The Day I Met Jeb Bush, and Why He Earns an F in Education:

The Day I Met Jeb Bush, and Why He Earns an F in Education

APRIL 20, 2015 BY NANCY BAILEY LEAVE A COMMENT

Years ago I met Jeb Bush under rather unusual circumstances. It was before he was governor and during the time his father was running for President. When I met him I liked him. He struck me as a genuine person. Unfortunately, today, like he grades public schools, I’d give him an F in education. There are other concerns I would have with him being President, but I will stick with education.

At the time, my husband and I were looking for a place to live in Tallahassee. We spotted a modest house for sale in a quiet section of a nice neighborhood. We met the realtor and began our walk through the house. Everything seemed normal, until we entered the living room. There were many lovely pictures of the Bush family, and I said, “These folks must really like the Bushes.” The realtor replied, “The house belongs to Jeb Bush.”

This struck me as unique. The house was nice but not fancy. I felt like I was trespassing. My husband was not fazed and proceeded to turn faucets on and off and look for leaks et cetera. Unlike other houses we’d looked at, I didn’t peek in closets. I didn’t think it polite.

After going through the house, the realtor guided us into a homey family room. Jeb was watching, golf, I think, and he jumped up and shook our hands. He wasn’t at all pretentious. I remember telling him my grandmother was Republican and would be voting for his father. He laughed and said “GOOD!” Then my husband talked with him more about the house, and Jeb said that he’d include a rider lawn mower. I thought that was nice of him.

Well, we didn’t buy the house, not that it wasn’t nice or that we didn’t appreciate the possibility of a rider lawn mower. It didn’t have the right floorplan for us and it was a bit too expensive.

A few years later, Jeb became Governor. I would have liked to cheer him on, but little by little I realized I didn’t like his education ideas. By then, as a teacher, I had pretty good insight into school problems. And I had developed research skills as a graduate student in education at FSU.

Why would I give him an F? Well first and foremost, Mr. Bush and his Foundation of Education Excellence and Chiefs for Change base reforms on ideology and not legitimate research.

For everything from Common Core State Standards, to grading schools, to retention, to The Day I Met Jeb Bush, and Why He Earns an F in Education:

City Council candidates' views on education: Helen Gym | Philadelphia Public School Notebook

City Council candidates' views on education: Helen Gym | Philadelphia Public School Notebook:

City Council candidates' views on education: Helen Gym

On May 19, Philadelphians will hit the polls to winnow the field of City Council at-large candidates. Out of 28 declared candidates, only seven will be elected in November (including at least two from a minority party). Each party can run five candidates in the general election. The Notebook reached out to the candidates, asking their opinions on the election's most gripping issue: education.

Where do candidates stand on the School Reform Commission's decision to approve five new charter school applications? Whose job is it to find more money for public schools, the city's or the District's? Absent an agreement with the teachers' union, do they think the SRC is right to pursue concessions through the courts? And finally, what ideas do they have for how the District can fix its financial problems?

We are posting statements from City Council candidates responding to these prompts in the order we received them. Today's statement comes from Democrat Helen Gym, an education advocate, mother of three children in public schools, and co-founder of Parents United for Public Education. She is also a co-founder of the Notebook, where she has written regularly.

Responses were edited for length and clarity.

---

I disagree with the characterization that our schools are in fiscal “distress.” There’s a difference between fiscal distress and the deliberate underfunding of schools. That our elected officials refuse to meet constitutional obligations is not a matter of distress. It’s a political and moral failure.

Presently, charter expansion is a zero-sum game. With funding levels at a historic low, we created two very unstable and unfunded systems (District and charter), which are cannibalizing each other. No one wins in this situation.

The SRC’s decision to expand charters is a major reason why it has lost the public trust. When parents, students, and staff talked about restoring nurses, counselors, or librarians for our schools, we were told our asks were unreasonable, given the financial crisis. But when it came to high-risk charter expansion, costing millions, the SRC hardly batted an eye. It’s ironic that, the following week, the SRC claimed in an appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that it was too impoverished to meet the obligations of its teachers’ contract. It rings false to plead poverty when it comes to District resources, but then sign off on charter expansion.

Moreover, I oppose the zip code designation and catchment area preference in the new charter applications. This directly pits underfunded, stripped-down public schools against a brand new charter operator. Our neighborhood schools deserve investment and support, not another “Survivor”-like competition where they are set up for failure.

Despite our situation, I see hope. Gov. Wolf’s commitment to restoring school funding is dramatic and should be a catalyst for city investment. State funding alone won’t solve our problems. I have proposed a number of solutions.

•  The city must restore to schools a minimum 60 percent share of real estate taxes. A shift in percentage would not place any new tax burden on homeowners.

•  Council must reform an overly generous tax abatement program.

•  We need a more progressive approach to the "use and occupancy" tax that would focus revenue growth in larger, more profitable businesses, which received tax breaks under AVI reform.

•  We have to do a better job collecting other school taxes: delinquent taxes, liquor-by-the-drink, and the school income tax, in particular.

•  Our nonprofit giants must think expansively about ways they can financially support funding equity for the District as a whole.

The SRC needs to end its war against teachers and school staff. Research has shown that quality teachers are the key to student achievement. The SRC must offer a reasonable contract that gets us back on track and is focused on teaching and learning.

If we are going to fix our schools, we need to re-build a culture of investment in public education. We need to end a sickening approach of austerity and deprivation for Philadelphia’s children. We have an incredible moment today to change a decade of failed “reform” efforts. I’ve got three children in this system. I am and have been invested for the long haul. It will take a mother’s passion, an educator’s vision and an organizing sensibility to set this city straight and bring financial stability, educational equity, and racial justice for our children. 

See the responses from other City Council candidates

No opt out: Are schools forgetting it is parents who are in charge? | Wisconsin Daily Independent

No opt out: Are schools forgetting it is parents who are in charge? | Wisconsin Daily Independent:

No opt out: Are schools forgetting it is parents who are in charge? 

 Common Core has rightfully started becoming a hot topic of discussion around the water cooler among many parents across the state. For those who might not hang out at the water cooler, Common Core is a set of language arts (reading, writing, spelling, and grammar) and math learning expectations. They were set for every grade, for every school in the nation and mandated for implementation for the 2014-2015 school year. However, the even bigger debate these days seems to be opting out of standardized testing, which in many schools has just begun, or will begin next week.

Common Core and standardized testing go hand in hand. In public schools in Wisconsin, one cannot happen without the other. After Common Core was mandated, school officials and politicians were left wondering about accountability. Since Common Core was never piloted or tested before being implemented, those in charge of our public school system had to figure out away of knowing if and how it was working with students and teachers across the country. Educational Testing Service (ETS) paired with Common Core and wrote standardized assessments for each grade level. ETS specializes in college entrance exams; writing K-12 assessments was a new venture for the testing service and it showed in the flaws in their systems. They wrote two assessments, Smarter Balance Assessment (SBA) – however, in Wisconsin the SBA was renamed the Badger Assessment – and Partnership for Assessment of College and Careers (PARCC), both of which help identify the “readiness” of K-12 students for college and career based on the standards and implementation of Common Core.

However, there is a big push by several groups across the nation for parents to opt their child(ren) out of the assessments. Many parents have identified the assessments as not being ready (This is true. The SBA was held back several weeks while many key issues were worked out of the system.). There is also concern that the testing system (which is entirely computer based, often expecting even young children to scroll, cut, paste, highlight and utilize other computer skills which are often lacking until middle or high school) goes against data backing learning strategies. The assessments are often promoting “test-driven education” that does not meet the individual needs of students. In many classrooms, teachers are given curriculum materials that teach to the test and emphasize test taking skills. There are more concerns from parents at the United Opt Out website.

The biggest issue becoming more prevalent, however, is public schools refusing to allow parents to opt their child out of taking the test, or refusing to allow their child to participate in the assessment. Schools are actually telling parents, “No. You do not have permission to pull your child from taking this test. We will not give you permission to parent your child, we will tell you and your child what will happen in their school day.”

Public schools are seeming to forget that parents get the final say in what their children are or are not doing in school, not the school. Schools seem to be forgetting that parents pay taxes, which fund schools, which give parents power to say no to certain lessons, tests, or topics in schools. Schools seem to forget that children belong to parents, not to schools. If a parent does not want their child participating in the assessment, it is their fundamental right to say no. But beware, as some parents are finding out, some schools will bully you into giving up. Some schools will threaten with non-issues, or make your child “sit and stare” if they opt out. “Sit and stare” is where your child will be forced to sit during the duration of the assessment (the length depends on the age) and stare at the paper covered walls (all classroom resources are covered as using them indicates cheating), doing absolutely nothing while their peers take the assessment. But, remember, it’s for the children.

It’s time parents take back their schools. Those with curiosity or concern can read more about SBA, Badger Exam or PARCC by simply googling the terms. There are even practice tests at different grade levels for anyone to practice or get a taste of what testing feels and looks like.No opt out: Are schools forgetting it is parents who are in charge? | Wisconsin Daily Independent:

Garfield High School Teacher Heather Robison’s Conscientious Test Objector Declaration | I AM AN EDUCATOR

Garfield High School Teacher Heather Robison’s Conscientious Test Objector Declaration | I AM AN EDUCATOR:

Garfield High School Teacher Heather Robison’s Conscientious Test Objector Declaration

By I AM AN EDUCATOR on April 20, 2015

Today marks the first day scheduled for Common Core testing, such as it is, at Seattle’s Garfield High School. As I reported last week, Garfield educators were debating about how best to oppose the newdeeply flawed Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) Common Core tests, when the parents spoke and opted out hundreds of students from the test. With so many students having opted out of the Common Core tests, the teachers are no longer being asked to administer the exam—a huge victory in this struggle against the testocracy! (Now the few remaining students who don’t have an opt out letter will be pulled out of class individually).

Garfield High School teacher Heather Robison delivers her declaration at a recent press conference.

During the period when Garfield teachers thought they were going to be asked to administer the SBAC Common Core test, Heather Robison, an inspiration in the struggle for authentic assessment, decided she would be a conscientious test objector. What fallows is Ms. Robison’s courageous and deeply insightful declaration, issued to the Seattle Public Schools and the politicians who legislate education–with a challenge for them to take the very exams they are pushing on our schools!

Once you have read Ms. Robison’s words, it will be clear that educators should be driving assessment rather than multibillion-dollar companies. And it should also be clear why we are going to win this struggle.

 Dear Superintendent Nyland, Seattle Public School Board, Legislators, and educational policy makers,

I am a National Board Certified teacher with a Master’s Degree in English and two years of Doctoral-level coursework in Curriculum and Instruction. I have twelve years of teaching experience, ten working in public high schools and two at the University level. I am passionate in my work, and have rigorous expectations for my students and myself.

I currently teach at Garfield High School, where half of my day is spent with Advanced Placement students who represent some of the most privileged and highest performing children in our city. The other half of my day is spent with General Education students, over a quarter of whom receive Special Education services. Across all sections, I have homeless students, students with restraining orders against abusers, students who read and write below grade level, students who currently read and write at a college level, and students who vacation in Europe every spring.

From this vantage point, my conscience demands that I publicly and emphatically assert that high-stakes standardized tests like the SBA used as graduation requirements and teacher evaluations tools are detrimental to the meaningful education of ALL of my students. Administering such exams goes against my professional and moral judgment.

For ALL of my students, these tests are a waste of time in which they are forced to be passive test-takers rather than active knowledge creators. This year’s proposed test took over two weeks of instructional time from classes. Superintendent Nyland, a recent email from you stated, “the amount of SBA testing time for each individual student is relatively small (about eight hours depending on grade level).” What a drastically skewed perspective that sentence reveals. Eight hours is an enormous time investment for an unreliable and inappropriately used assessment, enough to push an entire unit from the year’s curriculum.

For my students who are victims of the opportunity gap, the SBA disproportionately hurts their identity as capable learners and instead reinforces an identity of failure. These exams can only ever show a limited sample of student ability, and the cultural bias inherent in any standardized assessment exacerbates the SBA’s inability to reveal what my students truly know and can do.

Even if the SBA were a more reliable, valid, and culturally responsive measure of student ability, the learning environment created around it devalues true intellectual curiosity, risk-taking, and critical thinking. For ALL of my students, high-stakes tests breed a reductive mindset of “Will this be on the test?” and myopic focus on points rather than learning.

Yet students crave authentic challenges, and on a gut level they recognize the faults of a test-based system. When I first announced the upcoming SBA exams to my 11th graders, multiple hands shot up and asked, “Can we opt out of this?” These are high-performing students who are the most likely to succeed on this test, yet they were frustrated at the prospect of losing class time for this detached and inauthentic measure of their performance.

Measures that identify students in need of extra help are an essential part of an effective Garfield High School Teacher Heather Robison’s Conscientious Test Objector Declaration | I AM AN EDUCATOR:

What Hillary Clinton said about the Common Core State Standards - The Washington Post

What Hillary Clinton said about the Common Core State Standards - The Washington Post:

What Hillary Clinton said about the Common Core State Standards

Hillary Clinton arrives for a roundtable discussion with students and educators at the Kirkwood Community College Jones County Regional Center on April 14 in Monticello, Iowa.  (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Hillary Clinton, the only declared Democrat running for president in 2016, was at a community college in Iowa the other day for a roundtable discussion about education.

The former secretary of state and U.S. senator appeared last week at Kirkwood Community College in Monticello, Iowa, and talked with students and educators for more than an hour, listening to their stories and answering their questions.

As Anthony Cody notes in this piece, a teacher who supports the Common Core State Standards asked her about the initiative. The woman, who said she has been a high school teacher for the last 21 years and a part-time adjunct instructor at the college for six of those years, said that she finds it “painful” that the Core is being attacked.

Clinton responded, saying that there is “a really unfortunate argument” around the Core now and explained why she finds the standards initiative useful. (So does a potential opponent, former Florida governor Jeb Bush.)

You can read the full transcript here, and watch the video below, but here’s the question and answer, which you can find on this video from C-span at minute 50:

Questioner: I think we are very blessed to live where we do. Where education starting very young through high school, this community college, college. We have all these opportunities and we are fortunate here. I worry that not all of America gets to experience this treasure we have. And I think the Common Core is a wonderful step in the right direction of improving American education. And it’s painful to see that attacked. I’m just wondering what can you do to bring that heart back to education? What can we do so that parents and communities and businesses believe in American education and that teachers are respected and our schools are respected and our colleges are respected? And we offer a quality education to all Americans throughout the United States?

Hillary Clinton: Wow. That is really a powerful, touching comment that I absolutely embrace. When I think about the really unfortunate argument that’s been going on around Common Core, it’s very painful, because the Common Core started off as a bi-partisan effort — it was actually nonpartisan. It wasn’t politicized, it was to try to come up with a core of learning that we might expect students to achieve across our country, no matter what kind of school district they were in, no matter how poor their family was, that there wouldn’t be two tiers of education. Everybody would be looking at what was to be learned and doing their best to try to achieve that. Now I think part of the reason why Iowa may be more understanding of this is you’ve had the Iowa Core for years, you’ve had a system, plus the Iowa Assessment tests. I think I’m right in saying I took those when I was in elementary school, right — the Iowa tests. So Iowa has had a testing system based on a core curriculum for a really long time, and you see the value of it. You understand why that helps you organize your whole education system. And a lot of states, unfortunately, haven’t had that, and so don’t understand the value of a core in this sense  a common core that then — yes of course you can, y’know, figure out the best way, in your community to try to reach.

But your question is really a larger one. How did we end up at a point where we are so negative about the most important non-family enterprise in the raising of the next generation, which is how our kids are educated. And there are a lot of explanations for that, I suppose. But whatever they are, we need to try to get back into a broad conversation where people will actually listen to each other again, and try to come up with solutions for problems, cause the problems here in Monticello are not the same problems that you’ll find in the inner cities in our biggest urban areas — that’s a given — we have to do things differently. But it should all be driven by the same commitment to try to make sure we do educate every child. That’s why, you know, I was a senator and voted for Leave No Child Behind (sic) because I thought every child should matter and it shouldn’t be you’re poor or you have disabilities so we will sweep you to the back, don’t show up on test days so we don’t want to mess up our scores. No, every child should have the same opportunity. And so I think we have got to get back to basics and we have to look to teachers to lead the way on that.

Jeb Bush, one of the Republicans running for that party’s nomination, has been a vocal supporter of the Core for years and has been criticized by other Republicans for his stance on the initiative, which is a series of K-12 standards in math and English Language Arts and aligned standardized testing. It is not a curriculum; school districts are supposed to develop their own, though in the rush by states to implement the Core, many bought ready-made programs developed by education companies.

The Core once had strong bipartisan support but that began to change What Hillary Clinton said about the Common Core State Standards - The Washington Post:

How is CCSA’s Ref Rodriguez hiding his billionaire and ideologue contributors?:

How is CCSA’s Ref Rodriguez hiding his billionaire and ideologue contributors?

APRIL 20, 2015 BY ROBERT D. SKEELS * RDSATHENE LEAVE A COMMENT

“In the long run, charter schools are being strategically used to pave the way for vouchers. The voucher advocates, who are very powerful and funded by right-wing foundations and families, recognize that the word voucher has been successfully discredited by enlightened Americans who believe in the public sector. So they’ve resorted to two strategies. First, they no longer use the word “vouchers.” They’ve adopted the seemingly benign phrase “school choice,” but they are still voucher advocates.” — Jonathan Kozol

CCSA SuperPAC April 2015 Form 460

How does California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) hide the billionaires, fringe right-wingers, and extreme ideologues contributing to charter profiteer Refugio “Ref” Rodriguez and neoliberal school privatizer Tamar Galatzan’s Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) campaigns? Hide those contributions by laundering them from one SuperPAC, to another SuperPAC (CCSA Advocates), to another SuperPAC (Parent Teacher Alliance in Support of Rodriguez, Galatzan, and Vladovic for School Board 2015, Sponsored by CCSA Advocates Independent Expenditure Committee).

Although they’ll be able to hide the contributors until many months after the election, you can be sure it’s the usual suspects supporting their fellow school privatization profiteers. Reed Hastings, Eli Broad, Michael Bloomberg, Philip Anschutz, and others are names they are How is CCSA’s Ref Rodriguez hiding his billionaire and ideologue contributors?:

It's all about the tests to "It's All About The Bass" by Meghan Trainor - YouTube

It's all about the tests to "It's All About The Bass" by Meghan Trainor - YouTube:

It's all about the tests to "It's All About The Bass" by Meghan Trainor

 What's a little civil disobedience without a protest song. I'm not anti-testing. I'm against poor assessments. Hope you enjoy!

Lyrics

Because it's all about the tests, bout the tests
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests.
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests

Yeah it's pretty clear, what we gotta do!
Please don't take it, take it, like your supposed to
You know those tests, they make the kids hearts race.
All they see is scores and not the student's faces.

I see those Pearson reps, schmoozing the Governor.
"Do we have a deal?"
"C'mon do we sir?"
If you have freedom, freedom then lift it up.
Education for all students is not racing to the top.

You know my Momma she taught me the who's, the what's, and why's.
She said be worried of things that only fit one size.
They don't take into account individuality.
So if one size fits all, then what about you and me?

Because it's all about the tests, bout the tests
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests.
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests

Bring Education back!
Tell the Governor no way!
I'm not playin', I'm more than a stat!
I'm here to tell you that...
Every student matters from the bottom to the top!

You know my Momma she taught me the who's, the what's, and why's.
She said be worried of things that only fit one size.
They don't take into account individuality.
So if one size fits all, then what about you and me?

Because it's all about the tests, bout the tests
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests.
Not Students.
It's all about the tests, bout the tests

Feds eye CPS records on education group backed by state's, city's elites - Chicago Tribune

Feds eye CPS records on education group backed by state's, city's elites - Chicago Tribune:

Feds eye CPS records on education group backed by state's, city's elites

 Federal corruption investigators looking into a $20.5 million no-bid contract at Chicago Public Schools also have asked for any records related to an elite nonprofit education group that has long been at the center of city school reform efforts — the first indication that the public relations problem could extend beyond Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration.

The Chicago Public Education Fund is closely aligned with the education initiatives of both Emanuel and Gov. Bruce Rauner, who once chaired the nonprofit, as well as some of the city's most prominent power brokers and philanthropists.

Although the course of the evolving investigation is still unclear, the scandal has focused on Chicago schools CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett. She once worked for the Wilmette-based SUPES Academy company that received the no-bid contract to train school principals. On Friday, school officials released the wide-ranging federal subpoenas as they announced Byrd-Bennett would take a leave of absence while the investigation was ongoing.

The training program was launched with seed money from the nonprofit education fund. The group is made up of a broad list of the Chicago area's most influential politicians and business leaders — all of whom have made restructuring education a top civic priority over the past decade. Many have become key political supporters of Rauner, Emanuel or both.

Indeed, Rauner himself was a board director and is currently a director emeritus. Last week, the governor's hand-picked board of education named Tony Smith the state's new superintendent of schools. Smith, who has spent most of his career in California, was appointed to the fund's board of directors last year and served on Rauner's transition team after the November election.

Launched in 2000, the group was first led by then-Chicago Tribune Publisher Scott Smith. Rauner joined the board the next year and later was its chairman before becoming an emeritus member of the board, along with future U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, a former member of the Chicago school board; and current school board President David Vitale.

Others currently on the nonprofit board include Ken Griffin, CEO of Citadel, who has financially backed both Rauner and Emanuel's campaigns; Mellody Hobson of the powerful Ariel Investments; Helen Zell, wife of real estate magnate Sam Zell; Susan Crown, a principal of the Chicago firm of Henry Crown & Co.; and Beth Swanson, a former top education deputy to Emanuel.

Rauner spokesman Lance Trover said the governor has not been contacted by federal authorities. The administration declined to comment further on the investigation.

The subpoenas arrived at CPS as both Emanuel and Rauner have been at the forefront of controversial efforts to use private-sector expertise to reshape public education, an approach that's drawn sharp criticism from teachers unions. The federal probe also comes as the nation's third-largest school district teeters on the financial precipice.

CPS faces a funding shortfall equal to one-sixth of its budget, largely driven by required increases on teacher pension funding following years of failing to put in enough money to keep the funds solvent. In addition, the district is in the early stages of contract talks with the Chicago Teachers Union, and the last time the two sides had to negotiate in 2012, there was a strike.

Byrd-Bennett, whom Emanuel calls "B Three" when they appear together at schools, stepped in to help resolve the strike as the mayor's first schools chief, Jean-Claude Brizard, fell out of favor at City Hall.

Now Byrd-Bennett has become a political liability for a mayor just as he needs a way out of a financial crisis without resorting to Rauner's suggestion of declaring bankruptcy. And it appears unlikely she will be on hand to work out a new pact with CTU leaders who failed to stop Emanuel's bid for a second term in backing challenger Jesus "Chuy" Garcia. CTU Vice President Jesse Sharkey last week decried what he called "the culture of conflict of interest" at the school system.

With CPS anticipating a $1.1 billion shortfall next school year, Emanuel has pinned his hopes on a long-shot shift in Chicago school funding.

Emanuel wants the financially strapped state to use income tax revenue to pick up more than $700 million in pension payments now covered out of city property taxes, just as it picks up those payments for suburban and Downstate schools. Emanuel, who was out of town on vacation when Byrd-Bennett took her leave, said Wednesday that would close most of CPS' budget gap. Rauner has declared that a non-starter with the state's finances in disarray.

In between the strike and the subpoenas, Emanuel and Byrd-Bennett closed 49 schools and a high school program in a move the mayor said was necessary to deal with a rash of under-enrolled schools. The closures drew national attention, given Emanuel's affinity for charter schools and that most of the closures were in neighborhoods on the South and West sides and hit minority families harder.

Emanuel also drew criticism for what some have said was too big a focus on selective enrollment high schools to the exclusion of neighborhood schools. The situation became an embarrassment for Emanuel when he had to back off naming a planned North Side selective enrollment high school for President Barack Obama after South Side aldermen complained that a school honoring the first African-American president should be in that part of the city, where Obama got his political start.

On Friday, the mayor's office sought to portray Byrd-Bennett's decision to take a leave as being in the best interest of students. "Though there have been no formal allegations, the mayor has zero tolerance for any type of misconduct from public officials and welcomes today's decision to help ensure this issue does not distract from the incredibly important work happening in our neighborhood public schools," mayoral spokeswoman Kelley Quinn said in a statement.

Asked why Emanuel's hand-picked school board did not reject the SUPES contract given that Byrd-Bennett had previously been employed there, Quinn responded in an email, "You would have to ask the board."

Quinn also said the administration had no involvement in negotiating the SUPES contract. She did not respond to a question about whether the mayor feels the residents of Chicago would have been better served by having a school board that approached the SUPES contract with a more skeptical eye.

Ald. Patrick O'Connor, 40th, Emanuel's City Council floor leader, said by taking a leave, Byrd-Bennett will allow the city to concentrate on the "huge financial problem" at CPS and the contract negotiations with theFeds eye CPS records on education group backed by state's, city's elites - Chicago Tribune:Feds eye CPS records on education group backed by state's, city's elites - Chicago Tribune:

Louisiana Educator: Pink Unicorn Gimmick Backfiring

Louisiana Educator: Pink Unicorn Gimmick Backfiring:

Pink Unicorn Gimmick Backfiring

Last week a big business PAC, called Alliance for Better Classrooms, chaired by Dan Juneau, the former president of LABI and funded primarily by businessman Lane Grigsby and out of state donors delivered stuffed pink unicorns to the desks of all legislators. The message included a note to legislators that purported to dispel myths claimed by the opponents of the Common Core. The most vocal opponents of Common Core in Louisiana are conservative leaning moms of students in public and private schools, who believe that this new curriculum is an illegal effort by the federal government to control education in a way that it is not appropriate for their children.

Let me tell you what I know from speaking directly to these anti-Common Core moms. These parents are intelligent, well-informed individuals who really care about the education and welfare of their children. Usually their children are among the highest performing students in a school. They are the kids you can count on to complete their homework and to study for tests, who seldom get in trouble for being disruptive or breaking school rules. Yet, now many of these kids are being opted out of the faux PARCC tests being given this Spring. The mothers and fathers of these kids are very savvy politically and are quite willing to convert their frustration with the confusing and educationally unsound mandates of Common Core into powerful political organizing.

The use of the pink unicorns by the big business PAC as a way of making fun of the opponents of CCSS and questioning the intelligence and sophistication of the opposing moms has created a firestorm of political activity that will activate even more protesters. This pink unicorn gimmick was a huge mistake, and is finally making parents really aware of the arrogant know-it-all attitude of the big business bosses like Juneau, and Grigsby about education reform. I am willing to bet that these guys have never read the CCSS, have never talked about CCSS with teachers who have been directed to teach it, have never tried to answer the sample questions of the PARCC test, and have never read up on the history about the writers of the CCSS. But I can assure you that the anti-Common Core moms have done all of the above.

For example, parents are now contacting the list of businesses and chambers of commerce that were listed on the ABC PAC website as supporters of Common Core. Parents told the managers of Community Coffee that they would stop buying Community Coffee if the company continued to promote a cause that these parents believe is detrimental to their children. It turns out that none of the Community Coffee managers had ever read up on the CCSS and had just taken the word of LABI that this was good for our schools. They immediately asked that the name of their company be removed from the pro-Common Core list and explained that their company was "neutral" on this issue. The same thing happened with one of the local chambers of commerce. The pink unicorn gimmick is backfiring! 

Parents are finally connecting the dots about how big business plans to push the CCSS, the PARCC testing and the grading of schools, partly to force the privatization and charterization of more and more public schools. These parents who are politically active are finding out that such privatization means that their tax dollars will be going to private for-profit charter and voucher managers who are not responsive to the voters.  They have their own hand picked boards. Have you ever heard the old Revolutionary War slogan “No taxation without representation”? Parents are realizing that that’s what this privatization campaign means. Even parents who already send their children to private school have figured out that the CCSS campaign combined with the privatization movement means that private schools will eventually be mandated to adopt Common Core and accept the demands of the Federal Government in the operation of all schools. They absolutely do not want the Federal Government dictating policy and methods to our schools!

LABI, ABC PAC and CABL are the same big business groups that pushed for Acts 1 and 2 in 2012 that were designed to take power to operate schools away from local school boards and give it to the State Superintendent and BESE. These two laws mandated more charter schools, more voucher schools, and removed the requirement that teachers in such schools have education degrees.  State Superintendent John White is totally supportive of Federal control of our schools. Some public school systems have even had special masters appointed by the LDOE that were given full authority in contradiction to state law to rule over the Louisiana Educator: Pink Unicorn Gimmick Backfiring:

NYC Educator: Standardized Testing Your Way to Equality

NYC Educator: Standardized Testing Your Way to Equality:

Standardized Testing Your Way to Equality

Standardized testing is the Civil Rights issue of our time.  How do I know?  I heard it from Kati Haycock, president of the Education Trust and Wade Henderson, chief executive of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.  Henderson conveniently lobbies for tests as he sits on the board of trustees for the Educational Testing Service with a 2013 annual salary of close to $90,000.  There is clearly no conflict of interest here because as he states his work at ETS has provided a "useful grounding in understanding the science of psychonometrics [sic]."  Since there's no such thing as "psychonometrics," one would naturally guess he is grounded in either psychometrics or psychoticmetrics.

According to the logic of this new civil-rights rhetoric, we need to measure kids every year so as not to deny them equal access to education.  Who cares about all the test prep?  Who cares about losses in those things that are not tested like music, arts and science?  Who cares about the inherent biases of the tests?  If our minorities are failing at higher rates, we need to know. 

Of course, we already know they are failing at higher rates through NAEP scores.   But, the only way to guarantee equality is through more expensive and frequent testing.  Pearson and ETS will tell you as much.  It gives us cause to fire their teachers and close their schools.  It's off to one of Eva's schools, employing non-unionized workers and focusing narrowly on test prep as it banishes those who cannot make the grade.  Segregation was yesterday's problem.  Opting out is today's problem!

Wasn't this the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr.?  Wasn't he the one who said, "I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit together" and take standardized tests?

Let us imagine a formula by which Civil Rights plus Annual Testing equals Freedom.  Let us imagine a world where the lack of decent jobs, decent pay and adequate housing really stemmed from bad teaching.  And, Unions are completely unnecessary.  If anything, they protect the grossly ineffective teachers, the ones who work almost exclusively with poor kids, immigrants, special-needs children and any others who have trouble with standardized tests.

No Longer the Reality

The New Reality

The Civil Rights Movement of fifty years ago can serve as a reminder to us of the uphill struggle ahead. 

The business is unfinished.  You can sit side by side in schools, but if you can't take your annual standardized tests that, in itself, is a measure of how far you have to go!

And while you're busy reflecting on the glory of this new twist and turn in the U.S. Civil Rights movement, if you have time, take a moment to NYC Educator: Standardized Testing Your Way to Equality:

Some Dissection of the Latest Credo Study on Charter Schools | Educate All Students

Larry Miller's Blog: Educate All Students! | Educate All Students:

Some Dissection of the Latest Credo Study on Charter Schools

Filed under: Charter Schools — millerlf @ 5:13 pm 

The recent CREDO (Center for Research on Educational Outcomes) report comparing charter schools and traditional public schools has been described by charter proponents as deciding proof of charter superiority. Blogger Derek Black, with analysis from Bruce Baker, says not so fast.

Education Law Prof Blog: Are Charter Schools Finally Outperforming Traditional Public Schools?

Derek Black March 25, 2015

Probably not, but the news stories surround the most recent charter school study by the Center for Research on Educational Outcomes (CREDO) would have the public believe so. CREDO’s studies have been a center point in the debate over the efficacy of charter schools since 2009. Charter school advocates used the 2009 study to demonstrate that some charters (17% to be precise) were outperforming traditional public schools. Those advocates ignored the 37% that were under-performing in comparison to traditional public schools. Charter school skeptics hammered that point and backed it up with subsequent studies.

CREDO’s second report in 2013 was more equivocal than the first and moved in a direction to the liking of charter schools. Rather than focusing on raw performance, it sought to identify educational improvement, finding that charter schools in general were showing more growth than traditional public schools. Some argued that larger growth was potentially easier because charters were starting from a lower baseline. The changed frame of analysis also elicited criticism from both sides regarding the methodology of the study.

CREDO is now out with its 2015 report, and its equivocation is all but gone. The study finds that “urban charter schools in the aggregate provide significantly higher levels of annual growth in both math and reading compared to their TPS peers. Specifically, students enrolled in urban charter schools experience 0.055 standard deviations (s.d.’s) greater growth in math and 0.039 s.d.’s greater growth in reading per year than their matched peers in TPS. These results translate to urban charter students receiving the equivalent of roughly 40 days of additional learning per year in math and 28 additional days of learning per year in reading.”

This finding was met with applause by education reformers, charter school advocates, and the business community. It was met with keen interest by the media. It has been met largely with silence from those formerly critiquing charters (or they have been unable to capture headlines). Does this study and the silent reaction to it mean that charter schools have finally matured and are demonstrating superiority over traditional public schools? Is the debate, in effect, nearing resolution? Not so fast, says Bruce Baker. We still must compare apples to apples, and it is not clear that CREDO has done that.

Those seeking to demonstrate charter superiority have almost always compared apples to oranges. If the student demographics of charters differ from traditional public schools, raw achievement scores between the two cannot be accurately compared. Responding to this problem, newer studies, including CREDO’s, have attempted to account for differing student demographics.

But CREDO’s new study may have done both too much and too little in this regard. CREDO’s new study narrows the field further than every before, largely in the attempt to triangulate some area of advantage for charters. The new study does not compare charters and traditional public schools on the whole, but only urban charters to urban traditional public schools. That comparison is probably correct, but, of course, those are not the only charter schools in operation. Thus, at best, the study suggests that under certain circumstances, charters outperform traditional public schools.

Bruce Baker, however, says the new study still presents a distorted picture in regard to student demographics, even when narrowed to urban schools. The variables the study uses to “match” an urban public school to a charter for comparison “are especially problematic.” It is inaccurate to treat charters’ “poor kids” as equivalent to traditional public schools’ “poor kids.” And it is, likewise, inaccurate to assume that charters’ special education kids are the same as traditional public schools’ kids. In fact, there is a lot of variation within those two categories, and charters may very well have the most advantaged students within those otherwise narrow groups. Baker further explains:

Newark data are particularly revealing of these problems. Charters undersubscribe the poorest students and oversubscribe the less poor, but CREDO treats those kids as matched anyway…

Charters undersubscribe high need special education kids and oversubscribe mild learning disabled (as a share) but CREDO treats those kids as matched.

This creates a severe bias in favor of charters in Newark and in many other cities with similar sorting patters and high average poverty rates.

This perhaps provides partial explanation for why CREDO tends to find stronger charter effects in poor urban centers than, say in suburbs, where their matching measures – at least for income status – would potentially be more useful.

The point is that the virtual record comparison asserts that these kids are otherwise similar, and thus the gains are somehow attributable to “charter” schooling as a treatment. This assertion is deeply flawed at two levels. First, the as noted above the variables they are choosing for matching are nearly useless. They don’t necessarily identify similar kids at all. Nearly all kids fall below the income threshold they are using and thus they might label as “matched” (likely do in fact) a kid in deep poverty/homelessness, etc. in a district school with a kid marginally below the reduced lunch cut point in a charter. They might also label as “matched” a mild specific learning disability kid in a charter (since that’s all they have for disability) with a far more severely disabled kid in a district school (where district schools have disproportionate shares of those kids now because charters have siphoned some of the less needy spec ed kids).

The second level problem here is that the CREDO study doesn’t then account separately for who these kids attend school with – the peer effect. It conflates that effect with “school” effect, by omission.

Deep stuff. It is probably deeper than the average reporter cares to consider, which might explain some of the silence. But these distinctions are crucial in understanding the new CREDO Larry Miller's Blog: Educate All Students! | Educate All Students: