through it. We have to keep building on this momentum.

Our 2014 local election season is already underway and we can't forget to be visible and vocal now. We need to make sure that we support the people who will support the rights of workers and support our schools.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/koch-group-unions-battle-over-colorado-schools-race-99252.html?hp=l10

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/02/heres-how-red-states-are-rolling-back-worker-protections/

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/04/how_bipartisan_antics_could_save_the_next_michelle_rhee_from_humiliation/

Friday, October 25, 2013

Let's Leave Some Children Behind

Michael Petrilli is a leading conservative commentator on education policy. He is executive vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education-policy think tank based in Washington. He is also an executive editor of Education Next and a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Petrilli is notorious for his hostility to teacher unions. He has also been a strong advocate for charter schools and voucher programs. In a recent blog posting on Education Week’s Bridging Differences blog, Petrilli discussed his views that education policy should be about sorting out "the especially deserving poor" who are worthy of help, rather than attempting to help all children succeed through access to quality education. Petrilli is to be admired for his brutal honesty about the values that underlie his education reform agenda. The rest of us are left to wonder what happens to those children "left behind" - and to wonder how the conservative authors of the No Child Left Behind Act reconcile the rhetoric of the law's title with Petrilli's honest discussion of the moral values behind the conservative agenda for public education.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Why I Stopped Writing Recommendations for Teach For America

Congatulations to Slate Magazine for running an insightful piece by Catherine Michna entitled "Why I Stopped Writing Recommendation Letters for Teach for America". Michna is a Teach for America alumnus herself, but she has come to have serious reservations about TFA's model of sending thousands of poorly trained and ill-prepared recent college graduates to teach in high poverty schools, where they only stay for short periods of time before leaving: contributing to the high turnover rates in high poverty schools.

Monday, September 30, 2013

Kozol on Ravitch

Diane Ravitch has recently published an important new book on education policy in America entitled Reign of Error; the Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools. This past Sunday, reknowned education author Jonathan Kozol published a review of Ravitch's new book in the New York Times Book Review.
As Kozol explains, "Diane Ravitch was for many years one of the strongest advocates for the testing-and-accountability agenda. Because of her impeccable credentials as a scholar and historian of education, she was a commanding presence among critics of our schools. Some years ago, however, she reconsidered her long-held beliefs and, in an influential book, "The Death and Life of the Great American School System," parted ways with her former allies and joined the highly vocal opposition." Ravitch's new book is a must read by any educator, parent, or politician who truly wants to understand what has gone wrong with the so-called "education reform movement" today, and what we need to do to fix it.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Teacher Turnover in Charter Schools

Today the New York Times published an important article about teacher turnover in charter schools. The average length of service for teachers in public schools is around 14 years. Meanwhile the Times reports on charter school operators who are content with - and in fact seem to prefer - high teacher turnover that results in the average length of service for teachers in charter schools is more in the range of two to three years. The New York Times also reports that the research indicates that high teacher turnover "diminishes student achievement". Ron Thorpe, the president of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, perhaps said it best: "“To become a master plumber you have to work for five years, shouldn’t we have some kind of analog to that with the people we are entrusting our children to?” Click here to read the New York Times article.

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

MCEA BOD member Jennifer Martin blogs for EdWeek

MCEA Board of Directors member Jennifer Martin, an English teacher at Wooton High School has begun blogging for Education Week. Her posts appear in the "Teaching Ahead: A Roundtable" section of the site, where educators are asked to write about policy and practice in education. You can find here first three posts at http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teaching_ahead/. Way to go Jennifer!

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

How to evaluate teachers

The following letter to the editor was printed in today's Washington Post:

The debate over teacher evaluations is not about whether to include student data but how to do it and whether it makes sense to use state tests that are not aligned with the Common Core State Standards that Maryland and 44 other states have adopted. New tests aligned with these standards will be implemented starting in the 2014-15 school year. The Montgomery County Public Schools have begun implementing curricula that align with these standards, but as Superintendent Joshua P. Starr pointed out in his Feb. 8 op-ed, “Time out on standardized testing,” we need time to roll out the new curricula.

Holding teachers accountable in a prescriptive way for tests that do not match what we are teaching is not fair and works against effective implementation of these standards statewide. Our Teacher Professional Growth System, which has been in place for 13 years, already holds teachers accountable and results in high student achievement. Should we agree to a system that impedes progress?

Doug Prouty, Rockville
The writer is president of the Montgomery County Education Association

Monday, December 03, 2012

New ideas from a new generation of teachers

The following op ed column was published in the Washington Post on Friday November 30th, by Michael Stryer: Stryer, who is on leave as a high school teacher in Los Angeles, is a member of United Teachers Los Angeles and executive director of Teachers for a New Unionism. [Note the shout-out for MCEA two-thirds of the way through the article!].

What do you think? Post your comments and thoughts.

We have all heard about the dramatic changes in the American electorate and how, because he spoke to the concerns of the growing numbers of Hispanic, black, female and younger voters, President Obama was reelected despite adverse economic conditions.

Another critical demographic shift is occurring. This one is taking place, quietly, in teachers unions: Over the past several years, teachers who have spent 10 years or fewer in the classroom have become the dues-paying majority. The impact of this new majority is as important to the role of unions as the changing electorate is to presidential elections. These newer teachers, along with many longtime teachers, are looking for their unions to elevate the profession — not to sacrifice teaching quality for job security.

But the word is definitely not out. I’m a teacher and a union member — and a member of the new majority. Not long after the Chicago teachers strike ended, I had dinner with lifelong Democrats. Instead of support for a revitalized union movement or sympathy for the plight of teachers, the conversation included such comments as: “The last thing teachers unions think about are students,” “Teachers unions haven’t addressed teacher-quality issues, especially with the weakest teachers” and “Teachers unions have to start focusing on something other than pay and tenure.”

It was painful to hear this — especially because such sentiments accurately describe the situation in many large urban teachers unions. In smaller unions across the country, however, progressive teachers are committed to meeting student needs and advancing the profession. And the new majority is accelerating those changes.

The leaders of the biggest teachers unions, including in New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles, largely focus on narrow contractual protections to the detriment of teacher quality and student achievement, issues that are of critical concern to the new majority of teachers.

Unions in small and medium-size districts are taking a different approach. Eschewing top-down leadership, these unions are highly collaborative. As a result, their actions reflect their members’ priorities: improved student achievement and upgraded teacher quality.

At Green Dot Public Schools in Los Angeles, the union’s mission sets out that “every student deserves to be taught by an effective teacher.” The union reached a membership-ratified agreement last spring with management on a rigorous evaluation system that includes test data as 25 percent of a teacher’s total evaluation score.

In Connecticut, the New Haven Federation of Teachers abandoned its traditionally adversarial role and collaborated with both the school district and the mayor’s office to develop and implement an evaluation system that relies heavily on evidence of student progress — including the use of standardized tests and other measures. The new system, which is strongly supported by New Haven’s 1,600 unionized teachers, more effectively supports struggling teachers and identifies unacceptable performers and helps transition them out of the system.

In Maryland, the Montgomery County Education Association participates in a Peer Assistance and Review program that helps mentor new teachers and struggling veterans. It’s a program with real teeth: A panel composed equally of teachers and administrators has the power to remove teachers who fail to improve with mentoring.

Members of the Newark Teachers Union recently approved a contract tying teacher salaries to measures of effectiveness and giving teachers a leading role in establishing and monitoring those measures.

This encouraging transformation extends beyond small and medium-size districts. Increasingly, statewide teacher associations are collaboratively addressing teacher-quality and student achievement issues. In June, the Massachusetts Teachers Association supported statewide legislation requiring that teacher performance be a major factor in staffing and personnel decisions.

Signs of change are appearing in major urban unions. In New York, Boston and Los Angeles, teachers voice groups — representing the opinions of the new majority as well as those of many senior teachers — have become strong advocates for changes affecting teacher quality. Their efforts, combined with those of civil rights organizations calling for more attention to student achievement, and forces within the Democratic Party pushing for accountability, are putting tremendous pressure on entrenched leadership to adopt more responsive, democratic policies. Transformation of major teachers unions may happen in the near future.

The democratic system is at the heart of our unions’ governance. The majority of teachers believe that student achievement comes first. It’s only a matter of time until all teachers unions reflect that belief — and ardently work to support it.



Friday, November 09, 2012

Montgomery County schools superintendent launches podcast with teachers’ union vice president

Article posted yesterday on WashingtonPost.com
By Lynh Bui

Montgomery County Public Schools Superintendent Joshua P. Starr has hit the digital airwaves.

Starr has launched a podcast called “What’s the BIG Idea?” a show he hosts with Chris Lloyd, vice president of the Montgomery County Education Association and an eighth-grade teacher.

“Public education is really, really complex,” Starr says in the inaugural podcast. “There are no easy answers, and I feel like part of my job is to try to help people understand that complexity in a multitude of ways.”

The show will bring in people in from around the region “who have big ideas about things going on in education,” Starr said.

On first listen, it sounds like the podcast aims to give people in the education community a chance to think deeply about problems, innovations, systems and policy tied to teaching kids in America.

“We tend to kind of go for the latest fad, the latest reform, the latest kind of quick fix...” Lloyd said. “But we don’t really think about what’s the purpose of education.”

Lloyd is part of the Montgomery County Education Association, the union that represents more than 12,000 teachers, counselors and other educators in the school system.

In the first podcast, Starr and Lloyd talk to Sam Chaltain, a writer and education activist who lives in Washington, D.C. Chaltain was also national director of education advocacy organization the Forum for Education & Democracy.

Starr and Lloyd don’t waste any time in the first episode. Their first question to Chaltain:

“What’s the problem we’re trying to solve in American public education?”

To send questions for future podcasts, find them on Twitter @wtbipodcast or e-mail podcast@mcpsmd.org

“What’s the BIG Idea?” is available through iTunes or here.

Tuesday, October 09, 2012

The Results of Corporate School Reform in DC

Five years ago, Washington DC abolished its elected school board and the Mayor appointed Michelle Rhee as the new Chancellor. Although she had never run a school district, or even been a school principal, Rhee was empowered to up-end the system in the name of school reform. Over the next three years Rhee fired hundreds of teachers and principals, closed numerous schools and so alienated the community that many credit her for the Mayor being voted out of office after just one term. Rhee was - and still is - a darling of the neo-reformers: those who champion privatizing public education, those who ignore the impact of poverty on student achievement, and those who blame teachers and their unions for all the world's ills. Rhee successor - and mentee - Kaya Henderson, has proudly declared that she would be carrying on Rhee's agenda.

So here we are five years later, and Washington Post education writer Valerie Strauss has just posted a shocking letter about the school district's abyssmal failure to provide library books to newly renovated high schools. The excerpt below documents the facts - including the massive diversion of funding intended for library books to other purposes.

The neo-reformers always talk about accountability. Where is the accountability for this travesty?

"The city has every right to take pride in the $62 million modernization of Anacostia High School. It represents an important commitment to one of our most disadvantage communities. When your office issued the press release about the ribbon-cutting, it noted the school received a new library/media center. Unfortunately what the school received was not a library but merely a room. The school opened without any library books. The old collection — both literally and figuratively — was lost during the modernization.

What’s even worse is that this is not an isolated incident. Last year when the new H.D. Woodson High School opened, most of its books were lost during the renovation, including a 3,000 volume collection donated by a DCPS central office staff member. It now has a 450-volume collection. For a school its size, that figure should be 10,000. And Eastern High School had part of its collection lost during construction.

It is not simply the repeated loss of valuable school assets that is so troubling, it also the fact that the chancellor has paid so little attention to school libraries that they could be allowed to open in this state. A quarter of a billion dollars and the chance for significant gains in student achievement have been put at risk with the absence of these core academic materials.

The results of a Freedom of Information Act request show that in FY11 and FY12, the money appropriated to DCPS for library and media services was overwhelmingly used for other things. It paid for other things like building repairs, maintenance to HVAC systems. More than $400,000 was used for testing. DCPS used $80,000 of these funds to pay for a San Francisco-based consultant to develop a strategic plan for its Office of Family and Community Engagement."

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Another article citing the MCPS Teacher Evaluation System as a rationale alternative.

Here's yet another article published this past week that cites the MCEA/MCPS Peer Assistance and Review Program as a rational alternative to the reductionist student test score scheme being advocated by the neo-reformers. This article was published in the New Republic - hardly a bastion of pro-labor liberalism.

Can the Chicago Teachers’ Strike Fix Democratic Education Reform?
by Richard D.Kahlenberg

WPost Columnist Robinson Hits the Nail on the Head

Kudos to Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson for his clear and pointed analysis of the Chicago strike, the current neo-reform movement, and the undeniable role that poverty plays in our education system. Robinson rightly calls out the "brie-and-chablis 'reform' movement"... "whose knowledge of the inner-city schools crisis comes from a Hollywood movie".
     We cannot help but applaud Robinson's straightforward analysis that: "it is fair to insist that teachers approach their jobs with the assumption that every single child, rich or poor, can succeed. It is not fair to expect teachers to correct all the imbalances and remedy all the pathologies that result from growing inequality in our society."

Teachers are heroes, not villains, and it’s time to stop demonizing them.
By Eugene Robinson, Published: September 17. The Washington Post

It has become fashionable to blame all of society’s manifold sins and wickedness on “teachers unions,” as if it were possible to separate these supposedly evil organizations from the dedicated public servants who belong to them. News flash: Collective bargaining is not the problem, and taking that right away from teachers will not fix the schools.

Chicago teachers strike enters its second week: Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is turning to the courts to try to put an end to a teachers strike that is entering its second week and has left parents scrambling to make alternative child-care arrangements for at least two more days.

It is true that teachers in Chicago have dug in their heels against Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s demands for “reform,” some of which are not unreasonable. I’d dig in, too, if I were constantly being lectured by self-righteous crusaders whose knowledge of the inner-city schools crisis comes from a Hollywood movie.

The problems that afflict public education go far beyond what George W. Bush memorably called “the soft bigotry of low expectations.” They go beyond whatever measure of institutional sclerosis may be attributed to tenure, beyond the inevitable cases of burnout, beyond the fact that teachers in some jurisdictions actually earn halfway decent salaries.

The fact is that teachers are being saddled with absurdly high expectations. Some studies have shown a correlation between student performance and teacher “effectiveness,” depending how this elusive quality is measured. But there is a whole body of academic literature proving the stronger correlation between student performance and a much more important variable: family income.

Yes, I’m talking about poverty. Sorry to be so gauche, but when teachers point out the relationship between income and achievement, they’re not shirking responsibility. They’re just stating an inconvenient truth.

According to figures compiled by the College Board, students from families making more than $200,000 score more than 300 points higher on the SAT, on average, than students from families making less than $20,000 a year. There is, in fact, a clear relationship all the way along the scale: Each increment in higher family income translates into points on the test.

Sean Reardon of Stanford University’s Center for Education Policy Analysis concluded in a recent study that the achievement gap between high-income and low-income students is actually widening. It is unclear why this might be happening; maybe it is due to increased income inequality, maybe the relationship between income and achievement has somehow become stronger, maybe there is some other reason.

Whatever the cause, our society’s answer seems to be: Beat up the teachers.

The brie-and-chablis “reform” movement would have us believe that most of the teachers in low-income, low-performing schools are incompetent — and, by extension, that most of the teachers in upper-crust schools, where students perform well, are paragons of pedagogical virtue.

But some of the most dedicated and talented teachers I’ve ever met were working in “failing” inner-city schools. And yes, in award-winning schools where, as in Lake Wobegon, “all the children are above average,” I’ve met some unimaginative hacks who should never be allowed near a classroom.

It is reasonable to hold teachers accountable for their performance. But it is not reasonable — or, in the end, productive — to hold them accountable for factors that lie far beyond their control. It is fair to insist that teachers approach their jobs with the assumption that every single child, rich or poor, can succeed. It is not fair to expect teachers to correct all the imbalances and remedy all the pathologies that result from growing inequality in our society.

You didn’t see any of this reality in “Waiting for ‘Superman,’ ” the 2010 documentary that argued we should “solve” the education crisis by establishing more charter schools and, of course, stomping the teachers unions. You won’t see it later this month in “Won’t Back Down,” starring Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal, which argues for “parent trigger” laws designed to produce yet more charter schools and yet more teacher-bashing.

I’ve always considered myself an apostate from liberal orthodoxy on the subject of education. I have no fundamental objection to charter schools, as long as they produce results. I believe in the centrality and primacy of public education, but I believe it’s immoral to tell parents, in effect, “Too bad for your kids, but we’ll fix the schools someday.”

But portraying teachers as villains doesn’t help a single child. Ignoring the reasons for the education gap in this country is no way to close it. And there’s a better way to learn about the crisis than going to the movies. Visit a school instead.

eugenerobinson@washpost.com


Tuesday, August 21, 2012

The best way to retain good teachers


Kudos to Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, for writing this opinion piece in the Washington Post (published 8/20/12) 

 

Keeping the best teachers in the classroom requires a more comprehensive plan than the oft-used, yet naive and unsuccessful, “just fire the bad ones” strategy. Both The Post’s Aug. 17 editorial “Letting good teachers get away” on the New Teacher Project’s report on teacher retention and the report itself ignored the things that teachers consistently say they need to make teaching a long-term career, not a short-term job: evaluations that include regular feedback and continuous professional development (which have yielded positive outcomes where they are in place); resources to help them do their jobs and help all students learn; collaboration and shared responsibility among teachers, administrators and the community; safe and vibrant schools; and effective parental engagement.

Until lawmakers, school officials and others talk and work with teachers to fully understand what is required to retain great educators, we’ll continue to have the expensive turnover crisis, in which more than half of all new teachers leave within their first five years and other frustrated teachers, who have so much to offer our students, give up and quit.




Thursday, June 28, 2012

School Vouchers and the Loch Ness Monster

What do school vouchers and the Loch Ness monster have in common? Read this story to find out how a growing number of private religious schools in Louisiana will be using a textbook that claims the existence of the Loch Ness monster is evidence that evolution is myth.

Loch Ness monster cited by US schools as evidence that evolution is myth
by CLAIRE MCKIN
The Scotsman, Published on Monday 25 June 2012

THOUSANDS of American school pupils are to be taught that the Loch Ness monster is real – in an attempt by religious teachers to disprove Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Pupils attending privately-run Christian schools in the southern state of Louisiana will learn from textbooks next year, which claim Scotland’s most famous mythological beast is a living creature....(cont.)

Why is this important? Under a recently passed state law in Louisiana, "Thousands of children are to receive publicly-funded vouchers enabling them to attend the schools – which follow a strict fundamentalist curriculum". In America, private schools should be free to teach whatever they want to teach. But is this an appropriate use of public tax dollars? Most voters think not.

A national poll found that "The more people know about how voucher programs operate, the less they like them, and most importantly, Americans expectations of a voucher program sharply contrast with existing programs and proposals. For example, many Americans withdraw support if it (vouchers) means the public schools lose tax dollars. And the poll clearly shows that Americans overwhelmingly expect public accountability of any private or religious school receiving public dollars". It's hard to believe that the new Louisiana textbook would meet most Americans' criteria for public accountability.

Voters agree with the polling numbers. Over the past 30 years, vouchers have been on state ballots eight times, and every time the voters have rejected vouchers (including in Maryland in 1972).

Want five good reasons why school vouchers are a bad idea?

1. There's no link between vouchers and gains in student achievement. There's no conclusive evidence that vouchers improve the achievement of students who use them to attend private school. Nor is there any validity to claims that, by creating a "competitive marketplace" for students, vouchers force public schools to improve. In fact, the most dramatic improvements in student achievement have occurred in places where vouchers do not exist — such as Texas, North Carolina, Connecticut and Chicago. Instead, those states and communities focused on teacher quality and extra help for students who need it.

2. Vouchers undermine accountability for public funds. Private schools have almost complete autonomy with regard to how they operate: who they teach, what they teach, how they teach, how — if at all — they measure student achievement, how they manage their finances, and what they are required to disclose to parents and the public. The absence of public accountability for voucher funds has contributed to rampant fraud, waste and abuse in current voucher programs.

3. Vouchers do not reduce public education costs. Actually, they increase costs, by requiring taxpayers to fund two school systems, one public and one private.

4. Vouchers do not give parents real educational choice. Participating private schools may limit enrollment, and in many cases may maintain exclusive admissions policies and charge tuition and fees far above the amount provided by the voucher. Unlike public schools, private and religious schools can — and do — discriminate in admissions on the basis of prior academic achievement, standardized test scores, interviews with applicants and parents, gender, religion, income, special needs, and behavioral history.

5. The public disapproves of vouchers. (see above).

To understand more about why school vouchers are bad public policy, read more from NEA.