Archive for the ‘National Education Association’ Category

« Older Entries

Waiver to NCLB Goals?

Wednesday, August 10th, 2011

Vacation is over and our weekly posts resume just in time to comment on the waivers proposed by Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan to No Child Left Behind legislation that states 100% of United States students be proficient in reading and math by 2014.

Not long after 2002 when the law took effect, most teachers shook their heads as it became apparent that the goal was laudatory, but not gonna happen.

So four years after the legislation was up for revision and Congress still failed to amend the law, the Department of Education has overridden the requirement and set up a plan for waivers.

Did you hear sighs of relief even in states with high numbers of proficient students? Chiefs For Change, a bipartisan group of heads of state Departments of Education relaxed their pinched shoulders. They are all for setting high standards but allowing states to adjust for the needs of the students in their states. Last year, 2010, about 38,000 of the nation’s 100,000 public schools didn’t make the grade. As the benchmarks rise, more schools will “fail.”

On the other hand, the National Education Association (NEA) noted that now was the time to look at teacher-led and student-focused comprehensive reform. NEA wants to turn away from one-size fits all standardized testing. A good point that comes up the minute any state begins to adjust proficiency levels.

Waivers for flexibility in benchmark goals for reading and math will be offered under strict conditions, but even “plans in progress” will be taken into account, according to Duncan.

How about diverse California, where school starts next week in order to account for furlough days because of scarce money and to provide enough teaching days before state criterion-referenced tests are given in May? Will the state apply for a waiver immediately since it has pockets of proficient students among an abundance of students who are teetering on, if not already fallen below, the California proficiency level for 2010.

The state has not finished re-organizing its learning standards to agree with the Common Core Standards needed for various federal grants, nor completed a revised teacher evaluation and school accountability system. For certain, the state hopes it has sufficient “plans in progress.”

To top off these issues, on Wednesday, August 10, the news came out that the state has not gained enough revenues to keep its budget balanced. If revenues don’t increase, drastic cuts will affect schools and other social services. That’s what the state legislature agreed to in June 2011. Aside from flexibility waivers to achieve reform for California schools, will there be money available?

Who in California’s legislature will blink first?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Arne Duncan, NCLB, National Education Association, No Child Left Behind Act, public schools, school reform |
Be the first to leave a comment »

Money Trickles In

Wednesday, May 18th, 2011

After rambunctious teacher demonstrations last week from San Diego to Humboldt, California, the news has changed. Not a mere hopeful whisper, the April state tax revenues have actually been tallied in California (and many other states). School districts, at least for the 2011-2012 year, won’t see further slice and slash to their funds.

Teachers have already been notified by union negotiators that announcements will soon be made to withdraw lay-off notifications. The sigh of relief is more like a cumulative whoosh. No one was looking forward to next year and its combination of draconian cuts in services.

A brief update of why: during the first days of the 2007-2008 recession, state budgets were too optimistic about turn around in revenues. That error was soon obvious and so legislative budgets set cautious estimates, too cautious as it turns out. In California, it’s possible that $6.6 billion more revenue will be collected than last year, most of which will go to fulfill the state’s formula for funding schools.

As the demonstrations last week clamored, even while rumors made the rounds, the state still has a large imbalance to the budget. The tax legislation that will sunset this year must be extended to begin to balance the state budget over time.  But the conflict over spending cuts vs. raising revenue remains.

At the state and federal level, for whom and to where money is allocated continues to hurt the actual detailed reforms that numerous public school think tanks wish to implement. It has been a year since Congress began to fiddle with revisions to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), better known since 2002 as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

Teachers unions want changes to testing, student achievement benchmarks, and accountability. Most conservatives in Congress want to cut various programs funded by ESEA as a way to reduce the deficit. Others feel the state and local Departments of Education should take all the responsibility for flexible dispersal of funds in a state.

The last possibility affects federal Title I monies for disadvantaged children and Title II funds for English Language Learners. How will compromise be made when the National Education Association (NEA) sees that flexible use for those monies only means disadvantaged and ELL students will be short-changed as states try to balance budgets?

Most education think tanks that want to see reform begin, advocate for fully-funded models. Any kind of evaluation is for teachers, administrators, and school boards, including tenure issues. Plans must be clearly designed to support teachers, administrators, and school board members not meeting standards.

Now, with conflicts in many states between teachers and public employees’ benefits and pensions and state legislatures effort to decrease deficits, it seems improbable to bring reforms into the public schools.

Let’s hope the increase in tax revenue isn’t ephemeral, but the forefront of an improved economy.

(See article about tax revenues in The New York Times, May 18, 2011, “For States, a Glimmer of Hope on Deficits” by Michael Cooper.)

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in California budget crisis, ESEA, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, NCLB, National Education Association, No Child Left Behind Act, layoff notices, public schools |
Be the first to leave a comment »

On Not Vouching for Vouchers

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

You’d think the anxiety about debt, deficit, revenue, and spending cuts would leave school vouchers, one of the bugaboos of public education, to molder in the corner behind the trash containers.

Recall the ruckus to settle a budget for the entire United States government (only until October 2011) in which the Obama administration negotiators actually held onto a good number of education programs ready to be hooked and tossed into the education budget garbage bin by conservative players in the game. Notably, Title I grants, special education state grants, Race to the Top (RTTT) competitive-grant programs, Investing in Innovation (i3), Head Start, Pell Grants, and Promise Neighborhoods Initiative remained, mostly unscathed.

But, House Speaker Boehner (R-Ohio) and his cadre, slipped in a measure to reinstate the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship program, euphemism for vouchers of up to $12000 for a low-income student to attend a private school. OK, the measure does provide some aid for Washington, D.C. public and charter schools also.

Did you figure out why House of Representative billion dollar slashers would put funds back into an education program? The ideological love for parochial school education and “choice” are the often heard reasons. Also “competition” for funds would force schools to improve academic achievement in order to keep funds on the school district balance sheets. Back to the school system as “marketplace.”

Three school systems in the U. S. have passed and maintained legislation to provide student vouchers, also called “tuition tax credits” by Ronald Reagan and “school choice” by economist Milton Friedman. Milwaukee-1990, Cleveland-1995, and the entire state of Florida-1999 have voucher programs touted as an alternative to help to low-income students attend private and parochial schools with better academic success.

As yet, after 25 years, studies of schools with voucher students have not shown significant gains in student achievement, the main goal in school reform efforts. However, parents who apply for the vouchers for their children cite the desire for schools where students behave and where students graduate from high school. In D.C. students in voucher programs do have better graduation rates than students in public schools.

Five talking points on vouchers are promoted on the National Education Association (NEA) website. In brief, 1) as stated above, vouchers don’t mean gains in student achievement. 2) Voucher schools have almost no accountability in place for the public funds that are siphoned off. 3) Vouchers don’t reduce the cost of public school education, but ask tax payers to fund two systems, public and private/parochial. 4) Parents must search around to find real “choice” in private and parochial schools which, for example, maintain exceedingly high admissions requirements and fees far above the voucher sum. 5) Surveys show that the public prefers spending their scarce taxes to improve the schools in the public system.

Linked here is an article by Mike Winerip, August 8, 2010, from the New York Times which examined public schools in Boston who applied for and are instigating turn-around programs which use tax dollars exactly as stated above. As most programs in which improvement begins to show significant results, these schools have implemented teacher leadership, teacher training, smaller classes, ongoing staff development, collaboration, and adequate resources to support the needs of the variety of children. It is difficult, relentless work to assure failing schools improve.

Furthermore, for anyone interested in justice for all,

“We have to be careful not to succumb to this nonsense that a public system is inherently flawed and that therefore we have to turn to the marketplace for solutions. I’ve never in my entire life seen any evidence that the competitive free market, unrestricted, without a strong counterpoise within the public sector, will ever dispense decent medical care, sanitation, transportation, or education to the people. It’s as simple as that.”

–Jonathan Kozol, author of “Savage Inequalities” and “Amazing Grace.”

For more on school vouchers, google Rethinking Schools, for a slew of articles.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in National Education Association, Race to Top, public schools, school accountability, school reform |
Be the first to leave a comment »

What do unions say?

Wednesday, January 19th, 2011

Are unions bringing the U.S. down? Does unionization mean that jobs will never increase? Whose jobs-private sector, public sector?

Teachers unions, for example, are blamed for everything related to school problems.  They hold onto pay scale systems that are old-fashioned; berate the weaknesses of state tests; defend weak teachers; stand against changes to teacher evaluation; and, especially, defend teacher retirement systems.

Wait a minute. Teachers have formed professional organizations since the mid-eighteen hundreds. In 1959 when Wisconsin passed labor laws that allowed collective bargaining, teachers unions adopted labor union strategies. Negotiations for decent pay, hours, work place safety, as well as curriculum and evaluation became the norm.

With the current budget struggles, it is easy to lump all labor unions into one bundle and scapegoat those institutions for all the money problems of each state. It is true that to keep middle class wages, benefits, and pensions, the unions can use their negotiation muscle, but who would not want to keep what you’ve worked for?

Are you thinking of the Wall Street-hedge fund-private equity manager guys who’ve certainly used muscle to keep tax revenue low and bonuses high? Do the state governors and assemblies come to mind, who budgeted for pensions in good times but are now stingy in bad money times?

Right now, private sector workers are being pitted against public sector workers in unions, in an effort to justify taking away money to balance state budgets. The lawmakers who want to resolve the fiscal crisis on workers backs say that public employees earn far more in average wages than private sector employees. Think, however, about college degrees that teachers must have; only 23% of private-sector workers have those degrees. In most professions, a college degree is worth a higher salary. Overall in fact, public sector wages have dropped relative to private sector pay.  However, since jobs have been lost mainly in the private-sector, due to the recession, it is easy to establish a stand-off.

Teachers unions do need to turn to themselves. National Education Association(NEA) stances on dropout prevention, plans to lower the achievement gap, placing limits on charter schools and vouchers do benefit school communities.

Still, unions are not wearing halos. First and foremost, unions must use their muscle to help schools that are truly failing, instead of finding excuses for longtime poor performance. Insist on changes to student assessments that do not lead to school quality, a big factor for improvement. Next, teacher evaluation must be taken on. Once teachers feel they are being evaluated fairly, then unions can focus on changes in pay-no longer ’steps and ladders’ and tenure, but a plan to combine performance with pay. Last, teachers unions in some states can be part of a team that bargains for changes to pension systems.

Stop pointing fingers. All workers have the right to bargain for working conditions and decent pay. Setting teachers against social workers against electricians against public defenders against state engineers is not the solution to budget problems.

Stop reproaching unions, claiming that student achievement would improve if only unions were out of the way.

Civility and collaboration generate better outcomes.

(More on the private vs. public sector union issues can be found in the San Francisco Chronicle’s January 16, 2012, Insight article by Robert Reich. More on teachers unions at the NEA website.)

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in National Education Association, low-performing schools |
Be the first to leave a comment »

Prognosis: California Will Wrangle

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011

Happy New Year!  Take Care Productions wishes it would be, but it won’t happen until the state has exhausted itself fighting over ’spending cuts’ and ‘increasing revenue’.

Writers in the San Francisco Chronicle and the New York Times have scratched their heads over low-performing schools that are not improving test scores.  Whether it shows up in an effort to call out poor teachers by using the “value-added” formula or in the bleak results when analyzing low rates of student proficiency, no one is happy.

The California Teachers Association  strong-armed California’s passage of the Quality Education Invest Act (QEIA) which uses the Academic Performance Index (California’s API) as the indicator of scholastic improvement.  In six years (2004 - 2010) the 500 QEIA schools reached an average of 21.2% proficient students.  That’s good enough?  It means 68.8% still weren’t on track.

Why?  Is it the ‘test’ or is it teacher evaluation? The media has written article after article. Universities have spewed forth document after document to talk about low-performing schools and poor quality tests or low-performing schools and poor  teacher evaluation.

On the other hand, Mary M. Kennedy of Michigan State has reminded everyone of the attribution error, ignoring the working conditions of the teacher, preparation time, materials, work assignments, untreated student characteristics.  As if no matter the conditions, a good teacher can make the difference.  Maybe, but it takes time.  And the “value-added” attribute doesn’t make the grade when school boards as well as unions insist on old evaluation tools.

In British Columbia, Michael Shumatcher hits the button when he reminds the country of the demographic issue, urban or rural, and struggling populations who could use spending to promote the neededlearning tools instead of useless evaluation tools.

Or read Thomas Stephens, professor emeritus at the College of Education and Human Ecology, Ohio State University, who says one can find many good evaluation tools.  His hit is that the multi-billion dollar test industry won’t be pleased.

Let’s move on to California’s Sue Miller from Santa Monica who is representing the teachers who do all the work and need praise, not vitriol.

Which brings us to the wrangling likely in California which is deeply in debt from state to local entities.  Although many groups have been studying the problem, it comes down to cuts and taxes.

There will be no change in the tax plan to 1978’s Proposition 13 which started California down a long, dark road.  With effort, there may be a revision to the system of taxation generated by the proposition.  If you have read the article in SF Chronicle’s January 2 edition “Prop 13 in urgent need of retrofit” by Michael Gervais and Dontae Rayford, defunding special districts and creating regional property tax boards are the options suggested.  Neither change addresses the money that corporations don’t pay in taxes.

Governor Brown has been sworn in this week for a third term and one can figure that the dysfunctional sections of the California State Department of Education will get cuts, along with all state entities.  Let’s see if the temporary taxes made to balance previous budgets will be maintained.

The National Education Association in the January/February 2011 NEA today issue includes “The Long and Winding Road” by Mary Ellen Flannery and Kevin Hart. The writers covered the entire country and found priority schools that teachers have had some say in transforming.

However, the deficit is so large in California that it is hard to see how the state test (CST) and the evaluation system are going to be top priorities.  It is possible like Mary M. Kennedy has said that turning around low-performing schools should be the top priority.

Will that transformation ever happen?

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Academic Performance Index, California Teachers Association, National Education Association, low-performing schools, public schools |
Be the first to leave a comment »

« Older Entries