Monday, March 15, 2010

Superintendent's Corner: State puts education on the back burner - Whittier Daily News

Superintendent's Corner: State puts education on the back burner

By Edward Velasquez

Posted: 03/14/2010 10:51:56 PM PDT

"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."

I read these words on the back of hundreds of Montebello Unified School District teachers' T-shirts recently. They wore them on March 4 as they organized and rallied against state budget cuts to public education.

They were not alone. A day of passionate protest against these cuts attracted thousands of demonstrators from across the state and nation. They held rallies, walkouts, teach-ins and even funeral demonstrations to mourn the death of public education.

All of it was done in an effort to spark a movement to take us back to a time when education was not only valued, but was considered far more a right than a privilege.

With more than 30 years of experience in education, it is hard to pinpoint when the state's priorities shifted and when education was placed on the back burner.

Yet, $17 billion has already been taken away from California schools over the last two years, and it appears our state's leaders will not stop cutting unless more of us stand up and demand the state's budget no longer be balanced on the backs of our students.

MUSD is currently facing more than $50 million in budget cuts over the next three years. With nearly 90 percent of the district's budget being personnel, it is no secret that the district will be forced to make difficult decisions in order to remain fiscally solvent.

The message from the state is simple: Do more with less.

For two years, MUSD and other school districts from around the state have heard this message loud and clear.

Unfortunately "keeping cuts away from the classroom" is not realistic when more than 16,000 teachers

Obama's Education Reform Push is Bad Education Policy | CommonDreams.org

Obama's Education Reform Push is Bad Education Policy

One simple solution for our schools? A captivating promise, but a false one.

by Diane Ravitch

There have been two features that regularly mark the history of U.S. public schools. Over the last century, our education system has been regularly captivated by a Big Idea -- a savant or an organization that promised a simple solution to the problems of our schools. The second is that there are no simple solutions, no miracle cures to those problems.

Education is a slow, arduous process that requires the work of willing students, dedicated teachers and supportive families, as well as a coherent curriculum.

As an education historian, I have often warned against the seductive lure of grand ideas to reform education. Our national infatuation with education fads and reforms distracts us from the steady work that must be done.

Our era is no different. We now face a wave of education reforms based on the belief that school choice, test-driven accountability and the resulting competition will dramatically improve student achievement.

Once again, I find myself sounding the alarm that the latest vision of education reform is deeply flawed. But this time my warning carries a personal rebuke. For much of the last two decades, I was among those who jumped aboard the choice and accountability bandwagon. Choice and accountability, I believed, would offer a chance for poor children to escape failing schools. Testing and accountability, I thought, would cast sunshine on low-performing schools and lead to improvement. It all seemed to make sense, even if there was little empirical evidence, just promise and hope.

Today there is empirical evidence, and it shows clearly that choice, competition and accountability as education reform levers are not working. But with confidence bordering

National Day of Action to Defend Public Education a Major Success

National Day of Action to Defend Public Education a Major Success		Printer-Friendly E-Mail This

Mar 14, 2010 By Jesse Lessinger

The nation-wide protests of students and education workers against budget cuts to schools on March 4 was the most significant day of resistance to the economic downturn since the crisis erupted in 2008. It is an important harbinger of bigger struggles to come. The recession may be officially over but the crisis facing working people and youth is only getting worse. The layoffs and home foreclosures continue, while crucial social services are put on the chopping block. States all across the country face unprecedented declines in revenue. Public education has become one of the biggest targets for vicious budget cuts. The most severe deficit is in California, which faces a$20 billion shortfall for the coming fiscal year. This is on top of the massive cuts enacted this fiscal year after the state had to issue IUO's last summer when it ran out of money scrambling to pass an austerity budget. The cuts to higher education led to a faculty and student walkout in the University of California (UC) system on September 24 of last year. A state-wide conference in October, which brought together over 700 students, teachers, faculty and other activists, called for a state-wide “strike and day of action” on March 4 to defend public education. This conference also endorsed actions in mid-November to demonstrate against the plan for a massive 32% tuition hike. Across the UC system there were rallies and on some campuses students occupied buildings to protest the Board of Regents' vote to raise tuition. The occupations where met by repression of the police and administration against both the occupiers and their supporters who rallied outside. But these actions also brought national attention to the issues of cuts and other attacks on education, as well as the anger and growing resistance to these policies. March 4 Inspired by the events in California, students across the country put out a call to make March 4 a national day of action to defend public education. On March 4, in over 30 states from California to New

States should adopt common education standards

States should adopt common education standards:

"As the world shrinks, few things have become more important than a flexible, portable education. Elementary school students in California may find themselves one day working in Rhode Island or Russia - and they'll need to start learning the skills that will take them anywhere right now."

That's the thinking behind the Common Core Standards for English and math, which were released in draft form last week. The standards, which were created by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association with encouragement from the Obama administration, may become national benchmarks for all K-12 students. The draft standards are the product of almost a year's worth of work, and they're open for public comment through April 2.
Most experts agree that the draft standards look pretty good. The standards are written in plain English, and the goals they set seem reasonable: For example, they say that kindergartners should learn to count, first-graders should be able to retell a story, and third-graders should learn fractions.
It's clear that the development team relied on outside research, state comparisons and the judgment of professionals; rather than a politically palatable race to the bottom, the standards aim for the top. Jack O'Connell, California's secretary of education, called the standards "rigorous." And it's worth nothing that they are internationally benchmarked - which will help American students fight for tomorrow's global, mobile jobs.
There's controversy surrounding the draft standards, of course. Teachers complain that

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/14/ED221CEVHA.DTL#ixzz0iFK0wc8I

Jobs in jeopardy for 11 SBCUSD principals - San Bernardino County Sun

Jobs in jeopardy for 11 SBCUSD principals

Josh Dulaney, Staff Writer

Posted: 03/14/2010 07:03:05 AM PDT

SAN BERNARDINO - Several schools here are likely to see new leadership next year under a state law requiring poor-performing campuses to close down or take one of three paths to improvement.

Superintendent Arturo Delgado of the San Bernardino City Unified School District is scheduled to meet with staff today to explore the ramifications of 11 schools landing on California's list of the worst 5 percent in the state.

The California Department of Education started compiling the list after lawmakers, in an effort to make the state more competitive for federal grant money, passed legislation requiring the lowest-performing schools in California to close or go through one of three processes aimed at boosting student achievement.

The options are:

"Restart": Turning the school into a charter.

"Turnaround": Replacing the principal and at least half the teaching staff.

"Transformation": Replacing the principal, providing staff with ongoing education and rewarding effective teachers.

The charter school option is off the table in San Bernardino. So is shutting down schools.

"We know for certain the district is only considering the turnaround model and the transformation model," said Linda Bardere, spokeswoman for the district. "No decision has been made regarding which model each (of the)

2nd Banana SUNDAY, MARCH 14, 2010

2nd Banana SUNDAY, MARCH 14, 2010

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Fire The Parents, Not The Teachers: Bill Maher

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/23250/What_matters_is_what_parents_do

Dennis Van Roekel Testifies on ESEA Reauthorization

Dennis Van Roekel President, National Education Association Testifies on the Reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health Education Labor and Pensions

Weekly Address: Education for a More Competitive America & Better Future | The White House

The White House Blog

Weekly Address: Education for a More Competitive America & Better Future

Posted by Jesse Lee on March 13, 2010 at 06:00 AM EDT

The President discusses his blueprint for an updated Elementary and Secondary Education Act to overhaul No Child Left Behind, the latest step from his Administration to encourage change and success in America’s schools at the local level.

Education plan shuffles political deck - Nia-Malika Henderson - POLITICO.com

President Barack Obama’s brewing fight with teachers unions over his plans to overhaul education legislation could end up being a political trifecta for liberal Democrats, Republicans and a president eager to demonstrate he can work across party lines.

Obama has signaled that he wants a rewrite of No Child Left Behind on his desk this year—and proposed a $1 billion bonus for education should that happen.

The push to pass the legislation could scramble the political desks, with benefits to all sides.

Progressives could take on Obama and side with the powerful teachers unions, traditionally staunchly aligned with Democrats, who have harshly criticized Obama for what they see as a test-heavy approach to education that puts an undue burden on teachers.

At the same time, those no votes would be unlikely to derail the legislation, since Republicans, eager to shed the “party of no” label, could support Obama and go back to their home districts with a popular domestic issue to run on.

As for Obama, a rewrite of No Child Left Behind on his desk would let him claim a bipartisan legislative win, something that has so far eluded his administration on other domestic issues like health care and climate change legislation.

“Generally speaking, this is something that the majority of everybody would look forward to voting on and immediately send out the press release,” said Rich Galen, a Republican strategist. “For the majority and for most parents, they want more help to get their kids educated, not some theoretical argument.”

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who has emerged as one of the few stars in Obama’s cabinet, spent the weekend on a listening tour in Iowa with Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), the Senate leader on education legislation.

Congress will begin hearings this week on Obama’s approach to education, which will officially be submitted Monday as a 41-page “blueprint” on NCLB, the latest version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which was originally passed in 1965. In addition to the $1 billion bonus for passage this year, Obama’s budget proposal calls for a $3 billion boost to the education budget, with most of the new money going to competitive grants for states, districts and schools that align themselves with the administration’s new approach.

Schools Matter: Ravitch on Charter Schools, Today's Ed Reform Snake Oil

Ravitch on Charter Schools, Today's Ed Reform Snake Oil

A clip from the LATimes:

. . . .As an education historian, I have often warned against the seductive lure of grand ideas to reform education. Our national infatuation with education fads and reforms distracts us from the steady work that must be done.

Our era is no different. We now face a wave of education reforms based on the belief that school choice, test-driven accountability and the resulting competition will dramatically improve student achievement.

Once again, I find myself sounding the alarm that the latest vision of education reform is deeply flawed. But this time my warning carries a personal rebuke. For much of the last two decades, I was among those who jumped aboard the choice and accountability bandwagon. Choice and accountability, I believed, would offer a chance for poor children to escape failing schools. Testing and accountability, I thought, would cast sunshine on low-performing schools and lead to improvement. It all seemed to make sense, even if there was little empirical evidence, just promise and hope.

Today there is empirical evidence, and it shows clearly that choice, competition and accountability as education reform levers are not working. But with confidence bordering on recklessness, the Obama administration is plunging ahead,

Happy Pi Day: interview with pi poet � Fun Math Blog

Happy Pi Day: interview with pi poet

by Sol

1 person liked this

Happy Pi Day, everyone! Today I have a special treat. I had the opportunity to interview Pi poet, Mike Keith. Mike is into constrained writing and Pi, among other things. Mike recently published a book,Not A Wake, that demonstrates the constrained writing:

A collection of short stories, poetry, plays, puzzles, and other surprises, all constructed according to the rigid rules of “Pilish”, that peculiar variant of English in which the number of letters in successive words is required to follow the digits of the number π = 3.14159265358979…, in this case for a truly grand total of 10,000 decimals. The perfect book for fans of the number Pi, constrained writing, wordplay, puzzles, or experimental prose and poetry.

Mike sent me a copy of “Not a Wake” to review. In case it’s not obvious, the three words of the title of the book have 3, 1, and 4 letters. And, the pattern continues with the subtitle “A Dream Embodying Pi’s Digits Fully for 10000 Decimals.”

This is a fun book. The challenge in writing such a book is to have the writing be natural in the face of a pretty serious constraint! The book accomplishes that beautifully! Mike is clearly a poet as he is able to pluck the right words out of the ether to make the poetry flow. And, he does it for 10,000 words!

(more…)

Eduflack: Finally, an ESEA Blueprint from the Feds

Finally, an ESEA Blueprint from the Feds

After months of anticipation, we finally have the official blueprint for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act form the Obama Administration. The plan was teased in some news articles yesterday (Saturday) morning and was previewed during President Barack Obama's weekly radio address on Saturday morning. The official plan, found here, was officially released on Saturday evening at 8 p.m.

At first glance, I found the plan to be whelming. On the whole, I thought it was entirely solid and relatively thoughtful. But as I read it (and it shows you what type of life Eduflack lives when he spends his Saturday night reading the Administration's ESEA blueprint, but for what is was worth, I was also watching West Virginia University beat Georgetown), I was surprised by how little I was surprised with. As we used to write about two years ago, this was clearly NCLB 2.0. Much of the last iteration of ESEA remains intact. Some needed improvements are being made. And the priorities emphasized in Race to the Top are being codified, hopefully, into the new law.

The highlights? The plan is grouped under five key principles (not to be confused with ED's four pillars). The principles include: college and career-ready students, great teachers and leaders, raise the bar and reward excellence, equity and opportunity, and promote innovation. These principles break into the following tasks:

College and Career-Ready Students — Raising standards for all students, better assessments, a complete education (meaning a well-rounded curriculum beyond the common core standards)
Great Teachers and Leaders in Every School — Effective teachers and principals, our best teachers and leaders where they are needed the most, and strengthening teacher and leadership preparation and recruitment.
Equity and Opportunity for All Students — Rigorous and fair accountability for all students, meeting the needs of diverse learners, and greater equity.
Raise the Bar and Reward Excellence — Fostering a Race to the Top, supporting effective school choice, and promoting a culture of college readiness and success.
Promoting Innovation and Continuous Improvement — Fostering innovation and accelerating success, supporting recognizing and rewarding local innovations, and supporting student success.

See, nothing that exactly shakes the K-12 education earth. As I read the blueprint, I am seeing much of the original intent of NCLB, mixed in with the goals of RttT, a heavy, heavy influence of common core

Sacramento Press / What matters is what parents do.

On Friday, March 12, 2010 Bill Maher did one of his signature New Rules bits in the Huffington Post as well as on his weekly show Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO. The title of the piece was New Rule: Let's Not Fire the Teachers When Students Don't Learn -- Let's Fire the Parents which in my mind really nails the essence of the Public School Debate. Mr. Maher said, “According to all the studies, it doesn't matter what teachers do. …. What matters is what parents do. The number one predictor of a child's academic success is parental involvement. It doesn't even matter if your kid goes to private or public school. So save the twenty grand a year and treat yourself to a nice vacation away from the little bastards.”

So my question why isn’t anyone pushing Parent/Family/Community involvement or engagement in public education? Politicians, left and right are all about “charter Schools, failing schools and blaming teachers”. They say that charter schools are part of the solution, yet according to most studies of charter schools they are on average no more effective overall than traditional public schools. You would not know it by what is being said by the education reform advocates. Why would we want to set up a separate charter system that is no better than what we have when there is something else that has proven conclusively to work…parent engagement? Failing schools is the other big lie, yes we have had failing schools both charter and public and we have successful schools both charter and public but once again what works in all schools, failing or successful, charter, public or private…it is parent engagement. Why aren’t the reformers telling us this?. Why do we only hear about the failing public schools?
And then there is “blame the teachers’. Could this be “a little union busting”? If you have a child in our public schools you know that your child’s classroom teacher is your partner and that partnership is the key to your child’s success. Yet the reformers are saying your child’s teacher is bad. I say as a parent if you are engaged in your child’s education there are no bad teachers, your child will learn more from some than others. If you get involved your child will do better no matter the skill of the teacher.

So what does it mean to engage parents, families and the community?

Recognize that all parents, regardless of income, education or cultural

Putting My Borrower Hat On � The Quick and the Ed

Putting My Borrower Hat On

by Erin Dillon

On Saturday, the Washington Post published a letter to the editor I wrote (The “joy” of student loans) in response to Senator Lamar Alexander’s op-ed from last week. Sen. Alexander’s op-ed threatened that under the administration’s proposal to move to Direct Lending, “getting your student loan will become about as enjoyable as going to the Department of Motor Vehicles”.
In my letter, I disagree with the Senator. But I wasn’t writing from the perspective of Erin Dillon, policy analyst at Education Sector. Instead, I was writing as Erin Dillon who has been repaying student loans for several years, along with my husband.
To add to my description in the letter of the private lender’s terrible “customer service”: 1) they repeatedly provided my husband and I with conflicting and incorrect repayment information and 2) we get four copies of the exact same letter from them approximately once a week. And we all know what happens when we get multiple letters on the same, corporate letterhead–they get put aside or end up in the trash. Not exactly a model of private sector efficiency and customer-oriented behavior.
Putting my policy analyst hat back on, this kind of customer service is not just an inconvenience. As Student Lending Analytics points out, confusion over who, when and how much to pay can lead borrowers to default.
I’m not saying that Direct Lending is guaranteed to be a model of customer service, but I do think there is a chance things could improve under Direct Lending. Right now, lenders don’t make their money by selling students on their great repayment options or easy to use website. Lenders make money by selling their loan product to schools and convincing the federal government to continue providing subsidies. So schools get the customer service and the government gets lobbied.
Private loan companies are not full of bad people who don’t care about students, it’s just that the incentives in the current system don’t reward lenders that put a lot of resources into borrower customer service. Under the proposed 100% Direct Loan system, these loan companies won’t be making loans anymore. Instead, some of these same companies will get a government contract to service student loans during repayment. Assuming the

Latest News and Comment from Education

Monday, March 15, 2010