Teachers right about testing | Miami Herald Miami Herald

Teachers right about testing | Miami Herald Miami Herald:

Teachers right about testing

After 20 years of pushing, expanding and replacing standardized tests, the Florida Legislature has taken its first baby step to reverse the trend. Legislators don’t want to make a big deal of it, though, because one might jump to the conclusion that they caused the mess in the first place.

After ignoring the voices of professional educators, administrators, elected school board members and concerned parents for years, the tipping point has finally occurred with parents screaming about too many tests and threatening to opt out.

Well-intentioned legislators originally supported standardized testing with the honorable goal of ensuring accountability through measuring learning gains.

Since tens of billions of dollars are spent annually to fund public education, they have a fiscal responsibility to spend them wisely. As an assessment tool it made sense.

But professional educators warned us of some unintended (or perhaps intended) consequences that did come to fruition. They warned that the simple assessment would turn into high-stakes testing — putting too much pressure on students and teachers — and that it would be used for other purposes.

First the Legislature tied students’ grades to the overall grade of the school, creating stigmas for many schools. And while not true in every case, there was a correlation between low-performing schools and low-income student populations.

Next the Legislature targeted teachers through standardized testing by tying their pay and continued employment to their students’ test scores. This was so controversial it took several years and electing a new governor for it to become law.

Why is this unfair? Proponents argued that the teacher’s role is to educate children and if their students don’t perform well it is a reflection of their teaching ability.

But there are a few factors to consider here — the teachers don’t choose their students, students don’t learn in the same way or at the same rate, students move from one teacher one year to a different one the next, and students get vastly different levels of support at home for studying or completing their assignments. In fact, in some homes, students might not have an adult figure that can read or help them with math.

Most importantly, the tests don’t measure the learning gains of each student individually during the time they were with a particular teacher. Instead they measure where the students collectively, as a class and as a school, stand in the aggregate.

If an assessment is to be useful, it needs to be a tool for teachers to use to measure knowledge gains for each student under his or her tutelage. To do this, locally elected school boards required additional tests that would be more useful in assessing each student’s knowledge and individual learning gains.

As the educational experts predicted, high-stakes testing would inevitably lead to teaching to the test. Because the outcome of the standardized tests would affect the child’s promotion, the teacher’s employment status, the teacher’s pay and the school’s grade, it took precedence over actual learning gains. Performing well on a standardized test should not be — but has become — the goal.

Why is it, in education policy, we ignore the professional educators? Maybe it’s because teachers don’t have much money, power or political clout and most are too busy to follow the legislative process.

After years of administering the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or FCAT, Florida joined many other states in adopting the Common Core Standards — another major change in education policy — and with it a new test. Again the professional educators and concerned parents warned that the new test, the Florida Standards Assessments (FSA), should be thoroughly tested for reliability before being used for high-stakes purposes. And again they were ignored.

Over the past two months the FSA testing was disrupted twice. In round one the problem was attributed to computer hacking. Really? And in the latest testing period there were connectivity issues that Education Commissioner Pam Stewart blamed on the vendor. In both cases prepared students were put on hold.

Education advocates pleaded for students and teachers to be held harmless. The answer was no. They asked for testing to be suspended — again the answer was no.

Colleen Wood, founder of the group 50th No More, asked, “What reasonable adult can defend FSA as a valid measure of student growth or teacher effectiveness?” Good question -- not me.

Wood was on target when she added, “It is only proof of the disaster caused when politics drives education policy.”

Every dollar used for standardized school testing drains funds from our classrooms to the benefit of vendors with the money, power and influence to steer education policy.

The testing reform bill made some positive changes but we have a long way to go. In the meantime, teachers have every right to say, “We told you so.”

PAULA DOCKERY IS A SYNDICATED COLUMNIST WHO SERVED IN THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE FOR 16 YEARS AS A REPUBLICAN FROM LAKELAND.Teachers right about testing | Miami Herald Miami Herald:

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article19258404.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article19258404.html#storylink=cpy

Mayor Kevin Johnson and his staff use private email for public work—and there's no rule saying they can't

Sacramento News & Review - Mayor Kevin Johnson and his staff use private email for public work—and there's no rule saying they can't - News - Local Stories - April 23, 2015:

Mayor Kevin Johnson and his staff use private email for public work—and there's no rule saying they can't

The city of Sacramento has no policies about the use of emails

 The Hillary Clinton email controversy brought public attention to an issue that open-government advocates have worried about for years: the widespread use of private emails by government officials to do public business.

The danger is that some government officials will use private email accounts to skirt public-records laws and avoid scrutiny by the media and larger public.

Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson also uses private emails extensively to do city business. In fact, he and his staff have created a sort of parallel email system, not connected to city servers at all.

That’s a big problem, says Jim Ewert, an attorney with the California Newspaper Publishers Association. “The practice essentially guts the California Public Records Act.”

The mayor’s office has refused to answer SN&R’s questions about these private email accounts. And, unlike some other government agencies, the city of Sacramento has no policy at all regarding the use of private email accounts by government officials. In this way, Johnson is exploiting a legal gray area, one which is being fought over in the California Supreme Court right now.

Like all city employees, the mayor and his staff are all assigned official city of Sacramento email addresses. But the mayor’s staff also uses a special set of Gmail accounts to do a lot of city business.

The accounts are private, but all branded with the letters “OMKJ,” for “Office of Mayor Kevin Johnson.” So, the email for Johnson’s chief of staff, Daniel Conway, is daniel.omkj@gmail.com. His press person, Ben Sosenko, is ben.omkj@gmail.com, and so forth.

The mayor himself doesn’t appear to use Gmail, instead preferring to use other email addresses to do some city business. For example, he has in the past used mayorjohnson@kevinjohnson.com. A more recently used address is seven@kevinjohnson.com. (Seven was Johnson’s jersey number in the NBA.)

The mayor’s office won’t say why these accounts are used instead of the official city accounts available, or under what circumstances they are used. Sosenko did not return several calls and did not reply to an emailed list of questions, but sent a statement:

“As has been widely pointed out in the media, elected officials in California have no clear uniform guidelines on the use of email. We look forward to the Legislature addressing this issue.”

But the Legislature is not likely to address the issue any time soon, Ewert said, while the issue is tied up in California courts.

In 2013, the Santa Clara County Superior Court ruled that all emails used by San Jose city officials to conduct city business—even if they are sent using personal phones and private email accounts—were subject to the California Public Records Act. But a year later, the Sixth District Court of Appeal overturned the lower courts’ ruling. And now the case is before the California Supreme Court, which may or may not hear it this year. A decision is more likely sometime in 2016.

In the meantime, “Most state and local agencies are looking at this like it’s the Wild West,” Ewert said.

So, SN&R turned to the Sacramento city clerk for some answers. This paper filed a California Public Records Act request with the clerk’s office for all emails from all “OMKJ” accounts going back two years. The records request also included some basic questions about the use of the accounts, such as the names of the employees using the accounts and the number of emails generated.

Many of those questions could not be answered, because the emails are not directly accessible by the city clerk. Instead, the messages are on Google servers, in accounts controlled entirely by the mayor’s staff.

The city clerk’s office asked for and acquired 371 pages of emails from the mayor’s staff and turned them over to SN&R as part of a request. Much of what the city has turned over so far concerns the Kings arena. And much of it is information that was already turned over as evidence in a lawsuit brought by a group of citizens against the Kings arena deal, which is still in process.

Most of the material disclosed is from early in 2013, and shows the constant communication between the mayor, his chief of staff Conway, spokesman Sosenko—all using private email accounts—and certain players in the arena deal. These included Kunal Merchant, the mayor’s former chief of staff who went to work for the mayor’s nonprofit arena booster organization, Think Big, then later parlayed that into a job with the Kings. Another frequent correspondent in this batch is Jeffrey Dorso, a Sacramento attorney who helped push through the deal.

Many of the emails are historically interesting, allowing readers a glimpse of how the sausage is made at City Hall. Many of the exchanges show the group developing its talking points and planning how to Sacramento News & Review - Mayor Kevin Johnson and his staff use private email for public work—and there's no rule saying they can't - News - Local Stories - April 23, 2015:

30 of the City's 3,021,588 families push Cuomo, Albany for more charter schools - NY Daily News

City families push Cuomo, Albany for more charter schools - NY Daily News:

30 of the City's 3,021,588  families push Cuomo, state Legislature to allow more charter schools

 About 30 city families called on Gov. Cuomo and the state Legislature Wednesday to allow more charter schools to be created.

Cuomo had sought to include a provision for more charters in the state budget, but the issue was dropped from the spending plan and is now being considered by lawmakers.

Under current law, the charter school operators may still add 25 schools to the city’s existing 197 charters. But charter advocates and pro-charter parents say that’s not enough.

“I don’t think there should be a cap on charter schools at all,” said Karen Martin, 41, of Midwood, Brooklyn, at a press conference organized by the pro-charter group Families for Excellent Schools at City Hall.

Martin said she tried to get her daughter into a charter school in 2015 but was told Monday by school officials that there were not enough seats for the girl.

Charter school opponents say there are already enough of the privately run, publicly funded schools in the city. They contend many charter schools have vacant seats.

City schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña said she believes the charter cap should stay where it is. “I think at the moment the number is just where it needs to be,” Fariña said.City families push Cuomo, Albany for more charter schools - NY Daily News:

City schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña said she believes the charter cap should stay where it is.

Don't Pop Champagne Over Senate's No Child Left Behind Rewrite Yet - US News

Don't Pop Champagne Over Senate's No Child Left Behind Rewrite Yet - US News:

Put Away the Champagne

There's still work to be done on the Senate's No Child Left Behind rewrite.

 Last week, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee unanimously approved the Every Child Achieves Act, a bill to reauthorize the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, or NCLB. After the vote, the committee members and audience erupted in applause. But before popping the champagne, policymakers and advocates should ask themselves: Are they letting their desire for change overshadow their desire for progress?

No doubt, many observers are cheering. Mike Petrilli of the right-leaning Fordham Foundation hailedthe legislation as an “amazing tribute to … bipartisan leadership.” Chris Minnich, the executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, praised Sens. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Patty Murray, D-Wash., the chairman and ranking member of the committee, for their “extraordinary leadership.” Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the National Education Association, applauded Alexander and Murray "for listening to educators and leading the improvements made to the bill in committee.” The National School Boards Association declared the bill “a great victory.”

[SEE: Editorial Cartoons on Congress]

Parents, teachers and school leaders are eager for a new federal framework for education policy. But while there is a lot in the new Elementary and Secondary Education Act bill to like, in many ways it represents a missed opportunity.

Importantly, the new bill took some positive steps to address the growing concern about high-stakes standardized tests. By providing funding to states to audit their assessment systems, the bill prods states to eliminate unnecessary and duplicative tests and the time-consuming prep that too often accompanies them. Moreover, the new bill embraces more holistic school accountability systems that will reduce stress on teachers. And it continues to test students annually so parents can know if their children are on track to graduate ready for college or a career and school leaders can direct additional resources, support and interventions where needed.

Fortunately, the bill does not include portability, which would have shifted limited funds away from schools serving the poorest students and towards more affluent student populations. It also limits the number of students with special needs who can be held to different academic standards in order to ensure that they will not receive an inferior education. And thanks to an important amendment offered by Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and approved by the committee, the bill provides vital federal resources to support evidence-based innovative approaches to improving education.

[READ: Don't Let Special Needs Students Fall Behind]

But in some fundamental ways, the bill – like many schools identified under No Child Left Behind – needs improvement. First, it does nothing to fix our broken school finance system, which underinveststo the tune of $8.5 billion in students with greater needs – such as those living in or near poverty, minorities, and English language learners – relative to those from wealthier communities. As Bennetsaid during the committee debate, “It is a myth that we are providing additional resources to kids in schools with high concentrations of kids in poverty … the federal government is actually subsidizing districts and states efforts to spend more money in low-poverty schools.” Furthermore, it leaves in the place the inequitable and byzantine formulas for distributing federal funds among states, which results in Wyoming receiving nearly three times as much as Utah in taxpayer funds per poor student.

The bill also fails to make a meaningful new investment in high-quality early childhood education, even though such programs are proven to help close the achievement gap before it opens and are shown to generate dramatically outsized long-term return on investments in employment rates, earnings and health outcome. While the committee approved an amendment to allow for greater coordination among early childhood programs, it does not invest new funding into early childhood programs, nor does it include the high-quality standards that have demonstrated outcomes for children.

[READ: No Child Left Behind: Senators Unveil Bipartisan Agreement on Rewrite]

And perhaps of greatest concern, the bill does little to turn around chronically failing schools or require meaningful interventions in schools that aren’t ensuring that disadvantaged students live up to their potential. At the Center for American Progress, we’ve tracked real progress on this front over the last five years and are developing an evidence-based strategy for what works. Without targeted resources and a concerted message to states and districts that they cannot let the students trapped in underperforming schools continue to languish, it’s unlikely that we will see sustained momentum on this front.

Next the bill moves to the Senate floor, where every senator will have the opportunity to weigh in. Alexander made a powerful statement during the mark-up about wanting to continue to work on these issues as the bill moves toward the floor. Let’s hope he keeps that promise and that the Senate delivers a bill that offers both progress and change. Don't Pop Champagne Over Senate's No Child Left Behind Rewrite Yet - US News:

PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Education

Statewide Survey Interactive Tools:



PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Education

Mark Baldassare, Dean Bonner, Lunna Lopes, and Sonja Petek

April 2015

Full Report[PDF, 581K] Press Release[HTML]

Some findings of the current survey:

• A strong majority of Californians support the Local Control Funding Formula; fewer than half favor the Common Core State Standards.
• Most public school parents say they have heard nothing at all about the Smarter Balanced assessments.
• Half of Californians say the state’s budget situation is a big problem for K–12 education and six in 10 say state funding for local schools is not enough.
• Two-thirds of adults and about half of likely voters would vote yes on a state or local bond measure to fund school construction projects.

Most Public School Parents Unfamiliar With New Online Tests

High Hopes But Little Knowledge About Common Core, New Funding Formula

---

SAN FRANCISCO, April 22, 2015—As California schools begin administering new online standardized tests, most public school parents say they have heard nothing about them, according to a statewide survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).

A majority (55%) say they have heard nothing at all about the Smarter Balanced Assessment System, which replaces paper-based tests. The new tests are based on the Common Core math and English standards. About a third of public school parents (36%) have heard a little about the tests, and just 8 percent say they have heard a lot. Latino public school parents (54%) are much more likely than white parents (32%) to say they have heard about the tests.

While concerns have been raised about whether all schools have enough computers, bandwidth, and technology staff to effectively administer the online tests, most public school parents say they are very confident (29%) or somewhat confident (42%) that their local schools do.

Other states have found that the switch to the Common Core standards and new tests significantly reduced student scores. How do California public school parents expect students to score on the Smarter Balanced tests? A plurality (42%) predict that scores will be about the same as those on past tests, while 29 percent expect scores to be higher and 23 percent predict that they will be lower.

More generally, Californians are divided about whether standardized tests are accurate measures of a student’s progress and abilities, with 51 percent very or somewhat confident that this is true, and 46 percent not too confident or not at all confident. But few say there is too much testing in their local schools (24% too much in elementary and middle schools, 22% too much in high schools).

A year after the Common Core State Standards were implemented, 66 percent of public school parents have heard of them (43% a little, 23% a lot), while a third (32%) say they have heard nothing at all. White public school parents are nearly three times as likely as Latinos to say they have heard a lot (38% vs. 13%).

A third of public school parents (34%) say their child’s school or district has provided them with information about the Common Core standards and that this information has been adequate. But 20 percent say they have received inadequate information, and the largest share of parents (42%) say they received no information about the standards.

"Many public school parents are in the dark when it comes to Common Core," said Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. "Local schools need to do a better job of keeping parents informed as the state implements the new English and math standards.”

Based on what they’ve read and heard about Common Core, 47 percent of adults and 57 percent of public school parents favor the standards. There is a partisan divide, with Democrats (49%) much more likely to be in favor than independents (37%) or Republicans (30%).

Concerns have been raised about teachers’ readiness to teach the new standards—concerns that are shared by California adults (73% very or somewhat concerned) and public school parents (80% very or somewhat concerned). But Californians are optimistic that Common Core will meet two goals: Most (57%) are confident that implementing the standards will make students more college or career ready, and most (57%) are confident that the standards will help students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills. Public school parents express even higher levels of optimism (71% confident about each goal).

Baldassare summed up: "Most Californians are hopeful about the effect of Common Core on improving student achievement, but many worry that teachers are not fully prepared to implement these new standards in the classroom.”

Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos are much more likely than other groups to express confidence that Common Core will make students more college and career ready (75% Latinos, 65% Asians, 58% blacks, 44% whites) and help students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills (77% Latinos, 60% blacks, 51% Asians, 45% whites). Yet Latinos are also the most likely to express concerns about teacher preparedness to implement the standards (80% Latinos, 79% blacks, 70% Asians, 67% whites).

Most Expect New Funding Formula To Boost Achievement

As the state implements a new system for financing schools—the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)—most Californians say they have heard nothing about it (75% adults, 69% public school parents). Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (30%) are the most likely to have heard a little or a lot about the LCFF, followed by Asians (27%), blacks (20%), and whites (19%).

When they are read a brief description of the LCFF, strong majorities of adults (70%) and public school parents (73%) favor it. Among those who have heard at least a little about the LCFF, 75 percent favor it.

The LCFF allocates extra money to districts with more English Learners and lower-income students. Californians have long expressed the view in PPIC surveys that school districts in lower-income areas of the state lack the same resources—including good teachers and classroom materials—as those in wealthier areas. Today, 82 percent hold this view, which is consistent with their support of the LCFF. A majority (59%) also say they are very concerned that students in lower-income areas are less likely than other students to be ready for college when they finish high school. About half of Californians (48%) say they are very concerned that English Learners score lower on standardized tests than other students.

The LCFF allows local districts more control over spending decisions, and it gives additional funding to districts with more lower-income students and English Learners. How confident are Californians that districts receiving the extra money will spend it to support these students? Most adults (56%) are at least somewhat confident, and public school parents (66%) are especially likely to express this view. Will the LCFF improve academic achievement of English Learners and lower-income students? Strong majorities of adults (68%) and public school parents (78%) say it will, at least somewhat. Latinos (85%) are much more likely to expect improvement than Asians (67%), blacks (62%), and whites (59%).

The LCFF requires each school district to get input from parents in designing a Local Control Accountability Plan. While 42 percent of public school parents say they were given information about how to get involved, most (54%) say they did not receive any. Lower-income parents (51% of those with household incomes under $40,000) were much more likely than wealthier parents (37% of those with incomes of $40,000 or more) to say their child’s school or district provided them with information.

Among the parents who received information about participating, most (72%) say they were not involved in the process. Notably, public school parents with lower household income are more likely than those with higher incomes to be involved (25% with incomes under $40,000 vs. 8% $40,000 or more).

State Funding For Schools Is Up, But Most Say It’s Not Enough

California funding for K–12 public education has been rising in recent years, but 60 percent of all adults and 70 percent of public school parents today say current state funding for their local public schools is not enough. Among likely voters, 54 percent say there is not enough funding. Asked to identify the most important issues facing public education today, Californians are most likely to mention lack of funding (16%) and quality of teachers (12%). Public school parents are most likely to mention lack of funding (18%), large class sizes (13%), and quality of teachers (12%).

How do residents think California K–12 education compares to that of other states? About a third of adults (35%) say California’s spending per pupil is lower than average and 26 percent say it is higher than average. Only 29 percent correctly say that spending per pupil is average. Asked about K–12 test scores, 46 percent correctly say California’s results are lower than average (11% higher than average, 38% average).

How can California significantly improve the quality of public schools? Just 9 percent say increased funding alone will do this, while 38 percent prefer using existing funding more wisely. The largest share (49%) prefers that the state do both.

The survey also asks a series of questions about ways to fund education projects.

• A state bond for school construction projects: 66 percent of adults and 55 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes if there were a measure on the ballot.
• A local bond for school construction projects: 65 percent of adults and 53 percent of likely voters would vote yes if their local districts put a measure on the ballot. (A 55% majority vote is required for passage.)
• A local parcel tax for schools: 57 percent of adults and 49 percent of likely voters would approve an increase in local parcel taxes to benefit local schools. (A two-thirds majority vote is required for passage.) Half of adults (50%) think it is a good idea to replace the two-thirds requirement with a 55 percent majority vote to pass local parcel taxes for local public schools. However, only 44 percent of likely voters express support—short of the majority vote required to make the change.

More Key Findings

• Half approve of Brown’s job performance—page 14
  The governor’s approval rating is holding steady (50% adults, 53% likely voters), as is the legislature’s (42% adults, 36% likely voters). Approval of the way both the governor and legislature are handling of K–12 education is lower.
• Local schools get record-high ratings for college, career preparation—page 18
  Most adults (58%) say their local public schools are doing a good to excellent job of preparing students for college, and 48 percent rate their schools as good to excellent when asked how well they are preparing students for the workforce.
• Half give local schools an A or B—page 20
  While 53 percent of all adults give their neighborhood schools good grades, blacks are much less likely than other racial/ethnic groups to do so (blacks 38%, whites 50%, Latinos 59%, Asians 63%).

This PPIC survey is conducted with funding from the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation, the Silver Giving Foundation, and the Stuart Foundation.

ABOUT THE SURVEY

The PPIC Statewide Survey has provided policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents since 1998. This is the 11th annual survey focusing on K–12 education. Findings are based on a survey of 1,706 California adult residents, including 1,023 interviewed on landline telephones and 683 interviewed on cell phones. Interviews were conducted from April 3–13, 2015, in English and Spanish, according to respondents’ preferences. The sampling error, taking design effects from weighting into consideration, is ±3.7 percent for all adults. For the 1,405 registered voters, it is ±4 percent, and for the 1,069 likely voters it is ±4.4 percent. For the 501 parents, it is ±6.4 percent and for the 355 public school parents, it is ±7.7 percent.

Mark Baldassare is president and CEO of PPIC, where he holds the Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Chair in Public Policy. He is founder of the PPIC Statewide Survey, which he has directed since 1998.

PPIC is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office.

 http://www.ppic.org/main/publication.asp?i=1149

California parents are ill-informed about school reforms, poll finds - LA Times

California parents are ill-informed about school reforms, poll finds - LA Times:

California parents are ill-informed about school reforms, poll finds

 California has ushered in new academic standards, statewide testing and school finance reform in recent years, but the majority of public-school parents remain ill-informed about them, a new poll has found.

In an effort to promote deeper understanding and more critical thinking by students, the state adopted new math and English learning standards known as Common Core nearly five years ago. This year, California rolled out new tests tied to those standards after a test run last year.

But the poll released Wednesday by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 55% of parents surveyed had never heard of the new computer-based tests. And while 66% had heard of Common Core, nearly as many said they had received insufficient information about them -- including 42% who said they had received no information at all.

Parents with college degrees were far more likely to say their school provided adequate information about Common Core than those without higher education -- 48% to 28%.



“Many public-school parents are in the dark when it comes to Common Core," Mark Baldassare, president of the Public Policy Institute of California, said in a statement. “Local schools need to do a better job of keeping parents informed as the state implements the new English and math standards.”

Four of five parents surveyed said they were concerned that teachers were not prepared to teach the new standards -- a concern also voiced last month by state Board of Education President Michael Kirst.

The majority of California public-school parents surveyed, however, expressed confidence that Common Core would help prepare their children for college and careers, and improve their critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

Parents also expressed a low level of awareness about a groundbreaking shift in how the state funds schools, with extra dollars now provided for students who are low income, learning English or in foster care. Only 29% of public-school parents had heard of the Local Control Funding Formula, which was passed in 2013. But more than 70% supported it after hearing how it works.

And despite a national movement to reduce standardized testing, 76% of California parents with children in public elementary, middle and high schools said their schools did the right amount of testing -- or not enough. 



The institute surveyed 1,706 adult residents, including 355 public-school parents, April 3-13. The margin of error was 3.7%.California parents are ill-informed about school reforms, poll finds - LA Times:

California Teachers Association Pres. Looks to the Future - On California - Education Week

California Teachers Association Pres. Looks to the Future - On California - Education Week:

California Teachers Association Pres. Looks to the Future

Dean Vogel, the popular president of the California Teachers Association, has tirelessly crisscrossed the state trying to broaden the union's appeal to rank and file classroom teachers and increase their participation in the organization.  He turns over the reigns of office to Eric Heins on June 26.

His term of office ends at a time that I have called the best political opportunity in 40 years to reshape teaching and schooling.  And rather than look back, I asked him to look forward.  Our conversation, edited for length and clarity, follows:

What can the CTA do in the next couple of years that will continue on after the window of opportunity closes?

I think that there are a couple of things.  One of the things that we can do is that we can be a convener.  We can start bringing people together from different parts of the education community to keep this conversation going. 

We learned a lot today about the Instructional Leadership Corps[which is a collaboration between the CTA and Stanford University].  Districts are going to be desperate for professional learning opportunities.  And what we're learning is that teachers are most receptive to learning from teachers who are actual classroom teachers.

Can the CTA "own" professional development?

We don't have that capacity right now, but what we can do is start modeling more appropriate behavior for professional learning, and I think that the ILC is on the right track.  That's related to the extent to which teachers feel that they are dealing with their peer, with an instructional leader.

How do changes in professional development need to change the working conditions of teachers: when they come to work, how long their day is, their year is?

The United States leads the world in instruction time.  Our teachers are in front of kids more than anyone in any country.  So, one of the things that we could do is to start looking at how could we provide teachers time so they could collaborate with one another.   Sometimes it's not whole faculties; sometimes it's a grade level or a department being able to meet with one another or talk about their practice or observe one another and debrief, things like that.  In the high-performing countries, that's pretty routine.

When I was in Shanghai, I met a full-time English teacher who taught two classes.  I was surprised and I asked her what she did, and she said it's typical.  Her day starts at 7:30 and ends at 4:00 and in between her classes she's doing research or reading research, or visiting other classes, or debriefing or getting debriefed by somebody.  And that costs money.   You've got to be able to pay for that.

But I think that what CTA can do around this whole professional learning thing is to start driving that agenda.  At the same time we have to start driving a thoughtful consideration about how we increase funding.  That's another story.

Go back to the CTA's convening role.

You've got to bring people together who are not necessarily your thought partners.  I have a great time when I am sitting with Andy Hargraves or Michael Fullan and talking about where we need to go, but I have a more difficult time when I am sitting with Ed Trust West or Democrats for Education Reform.  But if you forget about all the differences and you talk about what it is that we are really trying to get done, and you can allow yourself the freedom to argue with one another, you can come to some common ground that will be valuable for everybody.  

That's what we are trying to teach our chapters, that even when you are in a very contentious environment, and you have difficulty around bargaining, one of the things that you can do is that you can find areas in which you can find common ground.  It's just like a marriage.  I don't get divorced just because I have an argument with my wife. 

This is a bit of sea change for CTA.  It's been notorious for my-way-or-the-highway talk.

It's a very big difference, and it was born out of the Strategic Plan the CTA adopted  in 2014.  About five years ago, when David Sanchez was president, our State Council, which is our policy making body, rose up and took the leadership to task and basically said "you have got to start a proactive agenda, we can't continue to be reacting to everything."

The strategic plan basically said you've got to focus on different things.  Advocacy for public education issues and governmental relations, that's important, but it is only one of about seven things.  I mean, what about the idea of transforming the profession, paying attention to social justice issues, or engaging the community or building an organizing culture?  All these other areas are important, too.

Where are the circles of overlap between the CTA and the new, vocal group called the Badass Teachers Association?

Every group has its ideologues, you know, the folks who are very positional and passionate about specific issues.  Teachers are no different from any other group in that regard. And I believe that many of the BATs fit into that category concerning the Common Core. They have it in their mind that the Common Core is bad, and the reason that it's bad is that it is all about testing and evaluating teachers based on test scores and loss of seniority and all this.  And I say, that's not what the Common Core is.  The Common Core is basically a set of standards and in California we have worked hard to separate the standards from the testing.  What you're talking about are conditions of Race to the Top and conditions of NCLB waiver.  They conflate the two.

I have tremendous respect for people who will stand up and say "No, Hell No."   When I'm talking to them, I say that you're absolutely right about standardized testing.  It is plain stupid.  But then they ask, "should we resist?"  I say you can inform parents about their right to opt-out, but  if you resist a direct order from your supervisor around testing, you can get fired, and all I can do about disobeying a direct order is to make sure that they treat you well while they fire you.

If you want to resist, it has to be more than you.  Try to find a parent that says,  "gee I really love all this standardized testing nonsense.  You can't."

What I say is that you have to tell the truth about how it feels as a professional with some expertise in the classroom being told continuously that you've got to do something other than that which you believe is in the best interest of kids.

There are some folks who just want to hold their fists in the air and they want to go on strike.  I don't particularly want to go on strike, I would if I had to.

I'm a member and I'm on the national Badass Teacher site and I'm on the California site.  And one of the things that I've noticed is that it is often the same  people who are posting.  And I used to engage them, but it just got too vitriolic.   They don't like differences of opinion, so I stopped doing that.

I've been puzzled that the CTA hasn't responded to the tenure and layoff issues raised in theVergara lawsuit.  There seem to be easy fixes available that wouldn't harm teachers.

We believe that it is going to get overturned and it is going to die, but the narrative isn't going to die.  The question is really what are we going to do about the narrative.

The moneyed interests in this state have used Vergara as a club.  They've used it to simplify the debate around what is good teaching and learning. They've used it as a weapon against lawmakers and anyone who disagrees with them. They've used it to mislead voters that teacher unions support keeping bad teachers in the classroom. 

We felt that a legislative response just wasn't necessary especially after AB215, which expedited the dismissal process for some of these egregious behaviors was approved with bipartisan and CTA support. 

But the narrative keeps you on the defensive.

It's true.  But the question that we should be asking instead of who gets laid off first is: how is that we're the 8th largest economy in the world and were 47th in the country in funding per pupil.  We're having to lose teachers because we don't have enough money in the system. 

What would you say to Eli Broad about all this?

I think Eli is on the wrong track.  This idea that the union is not representing teachers—and that is really where Eli stands—is wrong.  The union, especially as it is being transformed in California, really is the voice of the teacher.

Some of the most dynamic [CTA] chapter presidents I know are also instructional leaders and teachers of the year in their own right.  If Eli Broad could get it that the union is really the voice of the practitioner and then try to figure out how to work together I think he'd be really surprised.

Part of the problem is that if your only frame of reference is the Los Angeles Unified School District, it's a very difficult sell to believe that that the district or the union is a partner with you.  That relationship is born out of a long history of conflict. But that union is in transition.  United Teachers Los Angeles has an outstanding leadership team, and they understand the need to engage the community.  They have been building an organizing culture in Los Angeles that can only make the community stronger.

When I became president I said UTLA and L.A. Unified is going to be where everything is played out over the next five or six years.  In any statewide election in California, 60 percent of the vote is in the L.A. media market.  What you see on TV in the L.A. media market is what you think public education in California is.  So that district has to start doing well, and that means that union has to start leading.  I said that over five years ago, and I've been watching UTLA lead and take charge of the narrative and begin to lead.

We've been working very closely with them and helping however we can. I believe things are getting better in LA, not only for kids and teachers but also for local neighborhoods. 

So, let me come back to where I started.  Part of the strength we have in California is the diversity of opinion and the promise of the next few years is directly related to our willingness to come together—even with our differences—and stand together to move forward.  I happen to believe that is possible.  And I think my organization is ready to convene people who believe that if we come together we can make things better.California Teachers Association Pres. Looks to the Future - On California - Education Week:

TBT Thursday 1984 - The Test

TBT Thursday 1984 - The Test 

BY N. P. Education

Can't Make it to the

NPE Conference In Chicago this Weekend?

You Can "Virtually" Be There!!!

THE NETWORK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION NATIONAL CONFERENCE

I know not everyone can make it to Chicago this weekend -- but you can still be part of the action via the Livestream that will broadcast on as many as three channels. All the keynotes and many of the workshops will be available live, starting Saturday at 8:30 am central time at   www.schoolhouselive.org
 Please tweet with the hashtag ‪#‎NPEChicago‬ and help us trend #1 again like we did twice last year.

LIVE FROM CHICAGO, APRIL 25-26

THE NETWORK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION NATIONAL CONFERENCE

CHECK OUT ALL THREE CHANNELS!

http://www.schoolhouselive.org/

BustED Pencils: Education Activism's Punk Rockers | The Progressive

BustED Pencils: Education Activism's Punk Rockers | The Progressive:

BustED Pencils: Education Activism's Punk Rockers

 It was education and punk rock that brought Randy Hurley and Tim Slekar together, as college freshmen with a mutual love for Husker Du and The Sex Pistols. Thirty years later, they’re finding punk rock is a surprisingly great tool in the fight to save public education, and they’ve taken this fight on the air.

Slekar and Hurley stayed in touch via social media as their lives diverged after college. Hurley settled in Madison and went into radio production. Slekar became a teacher in his native Pennsylvania. But when Scott Walker attacked public employee unions in Wisconsin in 2011, sparking massive protests, they reconnected––over a Facebook argument.

“Randy would write things on Facebook about his kids having to stay home because of the damn teachers off protesting, and I would say, ‘Take it easy on the teachers, they’re trying to do what’s best for your kids,’” Slekar recalls. “We started a dialogue.”

Hurley invited Slekar to come on the radio to cover education and explain the teachers’ perspective.

As the public school activism movement grew, so did the duo’s momentum. Hurley flew Slekar to Madison to make a podcast demo, Slekar moved to Madison and took a job as Dean of Education at Edgewood College, and the rest is social studies.

“We wanted to come up with a great radio product and website,” Hurley recalls. But the work took a personal note for Hurley as his kids entered middle school. Things that Slekar had been saying about corporate education reform and overtesting began to hit home.

“The effect of the things he had talked about doesn’t kick in till almost third grade, so in those couple years when I started casually working with Tim I was still the radio person, helping him formulate what he wanted to do,” he recalls. “But as I became the parent asking, ‘What’s going on?’, I became more passionate about it.”

In this spirit, BustED Pencils, as the team named their project, was born as a website, radio show, and podcast focused on the war against public education, framing the concerns of two parents within a national-level perspective on education reform, standardized testing, and activism.

BustED Pencils features an activist of the week (past activists have included musician and music education advocate Robby Takac of the Goo Goo Dolls and college-level special education advocate Barbara Hong) as well as trending news coverage and a weekly feature from Nancy Carlson-Paige––the mother of actor Matt Damon and a passionate education activist. (The feature is appropriately titled "What Would Matt Damon's Mom Say?")

Hurley’s favorite show so far? The interview with punk rocker-turned-teacher Martin Atkins, which ran in The Progressive’s special issue on saving public schools. “[Atkins] says education is the new punk rock,” says Hurley.

That philosophy reflects the BustED Pencils approach, he adds. “Our vision is to try to present the subject matter in a way that will get people interested. I’ll say, ‘Tim, you’re talking like a professor; as a dad I don’t understand that. I just have a nine year old and I want to know why the computer lab has been turned into a standardized testing facility for a month.’

“We make the show palatable for everybody, but it is kind of punk rock––who knew you’d have to be rebellious to fight for children to get a quality education in the public school system? Who knew you’d have to fight to keep Wall Street interests out of the schools?”

Asked his advice on how to get progressives to rally behind public education, Slekar explains that it’s been a hard sell due to misunderstandings about the achievement gap. “Progressives are kind of stuck on this question of, if you don’t have accountability, who’s going to focus on those kids that aren’t getting what they need? People say if we stop testing we’ll never know what kids we’re leaving behind,” he says.

“That assumes we didn’t know before. I knew which kids needed what without a test––I was a trained teacher doing my job.”

Hurley adds that as a dad, not an educator, he finds much of the current public education discussion too jargon-heavy. “A lot of the people talking about it are using in-group vocabulary. Educators, teachers union, school systems are talking to each other in their own language.”

The goal of BustED Pencils is to eliminate that culture gap. “Having the drummer from Nine Inch Nails or a fourth grader that can understand that a test isn’t good for her [on the show] takes the conversation out of

- See more at: http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/04/188094/busted-pencils-education-activisms-punk-rockers#sthash.TbpDooil.dpuf