Triggering Parents

No matter where you go in the education reform discussions, it is impossible to avoid some sort of discussion on parents and families.  Earlier this year, as Connecticut was working its way through a comprehensive reform law, we had teachers blaming parents for kids coming to school ill-prepared to learn and incapable of showing educators the respect needed in the classroom.

There was even the head of a local teachers union who declared that teaching would be much easier if it weren’t for the kids and parents involved.  Now who could disagree with that?
In return, parents voiced frustration with teachers.  Groups like the Connecticut Parents Union demanded greater oversight and accountability for teachers, calling for overhaul of tenure laws and seeking to revisit a previous legislative fight to bring a “parent trigger” to the state.
Of course, the Parents Union was talking about a law like that adopted in California (and enacted by more than a dozen other states).  The “Parent Trigger” is the ultimate form of family engagement.  When a majority of parents or guardians in a given school agree that their children’s school is in need of turnaround, they can vote to reconstitute the school and bring about the sort of school improvement so many parents think.
No surprise, then, that the coalition of the status quo is opposed to such actions.  While we want parents to make sure their kids do their homework and bring their books to school, we certainly don’t want them meddling in how a school operates, what it teaches, or what is expected of educators. 
As the power of the “Parent Trigger” continues to grow, and as more and more parents seek this sort of power, it only makes sense that that coalition is going to try and discredit the effort.  They resort to name calling (with Diane Ravitch and others taking to the Internet to call it the “parent tricker.”  Get it?)  And then going even further to suggest that the who “Parent Trigger” movement was some sinister corporate plot to fool parents and turn all of our schools into Wal-Marts and One-Hour Martinizers.
Fortunately, there are some that are seeking to set the record straight.  There are some that are speaking up to educate and inform about the real origins of the Parent Trigger and the real power of meaningful parental engagement.
Over at redefinED, former California State Sen. Gloria Romero has a terrific piece on the Parent Trigger in California.  Why is this piece so important?  Senator Romero is the actual author of the California Parent Trigger law.  Speaking directly to Ravitch and her followers about efforts to disparage the origins of the law and the people who advocated for it, Romero writes:

Diane, I’m a product of public education, from kindergarten through Ph.D. I believe in the power of education. I understood the dreams of my mother, and the recognition that it is education that lifts us out of poverty and is the gate of entry to the American Dream. I never forgot where I came from, including that I was “counseled” in high school not to attend college. Too many kids like me from “the other side of town” experienced and continue to experience the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Hollywood makes nice movies about standing and delivering on behalf of kids, who are caught simply by virtue of zip code in chronically failing schools. But even then, generation after generation of children are sent back to those same schools with the same bureaucrats running them, simply to fail yet again. I proudly represented East Los Angeles. Garfield High School was in my district – that iconic school that Hollywood later immortalized in ”Stand and Deliver,” starring Eddie Olmos as Jaime Escalante. (I knew him too, and know great teachers matter.) But once the movie left the theaters, the demand for change dissipated. I wanted to revive it. We need to revive it.

Remember, my generation learned lessons not only from the non-violent boycott of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., but also from the by-any-means-necessary view of Malcolm X. Therefore, I also believe in the urgency of now, the power of the boycott (yes, I knew Cesar Chavez too), and the courage it takes to declare that we shall overcome by any means necessary. I know firsthand that separate is not equal. I have personally experienced what it means for kids like me when teachers and principals don’t believe in us, and tell us that our educational futures do not include a path to college.

So we may never agree on the law itself. But I ask you to be honest about its origins. And about the hard work and integrity of the people, mostly women of color, who understood what this meant for our children and our communities. Please do not disrespect me, a Latina from the Eastside, by falsifying the idea of the bill, and how I took an idea, shaped it into legislation, and gave life to it by forming a coalition that took on the number one political force in California – and succeeded!

In our quest to improve public schools for all, we must, at some point, move beyond the name calling and the ascription of personal motives and focus on the quality of the idea itself.  If one doesn’t like Parent Trigger, offer an alternative path for parents to get substantively involved in the direction of their local public schools.  But insinuating that parents are easily tricked and there are shadowy figures manipulating state senators, the clergy, the civil rights community and so many others who brought the California law to existence does no one any good.

Showdown in Chi-Town

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”

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”

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.

Speaking for 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?

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!


Jobs and Ed, Ed and Jobs

One has to be living under a rock not to recognize that that education and jobs share a strong bond.  As we look for ways to rebuild our economy and create new jobs, it is clear that reforming our K-12 education systems, ensuring all students have access to the knowledge and skills necessary to perform in our future economy, is a non-negotiable.

Over at National Journal’s Education Experts Blog, this is the question of the week.  On those electronic pages, dear olEduflack opines on both the need for education reform and our failures to address the skills gap we now have.
From National Journal:
It’s shameful that we can’t fill open jobs in an economy like this. And it is deplorable that one’s ability to get a strong public education depends, in large part, on race, family income, or zip code. We have no excuse for not preparing our kids, all of our kids, to meet the demands of a 21st century economy. Education is an economic development strategy – the best one that’s out there. We should be redoubling our efforts to ensure that policy makers see economic development and education as two sides of the same coin, and look to them to guide states, localities, and the nation toward meaningful reforms that will prepare all of our kids for college, career, and a productive life.
Happy reading!
 

“Teachers Matter”

Last evening, President Barack Obama delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress and the nation.  The speech focused on the four pillars the President and his team see as necessary for turning around the United States and strengthening our community and our economy.  No surprise for those following the pre-game shows, education stood as one of those four pillars.

Five paragraphs committed to education.  One pointing out our states and districts are cutting education budgets when we should be strengthening them.  One on the importance of teachers.  One on high school dropouts.  Two on higher education and how we fund a college education.  (We have a sixth if you include the President’s call to do something to help hard-working students who are not yet citizens.)
So let’s go ahead and dissect what the President offered up last evening.
“Teachers matter.”
Absolutely.  No question about it.  We cannot and should not reform our K-12 educational systems without educators.  Teachers (and I would add, principals) are the single-greatest factor in education improvement.  They need to be at the table as we work toward the improved educational offerings the President and so many other dream of.
“So instead of bashing them, or defending the status quo, let’s offer schools a deal.  Give them the resources to keep good teachers on the job, and reward the best ones.”
Sign me up.  As the son of two educators, the last thing I want to do is bash a teacher (I’ll get in trouble with my mom if I do).  As I’ve said many times on this blog, teaching — particularly in this day and age — is one of the most difficult professions out there.  Most people aren’t cut out to do it, or at least do it well.  We need to make sure our precious tax dollars are being directed at recruiting, retaining, and supporting great teachers.  We should reward classroom excellence with merit pay and other acknowledgements.  But the President is also right in noting we cannot defend the status quo.  We can no longer debate whether reform is necessary.  Reform is necessary.  The discussion must now shift to how we change how we teach, not whether we change.
“In return, grant schools flexibility: To teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test; and to replace teachers who just aren’t helping kids learn.”
Yes, yes, yes.  Great educators know how to help virtually all kids learn.  They know to tailor their instruction based on data and other research points.  We should be encouraging that and empowering teachers to do so each and every day.  But we can’t lose sight of that last clause (and many may have missed it last night over the cheap applause line of not teaching to the test).  We must “replace teachers who just aren’t helping kids learn.”  In our quest for a great educator in every classroom, we must also realize not everyone is cut out to teach.  We need serious educator evaluation systems that ensure everyone is evaluated, everyone is evaluated every year, and those evaluations are based primarily on student learning.  And, like it or not, student performance tests still remain the greatest measure we have for student learning.  So if we can’t get struggling educators the professional development and support necessary to excel in the classroom, we need to be prepared to transition them out of the school.       
And lastly, President Obama’s “bold” call to action to ensure every student is college and career ready.
“I call on every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen.” 
And here we have the President’s big educational swing and a miss.  This is a process goal, not an outcomes goal.  Based on AYP figures and recent on school improvement and turnaround, we know that far too many kids — particularly those from historically disadvantaged populations — are attending failing schools.  This is particularly true of secondary school students.  
Why force a student to stay in a school that has long been branded a “drop-out factory?”  Why keep a kid in school until he is 18 when he only reading at the grade level of an eight-year-old?  Why stick around for a high school diploma when it also requires massive remediation to attend a postsecondary institution?
No, the call should not be to require students to stick around a bad situation, giving us nothing more than a process win.  Instead, we should be focused on improving the outcomes of high school.  How do we demonstrate the relevance of a high school curriculum?  How do we engage kids?  How do we provide choices for a meaningful high school education?  How do we show the college and career paths that come from earning that diploma?  How do we make kids see they want to stick around, and don’t have to be mandated to do so?
At this point in time, we all realize that a high school diploma is the bare minimum to participate in our economy and our society.  For most, some form of postsecondary education is also necessary.  Until we improve the quality and direction of our high schools — and help kids see that dropping out is never a viable option — that mandatory diploma will be nothing more than a certificate of attendance.  We need to make a diploma something all kids covet … not a mandatory experience like going to the dentist.
 

“Choice Can, Should, and Must Inform”

It is School Choice Week!  Of course, that means yet another debate focused on whether schools of choice should play a role in our K-12 public education infrastructure.  By now, you would think such a debate would be unnecessary, yet the beat goes on.

Over at National Journal’s Education Experts Blog, the question of the week is “Is school choice a useful tool to fuel common ground on education policy?”  First up to offer a resounding “yes” to the question is dear ol’ Eduflack.
As for the continued question at hand, I opine:
It is unfortunate that, in 2012, we must continue a debate about whether all students should have access to high-quality school options. It is unfortunate that too many children don’t have the opportunity to attend public schools that can change their destinies. And it is truly unfortunate that we continue to look for excuses and justifications for denying students access schools that are proven to be effective when it comes to addressing all students’ learning needs and preparing all kids – regardless of race, family income, or zip code – for college and career.

And in answer to the question of the week:
Choice can, should, and must help inform the entire education policy agenda. Ultimately, our goal must be to provide great public schools to all students, no excuses. Public school success, regardless of the wrapper it might wear, serves as the exemplar for driving change. We should be agnostic about where solutions come from, as long as they are real, effective solutions that work for our kids. The stakes are too high for us to accept anything less.
Happy reading!

The Importance of Good Teachers

Most of us can point to that one educator who truly affected our lives — both in and out of the classroom.  We remember the one teacher who really pushed us to achieve.  Or the instructor who refused to let us take the easy way out.  And while we may not remember much about that year in the seventh grade, say, we definitely remember that educator from that year.

Which is why it is always so interesting when you hear folks arguing that “good teachers” can’t be measured in terms of student performance.  Yes, there are multiple measures that need to go into determining educator effectiveness.  Yes, there are inputs a teacher brings to the classroom that need to be factored in.  But at the end of the day, those teachers who likely left their marks on our lives also left their marks on our GPAs.
This morning, we have two interesting pieces out there reflecting on the importance of good teaching and good teachers.  The first is from Nicholas Kristof in today’s New York Times.  Kristof is reflecting on last week’s mega-study which showed the impact a strong teacher can have on the life of a student.  As Kristof notes:

What shone through the study was the variation among teachers. Great teachers not only raised test scores significantly — an effect that mostly faded within a few years — but also left their students with better life outcomes. A great teacher (defined as one better than 84 percent of peers) for a single year between fourth and eighth grades resulted in students earning almost 1 percent more at age 28.

Suppose that the bottom 5 percent of teachers could be replaced by teachers of average quality. The three economists found that each student in the classroom would have extra cumulative lifetime earnings of more than $52,000. That’s more than $1.4 million in gains for the classroom.

To complement Kristof’s keen analysis of an important piece of research, we have a new study coming from Education Trust.  In typical EdTrust fashion, EdTrust-West looks at more than 1 million students and 17,000 teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District.  One of the major takeaways?  Good teachers in LAUSD can close the achievement gap for Black and Latino students.  The disappointing reality?  Historically disadvantaged students in the City of Angels often have the worst instructors.
We should all be able to agree that all teachers should be evaluated every year to determine the sort of job they are doing.  We should all be able to agree that good teachers have a demonstrable impact on their students, including on student achievement measures.  We should all be able to agree that those good teachers are particularly important levers in the lives of low-income and minority students.  So with all of this agreement, why do we fight teacher effectiveness measures with such gusto?  Why do we fear outcomes being part of educator evaluation?  
Research such as that reflected on by Kristof and released by EdTrust makes a few facts clearer than ever.  Good teachers are essential if we are to improve student learning and close the achievement gaps.  We can determine who those good teachers are, and we can use test scores to help get there.  We need to do everything possible to determine who those good teachers are and ensure they are where they are needed the most.  And while it is not in the research, we need to properly pay and support those teachers that are making the sort of differences we expect to see in our classrooms.
Enough for today’s lesson.  Class dismissed.