Latest News and Comment from Education

Monday, February 15, 2016

Jersey Jazzman: Only You Can Stop Data Abuse: Red Bank, NJ Edition

Jersey Jazzman: Only You Can Stop Data Abuse: Red Bank, NJ Edition:

Only You Can Stop Data Abuse: Red Bank, NJ Edition

Data abuse in eduction policy has got to stop.

I freely admit that there can be different, equally valid ways of interpreting data. I am the last person to say a data analysis is always "proof" of a particular point someone wants to make. I am leery of the use of overly complicated statistical methods when simpler descriptive methods may be better.

But there is no excuse when a school "leader" misuses data to justify his or her practices and policies -- particularly when they do so at the expense of others. 

I'm cynical enough to know politicians and media pundits can and will do this all the time; however, when someone in a position of authority at a school or a district or a state agency or even the USDOE abuses data to make themselves look better and others look worse, it's completely unacceptable.

We are told over and over again by those in positions of influence that we have entered an era of "data-driven instruction." Well, if that's true, a leader is just as derelict in his duty when he misuses data as he is when he misapplies educational practices within the bounds of his authority.

This particularly irks me because we are seeing more "alternative" programs like Relay Graduate School of Education or the Broad Superintendent's Academy or SUPES that appear, to me, to have little interest in developing future educational leaders as good consumers of research and data. I'm not saying university-based programs don't often - See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2016/02/only-you-can-stop-data-abuse-red-bank.html#sthash.6Nha84Vy.dpuf

Teacher: What I didn’t expect to learn about people from standardized testing - The Washington Post

Teacher: What I didn’t expect to learn about people from standardized testing - The Washington Post:

Teacher: What I didn’t expect to learn about people from standardized testing



 Amy Roberts has been teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages in New York City since 2002. She currently teaches eleventh-grade English at International High School at Union Square, where the entire student body is composed of recently arrived immigrants. She is a native of Alexandria, Virginia, and a graduate of T.C. Williams High School. Roberts recently wrote what turned out to a popular post on Facebook about things she has learned from what she says is a dehumanizing standardized testing process,  and she has given me permission to publish it. It is a slice of life that in a high-poverty school that is not often seen.


This is Amy Roberts’ Facebook post:
Standardized tests are the worst. No doubt about it. Excruciating. Torturous. Bad. Not good at all. But I do have to say that there are a couple of aspects of the system that you might not know.
First, you’re getting the students ready, and you ask them to stay after school to prepare, and a die-hard crew actually does. They stay and practice with you, even if they didn’t eat all day because they hate the school lunch. And you say, “You guys done, or do you want to keep going for another half hour?” And they say, “Keep going!” So you do. And, a whole bunch of those kids that stayed after school with you, actually pass the test the first time they try it. And a whole bunch of others don’t pass, not even close, really, but they stayed and tried to do it in a language they have only known for two years, for up to six hours. And, of all the kids that tried it, never gave up, no matter the result, you’re proud. Beyond proud.
Second, you get sent to another school to grade the tests, and you’re in a building full of English teachers, nobody but English
Teacher: What I didn’t expect to learn about people from standardized testing - The Washington Post:

CURMUDGUCATION: NJ: Red Bank and the New White Flight

CURMUDGUCATION: NJ: Red Bank and the New White Flight:

NJ: Red Bank and the New White Flight

The Red Bank, NJ, school system is actually a tiny little thing. Three boroughs (Red Bank, Little Silver and Shrewsbury) run their own K-8 schools which then feed into a regional high school.

There's one other school in Red Bank-- Red Bank Charter School. Red Bank Charter School is back in the news because its operators have asked to double the schools size, from 195 seats to 400, in a move that represents a direct assault on the public schools of the city. RBCS has served not just as a drain on the public system, but a powerful engine for resegregation. Red Bank Charter School is not just an example of how charters gut public school resources, but how charters can be the new white flight.

Red Bank Charter is no Success Academy-- when they announced the expansion, they left their own parents and supporters flatfooted. In January, charter leaders held a meeting for parents who wanted some sort of response for when their neighbors cornered them in the grocery store. One characterized the proposal as a PR disaster. At that meeting, they learned that part of the reason for the initiative was Chris Christie's full-on support for charters in his State of the State speech.

Flanked by Trenton lobbyists and a pair of ex-superintendents-turned-consultants, charter Principal Meredith Pennotti said one key reason the school is seeking to expand is “the political climate” — specifically, Governor Chris Christie’s unabashed support of school choice.

Best to expand the operation while the business climate supports it and before Christie leaves office. But there are more arguments-- none of them good.

RBCS likes to make the argument that they actually spend less per pupil than the public school system. They don't like to point out that the lower per-pupil cost is because they serve fewer 
CURMUDGUCATION: NJ: Red Bank and the New White Flight:



Jeopardy Question: Where Did Teachers Take to the Streets to Protest Educational Centralization & Authoritarianism?

Jeopardy Question: Where Did Teachers Take to the Streets to Protest Educational Centralization & Authoritarianism? (It’s Not in America) – Missouri Education Watchdog:

Jeopardy Question: Where Did Teachers Take to the Streets to Protest Educational Centralization & Authoritarianism? (It’s Not in America)

hungarian protest
From http://hungarianfreepress.com/2016/02/13/twenty-thousand-protest-orbans-education-policies-in-budapest/rom

 Hungarian teachers are protesting centralized public education and current one size fits all educational reforms.  From Twenty thousand protest Orbán’s education policies in Budapest:

“The government’s great reform brought about a system that stripped students of the joy of learning and stripped teachers of the joy of teaching. The regime is consciously throwing into poverty an entire new generation. Our patience has run dry. We are here, so as to declare together, that enough is enough. We won’t stand idly by,” declared Mrs. István Galló, chief of the PSZ union.
The protest also included speeches from students and school administrators. The principal of the Teleki Blanka High School in Budapest, István Pukli, noted that the regime is “not accustomed to people saying ‘no’” and added that the government had now entered into its most stubborn phase. Mr. Pukli demanded that the regime spend 6% of Hungary’s GDP on education, in order to address the damage that they have done over the past six years.
The most radical group involved in the protests is called the Network of the Uninvited. Activists affiliated with this group distributed thousands of flyers on Saturday declaring that there “is no longer any reason to engage in dialogue with government on any issue.” The Network calls upon Hungarians, in all fields and in all regions, to reject all dialogue with the government and its officials, and instead engage in systematic forms of civil disobedience across the country. The Network described Mr. Orbán, his ministers and leading civil servants as “barbarians.”

Many American moms and dads could consider themselves to be in a Network of the Uninvited and would agree that there is no lonJeopardy Question: Where Did Teachers Take to the Streets to Protest Educational Centralization & Authoritarianism? (It’s Not in America) – Missouri Education Watchdog:

NYC Educator: Whatever Eva Wants, Eva Gets

NYC Educator: Whatever Eva Wants, Eva Gets:

Whatever Eva Wants, Eva Gets


The big story in reformy Chalkbeat NY's Rise and Shine, of course, is Eva Moskowitz. Moskowitz is under fire for the documented cruelty of one of her teachers. Alan Singer points out that this teacher is not actually certified but a Moskowitz mentor teacher nonetheless. Moskowitz, who refuses to sign the standard agreement for her pre-K program, can apparently certify anyone she wants however she pleases.

Chalkbeat links to a number of stories stating that this sort of behavior would not be acceptable in wealthier schools. Doubtless that's true. I certainly would not want my child in this teacher's class, and it's hard to imagine parents who feel otherwise. In fact, the NY Times report suggesting students regularly pee their pants rather than asking for a moment less test prep leads me to believe this behavior is not, as Moskowitz claimed, an anomaly.

The fact is Chancellor's Regulation A-421, against verbal abuse, would have landed this teacher in a ton of hot water. In NYC public schools, you simply are not permitted to address children in an abusive or hostile manner. In fact, the wording is such that pretty much anything that makes a kid feel uneasy can be construed as abuse. If you say, "hello," and it makes the kid feel bad somehow, a crazy principal could bring you up on charges.

Nonetheless, I do not condone what this teacher did to this first grader. A teacher ought to be supportive rather than abusive, and anyone 
NYC Educator: Whatever Eva Wants, Eva Gets:



The Horace Mann League: Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz

The Horace Mann League: Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz:

Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz



 From the Journal of Education Finance,  Fall 2012

by Kern Alexander
The story goes that tuition voucher schools and charter schools are creatures of the spirit of capitalismand that public funding of them will increase competition, making all schools more efficient and academically better, especially public schools. For that theory to work it is hypothesized that parents as “rational people will make choices as to the education of their children in perfect markets.” In the realm of economics, this reasoning is called the “rational expectations hypothesis” or the “efficient markets hypothesis.”

The “efficient markets” notion applied to schools via parental choice means that parents will, in their wisdom, utilize public money to send their children to private schools and that ipso factothe education level of the nation rises commensurate with the level and intensity of competition among parents in choosing private, clerical and/or corporate charter schools. For the education level to rise requires, of course, that parents will make rational decisions relative to quality education. Essential to the concept is that parents have the knowledge necessary to make informed educational choices. In a perfect market, information is presumed to “flow like water–faster than water,”and it is necessary that those things irrelevant to quality education, or even detrimental to it, are not present in parental decision making. If parental choice is not based on quality education and instead the school choices are rooted in race, religion, wealth, ethnicity, etc., then you will have “imperfect competition.” Imperfect competition would result in the overall decline in the quality of education. 

In the economic marketplace, “rational expectations,” serve as the engine to improve the economy. At bottom, these expectations of individuals and corporations foster efficiency, production costs fall and profits increase. Improvement of educational quality via a scheme of parental choice, however, is much more complex. If the state seeks to drive its economic progress by means of the wisdom of parental choice, it must be sure that the parental choices add to some worthwhile store of knowledge for the next generation. That education in which public money is invested must be calibrated to the end of producing productive knowledge, the “training of intellect” is designed to “stimulate the mind of the individual The Horace Mann League: Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz:

A Big Red “F” For Indiana | Live Long and Prosper

A Big Red “F” For Indiana | Live Long and Prosper:

A Big Red “F” For Indiana



 Indiana legislators and “reformers” love letter grades…so communities (via their schools) are graded as A through F using already invalid ISTEP scores. Those grades are good for things like getting campaign donations from privatizers, bashing public school teachers, and directing real estate agents to where the money is, but not much else.

Now that the Network for Public Education has given Indiana a grade of F because of the failure to actually help improve student achievement and public education, legislators will likely complain that these grades aren’t valid…that they’re biased (irony alert)…or even more likely, they’ll ignore them completely.
An editorial in Sunday’s (Feb. 14, ’16) Journal Gazette summarizes the report about Indiana…
Indiana earns Fs for supporting teacher professionalism, resisting privatization and investing school funding resources wisely. It earned Ds for rejecting high-stakes testing and giving children a chance for success. Indiana public schools continue to serve the vast majority of students. Public school enrollment this fall was 1,046,146 students, compared to 84,030 non-public students.
The poor mark for high-stakes testing won’t surprise anyone familiar with the state’s continuing struggles with ISTEP+, the standardized test administered to students in grades 3 through 8. Indiana also is among a handful of states requiring third-graders to pass a reading test to be promoted to fourth grade.
The state did get a B in school finance…and a D in High Stakes Testing and Chance for Success, though, as we’ll see I disagree with the High Stakes Testing A Big Red “F” For Indiana | Live Long and Prosper:

Hoosier School Heist TV is Doug Martin's channel featuring videos of his book tour across Indiana speaking on the corporate takeover of public education. Order Hoosier School Heist at http://hoosierschoolheist.com/.
Follow Hoosier School Heist on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HoosierSchoolHeist
Tweet with Doug Martin at: https://twitter.com/DougMartinED

Sarah Davies: Excellence not Success

Excellence not Success:

Excellence not Success

Happy kid reading magic book
Waiting in the doctor’s office today, my oldest asked what I was reading. When I told her it was Guy Claxton’s What’s the Point of School?, she looked confused. “Mommy, I know what the point of school is. Why do you need to read a book on it? It’s to learn and be patient and to learn to be nice, and respectful and honest, intelligent, and kind. You go to school to learn to be part of a group. That’s the point of school.” (pauses) “Oh! And magic tricks. You can’t learn magic tricks if you don’t go to school.”
Magic tricks aside, she sees school as a place to learn and grow. For her, it’s a shaping environment that will help her in her head, her heart, and her community.
This view of school all too often gets lost in the desire to have the ‘best’ students, the ‘hardest’ workers, Ivy-league at the expense of Junior League. Even when we try to mitigate its less than desirable effects, school can too easily become a shaping place for the wrong reasons.
Successful students, measured by grades, grow up to be measured by their bank account; the higher the number the better. Shouldn’t it be about something more?
I want excellence for myself and my children. When I was a kid, my grandfather told me that he didn’t care if I was a toll-taker as long as I was the best one I could possibly be. Whatever you do, be excellent at it he told all of his grandchildren.
We have, unfortunately, traded in excellence in education for success. The former is Excellence not Success:

Success Academies’ No-Excuses Charters: Today’s Dickensian Cram Schools | janresseger

Success Academies’ No-Excuses Charters: Today’s Dickensian Cram Schools | janresseger:
Success Academies’ No-Excuses Charters: Today’s Dickensian Cram Schools


 I am a great fan of the later novels of Charles Dickens—Bleak House, Great Expectations andOur Mutual Friend, but 40 years ago, when I read Hard Times, the fable seemed so overdone as to be far-fetched.  When I picked up this 1854 novel again last week, however, I discovered that these days, its critique seems hardly over the top at all. Hard Times is Dickens’ critique of inequality in a mid-19th century English mill town, of authoritarian schools that drill utilitarian economic theory, and of the social Darwinist ethic that celebrates the individual and the success of the self-made man.  Bounderby, Dickens’ bullying One Percenter, like Donald Trump, creates a fictitious story of a humble origin as a means of promoting the myth of his rise on his own merits.  And Thomas Gradgrind, the proprietor of the novel’s school, prefigures his modern counterpart, Eva Moskowitz.

As I watched the video on the NY Times website last Friday of a teacher at one of the “no-excuses” Success Academy Charter Schools run by Eva Moskowitz—this particular school in the Cobble Hill neighborhood of Brooklyn, I thought of Thomas Gradgrind’s school. The video exposes a first grade teacher berating and insulting a girl who has become confused while trying to explain her math paper after the teacher has demanded that the child present her work to the class.  When the six-year-old is unable to describe her work, the teacher grabs the child’s paper, rips it in pieces, and humiliates the little girl in front of her classmates.
Dickens’ second chapter, titled “Murdering the Innocents,” begins with a definition of utilitarian education,  the children described as “little pitchers… who were to be filled so full of facts.”  Never mind their hearts.  “Thomas Gradgrind, sir. A man of realities. A man of facts Success Academies’ No-Excuses Charters: Today’s Dickensian Cram Schools | janresseger:

Outspoken Candidates Could Revive Rancor on Education Board | The Texas Tribune

Outspoken Candidates Could Revive Rancor on Education Board | The Texas Tribune:

Outspoken Candidates Could Revive Rancor on Education Board

Right to Left, Top to Bottom: Georgina Perez, Dakota Carter, Mary Lou Bruner, Joe Fierro, Jr., Jasmine L. Jenkins, Keven M. Ellis
Right to Left, Top to Bottom: Georgina Perez, Dakota Carter, Mary Lou Bruner, Joe Fierro, Jr., Jasmine L. Jenkins, Keven M. Ellis

 Save for some flare-ups in the past few years over what to put in social studies textbooks — and how to handle an error in one of them — the State Board of Education has seen more turbulent days.

The 15-member board in charge of crafting curriculum and textbooks for the state’s more than five million public schoolchildren spent years building a national reputation as the center of raucous quarrels over how — and whether — to teach young Texans about evolution, Islam and climate change.
Now, such charged exchanges are less common. Those who closely watch the board attribute the shift to the dispersion of a cadre of fervent right-wing conservatives, many of whom either retired or were voted out.
But the relative camaraderie could soon come to an end as two more moderate members step aside — and not just among the board’s Republican membership, where nearly all the notorious infighting has occurred.
Among the contenders in the races to replace Republican Thomas Ratliff of Mount Pleasant and Democrat Martha Dominguez of El Paso is a 68-year-old East Texas retiree who has said that President Obama used to be a prostitute and a 41-year-old self-described“MeXicana Empowerment Specialist” who says the board’s Democrats have sat silent for far too long.
Both Republican Mary Lou Bruner, of Mineola, and Democrat Georgina Cecilia Perez, of El Paso, taught in public schools for years. That’s one of the few things they have in common, along with a clear passion for their respective causes. Observers and political scientists say both women have emerged as strong contenders in their separate races and could easily claim victory in the March 1 primary, an outcome that could mean the return of a more quarrelsome board.   
DISTRICT 9
Bruner, who has won endorsements from influential movement conservatives like Cathie Adams and JoAnn Fleming, is one of three Republicans vying for the nomination to replace Ratliff in representing District 9, a 31-county swath that spans the northeast quadrant of the state.
But it’s Bruner’s voluminous Facebook posts, not her endorsements, that have generated the most buzz in the race. A majority of them echo the kind of anti-Muslim, anti-gay or anti-science opinions commonly spouted by members at education board meetings of yore, but observers — and detractors — say she takes it to a whole other level.
“Obama has a soft spot for homosexuals because of the years he spent as a male prostitute in his twenties,” Bruner said last October in a now-deleted post on the wall of her personal Outspoken Candidates Could Revive Rancor on Education Board | The Texas Tribune:

Anti-Bullying Strategy That Teaches Bystanders To Intervene Is Most Effective, Say Study - Yahoo News

Anti-Bullying Strategy That Teaches Bystanders To Intervene Is Most Effective, Say Study - Yahoo News:
Anti-Bullying Strategy That Teaches Bystanders To Intervene Is Most Effective, Say Study


 A new anti-bullying strategy that focuses on teaching bystanders to intervene has been proven to dramatically cut bullying and also improve the self-esteem of bullied children.

Called KiVa, the the new approach involves role-playing exercises and computer simulations that encourage students to increase empathy and think how they could intervene if someone else is being bullied.
While previous strategies have concentrated solely on reducing bullying rates, KiVa also focuses on those who need the most help - children who are repeatedly bullied.
In a study led by UCLA, the strategy was found to cut down on bullying rates and also reduce the depression of those children who were bullied on a weekly basis.
It also helped to build the self esteem of those who had been bullied.
What’s more, a comparison with 53 other anti-bullying strategies showed that that the the KiVa approach was the most effective at reducing bullying rates.
The research involved more than 7,000 students in 77 schools across Finland.
The authors of the study believe that introducing ‘zero tolerance’ policies on bullying in schools and simply punishing bullies is ineffective.
Instead, they argue that the focus should be on teaching students to stand up for others.
The KiVa approach has been tested in several countries and has been implemented at a national level in Finland.
The new technique is named after the the Finnish words ‘Kiusaamista vastaan’ meaning ‘against bullying’, and ‘kiva’, meaning ‘nice’.
The research was first published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.

Free-range education: Why the unschooling movement is growing - Yahoo News

Free-range education: Why the unschooling movement is growing - Yahoo News:

Free-range education: Why the unschooling movement is growing

A once-utopian idea – allowing kids to ‘discover’ their own education path while learning at home – goes mainstream.



 On a late Monday morning in this rural New Hampshire town, Dayna and Joe Martin’s four children are all home. Devin, age 16, is hammering a piece of steel in the blacksmith forge he and his parents built out of a storage shed in the backyard. Tiffany, 14, is twirling on a hoverboard, deftly avoiding the kaleidoscope-painted cabinets in the old farmhouse’s living room. Ivy, 10, and Orion, 7, are sitting next to each other using the family’s two computers, clicking through an intense session of Minecraft.  

It looks a lot like school vacation, or a weekend. But it’s not. This, for the Martin kids, is school. Or, to put it more accurately, it’s their version of “unschooling,” an educational theory that suggests children should follow their own interests, without the imposition of school or even any alternative educational curriculum, because this is the best way for them to learn and grow. 
“I don’t even know what grades are,” says Orion, who has never spent a day in school, has never followed a lesson plan, and has never taken a test. (Tests, his mother says, can be degrading to children – an invasion of their freedom of thought.) 
“We live as if school doesn’t exist,” Ms. Martin explains. “People are really brainwashed into seeing things in school form, with life breaking down into subjects. This life is about freedom and not having limits. It’s about really trusting your kids. And it’s amazing what they do.”
Martin says that, left alone to follow their own interests, her children have learned everything from history and ethics to trade skills and math. But what they learn isn’t her concern, she says. She doesn’t much care if her son knows how to read by age 8. She trusts he will read when he is ready to read. Her role, she says, is not to be her children’s teacher or judge, but a facilitator and perhaps partner in helping them follow their own passions.  
Martin is the first to admit that her family’s approach to child rearing might seem, at first glance, “out there.” She is also upfront that it has been lonely at times, disconnected from families whose lives revolve around school, as well as from traditional home-schoolers. But in recent years she has noticed something: She and her family are a lot closer to the mainstream than they used to be. 
Over the past decade, the number of children home-schooling has skyrocketed, along with the number of families practicing some form of unschooling. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of children learning at home jumped from just over a million in 2003 to 1.7 million in 2012. But since there is no federal registry of home-schoolers, and many home-schooled children are counted as being in the public school system, many researchers believe the true number is somewhere between 2 million and 3 million, if not higher. To put that in context, the US Department of Education estimates that 2.3 million children were enrolled in charter schools in 2012-13.  
Meanwhile, although data are sketchy, some surveys have found that as many as 50 percent of home-schoolers embrace some variety of unschooling – a category that might range from the Martins’ extreme hands-off approach to that of other parents who incorporate many ideas of self-directed learning but still set some limits and goals for their children’s education. 
The rise of unschooling parallels a growing dissatisfaction among American parents about the country’s public education system and its focus on standardized testing. It also tracks an increase in alternative educational philosophies, such as the Montessori method or the popular Reggio Emilia theory, both of which are based on the idea of children as “whole,” curious beings whose education should be guided by their own natural interests and inclinations. 
But the blossoming of unschooling also reflects something more. While it once was considered a hippie, countercultural practice, experts say that unschooling now taps into changing mainstream values surrounding children and parenting, institutions and individuality, and the best way to seize the American dream. 
It also, says Michael Apple, an education professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, taps into a growing national sentiment that “safe” and “responsible” private institutions of all kinds are better than public ones that can sometimes be “messy and violent.” Although unschooling has many critics – those who worry about the educational philosophy behind it, those who worry that it reflects a narcissistic culture obsessed with self-fulfillment, those who see it as adding to a disturbing segmentation of American society – it is increasingly accepted as a viable educational option by everyone from soccer moms and urban hipsters to rural Evangelicals and suburbanites.  
“I see a shift in the types of people who contact me,” says Martin. “I get calls from doctors, lawyers. I have talked to [professional] rugby players, and low-income people living in trailers. This is not a small subculture anymore. This is a movement.”
•     •     •
The idea of unschooling is not new. The Massachusetts author and educator John Holt first coined the term in the 1970s as a play on the popular 7-Up “Uncola” advertising campaign. Holt believed that children learned best when given time and resources to follow their own passions outside schools, which he saw as prisonlike institutions that worked to squash inquisitiveness and produce homogeneous industrial cogs.
As an alternative, he suggested parents stand back and let children decide what they wanted to learn. This meant that some kids might never learn algebra, which he believed was just fine; those kids might find their passion in art or cooking. Other children might love math, or marine biology, or architecture, or farming. Although unschoolers follow Holt’s teachings to different degrees of faithfulness, they share the idea of letting children take a central role in how their lives are organized. They typically wake up naturally, have unstructured days, and delve into topics that they have chosen. Parents might act as guides – helping children find information on, say, veterinarian care and then setting up an internship at a local vet clinic – but they are typically followers rather than leaders when it comes to subject matter.   
“Unschooling takes learning out of the realm of the school,” says Patrick Farenga of HoltGWS LLC, which works to continue the late educator’s mission. “It’s ‘What do you want to learn today? How do you want to set this up?’ Educators still don’t get this. They have bought into the idea that the only learning that matters is the learning they can grade in school.”
From its beginning, unschooling attracted a small but steady band of followers. “It has had some bohemian chic for 40 years,” says Stanford University sociologist Mitchell Stevens, who wrote the 2001 book “Kingdom of Children: Culture and Controversy in the Homeschooling Movement.” “It was out-there cool when John Holt championed it in the 1970s. It’s always getting rediscovered.”
But increasingly, Professor Stevens and others who have studied unschooling say, the practice is losing its rebel, alternative ethos. Although regulations differ state by state (one reason why accurate statistics on the movement are difficult to pin down), unschooling in some form is legal everywhere in the country. And the families who do it are increasingly mainstream, middle-class, and educated. 
In a survey of some 5,500 home-schooling families, filmmakers Dustin Woodard and Jeremy Stuart, whose documentary about unschooling, “Class Dismissed,” came out in 2014, found that the vast majority of unschooling parents (almost 89 percent) were married, and 91 percent had at least some college experience. Almost half live in the suburbs, while the rest are split fairly evenly between urban and rural areas. Almost all say they are satisfied or extremely satisfied with their choice to unschool their children – whether because they have more time as a family, are able to travel more, or see their children learning successfully. While many unschoolers say they are opting out of the national obsession with college admissions and standardized test scores, literature about unschooling regularly mentions how unschoolers are often accepted into top colleges.  
All of this, education experts say, means that unschooling is becoming a less risky choice for parents and increasingly represents a viable alternative to a public school system that has Free-range education: Why the unschooling movement is growing - Yahoo News:

ESSA and the shifting landscape at the US Department of Education | Brookings Institution

ESSA and the shifting landscape at the US Department of Education | Brookings Institution:

ESSA and the shifting landscape at the US Department of Education


The year 2015 was momentous for American education for two somewhat contradictory reasons—it marked the 50th anniversary of the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).   ESEA established a major federal presence in K-12 schooling for the first time, while ESSA (the latest reauthorization of ESEA) significantly rolled back the federal role in education.  Americans have always been schizophrenic about federal involvement in education, with conservatives opposed to federal interference in what they see as a state issue, and liberals supportive of federal efforts to address pervasive socio-economic and racial achievement gaps.  Beginning in the 1990s, a centrist bipartisan coalition of moderate Democrats and Republicans coalesced around using federal policy to prod states to take steps to improve educational opportunity and workforce development.
A new federal focus on accountability for student achievement and school reform was outlined in the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994 and was given more “teeth” in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in 2001. These developments involved the federal government for the first time in core matters of school governance—such as academic standards, student assessment, teacher quality, school choice, and school restructuring—and fundamentally altered the relationship between the federal government and the states in education policy. They also severely strained the federal grant-in-aid system and the administrative capacity of the U.S. Department of Education (ED).
The challenge in the post-NCLB era was that the feds demanded that states develop new systems for tracking and disseminating student achievement data and intervening in struggling schools. States resented this new level of federal involvement and struggled to meet all of the federal mandates. Consequently, as federal goals and methods diverged from those of the states, the intergovernmental relationship underwent a significant transformation. As the main interpreter and implementer of federal education policy, the ED has played a crucial (if under-explored) role in this transformation.
Federalism, and the lack of national constitutional authority to directly impose school reform on the states, has greatly complicated American politics and policymaking in education.  It has forced the federal government to pursue its goals for school reform indirectly—through the grant-in-aid system and state education agencies. The U.S.’s intergovernmental relationship with education in the contemporary era is both cooperative and coercive—a duality that makes it complex and contingent on broader political forces. The relationship has a cooperative element because the ED must rely on state education agencies as a conduit for federal education spending and as the implementer of federal policies on the ground in school districts. It is also coercive, however, as federal spending and policies have increasingly been used to push states to undertake politically unpopular changes they likely would not have undertaken in the absence of federal pressure. For the ED to be effective in gaining state compliance with federal education policies, it needs sufficient statutory authority, administrative capacity, and political support. However, throughout most of the thirty-five year history of the department, these resources have not been present.
The department has always been a political hot potato and the anti-ED push joined forces with the anti-standards push in support of ESSA, which helped to codify a reduction in staffing and authority at ED.  As usual, Republican presidential candidates are calling for the abolition of ESSA and the shifting landscape at the US Department of Education | Brookings Institution:


The biggest regret from a 41-year career in education reporting (and a lot more) - The Washington Post

The biggest regret from a 41-year career in education reporting (and a lot more) - The Washington Post:

The biggest regret from a 41-year career in education reporting (and a lot more)

John Merrow is an award-winning broadcast journalist who spent 41 years covering public education in the United States for PBS. He retired last year and retired from his Learning Matters production company (which was taken over by Education Week.) In the following piece, Merrow talks about his biggest regret of his career and some things he learned along the way. The interview was conducted by James Harvey, executive director of the National Superintendents Roundtable. He helped write the seminal 1983 report “A Nation at Risk” and is the author or co-author of four books and dozens of articles on education.

By James Harvey
By the time he retired last October, John Merrow had had a 41-year bird’s eye view of American schools as a journalist with NPR and PBS NewsHour. Armed with a doctorate in education from Harvard, he’d served as a critical school friend throughout his career, pointing out the flaws in the thinking of defenders and critics of public education alike.
In just a single example of his doggedness in pursuing a story, Merrow once spent six years following superintendent David Hornbeck around Philadelphia for the raw material on a documentary about life as an urban school superintendent, titled, appropriately enough, “The Toughest Job in America.” Merrow, who founded the production company, Learning Matters and won numerous awards in journalism including Emmy nominations, prestigious Peabody Awards, and the Harold W. McGraw Prize in Education, was once hailed by Jim Lehrer, former host of PBS NewsHour, as “quite simply, the leading education journalist in America.”
He was in a reflective mood when he met with the National Superintendents Roundtable late last year, engagingly putting on a PBS hat to play the role of his successor interviewing him about what he’d learned over four decades — and then removing the hat to respond.
Q) What’s your big takeaway after 41 years?
A) Parents used to send kids to school because that’s where the knowledge was. They were also interested in socialization and custodial care. That’s all The biggest regret from a 41-year career in education reporting (and a lot more) - The Washington Post:


WTF: UC says the cost of its secret snooping system is secret - San Francisco Chronicle

UC says the cost of its secret snooping system is secret - San Francisco Chronicle:

UC says the cost of its secret snooping system is secret

UC President Janet Napolitano had Web scanners installed after a hacker attack at the UCLA medical center last summer. Photo: Lenny Ignelzi, Associated Press
UC President Janet Napolitano had Web scanners installed after a hacker attack at the UCLA medical center last summer.

 University of California President Janet Napolitano’s office is refusing to disclose the price ofthose controversial Internet snooping scanners installed recently at the 10 UC campuses — or reveal whether the taxpayer-financed security system went through competitive bidding.

Napolitano had the Web scanners installed in the wake of a hacker attack at the UCLA medical center last summer. They are capable of monitoring all faculty and staff e-mail and Web traffic.
Faculty members at UC Berkeley sounded the alarm, saying the system conjured the prospect that university bosses could eavesdrop on all sorts of private communications.
Now, they’re also pointing out that the system doesn’t come cheap.
“It looks as though the cost, just for the hardware installed on the Berkeley campus, is in the ballpark of $4 million to $6 million,” said Ethan Ligon, an associate professor of agriculture and resource economics and one of six members of a joint faculty-administration committee on information technology.
“Add numbers like that up over all 10 campuses and medical centers,” and you’ve got one pricey security system, Ligon said.
UC spokesman Steve Montiel insists there are no plans to read anyone’s e-mails, and that the entire process of planning and installing the new security system was discussed in open meetings with faculty participation.
However, when we asked for the cost of the system and whether there had been an open bidding process for what looks like a multimillion-dollar operation, Montiel responded in an e-mail: “Our cyber security efforts after the attack at UCLA Health were conducted at the direction of legal counsel in anticipation of lawsuits.
“We wound up with 17 lawsuits altogether,” Montiel said. “Because of the litigation and legal issues, we are unfortunately limited in what we can share broadly at this point.”
Ligon’s take: “Not only faculty, but also administration here at Berkeley are being kept completely UC says the cost of its secret snooping system is secret - San Francisco Chronicle: