Garn Press Chapters: The Educator and the Oligarch by Anthony Cody - Garn Press

Garn Press Chapters: The Educator and the Oligarch by Anthony Cody - Garn Press:

Garn Press Chapters: The Educator and the Oligarch by Anthony Cody

 Garn Press Chapters: A new series from Garn Press. Featured in this post, Chapter 20 of The Educator and the Oligarch, which is available in paperback on Amazon and Barnes & Noble, and as an ebook on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, andiBooks.

It takes courage to challenge the decisions made by the richest man in the world about the U.S. public school system, but that is exactly what Anthony Cody has done. He received the NCTE 2015 George Orwell Award for The Educator and the Oligarch for speaking truth to power. Anthony continues to speak truth to power and is consistent in his message that not only is Bill Gates wrong, his educational reforms are dangerous.

Anthony Cody leaves us in no doubt that the educational reforms forced on teachers, children, and their parents by Gates and the corporate elites with whom the billionaire keeps company are risking both the future of our kids and the opportunities they will have of living and thriving in the rapidly changing world we now inhabit.

At Garn Press we applaud Anthony Cody for the consistency of his educational reporting and his indomitable courage. Here is a link to his Living In Dialogue blog site and to a recent post that builds on Chapter 20 of The Educator and the Oligarch, which Garn is featuring here.

Chapter 20

The Classroom of the Future: Student-Centered or Device-Centered?

A basic question is emerging as our schools are urged to embrace the Common Core State Standards and the computer-based learning systems aligned to the standards. Are these digital devices becoming central to the classroom—and coming to dominate the way we teach and learn? And how will this serve our students?

In March, 2014 we heard from Bill Gates the virtues of the Common Core explained this way:

If you have 50 different plug types, appliances wouldn’t be available and would be very expensive,” he said. But once an electric outlet becomes standardized, many companies can design appliances and competition ensues, creating variety and better prices for consumers, he said.[1]

In the classroom, these “appliances” are the tablets and other digital devices now being aggressively sold. In 2012, Gates explained this model of device-centered “personalization”:

Teachers have not had these tools before. Fragmented standards that differ from state to state and district to district have made it hard for innovators to design tools to reach a wide market. The common core will help change that. In the classroom of the not-too-far-off future, kids will have computer devices with phenomenal interactive content. This will allow teachers to do what they call “flip the classroom.” Instead of learning a concept in class and applying it at home, students would learn the concept at home, on video, and apply it in class, where they can get help from the teacher. When students learn a concept on video, they can take as much time as they need and learn at their own pace. They can pause the video, rewind it, or just listen to it all over again. Then the students can use class time to do the problems. The teacher sees instantly on the dashboard which kids are getting it, and steps in if someone is stuck. The students move on when they master the material, and not before. This is very different from the old method where every student moves on to the next topic after the test, whether you got an A or a D.[2]

Iwan Streichenberger, the CEO of the now-defunct Gates-funded inBloom data-storage project used a slightly different analogy:

Our purpose is to remove the friction in the deployment of technology in the classroom. It’s not very exciting, but if you don’t have plumbing you can’t have appliances.[3]

In (now defunct) inBloom’s view, the “plumbing” is the system that will allow data from all these devices to be collected and used by all the appliance makers. Our classrooms are being re-wired and standardized to allow the proliferation of appliances that will transform education.

What do these appliances look like? What does this transformation entail?

At Austin’s SXSWedu, in March of 2014, I attended the product launch for one such appliance. Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify has produced a new tablet for the classroom market, which comes with a complete ELA, math, and science curriculum. The program promises:

With an e-library stocked with more than 300 books and educational games, and tools for immediate, in-class student assessment, Amplify ELA aims to help students read three times more and write three times more, and to help teachers provide three times more meaningful feedback.[4]

As the students work, the device keeps track of what they have read and written. Words that were misspelled are Garn Press Chapters: The Educator and the Oligarch by Anthony Cody - Garn Press:

If the PA Legislature Won’t Pass a Budget, Schools Shouldn’t Give High Stakes Tests | gadflyonthewallblog

If the PA Legislature Won’t Pass a Budget, Schools Shouldn’t Give High Stakes Tests | gadflyonthewallblog:

If the PA Legislature Won’t Pass a Budget, Schools Shouldn’t Give High Stakes Tests

 No one gives a high stakes test because he or she thinks it helps kids learn.

Public schools give tests because they are threatened by the state: give this test or we’ll withhold your funding.

In Pennsylvania, the legislature can’t be bothered to pass a budget. So lawmakers have already withheld funding.

So WHY THE HECK ARE SCHOOLS GIVING THESE TERRIBLE TESTS!!?

Pause with me a moment for a smidgen of background.

It seems the Keystone State just can’t afford its public schools.If the PA Legislature Won’t Pass a Budget, Schools Shouldn’t Give High Stakes Tests | gadflyonthewallblog:

“Resistance against corporate education reform”: Noam Chomsky, scholars warn Senate not to approve John King as secretary - Salon.com

“Resistance against corporate education reform”: Noam Chomsky, scholars warn Senate not to approve John King as secretary - Salon.com:

“Resistance against corporate education reform”: Noam Chomsky, scholars warn Senate not to approve John King as secretary

Leading teachers and public education activists warn Obama's choice for education secretary would be a disaster

Noam Chomsky, John B. King Jr. (Credit: Reuters/Majed Jaber/Joshua Roberts)

 Leading progressive voices are warning that President Obama’s choice for education secretary could be a disaster.

An open letter to the U.S. Senate, published in the Washington Post on Thursday, asks lawmakers to reject the confirmation of John King as the new secretary of education.

King, the acting secretary of education, has a long history of supporting corporate-friendly education reforms, and has pushed for unpopular policies like more standardized testing and Common Core, which critics say are ineffective.

The letter is signed by world-renowned scholar Noam Chomsky, along with journalist Naomi Klein, Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and a host of other prominent scholars and activists, including some of the most established pro-public education voices.

A variety of teachers’ and public education organizations signed the letter as well, including New York for Public Education, Save Our Schools and Time Out From Testing.

The signatories warn King’s policies “have been ineffective and destructive to schools, educators, and most importantly students.”

“The American public deserves a Secretary of Education who will advocate for their interests, not those of the testing corporations who profit from the Common Core,” the letter reads.

As former education commissioner for New York state, King strongly supported Common Core and inBloom, an organization that collected sensitive private information of students (inBloom has since been shut down).

The Washington Post notes that, during his time as New York’s education chief, King led extreme standardized testing-heavy reforms that, for instance, made art teachers responsible for students’ math test scores.

In fact, King’s push for Common Core and standardizing testing designed by the corporate education giant Pearson — which has been widely criticized for putting profit over effective policy — “was considered such a disaster that New York. Gov Andrew Cuomo wrote in a letter to top state education officials that ‘Common Core’s implementation in New York has been flawed and mismanaged from the start,'” the Post reports.

Because of King’s policies, 20 percent of test-takers across New York refused to take the tests in protest.

King stepped down from the position in December 2014, after years of protests, and moved to D.C. to serve under Education Secretary Arne Duncan. When Duncan “Resistance against corporate education reform”: Noam Chomsky, scholars warn Senate not to approve John King as secretary - Salon.com:

Will the US Department of Education take your school’s Title 1 funds if you opt your student out of the SBAC? Short answer, no. | Seattle Education

Will the US Department of Education take your school’s Title 1 funds if you opt your student out of the SBAC? Short answer, no. | Seattle Education:

Will the US Department of Education take your school’s Title 1 funds if you opt your student out of the SBAC? Short answer, no.

 There is no federal or state law that requires financial penalties to schools’ Title I funds if parents refuse to allow their children to take the PARCC tests. The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law did include a mandate that required schools to have a 95 percent participation rate on state tests or face sanctions. The intent of that law was to prevent schools from hiding subgroups of students from the accountability structure and was not aimed at preventing parents from refusing to have their children tested.

The parents in the states of New York and New Jersey have been fighting back against the Common Core Standards for the last year and the corresponding  PARCC battery of tests which is our SBAC set of tests in Washington State.

But let’s start at the beginning.

It is illegal for the Federal Government to specify a national curriculum or national test.

From my post High Stake Testing: A little history:

In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into Federal law the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) as part of the “War on Poverty” program. This bill ensured that children in poverty would receive additional funding for their school programs. The funding allocated was to include the professional development of teachers, class materials, and support for parent involvement. This federal money is referred to as “Title 1″ funding. (Note: Part of the original ESEA agreement ensured there would not be a national curriculum decided by the Federal government, but rather that each state would determine its own curriculum.)  ESEA was to continue for five years, but Congress has reauthorized the bill every five years and each time it is reauthorized, members of Congress, along with the President, have made changes to the bill.

Any standardized curriculum can only be legally developed at the state or district level. Arne Duncan and his backers, particularly Bill Gates, really, really wanted a standardized Will the US Department of Education take your school’s Title 1 funds if you opt your student out of the SBAC? Short answer, no. | Seattle Education:

What is Florida’s education chief talking about? - The Washington Post

What is Florida’s education chief talking about? - The Washington Post:

What is Florida’s education chief talking about?

 Pam Stewart, the education commissioner of Florida, said something recently that struck a bad note with a number of people in the state about what are known as “opt outs,” students who refuse to take state-mandated standardized tests used for “accountability” purposes.

With the 2016 testing just starting,  the Tampa Bay Times reported it this way:

The arrival of the testing season has brought a renewed debate over exactly how far school districts must go to accommodatechildren and parents who don’t want to take the tests.

In a conference call with superintendents, commissioner Pam Stewart made clear the message she wants the districts to promote. Testing is required, she said, just like vaccinations. Like it, or leave. From her call notes, distributed to all districts:

“We all know there have been questions about opt out and that there were situations where this occurred last year. Section 1008.22, F.S., regarding statewide, standardized assessments, states clearly that participation is mandatory for all districts and all students attending public schools. My belief is that students who do not want to test should not be sitting in public schools, as it is mandatory and required for students seeking a standard high school diploma. Statewide, standardized assessments are part of [the] requirement to attend school, like immunization records. That is our message and what we send to you to be shared with your staff.”

As you might imagine, some folks in Florida were not amused. There is a strong parent activist movement in Florida whose members speak out publicly against test-based school reform and who have opted their children out of the tests in recent years. Furthermore, educators and school administrators in the state have increasingly been speaking out against the state’s test-based accountability system.

The Florida Association of District School Superintendents issued a statement in September saying that superintendents have “lost confidence” in that system and they called for a suspension of the accountability system and a full review. The assessments, which were given to Florida students for the first What is Florida’s education chief talking about? - The Washington Post:

Candidates: How Will You Fight for the Children? - LA Progressive

Candidates: How Will You Fight for the Children? - LA Progressive:

Candidates: How Will You Fight for the Children?

We are America’s public school teachers. We are the parents of America. As American citizens we have the fundamental civil right to a strong, free, and appropriate public education system. Yet public schools, public school children,  and public school teachers are under attack by special interests on both sides of the political spectrum. These relentless attacks are occurring upon the very same public school teachers that are our society’s first responders against ignorance, poverty, and injustice. Our nation’s public school teachers take body blows, mental blows, and sometimes even bullets, in order to protect and educate our children.

From preschool to 12th grade our public education system is a target-rich environment for corporate privatization by education reformers using tactics worthy of insider trading to sell school “failure” as a way to market quick fixes and hedge fund solutions. Corporate privatizers use the word reform to work in tandem with politicians dedicated to removing racial and cultural equity from our society. ALEC—working under everyone’s radar–systematically authors laws to amplify fear so that the failure narrative has surged. “School choice” privatizers applied union busting “right to work” logic that has been used for decades.

A Nation at Risk even blamed education and educators for the problems of poverty in an attempt to divert the nation’s attention from the truth.  The truth is that too much corporate interest has pushed its way into public education, preventing our nation from creating true solutions to poverty and inequity.

Too much corporate interest has pushed its way into public education, preventing our nation from creating true solutions to poverty and inequity.

Poverty is deeply understood by American teachers because we address the real effects of poverty every single day. Census data tells us that 20% of children in the US come from impoverished homes and live with inadequate nutrition and poor hygiene in homes where there is little room to support academics due to high priority of these survival issues. Our public school teachers work hard to mitigate the effects of poverty. Yet the reality is our children and our teachers are not thriving. The agenda to systematically defund our public school institutions has left our educators with the daunting task of always having to do more with less.

Public education is one of this nation’s best weapons against poverty, and can play a major role in fixing poverty IF schools are fully funded and resourced. Corporate privatization that deflects full funding from public education will not help. Authoritarianism will temporarily silence the realities of poverty, as evidenced in Ferguson. But it will not fix cruelty and injustice. School privatization reinforces heinous pathways of segregation and cultural bias.

What may be most egregious is that, in spite of our efforts, public education has become part of the school-to-prison pipeline because the systemic roots of poverty have not been addressed.

This must stop.

Currently our United States Department of Education promotes charter privatization, even though “rigor” and “no excuse” policies have been proven to be ineffective in addressing behaviors that can stem from poverty. In a majority of states, charter schools are not held wholly accountable for Candidates: How Will You Fight for the Children? - LA Progressive:

How will you join us in this fight? How will you help us to reverse the damage that has already been created? How can we help you find the remedies that historically have and will continue to work? How will you restore the checks and balances to what has become unchecked by those who have initiated and forced these systemic imbalances?

How will you fight for the children?

Marla Kilfoyle and Melissa Tomlinson 
Badass Teachers Association

Public schools’ new public enemy: Inside a Netflix billionaire’s charter crusade - Salon.com

Public schools’ new public enemy: Inside a Netflix billionaire’s charter crusade - Salon.com:

Public schools’ new public enemy: Inside a Netflix billionaire’s charter crusade

Mogul Reed Hastings is ponying up $100 million in the hopes of ultimately replacing teachers with computers

 This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

When pondering the best way to transform and improve America’s K-12 public schools, do the ideas that first come to mind include: ditching locally elected school boards? Placing grade-school kids in overcrowded computer labs for hours at a time with unproven software and inexperienced teachers? Telling children from poor homes that test scores are the only results that matter? Or putting high-tech entrepreneurs who have financial stakes in the digital tools being road-tested on students on the private boards running those schools?

These are all cornerstones of the charter school movement that has grown out of Silicon Valley, supported by Microsoft’s Bill Gates, who has spent more than $400 million to promote technology-driven charter schools. And they’re being championed by Netflix founder-CEO Reed Hastings, who just launched a $100 million foundation where he is likely to become one of America’s highest-profile figures pushing this anti-democratic, tech-centric, corporate-inspired vision to recast America’s public schools.

“The underlying mentality that Hastings shares with Gates is that computers revolutionized commerce, revolutionized business, revolutionized manufacturing, so now why can’t computers revolutionize education,” said Anthony Cody, a retired high school teacher from Oakland, Calif. and critic of billionaire-led charter schools and their high-tech takeover of the learning process. “In their minds, it is inevitable that it will. The only question is what will be the delivery method.”

The charter school movement emerged in the 1990s as a way to innovate in individual public schools. But over the last decade the movement has evolved into a franchise-dominated industry, where a tight circle of interrelated for-profit and non-profit players are doing everything they can to privatize public education. Across the country, super wealthy foundations—including the Walmart-backed Walton Family Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—have put more than $1 billion into creating 6,700 charter schools. Besides Gates, there may be no figure more widely identified with the computers-will-fix-everything mindset than Northern California’s Hastings.

Hastings, 55, has been pushing charters for two decades. Last winter, he made national news when he gave the keynote address to the California Charter Schools Association’s (CCSA) convention and said locally elected school boards were hurting schools and should be replaced by privately run boards, like those at charters. Hastings, an ex-president of the California State Board of Education appointed by a Democratic governor, noted that the public might not buy this anti-democratic conclusion, but encouraged his movement players to look beyond the fact that “school boards have been an iconic part of America for 200 years.”

“The most important thing is that they [charters] constantly get better every year… Public schools’ new public enemy: Inside a Netflix billionaire’s charter crusade - Salon.com:

Donald Trump is wrong about Common Core — but he’s not the only candidate who is - The Washington Post

Donald Trump is wrong about Common Core — but he’s not the only candidate who is - The Washington Post:

Donald Trump is wrong about Common Core — but he’s not the only candidate who is

From left, Republican presidential candidates Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and John Kasich during a presidential primary debate at Fox Theatre on March 3 in Detroit. (Paul Sancya/AP)

 Donald Trump is wrong about the Common Core State Standards — but, to be fair, he’s not the only candidate running for president who is.

Repeatedly — in debates and speeches — the Republican presidential candidate has said that “we are going into get rid of Common Core,” sometimes in response to questions about how he is going to cut federal spending. During Thursday’s GOP debate, he linked that Core statement with one about eliminating the U.S. Education Department as a cost-cutting measure, and in a recent Trump ad, he said:

“I’m a tremendous believer in education. But education has to be at a local level. We cannot have the bureaucrats in Washington telling you how to manage your child’s education. So Common Core is a total disaster. We can’t let it continue. We are rated 28th in the world, the United States. Think of it, 28th in the world. And frankly, we spend far more per pupil than any other country in the world. By far. It’s not even a close second.”

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R), another candidate, has said repeatedly that he, as president, would get rid of Common Core. To be exact, he said:

“If I’m elected president, I will direct the U.S. Department of Education — which should be abolished — I will direct the Department of Education that Common Core ends today. Instead, I will restore power back to the states and to the local governments and ultimately back to the parents — those closest to our kids who have direct responsibility for raising our children, 

Donald Trump is wrong about Common Core — but he’s not the only candidate who is - The Washington Post:

What John Kasich got wrong about Detroit’s troubled schools in last night’s debate - The Washington Post

What John Kasich got wrong about Detroit’s troubled schools in last night’s debate - The Washington Post:
What John Kasich got wrong about Detroit’s troubled schools in last night’s debate

 Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate in Detroit did not only feature vulgar conversation about genitalia. It also featured the first really substantive question about K-12 education in the 11 GOP debates to date.

And that was apt given the setting. Detroit’s public schools are broken. They are $3.5 billion in debt and could run out of cash before the end of the school year, according to the Detroit Free Press. Children go to class in buildings with rats, roaches and crumbling ceilings. In some schools there are mushrooms growing out of the walls.

[Rats, roaches, mold: Poor conditions lead to teacher sickout]

Fox News anchor and debate moderator Megyn Kelly put the question to Ohio Gov. John Kasich: “If the federal government bailed out the auto industry here in Detroit, should it also bail out the Detroit schools?”

Kasich never directly answered Kelly’s question. He suggested that Detroit schools are on the right track to improvement in part because they are under mayoral control.

“Well, look, first of all, I think the mayor now is controlling the schools,” Kasich said. “This is not much different than what happened in Cleveland, Ohio, where the African American Democrat mayor, the union and business leaders came to see me and said, ‘Would you help us to pass legislation to really create a CEO environment so that we can take control of the schools?’ ”

“It worked beautifully,” Kasich said. “Cleveland’s coming back. The Cleveland schools are coming back because of a major overhaul.” He went on to discuss the importance of vouchers and charter schools and vocational education, and he said that adults need to “put politics aside” and fight in their communities for stronger schools.

Leaving aside the question of whether mayoral control would really be enough to fix Detroit’s problems, there is this fact: Detroit is not under mayoral control. The city’s schools have been under state-appointed emergency manager for years.

As unsexy as it might sound, governance of the public schools has been a matter of heated debate in Detroit. Teachers — who have staged massive What John Kasich got wrong about Detroit’s troubled schools in last night’s debate - The Washington Post:

STOP Malloy/Wyman from punishing students, parents, teachers and taxpayers on testing opt out! - Wait What?

STOP Malloy/Wyman from punishing students, parents, teachers and taxpayers on testing opt out! - Wait What?:

STOP Malloy/Wyman from punishing students, parents, teachers and taxpayers on testing opt out!

A bill that would – at least partially – prohibit the Malloy administration from punishing students, parents, teachers and taxpayers when parents utilize their unalienable right to opt their children out of the unfair, inappropriate and discriminatory Common Core SBAC) testing scheme will be coming up for a public hearing before the Legislature’s Education Committee on MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2016.

House Bill 5555 would prevent the Malloy administration from using SBAC and NEW SAT participation rates as part of the state’s absurd School Accountability System.

• People who believe in public education;

• People who believe that our schools are spending too much time on standardized testing and test prep;

• People who believe our children need and deserve a comprehensive education and not one driven by testing;

• People who believe that teaching should be done by teaches and not for-profit software companies

• People who believe in a parent’s right to make decisions for what is best for their child;

Should submit testimony, letters or comments about these issues to the Education Committee by Monday Morning – March 7, 2016. Emails should be sent toEDtestimony@cga.ct.gov and clearly state that they are related to House Bill 5555

For those who can attend the public hearing, it will take place in Room 2C of the Legislative Office Building.  The hearing actually starts at 11 AM but speakers will be STOP Malloy/Wyman from punishing students, parents, teachers and taxpayers on testing opt out! - Wait What?:

Inglewood schools lagging under state takeover, auditor says | 89.3 KPCC

Inglewood schools lagging under state takeover, auditor says | 89.3 KPCC:
Inglewood schools lagging under state takeover, auditor says

The Inglewood Unified School District's finances and operations have not significantly improved under the administration of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, officials with the California State Auditor's office told residents at a public hearing Thursday night.

“Deficit spending has continued in the three years following the state take over and the savings called for in the district’s fiscal recovery plan have not materialized,” said Deputy State Auditor Ben Belnap.

The 11,000-student school district was on the verge of bankruptcy in July, 2012, when school board members requested a $55 million bailout loan from the state. In accepting the loan, the board gave up its authority and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson appointed a state administrator to run the school district.

But there's been growing criticism of Torlakson’s oversight of Inglewood Unified, one of only nine school districts in the state that has requested a state bailout loan.

The audit found that expenditures increased from $115.3 million to $125.5 million between fiscal years 2012-13 and 2014-15. Getting the budget into the black is critical, the auditor said, because it’s a requirement for a return of local control and it’s the only way the school district will be able to repay the $29 million dollars it has spent from the loan it requested.

“The state has done a disservice, at this time, to this district,” Johnny Young, a former Inglewood Unified school board member, said as he left the hearing in the Inglewood High School auditorium.

State Asseblywoman Autumn Burke said recent reports of dilapidated and dangerous facilities should prompt Torlakson’s office to move Inglewood to the top of his priority list.

“I know you guys have a lot of schools but this one is incredibly important, this community is incredibly important, and it's going through an incredible time of change," Burke said. "It is inexcusable to allow our children to suffer the way they have."

The state auditor recommended the state administrator to come up with annual goals for the school district to address the improvements outlined by the district's fiscal crisis management team. The auditor also recommended the state administrator communicate what it’s going to take for the school district to return to local control and the progress toward that goal.

The audit was released last November but it was the first time officials spoke about it publicly in Inglewood. The hearing was organized by State Assemblyman Mike Inglewood schools lagging under state takeover, auditor says | 89.3 KPCC:

Exposing the Effects of Child Poverty Hidden in Plain Sight | janresseger

Exposing the Effects of Child Poverty Hidden in Plain Sight | janresseger:

Exposing the Effects of Child Poverty Hidden in Plain Sight

 While there is widespread agreement that family poverty is highly correlated with low achievement at school, it is a difficult issue to discuss because people immediately become defensive.  “Don’t tell me poor kids can’t learn,” people say.  Many children living in poor families do thrive at school. But life circumstances present challenges that too often interfere.  Here is long-time education researcher David Berliner explaining that, in the aggregate,poverty lowers school attainment:  “For reasons that are hard to fathom, too many people believe that in education the exceptions are the rule… These stories of triumph by individuals who were born poor, or success by educators who changed the lives of their students, are widely believed narratives…  But in fact, these are simply myths that help us feel good to be American… But the general case is that poor people stay poor and that teachers and schools serving impoverished youth do not often succeed in changing the life chances for their students.”  There is much to read this week that elucidates the kind of crisis poverty imposes on poor families and explains how families’ circumstances affect children in school.

What would it be like to raise children while living in extreme poverty? In their new book$2.00 A Day, Kathryn Edin and Luke Shaefer follow some of the 1.5 million American households (including roughly 3 million children) living without any cash income—only food stamps. (This blog covered Edin and Shaefer’s book in January when it was published.)  Too often families in extreme poverty cannot find anywhere they can afford the rent:  “Every family whose story is told in this book has doubled up with kin or friends at some point, because their earnings haven’t been sufficient to maintain a place of their own. While living with relatives sometimes offers strength and uplift, it can also prove toxic for the most vulnerable in our society, ending in sexual, physical, or verbal abuse.  The trauma from this abuse is sometimes a precipitating factor in a family’s fall into $2-a-day poverty, or the calamity that keeps them in such a state for far too long.” (p. 73)

Edin and Shaefer report that parents discover that the jobs they find—and they do work—are Exposing the Effects of Child Poverty Hidden in Plain Sight | janresseger:

School and Classroom Cultures: Easy To Describe but Tough To Create and Sustain | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

School and Classroom Cultures: Easy To Describe but Tough To Create and Sustain | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice:

School and Classroom Cultures: Easy To Describe but Tough To Create and Sustain

Probably the most important—and the most difficult—job of an instructional leader is to change the prevailing culture of a school. The school’s culture dictates, in no uncertain terms, ‘the way we do things around here.’ A school’s culture has far more influence on life and learning in the schoolhouse than the president of the country, the state department of education, the superintendent, the school board, or even the principal, teachers, and parents can ever have. One cannot, of course, change a school culture alone. But one can provide forms of leadership that invite others to join as observers of the old, architects of the new. The effect must be to transform what we did last September into what we would like to do next September.

Roland Barth, “The Culture Builder,” Educational Leadership, 5( 8) May 2002, p. 6

We speak of classroom and school cultures glibly. Listen to both experts and practitioners describe creating and sustaining a positive school culture for learning as if building it were as easy as a paint-by-numbers picture (see here,here, and here).

Both principals and teachers are leaders who can and do create cultures, knowingly and unknowingly, with the aid of students. Consider that teachers create from scratch a culture for learning (or not learning) in their classrooms. If they are novices, newcomers bring a clean slate although student carry into classrooms expectations and attitudes about what classroom teaching and learning should be all about. Experienced teachers in a school have already created cultures that students have heard about from brothers and sisters and other students. In even the most dismal of “dropout factories” in big cities, there will be some teachers whose classroom cultures have created islands of learning in a failing school. When that teacher leaves the school, the island disappears.

In entering elementary and secondary school classrooms, say after two months of the academic year have gone by, students and astute observers can see and feel immediately that there is “the way we do things around here.” Even if students cannot put into words what they feel about a particular teacher’s classroom, they surely sense the unwritten rules when they move from their kindergarten teacher to the first grade classroom across the hall. So do secondary school students as School and Classroom Cultures: Easy To Describe but Tough To Create and Sustain | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice: