accountability

Showdown in Chi-Town

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, AFT, teachers

Just because it is summer doesn’t mean that things aren’t happening in local school districts.  In Chicago, for instance, teachers and their elected officials are headed for a showdown.  Mayor Rahm Emanuel pushes to extend the school day and school year, while stepping away from previous promises of a pay boost.  The Chicago Federation of Teachers responds in kind with the authorization for a city-wide strike.

The debate has been an interesting one to watch, and in many ways serves as a microcosm for some of the larger discussions of education reform and school improvement across the country.
Teachers unions, however, have painted themselves into a corner by insisting that spending is the best predictor of educational performance — increase financial inputs and cognitive outputs will rise. In the past 50 years, real per pupil spending nationwide has tripled and the number of pupils per teacher has declined by a third, yet educational attainments have fallen. Abundant data demonstrate that the vast majority of differences in schools’ performances can be explained by qualities of the families from which the children come to school: the amount of homework done at home, the quantity and quality of reading material in the home, the amount of television watched in the home and, the most important variable, the number of parents in the home. In Chicago, 84 percent of African American children and 57 percent of Hispanic children are born to unmarried women.
Definitely an interesting read.  

“The Greatest Country in the World”

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, Media

Last week, HBO launched its new original series, The Newsroom.  While it isn’t exactly Network, the new serial attempts to do for the nightly news what Aaron Sorkin did for sports television (through Sports Night) and politics (through The West Wing).

Of course, the whole things gets going with a monologue of outrage and platform setting.  When asked why the United States is the greatest country on earth, the protagonist (a previously uncontroversial TV anchor always trying to walk the middle), let’s loose on an unsuspecting college student with the following:

Cheryn [the liberal panelist], the NEA is a loser. Yeah, it accounts for a penny out of our paycheck, but he gets to hit you with it anytime he wants. It doesn’t cost money. It costs votes. It costs air time and column inches. You know why people don’t like liberals? Cuz they lose. If liberals are so smart why do they lose so goddamn always? [Addressing conservative] And with a straight face, you’re going to tell students that America is so star-spangled awesome that we’re the only ones in the world who have freedom? Canada has freedom. Japan has freedom. The UK, France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Australia! Belgium! has freedom. So, 207 sovereign states in the world and 180 of them have freedom. 

And yeah, you, sorority girl. Just in case you ever wander into a voting booth one day, there’s some things you should know and one of them is: there is absolutely no evidence to support the statement that we are the greatest country in the world. We’re 7th in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 179th in infant mortality, 3rd in median household income, 4th in exports. We lead the world in only 3 categories: Number of incarcerated citizens per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, a defense spending – where we spend more than the next 26 countries combined, 25 of whom are allies. 

Now, none of this is the fault of a 20 year old college student, but you nonetheless are without a doubt a member of the worst – period – generation – period – ever – period. So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Yosemite? 

It sure used to be. We stood up for what was right. We fought for moral reasons. We struck laws – we passed down laws for moral reasons. We waged wars on poverty not poor people. We sacrificed. We cared about our neighbors. We put our money were our mouths were and we never beat our chests. We built great big things and made ungodly technological advances and explored the universe, cured disease. And we cultivated the world’s greatest artists and the world’s greatest economy.

We reached for the stars. Acted like men. We aspired to intelligence – we didn’t belittle it, it didn’t make us feel inferior. We didn’t identify ourselves by who we voted for in the last election and, we didn’t scare so easy.

We were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed by great men – men who were revered. 

First step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one. America is not the greatest country in the world anymore. Enough? 

And why do I offer this?  Interestingly, even Hollywood seems to determine our greatness, in part, by those student performance measures so many bemoan these days.  

“No Criticism is Too Vicious and Too Fact-Free”

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, charter schools, high-stakes testing, teachers, vouchers

Earlier this week, CBS Radio star and White House expert Mark Knoller (@markknoller for you Twitter followers) noted that former President Bill Clinton, while at a political event, said “‘no criticism is too vicious and too fact-free’ for opponents to use against Pres Obama.”

It was one of the few times, particularly lately, when Eduflack really paused to reflect on something I had seen on Twitter.  Regardless of whether it applies to the Obama-Romney showdown this fall, one thing is true.  President Clinton’s statement definitely applies when one looks at education reform.
Yes, there is no criticism too vicious or too fact-free for opponents to use against education reform.  Or perhaps, to be a little more generous and to paraphrase a line from Seinfeld, when it comes to defending the status quo, it isn’t a lie if you believe it to be true.
Don’t believe it?  Take a look at the opinions and vitriol that follow education reform across the nation.  In state after state, those who defend the status quo issue the same lines and look like carbon copies of other status quoers.  
If one is for greater accountability, then one is pro-bubble sheets and only teaching to the test.
If one supports public school choice, then one is stealing dollars from our community schools.
If one demands increased parental involvement and parental rights, then one is anti-teacher.
If one calls for teacher evaluations, then one is anti-collective bargaining.
If one provides philanthropic support to improve public schools, then one must be a profiteer looking to make personal fortunes off public education.
If one highlights the achievement gap and the disparities in both quality and outcome for Black and Latino students, then one must be a race-baiter.
If one asks for public school improvement, then one must be trying to privatize the schools and enact a voucher system.
If one believes we can do better and wears the tag of education reformer proudly, then one must be an anti-teacher, anti-union, anti-public school Republican looking to take over the system.
Sadly, there are no attacks that are too vicious or too devoid of fact for the defenders of the status quo.  In our modern era of campaign politics, it is all about trying to tear down the opponents.  It isn’t about policies.  It isn’t about facts.  And it certainly isn’t about the students.  It is about protecting what one has, no matter how ineffective the system may be.
And what of the reformers?  They simply have to stand and take the attacks and the vitriol, no matter how ridiculous.  Try to confront it, and you merely encourage those status quo defenders.  Try to set the record straight, and any egregious statement you don’t address is automatically accepted as gospel.  
In politics, we keep talking about the need for an end to negative politics and a new era of debate and collaboration.  The same can be said of education reform.  This should no longer be an argument of who is anti-teacher, who is anti-accountability, and who defines what as a true public school.  Instead, we should be focusing on both identifying the problem and offering real solutions.
Defending the way we have always done things because that is how we have always done things is not a solution.  Now is the time for ideas, for promising practice, and for real solutions.  Now is the time for a debate robust in facts, not a time for fact-free attacks.

Evaluating Teacher Eval

Eduflack accountability, teachers

Teacher evaluation is one of those hot topics in K-12 education right now.  How do we evaluate educators?  Should test scores count?  If so, for how much?  How does observation fit?  What non-academic, qualitative measures should be part of the process?

And while we often talk about what this district or this state is doing or contemplating doing, we rarely take a holistic look at what some of the true trailblazers in evaluation are doing — what they have in common, what they are doing differently, where they are excelling, and, yes, where they are struggling.
But today, there is a new report out — Measuring Teacher Effectiveness: A Look “Under the Hood” of Teacher Evaluation — that provides such an examination.  Written by the good folks over at Public Impact and jointly commissioned by ConnCAN (where I serve as CEO) and 50CAN, Measuring Teacher Effectiveness provides that picture so many of us have been looking for.
The 10 sites include three states — Delaware, Rhode Island, and Tennessee — five large urban districts — Hillsborough County, FL; Houston, TX; New Haven, CT; Pittsburgh, PA; and Washington, DC — the Achievement First Charter Network, and the Relay Graduate School of Education.
The report provides a cross-site analysis of all 10 sites, as well as 10 detailed profiles of the teacher evaluation systems in each of the featured sites.  It pays specific attention implementation challenges faced in five areas: 1) student achievement measures; 2) classroom observations; 3) other non-academic measures; 4) accuracy, validity, and reliability; and 5) reporting and using evaluation results.
As I said in releasing the report this AM:
There are few factors as important to student success than that of an effective educator.  To ensure that every child has that effective educator, we must implement comprehensive evaluation models.  Measuring Teacher Effectiveness is an important tool in understanding what teacher evaluation leaders are doing and what components must be factored into a meaningful evaluation model.

There is no magic bullet when it comes to effective educator evaluation.  But there is also no need to reinvent the wheel.  By taking a close look at many of our evaluation trailblazers, we can see the necessary components for evaluation, the challenges our states and districts face in doing it right, and the unanswered questions we must still pursue if we are to provide all students with exemplary teachers.
Happy reading!

“They’d Rather FIght Everything …”

Eduflack accountability, teachers
“I think that was the great tragedy of [the No Child Left Behind Act], the complete lack of real input the education establishment had, and it goes a long way to explaining the problems with the law.  That tragedy continues today with teacher evaluations. But the fact that they didn’t have a seat at the table was because they’d decided they’d rather fight everything than compromise.”
– Patrick J. McGuinn, associate professor of political science at Drew University, in Education Week’s Relationship Between Advocacy Groups, Unions Uneasy, by Stephen Sawchuk 

Migrating from AYP

Eduflack accountability, AYP, NCLB

Virtually every state in the union is working to get out from under No Child Left Behind and its measure of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).  Thanks to the U.S. Department’s efforts to offer “NCLB waivers” most states have submitted applications to do just that, veer away from the AYP standard established a decade ago and chart a new path that still demonstrates forward progress.

Over at Education Week, Andrew Ujifusa has a piece outlining the plans many states are crafting for their post-NCLB existences.  From letter grades to stars, many states are looking for new ways to demonstrate progress to both policymakers and parents, in a way that put there districts and schools in the best light possible.
Take, for instance, the plan offered up by Ohio.  According to Education Week, Ohio’s plan is as follows:

  • A-F letter-grading system, based on 4 points. A school with 3.67 points or more earns an A, and a school getting 0.67 points or below earns an F.
  • A school cannot earn an A on the “achievement and graduation gap” portion of its score if one of four groups (all students, white non-Hispanic students, disadvantaged students, and students with disabilities) earns a C, D, or F.
  • Based on 2011 data, under the new A-F system, 24.8 percent of 3,103 traditional public schools (charters not included) would have earned A’s, 33.2 percent would have earned B’s, and 23.9 percent would have earned C’s.

Will it work?  Most states will likely win their NCLB waiver requests, thus giving these states and others the ability to enact their versions of AYP 2.0.  But how many years will it take before we know if this latest version of accountability works or not?
  

Real Reform in the CT

Eduflack accountability, Parents, SBRR, teachers

For many, the notion of meaningful education reform in a blue state with strong teachers unions and a general resistance to change is a thing of folly.  In a state known as “The Land of Steady Habits,” can reform really take hold?

After watching the past few months up in Connecticut, the answer is a resounding yes.  Governor Dannel Malloy has demonstrated the sort of leadership we all seek from our officials, standing strong, fighting for what he believes in, and never wavering from his promise of doing right by the kids and families of Connecticut.
Malloy’s efforts, coupled with the hard work and fire demonstrated by Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor, the Black and Puerto Rican Caucus, legislative leadership, teachers, principals, superintendents, school boards, the business community, parents, and the community at large, have now resulted into a significant step forward for school improvement in Connecticut.
Rather than biting off a small piece now and saving more reforms for later, Malloy et al went at the heart of the issue.  The path wasn’t easy, most suggested it was too difficult to complete, but when the dust settles on Connecticut’s 2012 legislative session, the state will have adopted a comprehensive reform package with the power to have real impact and help provide all students access to great public schools.
Dear ol’ Eduflack goes into greater detail on the landmark deal for Connecticut over at 50CAN’s Great Big Blog, but the highlights of the legislation that passed the Connecticut Senate by a vote of 28-7 and the House by a unanimous 149-0 decision include:

    • A new educator evaluation system, to be piloted in 10 districts this year, that makes student learning outcomes the most important element of teacher and principal evaluation
    • That teacher tenure be earned based on effectiveness
    • A streamlined dismissal process for chronically ineffective teachers
    • A Commissioner’s Network for the state’s lowest-performing schools, providing the leadership, structure, funding, flexibility, and accountability to bring real change to those buildings and students who need it most
    • An evidence-based approach to teaching children to read, providing the instruction, measurement, and accountability to get all kids reading at grade level by fourth grade
    • Conditional funding for the state’s lowest-performing school districts, offering additional dollars for the implementation of real reforms
    • A Common Chart of Accounts so, once and for all, all Connecticut public schools account for their spending in a consistent, transparent way
    • Closer to real equity for Connecticut’s charter school students, providing the largest increase in per-pupil expenditure for charter schools in the state’s history
    • Additional state-authorized charter schools, including those that serve ELL populations, and providing financial incentives to create locally authorized charters

The significance of these ideas, all part of one comprehensive education reform package, cannot be overstated.  While some may want to play down the importance of these efforts or claim that they turned back fictitious reforms never in the bill, these are real gains worthy of real reflection.
Governor Malloy declared 2012 “The Year for Education Reform” in Connecticut.  Malloy and legislative leadership are to be credited for delivering on legislation that shakes Connecticut’s public schools out of the status quo muck and puts them on the path to 21st century excellence.  
Now the hard work begins.  Just because this is the year for education reform does not mean it is the only year for reform.  Now CT must enact these efforts with fidelity.  Now CT must begin to build on these reforms and identify additional changes necessary to improve instruction and learning in all public schools.  And now CT must deliver on its promise to do right by its kids, all of its kids.
As Leo McGarry once said on West Wing, “We play the full nine innings at this level.”  Nothing could be truer for education reform in Connecticut.  The Nutmeg State is now in the game.  It has taken its first cuts from the batter’s box.  But we have many more innings to go before the win.  But this is a helluva way to approach those early innings.
  

Speaking for Students

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, Students

There is little question that efforts to improve our public schools generate significantly heated rhetoric and emotions on all sides.  But when the shouting dies down, does anyone really want to hear a student ask, “who will speak for me?”

That’s the level we’ve reached in the ed reform fight in Connecticut, where the past few months have focused on the adults in the room and what is owed them.  But at some point, we need to ask who will stand up and advocate for the children in the room?
Over in the Connecticut Mirror, Eduflack has a commentary addressing that very question:
For months now, folks have spoken loudly in support of the adults in the room. We have spent week after week, hour after hour, discussing property rights, dismissal procedures and windows for contract negotiations. We’ve seen hundreds of teachers dance at a rally as our schools and students suffer, and as legislators tell those teachers they won’t have to agree to any uncomfortable changes that might benefit students. Yet we know 130,000 students remain trapped in failing schools, 9,000 won’t graduate this year, and thousands more will “graduate” but will be completely unprepared for the challenges of work and life in 2012 and beyond.
  

Should Teacher Eval Mean Something?

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, AFT, NEA, teachers

In the fight to close the achievement gap and ensure all kids have access to great public schools, what is the role of the teachers’ union?  I’m not talking teachers, we know how essential great teachers are to learning and achievement.  But when we talk about reform, shouldn’t the unions be part of the solution, rather than an obstacle protecting the problem?

Dear ol’ Eduflack addresses this issue in this morning’s New York Post, reflecting on school improvement efforts in Connecticut, the unions’ initial rhetoric that they were supportive of reforms, and how they have now balked at the process of real accountability and improvement.
From my piece:

The CEA claimed that linking evaluations and staffing decisions was “beyond [its] wildest nightmare”; it’s mounting a full-fledged campaign against any attempt to establish the link. It’s convinced some teachers to fear any linkage — so teachers have been shouting down the governor at town-hall meetings and even calling him a liar when he tried to correct the misconceptions.


What of the AFT? The national union, led by former New York City teacher-union chief Randi Weingarten, has been a key player in the development and early implementation of similar evaluation systems in states and cities across the country. The Connecticut chapter will be at odds with its national affiliate if it blocks key reforms — yet Weingarten’s silence has been deafening so far.


Happy reading!


Why Fear Choice?

Eduflack accountability, charter schools

According to Section 5210(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the Federal Government offers a comprehensive definition of a “charter school.”  The full definition actually has 12 components to it, including:

* Operates in pursuit of a specific set of educational objectives determined by the school’s developer and agreed to by the authorized public chartering agency
* Complies with the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
* Meets all applicable Federal, State, and local health and safety requirements
* Operates in accordance with State law
 
But there are two components of the definition that are most interesting, and relevant to the discussion of education reform.
First, A charter school “is a school to which parents choose to send their children, and that admits students on the basis of a lottery, if more students apply for admission than can be accommodated.”
Second, A charter school “has a written performance contract with the authorized public chartering agency in the State that includes a description of how student performance will be measured in charter schools pursuant to State assessments that are required of other schools and pursuant to any other assessments mutually agreeable to the authorized public chartering agency and the charter school.”
So charter schools are public schools.  They have to operate in accordance with all state laws and Federal requirements.  They must meet specific educational objectives.  They must be held accountable for their performance and for the performance of their students.  And they encourage family involvement by giving parents a choice.
Sounds good, right?  Then why do spend so much time fighting about charter schools?  Why do we pit public schools against each other, with charter opponents alleging that public charter schools “steal” money from traditional public schools?  Why do antagonists paint public charter schools, run by not-for-profits, as the gateway to school privatization and profiteering?  Why do we bemoan a lack of parental engagement in the classroom, then condemn those families that demonstrate their engagement by seeking to enroll their children in a public charter school?
There is no one-size-fits-all student, no one-size-fits-all method of instruction, and certainly no one-size-fits-all type of school.  We should be looking for ways we can offer a full portfolio of school choices — traditional publics, charters, magnets, technicals, vo-ags, and the rest — that are designed to meet student needs, family desires, and community expectations.  And we should be positioned to learn from all of the above, using best and promising practices to improve that full portfolio of public schools for all of our kids.
Despite the fear promoted by many charter opponents, public charter schools are not in the business of looking to take over the public schools.  They are public schools looking to provide choice to families looking alternatives.  They are public schools looking to provide opportunity to those who feel locked in a failed situation.  They may not be for every student, but for some, they are the path to possibility. 
Whether a family is looking for a school of choice for better academic opportunities, a safer learning environment, or one of many other reasons, we should be embracing choice.  It improves all of our public schools and, more importantly, improves student learning for all, regardless of race, family income, or zip code.