BESE Campaign News as of 9/28/15 | Crazy Crawfish's Blog

BESE Campaign News as of 9/28/15 | Crazy Crawfish's Blog:

BESE Campaign News as of 9/28/15

Big Education Ape: NPE Endorses Jason France, AKA Crazy Crawfish, for BESE – The Network For Public Education http://bit.ly/1TXoLG8

I want to apologize to my regular readers of the blog.  I have been remiss with  my postings of late and there are a lot of great stories to write about.  However one of the biggest potential stories is the campaign I am working on now, my own, and it’s been keeping me very busy.

Some curious and wonderful events have transpired that most of you are not aware.  For starters I made my candidacy to BESE official.  I am on the October 24th ballot.  That’s just 4 weeks away folks.

In addition the incumbent, Chas Roemer, announced at the last minute (during the qualifying period) that he would not be seeking re-election for a third term.  This announcement was made a few hours after I registered my candidacy.  I’m not sure if the two are related, but I like to think so.  I have not been easy on Chas these last few years and I had plenty of material I was saving up to use on him in the primary had he chosen to run.

This last minute announcement of the incumbent not seeking re-election lured three new challengers to the race for district 6.  One of these challengers is backed by business and industry and Roemer.  All three are relative unknowns, just as myself and my original campaigning counterpart.

This race could be very interesting.  District 6 is a very conservative district by the numbers, by the way it was gerrymandered, although not all parishes and people are aligned that way. Public sentiment is very anti-common core, especially among conservatives, and I was one of the very first people in our state to speak out against Common Core publicly, and certainly the first person in my race.

In addition, a new group called “FlipBESE” has formed with parent activists across the state which has honored me with their endorsement.  FlipBESE has endorsed a candidate in every race in the state which is a stark contrast to the incumbent or challenger supported by the business and industry lobby “LABI”.  This year there is a unified message and slate of challengers to the business and vendor sponsored status quo and most races are head-to-head match-ups and with only one party on the ballot (Republican or Democrat.)

My race is the exception and will be one of the few requiring a run-off.  My race has 5 candidates.  Four candidates are Republicans and one candidate is a Libertarian.  The Libertarian candidate happens to be me.

My platform is to remove the destructive influence of the state and federal government and to restore our local education systems to our local governments.  Our state and federal governments don’t have a clue what’s going on in our schools, and they don’t seem to care.  Rather than working with children and parents they prefer to work with numbers and 

Click Here to Follow Flip BESE on Facebook 

LEE P.BARRIOS FOR BESE 1 Web Site

JASON FRANCE FOR BESE 6 Web Site

MIKE KREAMER FOR BESE 7 Web Site

Common Core and Professional Development: Survey Results - Education Week

Common Core and Professional Development: Survey Results - Education Week:

Common Core and Professional Development: Survey Results

In February 2015, the RAND Corp. surveyed its American Teacher Panel, a random selection of 1,129 K-12 teachers, on current professional-development needs, focusing on topics related to the Common Core State Standards. In all, 655 teachers responded; the results were weighted for differential sampling and non-responses. The tables below show the percentages of teachers who said they had a high or moderate need for PD in the topics listed. The chart below looks at the amount of time teachers said they have for collaboration; most teachers also said they have limited opportunities to give or receive feedback on lessons.

Full Report: Teacher PD in the Common-Core Era

Common Core and Professional Development: Survey Results - Education Week:

The ‘moral and spiritual culture’ that elevates education - Yahoo News

The ‘moral and spiritual culture’ that elevates education - Yahoo News:

The ‘moral and spiritual culture’ that elevates education

A Christian Science perspective: A response to revising American history curriculum.

 With school in the U.S. and elsewhere in full swing, it’s a good time to remember there’s more to education than just learning core facts and developing basic skills.

The Monitor reported on the U.S. College Board’s rewrite of the 2015 Advanced Placement (AP) U.S. History course, to pare down issues on slavery and give more emphasis to American “exceptionalism.” Arguments and protests about what some see as a politicization of the AP curriculum have raised questions about education.

One historian interviewed for the article said, “History needs to deal with unpleasant topics as much as high achievements. You can’t just ignore past injustices because you don’t like them” (“New guidelines for AP history: Are they still unpatriotic?” CSMonitor.com).

Today’s scholars rapidly become the world’s thinkers and doers of tomorrow. Within a broad classroom experience of history, science, language, math, and the arts, they’re encouraged to explore not just the triumphs, but also the struggles, failures, and excesses of their nation. This is vital to charting their own course, as well as the collective course of society into the future.

Yet another form of education to shape society involves exploring and answering the even deeper needs that come from understanding who we are and what shapes us. The Monitor’s founder, Mary Baker Eddy, wrote, “... it is not so much academic education, as a moral and spiritual culture, which lifts one higher” (“Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,” p. 235).

To be clear, this isn’t advocating that public schools teach religion; rather, a deeper “spiritual culture” is an individual journey of thought that begins at home, and sets one on the path of progress toward right living through the development of right thinking. And right thinking certainly does complement and even enhance education.

The verb “to educate” comes from the Latin meaning “to lead out of.” To me, spiritual education is a lifelong journey out of conventional, mortal-based thinking into better conditions of thought and living through understanding the law of God. Knowing God better as the creator of all can greatly magnify a full academic experience by fueling more meaningful curiosity and engagement with the world around us. It enables us not only to discover our true, spiritual purpose, direction, and worth, but to help others discover theirs, as well.

Mrs. Eddy also wrote: “Academics of the right sort are requisite. Observation, invention, study, and original thought are expansive and should promote the growth of mortal mind out of itself, out of all that is mortal” (Science and Health, p. 195). In my own experience as a Christian Scientist, I’ve found that as I grow in my understanding of God, I’m able to define knowledge and learning The ‘moral and spiritual culture’ that elevates education - Yahoo News:

This Is How Out of Control Testing Has Gotten in Schools - Yahoo News

This Is How Out of Control Testing Has Gotten in Schools - Yahoo News:

This Is How Out of Control Testing Has Gotten in Schools

For anyone who doubts that education in the U.S. has become overrun by testing, consider this. My daughter's first day of kindergarten -- her very first introduction to elementary school -- consisted almost entirely of assessment. She was due at school at 9:30, and I picked her up at 11:45. In between, she was assessed by five different teachers, each a stranger, asking her to perform some task such as cutting, coloring in the lines, reciting her address and phone number, identifying letters and their sounds, and counting. She then had to wait two days, while all the other incoming kindergartners were assessed, to learn of her teacher and begin the school year in earnest.

From an educator's point of view, this approach makes good sense. Determine what it is that kids know. Then use that baseline knowledge to assemble a class.

But this was an intimidating initiation from a child's perspective. Usually an outgoing and independent girl, my daughter was clingy and nervous on her first day of kindergarten. When I asked how she was feeling as we approached the front door of the building, she said she did not want to go to school. She did not have any friends yet. She did not know her way around the building. She worried that there would be too many people. What if her teachers were mean? What if kids made fun of her when they heard her name? What if she had to use the restroom? She was a bundle of nerves. I'm sure this testing scenario did little to quell her concerns. I have no doubt that however she was assessed, she did not perform from a place of confidence or comfort. Even under less trying circumstances, such one-shot assessments are of questionable validity.

READ: [No Time to Lose]

Indeed, by the time I picked her up, she had not relaxed at all. She did not want to talk about what she had done in school, but she did say that she did not want to go back. She did not know the teachers' names. She did not make any friends. Later that afternoon, as she played with her animals in her room, I overheard her drilling them on their numbers and letters.

My husband and I will do our best to help her unlearn what she learned about school on her first day: that it is a place where you are judged for what you know -- not how eager you are to learn; that performance matters more than understanding or inquiry; that schoolwork is hard and uninteresting. We will work with her teacher (whomever he or she is) to ensure that the strengths she brings to kindergarten -- curiosity, compassion and creativity -- are recognized and nurtured. We will encourage her love of learning and her self-confidence; I just wish we did not have to work against the school system in doing so.

Our educational system's drive to assess, to label and sort kids, to make decisions on the basis of data of dubious quality has gone too far, and it is time for a course correction. We must remember that "data" are social constructions, shaped by the circumstances under which they are obtained. And just as these circumstances affect the nature of the information we collect, they have bearing on other things that matter, such as a child's first impressions of school. I submit that these impressions matter more than any purported snapshot of a child's abilities.

READ: [Building a Solid Foundation]

Yes, it is good for teachers to get a sense of what their students might know at the beginning of the school year, but there is no reason such formative assessments cannot wait until after the This Is How Out of Control Testing Has Gotten in Schools - Yahoo News:

Clinton endorsement divides teachers union - POLITICO

Clinton endorsement divides teachers union - POLITICO:

Clinton endorsement divides teachers union

State officials and rank-and-file members plan to protest upcoming vote to endorse Hillary Clinton.

Top brass of the 3 million-strong National Education Association, the country's largest union, are recommending an endorsement of Hillary Clinton, according to an email obtained by POLITICO -- a move that has many state leaders and rank-and-file members planning to protest the early endorsement.

The email, sent from the union's campaign office, states that the NEA PAC, the union’s political arm, is planning to hold an upcoming vote “recommending Hillary Clinton for the presidential primary.”

Story Continued Below

“After months of interactions with the three candidates who chose to participate in our process [Clinton, Martin O’Malley and Bernie Sanders], certain things became clear,” the email states. “Clinton is the best positioned candidate to win both the Democratic primary and general election. She has unmatched organizational strength, ground game, and fundraising ability to defeat the candidate of the Koch brothers.”

The email noted that while Clinton is the candidate the union believes is most likely to win, both Clinton and Sanders received “A” rankings on NEA’s congressional legislative scorecard, and O’Malley was voted NEA’s Governor of the Year. The email says the union hired a Republican consultant to reached out to Republican candidates, but none chose to participate in the endorsement process.

The email also defends the timing of the early recommendation process as a chance for the union to try and identify a winner early so as to “play a significant role in the next administration’s conversation and decision-making about public education.” (In 2008, the union did not endorse Barack Obama until after he had wrapped up the nomination.)

But the reaction is following a pattern that has played out in many major unions that have gone through the endorsement process this year -- anger and opposition from rank-and-file members who support Sanders and want their unions to hold off on any endorsement in the primary. Many teachers protested vigorously after the American Federation of Teachers endorsed Clinton in July.

Some NEA members supporting Sanders said they simply do not trust Clinton to fight for their interests -- and plan to fight back against any union endorsement. “Even if she says things that today sound supportive, she’s not going to be a steadfast friend of organized labor,” said Jamie Rinaldi, a teacher from Newton, Mass., and a union activist. “We don’t know she’s going to be the ally that’s going to stand with our legislative agenda.”

Other state leaders have expressed concern that an early endorsement does not allow members to be participants in a real debate around the issues that is still

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/hillary-clinton-teachers-union-214190#ixzz3n8cXTXNu

Charter Schools defend law that lets them set aside seats - WSJ

Teachers Union Criticizes Charter Perk - WSJ:

Teachers Union Criticizes Charter Perk

Charter Schools defend law that lets them set aside seats for employees’ children

The new ability of New York charter schools to set aside seats for employees’ children drew fire Monday from the United Federation of Teachers, which said such “nepotism” defied charters’ stated goals of serving the neediest children.

A state law letting charters give first dibs to staff for up to 15% of enrollment passed in June. Union officials chose to highlight it in advance of a pro-charter rally on Wednesday that is expected to draw a big crowd in Brooklyn.

The union and other critics of charters often accuse them of failing to serve their fair share of the most challenging students. UFT President Michael Mulgrew said at a news conference Monday that charters have long promised to teach the neediest children better than the district, so set-asides for largely middle-class staff were the “height of hypocrisy”—especially when charters say more than 40,000 applicants are on wait lists in New York City.

Charter advocates fought back. They said letting staff enroll their children where they work helps retain talented teachers. “I can’t think of a better endorsement than a teacher who is willing to send her own child to the school she teaches in,” said James Merriman,chief executive of the New York City Charter School Center. “Sadly, for way too many teachers in way too many traditional schools, the school they teach in is one to which they’d never send their own child.”

By law, charters admit students by lottery, but must give preferences to siblings and children in their neighborhoods. Some charters say they also give preference to students who are at-risk, struggling with disabilities and English language learners.

About 6% of charter students were English language learners, compared with 14% citywide, according to a New York City Charter School Center analysis of 2013-14 enrollment. About 16% of charter students had special needs, compared with 18% citywide.

The new policy was passed too late to affect admissions for this fall. Officials at Uncommon Schools, which has 21 charters in Brooklyn, expect that next year fewer than 20 of its 1,400 openings will go to staffers’ children. Barbara Martinez, a spokeswoman for Uncommon Schools, said, “This new opportunity allowed by law gives educators one more reason to choose teaching as a long-term profession.”

Charters are taxpayer-funded and independently run, usually free of union rules. They have grown rapidly in recent years. The New York City Charter School Center released a report Monday saying that one in three students in Harlem, the South Bronx and central Brooklyn attends a charter.

The center says more than 90% of the city’s charter students are African-American or Latino, and over 70% are from low-income families. This school year, 205 charter schools Teachers Union Criticizes Charter Perk - WSJ:

Point: Charter schools need to be shut down in Washington | Crosscut

Point: Charter schools need to be shut down in Washington | Crosscut:

Point: Charter schools need to be shut down in Washington

Last month, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that charter schools in the state – which voters approved in 2012 – are unconstitutional, due to the fact they are not governed by elected boards and are therefore unaccountable to taxpayers. As Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson asks the court to reconsider their opinion, we present two differing views on the issue. The below opinion is from Angel Morton, a kindergarten teacher and president of the Tacoma Education Association. To read a pro-charter school opinion from parent Shirline Wilson, click here. 

When the Washington Supreme Court recently threw out our state’s controversial charter school law, the timing was a surprise, but the decision itself was predictable – and correct.

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled the law was unconstitutional because it diverted funding from existing K-12 public schools to new charter schools operated by private organizations that are not held accountable to the public. The court was clear: Under our state’s Constitution, schools that are funded with taxpayer dollars must be accountable to the voters who fund them.

There’s another important principle at stake: Washington state has both a moral and a legal obligation to provide all students a quality public school education, regardless of their ZIP Code. It’s impossible to discuss the charter school ruling without viewing it in the context of the Supreme Court’s 2012 McCleary decision, which ruled the state is violating the constitution by not amply funding basic education. The Supreme Court is fining the legislature $100,000 a day and holding it in contempt for their failure to fully fund our public schools. In that light, it’s indefensible to divert a single penny away from existing public schools into new, unproven charter schools that serve a tiny fraction of our state’s students.

Angel Morton.

The need to invest in our existing public schools instead of siphoning scarce resources into unaccountable, privately run charter schools has been at the forefront of the charter debate for years. Public accountability was one of the primary arguments against charter schools when the law passed in 2012. Just this past month, the state’s first charter school made headlines for accounting problems involving taxpayer dollars. Yet if you’re a taxpayer in Seattle, whom do you hold responsible for that school’s problems?

If you have a concern about your local public school, you can go to your elected school board and be heard. Charters are overseen by an unelected commission, and they are operated by private organizations. That means that as a taxpayer, you help fund these schools, yet you have no say in Point: Charter schools need to be shut down in Washington | Crosscut:

What Boehner's Resignation Means for NCLB Rewrite - US News

What Boehner's Resignation Means for NCLB Rewrite - US News:

Boehner's Resignation Could Upend NCLB Rewrite

The House speaker was a principal architect of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Congress is closer than it's ever been to overhauling the No Child Left Behind Act, the much-maligned and latest iteration of the federal K-12 law. But the announcement made last week by House Speaker John Boehner that he plans to resign at the end of October, could disrupt those efforts.

The Ohio Republican was a principal architect of NCLB, the 2002 law that's now widely criticized for giving the federal government too much control over education. And for that reason, he's taken a personal interest in getting a reauthorization of the law to the president's desk, even rebuffing powerful special interest groups to do so.

RELATED

Congress Gets a Failing Grade on Education Policy

But now, as the House and Senate are conferencing to reconcile the NCLB reauthorization bills passed in each chamber, it's unclear whether a new speaker will continue to prioritize the legislation, especially given how difficult it was to shepherd a Republican-backed version through the House.

"I’m not saying it’s going to be impossible, but I do think it makes getting a conference report that [President] Obama could sign a lot less likely," said Charles Barone, director of policy at Democrats for Education Reform and formerly an aide to former Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., during NCLB negotiations.

Boehner's announcement put the education community on high alert Friday, prompting responses from some of the most powerful education groups about the need to broker a final version of the rewrite, especially since so many states are currently operating under NCLB waivers from the Department of Education.

"We need to reauthorize the law because students and educators across the country need a stable long-term federal policy," says Chris Minnich, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers. "Living waiver to waiver each year is not the way to run the country's education system."

In particular, Boehner has supported the House version of the NCLB rewrite, the Student Success Act, authored by Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the chairman of the House education committee who had a difficult time pushing the proposal through the House. NCLB is the latest iteration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Amid waning support for the bill from Republicans who didn't think it went far enough in limiting the role of the federal government, leadership yanked it off the floor after two days of debate. What followed was months of aggressive whipping to educate Republicans about what the bill would do and how it would be better than current law.

The bill would, for example, prevent the Secretary of Education from coercing or in any way incentivizing states to adopt certain academic standards, including the Common Core State Standards – a major Republican priority.

[READ: Boehner's Departure: 'A Victory for Dysfunction']

Still, there were a lot of folks who didn't want the measure back on the floor, including Heritage Action, the policy arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, and the right-wing Club for Growth. But with Boehner's nudging, they brought it up again. As the clock ran out on final passage, Republicans still didn't have enough support, but scrambled to garner the additional votes needed.

The measure ended up passing, 218-213.

The Senate, on the other hand, passed a bipartisan rewrite with broad support from both parties. The two bills are now being conferenced, but the expectation is that the final version will look much more like the Senate bill than the House's. And it's unclear if a new speaker would prioritize a conferenced ESEA bill the way Boehner would.

"I think it cannot go unnoticed that speaker Boehner is the last of the big four, as they were called back then, who negotiated NCLB in Congress," says Mary Kusler, director of government relations for the 3 million-member National Education Association. "Now we're closer than we've ever been in a rewrite of this law while Boehner is speaker of the House, and he has been very close and supportive of the efforts that Chairman Kline has been going through in this process."

But instead of derailing the effort, Kusler sees Boehner's resignation as a "shot in the arm" for beginning the conference process in earnest and having the tough conversations about the major policy gaps that exist between the House and Senate bills. Chief among those differences is how to hold states accountable for disadvantaged students while also limiting the role of the federal government.

"Certainly the outcome of the leadership race will impact the ability of the caucus to operate and how the floor will run," Kusler says. "But we knew going into conference, especially given the House vote this summer, that we would need a combination of Republicans and Democrats to pass [a final bill].

Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think-tank, says Boehner's forthcoming resignation won't impact the reauthorization process, which he predicts is unlikely to happen at all.

"It's not like he was going to woo any votes," Hess says of Boehner's relationship with those on the far-right of his caucus. "Some of them were so frustrated with him they were just going to cross their arms at anything he brought to the floor."

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., who is the front-runner to be the next speaker, has a What Boehner's Resignation Means for NCLB Rewrite - US News:

Right Wing School Choice Fan Rep. Kevin McCarthy Could Be Next Speaker - Politics K-12 - Education Week

School Choice Fan Rep. Kevin McCarthy Could Be Next Speaker - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

School Choice Fan Rep. Kevin McCarthy Could Be Next Speaker

So Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, the Speaker of the House, former education chairman, and a lead author of the No Child Left Behind Act, is out as of the end of the month—and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., will almost certaintly replace him.

McCarthy doesn't have nearly as long a resume on K-12 as Boehner did going into the job. (To be fair, very few lawmakers could.) He hasn't sponsored or co-sponsored many education bills since joining Congress in 2007.

He's co-signed a bill overhauling the Impact Aid program, which offers federal money to districts with a big federal presence, to help them make up for lost tax revenue, and a bill that would allow states to use existing money for technology to address cyber-bullying and protect kids from Internet predators.

And last year, he wrote an op-ed comparing school choice and ... milk choice. If one store is selling spoiled milk, customers can go to another grocery store and buy the fresh stuff, he noted. The same thing should happen with schools, he argued: 

"When a grocer sells bad milk, customers are free to shop at another store. If there is no other store, a new one will be opened, promising and providing fresh milk. ... The message is simple: if you'd like to be a successful grocer, sell fresh milk ... This principle—that people are free to choose among alternatives—operates in almost every aspect of our society.

But imagine if this sour-milk grocery store were state-owned, the only grocer in town, and that you were barred from shopping at grocers outside the city limits. Then, imagine that laws barred any new, privately managed grocery stores from opening. In effect, you would be forced to purchase milk at a store that sells bad milk or go without milk altogether. The grocer would have a monopoly on milk. While such limitations would be ridiculous in the world of groceries, it is all too common in education. For many families trapped in failing schools, the only way to access a quality education is to leave their homes for another district or take on extreme financial burdens to cover tuition at a private school."

Interestingly, McCarthy isn't the first GOP policymaker to use a milky metaphor in selling school choice. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, now a Republican presidential candidate made it a centerpiece of his speech on education to the GOP convention in 2012.

Another interesting tidbit: One of McCarthy's key policy aides, Barrett Karr, was the staff director for the Education and the Workforce committee, chaired by Rep. John Kline, R-Minn. So she clearly has some experience with K-12 issues—and might want to help her former boss get a big win on passage of a bill rewriting the NCLB law before Kline retires.

"She's the X factor," one source said. In fact, the source credited Karr with playing a major role in getting the bill off the House floor this summer. "There's a reason the same bill that couldn't pass in February made it the second time around." 

Still, many folks expect Boehner's retirement to put the brakes on an NCLB rewrite. More here. 

---

Don't miss another Politics K-12 post. Sign up here to get news alerts in your email inbox.

Follow us on Twitter at @PoliticsK12. School Choice Fan Rep. Kevin McCarthy Could Be Next Speaker - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

How the GOP Turned on Common Core

How the GOP Turned on Common Core:

How the GOP Turned on Common Core

Chris Christie was for it before he was against it. So, for that matter, was Mike Huckabee. When the Common Core education standards were introduced in 2009 by the governors and school superintendents of 46 states, most of the would-be Republican nominees for president were for this voluntary approach to kids’ education. In 2013, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal lauded the program, but a little over a year later, he was comparing it to Stalinism: “Let’s face it: Centralized planning didn’t work in Russia, it’s not working with our health care system, and it won’t work in education.”

Christie’s flip-flop was equally acrobatic. “We’re doing Common Core in New Jersey, and we are going to continue,” he thundered in 2013. By 2015, he was thundering against Common Core. “We need to take [education] out of the cubicles of Washington, D.C., where it was placed by the Obama administration, and return it to the neighborhoods of New Jersey.”

How did eliminating Common Core, a rather benign set of voluntary goals and best practices for teaching K-12 students, become one of the biggest applause lines in the Republican presidential race? (Only Jeb Bush and John Kasich are standing by the idea.) “It’s mystifying to me why there are individuals so entrenched in fighting this fight when you consider all the problems this country has,” says Dane Linn, vice president of the Business Roundtable, chuckling in exasperation. “How did Common Core become the whipping child?”

His group, which represents CEOs of the nation’s largest corporations, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and education reformers, has been pushing for years for something that would lift educational standards, putting them on par with high-achieving nations around the world. Now that they have that something, the pro-business party is denouncing it.

To understand how this happened, you need to know that Common Core was in part a reaction to the oft-criticized No Child Left Behind Act, the 2001 law that poured vast new federal resources into education and demanded that school districts meet performance thresholds or face sanctions. Even though No Child Left Behind passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support—the late Senator Ted Kennedy championed the George W. Bush proposal—it soon drew enemies from all sides, including teachers who found it meddlesome, parents who tired of the endless emphasis on testing and politicians, left and right.

Common Core was meant to be different. First, these standards weren’t some burdensome federal mandate. The states collaborated on new benchmarks—third-graders should be able to work with fractions, for example—and they were meant to promote best practices for how to teach English and math.

The business community, and business-minded nonprofits, loved it. They had been fretting for decades about American education. The American Federation of Teachers gave it qualified support. The result? School districts are adopting the standards, and they appear to be working. Test scores are up slightly, and up slightly more in states that embraced Common Core enthusiastically.

Opponents of Common Core like to say opposition to the law arose organically, from parents frustrated by ever-proliferating homework assignments. The truth is that the stunningly swift reversal by Republican politicians didn’t happen by accident. It was the result of an organized effort by Tea Party-affiliated groups anxious to make a mark after a series of legislative losses. Although the Tea Party had struck fear in the GOP establishment with the landslide elections of 2010, it had little to show for it despite antics like the government shutdown. The debt limit was raised again. Spending continued to rise. Obamacare was never repealed.

With Common Core, Tea Partiers spotted a chance to rebrand their image, from the tightfisted guardians of budgetary matters to the protectors of kids. FreedomWorks, the Heritage Institute, the American Principles Project, the Heartland Institute and a whole network of conservative advocacy groups and think tanks began alerting their members through emails, conference calls, emails and local organizing to oppose Common Core.How the GOP Turned on Common Core:

Guest Post: Deb Herbage on American Institutes for Research (AIR) | deutsch29

Guest Post: Deb Herbage on American Institutes for Research (AIR) | deutsch29:

Guest Post: Deb Herbage on American Institutes for Research (AIR)

Deb Herbage

Deb Herbage (@DebHerbage) was born and raised in Massachusetts and worked for a Fortune 100 company for 20 years as a business analyst.  She relocated to Trinity, Florida in 2007 with her husband and daughter. Deb is an outspoken advocate and active member of the Opt Out Florida Network and over 50 Opt Out groups across the country.

The following is a guest post by Herbage, who has been investigating American Institutes for Research (AIR).

_______________________________________________________________

Who is Really Benefiting from the State Assessment Contracts?

by Deb Herbage

With its inception in 1946, the American Institutes for Research is world famous for their social science and behavioral and psychological research.  Partnering with the US DOD (Department of Defense), the US DOH (Department of Health), the US COC (Chamber of Commerce), and the US DOE (Department of Education), AIR is a non-profit company based in Washington, DC, and is the recipient of many contracts from the various states for their Common Core “state assessments,” whether it be signing a contract directly with a state Department of Education (like the case in Florida, North Dakota, Delaware, Washington, Oregon, Maine, Michigan and Arizona)or through the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) (established in December 2010 for $175,649,539with the funds provided by the Federally funded Race To The Top, RTT).

On September 6, 2012 – AIR announced its partnership with the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium to create an online test delivery system for the states.

Here is an excerpt from the SBAC Memorandum of Understanding touting the “services” it is providing to their membership states (after they pay the fees of Guest Post: Deb Herbage on American Institutes for Research (AIR) | deutsch29:

Seattle School Board Candidates’ Forum | Seattle Education

Seattle School Board Candidates’ Forum | Seattle Education:

Seattle School Board Candidates’ Forum

The League of Women Voters and the Seattle Council PTSA 
invite you to a
Seattle School Board Candidate’s Forum
Thursday, October 8, 2015 from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM
Seattle First Baptist Church
1111 Harvard Avenue
Seattle, 98122

Seattle is the largest school district in the state, serving over 53,000 students and growing. The School Board makes vital decisions about how the Seattle Public Schools operate and oversees many aspects of district funding.  Four of the seven Seattle School Board positions will be elected citywide this November.  Come and learn more about the candidate’s positions and skills.

This forum is co-sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Seattle-King County and the Seattle Council of Parent, Teacher and Student Associations.

There is no cost for admission and RSVP’s are not required.

Seattle School Board Candidates’ Forum | Seattle Education:

Teach for America Deletes Educator Counter-Narratives; Educators Repost EVERY SINGLE ONE! | gadflyonthewallblog

Teach for America Deletes Educator Counter-Narratives; Educators Repost EVERY SINGLE ONE! | gadflyonthewallblog:

Teach for America Deletes Educator Counter-Narratives; Educators Repost EVERY SINGLE ONE!

On Sept. 23, Teach for America (TFA) published an article on its Website about the “Badass Women of Teach for America.”

Many of the more than 56,000 members of the Badass Teachers Association (BATS)commented on this article.

A few days later, all comments were deleted and the ability to make any additional comments was disabled. TFA then published two additional articles about thecomments BATS had made. The authors of these new articles then attempted to debunk what had been written about them but was too dangerous to be left for their readers to see for themselves.

The counter-narratives of hundreds of people had been erased. But as any good Teach for America Deletes Educator Counter-Narratives; Educators Repost EVERY SINGLE ONE! | gadflyonthewallblog:

HOW CRAPPY IS EDUCATION NEWS IN CALIFORNIA? UP to $1.6 BILLION ON COMMON CORE AND NO ONE HAS HEARD OF IT!

Big Education Ape: USC Poll: Californians Don’t Know Much About Common Core http://bit.ly/1NXBWHn

California. California’s Standardized Testing and Reporting Program, which began in 1998, tests students in grades 2–11 in English, math, science, social science, and history.Estimates suggest that it would cost California taxpayers $1.6 billion to replace the existing state standards with the Common Core standards.[4] Yet California has agreed to overhaul its existing system with the new national standards and assessments.

Congratulations to Denisha Jones! - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform

Congratulations to Denisha Jones! - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform:

Congratulations to Denisha Jones!

We are honored to have Denisha Jones as one of our eight UOO administrators!

Denisha Jones is an Assistant Professor in the School of Education at Howard University.  She is a former early childhood teacher and preschool director. She received her PhD from Indiana University in 2013. She has been active in the fight to stop the corporate takeover of public education since 2011. She is an admin for the Badass Teachers Association, and has recently joined the administration team of United Opt Out and has worked with Save Our Schools to expose the dangers of privatizing public education. She blogs about education for emPower Magazine, @ the Chalk Face, and the Badass Teachers Association. Her research interests include the de-professionalization of teaching, service-learning, providing meaningful professional development for early childhood teachers, and promoting diversity in education.

Congratulations to Denisha Jones! - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform:

Help fund the 2016 UOO Conference

Your contribution at United Opt Out's GoFundMe helps with conference expenses!

Find us on Facebook

United Opt Out National

The Washington Teacher: The Extinct Black Educator and the Death of Transparency in DC

The Washington Teacher: The Extinct Black Educator and the Death of Transparency in DC:

The Extinct Black Educator and the Death of Transparency in DC

By Candi Peterson, WTU General Vice President

Statements or expressions of opinions herein 'do not' represent the views or official positions of DCPS, AFT, Washington Teachers' Union (WTU) or its members. Views are my own. 

Think back and try to remember all the teachers that left the District’s public school system since the era of former Chancellor Michelle Rhee and beyond? (2008-2015)

How many of those teachers were African-American?

Unfortunately, we can’t answer those questions because we don’t have hard data, mainly because the District fails to provide data on the number of teachers hired, separated, resigning, and retiring by race, age, gender, school and years of service on a yearly basis.

Simply put, government officials in DC do not have the authority to refuse to honor Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. When I chaired a WTU Data committee, we attempted to get information about teacher terminations through a FOIA request, as well as through other internal channels. We requested information be released by common identifiers but the information we received was heavily redacted and of little practical use.

Either approve or deny the request. The practice of keeping information out of the hands of the public is government’s way of covering its tracks. 

Albert Shanker Institute researchers encountered similar challenges when preparing their national Teacher Diversity report. “Despite intensive efforts over the past 1 ½ years, we have been unable to procure teacher-level data for the District and charter schools in Washington, DC. We were therefore forced to draw data from a sample provided by the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE) Schools and Staffing Survey,” as quoted by Shanker researchers.

The Albert Shanker Institute gathered in September to release their findings from their study titled: “TheState of Teacher Diversity in American Education.” The group examined teacher diversity from 2002-2012 in The Washington Teacher: The Extinct Black Educator and the Death of Transparency in DC: