Charter School Operators Charged with Interfering with, Coercing Employees Seeking to Form Union - California Teachers Association

Charter School Operators Charged with Interfering with, Coercing Employees Seeking to Form Union - California Teachers Association:

CHARTER SCHOOL OPERATORS CHARGED WITH INTERFERING WITH, COERCING EMPLOYEES SEEKING TO FORM UNION

(Photo above) Flanked by charter school teachers and other supporters, Assemblymember Roger Hernandez (at podium) talks to reporters during a recent Capitol news conference about his CTA-cosponsored measure to shore up the rights of charter school employees to organize.  The measure also aims to block charter school management companies to profit at students’ expense.

The employees of Los Angeles’ largest charter school management organization are charging the chain’s management with using coercion and trying to undermine the educators’ right to form a union.

Alliance Educators United, an affiliate of United Teachers Los Angeles – CTA’s largest local chapter – has filed charges against the actions with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), the state agency that oversees public sector collective bargaining.

">Alliance is hardly the only charter school operators charged with trying to quash employees’ seeking to unionize.  California Virtual Charter Academy (CAVA) educators have made similar charges in the face of coercive management tactics.

One of four CTA-cosponsored charter school bills, AB 787 by Assemblymember Roger Hernández (D-West Covina), takes the coercion issue on directly. It would help protect public school employees by bolstering their right to unionize like other public school employees and by ensuring that California taxpayer dollars stay in the classroom.

The bill also bars a for-profit company from running a charter school. That provision will prevent for-profit organizations from exploiting the charter school system by packing students in deep and educating them on the cheap.

To learn more about the situation in Los Angeles, read UTLA's news release.

Alliance Charter Educators Charge Alliance College Ready Public Schools with Interference and Coercion in Organizing Effort and Urge Fair and Neutral Process

Alliance Educators United are charging Alliance College Ready Public Schools, the largest charter management organization with 26 schools in Los Angeles, with using coercive tactics and interfering with educators’ right to form a union.

The first set of unfair practice charges were filed last night against Alliance College Ready Public Charter Schools with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), alleging that school officials are interfering with the educators’ right to form a union.

Educators formed Alliance Educators United, affiliated with United Teachers Los Angeles, on March 13, 2015, to have a real voice in advocating for both themselves and their students. The teachers, counselors and other professional staff are seeking genuine due process and “just cause” rights, and the right to bargain over conditions of employment. 

“When teachers announced we were organizing a union, Alliance publicly stated that we, the teachers would be able to decide for ourselves free of coercion.  But since that time they are trying to persuade teachers against unionization” said Elana Goldbaum, World History/AP European History teacher, Alliance Gertz-Ressler High School. 

Alliance is using the funds that could be used for student education to hire high-priced PR consultants, to create an anti-union website, and are sending a steady stream of anti-union letters and emails to educators, parents, and alumni. Even students have been exposed to the anti-union campaign through Alliance’s web site.  Alliance is using its supervisors, school email accounts and even using professional development time and /or meetings attached to professional development to run anti-union meetings while restricting the use of facilities and school email accounts for pro-union activists.  

“Former Alliance CEO Judy Burton recognized California state law in her memo dated March 13^th, stating that ‘all unions have a right of access at reasonable times, to any employee work area in order to communicate with School employees regarding organizing a union.’ Since then, Alliance principals have stopped union organizers from entering school property, at reasonable times, on several occasions. This is a violation of EERA 3543.1(b). This is just one example that shows that the Alliance needs to agree to a fair and neutral process, in which the employer does not coerce and /or interfere, in the educators’  deciding whether or not to unionize” says Sam Taylor, History teacher, Alliance College-Ready Middle Academy #7.
 

Timeline of Alliance Anti-Union Activity:

Friday March 13^th – Almost 70 teachers at Alliance announce that they want to form a union at their schools. Alliance Chief Executive Dan Katzir told the Los Angeles Times that "We acknowledge the rights of our teachers to undertake this effort. We also recognize that our teachers are under no obligation to participate."^[1]

Judy Burton, former Alliance CEO and Dan Katzir send their first communication to staff regarding union activity stating, “To be clear, we do not endorse or denounce any particular union or unions generally.  Regardless, we will support any decision by employees to join or not join a union.”

Monday, March 16^th – Alliance sends a letter to teachers under the guise of facts about organizing. It says that teachers have a right to join a union free from coercion. The letter, sent to every teacher from their supervisor, then attacks unionization and unions.

Wednesday, March 18^th- Alliance, despite legal right to have union meetings on non-work time tells teachers and union organizers that they have no right to meet on school property.  

Friday March 20^th – Alliance purchases a domain that will house their anti-union website.^[2]

Friday March 20^th—Alliance distributes another letter to certificated staff under the guise of more facts about UTLA and the union.  The letter expands on the March 16th the attack on unionization, unions and UTLA. 

Monday March 23^rd—Dan Katzir sends an email to all staff encouraging staff to “give me a fair opportunity to prove that commitment to you—in not just words, but action—before you make any decisions on the unionization question.”

Monday March 23^rd – Alliance management sends a letter to parents attacking the teacher’s decision to form a union signed by Dan Katzir and former CEO Judy Burton. ^[3]

Wednesday, March 25^th- Alliance illegally blocks email newsletter to Alliance educators from Alliance Educators United. 

Thursday, March 26^th- Alliance, despite legal right to have union meetings on non-work time tells teachers and union organizers that they have no right to meet on school property.

Thursday March 26^th – Alliance website attacking the union goes online. ^[4]

Thursday March 26^th—Alliance sends a memo to all certificated staff outlining the benefits Alliance offers its teachers and stating “We respectfully disagree with the assertion that unionization with UTLA would help advance educational opportunities with our students.”

Friday, March 27^th- Alliance does an automated phone call to parents and families at one or more schools criticizing the unionization effort of educators. 
                                                                        ###

---

[1] http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-charters-union-20150314-story.html

[2] Follow https://www.whois.net/ - search ouralliancecommunity.com – registration date is 20-March-2015

[3]https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/alliancecommunity/pages/33/attachments/original/1427349218/Letter_to_Parents_English.pdf?1427349218

[4] http://www.ouralliancecommunity.com/

Enron Billionaire Arnold Has A Problem with Librarians' Pensions

Enron Billionaire Arnold Has A Problem with Librarians' Pensions

Former Enron trader and hedge fund billionaire John Arnold is launching a multimillion dollar national PR campaign attacking the hard-earned pensions of public sector workers. Arnold has already quietly poured tens of millions of dollars into his efforts to persuade politicians to reduce middle class retirement security and now it looks like he may really just be getting started

BATs, TNTs, and Others, Oh My |

BATs, TNTs, and Others, Oh My |:

BATs, TNTs, and Others, Oh My

 One of the most powerful benefits of blogging, in my opinion, is that I am able to connect with people from all over the country, who may have different backgrounds, but who share in the common mission to improve the field of education. I am honored to join a growing community of concerned citizens, parents, teachers, principals, scholars, and the like, in advocating for better education for all.

That being said, there are two grassroots organizations, in particular, that deserve recognition for their efforts in this area. They have also compelled me to fully endorse their movements—the Badass Teachers Association (BATs) and the TNT: Teaching Not Testing—A New Narrative for Education (Las Cruces, as based on my recent visit – see prior posts here and here).

The BATs, founded by Fordham Professor, Mark Naison, and long-time educator and activist, Priscilla Sanstead, is a grassroots organization made up of more than 50,000 educators, parents, and concerned citizens. Dr. Naison first described the group as a group “…for every teacher who refuses to be blamed for the failure of our society to erase poverty and inequality, and refuses to accept assessments, tests and evaluations imposed by those who have contempt for real teaching and learning.” The group has held strong to that original mission has since grown into a force with which to be reckoned. They organize and support various education rallies, meet with public officials and policymakers, and fight to have their voices heard.

If you haven’t already, I encourage you to check out the BATs and get involved. Here are some helpful links: here is the BAT Website, here is the BAT Facebook Group, and here are the BATs on Twitter: @BadassTeachersA.

The TNT: Teaching, Not Testing–A New Narrative for Education (Las Cruces), is another organization that I hope you will check out and also support. TNT is an action-oriented group made up of parents, educators, and community members who are interested in countering the current high-stakes testing reform movement. Linda, a TNT member said, “We like to make stuff happen. Talk is good, but action is necessary. We’ve got some serious strategies planned to counter this reform movement, both statewide and locally. We’re definitely one to watch, and would like to share our trials and victories with any other group fighting this same good fight.”

Otherwise, she described the group as: “…a group of concerned parents, students, teachers, and administrators who seek to offer a new narrative for education. We want to have a voice in bringing the high-stakes testing movement to an end. Teachers and students are the ones who suffer the most. We will have testimonial videos in the near future from students and retired teachers sharing their personal experiences about high-stakes testing. Current teachers and administrators live in fear of reprisal since BATs, TNTs, and Others, Oh My |:

Midnight in the Opt Out Movement: The Hanging Tree – Testing Games – Part 5 | Welcome to the Testing Games

Midnight in the Opt Out Movement: The Hanging Tree – Testing Games – Part 5 | Welcome to the Testing Games:

Midnight in the Opt Out Movement: The Hanging Tree – Testing Games – Part 5

THE PROPOSAL

“Are you, are you, coming to the tree?”

Chilling. These words, from Jennifer Lawrence’s rebel ballad in The Hunger Games, have burned themselves deeply into this school teacher’s psyche. But why?

You may remember the scene: While running from the Capitol forces, Lawrence’s character, Katniss, stops and sits alongside a river. She sings these lyrics among the mockingjays, harmonizing her voice to the whistle of the birds. The song is glorious. The message is bone chilling.

Watch and listen here:

What does the song represent? And, why oh why, does this song roll, over and over, in my mind, as I walk up and down the aisles of my classroom, watching my students dissolve into their exam booklets, during the long hours as I administer the required state tests? Why does this melody bring such a sense of sadness and hope, all at once?

In The Testing Games that we call ‘American Public Education’, what is our hanging tree?

CARVING INITIALS

“Are you, are you? Coming to the tree?”

Many have attempted to decipher the meaning of this question in the ballad. One Huff Post contributing writer, Julie Wherry, describes: “This is the singer beckoning the audience to return not necessarily to a physical place, but rather a state of mind and remembrance of a purpose (to be free) and of who the “real enemy” is.”

Now, that description makes sense to me. The ballad is a beckoning: a call to return to a state of mind, the hanging tree. So, when Katniss repeats, “Are you, are you, coming to the tree,” she is asking, ‘Are you willing to stand up and fight with me, no matter the cost? Are you willing to be brave?’

Are you coming to the tree? I am.

In fact, I would say, I have gone as far as taking out a pocket knife and engraving my name, conspicuously, on the trunk of that tree. The life I have been living, lately, certainly feels like the life of one running to her hanging tree. Let me explain.

I am a public school teacher in Florida. There are a few things you can’t say here, by Governor decree. Climate Change is one.

See, I said it. I am a rebel. Carve that into my tree.

Another phrase highly discouraged happens to involve the same initials – CC. No not Climate Change, but it is something just as controversial these days:  Common Core. See. I did it again.  Saying those two words in Florida equal a big ‘no no’. Our state leaders have, in fact, in an act of all great deception, I mean wisdom, re-branded those two words. Now, we educators are to use the phrase: Florida Standards.

Works for me – I just call it the F word. You can carve that into my tree, too.

Honestly, though, those words are not my fear. The initials I have carved into my hanging Midnight in the Opt Out Movement: The Hanging Tree – Testing Games – Part 5 | Welcome to the Testing Games:

A Letter to Non-Union Teachers in Wisconsin | Young Teachers Collective

A Letter to Non-Union Teachers in Wisconsin | Young Teachers Collective:

A Letter to Non-Union Teachers in Wisconsin

 Dear Non-Union Teachers in Wisconsin,

Let me start by introducing myself. I’m Hallie, a 27-year old, fifth year teacher in South Milwaukee, WI. I am certified to teach math, special education, and alternative education.  I currently teach in a unique program that is dedicated to meeting the social/emotional needs of students who have been disengaged in school in order to make progress with academic goals.  My classroom experience allows me to utilize and continue to develop my professional training for students with intensive needs.  Like many of you, I love the work that I do, but I am also very concerned about the world of education outside of my classroom.

I began teaching in 2010 which, coincidentally, is when sh*t hit the fan for public workers/educators in Wisconsin. Our governor (like so many other politicians in the United States) was able to pass Act 10, a law that stifled the voices of teachers and advocates for public education through the elimination of collective bargaining rights. This was a confusing time for me. I had just started teaching and was excited about the work I was doing. But outside of school, my family, friends, neighbors, and media expressed that they felt unions were to blame for the ‘failure’ of our public schools.  Their thoughts did not match with what I was learning about public schools through my direct experience.

At work, I was inspired by the intelligent, dedicated, and hardworking staff who quickly sprung into action to inform others about the potentially disastrous effects of Act 10.  I wanted to learn more from them. To me, these were realeducators – down to fight the battle to bring professionalism back to teaching, at the front lines to advocate for what is best for students, all with a deep understanding of social justice and the many different challenges our students face in their everyday lives. The teachers were part of their professional organization, a.k.a. the union. Among them, I was so proud to be a teacher! This feeling was in direct contrast to how I felt outside the classroom walls. I never wanted to share what my profession was with others.  I was too worried I’d hear the word, “mooch,” “union thug,” “freeloader,” or become defensive and get into a hate-filled political battle. I still have a hard time understanding how the views were so far apart and how insensitive people were to me. I was a new teacher.

I was disheartened when I learned that there were people within the profession who also held negative beliefs or spoke inaccurately about teachers and unionism.  I have had countless conversations with non-members who say that they will not join the union. Frankly, the reasons and rationale I have heard really scare me. If teachers don’t understand what’s going on in education, how can we expect parents, community members, or even administrators to understand?  How can we expect more support and resources for our students and schools?  Can any of us alone accomplish these large tasks?

I hear four very common responses to why people choose not to be a part of their professional organization:

1. Due to Act 10, there is no longer a union in our district (I know teachers in many districts!)
2. I don’t know why we have a union – it’s the 21st century
3. I have a good administrator, so I’ll be fine
4. I can’t afford it.

You say, “my school doesn’t have a union.” Who do you think the union is? Some outside agency or outside group of people not involved in education? The union is YOU. The definition of a union is: “an organization of workers formed to protect the rights and interests of its members” and “an act of joining two or more things together.” This means, as a A Letter to Non-Union Teachers in Wisconsin | Young Teachers Collective:

Charter schools and “churn and burn”: How they’re trying to hold on to teachers by making them happier

Charter schools and “churn and burn”: How they’re trying to hold on to teachers by making them happier:

Charter Schools’ Latest Innovation: Keeping Teachers Happy

Eighty- and 90-hour work weeks are all too familiar to some charter school teachers.

 NEW ORLEANS—One Wednesday afternoon last fall, teachers at Success Preparatory Academy gathered for a professional-development session on an unlikely subject: their grocery lists.

Principal and co-founder Niloy Gangopadhyay had enlisted a nutritionist to talk about healthy eating. On the agenda: healthy, easy-to-make dishes; coping mechanisms for work stress, like going for a walk instead of opening a bottle of wine; and how to shop for protein- and fiber-rich foods, like Louisiana crawfish or flame-grilled meatless burgers. The information was designed to send two important messages to the twenty- and thirtysomething teachers, many of whom work more than 60 hours a week: Take care of yourself. And we want you to stay.

As the charter school movement comes of age, school leaders are realizing that good teachers aren’t widgets that can easily be replaced.

As charter schools have proliferated New Orleans and the country, many schools, including Success Prep, have largely relied on young, inexperienced teachers who tend to leave the classroom sooner than their peers at traditional public schools—an approach to hiring sometimes described as “churn and burn.” Charter supporters like Teach for America founder Wendy Kopp have even insisted that strong schools with an emphasis on good training can survive the constant loss of teachers.

But as the charter school movement comes of age, school leaders are realizing that stability and consistency matter, and that good teachers aren’t widgets that can easily be replaced. As a result, schools are offering new perks designed to build sustainable staffs, like retirement plans, on-site childcare, and nutrition advice. They face an uphill battle, however, in countering the deeply ingrained perception that many charter jobs are high-velocity detours for young people on the way to something else. In part, they’re hoping to rebrand charter-school teaching as a viable long-term career option with the job security we associate with traditional public schools—at least up to a point.

While these changes can’t match the pensions, union protections, and tenure provisions teachers have at many traditional schools, they mark a significant shift for charters. Long-term teacher retention wasn’t a priority at Success Prep when the school opened in 2009, part of a radical reconstruction of the city’s long-troubled school system after Hurricane Katrina that involved opening dozens of new charter schools. The plan was to “constantly replace teachers with new teachers,” says Gangopadhyay, 35, while focusing on providing the staff with strong curricular professional development. Most of the founding teachers had just a couple years of experience in the classroom. (Although three had more than 10 years of experience teaching.) The average age was 29. First-year teachers at Success Prep make $44,295.

Because of the demanding nature of the job, departures were expected. Most teachers, Gangopadhyay then believed, had “a shelf life” at his school.

Throughout the charter sector, that’s largely been true. At the end of the 2008-2009 school year, almost a quarter of charter school teachers left their schools or the profession, compared to 15.5 percent in traditional public schools, according to asurvey by the National Center for Education Statistics.

The transiency can be attributed to a few main causes: At urban charters like Success, which frequently serve mostly low-income, underprepared students of color, teachers are expected to work considerably longer hours than is typical—sometimes as much as 80 or 90 hours a week. Such charters, often referred to as “no excuses” schools, rely heavily on programs like Teach for America, which import young teachers for two-year commitments. And charter school teachers are far less likelyto belong to unions, and have less job security as a result. While charter school leaders don’t necessarily plan on high turnover, it might be “a necessary byproduct” of an intense, results-driven approach, says Andy Rotherham, a co-founder of Bellwether Education, a nonprofit consulting organization that works with charter schools.

At Success Prep, teacher attrition has worsened over the years. In 2012 the school lost just three out of 24 teachers, but the following year, six more departed. As a result, all but one of the eighth-grade teachers were new last fall. The instability led to student misbehavior and classroom management problems early on in the school year according to John Gonzalez, a first-year eighth-grade math teacher. Students didn’t have relationships with most of their teachers, which made enforcing strict rules—already tough to sell to the young teens—even more difficult.

Gangopadhyay admits that Success Prep hired more new teachers than the school’s teacher-coaching staff could handle this year. Success Prep has struggled, he said, to train so many novice teachers while also recruiting virtually year-round to fill next year’s expected vacancies. Ten teachers—more than 20 percent of the school’sCharter schools and “churn and burn”: How they’re trying to hold on to teachers by making them happier:

SES IS A MESS: California Mulls NCLB Tutoring Waiver - Politics K-12 - Education Week

California Mulls NCLB Tutoring Waiver - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

California Mulls NCLB Tutoring Waiver

 California may be one of just eight states without a statewide waiver from provision of the No Child Left Behind Act. But districts could get relief from one of the most onerous pieces of the NCLB law anyway, if the feds give the Golden State the green light on what may be its next ask: allowing California districts to offer their own tutoring services, should they so choose.

If the state decides to officially make the request, which seems likely since it's on the agenda for the state board meeting next month, districts would be allowed to offer tutoring to their own students. That means they would have more control over some $400 million in federal Title I money that right now is directed to private tutors who haven't been very effective, at least according to the state board.

There's precedent for this type of move. Chicago Public Schools got a similar waiver when now-U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was the superintendent. And districts in waiverless North Dakota have similar leeway. But the entire state of California is obviously much larger than either of them.

California has already gotten some of the same benefits of waiver states, such as the ability to essentially "pause" accountability by using Common Core State Standards field tests with all students during the 2014-15 school year, without having to clear the hurdles required of waiver states, such as tying teacher evaluation to test scores.

And if California did get permission to do its own tutoring, it would essentially shed yet another irksome aspect of NCLB, without having to jump through the Obama administration's waiver hoops. California Mulls NCLB Tutoring Waiver - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

SES IS A MESS: Impacts of Title I Supplemental Educational Services on Student Achievement http://bit.ly/1ijuvGD

solidaridad: LAUSD District 5: Money, education and the school board race! On KPFK's Politics or Pedagogy? with John Cromshow

solidaridad: LAUSD District 5: Money, education and the school board race! On KPFK's Politics or Pedagogy? with John Cromshow:

LAUSD District 5: Money, education and the school board race! On KPFK's Politics or Pedagogy? with John Cromshow

Featuring an analysis of education, policy and practice affecting our public schools.

KPFK 90.7 FM
KPFK's Politics or Pedagogy? with John Cromshow

Tuesday, April 28
7:00 PM
Call in number: (818) 985-5735

TOPIC:
Money, education and the school board race. Case in point, LAUSD District 5. It takes money to run a political campaign - lots of it - even for something as basic to education as a school board race.

GUESTS — PRERECORDED:
Bennett Kayser (LAUSD School Board), 10-minute Q & A
Scott Folsom (4LAKIDS), Money, the School Board Race and more
Roger Wagner, Ph.D. (Servant Leadership)

GUESTS — IN-STUDIO:
Andrew Thomas, Ph.D. (District 5 candidate in the 2015 Primary)

PANELISTS:
Lisa Karahalios (LAUSD Teacher)
Plus a Kayser Campaign Staffer

Both Refugio "Ref" Rodriguez's and the Honorable Bennett Kayser's campaigns were invited but only the Kayser campaign agree to appear as requested below.

TO: Campaign Managers, LAUSD School Board, District 5
FROM: John Cromshow, KPFK, Politics or pedagogy?
RE: INVITATION Candidates Forum Participation
DATE: Tuesday, April 21, 2015

To confirm our conversation regarding the Candidates' On-Air Forum:

1. Each candidate has been invited to participate in an individual pre-recorded interview.
2. John Cromshow, host of Politics or pedagogy? on KPFK will conduct each interview.
3. Each candidate will be asked to respond to the same questions.
4. Pre-recorded interview answers (10 minutes total) will be a central part of the forum.
5. Invited on-air panelists - one teacher-supporter and one campaign-staffer for each candidate.
6. Panelists will discuss the School Board race and answer listener calls.
7. Program will air on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 from 7:00-8:00 p.m.
8. Candidate(s) accepting the invitation, as outlined above, will be represented in the program.

Call in number: (818) 985-5735solidaridad: LAUSD District 5: Money, education and the school board race! On KPFK's Politics or Pedagogy? with John Cromshow:

Why calling school reform ‘corporate reform’ is an insult to corporate reform - The Washington Post

Why calling school reform ‘corporate reform’ is an insult to corporate reform - The Washington Post:

Why calling school reform ‘corporate reform’ is an insult to corporate reform

 School reform in the age of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top has for years been referred to by critics as “corporate reform.” Why? Because many school reformers seek to privatize the public education system, and they want the public education system to be operated like a business, even though it is a civic institution not designed to function within a business model. This post takes an unconventional view of the labeling of today’s school reform as “corporate reform,” arguing that “no leading company” would do some of the questionable things being done to public schools in the name of reform.

This post was written by  William Doyle, who was just selected as a 2015-2016 Fulbright Scholar to study global education best practices. He is the co-author of civil rights icon James Meredith’s 2012 memoir, “A Mission from God: A Memoir and Challenge for America,” and he was recently named to the Fulbright Scholars Program Specialist roster for 2013-2018. Previously he managed budgets totaling over $200 million for public U.S. media companies,  including HBO.

By William Doyle

It is a mistake to refer to failing education reforms as “corporate reform.”

No leading company would place the entire foundation of its business on inaccurate, unreliable, system-distorting and often “bad” data like multiple-choice standardized tests.

No leading company would roll out a multi-billion-dollar national venture (like Common Core) nationally without extensive field-and-market testing first.

And while much education policy is currently focused on rating, shaming, stressing and punishing teachers, schools and even students based on alleged “performance” on standardized test “data,” according to an article in the April 21, 2015, Wall Street Journal (“The Trouble With Grading Employees“), a number of leading companies including Microsoft, Adobe Systems and Gap, Inc., are realizing that “performance ratings” are counterproductive, are abolishing them, and achieving better results.

The article reports that the companies “abolished such [performance] ratings after leaders decided they deterred collaboration and stoked staffers’ anxieties,” and quoted David Rock, the director of the NeuroLeadership Institute, as saying that ratings conjure a “threat response” in workers, or “a sensation of danger” that can last for months if they didn’t get the rating they expected.

The article reports that “companies that have gotten rid of ratings say their employees feel better about their jobs, and actually listen to managers’ feedback instead of obsessing over a number.”

Since late 2013, when Microsoft stopped rating and ranking employees because the practice “discouraged risk-taking and collaboration,” the company has found that teamwork has increased, said John Ritchie, a Microsoft human-resources executive quoted in the article.

The article reports:

 The internal change mirrors the shift CEO Satya Nadella is working to effect externally, charming and collaborating with startups and venture-capital firms so that Microsoft doesn’t get left behind in the increasingly heterogeneous world of technology. “We needed to change and everybody knew it,” Mr. Ritchie said of the new performance management system.

It’s time that education reform followed the example of companies like Microsoft in adopting a truly 21st Century approach to this critical aspect of organizational management. Our schools, teachers and students stand to reap enormous benefits.

Valerie Strauss covers education and runs The Answer Sheet blog.Why calling school reform ‘corporate reform’ is an insult to corporate reform - The Washington Post:

Rejecting city argument, judge rules that school leadership meetings are public | Chalkbeat

Rejecting city argument, judge rules that school leadership meetings are public | Chalkbeat:

Rejecting city argument, judge rules that school leadership meetings are public

Public Advocate Letitia James (center) and parent advocate Leonie Haimson (right), seen here in 2013, joined a lawsuit to make school leadership team meetings open to the public.

Schools cannot bar members of the public from attending leadership team meetings, a judge ruled in a decision filed Thursday.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Peter Moulton rejected the city’s argument that the joint parent-educator teams play only an advisory role and so are not subject to open-meetings rules. Instead, he sided with advocates who filed a lawsuit arguing that the meetings should be public since the mandatory teams play an important role in schools.

“This is a victory for school parents, teachers, and students across our city, who all have the right to be involved in decisions about their schools,” Public Advocate Letitia James said in a statement. In January, James and the advocacy group Class Size Matters joined the lawsuit, which was filed by a retired Manhattan teacher who had been blocked from attending a leadership team meeting.

State law requires every city school to have a leadership team composed of the principal, parent association president, teachers union representative, and an equal number of elected parents and staff members. The teams are responsible for crafting an annual list of goals and strategies for their schools and must be consulted on major decisions, such as the hiring of new principals and the placement of other schools in their buildings.

In 2013, a Staten Island teacher sued the city after he was not allowed to attend a leadership meeting at his school. In that case, the judge agreed with the city that the teams are not “public bodies” subject to open-meetings rules. The city repeated that argument last year after Michael Thomas, the retired Manhattan teacher, brought a new suit.

In an April 16 ruling that was filed on Thursday, Justice Moulton said that leadership team “activities touch on the core functions of a public school.”

“Accordingly,” he wrote, “the [city’s] determination that SLT meetings are not subject to the Open Meetings Law is arbitrary and capricious and contrary to the law.”

A spokesman for the city law department said the agency is reviewing the decision with the education department in order to decide on a response. He wouldn’t say whether they would appeal, adding only that the agencies are likely to discuss the possibility.

Leonie Haimson, executive director of Class Size Matters, said an appeal would be “pointless and a waste of taxpayer dollars, given this slam-dunk decision.”

Haimson is a member of NYC KidsPAC, a political action committee that released a reportSunday giving Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration an F grade for “transparency and accountability” and a D for “parent engagement and input.” Among its reasons, the group cited the city’s argument in the school leadership team case.

“The tendency of this administration to be non-transparent and ignore parental input is a theme that we see in many of their actions and policies,” Haimson said.Rejecting city argument, judge rules that school leadership meetings are public | Chalkbeat:

Time to Stop the CREDO-Worship? | National Education Policy Center

Time to Stop the CREDO-Worship? | National Education Policy Center:

Time to Stop the CREDO-Worship?

New review explains CREDO charter school research flaws,

raises concerns about misunderstandings of effect sizes

 BOULDER, CO (April 27, 2015) – A recent report contends charter schools generally helped students increase reading and math scores and that urban charters had an even stronger positive effect. But a new review released today questions the strong reliance that has been placed on this and similar reports.

Andrew Maul reviewed Urban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions 2015 for the Think Twice think tank review project. The review is published by the National Education Policy Center, housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education. Maul, an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of California-Santa Barbara, focuses his research on measurement theory, validity, and research design.

Urban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions 2015 was produced and published by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. It is a follow-up report to CREDO’s 2013 National Charter School Study.

The new report analyzes the differences in student performance at charter schools and traditional public schools in 41 urban areas in 22 states. Researchers sought to establish whether being in an urban charter school, as opposed to a non-urban one, had a different effect on reading and math scores, and if so, why. The report found a small positive effect of being in a charter school overall on both math and reading scores, and a slightly stronger effect in urban environments.

Maul’s review, however, explains “significant reasons to exercise caution.”

For its analysis, CREDO again used its own, unusual research technique that attempts to simulate a controlled experiment: constructing “virtual twins” for each charter student. The “twins” were derived by averaging the performance of up to seven other students, chosen to match the charter students by demographics, poverty and special education status, grade level, and a prior year’s standardized test score.

Maul points out that the technique isn’t adequately documented. He adds: “It remains unclear and puzzling why the researchers use this approach rather than the more accepted approach of propensity score matching.” The CREDO technique, he warns, might not adequately control for differences between families who select a charter school and those who do not.

CREDO also fails to justify choices such as the estimation of growth and the use of “days of learning” as a metric.

But regardless of concerns over methodology, Maul points out, “the actual effect sizes reported are very small, explaining well under a tenth of one percent of the variance in test scores.” The effect size reported, for example, may simply reflect the researchers’ exclusion of some lower-scoring students from their analysis.

“To call such an effect ‘substantial’ strains credulity,” Maul concludes. Overall, the report fails to provide compelling evidence that charter schools are more effective than traditional public schools, whether or not they are located in urban districts.

Find Andrew Maul’s review on the NEPC website at:
http://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-urban-charter-school

Find CREDO’s Urban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions 2015 on the web at:
http://urbancharters.stanford.edu/index.php

The Think Twice think tank review project (http://thinktankreview.org) of the National Education Policy Center (NEPC)provides the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC is housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education. The Think Twice think tank review project is made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice.

The mission of the National Education Policy Center is to produce and disseminate high-quality, peer-reviewed research to inform education policy discussions. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence.  For more information on the NEPC, please visithttp://nepc.colorado.edu/.

This review is also found on the GLC website at http://www.greatlakescenter.org/