Archive for the ‘Race to Top’ Category

« Older Entries

Money Rolls In

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

In spite of comments about the Obama administration from the right and the left, one of the big coups that has just landed in California comes from a United States Department of Education’s Race to the Top grant. Anyone in the education world is happy to grab money for young kids to provide readiness before they start kindergarten. Finally, the state has written a grant that has been approved. Would anyone raise his or her hand to vote to give the funds back? The GOP has tried time after time to snuff out funds for early childhood education.

So, the Obama administration hasn’t shown leadership-when?

Here is a list from Elaine who commented on David Brooks and Gail Collins post on the Opinionator, December 14, 2011.

President Obama’s successes:
-End the Iraq War.

-Health care reform-this will change the way Americans can access health insurance . It will make health insurance affordable for everyone. Who in their right mind can argue the benefits?

-Brought down Osama bin Laden. This is a big deal.

-A great deal of financial intervention, aside from stimulus, during a time when the economy was poised to go over a cliff.

-Recognized the problem with unemployment and the reasons behind the problem-meaning recognizing the real reasons unemployment stays high. Corporations are holding back, not hiring, and also taking this opportunity to practice age and other discrimination.

Also one might add, help to orchestrate the demise of Muammar el-Qaddifi.

Stimulus funds, though not enough and fought over since they were voted for, helped California fix Interstate 5 after trucks had destroyed the right lane. Have you seen the ARRA signs around?

The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The resuscitation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (NCLB) that was about to go another year without revision. The administration finally suggested “waivers” and offered them to states.

The California Early Learning Challenge grant of $52.6 million squeezed out of Race to the Top monies given to eight other east coast states is for a specific program that will primarily fund local Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS) being developed by Regional Leadership Consortia - voluntary groups of local First 5 commissions, county offices of education, and county governments. These Consortia will work with licensed child care programs, school districts, and child care partners.

Although the current Congress has a perverted way of counting every penny, one of the ways that the administration has led the nation is by looking out for young children. All those, including teachers, who need to criticize, must keep their students in mind.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Elementary and Secondary Education Act, NCLB, No Child Left Behind Act, Race to Top, public schools |
Be the first to leave a comment »

Is It Luck?

Wednesday, November 9th, 2011

I have a student who reads well and is a math whiz, but can be hyper-focused on a book or a math concept that he finds intriguing. Sometimes during discussion time, he will focus on making origami birds, one after another, rather than participate. It’s a quiet activity but can be distracting as other kids at his table watch his progress instead of leaving him to himself. Other times, he uses his pencil like a tiny baton, twisting it back and forth like a drum major. It flicks the table and this time it’s a noisy distraction. His mother is one of my best classroom volunteers. She won’t tell him that he’s been diagnosed with ADHD, even though he has seen articles about the syndrome on television and has said, “Is that me?”

the pencil as distraction

the pencil as distraction

Was it luck that I didn’t blurt out in a conversation with the boy and his parent a comment about such symptoms? I know better than to offer a diagnosis, no matter how distressed the parent is. But just an offhand comment would have been unkind.

Compare my problem in a full classroom of smart children with the articles in the news about Tennessee and Memphis. The state was one of the first lucky grantees of Race to the Top funds to turn around low-performing schools. How can a state turn a piece of luck into the monstrosity that has become the model as depicted on TV and in the news? Speed seems to be the problem. For one, the state instituted a teacher evaluation system based on a single poor test, instead of spending the time to devise a good model for evaluation. Second, the changes were made top-down, not getting buy-in from the teachers or administrators affected before implementing change.

On top of that confusion, imagine re-playing the 70’s when white students left the Memphis schools for the suburbs to avoid integration. At that time the district had a half white and half black demographic, but all black schools on one side of town and all white on the opposite side of the city. Now it’s an issue of money-the inner city district is way down on its luck and the suburban county district is doing fine. A controversy over who gets how much lead to the merger of the districts. Good luck for the students in Memphis, but class and race challenges rise to the surface for the suburbs.

Reading about those shifts makes me wonder what’s going to happen to the children like my ADHD student who need support way down at the classroom level.

Will their luck depend on me as one of the teachers who keeps chugging along even in difficult circumstances? Leave it to the big guys to hash out the system? And hope that the big guys rise above race and class and use some research to guide decisions. Can we depend on such luck?

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Race to Top, low-performing schools, 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 »

Give Us a Break

Wednesday, November 24th, 2010

Don’t lose perspective says Nicholas Kristof in the 10/31/10 issue of the New York Times.  Until 2008 we had only No Child Left Behind aka NCLB (the current name for the Elementary and Secondary School Act) which has been roundly criticized in education circles in spite of the initial bipartisan send off as the new century began.

By now, in California and other states minority groups form the majority.  See the San Francisco Chronicle November 17, 2010, “When minorities are the majority” by Arun Ramanathan.  You didn’t see this happening? Our education for those students is no longer the old style sit-in-your-seat-and-drink-it-in model.

middle school renovated after a bond passed

middle school renovated after a bond passed

It isn’t even the model that mostly white student schools use nowadays, especially when students reach middle school and begin to lag behind, if they haven’t already.  For anyone, studies describe what works.  For instance, Edsource’s report “Gaining Ground in the Middle School: Why Some Schools Do Better.”  You can leave it, but if you’re looking to change, you’d be wise to take it.

The latest anxiety is teacher education, never mind that educators have been hollering about it since the 1983 report Nation At Risk.  Give us a break–it’s a favorite worry of those who like to blame all on weak teachers.  If only teacher’s unions would let the experts get rid of “bad” teachers.  If only teacher training was upgraded.

The United States does need to look at what other nations do to find good teachers, accepting high quality scholars would help.  Raising salaries would help.  Training in critical thinking, problem solving, effective communication, and collaboration would help.  All were points made by Thomas Friedman in his Sunday, November 21, 2010, New York Times column titled “Teaching For America.”

Does the world think teacher training-whether pre-service or staff development– isn’t happening?  Does anyone think that various school boards haven’t analyzed the compensation issue, realizing that the old “steps” approach no longer works?  Do teaching institutions not try to accept the best?

Here is what everyone doesn’t remember.  In America individual states can listen to the federal government, but their decisions are made depending are where they are regionally and demographically in the country.  No one can tell all states to change.

The federal Department of Education can offer grants like Race to the Top which have excellent guidelines.  The president can be correct when he reminds the 300 million citizens of the U.S. that being well-educated is what makes a country strong.  The governors of the 50 states can designate a commission to come up with Common Core Standards and ask, but not require, the states to teach them.

However, three main things must be done no matter where you live.  State departments of education, school boards, and teachers must address the accountability issue and the assessments used to evaluate accountability.

They must address the gap in achievement for the minorities that are now the majority of traditional public, many charter public, and even parochial schools in this diverse country.  Every week another model is given accolades.

Last, state departments of education, school boards, and teachers must find a way out of the financial mess.  Whether it’s through changes in the pension system, a different road for compensation, changes in the structure of a particular school district, or the realignment of school districts, anything can be tried.  Keeping what is already there without paying is not an option.

The obstacle is to get states or regions in a state to agree on any of them.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Edsource, NCLB, No Child Left Behind Act, Race to Top, achievement gap, public schools, school accountability, school finance reform |
1 Comment »

Colorado Lost RTTT, but Jeffco wins big with TIF

Wednesday, September 29th, 2010

Public school teacher compensation has taken shots from every direction based on its lock-step grid structure.  Generally, all teachers in a district who have worked ten years and have 30 post-secondary credits receive the same salary.

Jefferson County School District in Colorado, the largest district in the state, is piloting a completely different compensation program funded by a $32.8 million federal Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) grant.

The grant provides money for a 20-school pilot project at elementary and middle schools with at least 50% of students on free or reduced price lunch.  Ten schools will pilot the new compensation plan; ten “control” schools will receive an across-the-board one percent pay increase and all the additional professional development services of the grant.  Teachers in the control group will continue to be paid for “steps and levels” negotiated in the District’s teacher contract.

The new strategic compensation plan is the result of collaboration by Jefferson County Education Association (JCEA), the teacher’s bargaining unit, district administration, and the school board.  It divides compensation into three tiers:  new teachers, experienced classroom teachers, and teacher leaders.  The pay structure looks like this:

Tier 1:  $40,000-$50,000

Tier 2:  $55,000-$75,000

Tier 3:  $80,000-$100,000

In Jeffco’s “steps and levels” structure, beginning salary is $33,000, and salaries top out at about $85,000.

How does the compensation plan work?

New teachers will start at $40,000 and will have a minimum of three years, and up to five years, to move out of the first tier.  During that time, they will establish annual individual, team, and school goals.  They will receive additional compensation, up to a total of $10,000, for goals met.  Goals include student achievement and growth using the Colorado Department of Education growth model.  Theoretically, new teachers can earn up to $50,000 their first year out.

Tier 2 teachers represent the experienced teacher corps.  These teachers will also establish individual, team, and school goals.  They will receive pay based on goal achievement levels, with up to $20,000 on the table.

Tier 3 teachers will serve as teacher leaders.  This level continues the career pathway set by Tiers 1 and 2, focusing on additional value that leaders bring.  These teachers may work longer days or more days during the school year.  They will mentor, provide data analysis skill, do model teaching, and/or perform peer performance evaluation.  With an entry salary of $80,000, these teachers can earn up to an additional $20,000.  Ideally, this tier will offer teachers a chance to try out leadership roles that can prepare them for administration leadership positions.

Additional professional development

Compensation change isn’t the only purpose of the TIF grant.  The district will create professional development programs for both pilot and control schools.  Schools will also receive an additional half-time vice principal to help manage the grant.

Overall the grant, distributed over five years, encourages creativity and innovation to ensure that children in low-income areas receive the support and powerful teaching necessary for their success.

Program received with mixed results

The JCEA is now meeting with the 25 elementary and middle schools that meet the free and reduced lunch criteria.  High schools are currently excluded from the study because of their size.  Issues have arisen around teachers at the top end of the current salary structure.  Some salary adjusting in Tier 2 will have to occur to accommodate the transition.  Some teachers are eager for the opportunity; others see risks and are “wait and see.”

Teachers’ union key to developing the plan

The Jefferson County Education Association was a critical player in developing the plan.  The union wants to take a lead role in figuring out how their professional compensation will look in the 21st century.  Kerrie Dallman, president of JCEA, said, “I am excited about this grant because it gives Jeffco teachers the opportunity to shape our profession now and in the future.  We know change is coming, and we want to help plan that change.”

Answering important core “reform” questions

Does teacher compensation affect teacher performance?  Does more focused professional development make the most difference for kids?    A related question is whether such a plan will attract a broader array of college students into the teaching profession if they can increase their income faster than in the current system.  JCEA wants to know if having a career path giving teachers more leadership opportunities will make a critical difference.

The five-year time frame may not be long enough to adequately test these premises, but much is at stake in the Jeffco study: new ways of thinking about compensation, professional development, career opportunities, new teacher training, and especially union-management collaboration.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Colorado Education Association, Jeffco Public Schools, Race to Top, TIF, Teacher Incentive fund, school finance reform |
Be the first to leave a comment »

« Older Entries