based

Evidence builds - corporate ed policies are failing

Lately, study after study, report after report is casting doubt on the efficacy of corporate education reform polcies. The ltest comes from The Broader Bolder Approach to Education

Pressure from federal education policies such as Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind, bolstered by organized advocacy efforts, is making a popular set of market-oriented education “reforms” look more like the new status quo than real reform.

Reformers assert that test-based teacher evaluation, increased school “choice” through expanded access to charter schools, and the closure of “failing” and underenrolled schools will boost falling student achievement and narrow longstanding race- and income-based achievement gaps.

KEY FINDINGS
The reforms deliver few benefits and in some cases harm the students they purport to help, while drawing attention and resources away from policies with real promise to address poverty-related barriers to school success:

  • Test scores increased less, and achievement gaps grew more, in “reform” cities than in other urban districts.
  • Reported successes for targeted students evaporated upon closer examination.
  • Test-based accountability prompted churn that thinned the ranks of experienced teachers, but not necessarily bad teachers.
  • School closures did not send students to better schools or save school districts money.
  • Charter schools further disrupted the districts while providing mixed benefits, particularly for the highest-needs students.
  • Emphasis on the widely touted market-oriented reforms drew attention and resources from initiatives with greater promise.
  • The reforms missed a critical factor driving achievement gaps: the influence of poverty on academic performance. Real, sustained change requires strategies that are more realistic, patient, and multipronged.

That's a troubling litanty of corporate education reform failure. You can read the report, here.

Turmoil swirling around Common Core education standards

Via the Washington Post

As public schools across the country transition to the new Common Core standards, which bring wholesale change to the way math and reading are taught in 45 states and the District, criticism of the approach is emerging from groups as divergent as the tea party and the teachers union.

The standards, written by a group of states and embraced by the Obama administration, set common goals for reading, writing and math skills that students should develop from kindergarten through high school graduation. Although classroom curriculum is left to the states, the standards emphasize critical thinking and problem solving and encourage thinking deeply about fewer topics.

But as the common core shifts from theory to reality, critics are emerging. State lawmakers are concerned about the cost, which the Fordham Institute estimated could run as high as $12 billion nationally. Progressives fret over new exams, saying that the proliferation of standardized tests is damaging public education. Teachers worry that they haven’t had enough training and lack the resources to competently teach to the new standards. And conservatives say the new standards mean a loss of local control over education and amount to a national curriculum. They’ve begun calling it “Obamacore.”

On Tuesday, the head of the American Federation of Teachers and a strong supporter of the Common Core standards will warn that the new approach is being poorly implemented and requires a “mid-course correction” or the effort will fall apart.

“The Common Core is in trouble,” said Randi Weingarten, the union president who is slated to speak Tuesday in New York about the issue. “There is a serious backlash in lots of different ways, on the right and on the left.”

Weingarten is concerned that states are rushing out tests based on the new standards without preparing teachers and designing new curricula.

“This is a wake-up call for everyone else in the country,” she said, pointing to New York, which just administered new tests based on the Common Core standards. Teachers, parents and students complained that the tests were poorly designed, covered material that had not been taught and frustrated children to the point of tears.

Is Ohio ready for computer testing?

The Cincinnati Enquirer has a report on how Ohio schools are not going to be ready for the new online PARCC tests that are scheduled to be deployed next year.

Ohio public schools appear to be far short of having enough computers to have all their students take new state-mandated tests within a four-week period beginning in the 2014-15 school year.

“With all the reductions in education funds over the last several years and the downturn in the economy, districts have struggled to be able to bring their (computer technology) up to the level that would be needed for this,” said Barbara Shaner, associate executive director of the Ohio Association of School Business Officials.

Districts could seek state permission to deliver the new tests on paper if they can’t round up enough computers, tablets and gadgets to go around, Jim Wright, director of curriculum and assessment for the Ohio Department of Education, said. A student taking a paper test could be at a disadvantage, though. While the paper tests won’t have substantially different questions, a student taking the test online will have the benefit of audio and visual prompts as well as online tasks that show their work on computer, said Chad Colby, a spokesman for the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers.

The state really does need to step up and help districts fund this costly mandate that has been foisted upon them. Added to this, the computer industry is going through significant changes as more and more people move away from the traditional desktops and laptops in favor of the simpler more portable tablets. School districts could find themselves having to make costly investments again in the near future if they pick the wrong technologies.

The article makes note of the possibility of paper based test takers being at a possible disadvantage over those taking the computer based tests. There has been a significant amount of research over the years on this, and the results seem to indicate the opposite effect - that computer based test takers score lower than paper based tests.

The comparability of test scores based on online versus paper testing has been studied for more than 20 years. Reviews of the comparability literature research were reported by Mazzeo and Harvey (1988), who reported mixed results, and Drasgow (1993), who concluded that there were essentially no differences in examinee scores by mode-of-administration for power tests. Paek (2005) provided a summary of more recent comparability research and concluded that, in general, computer and paper versions of traditional multiple-choice tests are comparable across grades and academic subjects. However, when tests are timed, differential speededness can lead to mode effects. For example, a recent study by Ito and Sykes (2004) reported significantly lower performance on timed web-based norm-referenced tests at grades 4-12 compared with paper versions. These differences seemed to occur because students needed more time on the web-based test than they did on the paper test. Pommerich (2004) reported evidence of mode differences due to differential speededness in tests given at grades 11 and 12, but in her study online performance on questions near the end of several tests was higher than paper performance on these same items. She hypothesized that students who are rushed for time might actually benefit from testing online because the computer makes it easier to respond and move quickly from item to item.

A number of studies have suggested that no mode differences can be expected when individual test items can be presented within a single screen (Poggio, Glassnapp, Yang, & Poggio, 2005; Hetter, Segall & Bloxom, 1997; Bergstrom, 1992; Spray, Ackerman, Reckase, & Carlson, 1989). However, when items are associated with text that requires scrolling, such as is typically the case with reading tests, studies have indicated lower performance for students testing online (O’Malley, 2005; Pommerich, 2004; Bridgeman, Lennon, & Jackenthal, 2003; Choi & Tinkler, 2002; Bergstrom, 1992)

Education News for 02-20-2013

State Education News

  • State aid for Columbus schools uncertain (Columbus Dispatch)
  • What initially looked like a $29 million boost for the Columbus school district under a proposed state funding plan could really be more like $4.4 million…Read more...

  • Taxes, Medicaid, education focus of Kasich address (Dayton Daily News)
  • Gov. John Kasich used his third State of the State address on Tuesday to convince Ohioans and state lawmakers that his budget plan is the right mix of smart government service…Read more...

  • School technology struggles with digital learning push (Hamilton Journal-News)
  • As the state prepares to move to computer-based standardized testing by 2015, officials at some Butler County school districts say they that don’t have the computers…Read more...

  • Senior volunteers mentor students in reading (Lima News)
  • A pilot program pairing senior citizen volunteers with students to improve childhood literacy has been introduced in Ohio…Read more...

  • Kasich Outlines School Funding Plan, Budget In State Of State (WBNS)
  • Ohio Gov. John Kasich is calling his school-funding proposal an objective plan that applies equally to all districts based on their property tax wealth, residents' income…Read more...

Local Education News

  • Upper Arlington lays out job cuts, athletic-fee hikes (Columbus Dispatch)
  • The Upper Arlington school district will cut almost $3 million from the budget next school year under a plan the superintendent outlined…Read more...

  • Coleman’s panel wants city schools to put superintendent search on hold (Columbus Dispatch)
  • Mayor Michael B. Coleman and several members of his Education Commission have told the Columbus school board to halt its efforts…Read more...

  • Elida board approves reductions; higher pay-to-play costs (Lima News)
  • Elida schools will cut $465,569 from its budget next year by restructuring two central office positions, replacing retiring staff with people…Read more...

  • Law enforcement, schools share safety tactics (Lima News)
  • School safety has been pushed to the forefront for many concerned parents and local officials…Read more...

  • Perrysburg Board of Education concerned with governor's school funding formula (Toledo Blade)
  • Perrysburg Superintendent Tom Hosler sat in a car with other local superintendents digesting a statewide education meeting held recently in Columbus…Read more...

Editorial

  • ‘Trigger’ for parents (Akron Beacon Journal)
  • Reformers in recent years have proposed different ways to hold public schools accountable for performance…Read more...

  • Stop investigating Franklin's school chief (Cincinnati Enquirer)
  • Speaking freely is a near-sacred American right, enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution. That’s why the decision of the Warren County prosecutor…Read more...

  • Stuck with the check (Columbus Dispatch)
  • During his re-election campaign, President Barack Obama paid many visits to Ohio State University and other colleges around the country…Read more...

Begone Ghosts of Reform Past!

The first few weeks of 2013 have greeted us like a trip with old Marley revisiting school reforms of the past. In the very first weeks, we have Michelle Rhee's StudentsFirst lobby announce letter grades for states based on their adherence to her favorite pillars of reform policies. John Merrow provided us with a reprise of her greatest hits as the head of DC schools, along with some news regarding the cheating that accompanied her regime.

And next the Gates Foundation has provided us with another example of the perils of mixing research with advocacy. Their multi-year, multi-million dollar Measures of Effective Teaching project has once again supported their belief that we can predict which teachers will get the best test scores next year by looking at who got the best test scores this year. The practice of actually observing a teacher to see how "effective" they are does not apparently add much accuracy to the prediction, but they keep it in there nonetheless, perhaps for sentimental reasons. Then we have tossed in a new element - student surveys. And the perfect evaluation is some balanced mixture of these three elements, which will turn VAM lead into gold.

One reformer, Michael Petrilli of the Fordham Foundation, has come right out and admitted what public school advocates have contended from the start. Many charter schools filter out difficult students, and whatever competitive performance advantages they have demonstrated are not credible evidence that they can do more with less. They can do more with more - and with fewer of the students most damaged by the scourge of poverty. Of course, Mr. Petrilli believes this ought to be celebrated, because like the Makers of Romneyan mythology, these students are "strivers," who ought to be well-served. The laggards they leave behind are of little concern. This is a frightening educational philosophy that runs counter to the main reform narrative, which has called upon civil rights rhetoric to justify school closures and charter expansion. But how can we reconcile an ethic supposedly based on equitable opportunities for all with a bare-knuckle life boat strategy that leaves many students behind to sink in under-funded public schools?

But alongside these visits from the ghosts of reforms past, we have some auspicious evidence that there may be a different future ahead.

[readon2 url="http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2013/01/hopes_for_the_new_year_begone_.html"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

StudentsFirst is an anti-tax group

StudentsFrist, the lobbying organization ran by Michelle Rhee, puts itself forward as an education reform organization, but when one carefully looks at their agenda it is clear what they really are is another extreme right wing anti-tax group.

Their goal is to transfer as much money from public schools to private enterprise, while eroding public schools themselves. Let's look at the clear evidence.

The NYT reports

In just a few short years, state legislatures and education agencies across the country have sought to transform American public education by passing a series of laws and policies overhauling teacher tenure, introducing the use of standardized test scores in performance evaluations and expanding charter schools.

Such policies are among those pushed by StudentsFirst, the advocacy group led by Michelle A. Rhee, the former schools chancellor in Washington. Ms. Rhee has generated debate in education circles for aggressive pursuit of her agenda and the financing of political candidates who support it.

In a report issued Monday, StudentsFirst ranks states based on how closely they follow the group’s platform, looking at policies related not only to tenure and evaluations but also to pensions and the governance of school districts. The group uses the classic academic grading system, awarding states A to F ratings.

With no states receiving an A, two states receiving B-minuses and 12 states branded with an F, StudentsFirst would seem to be building a reputation as a harsh grader.

Ohio received a C-. StateImpactOhio talked to StudentsFirst about this report.

You mentioned that we’re a C but there are things in action that – according to your standards – will improve education in Ohio. What are those things?

A: Currently we have a system where regardless of how a child performs, teachers’ evaluation, pay, performance is pretty much divorced from the students’ outcomes. When you evaluate teachers you have to factor in student performance in those evaluations, and so Ohio has now passed legislation saying that student performance has to play a role in terms of teacher pay and promotion. We think it needs to go further, we think tenure decisions need to be based on student performance.

This comes as no surprise. StudentsFirst supported SB5 which had similar goals. What should be eye opening is this policy goal itself. If the goal is to put students first, why would this organization choose to pursue a failed policy?

In Washington DC where Michelle Rhee was head of the schools, she implemented this system, and as we reported last year it has been an unmitigated disaster.

Washington DC has purged a vast number of experienced teachers pursuing the policies of Michelle Rhee and the results have been terrible for students

D.C. public schools have the largest achievement gap between black and white students among the nation’s major urban school systems, a distinction laid bare in a federal study released Wednesday.

The District also has the widest achievement gap between white and Hispanic students, the study found, compared with results from other large systems and the national average.

The study is based on the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress, federal reading and math exams taken this year by fourth- and eighth-graders across the country.

The country already has a teacher attrition problem. We need policies that will retain experienced teachers, not drive them faster from the profession

In what other policy arena would a group be taken seriously by arguing for policies that eliminated experience? It is clear that what StudentsFirst aim is then, is to reduce the cost of teachers in order to pursue low taxes and siphon that saved money to private enterprise.

Furthermore, the recent 2012 elections demonstrated that ideology, not putting students first, is the main goal of Rhee's organization

Rhee makes a point of applauding “leaders in both parties and across the ideological spectrum” because her own political success — and the success of school reform — depends upon the bipartisan reputation she has fashioned. But 90 of the 105 candidates backed by StudentsFirst were Republicans, including Tea Party enthusiasts

Many of those endorsed candidates include legislators who cut Ohio public schools funding by by $1.8 billion - a move decried by the majority of public school supporters, but found StudentsFirst silent on the matter.

When you separate the rhetoric from the results and the goals, it becomes far easier to understand StudetnsFirst not as an education reform group but instead as a right wing anti-tax group - something all the available evidence demonstrates.