Scoring the New Every Student Succeeds Act :: Frederick M. Hess

Scoring the New Every Student Succeeds Act :: Frederick M. Hess:

Scoring the New Every Student Succeeds Act

It's crunch time for the new Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The week before Thanksgiving, months of intense negotiations yielded a House and Senate deal on their competing bills to overhaul the No Child Left Behind Act. The ESSA will, in short order, get an up-or-down vote in each chamber. In judging the merits of the final deal, it's important to keep in mind what an appropriate and effective federal role in education entails.

A bit of history can help. In 1965, as part of President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty, Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Johnson hoped that ESEA would boost the achievement of disadvantaged students, helping to break the cycle of poverty. ESEA failed to deliver on that promise. No one knew whether federal money was doing any good, even as rules, regulations, and bureaucracy proliferated. Meanwhile, schools found it all too easy to overlook or ignore disadvantaged students.

In 2001, President George W. Bush and key congressional Democrats wanted to ensure that federal funds were being used effectively and that vulnerable children would no longer be overlooked. Unfortunately, the bipartisan NCLB that they settled upon was a flawed (if well-intentioned) mash-up. Remarkably intrusive, it was especially prescriptive about how states would measure school performance and what states would do to schools deemed "in need of improvement." Absurdly, NCLB required that 100 percent (!) of the nation's children be "proficient" in reading and math by 2014, with mandated consequences for schools that missed the bar.

Ultimately, NCLB allowed the Obama administration to dictate K-12 policy via quid pro quo waivers granted to states desperate to escape NCLB's "100-percent" mandate. The Secretary of Education released dozens of states from NCLB's fantasy targets if—and only if—they promised to pursue Obama priorities. The problem with that? Setting aside niceties of constitutional propriety, the salient point is that because Washington doesn't run America's schools, all it can do is pen rules for schools, which yields ham-handed directives and compliance-inducing bureaucracy. When it comes to complex enterprises like public schooling, whether things are done often matters far less than how they are done. Even Washington's best efforts wind up suffusing schools in red tape and undermining the ability of educators to make sensible decisions. Given that, here are the ways I think it's most helpful to judge the new law:

Does it promote transparency? For all its flaws, NCLB does have one invaluable legacy. By requiring states to test in the same subjects and grades, Congress created a framework for the public to see how schools are doing. Setting forth this kind of framework is entirely consistent with Congress's responsibilities under the "weights and measures" provision of the Constitution. Moreover, data reporting and analysis pose minimal implementation headaches, do not involve the feds in dictating practice or monitoring compliance, and equip the public to set priorities and make decisions. ESSA retains NCLB's requirement that states continue the once-a-year testing requirement that NCLB had for reading and math (in grades 3-8 and once in high school) and science (once in elementary, middle, and high school). ESSA also continues to require states to disaggregate and report the results for a variety of demographic subgroups.

Does it end federal efforts to micro-manage school improvement? It was a mistake for NCLB to get Washington into the business of trying to determine which schools are making "adequate yearly progress" and what to do about those that are not. States do an uneven job of flagging troubled schools, but even the most self-impressed Beltway wonk should by now recognize that Washington is no better at this task. Crafting a national law that can apply to 100,000 schools in 50 states means metrics are inevitably going to be clumsy and applied in capricious ways. And, unlike when state and local leaders create targets, Washington is not held accountable for meeting them—local and state leaders are. Mayors, superintendents, principals, and CEOs set targets and then are held responsible for meeting them, which encourages setting targets that are realistic and owning the consequences. When federal officials insist on "accountability," these are just politicians and bureaucrats mouthing off. They know that there's no reciprocal accountability to states and that no one imagines they're accountable for what happens in a given state or system. That's how we end up with ridiculous, counterproductive targets. Happily, ESSA gets Washington out of the accountability business, although it does leave much more compliance-inducing vague guidance about what states "should" do than is optimal.

Does it enable states to expand school choice? As states increasingly adopt choice-based models, ranging from Nevada's Education Savings Accounts to Louisiana's "course choice" programs, Congress should adapt funding requirements to ensure that federal funds serve the intended beneficiaries without tying states' hands. One sensible move would be to embrace full Title I portability, so that states can use federal funds to help low-income students attend the district, charter, or private school of their choice. Unfortunately, private school portability never went anywhere and the House's public portability provision got dropped in ESSA. More promisingly, ESSA allows up to 50 local education agencies to experiment with weighted student funding models that would make all federal, state, and local funds portable.

Does it get the feds out of the teacher business? NCLB's Highly Qualified Teacher provision was a well-intentioned mistake. There's no constructive way for federal Scoring the New Every Student Succeeds Act :: Frederick M. Hess:

I Used to Think... That Experts Understood the World, Part 3

Note: This week, I'm posting a three-part essay I wrote for Richard Elmore's volume, I Used to Think...And Now I Think in the spirit of RHSU Thanksgiving tradition. Check out Parts 1 and2.

Say something smart once and there are huge rewards for spending a career saying it, in increasingly elaborate forms. Academics who own an idea get hired by prestigious universities, deliver keynotes, and get all kinds of attendant perks. Consultants who own an idea become must-haves for districts, foundations, and contractors. The result is a familiar kabuki of hyperspecialists airing their prebaked views.

The world is composed of niches. In each, a thinker may be iconic so long as she stays in her little crevice. Thus, an expert in pharmacology may speak to a cheering conference hall of awe-struck attendees only to walk across the campus or the hotel and quickly become just an anonymous face in the crowd. An expert on school violence or science instruction might be feted as legendary by those in her field but sacrifice that respect and deference should she wander outside that circle. The result discourages individuals from spending much time wrestling with thorny questions or complexities that reach beyond their core expertise. Hence, enormously respected thinkers will offer prescriptions for educational policy or practice that are woefully naïve in terms of political dynamics, organizational realities, institutional pressure, incentives, or practical constraints. Why? Because many of these experts have never spent much time thinking about how their expertise intersects with all the stuff in which they're not expert.

Meanwhile, within niches, the interest in weighing competing arguments or determining how one's expertise translates to the larger world is massively undervalued. Expertise promotes deep knowledge, which can too readily lead to inflexibility and self-assuredness (along with the expectation that one's biases and assumptions will be afforded deference). There are always exceptions, but most thinkers become expert by struggling to the top of their niche on the back of their big idea, and then do all they can to extend the reach of that idea and of the acolytes who aid in that quest—incidentally, or quite purposefully, I Used to Think... That Experts Understood the World, Part 3

Congress Is Likely to Reauthorize Education Law. How Will We Undo Arne Duncan’s Damage? | janresseger

Congress Is Likely to Reauthorize Education Law. How Will We Undo Arne Duncan’s Damage? | janresseger:
Congress Is Likely to Reauthorize Education Law. How Will We Undo Arne Duncan’s Damage?

Seven years ago today—on November 30, 2008—I picked up my Sunday Cleveland Plain Dealerto see a story above the fold on the front page, a story whose headline screamed: Good Teachers Are Key to Student Achievement, but Bad Ones Are Hard to Fire.  The story itself purported to be a news analysis, part of a series, “a Plain Dealer project reporting on the state of teaching.”  But then there was the photo, of a truck parked in front of the National Education Association’s building in Washington, D.C.  It was one of those trucks that pulls nothing but a sign, and this one—with a picture of a wormy apple—said: “Vote for the Worst Unionized Teachers Who Can’t Be Fired.”  Whatever the content of the article, the message that Sunday morning came from the sign the truck was pulling along—“worst unionized teachers who can’t be fired.”

Then a few days later came David Brooks’ NY Times column about newly elected President Barack Obama’s pending decision about a Secretary of Education.  The new president had appointed Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford University professor of education to head his education transition team, but there was enormous pressure from New York’s mayor Michael Bloomberg for Obama to choose Joel Klein, who was at that time serving as Bloomberg’s appointed chancellor of the NYC public schools.

On December 5, 2008, Brooks, a school “reformer” through and through, framed what had already become a polarized battle—“reformers” vs. teachers’ unions: “On the one hand, there are the reformers like Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee, who support merit pay for good teachers, charter schools and tough accountability standards.  On the other hand, there are the teachers’ unions and the members of the Ed School establishment, who emphasize greater funding, smaller class sizes and superficial reforms.  During the presidential race, Barack Obama straddled the two camps.  One campaign adviser, John Schnur, represented the reform view in the internal discussions.  Another, Linda Darling-Hammond, was more likely to represent the establishment view… Each camp was secretly convinced that at the end of the day, Obama would come down on their side… Obama never had to pick a side.  That is, until now.  There is only one education secretary, and if you hang around these circles, the air is thick with speculation…   (O)ne morning a few weeks ago, I got a flurry of phone calls from reform leaders nervous that Obama was about to side against them…  (T)he union lobbying efforts are relentless and in the past week prospects for a reforming education secretary are thought to have dimmed… The candidates before Obama apparently include: Joel Klein, the highly successful New York chancellor who has, nonetheless, been blackballed by the unions; Congress Is Likely to Reauthorize Education Law. How Will We Undo Arne Duncan’s Damage? | janresseger:

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: WEEKEND QUOTABLES

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: WEEKEND QUOTABLES:

WEEKEND QUOTABLES

Kim Foxx, running against Alvarez

Carol Marin

“The federal investigation of the shooting is active and ongoing,” the U.S. Attorney’s office assured us this week. 

Just remember. The feds never hurry. And Chicago is bleeding. --Sun-Times

Kim Foxx

“She [State's Attorney Anita Alvarez] waited until her hand was forced by intense political and media pressure surrounding the release of this painful video. She waited even after City Hall was prepared to pay the McDonald family $5 million in damages.” -- Chicago Defender

Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve, former member of "Anita's Army"

It was in this culture that Anita Alvarez and many other prosecutors (including Mayor Richard M. Daley) rose through the ranks of the Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: WEEKEND QUOTABLES:

NYC Educator: The Wit and Wisdom of Class Size Arbitrators

NYC Educator: The Wit and Wisdom of Class Size Arbitrators:

The Wit and Wisdom of Class Size Arbitrators

Our arbitrator couldn't remember my name or that of my principal, and got them both wrong, but it doesn't matter. It's not like a parking ticket, where you can appeal. 

There were not a whole lot of oversized classes by the time my school got to a hearing. One of them was a College Now class. I've been protesting them for the last three semesters, as they are oversized and I think 34 is already too high. Though they take place in our public school building, are taught by UFT teachers, and consist of our students, the arbitrators have ruled over and over that since a college pays the teacher salary class size rules don't apply. I don't care. I will keep protesting them.

In another case, we had a period ten class of 41 students. I'm told this is a remedial class, consisting only of students who'd previously failed the course. In that case, I have to question the wisdom of placing them in a class of 41. How the hell are students who already failed the class supposed to be supported when the teacher's attention is so widely divided? Don't kids who've already proven to have trouble need more attention, not less? This was defended by administration as being outside the normal school day and therefore not subject to contract. However, a recent arbitration says that even these classes are subject to class size regs.

The DOE lawyer argued that the precedent did not apply, and that if it did they wanted an exception. It must be a heckuva job to sit in an office all day and argue kids need larger classes. In any case, the arbitrator decided to grant a "half-class exception," which means it's just fine for 41 kids to sit in the class.

I also grieved a Saturday special education class that had 46 students. Admin has argued, to me, that not all 46 students are there at once. I did not find that argument particularly compelling. After all, if only 45 kids show, or if even 34 show, it's still too much, particularly when you consider that there are 46 IEPs to be considered. I thought there was no way the arbitrator would grant another exception, but alas, that's what I get for thinking. The arbitrator is fine with it, but I'm not, so I filed a UFT special education complaint. I'm pretty sure the state would not look fondly on a special education class of 46.

The last cases I had were of classes taught by two teachers. One had 39 students and the other had 69. An argument could be made that since there were two teachers there could be up to 68 students in the class. I'm told they have an unusually large classroom. Now, if it were me, I'd say OK, why not transfer one of the students from the class of 69 into the class of 39. Of course, it wasn't me, and the arbitrator didn't bother NYC Educator: The Wit and Wisdom of Class Size Arbitrators:

School advocates look to extend tax hike on wealthy :: SI&A Cabinet Report

School advocates look to extend tax hike on wealthy :: SI&A Cabinet Report :: The Essential Resource for Superintendents and the Cabinet:

School advocates look to extend tax hike on wealthy

(Calif.) A voter initiative aimed at extending temporary personal income tax hikes to fund schools was cleared for circulation last week, allowing backers to seek the 585,407 signatures needed to qualify the measure for next November’s ballot.

Titled “Tax Extension to Fund Education,” Initiative 15-0065 would extend by 12 years temporary personal income tax increases enacted in 2012 on single filers earning over $250,000; over $500,000 for joint filers, and over $340,000 for heads of household.

If approved, the tax would raise between $5 billion and $11 billion annually from 2019 through 2030 for K-12 schools and California Community Colleges, according to state finance officials.

“Temporarily extending these critical revenues will help keep our state budget balanced, and prevent devastating cuts to programs affecting students, seniors, working families and healthcare,” said Gale Kaufman, spokeswoman for the initiative’s backers, Alliance for A Better California, in a statement.

“California continues to rank 46th in per student funding,” Kaufman’s statement read. “This year’s budget is a strong step towards restoring the billions in cuts since 2008, but schools have lost more than $50 billion in funding that will never be repaid. We need to ensure that the funds that our schools receive stay stable to avoid repeating the massive cuts of the recent past.”

The potential for further cuts to education was stymied in 2012 by the passage of Proposition 30, championed by Gov. Jerry Brown as the only way to stabilize the eroding state budget and bring in more funding for schools. A quarter-cent sales tax increase created by the measure expires at the end of 2016, and personal income tax increases on residents with annual incomes over $250,000 are set to expire in 2018.

The measure has generated between $6 billion and $7 billion annually, with about half going to K-12 schools and community colleges.

While the initiative from the Alliance for A Better California – a coalition that includes the California Teachers Association – calls for its extension of the tax hikes to expire, a second proposal would make them permanent.

That initiative, backed by a group of health and youth advocates, was cleared for signature gathering last week as well.

Initiative 15-0070, titled “Tax to fund Education, Healthcare and Child Development,” would use the revenues for K-12 schools and Medi-Cal, the state-funded healthcare system for the poor.

In addition to extending tax increases on couples earning at least $580,000 annually, the measure would impose even higher income tax rates for so-called “super-earner” couples making more than $2 million a year.

According to the groups leading this effort – the California Hospital Association, the Service School advocates look to extend tax hike on wealthy :: SI&A Cabinet Report :: The Essential Resource for Superintendents and the Cabinet:

House, Senate Education Committees Release Final Proposal to Replace NCLB | Education & the Workforce Committee

House, Senate Education Committees Release Final Proposal to Replace NCLB | Education & the Workforce Committee:
House, Senate Education Committees Release Final Proposal to Replace NCLB 

WASHINGTON, D.C. | November 30, 2015 - Today bipartisan leaders on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions released the final legislative text for improving K-12 education and replacing No Child Left Behind. The final bill is being released after legislative proposals passed separately by the House and Senate in July and embodies the reforms agreed to by members serving on a joint conference committee earlier this month. The House-Senate conference committee approved the proposed reforms reflected in the final bill by a vote of 38 to 1.

To read the final bill, click here.

For more information, visit edworkforce.house.gov/k12education.

House, Senate Education Committees Release Final Proposal to Replace NCLB | Education & the Workforce Committee:

Help NPE STOP Damaging New Provisions in ESEA Reauthorization Bill - Action Network: 

Leaving math standards to politicians doesn’t add up (By Wendy Lecker) - Wait What?

Leaving math standards to politicians doesn’t add up (By Wendy Lecker) - Wait What?:

Leaving math standards to politicians doesn’t add up (By Wendy Lecker)

The Corporate Education Reform Industry and its allies say the Common Core, Common Core testing mania and their agenda to privatize public education in the United States is necessary in order to ensure children are college and career ready.

However, as parents, students, teachers and the public are learning, the effort to disrupt and undermine public schools is having a very negative impact on the quality of education many students are receiving.

In her latest column in the Stamford Advocate, fellow public education advocate Wendy Lecker takes on the notion that the “new” math being pushed by those focused on selling new textbooks, computer programs and curriculum is pushing children in the wrong direction.

Wendy Lecker writes;

At parents’ night this fall, a high school math teacher I know begged parents to teach their children long division “the old-fashioned way.” She explained that the new way students had learned long division impedes their ability to understand algebraic factoring. She lamented that students hadn’t been taught certain rote skills, like multiplication tables, that would enable them to perform more complex math operations efficiently.

It turns out that brain science supports this math teacher’s impressions. Rote learning and memorization at an early age are critical in developing math skills.

A study conducted by Stanford Medical school examined the role of a part of the brain, the hippocampus, in the development of math skills in children. The authors noted that a shift to memory-based problem solving is a hallmark of children’s cognitive development in arithmetic as well as other domains. They conducted brain scans of children, adolescents and adults and found that hippocampus plays a critical but time limited role in the development of memory-based problem solving skills.

The hippocampus helps the brain encode memories in children that as adults 

Leaving math standards to politicians doesn’t add up (By Wendy Lecker) - Wait What?:

With A Brooklyn Accent: The War on Public Education in Broward County Florida- A Guest Post by Terry Pruess

With A Brooklyn Accent: The War on Public Education in Broward County Florida- A Guest Post by Terry Pruess:

The War on Public Education in Broward County Florida- A Guest Post by Terry Pruess

LISTEN… PEOPLE OF BROWARD…  A FORT LAUDERDALE TEACHER SPEAKS…

Things I plan to say to my leaders with my local and national community of public education supporters listening in...

Let’s NOT be  “The Last Honeypot for Wallstreet.”

I have been a loyal, dedicated, caring, hard-working, responsible, dependable, trustworthy, “highly effective” career public educator for 3 decades, Teacher of the Year at Olsen Middle School and a Hispanic Teacher of the Year in Broward. I have been held in high regard and been a leader in three counties: L.A., Dade and Broward. I’ve also been a vocal advocate of student, teacher and parent rights in all the leadership roles I’ve held... As such, I know fully that my opinions will not be met with any repercussions or retaliation.

Some teachers, however, fear that they will be harmed for speaking out, brought up on some false charges, sent off to “Teacher Jail’ or “The Book Depository”…cast out to another school on the far end of the county to teach an unfamiliar subject until they are broken down and leave the profession on their own, marked via “gotcha” evaluations systems as “ineffective,” or even marginalized as a lone disgruntled voice. I’ve seen and heard it all from one coast to another as I have evolved in education advocacy, but those things can not worry me today because this letter is about JUSTICE for our children and communities. 

I have been, along with thousands of colleagues, far too “highly effective” to need to worry about retaliation. Right?  I am stealing this term from the hands legislators and our imposed evaluation system of Marzano because it fits too many teachers I know, far more than the shamefully low 5%SBBC’s flawed evaluation system officially produced for Broward County… among the lowest in the state of Florida!  

So, let me begin…

How we got to this point is not always clear to those of us who are working daily in the trenches, giving love, support, encouragement and a quality education to the students of Broward County. But we do With A Brooklyn Accent: The War on Public Education in Broward County Florida- A Guest Post by Terry Pruess:

No Child Left Behind’s Successor - WSJ

No Child Left Behind’s Successor - WSJ:

No Child Left Behind’s Successor

Congress rewrites the Bush-era law by giving more power to states.

Conservative reformers have had major successes, notably on welfare in 1996. But when a reform doesn’t turn out as hoped, they need to adapt. A case in point is No Child Left Behind, which the GOP Congress is now preparing to leave behind.

This week the House plans to debate the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which lapsed in 2007 and needs revision. A bipartisan compromise has emerged from the Senate and House that isn’t perfect but would represent the largest devolution of federal control to the states in a quarter-century. It’s far better than the status quo that would continue if nothing passes.

No Child Left Behind, signed by George W. Bush in 2002, was the product of an imperfect union between Republicans who wanted more school accountability and Democrats who wanted more spending. In return for more federal funds, states were required to test students annually and report the results. One hundred percent of students were supposed to rate proficient by 2014, and failing schools were required to restructure under federal guidelines.

Yet few of the law’s goals have been achieved. Some states dumbed down standards so more students would pass the tests. Then the Obama Administration issued blanket waivers from the law’s mandates—but only if states adopted Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s prescriptions for teacher evaluations and common academic standards.

Washington’s heavy hand has produced a political backlash that crosses ideological lines, uniting teachers unions who want less accountability with Republicans who want less federal control. The ESEA compromise tries to accommodate this revolt by balancing federalism and accountability.

Gone are No Child Left Behind’s proficiency benchmarks and mandated federal interventions. The Education Department wouldn’t be able to prescribe accountability systems and standards. Yet importantly, the bill retains annual testing requirements for students from third to eighth grade (16 tests in total from K-12).

Testing in education is crucial to measure progress and ensure public accountability. Hence, states would have to publish test results disaggregated by race, socioeconomic No Child Left Behind’s Successor - WSJ:

Segregated by choice, state's charter schools face a test - StarTribune.com

Segregated by choice, state's charter schools face a test - StarTribune.com:

Segregated by choice, state's charter schools face a test

State weighs whether to include charters in integration plan, and a lawsuit blames charters for heightening segregation in Minneapolis and St. Paul schools. 

The cafeteria at Noble Academy charter school in Brooklyn Park is adorned with Laotian-style ornamentation, a nod to its mostly Hmong student body. Employees at St. Paul’s Higher Ground Academy can converse in the first languages of its predominantly East African population. Nearly all the students at Friendship Academy of the Arts in Minneapolis are black.

To compete for students, Minnesota’s charter schools mold themselves with distinct identities that often appeal to individual racial or ethnic groups. That approach has helped create schools so racially homogeneous that more than three-quarters of elementary students at Twin Cities charters attend schools with 80 percent or higher white or nonwhite enrollment.

It’s a higher rate of racial concentration than traditional public elementary schools, which in Minneapolis and St. Paul have reached levels of segregation not seen since the 1980s. And many charter schools have served homogeneous student bodies from the start.

Charter school supporters make no apologies for the lack of diversity in their classrooms.

“Choice is like a civil right,” said Bill Wilson, executive director of Higher Ground Academy. “Choice is democracy.”

Yet in a lawsuit filed against the state this month, attorneys blame charters for heightening segregation in Minneapolis and St. Paul schools. The lack of diversity in charters also has caught the attention of the Minnesota Department of Education, which is considering whether charters should be subject to state integration rules for the first time.

Advocates for charters say mandating integration would remove the pillar of charters: parental freedom to choose the best-fitting school. Others say segregated schools do a disservice to students.

Diversity in schools gives students increased critical thinking skills and resiliency in different environments, said Halley Potter, who studies integration at the Century Foundation, a public policy think tank in New York.

“It’s a mistake to settle for an education approach with a more segregated student body, even when you’re producing strong academic results,” Potter said.

Mandate would cause chaos

A majority of charters in the Twin Cities enroll heavy concentrations of students of color, while some lean toward mostly white student bodies. Only 16 of the metro area’s 72 elementary-level charter schools are integrated with what education researchers consider a healthy mix of white and minority Segregated by choice, state's charter schools face a test - StarTribune.com:

Online schools are losing support, creating divisions in the national charter school movement | cleveland.com

Online schools are losing support, creating divisions in the national charter school movement | cleveland.com:
Online schools are losing support, creating divisions in the national charter school movement

CLEVELAND, Ohio – Poor test results at online schools are creating divisions in the charter school community in Ohio and nationally, leading some national leaders to question whether e-schools should even be part of the charter school movement anymore.

At the top of the list is Nina Rees, head of the nation's largest charter school organization, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, who is distancing herself from online schools and the damage they are causing to the public perception of charters overall.

After a visit to Ohio earlier this month, Rees said e-schools - schools where kids take all their classes by computer at home, instead of in classrooms - are dragging down the overall performance of charter schools in Ohio and other states.

"If you were to eliminate the (test scores of) online schools, the performance of the state would dramatically improve," Rees said.

And she questioned whether online schools make sense as charters – privately-run public schools that are open to any student that wants to enroll in them. Taking classes online, instead of in classrooms, doesn't work well for all students she said, but public schools have to accept kids that are not a good fit.

"I don't know if these online schools are the right fit in the charter model," Rees told The Plain Dealer.

Meanwhile, others are questioning whether states should change how they fund online schools with tax dollars and whether the agencies overseeing online schools are doing what they should to make the schools better.

Oversight a major issue

The latest issue is a big one for Ohio, where Gov. John Kasich and the state have made new ratings of those oversight agencies, known as "sponsors" or "authorizers," the cornerstone of their charter school improvement efforts.

Those ratings are also the source of major controversy in Ohio this year after former school choice chief David Hansen left F grades of online schools out of the first few ratings, in violation of state law.

Much like Rees, Hansen believed the poor grades of online schools would "mask" the stronger performance of other charter schools.

Susan Patrick, the head of the International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL), the main organization representing online schools, disagrees with Rees about whether e-schools should be charter schools. They just need better quality control, she said.

"The problem is not that the online schools are getting authorized as charters," Patrick said. "The problem is that the authorizers are not demanding adequate transparency, evidence of quality of work at a college-ready level and are not shutting down or intervening in poor performers."

She added: "It is up to the schools to do everything in their power to ensure students can succeed."

A new way of calculating sponsor/authorizer ratings for Ohio that includes online schools will be presented to the state school board Dec. 14 or 15.

Click here for our early look at how that would work.

E-schools fight back

In Ohio three statewide e-schools, each run by for-profit companies, dominate the market with 30,000 students between them. Combined, the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow (ECOT), Ohio Connections Academy and Ohio Virtual Academy account for 76 percent of all online students in the state.

These big schools are all trying to poke holes in some of the major criticisms they Online schools are losing support, creating divisions in the national charter school movement | cleveland.com:

Common Core Forces Fiction From Classroom | The Daily Caller

Common Core Forces Fiction From Classroom | The Daily Caller:

Goodbye To All That: Common Core Forces Fiction From US Classrooms, Lowers Test Scores

The adoption and implementation of the Common Core State Standards Initiative in more than 40 states around the country since 2010 has wrought two major changes: (1) a notable decrease in the use of fiction and literature in America’s reading and English classes and (2) lower reading and math scores on the U.S. Department of Education-mandated National Assessment of Educational Progress.

The Common Core standards — now instituted in more than 40 states — mandate that nonfiction books constitute at least 70 percent of the texts read by high school students.

The nonfiction-heavy reading regime has forced English teachers nationwide to ditch short stories, poetry and literary classics such as “Huckleberry Finn” and“The Great Gatsby” in favor of dry how-to manuals and dated dispatches from the Federal Reserve. (RELATED: Classic Literature To Be Dropped From High Schools In Favor Of ‘Informational Texts’)

Common Core “is having an impact on the content of reading instruction, moving from the dominance of fiction over nonfiction to near parity in emphasis,” Brookings Institution education policy analyst Tom Loveless wrote last week.

Loveless notes that there is little evidence that the shift toward nonfiction has had any positive effect on the collective reading ability of America’s public school students.

“Reading more nonfiction does not necessarily mean that students will be reading higher quality texts,” Loveless notes.

A list of suggested “informational texts” which have replaced world-class literature in public schools under Common Core includes “Recommended Levels of Insulation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency” and “FedViews” by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

There’s also “Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy and Transportation Management,” a publication of the General Services Administration.

In 2009, about 36 percent of the material America’s fourth graders were reading was nonfiction. About 25 percent of the material America’s eighth graders were reading was nonfiction. In 2015, under Common Core, the percentages of nonfiction reading material have climbed to 45 percent for Common Core Forces Fiction From Classroom | The Daily Caller:

Does Obama’s Call to Cap Standardized Tests Really Matter? | Articles | Noodle

Does Obama’s Call to Cap Standardized Tests Really Matter? | Articles | Noodle:

Obama’s Call to Cap Standardized Testing: Is it Better?

When President Obama announced on October 24 that he wanted schools to spend no more than two percent of instructional time on standardized testing, it seemed like the announcement educators had been waiting for since he took office in 2008.

Critics, though, think Congressional action could make testing situations worse.

Instead of reversing the No Child Left Behind Act, as many had hoped, the Obama administration reinforced the country’s focus on standardized testing by linking federal subsidies to states’ implementations of Common Core standards for testing K–12 content knowledge. More and more, school communities are complaining about the increasing infringement of mandatory testing on instructional time.

It makes sense, then, that when the U.S. Department of Education released its Testing Action Plan, American Federation of Teachers union president Randi Weingarten found hope in Obama’s call for Congress to enforce his two percent clause. “Parents, students, educators,” she said, “your voice matters and was heard.”

Why Two Percent

Valerie Strauss of The Washington Post asked where two percent came from. The answer, ironically, is New York — a state where 20 percent of students opted out of standardized testingthis year, even after Governor Andrew Cuomo had already signed into law in 2014 that no student would spend more than two percent of class time taking standardized tests — one percent for state-level tests, and one percent for district-level tests. His former commissioner of education, John King, will succeed Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education at the end of this year.

A recent report from The Benjamin Center for Public Policy Initiatives at SUNY New Paltz surveyed New York state teachers for grades three through eight about how many instructional minutes they spent preparing students for standardized tests. Time on Test: The Fixed Costs of 3–8 Standardized Testing in New York State examined actual testing time in combination with the “fixed costs” of testing, defined as the necessary process of making possible the conditions for test taking: fulfilling administrative tasks, providing necessary accommodations for students, and reading the directions students need in order to understand what is required of them.

By taking into account the fixed costs of testing with the actual time spent taking the test, the study found that “on average, 185 minutes are dedicating to testing in grades 3–6 and 189 minutes in grades 7–8 during the administration of each daily exam,” which comes to a yearly Does Obama’s Call to Cap Standardized Tests Really Matter? | Articles | Noodle:

N.J. recess bill: Go and play, every day

N.J. recess bill: Go and play, every day:

N.J. recess bill: Go and play, every day

Want to know the deal on recess? Go to the experts.

"We can exercise!" said Collette Guerin, one in a gaggle of second graders rocking the playground last week at Zane North Elementary School in Collingswood.

"You can use up your energy so you're calmer," chimed in classmate Celia Titcombe.

Lilly Stout spoke for all:

"It's so fun!"

In time, schoolchildren all over New Jersey may join in that chorus.

A bipartisan-backed bill recently cleared the state Assembly's Education Committee that would require school districts to provide a daily recess period for students in kindergarten through the fifth grade.

The recess would have to be at least 20 minutes long and held outdoors, if possible.

"In addition to giving children time to recharge during the school day, recess allows students to develop their social skills and get some physical activity," said Assemblyman Joseph A. Lagano (D., Bergen/Passaic), one of the bill's primary sponsors.

"With more and more young people at risk for illnesses due to inactivity," Lagano said, "it's critical for recess to be part of their routine starting at an early age."

According to data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 17 percent of youth in the United States were obese during the period from 2011 to 2014. That represents an increase from nearly 14 percent of youth in 1999-2000.

The rate of obese adults has risen as well, to more than a third.

If the bill becomes law, New Jersey would be one of a relatively small number of states requiring recess.

According to a 2012 report of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education and the American Heart Association, only about nine other states mandate recess. Among those are Hawaii, North Dakota, and Virginia.

The sport and physical education association recommends that all elementary students should be given at least one daily period of recess lasting a minimum of 20 minutes.

A majority of states require physical education in their public schools. However, only a few, including New Jersey, require the nationally recommended 150 minutes a week of physical education for elementary students, according to the 2012 report.

A number of federal sources including the Department of Health and Human Services advise that children and adolescents do at least 60 minutes of physical

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20151129_Daily_recess_bill_moving_through_N_J__Legislature.html#DrxP275M5o776oBy.99