RT @njleftbehind NJ’s “Telenovela”: Patrick Riccards over at @Eduflack reviews the “telenovela” in Jersey over #RttThttp://bit.ly/a8MKiy
Year: 2010
Around the Edu-Horn, June 9, 2010
Experts differ on causes of racial segregation in New Orleans schools http://sbne.ws/r/4Trd (from ASCD)
RT @PoliticsK12: Blog: White House’s Go-To Senator Introduces Turnaround Bill: http://bit.ly/cdGQ3c
Concerns about TAKS gains? http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/06/09/35mct_taks.h29.html
RT @EdPolicyatNAF CA lawmakers voted to raise kindergarten age, which will reduce the state’s K pop by 100,000. http://bit.ly/aruVFI
RT @njleftbehind Schundler: “The Incredible Shrinking Ed. Comm.”: http://bit.ly/biZFhH
“The Incredibly Shrinking Education Commissioner”
We all assume that governors and their appointed education commissioners (or state superintendents or secretaries of education) will generally get along. When the top ed job is appointed (as opposed to many states that actually elect the educator-in-chief), the gov and the ed commish tend to hail from the same party. We assume they share the same general philosophy. And we most certainly expect that the commish serves at the pleasure of the governor, and is on the same page agenda wise (at least publicly).
But then we have those great political states like New Jersey, the state dear ol’ Eduflack is mostly likely to call home. After reading the political soap opera that is education policy and politics in the Garden State, a state known for bare-knuckle politics, we are now seeing the best and worst of it on the education front.
For those who haven’t been turning into the telenovela, here’s what you missed. Gov. Chris Christie was elected last November despite the incredible vitriol and massive campaign attacks waged by the New Jersey Education Association. NJEA expected Christie would then play ball with them, as they are a powerful labor union in a state that generally appreciates powerful labor unions, but he refused (and who can blame him, after the attacks he suffered during the campaign). On Christie’s first day of office, New Jersey submitted a Phase One Race to the Top app, based largely on the wishes of NJEA. The application didn’t make the cut, and NJ was not a Phase One finalist. Christie appoints Bret Schundler, champion of charter schools, as the state education commissioner. Schundler reworks the state’s RttT app, based on reviewer feedbak, and cuts a deal with NJEA to make the state’s recommended teacher quality provisions (particularly on seniority and incentive pay) palatable to the union so they sign on. Folks are shocked the Christie Administration and NJEA reach detente. Then, before the app is submitted, Christie swoops in, says he agreed to no such deal with NJEA, and changes the RttT application to reflect his preferences and reject NJEA’s needs with regard to teacher quality measures. The RttT app was then submitted to the feds last week in Christie’s image, the NJEA (and Schundler) be damned. With me so far?
Immediately following Christie’s charge up RttT Hill, some presumed that Schundler’s days would be numbered. After all, how could a Christie lieutenant strike a deal with Public Enemy Number One? The Newark Star-Ledger editorial board now says that Schundler’s “credibility is in jeopardy.” The folks over at NJ Left Behind wonder if Christie and Schundler are playing “good cop-bad cop” with the teachers’ union in the name of progress?
Back in January, Eduflack was so bold as to suggest that New Jersey should have pulled its Phase One application. Christie should have demonstrated his strength on Day One, declared that the hard work of his predecessor did not reflect his educational priorities as the state’s new governor, and spend the next few months crafting an application in his own image. Instead, the app went forward. New Jersey came in 18th place, and the rework has been in process for the past few months.
So where does New Jersey go from here? Some seem to think the current application is damaged goods, that the loss of union support will be too great for Joysey to overcome. Those critics forget, though, that US EdSec Arne Duncan has been preaching that strong reform is more important that kumbaya universal buy-in. So do ed reformers in New Jersey now need to pick sides, choosing Camp Christie or Camp Bret?
Hardly. Christie made a shrewd political move. He knows it is still a long shot that New Jersey will win a RttT grant. (Particularly with Duncan saying there may only be another 10 or so winners). If NJ wins, Christie wants to do so on his own terms. Winning Race means having to take on new responsibilities in reporting and accountability. It also likely means having to pony in additional dollars from the state coffers to make good on the promises to the feds. If Christie is going to do that, in what is a disastrous financial climate in his state, he needs to do it on his terms. His house, his rules, if you will. He won the election, so folks can do it his way or no way at all. With so many strings attached to the funding, and the US Department of Education talking about withdrawing funding if they find the application is not being followed to the letter, it is only natural for Christie to seek to pull as many of the strings involved here as possible.
And as for Schundler? He deserves major points for reaching out and trying to actually work with NJEA. Yes, his credibility with the union may be a little damaged in the short term. He now needs to demonstrate he can deliver on the specific deals he may cut. (And that requires a team at the State Department of Ed cast in his image, which is in process.) But he’s shown a willingness to deal and has demonstrated a bit on an independent streak from the good governor. Whether that was intended or not, it can now be used to help move specific state efforts on other school improvement efforts.
Now is the time for both leaders to put a bold, yet simple, plan for education improvement forward. Communities across the state have turned back efforts to raise taxes to provide additional dollars for the schools. Now is the time for the state to step forward and issue three challeges, challenges focused on outcomes and students. For instance, scrap efforts to award high school diplomas to anyone who is 18 and with a pulse and ensure that a NJ high school diploma means more than an attendance certificate. Figure out what is working in places like Newark and replicating those programs and initiatives in other struggling urban centers. Implement a real strategic plan for charter school expansion across the state. Even figure out the best practices that can be learned from the Abbott Schools, and apply them in other schools (without the promise of big dollars).
Address a couple of those issues, offer some measurements to know the state is making progress, and remind parents, business leaders, and even teachers’ unions of what you are doing and why you are doing it, and you could have some real progress. Christie provides the global vision, Schundler leads the troops on the ground. All get to declare victory.
Around the Edu-Horn, June 8, 2010
Check out my take on DC teachers’ contract over at National Journal ed experts blog — http://tinyurl.com/2aum7bz Thanks @ekspectacular
Teachers union looks to sue CPS over class size — http://tinyurl.com/2f5ozy3
OH OKs common core standards — http://tinyurl.com/35wlcl6
RT @sgermeraad USA Today: Edujobs makes no effort to keep best teachers working http://bit.ly/dam4Hl #education
Investigating DCPS’ philanthropic support — http://tinyurl.com/2eqwska
RT @Larryferlazzo Interview With Ed Secretary Duncan On Parent Involvement http://bit.ly/crHpsj
Private Dollars and Public Education
For years now, we have heard how school districts simply don’t have the necessary funds to operate as we expect. Just in recent weeks, we’ve had education advocates lobby for $23 billion in federal funding to help pay teacher salaries, asking for outside assistance to avoid major cuts to their payrolls and their educator forces. And while this $23 billion for edujobs has gotten stymied in Congress, it hasn’t been because folks feel it is inappropriate for anyone other than the school district to pay for teacher salaries.
So why the double standard when it comes to the District of Columbia Public Schools and Chancellor Michelle Rhee’s plans for financial incentives and pay raises for teachers who excel in the classroom? Over in today’s Washington Post, Bill Turque offers up another strong piece on the evolution of teaching in our nation’s capital, this time focusing on efforts by the DC Office of Campaign Finance to investigate charges that the philanthropic support behind the new teacher pay pact somehow violates the law.
Let’s pause to take a look at the basic facts. Rhee has pushed for nearly three years to enact her vision to boost student acheivement and teacher quality in DC Schools, offering up a new approach to scrap traditional teacher tenure and reward educators based on performance. To accomplish this, she secured $64.5 million from private foundations, including Broad, Walton, Robertson, and Arnold. Knowing the politics of our little city by the swamp, these generour philanthropic donors included language in their agreements that they could pull back the $64.5 million if Rhee is no longer with DCPS. The Cliff Notes version here — these foundations are investing in Rhee and her vision of teacher quality. If Rhee isn’t here to shepherd the project, the donors reserve the right to re-evaluate their financial commitment to the District.
Accusers say this is a violation of the law, and that such wiggle langauge does nothing more than protect Rhee in the event of a change in mayoral leadership. The Chancellor, the allegations go, personally benefits because she agreed to such “leadership clauses.”
Over on WaPo’s editorial pages, the newspaper rightfully questions why such an investigation is even being pursued. As WaPo notes, Rhee raised millions from credible philanthropic organizations, all with a significant track record in public education and school improvement.
It all makes Eduflack wonder, if Rhee had gone to these foundations, hat in hand, because she needed $60 million to avoid laying off hundreds of teachers, would there be the same outrage? If the Chancellor were coming forward and saying she can’t make due with her available resources and needs real help to shore up her basic operating budget, would there be the same concern? Or is this simply an issue of using a little inginuity to break the status quo, and the status quoers being upset about it?
From the cheap seats, it seems that Rhee is using philanthropic support exactly as it is intended. DCPS operations continue to get funded through the traditional mixes of federal, state, and local funding (though a little less traditional in DC’s case). Rather than cut those core services and programs, Rhee has secured outside funding to implement an innovative (or not so innovative, depending on your perspective) program intended to boost student achievement and teacher quality. If it works, terrific. If it doesn’t, it is largely the outside funders who fail to gain return on their investment.
In return, those philanthropic causes want to see some conditions on their contributions. They aren’t handing over tens of millions of dollars blind. They want oversight and assurances. They want guarantees. And they want some stability in management to make sure years aren’t wasted or programmatic goals don’t change mid-stream. All seems perfectly reasonable.
Without question, there are a significant number of individuals — inside DC, in the eduaction community, etc. — who simply don’t like DCPS’s new teacher pact. They will play whatever cards they can to try and delay and derail the deal, particularly knowing that this year’s campaign for DC mayor could result in new leadership, both for the city and for DCPS. But this investigation seems silly, even for DC politics.
It does raise a very important point, though. We are at a time when more private sector and philanthropic money is going into public K-12 education than ever before. From the Gates Foundation to the matches sought by the pending federal Investing in Innovation grants, public/private partnerships and third-party financial support is becoming more and more the norm these days. Yet much of these deals seem to still happen behind closed doors. We learn of private support, but we often don’t know the dollar figures involved or the conditions attached, as we do with the current DCPS deal.
It seems we need some additional sunshine on the process. A common database where philanthropic donations over a certain threshold are reported and cataloged. A place where we can see who is giving money (and for what and with what conditions) and who is receiving it. A clearinghouse where we can both see the inputs of such public/private school improvement efforts, as well as the documented outcomes of such investments. A way to see what is working and replicate it, using these philanthropic supports to guide systemic reforms later on.
I recognize that folks are tired of reporting and accountability, but if we are to truly learn from these sorts of public/private investments, a little sunshine and accountability can be an enormous help. And it may even maximize such outside investments, allowing us to see real, long-term results.
Around the Edu-Horn, June 7, 2010
Bob Wise: A General Motors moment for education? http://tinyurl.com/23ec2fk
RT @D_Aarons Detroit Mayor Wants School Control http://bit.ly/aK80RI
RT @mazehr Board for a Phoenix school district asked to bar school police from enforcing new immigration law. http://tinyurl.com/22n395o
George Will’s oppo piece against $23B in edujobs — http://tinyurl.com/287e6vw
WaPo editorial questions VA’s decision not to sign on to common core standards — http://tinyurl.com/2duwkf8
Around the Edu-Horn, June 4, 2010
RT @John_Bailey N.J. Ed. Commish: Race to Top’s First Casualty? http://ht.ly/1Uf3V
Proposed Pittsburgh contract aims to benefit teachers, students http://sbne.ws/r/4Rl1 (from ASCD)
RT @USNewsEducation What May Change in Upcoming College Rankings http://bit.ly/c0wmD6
Incentive pay for at-risk Houston students — http://tinyurl.com/27gt75m
Making college freshmen read — http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/04/books
Around the Edu-Horn, June 3, 2010
RT @D_Aarons End of the Road for 21 K.C. Schools http://bit.ly/9wi4J1
DC teachers overwhelmingly approve merit pay plan — http://tinyurl.com/2ckuk6u
NYC cuts budget, raises but saves teachers’ jobs — http://tinyurl.com/2dddusl
RT @wpnick: Rhee and 54 other big-city supes endorse common core standards. http://ow.ly/17zJfZ
Resistance to a three-year college degree? http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/03/aacu
RT @getschooled Vicki Phillips has a new blog post up about common core standards http://ow.ly/1Tgei see the standards at http://ow.ly/1Tgfa
So, You Say It’s Not a Revolution
It is now official. Yesterday afternoon, the Washington (DC) Teachers Union revealed the vote on DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee’s ambitious plan to move toward merit pay for all teachers in the nation’s capital. While some suspected the vote would be close (with new teachers voting yes and the many veteran teachers having doubts), it wasn’t close at all. The new contract was ratified 1,412 to 425, giving the Rhee agenda a nearly 4:1 win.
The Washington Post’s Bill Turque offers us the full story here.
We’ve come a long way from when Rhee first offered up the plan back in 2007. When the DCPS Chancellor first arrived in Washington nearly three years ago, she was brimming with ideas and innovations. One of them was merit pay, offering huge incentives to teachers who could boost student achievement (as Rhee says she did as a Teach for America teacher in Baltimore two decades ago). At the time, few school districts had been able to truly do merit pay well. In fact, Denver’s ProComp program probably stood as the only true exemplar in the field.
Rhee was offering five-figure bonuses to teachers in a district that was already perceived as paying its teachers, particularly its veterans, extremely well. To get to her end game, Rhee enlisted the help of the philanthropic community, which pledged tens of millions of dollars to make this all happen.
Along the way, there were missteps. A Time magazine cover story with a broom. Significant teacher layoffs in the name of budget, then under the banner of misconduct. Concerns of the financial stability of the promise of such incentives. And, of course, the worry of what happens to all of that outside support should Rhee (or the mayor) move on. (And Eduflack is thinking, perhaps, of Rhee going to the Gates Foundation to do nationally what she has just done in the District of Columbia, but that’s just me thinking it fits nicely with Gates’ human capital push and the work currently being done at Gates by John Deasy.)
What was particularly telling about the ratification was the sentiment offered up by Kurt Schmoke, the former Baltimore mayor and the consigliere brought in to make peace between Rhee and WTU. As reported by Turque, in regard to merit pay, Schmoke said, “The ideas have gained currency at the national level … What was seen as bold is now reform, not revolution.”
It is a very interesting thought, and one the entire education community should reflect on. Just a few years ago, what Rhee proposed was seen as true revolution by most, and a breaking of an urban teachers union by quite a few. Since then, we’ve seen Houston beat DC to the punch on such a plan (though Houston doesn’t have to deal with unions the way DC does). We’ve seen threats of massive teacher layoffs and a growing feeling that last hired, first fired is no way to run school systems looking to boost student achievement. And we’ve now seen 40 or so states pledge to adopt ambitous teacher quality efforts in pursuit of the $4 billion Race to the Top grail. One can now argue that the DC teacher deal is no longer revolution, and may no longer even be reform. It is just keeping up with the Joneses.
Don’t believe Eduflack? Take a look at the public statements offered yesterday. Rhee, who should be declaring victory from every rooftop in the District, offered a very muted statement here. (And based on past experience, this was the right approach. Rhee should let others declare her victory for her.) AFT President Randi Weingarten, as to be expected, praised DC teachers here for putting their students first. And, interestingly, WTU still does not have a statement posted on its website, with interested readers being directed to last month’s missives on the “tentative” contract. This was far from a bold pronouncement of revolutionizing the education sector. In many ways, it read like DCPS has changed its chalk provider.
The real celebration (or protestation) will come next year, as teachers start feeling the 21 percent pay increases and start anticipating those $20,000 to $30,000 performance pay bonuses. The real fun is now in seeing if other urban school districts (particularly those in AFT cities) decide to “borrow” from the DC model and enact similar plans, or if we wait a few years to see if the DC approach works.
Looking at the history of real reform and improvement in the education sector, DC is likely to be extremely lonely in this pool for a bit.
Around the Edu-Horn, June 2, 2010
“Glee” summer camps could help fill music-instruction void for students http://sbne.ws/r/4Q0K (from ASCD)
