teachers

“None of You is Special”

Eduflack Students, teachers

As the merriment of commencement commences, one if often inundated with tales of graduation speakers orating on how much students have accomplished, how much they can now achieve, all with a generally congratulatory tone for the impending graduates.

It seems Massachusetts’ Wellesley High School asked one of its English teachers to deliver the remarks to the graduating class of 2012.  And what did David McCullough, Jr. (the son of noted historian David McCullough) inspire his former students with?  Here’s some of it:

All of this is as it should be, because none of you is special.

You are not special. You are not exceptional.

Contrary to what your soccer trophy suggests, your glowing seventh grade report card, despite every assurance of a certain corpulent purple dinosaur, that nice Mister Rogers and your batty Aunt Sylvia, no matter how often your maternal caped crusader has swooped in to save you… you’re nothing special.

Yes, you’ve been pampered, cosseted, doted upon, helmeted, bubble-wrapped. Yes, capable adults with other things to do have held you, kissed you, fed you, wiped your mouth, wiped your bottom, trained you, taught you, tutored you, coached you, listened to you, counseled you, encouraged you, consoled you and encouraged you again. You’ve been nudged, cajoled, wheedled and implored. You’ve been feted and fawned over and called sweetie pie. Yes, you have. And, certainly, we’ve been to your games, your plays, your recitals, your science fairs. Absolutely, smiles ignite when you walk into a room, and hundreds gasp with delight at your every tweet.

Strauss includes the full text of McCullough’s (what’s the opposite of cheerleading) remarks.  It makes for an interesting read.

“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.

Are Unions Having a Positive Effect on Schools?

Eduflack teachers

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Paul Peterson, William Howell, and Martin West have an interesting commentary detailing the toplines of a recent survey they conducted on behalf of Harvard University’s Program on Education Policy and Governance and Education Next magazine.

One question, asked by the researchers since 2009, was:
“Some people say that teachers unions are a stumbling block to school reform.  Others say that unions fight for better schools and better teachers.  What do you think?  Do you think teacher unions have a generally positive effect on schools, or do you think they have a generally negative effect?”
On the whole, a fairly balanced question to a very challenging inquiry.  And the response?
Only 22 percent of those surveyed said that unions were having a generally positive impact.  And of those classroom teachers who were surveyed, only 43 percent said unions were having a positive effect on the schools.  
Even more startling, 32 percent of teachers surveyed said the unions were having a generally negative impact on the schools, but from only 17 percent of teachers holding a negative view of their union in 2011.
These numbers come when respondents were given five choices — very positive, somewhat positive, neither positive nor negative, somewhat negative, and very negative.
When given a choice of simply a positive or negative effect, 51 percent of those surveyed said unions were having a net negative impact on the schools.  Forty nine percent gave the unions a positive vote.
Discuss amongst yourselves how this data crosswalks with assertions that the unions are advocating for the interests of their teachers and their students …

True Collaboration on the Field

Eduflack Parents, Students, teachers

This morning I have the privilege of volunteering for Field Day at edu-son’s elementary school.  There is nothing quite like watching a group of kindergarteners through fourth graders run obstacle courses, do three-legged races, roll tires, and crab walk down the field.

I didn’t realize how hard volunteering would be, as I just wanted to watch my son compete (he ran the anchor leg of the sack race, by the way, and did just a stellar job).
But Eduflack was really taken by the collaboration that was happening on that field this morning  Teachers, administrators, and parents all working together.  All focused exclusively on the kids and their experience.
Even with all of the fighting and the concerns and the vitriol thrown around as part of the education reform efforts in Connecticut these past few months, all stakeholders were able to come together, work together, enjoy each other, and make a difference.
Yes, it was just one day.  Yes, it was just field day.  But for a few hours this morning, I saw what was possible.  How we can set aside differences to focus on the most important part of this whole equation — the students. 
Now we just need to figure out how to do it without a wet field.

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 

“Meaningful Education Reforms” in CT

Eduflack reading, teachers
“I commend Connecticut for coming together to enact meaningful education reforms that will benefit students. I know the negotiations on S.B. 458 were difficult, but Governor Malloy and the Legislature, business, unions, educators, and advocates were committed to begin fixing what is broken in public schools. The final bill includes important reforms in early reading, school turnarounds, school choice, and school staffing and delivers more resources targeted to those districts and schools with the greatest need. Now that Governor Malloy has enacted the law, Connecticut can begin the hard work of putting these important reforms to work in the classroom.”

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, in a May 15, 2012 statement

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.
  

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!


Representing Kids … or Adults?

Eduflack accountability, AFT, NEA, Students, teachers

What is the primary objective of a teachers’ union?  Is it to represent the adults in the system with the ultimate zealousness, or is it to improve student learning and outcomes?

In the 1980s, the great Al Shanker, long-time head of the American Federation of Teachers, was quoted as saying “When schoolchildren start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of schoolchildren.”  And while some believe he may not have said those words, it is easy to see where such sentiment comes from.
For example, let’s take a look at the Connecticut Education Association.  In reading “About CEA” on the labor union’s own website, the CEA defines its role as, “advances and protects the rights of teachers at the bargaining table, and works with state policymakers to continue to elevate the teaching profession.”  
On that same page, we see the list of accomplishments the “state’s largest public employees union” can tout, including creating the State Teachers’ Retirement System, written notice on contract non-renewals, collective bargaining, fair dismissal laws, binding arbitration, pension benefits, indoor air quality programs, and increased state aid.
But something important is missing from CEA and many teachers’ unions like it.  In its nearly 700-word “CEA: The Advocate for Teachers and Public Education,” the word “students” only appears twice.  Once in saying CEA represents college students looking to become classroom teachers.  The second noting that students also benefit from the clean air rules that CEA fought for for its educators.
Let’s be clear here.  There is nothing wrong with CEA and other teachers’ unions advocating, lobbying, and acting on behalf of its members.  That is the point of a labor union.  It is fighting for the salaries, rights, and benefits of those who pay it dues.  In the case of public education, it is fighting for the adults in the room, ensuring those teachers and other educators are protected and don’t lose what is “theirs.”
But it begs the question, who is fighting for the students in the system?  Who is speaking for those kids who are slated to go to an historically failing school?  Who is speaking for the kids predestined to attend a drop-out factory?  Who is speaking for the kids on the short end of the achievement gap?  Who is advocating, lobbying, and acting on behalf of those kids?
In reform fights like those we are having in Connecticut, many school teachers will get up and say they are speaking for their kids (and we’ll try to overlook those scenes of ugliness when, at public hearings, teachers have been telling parents and kids to “sit down and shut up,” saying they had no business participating in the education reform discussion).  And in their heart of hearts, I believe that to be true. 
But when a discussion that began by focusing on student achievement, opportunity, and college readiness has devolved into one of tenure, property rights, termination procedures, and what is “owed” teachers who have put their time in the system, one has to wonder.  Can one represent both the educators and the students in the same fight?  Can you have it both ways when we know the benefits, to students, of excellent teachers yet we have union leaders saying “the last thing I’d want to do is get someone fired?”
There is no question that the rights of the adults in the room are important.  But at some point, we need to shift our attention to the students, the very reason why public education exists.  Over the weekend, Eduflack wrote about this needed shift in the Connecticut Post, in a piece entitled Conversation Needs to Focus on Children, Not the Adults.
In it, I wrote:
We’ve spent the past two months hearing the Connecticut Education Association and its local union heads focus exclusively on what is owed the adults in the room. We have heard teachers shout down parents in public forums, hurling insults and indicating that families are to blame for the failures of our school system. We have seen the CEA ads and publications spreading lies and misleading half-truths about the content and meaning behind proposed reforms, and personally attacking supporters of those reforms. No wonder the statewide conversation about reform has focused so much on fear and punishment and so little on what’s best for kids.

If we are going to have a serious conversation about improving our public schools, we need to bring all parties to the table — educators and advocates, parents and policymakers — and leave the vitriol at the door.  The stakes are too high for us not to focus on what matters the most … real, measurable student learning.