Latest News and Comment from Education

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

The U.S. Education Reform Movement Has Stalled

The U.S. Education Reform Movement Has Stalled:

THE U.S. EDUCATION REFORM MOVEMENT HAS STALLED


Everyone wants to think her job is challenging, but Carmen Fariña’s is close to impossible: She is the chancellor of New York City’s Department of Education. There are 1.1 million students in the five boroughs, which is more than the population of all but nine American cities. There are 1,800 schools in New York; Chicago has 500. Brooklyn Technical High School has more students (5,500) than Princeton does undergraduates (5,200).
The budget for the department Fariña manages is $27.6 billion, which exceeds the gross domestic product of El Salvador. There are 76,000 teachers in New York City, five times as many as in all of Idaho. The quantity of No. 2 pencils used each year is unknown but, most likely, vast enough to fell several forests.
The woman who presides over this pedagogical enormity is a 73-year-old abuela (as The New York Timesonce called her) from Brooklyn who has been in public education for the entirety of her four-decade-long professional life. Nearly three years ago, Fariña was appointed to the chancellorship by the newly elected mayor, Bill de Blasio, a selection that surprised some who had hoped for a more radical break with the past. De Blasio, after all, is a self-styled progressive who promised “transcendent” change, surrounding himself with youthful advisers minted in the Barack Obama mold. Fariña, meanwhile, was coaxed out of retirement.
De Blasio is now more than halfway through his term, as is Fariña. Neither is especially popular. The mayor is facing several investigations into his fundraising activities, which have left him testy and New Yorkers exasperated; only 42 percent of voters in a July poll approved of the job he is doing. Fariña’s approval rating, according to a May poll, is an even-more-dreary 29 percent. Some are wondering if she’s doing enough to improve schools, or if she seeks merely to placate the powerful teachers union while stopping the charter school movement. Others believe the school reform movement has been a disaster that only veterans like Fariña can fix.
Since New York is the national bellwether for education reform, Fariña’s smallest decisions attract scrutiny. Her biggest often invite fury. Some see her as a defender of teachers, others as the pawn of teachers unions. Is she merely a supporter of big public schools, of the sort that used to anchor a neighborhood, or does she harbor a visceral antipathy toward charter schools, which often swoop in when bigger schools fail? Is she resistant to evaluating teachers and testing students or just suspicious of how easily data can be misunderstood and misused?
These are questions that matter not only to P.S. 75 in the Bronx but also to an elementary school in Tulsa and a high school in Seattle. Much like the New York City Police Department, the New York City Department of Education often instructs the rest of the country in how to do things—and, sometimes, how not to do them.
Fariña’s answers to the above questions have been starkly different from those proffered by her predecessor, Joel Klein, a potent symbol of a school reform movement pumped full of money by philanthropic foundations and altruistic hedge-funders. With the blessing of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Klein embraced teacher evaluations and standardized exams, spurned unions and built charter schools. The efforts of Klein and like-minded reformers were chronicled in the 2010 documentary Waiting for Superman, which demonized traditional public schools as snake pits of union cronyism and chronic failure.
Superman never showed up. Federal programs like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top left plenty of children well below the summit, while teacher evaluations and standardized tests remain fraught, imperfect measures of teaching and learning. “It’s hard to see any good news for reformers,” says Diane Ravitch, a New York University professor who is a vociferous supporter of traditional public schools. As The U.S. Education Reform Movement Has Stalled:

Fethullah Gülen: public intellectual or just another charter school crook?

Fethullah Gülen: public intellectual or public enemy?:

Fethullah Gülen: public intellectual or public enemy?


On July 15, 2016, the Turkish Republic survived an attempted military coup d’état that killed nearly 300 people and cost more than an estimated US$100 billion.
Immediately following the coup, Turkey’s government began a massive purge of state, military, business and civil society institutions in an attempt to remove alleged plotters from the ranks of social power. To date, approximately 75,000 people have been detained or forced to resign.
Human rights groups allege that arbitrary arrest and torture are becoming routine. Turkey’s leaders strongly refute such claims. They argue that security forces are doing what is necessary to protect the nation from a clearly defined enemy. The implications of the failed coup are deeply concerning for Turkey, the region and the world.
Gulen is burned in effigy during a pro-government demonstration in Istanbul, July 18, 2016. REUTERS/Alkis Konstantinidis
What unites the purged are alleged connections to Turkey’s most famous religious personality, Fethullah Gülen.
Presented by his followers as a learned scholar and orator, Gülen leads a transnational social and economic network that participants call Hizmet, from the Turkish word for “service,” and outsiders call the Gülen movement. The Turkish government insists Fethullah Gülen orchestrated the coup, and are demanding both domestic and international cooperation to bring him and his alleged co-conspirators to justice.
What do we know about this man and his movement?

The Gülen movement

Anchored in private education, the GM began in the late 1960s. That’s when Gülen established a following of mostly young men attracted to his emotional call for religious Turks to participate in secular education and the market economy.
Gülen discouraged participation in Turkey’s primary Islamic political movement. Instead, he encouraged a patient and calculated accumulation of economic and institutional influence. As a form of “market Islam,” members of the GM moved beyond education to succeed in news and entertainment media, information technologies, manufacturing, finance and other sectors. By the early 2000s, the GM operated schools and businesses in well over 100 countries.
I first met associates of the Gülen movement in 2005 in the United States. At the time, I was aware that Gülen lived in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania, and I knew of several interfaith institutions that designated Gülen as their honorary president. I chose to do my dissertation research on the GM. I was intrigued by his brand of Islamic activist thinking, and by his followers' focus on participation over confrontation, and on market competition Fethullah Gülen: public intellectual or public enemy?:
 

Big Education Ape: US to discuss Gulen extradition in Turkey next week | TRT World - http://bigeducationape.blogspot.com/2016/08/us-to-discuss-gulen-extradition-in.html

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

Diane Ravitch: Worldwide, Public Education Is Up for Sale | Best Countries | US News

Worldwide, Public Education Is Up for Sale | Best Countries | US News:

Worldwide, Public Education Is Up for Sale
From the U.K. to Liberia, the school privatization movement gathers steam.



For the past three decades, critics of public education in the United States have assailed it and used its flaws to promote publicly funded privatization. Corporate and political interests have attacked the very concept of public education, claiming that the private sector is invariably superior to the public sector.
These developments are by no means limited to the U.S.; the same movement to privatize public schools is occurring in the United Kingdom, Africa and other regions – with troubling implications

In the U.K., the Conservative Party government wants to turn all public schools into private academies, funded by taxpayers. The British multinational corporation Pearson has ambitions to open for-profit schools using its products in many nations across the world. In Africa, a corporation called Bridge International Academies (BIA) is opening for-profit schools in poor countries that cost $1 a week. Liberia is considering outsourcing its entire elementary program to BIA, which is funded by American billionaires Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and others from Wall Street.
The Economist magazine wrote a glowing article about BIA's plan to make low-cost schooling available in Africa, because existing public schools are so poorly resourced. The potential market of hundreds of millions of children is alluring and sure to be profitable. Teachers in the Bridge schools are uncertified; They teach a scripted curriculum from a notebook computer. Many families cannot afford even $1 a week, especially if they have more than one child. Meanwhile, the state is relieved of responsibility to supply what is being outsourced to private enterprise.
Many of the plans to privatize education globally can trace their beginnings back to ideas and funding that started in the United States.
In the U.S., the attack on public education can be traced to a 1983 report by a commission appointed by the Reagan administration. Titled "A Nation at Risk," it warned that the public schools were so mediocre that the future prosperity of the nation was endangered by them. Advocates of privatization saw an opportunity to advance their cause and joined in the Worldwide, Public Education Is Up for Sale | Best Countries | US News:

Obama administration accused of trying to dictate education policy to states — again - The Washington Post

Obama administration accused of trying to dictate education policy to states — again - The Washington Post:

Obama administration accused of trying to dictate education policy to states — again



 The U.S. Education Department solicited public comment on draft regulations it has created for states to implement the school “accountability” and data reporting provisions of the new Every Student Succeeds Act — and, boy, did it get feedback, some of it scathing.

When Education Secretary John B. King Jr. announced the proposed rules in May, he said they were designed to “give states the opportunity to work all of their stakeholders … to protect all students’ right to a high-quality education,” and that they “give educators room to reclaim for all of their students the joy and promise of a well-rounded educational experience.”
King was referring to the mess created by No Child Left Behind, the K-12 education law that ESSA was passed last December to replace. NCLB, with accountability goals literally impossible to meet, had led to a severe narrowing of the curriculum and an over-emphasis on high-stakes standardized testing. Congress finally replaced No Child Left Behind — eight years late — because of NCLB’s flaws and because of criticism from across the political spectrum that the Obama administration had become too prescriptive and heavy-handed in education policy
Now, the deadline for public comment of the proposed regulations has just passed, and education officials in some states as well as teachers, superintendents and others have told the Obama administration that it is still overreaching with its proposed ESSA regulations — and in at least one instance, went further and blasted the Education Department. Here’s a taste of a letter from the Vermont Board of Education, signed by chairman Stephan A. Morse (and you Obama administration accused of trying to dictate education policy to states — again - The Washington Post:

BACK TO SCHOOL: A parent’s guide to K-12 school success


A parent’s guide to K-12 school success


The teacher pay gap is wider than ever: Teachers’ pay continues to fall further behind pay of comparable workers | Economic Policy Institute

The teacher pay gap is wider than ever: Teachers’ pay continues to fall further behind pay of comparable workers | Economic Policy Institute:

The teacher pay gap is wider than ever

Teachers’ pay continues to fall further behind pay of comparable workers



Summary

What this report finds: The teacher pay penalty is bigger than ever. In 2015, public school teachers’ weekly wages were 17.0 percent lower than those of comparable workers—compared with just 1.8 percent lower in 1994. This erosion of relative teacher wages has fallen more heavily on experienced teachers than on entry-level teachers. Importantly, collective bargaining can help to abate this teacher wage penalty. Some of the increase in the teacher wage penalty may be attributed to a trade-off between wages and benefits. Even so, teachers’ compensation (wages plus benefits) was 11.1 percent lower than that of comparable workers in 2015.
Why this matters: An effective teacher is the most important school-based determinant of education outcomes. It is therefore crucial that school districts recruit and retain high-quality teachers. This is particularly difficult at a time when the supply of teachers is constrained by high turnover rates, annual retirements of longtime teachers, and a decline in students opting for a teaching career—and when demand for teachers is rising due to rigorous national student performance standards and many locales’ mandates to shrink class sizes. In light of these challenges, providing adequate wages and benefits is a crucial tool for attracting and keeping the teachers America’s children need.

Introduction and key findings

An effective teacher is the most important school-based determinant of education outcomes.1 Therefore it is crucial that school districts recruit and retain high-quality teachers. This is increasingly challenging given that the supply of teachers has been greatly affected by high early to mid-career turnover rates, annual retirements of longtime teachers, and a decline in students opting for a teaching career.2 At the same time, many factors are increasing the demand for teachers, including shrinking class sizes, the desire to improve diversity, and the need to meet high standards. In short, the demand for teachers is escalating, while simultaneously the supply of teachers is faltering.
The supply of teachers is diminishing at every stage of the career ladder. On the front end, fewer students are entering the profession. Generally speaking, the small fraction of the most cognitively skilled college students who elect to become teachers has declined for decades (Corcoran, Evans, and Schwab 2004). Several factors have helped to drive this trend. Over the long run, employment opportunities for women have greatly expanded, and thus the teaching profession can no longer rely on what was a somewhat captive labor pool. At the same time, teachers are less satisfied and more stressed as standardized testing has been elevated as a tool for student, school, and teacher evaluations.3


SECTIONS

Cost of lead poisoning in Flint: $458 million - The Atlantic

Cost of lead poisoning in Flint: $458 million - The Atlantic:

Cost of Lead Poisoning in Flint Now Estimated at $458 Million

A case for investing in human health rather than paying for the consequences of inaction



 Switching to the Flint River as the city’s primary water source was an attempt to save around $5 million over the course of two years in Flint, Michigan.

Instead it has cost $458 million.

That’s according to calculations from analyst Peter Muennig at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. Only $58 million of that is expenditure by the state on medical care and unleaded water. The bulk of the number includes the social costs: Exposures leaking IQ points from children and disposing them to aggression and violence later in life, which leads to lower economic productivity, greater dependence on welfare programs, and greater costs to the criminal justice system.

The lifelong bill for each case of low-level lead poisoning is about $50,000 and 0.2 years of perfect health, based on CDC data. Flint has already seen more than 8,000 documented exposures, while each year there are some 90,000 across the country. When it comes to low-level exposure, Muenning and many others believe that drinking-water is the most common source. Chewing on paint tends to cause higher lead levels.
Muenning explained to me that while the chain of events may not be immediately evident, it’s important to follow backward as a matter of avoiding a common fallacy: considering the costs of action (primarily in economic and financial terms) while ignoring the costs of inaction. Those costs can be rendered in the interest of maximizing human well-being or simply protecting a municipal bottom line, depending on one’s priorities.
Either way, confronting the cost up-front—for public-health measures as for so many things in life—tends to be difficult. It also tends to divide people along political lines.
“Hopefully these numbers generate some feedback and controversy,” he laughs.
I wondered if there were something controversial about his calculations that I was overlooking.
“No,” he explained, “I just think it’ll be controversial because people feel weird Cost of lead poisoning in Flint: $458 million - The Atlantic:

Big Education Ape: Flint Water Crisis: Mr. Shuette I Am Shocked - http://bigeducationape.blogspot.com/2016/08/mr.html

Wendy Lecker: Policy can foster positive relationships for kids - StamfordAdvocate

Wendy Lecker: Policy can foster positive relationships for kids - StamfordAdvocate:

Wendy Lecker: Policy can foster positive relationships for kids

 Photo: Donna Grethen
Current education policy focuses on a failed strategy of school and district “turnarounds;” characterized by staff shake-ups and pedagogical practices that focus narrowly on raising test scores. This reform has been the Malloy Administration’s approach to school “improvement” since 2012. The evidence demonstrates that turnarounds produce at best temporary small increases in test scores, but at the high cost of destabilizing schools and communities in the long run.
While policymakers stubbornly pursue this dead end, they ignore evidence from science and educational practice pointing to methods that result in long-lasting improvements in both academic and life outcomes, especially for at-risk children.
A recent article in the science magazine, Mosaic, described a longitudinal study of children in Hawaii that examined why some at-risk children develop significant problems while others do not. The researchers found that for the one-third of at-risk children who did not develop problems, positive relationships, whether in the context of a community or one adult, were key. Even those who engaged in risky behavior as teens were able to turn their lives around with the help of a personal connection.
One of the researchers observed that resilience, often described as a trait, is instead an adaptive process; one that is helped by relationships.
Education reformers misread resilience as a trait they like to call “grit,” and consequently develop misguided policies such as the recent announcement by the federal government that the National Assessment of Educational Progress will create a standardized test to determine whether children have “grit.”
Understanding resilience the way these scientists have come to understand it would lead to a focus on more successful educational policies. Consistent with what science has discovered, it turns out that school programs and policies that promote the development of relationships are the ones that provide long-term educational and life benefits, especially to disadvantaged children.
It stands to reason that school mechanisms promoting a personal connection improve learning as well as social development. Neuroscientists have found that the brain does not recognize a sharp distinction between cognitive, social and motor functions. Consequently, research has shown that feelings of social isolation impair key cognitive abilities involved in learning.
Though they require substantial initial investments, educational policies that foster relationships save money in the long run.
Developmentally-appropriate preschool, with an emphasis on play, enables children to acquire the skills necessary to form healthy relationships. There is near universal consensus that quality preschool benefits children, increasing the chance of Wendy Lecker: Policy can foster positive relationships for kids - StamfordAdvocate:

School Nutrition Programs (SNP) Reimbursement Rates - Rates, Eligibility Scales, & Funding (CA Dept of Education)

2016-17 CNP Reimbursement Rates - Rates, Eligibility Scales, & Funding (CA Dept of Education):



School Nutrition Programs (SNP)

Reimbursement Rates for
July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017

SNP Reimbursement Rates Sheet for 2016-17 (DOC)
Schools/agencies can download this sheet for an easy reference for SNP Reimbursement Rates for 2016-17.

School Breakfast Program

 FreeReduced-PricePaid
Basic Breakfast$1.71$1.41$0.29
Especially Needy Breakfast$2.04$1.74$0.29
Note: Especially Needy Breakfast is for approved sites that served 40 percent or more free and reduced-price lunches in 2014-15.

National School Lunch Program

 FreeFree+6 cents*Reduced-PriceReduced-Price+6 cents*PaidPaid+6 cents*
Agencies that served less than 60% free/reduced-price lunches in 2014–15$3.16$3.22$2.76$2.82$0.30$0.36
Agencies that served 60% or more free/reduced-price lunches in 2014–15$3.18$3.24$2.78$2.84$0.32$0.38
Commodity ValueNot AvailableNot AvailableNot AvailableNot AvailableNot AvailableNot Available
Note: Payments listed for free and reduced-price lunches include both section 4 and section 11 funds of the National School Lunch Act.
*Certified SFAs are eligible to receive performance-based cash assistance for each reimbursable lunch served beginning October 1, 2012.

Meal Supplements (After-School Snacks) in the National School Lunch Program

 FreeReduced-PricePaid
Snacks$0.86$0.43$0.07

State Meal Program and State Meal Reimbursement for Public SFAs Serving Breakfasts and Lunches in Federal Programs

 FreeReduced-PricePaid
Prop 98 Agencies certified with EC sections 49430, 49430.5, & 49430.7
$0.2271
$0.2271
Not Applicable
 Prop 98 Agencies not certified with EC sections 49430, 49430.5, & 49430.7
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
All Other (or non-Prop 98) 
Agencies
Not ApplicableNot ApplicableNot Applicable

Special Milk Program

Free
Reduced-Price
Paid
Average cost per half pint
Not Applicable
Per half pint: $0.1975

Summer Food Service Program

Reimbursement Rates for
January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016

Total (Combined) Reimbursement

Includes operating and administrative components.
Type of MealRural or Self-PrepAll Other Site Types
Breakfast
$2.1325
$2.0925
Lunch or Supper
$3.7450
$3.6850
Supplement
$0.8875
$0.8650