Spotlight on Parent Power Indianapolis: Aleesia Johnson and Teach for America | Parents Across America

Spotlight on Parent Power Indianapolis: Aleesia Johnson and Teach for America | Parents Across America

Spotlight on Parent Power Indianapolis: Aleesia Johnson and Teach for America

From John Harris Loflin, a leader of Parents Across America’s Indianapolis affiliate, Parent Power Indianapolis: The hidden influence of Teach for America ideology on education in Indianapolis: A commentary on why Aleesia Johnson must not be Indianapolis Public Schools superintendent.

Parent Power Indianapolis has published a commentary about the negative ramifications to Indianapolis Public Schools if interim superintendent Aleesia Johnson becomes the school district’s leader.

They’ve connected the dots among Indianapolis’ Teach for America alumni (Indianapolis Public Schools interim leader Aleesia Johnson, the Mind Trust’s Brandon Brown, four of Hogsett’s Office of Education Innovation workers, and Enroll Indy’s Caitlin Hannon) who are close to reaching Teach for America’s goal of controlling public education in Indianapolis.

Read Parent Power Indianapolis’ commentary on why Aleesia Johnson must not be Indianapolis Public Schools superintendent: A Commentary: Why we don’t want Aleesia Johnson as IPS superintendent: Connecting the dots around TFA’s hidden influence on educational politics in Indianapolis.

Aleesia Johnson and other persons in important positions in Indianapolis’ education scene are Teach for America graduates. The analysis by Parent Power Indianapolis shows that the Teach for America program encourages participants to become involved in educational politics after just two years in the classroom. Programs like Teach for All and the Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) have spread Teach for America’s corporate reform/privatization ideology around the world. Parents need to know this.

Follow Parent Power Indianapolis on Facebook.

Spotlight on Parent Power Indianapolis: Aleesia Johnson and Teach for America | Parents Across America

Why Does California Want My Kids Glued to Their Computers? - LA Progressive

Why Does California Want My Kids Glued to Their Computers? - LA Progressive

Why Does California Want My Kids Glued to Their Computers?

Agreat conflict is tearing this country apart, bitterly pitting generations against each other. It’s not immigration or “Medicare for all.” It’s the fight over how much time kids can spend staring at screens.

Call it the Great Screen Time War of 2019.

And I thought I was winning the war on behalf of my three sons—until California intervened in favor of the screens.

To be a parent in 21st century America is to be whiplashed by contradictory advice. Give your children space to explore, but don’t let them out of your sight for a second—or some bystander will call the police. Teach them to mind their manners, but also train them to be “disruptors” who will shake up the world for the better. Make sure your children follow current events and participate in civic life, but shelter them from the media-dominating bigotry and vulgarity of President Trump.

As the state moves testing and homework online, parents are losing the battle against screen time.

But of all the double-edged directives aimed at parents, the one that most rankles me involves the internet and screens. To wit, I must keep my children away from screens to protect their health and their future; the World Health Organization just issued a highly publicized report covering screen time’s dangers, and the state of California recommends no more than 60 minutes of screen time after school. Yet, I am supposed to keep them online and in front of screens, where—also at the behest of the state—more and more of their academic work must be performed.

My wife and I have tried to square that circle with the Three Stooges, our three young sons, now CONTINUE READING: Why Does California Want My Kids Glued to Their Computers? - LA Progressive

LeBron James' I Promise School Receives $1M Grant from Dick's Sporting Goods

LeBron James' I Promise School Receives $1M Grant from Dick&'s Sporting Goods

LeBron James’ I Promise School Receives a $1 Million Boost from Dick’s Sporting Goods

The good news keeps coming for LeBron James’ groundbreaking I Promise School in his native Akron, Ohio. Following April reports that the school was already yielding incredible results in its first year, the NBA star surprised I Promise students by announcing that they’d be receiving a brand new gym, thanks to a $1 million grant from Dick Sporting Goods, as part of the Sports Matter program.

James made the announcement in the gym of his alma mater, St. Vincent-St. Mary High School, saying:

“To my kids, this is more than a gym. The Dick’s Sports Matter program is helping us provide even more opportunities. An opportunity to play and learn in a safe place that many don’t have access to. I can’t imagine where my friends and I would be if it weren’t for the coaches and teachers who cared about us and the opportunities we had.”

It’s a well-earned reward following significant academic improvement and achievement by I Promise, a public school founded in partnership with Akron Public Schools and the LeBron James Family Foundation. In its inaugural year, the school welcomed 240 of Akron Public School’s most at-risk 3^rd and 4^th graders, who began the 2018-19 school year in the bottom 25th percentile and were performing below grade level. Currently, 90 percent are “meeting or exceeding individual growth goals in reading CONTINUE READING: LeBron James' I Promise School Receives $1M Grant from Dick&'s Sporting Goods

To promote success in schools, focus on teacher well-being

To promote success in schools, focus on teacher well-being

To promote success in schools, focus on teacher well-being

Without question, teachers are central to student success. Anyone who has taught knows how rewarding it is to witness student learning. Teaching can also be one of the most stressful, demanding, and undersupported professions, leading to national teacher strikes, shortages, and high rates of turnover. In fact, research shows that 46% of teachers report high levels of daily stress, which affects their health, quality of life, and teaching performance, and costs U.S. schools billions of dollars each year. Although almost everyone understands the importance of student well-being and how teachers impact students, there is much less consideration for the well-being of teachers themselves. Even when teacher well-being is considered, it is often narrowly defined and something teachers are expected to “fix” on their own. In honor of National Teacher Day in the United States, we explore why a more holistic approach to teacher well-being is needed to optimize success in schools.

Teacher well-being is often narrowly characterized by what it is not. As one teacher shares in an all-too-common scenario, “The hours are long, the pay is poor, and the paperwork piles up quickly; it’s easy to lose sight of why I became a teacher in the first place.” Research consistently shows that teachers who are more stressed are less likely to form close relationships with students, which can negatively impact student achievement.

However, well-being is much more than the absence of illness or stress, or even feeling content; it is about teachers flourishing more holistically. In contrast to the previous teacher’s statement, well-being could manifest in the following ways, “I feel balanced and supported; I have freedom to use my creativity to help my students succeed; I have opportunities to learn and advance in my career; I am fairly compensated; I have a network of support to help me overcome challenges.” Narrowly defining well-being as the absence of stress or the presence of a positive mood leads to equally narrow CONTINUE READING: 

Florida Charter Schools | Dissident Voice

Florida Charter Schools | Dissident Voice

Florida Charter Schools
Obsolete Aim of Maximizing Profits as Fast As Possible Results in More Parasitism and Deeper Attacks on Public Schools and Public Interest

Under the veil of high ideals, nonprofit and for-profit charter schools across the nation have long been violating the public interest in a variety of ways.

One of the most destructive ways is the non-stop siphoning of unthinkable sums of public funds from public schools—schools that are often chronically-underfunded, over-tested, constantly-shamed, and increasingly militarized and surveilled.

This legalized theft usually takes the form of a large or full portion of state and federal per-pupil funds “following” a student to a deregulated charter school governed by non-elected individuals with many business connections. Incidentally, these “per-pupil” funds, contrary to what charter school supporters dogmatically repeat, do not actually “belong” to this or that student. This is a distorted and self-serving way to render a complex social issue like public school funding. It trivializes the deep social significance and nature of societal investments in social programs like education.

Oftentimes, however, additional fleecing of public schools and the public purse takes the form of private charter school operators also seizing different types of local funds approved and raised democratically by local residents for local public purposes. Not only do these residents usually have nothing to do with charter schools, they voluntarily and independently raise such funds for the specific purpose of improving locally-governed public schools they highly value. This public money is not raised to fund private entities like charter schools. The public is not interested in that. It is important to note here that the inability of charter schools to levy taxes is, in fact, one of the many ways that charter schools differ fundamentally from public schools.

Recently, Florida’s legislature passed an antisocial bill that would permit privately-operated charter schools to seize a significant portion of voter-approved local tax dollars designated specifically for improving public schools governed by locally-elected public officials. This means that when a community engages in a democratic and public vote to raise their own local CONTINUE READING: Florida Charter Schools | Dissident Voice

When our unions made these early endorsements, what did we get for it? – Fred Klonsky

When our unions made these early endorsements, what did we get for it? – Fred Klonsky

When our unions made these early endorsements, what did we get for it?

There was never any doubt that the teachers unions were going to endorse Obama to a second term in 2011.  But why the rush?

I asked that question as a delegate to the NEA Representative Assembly. The union demanded nothing in return. We got worse than nothing. We got more Arne Duncan.

“By endorsing Obama’s reelection without making his administration answer to their record on public education, the message would be sent that millions of NEA members approve of his Education Department’s policies, which are rapidly unraveling our public school systems at the seams. I do not think this message accurately portrays the sentiments I hear expressed each and every day,” wrote Romero Maratea, a CTA local president in an Ed Week article in 2011.

The early no-strings endorsement of Obama by the NEA went ahead as planned.

It was deja vu all over again when Hillary Clinton ran her disastrous campaign after being nominated by the Democrats in 2016.

It was pretty clear the fix was in. Hillary would receive the NEA’s early no-strings endorsement come hell or high water.

Leaked emails revealed how the NEA rank and file was being manipulated and lied to by union leadership in order to seal the deal on a Hillary endorsement over Bernie CONTINUE READING: When our unions made these early endorsements, what did we get for it? – Fred Klonsky

We Need Many “Grammars of Schooling” (Part 4) | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

We Need Many “Grammars of Schooling” (Part 4) | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

We Need Many “Grammars of Schooling” (Part 4)

In a recent conversation with an educational entrepreneur* about the power inherent in the organization of the age-graded school and its “grammar of schooling,” I was asked if I wanted to disrupt the “grammar of schooling.” I said I did not. I wanted–and he put it in words I wished I had used–many “grammars of schooling.”

What did I mean? There is not just one way to organize a school. Age-graded is simply a choice that policymakers made many decades ago. It is the “one best system” that has characterized U.S. schools since the late-19th century. There are other ways to organize schools.

One room schoolhouses  where children of mixed ages learn content and skills under the tutelage of a teacher. Ungraded schools where groups of mixed-age students learn at different paces the prescribed content or a curriculum jointly constructed by teachers and students. Cyber schools where students learn at home or at different sites are another way of organizing a school. And there are combinations of all of these. Each of these ways of operating schools contains a “grammar of schooling,” that is, a theory of learning and teaching, implicit and explicit rules to follow, and a organizational framework that shapes the social and individual behavior of both children and teachers.

Historically, then, many ways of organizing schools have existed. Thus, multiple “grammars of schooling” were in play. Not now.

But my critique of age-graded schools is not a preface for a call to eliminate all CONTINUE READING: We Need Many “Grammars of Schooling” (Part 4) | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice

“Your Blog Dropped Me”: Restoring Email Notifications for WordPress Blogs | deutsch29

“Your Blog Dropped Me”: Restoring Email Notifications for WordPress Blogs | deutsch29

“Your Blog Dropped Me”: Restoring Email Notifications for WordPress Blogs

I began following Diane Ravitch’s blog in 2014.

Several years ago, I stopped receiving email notifications of her posts, and I was able to restore the notifications by “unfollowing” and then immediately choosing again to “follow” her blog.

Then, in April 2018, the same issue happened: No more email notifications of her posts. I tried numerous times to “trip the switch” by unfollowing-following again, but to no avail.

I also checked to see if my email was somehow sending the notifications to my spam folder, but it was not.

Contacting WordPress only produced a circuitous non-resolution in which their personnel could not seem to understand that my unfollow-follow again attempts did not cause a loss of email notifications but was instead my effort to reset WordPress’ mysteriously and spontaneously ceasing to provide email notifications of Diane ‘s new postings.

I had somehow been “dropped” from receiving email notifications through no effort of my own.

As it happens, individuals following my blog have occasionally complained of being “dropped,” meaning their email notifications from my WordPress blog had ceased appearing in their email inboxes.

I do not know what occurs at WordPress to cause the site to suddenly block those following its blogs from receiving desired email notifications. However, today, I learned how to reset the notifications, and today, for the first time in over a year, I am again receiving email notifications from Diane Ravitch’s blog.

First of all, be sure that you are indeed following the WordPress blog in question. If you are, then click this link to WordPress subscription management; one of two things will happen: 1) The link will recognize your email address and show a CONTINUE READING: “Your Blog Dropped Me”: Restoring Email Notifications for WordPress Blogs | deutsch29

CTA and NEA Presidents Declare Racist Symbol Has No Place In Our Neighborhood Schools - Lily's Blackboard

CTA and NEA Presidents Declare Racist Symbol Has No Place In Our Neighborhood Schools - Lily's Blackboard

CTA and NEA Presidents Declare Racist Symbol Has No Place In Our Neighborhood Schools

Concerned educators are committed to working with the community to ensure all students have a safe and nurturing learning environment

CTA President Eric C. Heins and NEA President Lily Eskelsen García issued the following comments today regarding a recent photograph of Pamdale, California educators posing for a photograph holding a noose in a California school district:

“We are shocked and saddened at the deeply disturbing photo taken recently at a school in Palmdale. Such a picture, and its resulting hurt and division, has no place on any school campus or in our education communities. A noose is a painful and racist symbol of our history.

“The California Teachers Association and the National Education Association have a deep and long-standing commitment to human rights, social justice and equity. We work regularly with school districts and our local chapters to further these causes and are committed to working with the educators and parents of Palmdale on eradicating the institutional racism that leaves many students without access and opportunity; but also to the individual, implicit bias that blinds many people, including educators, to the harmful impact of their actions. As the school district’s investigation continues, we will continue to do all we can to ensure that our schools remain safe and caring environments for all students and staff.

“As educators, we are called on to model high standards for our students. This is an opportunity to reflect on the history of racism in our nation and what effect that has on who we aspire to be as a country. We must continue to talk deeply, intentionally and meaningfully about institutional racism and individual biases if we are to achieve the foundational and aspirational principles of equality and respect.”

###

The 325,000-member California Teachers Association is affiliated with the 3 million-member National Education Association.

CTA and NEA Presidents Declare Racist Symbol Has No Place In Our Neighborhood Schools - Lily's Blackboard

Principal and 4 Teachers on Administrative Leave After Photo Surfaces of Teachers Posing With Noose - https://www.theroot.com/photos-surface-of-teachers-at-a-california-school-laugh-1834671412 on @TheRoot

Only Five States’ Charter School Laws Rate "Mediocre” or Better

Only Five States’ Charter School Laws Rate "Mediocre” or Better

NEA Report: Only Five States’ Charter School Laws Rate “Mediocre” or Better

Even as evidence continues to mount that much of the charter school sector has been overrun by a host of problems, its supporters have become even more emphatic. They concede that, yes, a few “bad actors” have emerged, but otherwise it’s all systems go on continued expansion.

Privately-managed charter schools do not have to operate by the same rules as district schools and in many places do not have to be as transparent about how they spend public money. They are run by private boards who do not have to be accountable to the public.

While exposing the financial mismanagement, exclusionary enrollment procedures, and a less-than-stellar academic record is obviously important, singling out individual schools obscures the fact that the system itself is the issue – and that’s where top-to-bottom improvements have to be made.

A new NEA report card on state charter laws and statutes zeroes in on the weak regulation and lax oversight that enable for-profit organizations to open and manage charters in most states.

The report, titled “State Charter Laws: NEA Report Card,” concludes found that nearly every state (44 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico currently have charter schools) is failing to require adequate oversight over the charter school sector. Statutes in forty states received “F” grades. Five states that have laws requiring some oversight received “mediocre” ratings, with grades ranging from “D” to “C-“.

Maryland is the only state that received an “adequate” rating – a grade of “B-”.

“Charter schools were started by educators who dreamed of schools in which they would be free to innovate, unfettered by bureaucratic obstacles,” said NEA CONTINUE READING: Only Five States’ Charter School Laws Rate "Mediocre” or Better

Audio: LAUSD board special election candidate Q&A: Jackie Goldberg | 89.3 KPCC

Audio: LAUSD board special election candidate Q&A: Jackie Goldberg | 89.3 KPCC

LAUSD board special election candidate Q&A: Jackie Goldberg

On Tuesday, May 14, voters in northeast and southeast Los Angeles will elect a new representative to fill an open seat on the L.A. Unified School Board.

Jackie Goldberg, a longtime L.A. politician who has served on the LAUSD board, L.A. City Council and in the California Assembly, is running against Heather Repenning for this seat.

Listen to an interview segment with Goldberg as it aired on KPCC's Take Two on April 10, 2019. Here's more of KPCC/LAist's coverage of the LAUSD special election:

• Everything voters need to know about the LAUSD race
• Goldberg's full interview on LAist

Audio: LAUSD board special election candidate Q&A: Jackie Goldberg | 89.3 KPCC

Choosing Democracy: Make Smart Cuts- Not Dumb Cuts

Choosing Democracy: Make Smart Cuts- Not Dumb Cuts

Make Smart Cuts- Not Dumb Cuts

The president of the Sacramento City Unified School District school board, Jessie Ryan, called for a “ceasefire” following the recent strike by Sac City Unified educators, saying “together we can solve this fiscal crisis and unite to save our schools with smart solutions.”

The Sacramento City Teachers Association (SCTA) couldn’t agree more. We know a state takeover is entirely avoidable.But the district’s leadership hasn’t offered any realistic, “smart solutions.”

Sticking one’s head in the sand and unlawfully avoiding contractual obligations is not a solution. Neither is refusing to make necessary cuts to a bloated bureaucracy. The district needs to do better.

SCTA has proposed a comprehensive budget plan that boosts services to the district’s students. Our plan avoids a state takeover.

The district needs to honor its contracts and obey the law. Superintendent Jorge Aguilar and Board President Ryan’s refusal to honor the SCUSD’s contract with teachers resulted in the transfer of more than $11 million in taxpayer dollars to the for-profit health insurance giant Health Net.

Those funds should have been used to lower class sizes and increase the number of school nurses, psychologists and other support staff serving students – as outlined in contract signed 17 months ago. Aguilar and Ryan are about to repeat this same giveaway this year, with a loss to the district of as much as $16 million dollars.

Rather than keep their promises, Aguilar and Ryan have employed a divisive and unlawful strategy of declaring the contract null and void. Their backtracking precipitated the unfair labor practices strike on April 11 – as part of a larger effort to cover up their fiscal mismanagement –and may result in another strike on May 22.

In stark contrast, SCTA’s budget proposal keeps promises to students, fixes the budget fiasco AND eliminates the $34 million deficit.

First, it recognizes that SCUSD overfunds retiree health benefits by $8.5 million per year. The district budgets $25 million per year for retiree health, but expenses are only $16.5 million. Redirecting that $8.5 million over three years creates a savings of $25.5 million.

Second, it chops from the top. SCUSD can save a minimum $16 million per year by trimming the district’s bureaucratic bloat. This can be done through a combination of wage and staffing cuts at the Serna Center, the district’s front office.

Mr. Aguilar recently told the CBS Evening News that everything was on the table, including his own salary, which exceeds the governor of California’s paycheck by 58 percent. A 25 percent reduction in the pay of administrators who make over $125,000 would save $4.2 million that could be better spent in the classroom.

Since 2014, even as student enrollment has declined, the number of SCUSD administrators has surged from 166 to 274 – a 65 percent increase. Cutting staff and salaries achieves nearly $16 million in savings, with a net decrease of $48 million over three years.

Finally, the district must make targeted cuts of $5 million a year to its $75 million in contracts with outside consultants and service providers.

Additional ongoing cuts might include delaying unused vacation buyouts to administrators and capping legal fees to outside law firms. These alone could save over $4 million per year.

SCTA’s proposal conservatively reduces the district’s deficit by more than $60 million – nearly double the $34 million deficit. SCTA has reviewed these proposals with staff from the state’s Fiscal Crisis Management Assistance Team and have been assured by state authorities that these projections are both fiscally sound and viable.

Our proposal avoids a state takeover, protects vital programs and allows Aguilar and Ryan to keep their promises and obey the law.

Board president Ryan is correct. It’s time for smart solutions and responsible choices. We shouldn’t delay. Shirking obligations and pursuing unlawful actions will only lead to a state takeover.

David Fisher is a second grade teacher and the president of SCTA. Nikki Milevsky is a school psychologist and the SCTA’s first vice president. They can be reached at scta@saccityta.com.

Published in the Sacramento Bee

Choosing Democracy: Make Smart Cuts- Not Dumb Cuts

The promise of historic Brown v. Board school desegregation ruling is 'at grave risk,’ report says - The Washington Post

The promise of historic Brown v. Board school desegregation ruling is 'at grave risk,’ report says - The Washington Post

The promise of historic Brown v. Board school desegregation ruling is 'at grave risk,’ report says

Sixty-five years ago, the Supreme Court declared that segregated public schools were “inherently unequal” and unconstitutional, smashing a 1896 ruling that permitted “whites-only” and “Negroes-only” schools. The historic Brown vs. Board of Education decision ordered that public schools must be integrated, launching a decades-long struggle to end systemic inequality in American life.

After all these years, a new report says that while Brown vs. Board may have led to desegregation in other parts of American society, it has been unsuccessful in its stated mission: to integrate public schools.

Now, the promise of the ruling is “at grave risk,” according to the report titled “Harming our Common Future: America’s Segregated Schools 65 Years after Brown.”

[65 years after Supreme Court’s historic Brown v. Board of Education ruling: ‘We are right back where we started’]

The report was issued by the Civil Rights Project at UCLA and the Center for Education and Civil Rights at Pennsylvania State University, with input from researchers at Loyola Marymount University and North Carolina State University.

It says that while intense levels of segregation markedly decreased for black students after the 1954 court ruling, they have been rising again since Supreme Court decisions in the 1990s led to the end of hundreds of desegregation orders and plans across the country. It says:

The growth of racial and economic segregation that began then has now continued unchecked for nearly three decades, placing the promise of Brown at grave risk.

These trends matter for students, and for communities whose futures are determined by how the public schools prepare their students for a diverse future. Research shows that segregation has strong, negative relationships with the achievement, college success, long-term employment and income of students of color.

The report measures segregation based on how much exposure groups of students have to each other, regardless of the demographics of the districts in which they live. It says:

• Public school enrollment stands at nearly 50 million. White students are less than half of the student population: 48.4 percent in 2016. Latinos were 26.3 percent of the student population; blacks, 15.2 percent; Asians, 5.5 percent; multiracial, 3.6 percent; and American Indian, 1 percent.
• Despite the increase in diversity, segregation has intensified and expanded. Over the last three decades, black students have been increasingly segregated in intensely segregated schools (which are defined as being 90 to 100 percent nonwhite). By 2016, 40 percent of all black students were in schools with 90 percent or more students of color. New York, California, Illinois and Maryland are the four states in which a majority of black students attend intensely segregated schools.
• New York remains the most segregated state for African American students, with 65 percent of African American students in intensely segregated schools. California is the most segregated for Latinos, with 58 percent of those students attending intensely segregated schools. The typical Latino student attends a school in which only 15 percent of students are white.
• White students continue to attend schools in which nearly seven out of 10 classmates are also white, a much higher percentage than their overall share of the enrollment.
• In 2016, Latino students on average attended a school in which 55 percent of the students were Latino. The states in which they were most likely to attend intensely segregated schools were California, New Jersey, New York and Texas.
• In suburban schools in the country’s largest metropolitan areas, 47 percent of students were white in 2016, a 10 percentage point decline in a decade. About one-seventh of suburban students were black, and more than one-fourth were Latino. Considerable segregation exists within the suburbs, where African CONTINUE READING: The promise of historic Brown v. Board school desegregation ruling is 'at grave risk,’ report says - The Washington Post