When bad news about privatization is reported in the news, privatizers fight back. Then, if they have to concede, they use the "failure = success" argument. Fordham coughs up this argument in its weekly Gadfly newsletter in reference to Philadelphia's school privatization effort.

From a Philadelphia Inquirer article on the district's decision to cancel privatization contracts: "[I]n the last six years, the privately run schools have not proved to be a silver bullet. The schools failed to deliver higher test scores than district schools did, despite costly interventions."

So, the privatizers fought like hell to repudiate these reports. (See, for example, here, here, and here.) Then, what happened when the district moved to close some of the schools? You guessed it, the failures are a sign of success. Or as the Gadfly put it, "the revocation of several management contracts is an indication that the experiment is in fact working as intended."

Yes, it's a win for everyone, except the students who were in those schools.

Posted by John at 11:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

(And Some Paint)

From WGNO-TV in New Orleans, where the AFT has a large contingent of teachers, many from out of town, attending the National Charter School Conference.

Volunteers helped touch up a New Orleans charter school, and they know how much it helps kids when their school looks nice.

The group is made up of teachers from the United Teachers of New Orleans Union, as well as the American Federation of Teachers....

Video here. 

Posted by John at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Below is the AFT statement on yesterday's CEP report showing rising math and reading scores since 2002:

CEP’s report is good news for America’s students, parents and teachers. It confirms that the steady rise in student achievement, a trend that dates back to the beginning of the nationwide effort to raise academic standards, continues today.

We are very proud of our members, who work their hearts out every day to educate children. This report offers proof that teachers and students are succeeding. It is especially encouraging that the scores of disadvantaged students and minority students are rising, and that the achievement gap is closing. Congratulations to the students, their parents and all those who work in their schools.

We welcome today’s news and are confident that student achievement will continue to rise. However, we will not be satisfied until every child—in every school and in every community—has the opportunity to receive an excellent education and fulfill his or her potential.

Posted by John at 10:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

If so, watch the video below click here* for the CNBC video of a debate between WaPo columnist/editorialist Jay Mathews and filmmaker/entrepreneur Bob Compton. The subject is how children are educated in China, India and the U.S.

After watching this cablicious babblefest, I know less about the subject than I did before.  (Hat tip Matthew Tabor.)

*Embedding video -- sometimes it works for me, sometimes, especially Monday mornings, it doesn't.

Posted by John at 10:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I get to pretend to be smart on the days I read Alexander Russo's "Around the Blogs" and "Big Stories of the Day" posts. His blog is the place I go when I need a quick fix on education news.

Today, Russo's "Around the Blogs" links to David Hoff's post on the markup of the FY 2009 appropriations bill for Labor-HHS-Ed, where I learned Reading First had been zeroed out. Big news, though probably not a surprise to the people who track this stuff closely.

In Rep. Obey's statement on the bill, he notes:

The bill does not continue funding for the Reading First program, which has been plagued with mismanagement, conflicts of interest, and cronyism as documented by the Department of Education Inspector General. Moreover, a scientifically rigorous study released by Department of Education in May 2008 found that the program has had no discernable impact on student reading performance.

Let the reading wars begin. Again.

Posted by John at 02:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

To Sherman Dorn, AFT member/AFT leader/historian/author/blogger. He's added a new title.

Posted by John at 01:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I’ve been reading some studies about the effects of teacher absenteeism on student learning, and of course we had a little back and forth here once before about teachers having chronically high absenteeism.  In that back and forth, Michele put forward the idea that women will, for a variety of reasons, take more time off.  The underlying implication is that absenteeism among teachers isn’t out of whack. Instead, it’s both the lack of sick days and paid leave and a set of norms that discourage people from using the leave they have in the rest of the workforce, that’s out of whack.  I’m taking the occasion of Stephanie Izzard becoming the first woman to win Bravo TV’s Top Chef contest to revisit this issue. Here are excerpts from the blog of Chief Judge Tom Colicchio – and really it's quite a read -

….And even though their numbers are growing, women as a rule are still a significant minority in the uppermost reaches of the culinary world.

It used to be for lack of opportunity, but I don’t think that still applies today. None of the great American chefs (or at least not the ones I respect) have a glass ceiling in their restaurants. Quite the opposite: We like to hire women because they work hard without any of the competitive, macho bulls**t you often see among their male counterparts. The women I’ve hired help each other, don’t jockey for position, and work until they drop. So if the opportunities for advancement that make up the early part of a top chef’s career are there, why aren’t women availing themselves of them?

Because the perception of opportunity, on the part of women themselves, hasn’t kept pace. Women are reluctant to enter the culinary world because they believe (and this is not unjustified) that a cooking career is incompatible with raising children, which leaves those of us who want to hire, promote, and mentor women with a slimmer field to choose from than we’d like. And to an extent, they're right: The bottom line is our society does not yet provide women in the workplace with the type of social supports, like high-quality subsidized child care or extended parental leave, that allows them to fully go for it, and the impact this has on the scope and depth of a career is profound. Right or wrong, men plunge into their careers without much thought about how they’ll navigate the work/family balance. They assume someone -- spouse, parent, paid caregiver -- will materialize to take care of it (and usually someone does.)….

Couple this with a reading of Bill Buford’s Heat, where flu-ridden chefs show up for work because “there are no sick days in restaurants.” It’s an ugly picture of a workforce.

This dynamic may mean that schools simply attract a less able/healthy workforce.  And one solution would simply be to make it easier for people to have the time they need in the event of illness or family catastrophe.  The AFT has been working on that, supporting the successful effort to pass paid family leave legislation in New Jersey this year, for example.

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do better in education to deal with the consequences of absenteeism. The research might speak to the need to improve the professional development of substitute teachers and building ways to make subs part of the culture of the schools they work with. It shouldn’t lead to attacks on benefits or on those who use them.

Posted by Ed at AFT at 09:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

There's a blog I'd read every day, but, until he comes back from the dead and stoops to blog, his novels make pretty good reading, too.  I'm rereading A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, which, as the title suggests, is about a character, The Boss, who travels back in time to Camelot.

Here's The Boss's formula for nation-building: "The first thing you want in a new country, is a patent office; then work up your school system; and after that, out with your paper."

Sounds about right to me. Now what would Clemens say about comparability?

Posted by John at 09:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Chad Alderman (oops) Aldeman at the Q&E calls baloney on Fordham's overly generous take on research about a study on the DC voucher program.

Posted by John at 03:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The latest issue of AFT's American Educator takes on the often contentious question of how best to help English language learners master English and meet academic standards.

Continuing to quote from the press release:

"The highly charged debate over how to teach English language learners often overlooks the available research. In his article in American Educator, Stanford University professor Claude Goldenberg highlights the most promising instructional approaches and discusses important questions that research has yet to answer. Based on the research, Goldenberg suggests the following instructional framework:

• If feasible, teach children to read in their native language and in English.
• Teachers should help students transfer knowledge from their native language to English.
• What we know about good instruction and curriculum for all students holds true for English language learners. However, modifications will be necessary as students master academic English.
• English language development is crucial but must be addressed in addition to—not instead of—academic content instruction."

And there's much, much more, including an article on diagramming sentences, an old school exercise that I, super-nerd that I was, actually liked. There. I've admitted it.

Posted by John at 03:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by John at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Here's a bigger, bolder concept that could revolutionize education in this country: community schools.

The May/June issue of PSRP Reporter, one of the AFT's publications, highlights a few community schools, which "stay open day and night, serving as the hub of their neighborhoods by hosting a wide range of services."

The article continues: "While there's no single model, they all have features in common, including such services as child care, healthcare, recreation and the arts, job training and a stunning array of adult education classes, from English as a second language to tax preparation."

In New York City, a community school provides middle schoolers with provides homework help, food, counseling, vaccinations, community volunteer opportunities, and summer camp. In Philadelphia, a community school has a health clinic, after-school activities, and a science program focused on lead poisoning in children (paging Greg Toppo) in which students identified lead "hotspots" and checked their siblings' teeth for lead.

The article describes community schools as a "local movement"  but notes that Rep. Steny Hoyer has introduced federal legislation to promote them. There's a policy that, one would think, would attract a lot of support from across the political/ideological spectrum.

Posted by John at 01:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I went to the National Press Club to see a PR stunt today a press conference about a newish education initiative. Apparently, Ed in '08, which has had little impact despite its 60 gazillion dollar budget, has been reincarnated as the Educational Equality Project (EEP). The "two" programs seem to have the same funders, a lot of the same players, and similar goals.

At today's event (the all-purpose inside-the-beltway term for someone trying to make news), a reporter asked NYC Schools Chancellor Joel Klein what EEP would, you know, do. Big and bold, he promised recommendations, position papers, radio and TV appearances and a Klein-Sharpton* tour.  Yes, that would be the Rev. Al Sharpton, who is EEP's other co-chair.

Randi Weingarten, head of the AFT's NYC affiliate (and thus someone who knows Sharpton and Klein), talked to USA Today's Greg Toppo about today's doings:

"Too often what happens is that when people get into this, they blame all the people who have been toiling in this field without the resources and without the public focus on it. It's like saying that those of us who have been frontierspeople in this fight for equity for the last 50 years are the ones who should be faulted, as opposed to saying, 'We'll join you ready for duty — what can we do to help?'"

Sure enough, no teachers were at the podium for today's event. There was a lot of talk about sorting teachers into different categories and making it easier to fire teachers. I didn't hear a single word about helping teachers do their jobs better or giving them the tools they need.

UPDATE: WaPo reporter Bill Turque, like me, seems to feel the event was unusual, writing that it "seemed more like the premise for a reality show than a news conference on education policy."

Random note: DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, a signatory of EEP's six principles, was asked about NCLB, and she responded by channeling EdSec Margaret Spellings. Rhee said the law needed some "tweaks." No, she did not mention Ivory soap.

Posted by John at 10:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

You know those movies and TV shows about the lone juror holding out because he/she is the only one who believes the defendant is innocent (or, maybe, in this case, guilty)?  Not only does Henry Fonda (Juror #8 in 12 Angry Men)  come to mind, but also Aunt Bee and Edith Bunker.

That's how AASA is portraying itself here.  I wasn't paying that much attention to NCLB six years ago, so I don't know how accurate AASA's portrayal is, but I have to say it makes a compelling story.

Posted by John at 05:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Joe Williams recently wrote a post about teachers' opposition to the creation of a fourth public funded system of schools in Rhode Island that focused on how teachers are part of the "old rhode island." That's because only their union reps showed up for a hearing that took place during a school day. He then followed it up with a post that criticized California teachers for protesting budget cuts in california by staging a job action during the first hour of their workday. It seems no matter what we do, it wouldn't be good enough for Joe.    

Of course, Joe is also calling us "thugs" in one of these posts. And he's referred to my home state fed's leadership as "gorillas" in the past. It's one thing to disagree, but that level of ad hominem is just foolish and makes it seem like this is more about Joe feeling comfortable in his cloak of self-righteousness than it is about anything else.  It's where too much of the education reform cocktail party goes after they've had a few too many.

As for the substance of the policy, Joe actually agrees with AJ Duffy in California, which makes the whole thing even sillier.  He just wants him to act more like the people Joe was mocking in Rhode Island. And in Rhode Island, I'm unsure how many publicly funded school systems Joe thinks we'll need before we get to educational nirvana. My own thought is that it is silly to just keep layering new systems on top of old, and that doing so has ramifications -- not good ones -- for kids.

Posted by Ed at AFT at 03:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

UPDATE: I spoke with Kevin Carey at a Center for American Progress event today, and, very politely, he assured me he is strongly opposed to school vouchers. That's something I should've known from his many posts on the subject. It's hard to sort things out while whispering at the back of the room during presentations, but I think it's safe to say Kevin and I disagree on whether his summary of the article was fair to Del. Norton.

Commenting on a Post article about the D.C. voucher program, Kevin Carey writes:

While I don't think the program should be expanded or continued in the long run, the first obligation is to the kids here and I think Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton owes them more than just an "FYI, I'll be taking your voucher away."

Carey is absolute right: Norton should think about the kids already receiving vouchers and how disruptive it would be if they were pulled out of school suddenly. Too bad Norton didn't tell the Post she wants to proceed in a way that will not harm recipients or say that she wants to protect the children in the program.

Because, you know, if she did, then I'd wonder about Kevin Carey's ability to read. And I'd wonder why he is so eager to distort Norton's words to make her look bad. And I'd wonder if he's bending over backwards to suck up to some potential Ed Sector funder with a pro-voucher bent. (See update above.)

Ugh, here's the first three !@#$%^& paragraphs of the article that made Kevin go all holier than thou on Norton and drag out the adults vs. kids line:

The groundbreaking federal voucher program that enables nearly 2,000 D.C. children to attend private schools is facing an uncertain future in the Democrat-controlled Congress and may well be heading into its final year of operation, according to officials and supporters of the program.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said this week that she is working on a plan to phase out the controversial D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, the first in the country to provide federal money for vouchers. Norton said she wants to proceed in a way that will not harm recipients. But she added that she regarded the program, narrowly approved in 2004 for five years by the then-Republican majority, as on its last legs.

"We have to protect the children, who are the truly innocent victims here," said Norton, who like many Democrats opposes vouchers as a threat to public school systems. "But I can tell you that the Democratic Congress is not about to extend this program." [Emphasis added.]

Kevin, next time, before you whip out your talking points, take a sec and read the first few paragraphs of the article you're pretending to analyze.

Posted by John at 03:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Diplomas Count came out and said something about P-16 councils, but I'm most impressed with the cool online doo-dads. For instance, I grabbed a quickie report on my hometown, population 40,000 or so, and found that the place I grew up is pretty similar to national averages in terms of demographics and graduation rates (fact-checking this because there seem to be conflicting numbers on grade rates) and a much lower graduation rate. As I recall there were 400+ students in my class when I started high school  and a lot fewer than 400 by the time I graduated in the '80s. So, sadly, maybe things haven't changed much back home.

Back to the national scene, a Nobelist and some others pushed back on the report's method for counting graduates. Fair enough, duke it out, mathletes. But how about some ideas* for actually increasing the percentage of kids who graduate?

Here are three:

1. Universal early childhood education. Okay, come back at me with reserach showing ECE's positive effects aren't sustained. Yes, ECE is my answer for everything. And, yes, this study is an outlier. Fine, haters. You win. But only if you come up with something to reduce the dropout rate. I'm listening.

2. Early identification of struggling readers and intervention with research-backed reading instruction. American Educator has been all over this. (And, yes, we can refight the reading wars -- commenter August, are you still out there?) If kids can't read independently by the end of 3rd grade, it's tough slogging from then on. Really, the research says "tough slogging." A longtime math teacher told me recently that making sure a child is a grade-level reader from the get-go is as good a way as any to make sure the child will be a good math student come middle school and high school.

3. High-quality career and technical education, and I'm not talking about shop class. I took the Gates-funded survey of dropouts with a million grains of salt. Of course dropouts are going to say they weren't challenged enough. Did you think they were going to say they were just too dumb to stay in school? But it's clear that some kids are not engaged with school because they're eager to get into the work world and they see no connection between school and work. So, let's create more high schools (and middle schools) to serve these students.

Question: Ten years from now, which of the following will advance the furthest ECE and ECE research, reading research and nonpoliticized efforts to improve reading instruction, career and technical education -- or more sophisticated methods of counting graduates and dropouts?

Posted by John at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Rah, Rah  Rhee
Kick 'em in the knee
Rah, Rah Rass*
Kick 'em in the other knee.

The NCLB spirit bunnies cheerleaders are FIRED UP!!!! (Was there a big NCLB pep rally recently?)

Charles Barone kicks 'em in the knee, taking to task Jack Jennings' Center on Education Policy for insufficient consideration of NCLB's "safe harbor" provisions in CEP's latest report. The CEP report noted that states put off the biggest leaps toward 100% proficiency until, well, about now. But David Hoff counters Barone with a dose of reality-based blogging. And CEP's report is useful in that it illustrates that NCLB's accountability system will continue to misidentify and overidentify failing schools. That means limited federal education funds will not be targeted wisely.

Egowonk kicks 'em in the other knee (and rips off echoes a two-year-old Alexander Russo post in the process). Egowonk argues, disingenuously, that NCLB's high-stakes tests shouldn't put any pressure on children. To which I respond, get real. If NCLB was designed to change student behavior -- that is, increase students' test scores -- then the law would inevitably pressure students. You might as well argue that NCLB's tests don't put much pressure on teachers because the only consequence is a few student transfers or tutoring sessions after a few years or just maybe some restructuring or something that might directly affect teachers after five or six years.

The argument that no one could have foreseen that NCLB would put pressure on kids just doesn't hold water, though Egowonk is certainly carrying a lot of water for the cheerleader pictured here.

The NCLB cheerleaders have their work cut out for them. Judging by the commenters on this newspaper article (hat tip: David Hoff), NCLB really is the most tainted brand in America. (I guess those awful anti-NCLB propagandists were successful.) Awwww...there's nothing sadder than a crying cheerleader.

*This line doesn't quite work. Though we've had Rah, Rah Rhee ad nauseam, I haven't seen any Rah, Rah Rass.

Posted by John at 01:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Big news in the edublogosphere is that Joel Packer of the NEA is now blogging.  Joel is simply one of the best people in the DC public education community. When I first started at AFT I was on a summer fellowship.  As part of that I covered some committee meetings on the hill for the AFT legislation department. Joel went out of his way to be kind and supportive during my very brief sojourn in that world.  Hopefully we’ll be able to return the favor here on the Internets.

Eduwonk wants to know if this means my blogging brother John is losing some sort of status as a result.  John’s a cult figure, a populist icon and a true friend to educators everywhere. There’s no way that the creation of a mere blog can change that.  My big concern is that Joel is podcasting. Having listened to the Gadfly’s podcasts a couple of times, I am uncertain as to whether this is a wise course of action. 

Posted by Ed at AFT at 01:27 PM | Permalink