What Poverty Does To Your Brain | PopularResistance.Org

What Poverty Does To Your Brain | PopularResistance.Org:

What Poverty Does To Your Brain

Recent research suggests that poverty may have a profound effect on the brain. Imaging studies show that the conditions that go hand-in-hand with poverty — a combination of environmental factors and emotional stressors — can actually slow the development of crucial parts of the brain involved in regulating behavior, impulsivity, and mood. And lacking resources appears to promote certain behaviors (such as excessive borrowing) that perpetuate the poverty cycle.

HOW POVERTY IMPACTS BRAIN DEVELOPMENT

Children from low-income households tend to have poorer academic performance and lower standardized test scores than kids from higher-income families, as well as more emotional and behavioral problems, including ADHD, depression, and anxiety. In adulthood, they typically hold fewer advanced degrees and have truncated earning potential. New research suggests this may, in part, be attributed to the way growing up in an impoverished home changes the brain.

A study published Monday in the journal JAMA Pediatrics followed 389 kids and teens, aged 4 to 22, from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds between 2001 and 2006. The researchers, including Jamie Hanson, Ph.D., a postdoctoral fellow at Duke University and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill’s Center for Developmental Science, and Barbara Wolfe, Ph.D., a professor of economics, population health sciences, and public affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, found that kids living in households just above the federal poverty level had gray matter volumes that were 3 to 4 percentage points below the norm for their age group. The lower volume was concentrated in the brain’s frontal and temporal lobes, regions that are implicated in behavioral and learning problems. Among kids living below the federal poverty line, gray matter volumes were 8 to 10 percent below the norm. On average, these kids performed 4 to 7 points worse on standardized tests.

Hanson, Wolfe, and their colleagues calculated that as much as 20 percent of the disparity in test scores could be explained by these maturation gaps.

“We’re still charting what this truly means for behavior, but we’re starting to try to connect it to the various outcomes you often see, things like educational achievement and health-related behaviors and outcomes,” Hanson tells ATTN:. “The hope is that we’ll find neural signatures of that, and then use them to develop interventions and argue for public policy measures that would help families in need.”

Earlier work by Hanson and Wolfe, published in the journal PLOS ONE in 2013, found similar neurodevelopmental disparities between lower- and higher-income children. That study followed 77 kids from a few months after birth until age 4. They found that children born into families with incomes under 200 percent of the federal poverty level had lower gray matter volumes than kids from high-income families. Gray matter volume in kids from middle-income families did not statistically significantly differ from that of their richer peers, suggesting a poverty-specific effect.

These differences weren’t present at birth, Wolfe says. “We found that before age 1, infants’ brains were basically the same, regardless of whether or not they were growing up in a poor family. But then as we traced them to age 4, we found areas that were developing more slowly among infants in low-income families.”

The brain regions that are suffering are critical, Hanson adds. “The frontal lobe, the region that helps with self-control and strategy and planning, had a slower growth rate for kids in lower-income households.”

Similarly, in a paper published in Nature Neuroscience in March, Kimberly Noble, MD, Ph.D., an associate professor of neurosciences and education at Columbia, and her colleagues imaged the brains of 1,099 kids, teens, and young adults aged 3 to 20. They found that those who came from families with a yearly income of less than $25,000 had What Poverty Does To Your Brain | PopularResistance.Org:

Poll finds for the first time that majority of teachers shun Common Core - The Hechinger Report

Poll finds for the first time that majority of teachers shun Common Core - The Hechinger Report:

Poll finds for the first time that majority of teachers shun Common Core

Just a week after the New York State Education Department confirmed that the proportion of students refusing to take annual state tests had quadrupled from five percent last year to 20 percent this year, the results of a new poll raises questions about how pervasive opposition to testing and the Common Core is around the country.

The poll, sponsored by EducationNext, a journal that covers education reform policies, found that while Common Core – a set of math and reading standards in place in over 44 states and the District of Columbia – has declined in popularity, more people voiced support for annual testing. These findings come at a time when Congress is in the process of revamping the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law that mandates annual testing in grades 3 through 8, as well as once in high school.

Related: The surprising initial results from a new Common Core exam

Martin West, an associate professor at Harvard University’s education school and an executive editor at EdNext, says that while the poll did reveal some changes in public attitudes, it also showed the enduring popularity of testing.

“Testing has consistently drawn strong support from the general public in polls going back a decade now and that remains the case today,” said West. “There’s not, however, overwhelming support for broader changes to the governance of public education, but there are pluralities that support the Common Core, charter schools and various forms of private school support.”

This poll, which was EdNext’s ninth annual survey, gathered 4,000 responses, including approximately 700 teachers, 700 African-Americans, and 700 Hispanics.

Not only is the public at large supportive of current testing policies, 67 percent to 21 percent, parents support testing by a 44 point margin. Teachers, however, were almost evenly split, supporting current federal testing policies by a margin of 47 percent to 46 percent. Yet the poll found that the majority of teachers, parents and the public are against allowing parents to opt their children out of the tests.

Related: With all the tests scored, policymakers are grappling with what Common Core test results mean

West hopes that the poll’s findings will inform the Congressional rewrite of NCLB. The U.S. House of Representatives’ version, differs from the Senate version in that while both mandate annual testing, the House bill would create protections for parents looking to have their kids sit out the tests.

The poll found that as with testing, teachers were the least likely to support the Common Core standards.

In 2013, EdNext found that 65 percent of the public supported the Common Core standards. That dropped to 53 percent last year and has further slipped to 49 percent in this poll – that compares to 35 percent who oppose the standards. The biggest decline in support for the Common Core was among teachers, who supported the standards by a margin of 76 percent to 12 percent in 2013. While support dropped to 46 percent last year, for the first time the poll this year found more teachers were against, 50 percent, the standards than were for them at 40 percent.

Related: Lessons from New York: Don’t expect fast change under Common Core

While the poll, consistent with other recent surveys, found that support for Common Core has dropped, it also found that the public was split on Poll finds for the first time that majority of teachers shun Common Core - The Hechinger Report:

Election 2016: GOP candidates to to be pressed on education reform at summit - CBS News

Election 2016: GOP candidates to to be pressed on education reform at summit - CBS News:

Election 2016: GOP candidates to to be pressed on education reform at summit

Six Republican presidential hopefuls head to New Hampshire this week to take part in an education summit where they will be expected to dive deep into their visions for education reform. Wednesday's event will also be a test for candidates as they confront a thorny issue that has been riling up conservative activists for years: Common Core.

The event is sponsored by former NBC and CNN journalist Campbell Brown and The Seventy Four, Brown's nonprofit news site focused on education issues. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina will each participate in 45-minute, one-on-one conversations with Brown. They're expected to discuss how the federal government should -- and should not -- influence education policy in the U.S.

"Polling shows that education is the most important issue to our country - how our children get educated - and it ends up being very little in terms of what the candidates actually talk about," Brown told CBS News.

Yet this election cycle presents an opportunity to put the issue of education reform front and center due to an array of clashing ideas surrounding unions, vouchers, school choice and standardized testing.

"Last campaign cycle, Romney and Obama agreed on major education policy issues, and education barely got a mention," Brown lamented.

The biggest source of tension on Wednesday is likely to be the debate over theCommon Core State Standards, an initiative that encouraged states to develop similar, competitive benchmarks for student achievement in math and language arts. Though Common Core initially enjoyed broad bipartisan support, some in the GOP turned against the program after the Department of Education tied the disbursement of grant money to an adoption of similar standards.

Jindal, Walker, and Christie once spoke favorably about the standards, but they now oppose them, and they may be asked Wednesday to defend their change of heart. Bush and Kasich, the only 2016 Republican contenders who still support Common Core, may be asked to explain themselves as well.

The standards have some high-profile defenders in the GOP. In an op-ed for The 74, William Bennett, the former U.S. Secretary of Education under President Reagan, criticized "Republican governors who once supported and implemented the Common Core but are now running from it under political pressure." He argued governors have a right to review standards in their states - and most states do - but in the end, they will end up creating standards similar to those of Common Core, just with a different name.

"Christie and the other Republican governors, should be courageous enough to defend the concept -- both in policy and in politics," Bennett wrote. "If a state ends up tweaking and renaming the standards, it will be acting in a way that is entirely consistent with how the Common Core was designed to function - as exemplar standards for states to improve and build upon."

Still, the term "Common Core" has stirred enough passion among the Republican base that even defenders of the program have had to wrestle with how they discuss the issue. Bush dubbed the debate surrounding Common Core "poisonous" last Friday while campaigning at the Iowa State Fair. And he added, "I'm for higher standards - state-created, locally implemented - where the federal government has no role in the creation of standards, content or curriculum."

Kasich told voters at a town hall in New Hampshire last month, "I'm going to make sure, at least in my state, that standards are high and local control is maintained. Now some may call that Common Core. I don't really know, but I'm telling you the way it is in my state."

Beyond Common Core, Brown aims to press candidates on how they'd confront other divisive education issues, including the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, President Obama's "Race to the Top" initiative, and how they plan to use dollars at a state or federal level to incentivize reform.

"There are Republican candidates who have argued that the Department of Education should be abolished... so why are you at this forum? You'll really have an opportunity to see whether or not they really know their stuff," Brown told CBS. "Not everybody can carry on an in-depth education policy [conversation] for 45 minutes. We'll see who has really done their homework."

Brown and The 74 are partnering with the Des Moines Register to host a second education summit for the Democratic candidates in Iowa in October.Election 2016: GOP candidates to to be pressed on education reform at summit - CBS News:

The Real Failure Of Common Core | Ted Dintersmith

The Real Failure Of Common Core | Ted Dintersmith:

The Real Failure Of Common Core

The Common Core State Standards were developed in 2009 in an effort to create more rigorous K-12 curriculum standards in math and literacy. To date, 44 states have adopted the standards. But even with such widespread adoption, the Common Core State Standards are among the most hotly contested pieces of legislation in the country -- and will play a prominent role in the presidential campaign ahead.



Why the disagreements? Many conservatives are outraged at attempts to "federalize" the curriculum. Jeb Bush, an ardent supporter of Common Core, is being vilified for his support -- with Donald Trump going so far as to say that support of Common Core will "kill Bush". Chris Christie, a vocal supporter of the Common Core in 2014, now says his views have "evolved" and opposes it. Ted Cruz chimes in, "We need to repeal every word of Common Core!" On the left, Hillary Clinton called the arguments around Common Core "very painful, because the Common Core started off as a bi-partisan effort," but she has avoided taking much of a position. Others on the left express concern about the increasing number of hours that will be spent on testing, lack of teacher preparation, and inadequate curriculum materials.

As with many issues in politics, very few people -- even those with fierce opinions -- understand what Common Core is or have actually plowed through the nearly 200 pages of the standards documents. And almost no one is asking the right questions: Are these the right standards? Will they increase or diminish students' motivation to learn? And, finally, how do we assess student performance against these standards?



In an effort to implement the policy mandate of "all students college ready," the Common Core state standards have been designed to align with college admissions requirements. Because colleges require all applicants to take advanced math -- at least Algebra II -- this is the math standard that all students in the country will now have to meet, requiring mastery of obscure algebraic procedures that the vast majority of adults never use. In English, high school student writing will be limited to essays on the assumption that skill in writing essays is what is required for college. The ability to tell stories -- an essential tool for making one's point in the adult world -- is not in the curriculum.



Even at its best, the new Common Core tests will not assess any of the so-called soft skills that matter a great deal -- and are hard to teach and to learn. Also, because Common Core standards only exist for language arts and mathematics, the time given to teaching other subjects such as science, history, and the arts will continue to decline. New York City schools, for instance, saw an 84 percent decline in spending for arts supplies and equipment between 2006 and 2013. What's worse, 20 percent of the schools do not have an arts teacher of any kind. But in our current high-stakes testing environment, schools are pressured to spend ever-increasing amounts of class time on the subjects that will be tested.



There is the question of whether the Common Core curriculum will result in students working on material that is merely more difficult (and more frequently tested) rather than spending time on content that actually interests them. Will students be more actively engaged as learners with the new curriculum?



In one popular video about recommended approaches to teaching the Common Core, teachers are encouraged to spend eight days teaching Martin Luther King's famous "Letter from Birmingham Jail." There is no suggestion that the teacher might want to explore students' experiences with racism or other topical issues. Teachers are supposed to require students to "just stick to the text" in the discussions. Outstanding urban teachers who have seen this video laugh at it. One told us, "This guy wouldn't last a day in our classrooms."



While we agree that far too many high school discussions lack rigor, a consideration of The Real Failure Of Common Core | Ted Dintersmith:

States Gaining a Say on School Accountability - Education Week

States Gaining a Say on School Accountability - Education Week:

States Gaining a Say on School Accountability

Whether a rewrite of the No Child Left Behind Act makes it over the finish line this year, the federally driven accountability system at the heart of the law seems destined to go the way of the Blockbuster video.

The Obama administration has already opened the door to major flexibility by issuing waivers from the NCLB law, the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

And now, a pair of ESEA rewrite bills headed to conference in Congress would give states acres of new running room when it comes to setting student achievement goals, figuring out how much tests matter, evaluating teachers, and more.

Even if those bills aren't finished by the time President Barack Obama leaves office, presidential candidates in both political parties have either embraced the general direction of the legislation or demanded even more flexibility for states.

If states do win new freedom, what will they do with it? And will the new systems they build be better than the current ones, or will they leave poor and minority students behind?

Some state chiefs are chomping at the bit for greater control, and the chance to experiment with new approaches.

"You're not going to get innovation on these things unless you allow states to be laboratories of policy change," said John White, the Louisiana state superintendent of education.

If the new federal law blesses a state-driven approach, White is interested in giving schools double credit for helping students with disabilities make progress, something he hasn't gotten permission to do under waivers.

Others aren't so optimistic that new federal freedom will produce good results.

"I don't think there's any basis to say there's going to be a lot of people choosing rigorous accountability," said Sandy Kress, who helped write the NCLB law during President George W. Bush's first term in office.

The law, passed in 2002, capitalized on growing attention to accountability at the state level. But Kress doesn't see that same attention now.

"It's being chosen less and less on its own, particularly without the federal pressure to do it," he said.

Holding the Line

The Obama administration shares those concerns, and has made it clear that it wants strong language on accountability in the final version of the ESEA update.

Shifting Landscape

The federal government got involved in accountability in a big way in 2002, with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act. The Obama administration changed the game in key areas, and House and Senate legislation to rewrite the law—the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—would do so as well.

No Child Left Behind Act
The law called for states to develop challenging academic standards and test their students in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school. Schools that missed annual achievement targets—either for all their students, or for a particular group of children, such as English-language learners—faced increasingly serious sanctions. The law’s ultimate goal was to bring every student to the “proficient” level on state tests by the 2013-14 school year, but in practice, no state got all its students over that bar.

NCLB Waivers
In 2011, the Obama administration allowed states to get out from under many of the mandates of the NCLB law–including the 2013-14 proficiency deadline—as long as they embraced the administration’s education redesign priorities. Among those: teacher evaluation through test scores, higher standards, and dramatic school turnarounds for the lowest-achieving 5 percent of “priority” schools, plus interventions for another 10 percent of “focus” schools. Right now, 42 states and the District of Columbia have waivers.

Pending ESEA Reauthorization
Under both House and Senate bills, states would have to stick with the NCLB law’s testing schedule. But they could decide how much weight to give those tests in gauging school performance and could set their own goals for student achievement. There would be no requirement that states identify a certain percentage of schools as low-performing, or use any specific turnaround techniques. Both bills would also open the door to some sort of local assessment, although the House bill goes further than the Senate measure.

For instance, the White House would like to see a final bill require states to single out 5 percent of their schools as low-performing and take the lead in fixing them, like waiver states must do now.

But even if the administration is successful in beefing up protections for struggling students, it's unclear how much those changes will influence some emerging state systems.

California, for example, is already designing a new accountability system that would give districts broad leeway in how they hold their schools accountable. The draft plan is silent on how the state would have to identify and help low-performing schools.

That's a conscious choice, said Keric Ashley, the deputy superintendent.

"I don't think California cares about identifying the lowest 5 percent [of schools] in our state," he said. "That's a federal rule that may continue under ESEA [reauthorization]," and the state will comply, "but that's not going to drive the system we create."

The picture of a state-driven, post-NCLB, post-waivers accountability era is still emerging, and may not come into focus for another four or five years, as states revisit their laws and regulations in the wake of new flexibility, experts say.

Still, waiver applications, trends, and interviews with state chiefs themselves offer clues to what the future may hold.

Some states are beginning to experiment with accountability systems that they say present a more holistic approach to teaching and learning, taking into account noncognitive factors such as "grit," and substituting performance tasks for traditional tests.

States are also moving toward systems that embrace a broader definition of what it means to be "college- and career ready." They're using factors like Advanced Placement participation and dual enrollment, or giving schools credit for career certification.

In some states, not much may change, at least not right away. Chiefs in Minnesota and New Mexico said that, by and large, they're happy with the accountability and teacher effectiveness systems they've developed under waivers.

"We would probably just keep our accountability system the way that it is," said Brenda Cassellius, Minnesota's education commissioner. The legislature may tinker with the state's teacher-evaluation system, which calls for test scores to make up 35 percent of a teacher's overall rating, Cassellius said, but she doesn't envision dropping the test-score requirement altogether.

Minnesota may not be alone there. Thirty-nine states have some sort of teacher-evaluation policy on the books, either in law or regulation, that requires student States Gaining a Say on School Accountability - Education Week:

John Kasich’s Biggest Joke: Ohio Charter Schools

John Kasich’s Biggest Joke: Ohio Charter Schools:

John Kasich’s Biggest Joke: Ohio Charter Schools

John Kasich is a master of making jokes at other people’s expense. His reputation of delivering snide, snarky comments, after nearly 40 years as a performance politician, is legend.

One joke making news Monday is the expectation that Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley will endorse Gov. Kasich for president. This is funny only if backward Alabama, where Republicans dominate state politics even more than in Ohio, is deemed a state whose policies should be bellwethers for the nation. The pending endorsement is framed as an example of Gov. Kasich’s strength stretching “beyond his home state and New Hampshire, and beyond moderate Republicans.”

One joke that isn’t funny and that Gov. Kasich won’t laugh at is Ohio’s education record on for-profit charter schools, which now enroll a record 120,000 students and siphon off billions from better performing public schools.

Various sources have ridiculed the Buckeye State under Gov. Kasich for its ideologically driven partisan plan to dole out billions to for-profit charter schools in spite of state report cards showing just how bad they perform when compared to their public school cousins. Ohio public schools and unionized teachers have long been top targets for Kasich and his for-profit education sponsors and backers, who count on sizable campaign donations to keep the ax of responsibility from falling on them and their business-model schools.

Kasich: “That’s Kind Of The End Of It”

Separate from the generally poor performance of Ohio charter schools, which remains a big thorn in Gov. Kasich’s side as he runs for president, is the potentially criminal conduct of the husband of Gov. Kasich’s chief of staff, Beth Hansen, who now serves as the governor’s presidential campaign manager. David Hansen could find himself in legal cross-hairs for falsifying charter school data to make the industry and its sponsors look less terrible on paper, even when reality shows billions in tax payer dollars taken away from public schools has been squandered by Ohio’s charters, which critics argue should be regulated to the same degree public schools have been forced by the Kasich Administration to dance to the tune orchestrated by he and like-minded hard-right state lawmakers.

One report about the scrubbing said Hansen didn’t include online schools or dropout recovery schools because he thought it was fair to for-profit charter school sponsors.

Hansen did similar data scrubbing before Gov. Kasich hired him as school choice director at more than $100,000 per year in salary. When news broke on Hansen’s allegedly illegal activity, he resigned. Kasich has called a request by seven members of the state school board to investigate Hansen’s conduct at the Ohio Department of Education “political” as he tries to make the troubling issue go away.

Ohio’s twice-elected and now term-limited governor got testy when reporters dared ask about the Hansen affair. Kasich is on record talking about Hansenand why he wants any investigation to stop.

“I mean, the guy is gone. He’s gone. We don’t tolerate any sort of not open and John Kasich’s Biggest Joke: Ohio Charter Schools:

Think It Up - STUDENT POWERED. TEACHER LED. CROWD FUNDED.™

Think It Up:

STUDENT POWERED. TEACHER LED. CROWD FUNDED.™

Think It Up:

Think It Up:

We Are All on the Lunatic Fringe – The Centerless Battle Against Corporate Education Reform | gadflyonthewallblog

We Are All on the Lunatic Fringe – The Centerless Battle Against Corporate Education Reform | gadflyonthewallblog:

We Are All on the Lunatic Fringe – The Centerless Battle Against Corporate Education Reform

It was one of the strangest meetings I’ve ever had with a state legislator.

Why?

First of all, we were all teachers.

Even the legislator. Even his Aide!

Pennsylvania State Rep. Dan Miller (D-Mt. Lebanon) had been a history teacher before he sought a law degree and higher office.

His aide had been a Pittsburgh Public School teacher before she was furloughed and found a place in the representative’s office.

And, of course, there were the seven of us – all teachers at my school district.

We crowded together in his tiny district office to talk about how standardized testing is destroying public schools.

Which brings me to the second strangest thing – Rep. Miller didn’t just agree with us, he did so knowledgeably.

I’ve sat across a table from an awful lot of lawmakers, and they almost always try to find common ground. Disingenuously.

Sure! I agree teachers are important! That’s why we need to fire more of them!

You bet neighborhood schools are vital! That’s why I want to close all the public schools and replace them with charters!

Uh-huh! School funding is critical but not more so than classroom teachers. That’s why we’re cutting your budgets! We want to see what you can do!

None of that at Rep. Miller’s office.

When we brought up how important it is to allow parents throughout the Commonwealth to opt their children out of standardized tests without penalizing their school districts, he praised parent rights.

When we described how the definition of school accountability has changed from We Are All on the Lunatic Fringe – The Centerless Battle Against Corporate Education Reform | gadflyonthewallblog:

Chicago Tribune Editor Kristen McQueary’s Romanticized View of Paul Vallas’ Role in Post-Katrina New Orleans | deutsch29

Chicago Tribune Editor Kristen McQueary’s Romanticized View of Paul Vallas’ Role in Post-Katrina New Orleans | deutsch29:

Chicago Tribune Editor Kristen McQueary’s Romanticized View of Paul Vallas’ Role in Post-Katrina New Orleans

On August 13, 2015, Chicago Tribune editor Kristen McQueary published an editorial in which she wished a “Hurricane Katrina” upon the city of Chicago.

A Katrina would force Chicago to “hit the reset button,” and that is why she was “praying for a real storm” to hit Chicago.

It should come as no surprise that she found herself in a storm as a result– a media storm publicly chastising her for her callousness. (See here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here.)

The August 14, 2015, International Business Times reports on the Chicago Tribune’s initial efforts to quell the resulting swift and powerful negative media response:

After outrage broke out on Twitter, the Chicago Tribune quickly changed the headline of McQueary’s piece from “In Chicago, Wishing for a Hurricane Katrina” to ““Chicago, New Orleans, and Rebirth.” The article was also edited after its original publication to tone down some of the statements readers found most inflammatory. But the New Orleans Times-Picayune archived the original column, and all citations in this article come from the first release of McQueary’s op-ed.

The first link in this post is also to McQueary’s original column entitled, “In Chicago, Wishing for a Hurricane Katrina.”

In her original editorial, McQueary not only glamorizes Katrina’s destruction; she also Chicago Tribune Editor Kristen McQueary’s Romanticized View of Paul Vallas’ Role in Post-Katrina New Orleans | deutsch29:

Alexandra Miletta: It’s All About the Bell Curve: Sheri Lederman’s Day in Court

Alexandra Miletta: It’s All About the Bell Curve: Sheri Lederman’s Day in Court:

It’s All About the Bell Curve: Sheri Lederman’s Day in Court

I traveled up to Albany this morning to hear the oral arguments in the Lederman v. King case presented to Acting Supreme Court Justice Roger McDonough by Bruce Lederman, and Colleen Galligan representing the State Education Department. This is the first time in my life I have sat in a courtroom proceeding. I don’t even watch Law and Order. Let’s just say I was most definitely not in my element. But I’m a pretty good observer of human behavior, a decent note-taker, and I had personal reasons for caring deeply about the outcome of this case, above and beyond all the reasons we all should care about a case that may have far-reaching implications for the misguided reforms of Race to the Top (see full disclosure below). What I witnessed was a masterful take down of the we-need-objectivity rhetoric that is plaguing education. So I should begin by saying that I am hopeful, because it seems someone with the power to make a difference gets it. Judge McDonough gets that it’s all about the bell curve, and the bell curve is biased and subjective.

In case you need a refresher on how test scoring works these days (and who doesn’t) I suggest you start with the excellent fact sheets from Fair Test, first on norm-referenced tests, or NRTs, and then oncriterion-referenced tests, or CRTs, and tests used to measure performance against state standards. In particular note the following important points:

“NRTs are designed to sort and rank students 'on the curve,' not to see if they met a standard or criterion. Therefore, NRTs should not be used to assess whether students have met standards. However, in some states or districts a NRT is used to measure student learning in relation to standards. Specific cut-off scores on the NRT are then chosen (usually by a committee) to separate levels of achievement on the standards. In some cases, a CRT is made using technical procedures developed for NRTs, causing the CRT to sort students in ways that are inappropriate for standards-based decisions.”

As you may notice, we’ve come a long way from getting a 91 out of 100 on a test and knowing that was an A-. Testing today is obtuse and confusing by design. In New York State, we boil it down to a ranking from one to four. That’s right, there’s even jargon for “ones and twos” that is particularly heinous when you learn that politicians have interests in making more than 50% of students fall in those “failing” categories. Today the state released the test score resultsfor students in grades 3-8 and their so-called “proficiency” is reported as below 40% achieving the passing levels. By design the public is meant to read this as miserable failure.

The political narrative of public education failure extends next to the teachers, who must demonstrate student learning based on these faulty tests, even if they don’t teach the subjects tested, and even if they teach students who face hurdles and hardships that have a tremendous impact on their ability to do well on the tests. In Sheri’s case, her rating plunged from 14 out of 20 points to 1 out of 20 points on student growth measures. Yet her students perform exceedingly well on the exams; once you are a “four” you can’t go up to a “four plus” because you’ve hit the ceiling. In fact, one wrong answer could unreasonably mark you as a “three” and you would never know. Similarly, the teacher receives a student growth score that is also based on a comparison to other teachers. When it emerged in the hearing today that the model, also known as VAM, or value-added, pre-determined that 7% of the teachers would be rated “ineffective” Judge McDonough caught on to the injustice that lies at the heart of the bell curve logic: where you rank in the ratings is SUBJECTIVE.

In his affidavits, Professor Aaron Pallas of Teachers College brilliantly explains the many flaws with this misuse of student test Alexandra Miletta: It’s All About the Bell Curve: Sheri Lederman’s Day in Court:

The “turnaround” snafu–deliberately making neighborhood public schools fail? | Bob Braun's Ledger

The “turnaround” snafu–deliberately making neighborhood public schools fail? | Bob Braun's Ledger:

The “turnaround” snafu–deliberately making neighborhood public schools fail?

The latest round of state-mandated school “reforms” imposed on the children, parents, and employees in the Newark public schools has created a bizarre situation in which virtually the entire staffs of so-called “turnaround” schools will be new and unknown to both neighborhood residents and to each other, many of these new teachers already have signaled their opposition to the changes mandated by the reform, and  faculty will be working two different schedules in the same schools.

That could hardly be a recipe for success. So, maybe it is a deliberate plan for failure.

“It’s probably the most destructive action taken yet so far by the state,” said one teacher caught up in the turmoil who, out of fear of retribution, asked to remain anonymous. “It’s massive teacher swapping without any thought given to what the consequences are to children.”

The teacher called it  the “One Newark plan for teachers”–after the “One Newark” universal student enrollment plan that has scattered children to schools throughout the city without regard to family needs. The new Newark superintendent, Christopher Cerf, has refused demands to end “One Newark” and also isn’t likely to stop the destructive “turnaround.”

The president of the Newark Teachers Union, John Abeigon, called the obvious screw-up an effort to impose the “shock doctrine” on schools, creating “intentional chaos” and deliberately trying to make neighborhood public schools fail.

However, neither the school board, the mayor’s office, nor Cerf’s office, would comment on the bureaucratic snafu.

The absurd set of circumstances was created when then state-imposed superintendent Cami Anderson announced that nine more schools would be added to the list of so-called “turnaround” schools that would–theoretically–operate on an extended day schedule with a staff of committed volunteers who had bought into the reform.

But it hasn’t turned out that way. Teachers had the right to opt out of the reform although they were warned they would be transferred to other schools, no matter The “turnaround” snafu–deliberately making neighborhood public schools fail? | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Standardized Test Refusals Ripple Through Statewide Results | KPLU Seattle

Standardized Test Refusals Ripple Through Statewide Results | KPLU News for Seattle and the Northwest:

Standardized Test Refusals Ripple Through Statewide Results

Listen

Listening...

1:24

New statewide test scores released Monday largely confirm what a sneak peek suggested earlier this summer: Pass rates on the new, tougher assessments have dropped, though by less than many feared. But those results come with an asterisk in one grade.

Washington students outperformed the scores from a national trial run of the Smarter Balanced Assessments last year. That’s in line with preliminary results released in July.

What those results didn’t show, however, was what happens when you factor in the kids who declined to take the test, whose scores get averaged in as zeroes. In grades 3-8 it was just a few percent, but in grade 11, about half the students refused the test.

This year the Smarter Balanced tests are not required for those high school juniors to graduate, but they will be phased in as a graduation requirements starting next year.

State Superintendent Randy Dorn says he agrees with the refusers that high school students are over-tested, but says the new Smarter Balanced assessments are still an important tool.

“I think it provides kids information about where they’re at. I think it provides parents information. And it’s just an element of your educational system. It’s not theelement,” Dorn said.

Test refusals brought the share of 11th graders meeting standards down to 26 percent in English, and just 14 percent in math. They also shrank the state’s overall participation rate below a threshold that could trigger sanctions by the U.S. Department of Education.

Dorn says he doesn’t think the federal government is looking to act punitively, though.  Standardized Test Refusals Ripple Through Statewide Results | KPLU News for Seattle and the Northwest:

from a loyal teachers union member – Dear NEA Retired: HOW DARE YOU! | Reclaim Reform

from a loyal teachers union member – Dear NEA Retired: HOW DARE YOU! | Reclaim Reform:

from a loyal teachers union member – Dear NEA Retired: HOW DARE YOU!

Today, August 17, I received the new Summer 2015 issue of neaTODAY: for NEA-Retired Members with the following cover article:

NO PLANS TO RETIRE! ~ 87-year-old school counselor’s high-touch, personal approach boosts student success.

NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia and the NEA Board continue to take funding, in spite of openly promising otherwise, from Bill Gates and other billionaire funders of Common Core State Standards. They accept that money for an NEA Foundation. Therefore they approve of CCSS which comes with attached high stakes tests. The high stakes tests are used as hire-fire decision makers for teacher evaluations. Value Added Modeling (VAM and the other alphabet soup mix of unproven teacher evaluation models) allows teachers to be fired without just cause before they become too old, too ill or too expensive by reaching retirement age. The cover story lauding a person who has no plans to retire sends a “happy” message that is redolent of Gomer Pyle as a US Marine. However, Gomer was a mere television amusement which was never meant to be even close to reality. The NEA article is meant to be what it states.
I intend no personal slight or insult to the lauded counselor, Lillian Orlich, who is certainly a fine person and a fine counselor.
Where are VAM points for a “school counselor’s high-touch, personal approach boosts student success.” Are we really meant to believe that a “high-touch, personal approach” boosts student success? Where is this on any teacher evaluation list?

In my little county of Brevard, Florida over 350 career teachers have left teaching. The same in happening across America which is facing an accredited teacher shortage.
I am a loyal NEA member and have been for over four decades. I served NEA in Illinois on our local faculty association board for years prior to my retirement. I attended this year’s NEA-RA in Orlando not as an elected delegate but to chauffeur a friend and delegate one day, to have dinner and supportive conversations with Illinois delegates another day, and to attend a BAT event on a third day. I shook hands and talked with the Illinois Education Association President. Even though I need not defend my loyalty, I want to make it very from a loyal teachers union member – Dear NEA Retired: HOW DARE YOU! | Reclaim Reform: