No Child Left Behind Rewrite Heads to House Floor Despite Democrats' Objections - US News

No Child Left Behind Rewrite Heads to House Floor Despite Democrats' Objections - US News:

House Lawmakers Push 'No Child' Overhaul Forward

The bill would significantly reduce the federal government's footprint in public education.

Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., who leads the House Education and the Workforce Committee, would not back amendments that added federal programs or costs to the bill.
Big Education Ape: Student Success Act: Corporate Education Reform on Steroids | Education & the Workforce Committee http://bit.ly/1uFiMzf

By Allie BidwellFeb. 12, 2015 | 12:06 p.m. EST+ More

The House Education and the Workforce Committee has passed a bill to reauthorize the long-outdated No Child Left Behind Act, despite strong objections from Democratic committee members, the Obama administration and dozens of education advocacy groups.

The bill, dubbed the Student Success Act, passed on a party-line vote (21-16) Wednesday night. It would significantly scale back the role of the federal government in overseeing public education, give states more flexibility in designing accountability systems and consolidate dozens of federal education programs. Block grant funding also would allow states to distribute federal money to districts and schools as they see fit. The bill is expected to move to the House floor in less than two weeks.

[READ: No Child Left Behind Debate Moves From Testing to Federal Oversight]

"The Student Success Act helps provide American families the education system they deserve, not the one Washington wants," Rep. John Kline, the committee's chairman, said in a statement following the vote. "We have a lot of work ahead, and we will continue to move forward in a manner that is open, transparent and fair. America’s parents, teachers and students have waited long enough for a new law that helps every child in every school receive an excellent education."

In the days leading up to the committee markup, Kline, R-Minn., and his GOP colleagues were criticized by Democrats and others who said the chairman failed to include input from stakeholders like teachers, parents and students. The committee sent the bill, nearly identical to one the House passed in July 2013, to the House floor without holding any hearings, which Kline said would be unnecessary because the bill is so similar to the previous version and the committee heard from experts the last time around.

But Democrats on the committee said the refusal was a sign Kline wasn't willing to work in a bipartisan manner. Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., said 37 percent of the current committee members – some of whom are new and others of whom were absent for hearings in 2013 – never had the opportunity to contribute to the bill.

The tension was also evident during Wednesday's markup session as Republican committee members blocked every amendment offered by a Democrat, based only on whether the amendment would create a new program or cost additional money.

Oregon Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, for example, introduced a bill to reduce testing (the SMART Act) as an amendment, and the proposal had garnered bipartisan support.

"I struggle to understand how this can be opposed," Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif, said before the vote on the amendment.

[ALSO: Senators Debate Testing, Federal Role in No Child Left Behind Rewrite]

But Kline said that while he supported the idea behind the amendment, he couldn't back the proposal because it called for additional funding, and the amendment was withdrawn. Likewise, amendments to include funding for high-quality early childhood education – a topic popular among both Democrats and Republicans – and to establish dropout prevention programs failed to pass.

Another amendment from Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., would have established federal protections against the bullying and harassment of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students, but was ruled not germane.

Democratic members repeatedly said during the daylong hearing that they would have liked to see more collaboration between members, and that areas for compromise were possibly missed.

"I am extremely disappointed that this ill-advised legislation was approved and would have preferred the chairman work with Democrats to bring about a bipartisan bill that truly serves the students of this country," Rep. Alma Adams, D-N.C., said in a statement. "As a new member of the committee I felt completely left out of this rushed process and believe we owe it to the American people to have thoughtful [dialogues] about such overarching policies."

In the end, the only approved amendments came from four Republican members: Reps. Steve Russellof Oklahoma, Joe Heck of Nevada, Dave Brat of Virginia and Carlos Curbelo of Florida.

The Russell amendment strengthens student and teacher data privacy provisions; the Heck No Child Left Behind Rewrite Heads to House Floor Despite Democrats' Objections - US News:

No Child Left Behind’s test-based policies failed. Will Congress keep them anyway? - The Washington Post

No Child Left Behind’s test-based policies failed. Will Congress keep them anyway? - The Washington Post:

No Child Left Behind’s test-based policies failed. Will Congress keep them anyway?

Big Education Ape: Student Success Act: Corporate Education Reform on Steroids | Education & the Workforce Committee http://bit.ly/1uFiMzf

Education Secretary Arne Duncan wrote on the department’s website herethat “for more than a decade, states and schools throughout this country have worked within the narrow confines of the No Child Left Behind law,” and that “it’s long past time to move past that law, and replace it with one that expands opportunity, increases flexibility and gives schools and educators more of the resources they need.” He’s right about that; the severely flawed  NCLB was supposed to be rewritten in 2007 but Congress didn’t get around to doing it until now. But Duncan says he wants to retain the NCLB requirement of annual standardized testing that drove the law’s unworkable accountability system, and many Republicans in Congress agree. Indeed, the House education committee this week approved legislation to rewrite NCLB that includes an annual testing mandate.

The important policy memo below, written by Kevin Welner and William J. Mathis, explores how the debates in over the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (which in its current version is NCLB), ignore the harm caused by NCLB’s test-based reforms. They write:

As a result, the proposals now on the table simply gild a demonstrably ineffective strategy, while crowding out policies with proven effectiveness. Deep-rooted trends of ever-increasing social and educational needs, as well as fewer or stagnant resources, will inevitably lead to larger opportunity gaps and achievement gaps. Testing will document this, but it will do nothing to change it. Instead, the gaps will only close with sustained investment and improvement based on proven strategies that directly increase children’s opportunities to learn.

Welner is the director of the National Education Policy Center, an attorney and a professor education policy at the University of Colorado Boulder. Mathis is the managing director of the center and a former Vermont superintendent.   You can find the fully annotated memo here, at the National Center of Education Policy website.

By Kevin Welner and William Mathis

Today’s 21-year-olds were in third grade in 2002, when the No Child Left Behind Act became law. For them and their younger siblings and neighbors, test-driven accountability policies are all they’ve known. The federal government entrusted their educations to an unproven but ambitious belief that if we test children and hold educators responsible for improving test scores, we would have almost everyone scoring as “proficient” by 2014. Thus, we would achieve “equality.” This approach has not worked.

Yet over the past 13 years, Presidents Bush and Obama remained steadfastly committed to test-based policies. These two administrations have offered federal grants through Race to the Top, so-called Flexibility Waivers under NCLB, School Improvement Grants, and various other No Child Left Behind’s test-based policies failed. Will Congress keep them anyway? - The Washington Post:

Georgia seeks a leader to oversee schools seized by the state | Get Schooled

Experts: Hire committed and visionary leaders for recovery school district. Hasn’t Atlanta already done that? | Get Schooled:





Experts: Hire committed and visionary leaders for recovery school district. Hasn’t Atlanta already done that?

 The experts yesterday at the joint House-Senate meeting on recovery school districts provided a clear summation of what Georgia needs to seek in a leader to oversee low-performing schools seized by the state: The candidate has to be committed to the tenet all students can learn, unwilling to accept excuses, inspirational and smart.

Gov. Nathan Deal is proposing to seize control of some of the 141 lowest-performing schools in Georgia by moving them into a new state-run Opportunity School District. (His plan calls for 20 schools a year to be added, capping his district at 100.)

Of those 141 struggling schools, 60 are in metro Atlanta. With 27 schools on the list, APS has the highest number eligible for Opportunity District takeover. DeKalb County is next with 26; Fulton has seven and Clayton three. No schools from Cobb or Gwinnett are on the list.

The plan would empower the state to run these struggling schools, close them, partner with local school districts or convert them into charter schools. (Georgia law already allows them to become charter schools. APS has 17 charter schools. )

The Opportunity School District would be overseen by a new education czar who would report to the governor.

Deal’s plan hinges on recruiting a charismatic leader to pilot these schools to success. But Atlanta has already done that.

Atlanta Public Schools Superintendent Meria Carstarphen waves to spectators during the parade at the homecoming festivities at Booker T. Washington High School. HYOSUB SHIN / HSHIN@AJC.COM

And the woman only just arrived. The state ought to give Dr. Meria Carstarphen time to prove her mettle before it starts gathering up APS schools for its Opportunity District.

It makes no sense to put another high-salaried education leader on the APS case when the system has already hired a nationally recognized wunderkind to do the job.

How many visionary, six-figure-salaried leaders does a system of 56,000 students need? Atlanta doesn’t need another school chief for its under performing schools.

So who does need the state’s help? Districts in the far reaches of Georgia without the resources or location appeal of an Atlanta or a DeKalb.

Unfortunately, those remote systems are the least likely to benefit from an Opportunity District.

Over the years, I’ve talked to a half dozen bright young teachers who moved to NOLA to work in or lead the charter schools that arose from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.

Each of those teachers cited two factors in their decision, the urge to be part of an education experiment never Experts: Hire committed and visionary leaders for recovery school district. Hasn’t Atlanta already done that? | Get Schooled:

Georgia unveils statewide plan to take over failing schools

Gov. Nathan Deal would create a statewide school district and give his office broad new powers to take over failing schools, under a plan unveiled Wednesday ahead of a likely contentious battle toward approval.

The plan, which can be found here, would allow the state to take control of failing schools, close them, partner with local school districts to run them or convert them into charter schools.

It would for the first time ever create a statewide “Opportunity School District” to oversee the program — led by a superintendent who would report directly to the governor and not the state education department.

Georgia Sen. Butch Miller, R-Gainesville, talks with visiting students during a break in action Wednesday. BOB ANDRES / BANDRES@AJC.COM

“When we talk about helping failing schools, we’re talking about rescuing children,” Deal said. “I stand firm on the principle that every child can learn, and I stand equally firm in the belief that the status quo isn’t working.”

To determine which schools would be targeted, the plan defines “persistently failing schools” as those scoring below 60 for three years in a row on the College and Career Performance Index – which is essentially the state’s annual report card for school performance.

More than 140 schools, including at least a dozen in metro Atlanta, could be eligible — although annual enrollment would be limited to up to 20 schools a year.

“What is the definition of insanity? Continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result,” said state Sen. Butch Miller, R-Gainesville, who will take a lead role carrying the legislation at the state Capitol. “It’s not a one-size-fits-all. You would have a different address, a different business plan for each individual school. And I would say to those educators who might push back and challenge this that, if they know what to do why aren’t they doing it?”

For Deal, it is his signature education proposal of the year, one that comes after weeks of quiet meetings with legislators who must overwhelming pass the initiative before it would be put to voters on the 2016 ballot.

That’s because Deal has framed it as a constitutional amendment, needing two-thirds support in each of the House and the Senate. Opposition, however, is already mounting.

“This is an educational mirage,” said Senate Minority Leader Steve Henson, D-Tucker. “Yes, we have a problem with failing schools and yes, we need to correct the problem.”

“But we don’t accomplish this by privatizing the public school system, denying equal education to all Georgia students and by refusing to address the fact that we have short-changed our state education system by $8 billion over the past 12 years,” Henson said.

Democrats are expected to unveil a counter-proposal as soon as next week.

The Opportunity School District would be capped at 100 overall. Schools would stay in the district for a minimum of five years and not more than 10 years. Those 

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/georgia-unveils-statewide-plan-to-take-over-failin/nj8ph/

The choice? Closer to the heart. | BustED Pencils

The choice? Closer to the heart. | BustED Pencils:

The choice? Closer to the heart.

Posted February 12, 2015 by Tim Slekar

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”

I remember listening to these lyrics for the first time when I was in middle school.  It was some time after that that I remember “hearing” the same lyrics.

For those of you that can place the lyrics with the song you know what I’m talking about.  If this is the first time you have ever seen these lyrics you need to know that the words come from a the song “Freewill” and were written and performed by the band Rush.  Here check it out.

Great song, I know.  But what about that simple line? What was Rush saying and why should educators care?  Because our system of education is under assault and I still find way too many educators that absolutely know what’s going on but “choose” to remain silent or focussed on the wrong things.

Think about it. Right here in Wisconsin our governor declared war on the idea of free inquiry and the search for truth.  He then went and also put forth a budget that cuts $300 million from the UW system.  When called on his blatant attack on the academic mission of higher education—specifically the Wisconsin Idea—his response was a simple dismissal and officially called it a “drafting error.”

According to Jonas Persson and Mary Botarri of the Center for Media and Democracy’s The choice? Closer to the heart. | BustED Pencils:

Teachers: Tell Me How You Feel About the Upcoming PARCC or SBAC - Education Under Attack

Education Under Attack | Attacks on public education system hurt America:

Teachers: Tell Me How You Feel About the Upcoming PARCC or SBAC

Dear Fellow Educator,

Since retiring I began a blog at educationunderattack.info because I am concerned about all the issues that are negatively affecting public education.  Recently I have been reading about the issue of parent (and as a result, legislator) concerns about the upcoming PARCC and SBAC assessments.  I think it's important to find out what teachers feel about these assessments so I designed an online survey just for teachers.  The survey is only 13 questions long and should take no more than 5 minutes to complete.  All responses are anonymous - there is no way to track a response back to the person who completed it.

I am asking your help in one of two ways:

1) If you are a classroom teacher, please take the survey and forward this message to your fellow teachers.

2) If you are not a classroom teacher but know some, please forward this to them and ask them to take it.  Before forwarding you can check out the survey by clicking the link below - just don't hit "Submit" at the end of the form.  It's just for current teachers.

Click below to take the survey:

Go To The Common Core Assessment Survey for Teachers

If you are interested in the results, please check my blog in late March.

Thanks, 

Mike Warner

education.under.attack@gmail.com

Education Under Attack | Attacks on public education system hurt America:

Report Faults Charter School Rules on Discipline of Students - NYTimes.com

Report Faults Charter School Rules on Discipline of Students - NYTimes.com:

Report Faults Charter School Rules on Discipline of Students

Most of New York City’s charter schools have disciplinary codes that do not meet either state or federal requirements, according to a report by a children’s advocacy organization that is to be released on Thursday.

The finding adds a new dimension to a long-running debate about the role of strict forms of discipline in the city’s public schools.

“These are public schools, and we should be expecting them to meet the requirements of the law,” said Paulina Davis, a staff attorney with the group, Advocates for Children, and the principal author of the report.

Publicly financed but privately run, charter schools often hover between the autonomy of independent schools and the accountability demanded of district public schools. With the Advocates for Children report, the question of whether they should be treated like private or public schools bubbles up again. Some in the charter community argue that a section of state education law related to discipline — one of the provisions this report says is being violated — should not apply to charter schools at all.

In preparing the report, the group surveyed the disciplinary policies of 155 charter organizations — large networks as well as smaller, independent schools — out of 183 such organizations that operated in New York City during the 2013-14 school year. (The 155 organizations had 164 disciplinary policies between them because some set different standards for different grade levels, Advocates for Children said.)

Some charter schools have drawn criticism for having high suspension rates and a strict approach to discipline that pushes children out of the classroom unnecessarily. But many charter advocates have said it is crucial to maintain order so children can learn.

The Advocates for Children report cites complaints from parents who said their children had been suspended from charter schools over minor offenses such as wearing the wrong shoes or laughing while serving detention. Ultimately, though, the group said the main issue was legal.

Half of the policies examined by Advocates for Children let charter schools suspend or expel students for being late or cutting class — punishments the group said violated state law. At three dozen schools, there were no special rules covering the suspension or expulsion of children with disabilities, which the group said violated federal law. And in 25 instances, charter schools could suspend students for long periods without a hearing, which the group said violated the United States and New York State Constitutions, as well as state law.

James D. Merriman, chief executive of the New York City Charter School Center, an advocacy group for charter schools, questioned how frequently the incidents cited by Advocates for Children occur.

“No one can disagree that those policies that do not fully meet applicable law should be amended,” he said in an email. “But it is tremendously unfair to suggest, as A.F.C. does, that a handful of one-sided anecdotes compiled over a long time are any evidence that charter schools are wholesale violating civil rights laws.”

Ms. Davis of Advocates for Children acknowledged that the organization did not have figures for such violations, but said schools were expected to follow their policies.

In addition to comparing charter school disciplinary policies to state and federal laws, the report also matched them against the city Education Department’s disciplinary code, which governs other public schools.

While the department’s rules were generally described as more appropriateReport Faults Charter School Rules on Discipline of Students - NYTimes.com:

Why School Privatization is an Irresistible Urban Development Strategy for Economic Elites - BK Nation

Why School Privatization is an Irresistible Urban Development Strategy for Economic Elites - BK Nation:

Why School Privatization is an Irresistible Urban Development Strategy for Economic Elites

By Mark Naison

In almost every urban center in the nation, a cross section of the business community seeks to dismantle urban public schools and to replace them with charter schools supported by a campaign of demonization aimed at teachers and at their unions.

The list of benefits that elites expect to realize from privatizing urban public school systems includes the following:

1. Tax credits
Federal tax codes allow a 39% tax credit for investing in a new charter school, allowing investors to recoup their initial investment in seven years and begin registering profits.

2. Real-estate speculation
Closing public schools destabilizes lower- and working-class neighborhoods and forces residents into suburbs or the outskirts of cities, allowing real-estate investors to buy up existing properties at bargain rates and to build market-level units that attract a far wealthier clientele. You can see this kind of investment in New York, Chicago and Washington neighborhoods.

3. State contracts
Consulting firms receive lucrative contracts to “turn around” failing schools and districts, or to provide professional development services to newly created charters. Major universities offer programs in “Educational Entrepreneurship” budding profiteers.

4. For-profit charter schools/on-line schools
This Florida phenomenon will take root in many other states.

5. Diminished bargaining power for private-sector employees
Destroying a key union in the public sector weakens the labor movement as a bargaining agent and as a political force.

With so much at stake for the economic elites, it becomes quite clear why they attack urban public schools with such ferocity. Only through broad-based and militant resistance can this effort be thwarted.Why School Privatization is an Irresistible Urban Development Strategy for Economic Elites - BK Nation:

Statement by Burke, Evers, Rebarber, Stotsky, and Wurman on ESEA | Jay P. Greene's Blog

Statement by Burke, Evers, Rebarber, Stotsky, and Wurman on ESEA | Jay P. Greene's Blog:

Statement by Burke, Evers, Rebarber, Stotsky, and Wurman on ESEA

Big Education Ape: Student Success Act: Corporate Education Reform on Steroids | Education & the Workforce Committee http://bit.ly/1uFiMzf

The following is a statement by Lindsey M. Burke, Williamson Evers, Theodor Rebarber, Sandra Stotsky, and Ze’ev Wurman that they asked me to post.  I have not yet had a chance to think carefully about ESEA re-authorization, but I think their views are worth consideration:

Reauthorizing ESEA: The road to effective education is paved with local control and parent power

Lindsey M. Burke, Williamson Evers, Theodor Rebarber, Sandra Stotsky, and Ze’ev Wurman

In reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 2015, Congress should restore the power of state and local governmental authorities. The law as it currently reads has centralized education and moved decision-making to a large and ever-growing federal bureaucracy — far from the schools most students attend.

The current drafts, both the Senate and the House versions, do not return authority to the states and localities or empower parents.  The ESEA has evolved from what was described at the outset in 1965 as a measure to help children from low-income families into an instrument of testing mandates and federal control of public K-12 education and, increasingly, of private education as well. The road to effective education is paved with local control and parent power.

We need to reauthorize ESEA in a way that empowers parents and moves authority back to local communities and the state laboratories of democracy where it belongs. Moreover, the reauthorization should abandon the ill-considered idea planted in the Obama administration’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Flexibility Waivers that our high schools are simply college-prep factories. Instead, the reauthorization should return to the previous widely accepted idea that high schools should prepare young people for American citizenship and to fulfill their individual potential as they see fit. Toward that end, high schools should be permitted to establish several sets of challenging academic standards rather than a single set of standards that purport to deliver self-proclaimed (but actually meaningless) “college-readiness.” Similarly, instead of federal regulations that require that the testing “tail” wag the curriculum “dog,” communities and charter schools must be able to select reliable assessments that align with their locally established curriculum.

Recent attempts to provide better educational opportunities to low-income children through one-size-fits-all requirements and increased federal testing mandates in the various versions of ESEA since its inception have met with little success.  As education researcher Helen Ladd concluded in her comments on a 2010 Brookings Institution paper by Thomas Dee and Brian Jacob:

“… First, the null findings for reading indicate to me that to the extent that higher reading scores are an important goal for the country, NCLB is clearly not the right approach. That raises the obvious follow-up question: what is?…

“[T]he suggestive evidence that I have included here on Massachusetts [indicates] that states may be in a better position to promote student achievement than the federal government.”

The 2015 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act should restore power to states and localities by allowing states, school districts, and charter schools to opt out fully and completely from the programs and regulations of ESEA, currently reauthorized as No Child Left Behind. When they opt out, states, local school districts, and charter schools would formally and publicly explain the accountability measures that they would use to assure that federal dollars improve the K-12 education of disadvantaged children. They would also provide the rationale that supports these measures.

States and local authorities would thereby be in a position to direct federal dollars to their students’ most pressing education needs. By this we mean that the 2015 reauthorization should follow the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (A-PLUS) approach, which has been offered in previous years.

In addition, the 2015 reauthorization should:

1. Eliminate mandates, including, but not limited to: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), federal prescription of annual grade-level testing for each student, the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) mandate, and maintenance of effort (MOE) regulations. The reauthorized act should not require a single statewide set of standards or assessments in each state, nor approval or review of any state or local district or charter school standards or assessments by the U.S. Department of Education. It should instead allow states, local school districts and charters the choice of what grades and subjects to test, and the number of tests, letting them choose from among a wide range of state-approved standards and aligned valid and reliable tests. Those states that believe annual grade-level testing in specified subjects of each student Statement by Burke, Evers, Rebarber, Stotsky, and Wurman on ESEA | Jay P. Greene's Blog:

Rescinding My Invite to Governor Andrew Cuomo | The Jose Vilson

Rescinding My Invite to Governor Andrew Cuomo | The Jose Vilson:

Rescinding My Invite to Governor Andrew Cuomo

 JOSE VILSON FEBRUARY 11, 2015 JOSE LEAVE A COMMENT

First off, Governor Andrew Cuomo is never getting an invitation to my classroom nor would I want him anywhere near my students.

The most likely scenario is that he stops in for 10 minutes, listens to me do some math, stares at me coldly with the kids whispering “Who is this guy?” to each other, smirking with an “I told you that I’d drop by” look. Then, he’d ask me for time and I’d shake my head and his people would look at me like, “Come on …” and I’d begrudge it and say, “Make it quick,” and then he’d make a bold proclamation about the good work we (!) are doing to improve my students’ test scores and I’d snicker loud and roll my eyes and then he’d strut out of my classroom the way some guy in the suit who drops an explosive dump in the bathroom does. I’d gag shortly thereafter, wash my hands, and hope I never remember that day happening to me.

I’m not backing that.

Cuomo doesn’t seem at all swayed by the faces and names of students, educators, and parents doing hard work in arduous conditions, but will sweep whole commissions under a rug for friends with nice ties and good ties to him. He already invades our homes with his faux-ratory every morning, pretending that his solution for public schools will serve “every child” even though his calls for equity never include any tax restructuring methods or fulfilling school funding mandates. To wit, another commercial that plays alongside his education speech excerpt features his StartUpNYC program that offers an ingratiating incentive for companies to come to the state that include no business, corporate, sales, property, state, or local taxes for ten full years.

How he purposefully neglects funding in favor of his corporate friends doesn’t stun me in the least. How his finger can contort so the index faces teachers befuddles me to no end.

He’s become so predictable, too. How is it possible that he might want to walk into my classroom, listen to the discussions, take in some of the non-Common Core aligned banter, watch students produce math work, and think exactly half my job is to prepare students for a six-hour exam? If ramping up the testing accountability measure to 50% is a means of doubling the percentage of ineffective teachers (after his own bill didn’t fire enough teachers to his liking), where, pray tell, will he find educators that would want to fill the 10% – 20% of staff he’d like to fire? (Also, how does he make a political party for women without holding into account that most teachers, by a grand majority, are women?) How does testing my students more legitimize the students’ learning when you’re reducing our jobs to test preppers? How does he think driving public funds for private entities is the same as equity, as if the floundering donations of a select few combined with paltry public education funds is equivalent to a robust and reliable funding source that gives all schools equitable resources? If you’re not about improving working conditions for every child, then how do you think your corporatist ideas for school reform will make equity possible?

I doubt it.

So please, don’t visit my classroom. My door has now been open, sometimes reluctantly, to adults of many backgrounds, some well-intentioned and some not-so-well-intentioned. In the time I’ve spent harboring these visitors peering through me and my students like my classroom was a fish tank, I’ve learned that the most powerful visitors rarely came to support our efforts. Save for one or two superintendents, they came to find fault with nary a step for improvement. It might astonish Cuomo to know that teachers crave timely, informed, and powerful critique Rescinding My Invite to Governor Andrew Cuomo | The Jose Vilson:

Title I Formula Changes Included in House Republican NCLB Rewrite - Politics K-12 - Education Week

Title I Formula Changes Included in House Republican NCLB Rewrite - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Title I Formula Changes Included in House Republican NCLB Rewrite

By Lauren Camera on February 11, 2015 11:57 AM

Big Education Ape: Student Success Act: Corporate Education Reform on Steroids | Education & the Workforce Committee http://bit.ly/1uFiMzf

Lawmakers who have been trying for years to change the way Title I dollars for low-income students are disbursed to school districts scored a big win with House Republicans Wednesday morning.

When GOP members on the education committee unveiled the No Child Left Behind Act overhaul that they plan to clear later in the afternoon, it included several technical changes to the measure they originally introduced. Notably, it increased the weight given to the percentage of low-income students in a school district, which is part of how Title I aid is distributed.

The Title I formula is complicated, but generally speaking, the money is given to districts based on their size and concentration of poverty, among other factors. For years now, critics of the formula have argued that it's unfair because the formula weighs more heavily the size of a school district over the percent of students in poverty in a school district.

That means that, generally speaking, larger districts and big urban areas often come out ahead of poor, rural districts and small cities. Indeed, Fairfax County, Va., (one of the richest counties in the nation) gets a disproportionate share of Title I dollars compared with some rural districts with higher concentrations of poverty.

The change in the formula amounts to one one-hundredth of a percent, but it is still considered a big win for advocates like Rep. Glenn Thomspon, R-Penn., who's been pushing Congress on this issue since at least 2011.

During opening remarks at a markup on the NCLB overhaul, Thompson thanked Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the committee chairman, for beginning to address the issue of the Title I formula, but said Title I Formula Changes Included in House Republican NCLB Rewrite - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Big Education Ape: Twitter Call to Action! Tweet your trouble with NCLB rewrite! The Network For Public Education | http://bit.ly/1AjngfH

Diane Ravitch takes aim at Ritz detractors on Indiana show | Chalkbeat

Diane Ravitch takes aim at Ritz detractors on Indiana show | Chalkbeat:



Diane Ravitch takes aim at Ritz detractors on Indiana show 

 A national critic of testing and accountability-based school reform took aim at opponents of state Superintendent Glenda Ritz on a lndiana-based Internet radio talk show tonight.

“It seems as if the governor and legislature are just determined to crush her,” said Diane Ravitch, the education historian and one-time school reform advocate who has become perhaps the nation’s most recognized spokeswoman against testing, school choice, test-based teacher evaluation and other proposals she says harm public schools.

Ravitch served as assistant U.S. Secretary of Education under President George H.W. Bush and was on the board of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a national pro-school choice advocacy group, but then had a change of heart and wrote two books deeply critical of her prior allies.

She appeared on the Just Let Me Teach Internet radio show on IndianaTalks.comdiscussing Indiana politics for an hour with host Justin Oakley, a former teacher who stepped aside to make way for Ritz after seeking the Democratic nomination to run against then-state Superintendent Tony Bennett in 2012.

Ravitch has frequently backed Ritz and criticized Indiana Gov. Mike Pence. She called bills that aim to remove the guarantee in state law that Ritz serve as chairwoman of the Indiana State Board of Education “pathetic” and “vindictive.”

“They’re trying to take away even her title,” she said. “This is because they are afraid of her because she is a vote getter.”

Robert Enlow, president of the Friedman Foundation, said in an interview after the program Ravitch and Ritz both “pander to the lowest common denominator.” Ravitch singled out Friedman and Enlow for criticism during the interview, saying Diane Ravitch takes aim at Ritz detractors on Indiana show | Chalkbeat:

Lehigh lecturer says reformers out to destroy public education - The Morning Call

Lehigh lecturer says reformers out to destroy public education - The Morning Call:



Lehigh lecturer says reformers out to destroy public education

'Merit pay [for teachers] is a zombie idea,' says former U.S. assistant secretary of education

Lehigh University billed Tuesday night's lecture as "School Reform: Finding Common Ground," but the speaker made sure from the get-go where she stood, saying some so-called reformers really want to destroy public education.

Diane Ravitch, an author and the nemesis of pro-school voucher/pro-charter reformers, told the crowd of about 700 at Zoellner Arts Center that she finds little common ground with them.

"If someone wants to tear your house down, can you reach a compromise and tear down half of it?" said Ravitch, an assistant secretary of education under President George H.W. Bush.

Lehigh originally sought to have a debate between Ravitch and Michelle Rhee, the former schools chancellor for Washington, D.C., but negotiations to get them on the same stage broke down, according to Gary M. Sasso, dean of the College of Education.

"Diane's opinion was that Michelle was a scaredy cat," he said to laughter from the largely pro-Ravitch crowd who gathered for the latest in the university's 2015 Distinguished Lecture Series.

Sasso said Lehigh plans to bring in a lecturer with opposing views at a later date.


So, Ravitch debated an imaginary education reformer for the first part of the forum. She scoffed at fears that America's public schools are failing.

She said that scores for National Assessment of Educational Progress tests — which she called the "gold standard of testing" — are the highest ever, and high school graduation rates are also at a historic high.

For the schools that are doing poorly, Ravitch blamed poverty and segregation.

"Did you know that the U.S. has the highest rate of child poverty of any advanced nation in the world?" she said.

Ravitch criticized the Common Core education standards, which she said are designed to fail a high percentage of students. High-stakes standardized testing has led to school districts narrowing the curriculum, she claimed.

The United States is not an economic powerhouse because of high standardized test scores, and countries that out-perform American students on standardized tests are not Lehigh lecturer says reformers out to destroy public education - The Morning Call: