tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-68758484045105176852024-02-20T20:15:01.570-05:00More ThoughtfulA call for more thoughtfulness in both the means and ends of education.<br>
(Though often without sufficient proofreadding.)Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-36453661232414612242013-04-30T11:42:00.000-04:002013-04-30T11:42:07.866-04:00The Case For Standardized Testing (Part II): Fundamental Hollowness of Accountability<i><a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-weekly/2013/february-14/the-four-biggest-myths-of-the-anti-testing-backlash.html#.UR14K48mpTs.twitter">Inspired</a> by <a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff/kathleen-porter-magee.html">Kathleen Porter-Magee</a> of <a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/">The Fordham Institute</a>, I present a series on the remarkable weakness of the case for standardized testing in our education policy and education system. You can read part one <a href="http://morethoughtful.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-case-for-standardized-testing-1-nra.html">here</a>. </i><br />
<h2>
The Case For Standardized Testing: The Fundamental Hollowness of "Accountability"</h2>
So-called "Accountability" in education is about a particular formulation. The idea is to give educators, schools and or/districts control over the means and methods, but to hold them responsible for the ends.<br />
<br />
For decades, we looked at the inputs into schooling. We looked at funding. We looked at teacher qualifications. We looked at textbooks. We looked at curriculum. At management strategies. We looked at what educators were given and/or tried to do. But, so the argument goes, we did not look at what they accomplished -- or failed to accomplish.<br />
<br />
The so-called "Accountability Movement" has been an attempt to shift attention from inputs to outputs. Educators, schools and districts can control the means. But they are responsible for accomplishing the ends.<br />
<br />
Whether or not you agree with this approach, it is what we have today. And those ends are examined through standardized testing. So-called "Accountability" policies are testing policies. They depend on standardized tests. <br />
<br />
*********************<br />
<br />
Nancy and Ted Sizer <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Students-are-Watching-Contract/dp/0807031216/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361905627&sr=8-1&keywords=nancy+sizer">wrote</a>, "Education is the worthy residue that remains, long after the lessons have been forgotten." I talk about "Lessons worth learning for a lifetime."*<br />
<br />
<i>* I don't say it anywhere nearly as well as they did, do I? </i><br />
<br />
**********************<br />
<br />
Our standardized tests do not measure the important outcomes of education or schooling.<br />
<br />
Think about the great lessons you learned in school. Think about the lasting impact. Think about that great teacher who made a difference in your life. Can any of that be tested with a standardized test?<br />
<br />
We should recognize what standardized tests <i>can</i> do, says Ms. Porter-Magee. I agree. They can test individual skills, usually in isolation, without authentic contexts or purposes. The <a href="http://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards.aspx">Standards of Educational and Psychological Tests</a> point to the importance of testing one thing at a time, so that you can be sure you are not conflating different things and can be sure what the testee can and cannot do. "Standardized" refers to standard questions in a standard testing environment. <br />
<br />
Simply as a matter of good professional practice, standardized tests <i>cannot</i> assess students in authentic contexts and cannot assess their skills or knowledge in the kind of interrelated use that matters most.<br />
<br />
What standardized tests <i>can</i> do is access the building blocks of authentic proficiency or mastery. But building blocks are not the goals of education and schools. Building blocks are -- by definition -- the means or intermediate outcomes along the way. <br />
<br />
There, so-called "Accountability" policy is fundamentally hollow. It is supposed to examine the ends and goals of education, but substitutes examination of intermediate outcomes for the actual goals. In doing so, it replaces accountability for actual meaningful outcomes with reductive, simplified and dumbed down goals.<br />
<br />
By substituting what we know how to test quickly and cheaply for the real goals of education, the "Accountability" movement has betrayed its own basic formula and set back efforts to improve meaningful educational outcomes for students.<br />
<br />
I am not saying that those who support the "Accountability" movement have done this intentionally. Rather, it's been a laziness; they have been content with what's convenient. They do not look closely at what tests actually can do, at what current test development practices are, at what the best research and scholarship says about what we know and what we know how to do. They insist that these tests are good enough simply because they are available.<br />
<br />
And in doing so, they have lost touch with the basic principle of the "Accountability" movement. They do not even live up to their own formula. <br />
<br />
Having gutted their own theory of action, proponents of standardized testing have virtually eliminated any chance they can make a strong case to defend their tests or their policies. Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-30798489649869968892013-04-22T18:56:00.000-04:002013-04-22T18:58:27.747-04:00The Case For Standardized Testing (Part I): The NRA Defense<i><a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-weekly/2013/february-14/the-four-biggest-myths-of-the-anti-testing-backlash.html#.UR14K48mpTs.twitter">Inspired</a> by <a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff/kathleen-porter-magee.html">Kathleen Porter-Magee</a> of <a href="http://www.edexcellence.net/">The Fordham Institute</a>, I present a series on the remarkable weakness of the case for standardized testing in our education policy and education system. This is part one. </i><br />
<h2>
The Case For Standardized Testing: The NRA Defense</h2>
Many people who defend either testing policies, the basic idea of standardized tests or the tests themselves try to differentiate between what they are defending and some other flawed part of the equation.<br />
<br />
For example, Bonny Buffington <a href="https://twitter.com/BBuff43011/status/304022905312927744">tweeted</a> last week, "Standardized tests aren't the problem. It's the undue emphasis on them that causes the stifling of creativity. #edchat." Ms. Porter-Magee has herself tried to differentiate the tests from testing policy.<br />
<br />
I don't buy it. To my ears, that sounds like the old line, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." The guns line, so <a href="http://www.quotecounterquote.com/2011/03/guns-dont-kill-people-people-kill.html">attacked, refuted and mocked</a> through the years, doesn't need explaining*.<br />
<br />
<i>*Full disclosure: when I was in high school so many decades ago, one of the many pins/buttons I wore said, "Bombs don't kill people, explosions kill people."</i><br />
<br />
The fact is that testing policy depends on the tests we have. The fact is that the test developers know how their tests are already being used, and how the trends in how tests are being used suggest they will be used in the near future. Separating the tests from testing policy is as foolish as trying to say that guns are not relevant to understanding our murder rate or the violence in our society.<br />
<br />
I call this line of argument The NRA Defense.<br />
<br />
I could also call it the Ostrich Defense, because it is like sticking your head in the sand. But I think the obvious finger pointing, as though pointing makes it true, should be highlighted. <br />
<br />
So, when we examine the case for standardized tests, or for standardized testing policy, let's skip past that NRA Defense finger pointing, and examine all of it as inextricably tied together, as it actually is. Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-2302363635559525262013-04-15T13:08:00.001-04:002013-04-15T13:08:34.498-04:00Common Sense: The argument againstWeeks ago, I said of common sense:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I'll say it right here. I hate appeals to <i>common sense</i>. I've done
a little original research on this term, and I believe that it means
"What I already think, and cannot/will not justify with reasoning or
evidence." It refuses to engage or critically self-examine. </blockquote>
But I have more to say about so-called <i>common sense</i>. <br />
<br />
First, appealing to <i>common sense</i> has got to be the <i>least</i> convincing argument that anyone can make. Those who already agree that your point is <i>common sense</i> need no convincing. Those who do not can only find your claim that what they disagree with is <i>common sense</i> insulting. I literally cannot imagine anyone changing their mind or reconsidering someone else's position upon hearing someone else say, "It's common sense."<br />
<br />
Second, I'm just guessing here, but I'll bet that, "It's <i>just</i> common sense," is as common a claim as, "It's common sense." This underscores my point that an appeal to <i>common sense</i> is a tacit acknowledgement that the position in question lacks reasoning or evidence to support it; either only common sense is available to support it, or (more likely) the person making the claim is too lazy to figure out what the reasoning or evidence might be.<br />
<br />
Third, I do not think I have ever heard anyone say, "That guy has just got more common sense than me," though I have heard many, many people try to point out someone else's lack of <i>common sense</i>. Heck, I don't think that I've even heard anyone laud another person's abundance of <i>common sense</i>. Instead, it is only something whose absence is noted.<br />
<br />
Fourth, I came across talk of common sense in my dissertation research. When I asked practicing mid-career high school principals about what they are seeing (or not seeing) when they think to themselves, "That AP [or intern] simply does <i>not</i> have what it takes to be an effective principal" (or conversely that a teacher or AP <i>has</i> got what it takes to be an effective principal), their answers often included, "common sense." As I followed up on this, I came to realize that when they said that someone lacked common sense, they almost invariably meant, <i>Your judgment in the moment doesn't match mine, and I know that I am right and you are wrong.</i><br />
<br />
Fifth, "common sense" doesn't actually mean anything. I asked those principals to unpack what they meant when they said, "common sense." I later took the complete list of concepts back to each of them and asked them which are part of common sense and which are not -- pointing out that they all are good, but might not all be common sense. To no great surprise, their answers varied. On a particular day when I had meetings with two different principals, one said to me that it included all but one of the ideas listed, and the other said it was just one of the elements -- the only one that the first principal said it did not include. If there is <i>that</i> little consensus as to what common sense means, it doesn't actually have any particular meaning. <br />
<br />
**********************<br />
<br />
Common Sense is what I call a <i>contested key construct (CKC)</i>. All CKCs share three qualities.<br />
<ol>
<li>Each is a term for a concept or idea (i.e. a construct) about which there is universal (or near-universal) agreement on its importance. </li>
<li>There is no clear consensus as to the precise meaning of the term.</li>
<li>There is a dearth of concern about the lack of common meaning.</li>
</ol>
I have a lot of concern about the use of contested key constructs. At times, they can help to lubricate discussion by hiding substantive disagreements, and thus help build coalitions to build attention, support or resources. However, by hiding those differences -- usually from central participants in the cause, too -- CKCs end up hampering implementation efforts, act to worsen program alignment and prevent decent evaluation and learning. <br />
<br />
Let me give you an example. Imagine that a school district got a big grant to support teacher leadership to support school improvement. Imagine that each school got a decent pot of money, and each used the money in good faith. When the leaders of these schools discuss their efforts, they could be talking about entirely different programs that are based upon remarkably different visions for the roles of teachers in schools. But because they talk about their teacher leadership programs going well and who is most active in them, no one ever notices that they are not at all working on the same thing.<br />
<br />
Contested key constructs prevent us from learning from each other. They prevent us from even understanding each other. They give the appearance of meaning, but actually act as ciphers.<br />
<br />
***********************<br />
<br />
If someone is depending on their experiences to support what they think, they should say so. Then, others can better understand them, and evaluate the relevance of that experience to the issues at hand. Then others can engage with them to understand what they actually think, and why. Then, everyone can examine the validity (or potential) validity of the ideas in question. Calling it <i>common sense</i>, instead, prevents all of that. <br />
<br />
But just as importantly, appeals to <i>common sense</i> allow the speaker to let him/herself off the hook. S/he is not engaging in the kind of awareness and self-criticism that leads us to growth, learning and the best ideas. We can pay attention to our thinking and our own expression of that thinking. Each of us can make sure that we are being true to our values, ideals, knowledge and priorities -- but not with claims of <i>common sense</i>.<br />
<br />
And so, I do not want to hear about common sense. It's a waste of breath, ink, toner, bits and pixels. It's the antithesis of being more thoughtful. Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-21684588449252415192013-04-10T13:11:00.000-04:002013-04-10T13:11:15.184-04:00How Broken Is Teacher Evaluation?On School Finance 101, Bruce Baker <a href="http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/who-will-be-held-responsible-when-state-officials-are-factually-wrong-on-statistics-teacher-evaluation/">wrote today</a> of some of the indefensible things said by state officials about proposed and/or new teacher evaluation models. He highlighted the idea behind many of them, that anything would be better than the status quo.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The standard retort is that marginally flawed or not, these measures are much better than the status quo. ‘Cuz of course, we all know our schools suck. Teachers really suck. Principals enable their suckiness. And pretty much anything we might do… must suck less. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
WRONG – it is absolutely not better than the status quo to take a knowingly flawed measure, or a measure that does not even attempt to isolate teacher effectiveness, and use it to label teachers as good or bad at their jobs. It is even worse to then mandate that the measure be used to take employment action against the employee.</blockquote>
I want to address the unspoken thinking behind that sentiment. Well, actually, I want to highlight the missing thinking behind that sentiment.<br />
<br />
By "missing thinking," I mean that there are some important questions whose answers are assumed, without real examination.<br />
<br />
The most important question might be: <i>Is the traditional model of teacher evaluation inescapably wrong-headed and flawed, or is it just implemented incredibly poorly?</i><br />
<br />
Regardless of how poorly we evaluate teachers -- and I think that everyone could agree that there is room for improvement there -- we each need to have a answer to that most fundamental question. Our answer there determines what kind of action we need to take.<br />
<br />
So, let me unpack the basic elements of our traditional teacher evaluation system, without delving into implementation details. <br />
<ul>
<li>Teachers efforts and practices are evaluated (i.e. not their students' learning)</li>
<li>Evaluation is based upon expert observation of their pedagogy in action</li>
<li>Evaluation is performed by their supervisor (i.e. department chair, assistant principal or principal.</li>
</ul>
Obviously, there is currently great distrust -- even condemnation -- of teacher evaluation, but it is not clear to whether that is because people thoughtfully have concluded that the basic model is inescapably flawed or because they do not like the results of we see today of teacher evaluation programs.<br />
<br />
Reports like <a href="http://widgeteffect.org/">The Widget Effect </a>and officials like Florida Board of Education member Sally Bradshaw seem to <a href="http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/why-dont-florida-school-grades-teacher-evaluation-ratings-match/2106065">object</a> more to the outcomes of those evaluations than the methods. As Matt Di Carlo <a href="http://shankerblog.org/?p=7937">pointed out</a>, there is a lot of pressure to give more teachers lower ratings.<br />
<br />
If that really is the objection, than the model used for traditional teacher evaluation might not be the problem, or at least might not need to be de-empahsized as it is in newer evaluation policies. (Perhaps greater training for school leaders in the standards and expectations for their evaluations could address the problem.)<br />
<br />
And so, these are the questions I would ask of anyone weighing in on teacher evalaution:<br />
<ol>
<li>Do you think that expert evaluation of teacher practice, if done properly, is an appropriate way to evaluate teachers?</li>
<li>Do you think that those above a teacher in his/her chain of supervision are the appropriate evaluators of their practice (as opposed to their experts peers or some outside inspector)?</li>
<li>Can a teacher do everything well in his/her classroom, but student learning be hampered by outside (i.e. home, community, preparation, etc.) factors?</li>
<li>Do you think we can effectively capture/recognize/measure all of these relevant outside factors for each student?</li>
<li>How much of a teacher's effectiveness rating should be tied to portion of the standards/curriculum/lessons that we can/have put on the big standardized tests?</li>
</ol>
Note that these question are not necessarily technical in nature, in that they do not necessarily have definitively correct answers. Of course, greater knowledge should influence people's thinking, and there is room for making use of research in answering each of them. But they also get to people's values and expectations, things that not only should be made explicit, but also thoughtfully examined and considered.<br />
<br />
While I agree with Baker that there are many things that would be worse that the status quo, what concerns me most is the lack of clarity in the reasoning behind people's objections and policy proposals. I do not know how to evaluate their proposals or how to think about a widely agreeable solution, as it is not clear what people are actually thinking.<br />
<br />
<br />Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-87039625954779412892013-04-05T11:24:00.000-04:002013-04-05T11:24:02.843-04:00The Breadth of Real AccountabilityUnfortunately, <i>Accountability</i> in education has taken on a very narrow meaning. The term almost always refers just to the use of quantitative data (i.e. most often test scores) to mete out sanctions. Sometimes it refers to to meting out rewards as well, though that is far less common.<br />
<br />
In my research, I have asked high school leaders about the full range of accountabilities they face. I have tried to get a fuller picture of what they face and are held responsible for.<br />
<br />
The range is pretty damn broad.<br />
<br />
So, below is a very simple typology of categories and sub-categories of <i>accountances</i> (i.e what they accountable for), without the complications of the <i>accountors</i> (i.e. whom they are accountable to). It is <i>not</i> a list of individual accountances, as each sub-category is itself full of different kinds and examples of professional responsibilities. Each of those is itself a group of accountabilities.<br />
<br />
For example, even <i>test scores</i> is complicated. Of course, there are the tests connection to our test-based accountability (TBA) policies. But schools (and their leaders) are also held accountable for SAT and AP test performance by one constituency or another. Many states have end of course exams (EOCE's), adding <i>more</i> tests that are not even connected to TBA policies (e.g. New York's <a href="http://www.nysedregents.org/globalhistorygeography/" target="_blank">Global History and Geography Regents Exam</a>). And <i>test score</i> is just one sub-category under <i>Student Outcomes</i>, just one of 46 different sub-categories across the range.<br />
<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-insideh: none; mso-border-insidev: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="-moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-top-colors: none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color windowtext; border-image: none; border-style: none none solid; border-width: medium medium 1pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 159.6pt;" valign="top" width="160"><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Everything</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Everything</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Help Lift the School System</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>School Offerings</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Quality Education</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Academics</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Athletics</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>High School Experience</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Character/Affective Education</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Student Outcomes</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Test Scores</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>System-Wide Goals</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Graduation Rate</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>College Application Process</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Learning</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Prepare for Future/Skills</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Students' Futures</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Guilt</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Students & Safety</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Students</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Relationship with Students</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Safety/Discipline</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Students Off School Grounds</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Teachers and Staff</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Staffing</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Support Staff</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Instruction</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Supervision</span></div>
</div>
</td>
<td style="-moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-top-colors: none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color windowtext; border-image: none; border-style: none none solid; border-width: medium medium 1pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt; width: 159.6pt;" valign="top" width="160"><div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Community</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Be Part of Community</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Help Parents</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Public Relations</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Support PTA Growth</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Organizational Context</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Policy Context</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Relationship w/ Supervisor</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Relationship w/Peers</span></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Branch Administration</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Budget</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Purchasing</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Miscellaneous To District Offices</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Physical Plant</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Cafeteria & Transportation</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Leave a Smooth Operation Behind</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Classic Leadership</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Culture/ Environment</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Good/Fair Decisions</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Interpersonal Leadership</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Keep People Out of Trouble</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Vision </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Moral</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Own Character</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Pay It Forward</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Representing</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Owe An Accounting</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span>Owe An Accounting</span></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
So, the next time you think that our current <i>accountability</i> policy framework addresses anything other than a <i>tiny</i> fraction of what accountability <i>really</i> means in schools, stop and look at that list again. The next time you heard others talking about <i>accountability</i>, without even a tacit acknowledgement that there is more than test-based accountability, refer them to that list.
Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-38910175583425279812013-03-08T09:47:00.000-05:002013-03-08T09:47:58.287-05:00Incredible Changes in Our Classrooms"Strawman" is a term from rhetoric that refers to to someone mis-characterizing or exaggerating his/her opponents' arguments so as to make it easier to respond to. It it is low and dishonest strategy, infuriating and all too common. Luckily for those of us who think that the transformative power and usefulness of tablet computing and computer in the classroom is has been massively overhyped, we have Rupert Murdoch; we don't need a straw man. <br />
<br />
I <a href="http://www.npr.org/2013/03/08/173766828/news-corp-education-tablet-for-the-love-of-learning">learned this morning</a> that Rupert Murdoch (Chairman and CEO of News Corp), who has a new tablet to sell to schools, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGcPzyioi14">said</a> two years ago, "Today's classroom looks almost exactly the same as it did in the Victorian age: a teacher standing in front of a roomful of kids with only a textbook, a blackboard, and a piece of chalk."<span id="goog_1569989350"></span><span id="goog_1569989351"></span><br />
<br />
This just shows how little he -- and far too many who cheerlead for spending more on computer technology in the classroom -- know about the massive changes to our classrooms in the last 100-175 years. (Queen Victoria reigned from 1837-1901.)<br />
<br />
* Now, virtually all children go to school through the middle of their teenage years, not merely the children of the rich. <br />
<br />
* Now, most students are educated away from the oversight of the church.<br />
<br />
* Now, every student has his/her own textbook. Every students has his/her own textbook<i><b>s</b></i>.<br />
<br />
* Now, we have ballpoint, gel and other easy to use pens instead of inkwells. We have plentiful pencils. We even crappy erasable pens.<br />
<br />
* Now, schools have central heating, and perhaps air conditioning too.<br />
<br />
* Now, our schools have running water and flush toilets <br />
<br />
* Now, our classrooms have electricity and electric lights.<br />
<br />
* Blackboards and chalkdust? Disappearing. Now, we have had dry erase white boards and even fancy digital White Boards.<br />
<br />
* Now, even in the absence of fancy digital White Boards, we have overhead projectors.<br />
<br />
* Now, we have filmstrips, movie projectors, televisions and DVD players. We have a rich array of audio players, as well.<br />
<br />
* Now, we have plentiful supplies of paper. Even our poorest classrooms are far richer in arts and craft materials than those of the Victoria era.<br />
<br />
* Now, we've moved entirely past the age of dittos -- which came long after the Victorian era -- and are moving beyond the photocopy era. <br />
<br />
* Now, children are divided into classrooms by age or grade.<br />
<br />
* Now, we have so many books that classrooms are expected to have their own, "classroom libraries."<br />
<br />
* Now, the norm is 20-25 younger students in a class, or 30-35 older students, compared to the 40-50 or more of the past.<br />
<br />
* Now, chairs and desks are <i>not</i> nailed to floor, all facing forward in rows.<br />
<br />
* Now, students often face each other, rather than the front of the room. Now, in some classrooms, the basic arrangement is to face each other in clusters of desks or at tables, rather than in rows.<br />
<br />
* Now, children of all colors, backgrounds and origins can be found in the same classroom.<br />
<br />
* Now, the walls of many classrooms are covered with student work, word walls and/or (hopefully) useful posters.<br />
<br />
* Now, we might find multiple adults in the same room, especially when students with special needs are in the class -- students who we would not have seen in classrooms during the Victorian Age.<br />
<br />
That's just off the top of my head, and I am not education historian. That is just a list of a few things are are obviously different upon visual inspection. We a visitor to listen, s/he would many other differences. Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-74696275545709868712013-03-07T20:15:00.000-05:002013-03-08T10:53:28.996-05:00In Search of a Better Education Policy Advocate TaxonomyOn March 5, Eric Horowitz posted <a href="http://www.peerreviewedbymyneurons.com/2013/03/05/in-search-of-better-education-classification/#comment-2805">In Search of a Better Education Policy Taxonomy</a> on his blog, <a href="http://www.peerreviewedbymyneurons.com/">Peer-reviewed by my neurons</a>. However, he does not offer a taxonomy of education policy. Rather, he posts a taxonomy of education policy (i.e. "reform") advocates. What he really does is try to put advocates into different groups, but without offering a basis for comparison between groups. It is just a list of groups, the result (I think) of a search for labels. He then defies his own effort by declaring himself to be a partial member of a number of different groups -- something he allowed no one else in his writing.<br />
<br />
More useful, as <a href="http://www.gothamschools.org/">Elizabeth Green</a> <a href="http://www.peerreviewedbymyneurons.com/2013/03/05/in-search-of-better-education-classification/#comment-2746">points out</a>, would be a typology of elements and aspects of beliefs and preferred policies. While I cannot provide a complete inventory or tool, I would like to offer some of the dimensions that might be considered, so we can think about the commonalities and differences between different policies and different policy advocates. (Note: this is off the top of my head, and will be messy, sloppy, incomplete, overlap and fail in any number of ways. Let me know what you think those ways are.)<br />
<br />
<b>I. Relationship to Disciplines</b>: Different disciplines take different views, use different tools and concern themselves with different issues. But many disciplines have been brought to education policy. Here are inadequate explanations of the chief relevant disciplines: <br />
<i>A. Economics</i>: This discipline has been prominent for a number of years. It is very concerned with incentives and markets -- and unlike what you probably think, not nearly as focused on money or dollars. It usually assumes rational actors and has brought us econometrics (e.g. linear regression and other basic statistical tools).<br />
<i>B. Sociology</i>: This discipline has informed education policy for a long time. It looks at society, groups of people, and the impact of social structures, societal forces and norms on individuals. Discrimination and segregation have long been examined through the sociologist's lens, for example. Ethnography and grounded theory come from sociology, though sociologists today use a wide variety of tools.<br />
<i>C. Psychology</i>: Obviously, this discipline is at the root of education. It focuses on how the mind works. In more recent decades, it has shifted some of its focus on how the brain works, and in the last decades, so-called brain-based research has attempted to tell us even more. As I understand it, psychology is more focused on the individual and the nature/mechanism of his/her internal functioning than sociology (which is more interested in the nature of the outside forces and their impact).<br />
<i>D. Law</i>: Obviously, this discipline is about law, regulation and courts. Intentionally crafted rules and precedent -- even when the impacts were not foreseen -- are central. Honestly, I think that this disciplinary approach is rare in education policy, though its subjects matter is often used as a lever.<br />
<i>E. Political Science</i>: This discipline looks at political structures, governance and governmental structures and their functioning. How do decisions get made for a collective or group? There is a focus on relationships between people in different positions and how they influence each other. While some of this looks at intentionally crafted structures, political science also looks at more organic structures and relationships. As in most disciplines, quantitative and statistical tools are quite prominent in the discipline, but not so much for most education policy advocates.<br />
<i>F. Business</i>: I am not sure this is a discipline, but they teach something in business school, right? Management, budgets, finance -- which is not economics, mind you --, logistics. As a method, it relies very strong on case study and best practices, which I believe leads to a pattern of trying to replicate and scale up particular examples. That is, once a good example is found, the goal is to replicate it (as opposed to simply understanding how and why it works, or considering how or why it might not be replicable). Very action focused in its mindset.<br />
<i>G. Education</i>: Even less a discipline than business, but they teach something in ed schools, too. Let's say ideas of teaching and learning, curriculum, classroom organization and techniques. How to work with children. While there is a lot of overlap between these so-called disciplines, education's overlaps with psychology, sociology and business (for education leadership programs) might be the greatest.<br />
<i>H. Common Sense</i>: I'll say it right here. I hate appeals to <i>common sense</i>. I've done a little original research on this term, and I believe that it means "What I already think, and cannot/will not justify with reasoning or evidence." It refuses to engage or critically self-examine. <br />
<br />
<b>II. Relationship to Research</b>: There are enormous quantities of education-relevant and even policy-relevant research in each of the disciplines listed above -- and many others. But that does not mean that particular policies or particular advocates all have the same relationship to the research base. Rather, they may be or do any of the following:<br />
<i>A. Well grounded in the research</i>: Fully aware of the research, both that which supports and that which contradicts preferred positions and/or policies, often requiring including research from a variety of disciplines.<br />
<i>B. Touches on research</i>: Is aware, may cite or build upon research that supports preferred positions or policies, but is not conversant with or aware of contradictory research. Often assumes and declares that the preferred position is notably better supported due to confirmation bias, ignorance, laziness or (at worst) disingenuousness. <br />
<i>C. Coincides with the research</i>: Offers or prefers policies and programs that have support in the research, but has not looked for or been educated in it. Assumes that the research supports their positions, without really looking into it. I am fairly certain that this describes most policy advocates.<br />
<i>D. Coincides <u>against</u> the research</i>: Very much like the prior category, but it happens to be wrong about the research in one of the few areas in which the research is clear.<br />
<i>E. Actively against the research</i>: Is aware that the research argues against their position, but believes that the research is wrong or somehow inadequate for one reason or another.<br />
<i>F. Ahead of the research</i>: Advocates a position in advance of the research having a chance to adequately weigh in. May be proven correct later, but there does not exist a sufficient basis to support claims. Many more advocates believe that they are in this position than actually are.<br />
<br />
<b>III. Private Good/Public Good</b>: Some people believe that we should view and judge schools by how well they serve the needs of a student or family, and ask what value the school is giving them. Others see a more public purpose, connected to the common good, improving society and preparing future citizens for their roles as citizens. I think that most people believe that each of these are true, but particular policies often are built on just one or the other. <b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>IV. The Black Box</b>: No one has such a well developed theory of action that they can explain how every step of everything works. They take some things for granted, acknowledge the limits of their expertise, and/or believe that some things are simply not important. For example, some advocates of increasing school funding treat tax policy (i.e. exactly how the the money is raised) as a black box. Some who focus on increasing caps on charter schools treat the classroom itself as a black box. Understanding where the black boxes are is key to understanding a policy or position. One way to think about them is based on scope or scale: <i>National Policy -- State Policy/Organization -- District or Network Issue -- School -- Classroom -- Teacher(s) -- Student(s)</i>. There are, no doubt, other ways to identify and classify the black boxes.<br />
<br />
<b>V. Scale</b>: Do the changes or reforms require national efforts (e.g. at the federal level of government)? Or are they something that individual states can do? Is this a program that an individual teacher can adopt; does it require school level action or even district/network level action?<br />
<br />
<b>VI. Time Frame</b>: How long until we will see a pay off? Is this something we expect to see results on in the same year we start? Or is it something that will take much longer to yield results? <br />
<br />
<b>VII. Vantage Point</b>: Is the advocate speaking as a parent? As a teacher? As a local elected official? As a generic business leader? As someone with a product to sell? Is this coming from the ivory tower? Professional advocate? Concerned citizen?<br />
<br />
<b>VIII. Experience</b>: How much experience does the advocate have with actual implementations of the programs or policies she/he/it advocates? How much experience does she/he/it have in the context where she/he/it is advocating implementation?<br />
<br />
<b>IX. Trust in Standardized Tests</b>: While this is much more closely tied to particular levers and policy ideas, standardized tests and the policies built upon them are at the center of our education policy debate. Understanding someone's stance with regard to standardized tests can help understand why they support the policies they support.<br />
<i>A. High Levels of Trust</i>: Believes that the hard work and professional work that goes into the development of high quality standardized test produce reliable data that give unique and irreplaceable insight into the performance students, teachers and schools. The work of very smart statisticians, psychometricians and others continue to produce data and result that we can rely upon.<br />
<i>B. Medium Levels of Trust</i>: Believes that while standardized test offer valuable data, they provide an incomplete picture and should only be used alongside other -- perhaps more valid -- sources of information when making decisions. <br />
<i>C. Low Levels of Trust</i>: Believes that while the promise of standardized testing is interesting, the tests we have are flawed enough that they are not useful for wise decision making. Some tests are better than others, but generally they are not ready for serious use in policy or practice -- though hopefully they will be some day (soon?).<br />
<i>D. Absolute Hostility</i>: Believes that standardized tests do not and cannot measure what is important in education. They can only be a waste of time and vehicle for the destruction of meaningful education for students. <br />
<br />
<b>X. Preferred Levers</b>: Without having to get down to the level of individual policies, different advocates look to different sorts of levers. I think that this comes the closest to what Mr. Horowitz <a href="http://www.peerreviewedbymyneurons.com/2013/03/05/in-search-of-better-education-classification/">tried to describe</a>. Of course, individual policies or advocates blend different levers together. (Note that I do <i>not</i> necessarily support or agree with the reasoning behind every lever I list.)<br />
<i><i>A. Laws</i>: By changing legislation, we can achieve results.</i><br />
<i>B. Peers</i>: Who a student is with in school makes a difference for that student.<br />
<i>C. Centralization</i>: Bringing control together in one place. <br />
<i>D. Decentralization</i>:
Loosening that central control to give more discretion. Note that this
is not just done for the sake of innovation. It can also be done for
other reasons, such as the value of variety or the value placed on local
(or community) control. <br />
<i><i>E. Choice</i>: Chubb and Moe famously wrote <a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=choice+is+a+panacea&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8">Choice is a Panacea</a>. This lever includes most "market"-based policies.</i><br />
<i>F. Funding</i>: Where does the money come from? How much money? How do we decide how much money? <br />
<i>G. Governance</i>: Who runs the schools? Who is responsible for them? Who has control over them? Mayoral control and charter schooling are examples that rely on this lever.<br />
<i>H. Standardization</i>: Applying some common best practices, procedures or tools more widely. <br />
<i>I. Innovation</i>: Perhaps the opposite of standardization. Giving freedom for new ideas and approaches to be discovered and tried. <br />
<i>J. Time</i>: We need to use the time in the school day or year differently, or define it differently.<i>K. Green</i> <i>Sites</i>: Replacing old programs, schools or systems with new ones, usually because the old ones are so dysfunctional that it is easier/better to start over. <br />
<i>L. Leadership</i>: Somehow, addressing just a few people in key
positions, we can leverage massive change. (This is where most of my own
research falls.)<br />
<i>M. Measurement</i>: We need to have more data on what our schools are producing/accomplishing. <br />
<i>N. Standards/Curriculum</i>: Focusing on what is taught. Includes both the formal curriculum and the informal curriculum.<br />
<i><i>O. Outsiders</i>: There are better ideas, practices and even people
outside of our education systems, and if we bring them in then our
schools will be much better for it.</i><i>P. Profit</i>: There is no
incentive like money, and utilizing the profit motive can increase
performance and innovation -- perhaps even with a local net cost.<i> </i><br />
<i>Q. There doubtless are </i><br />
<i>R. Rewards</i>: Recognizing good or desired practices or results with rewards.<br />
<i>S. Sanctions</i>: Recognizing bad practices or results with sanction or punishment.<i>T. Teachers & Staffing</i>: Hiring different teachers, training them more/better, retaining/promoting/removing them differently. <br />
<i>U. Mandates</i>: Simply require action/change.<br />
<i>V. Inducements</i>: Make change or action optional, but try to tip the scales.<br />
<i>W. Capacity Building</i>: Provide/increase ability to do something. <i>Conservatism</i>: We used to do it better, so let's go back to that. <i>Technology</i>: Modern computer/electronic technology can enable changes that were not previously possible.<br />
<i>X. Widening the Problem Definition</i>: The focus is too narrow, and
if we look a bit wider and address the causal forces, we can better
solve the problem we are concerned with.<i>Y. Tightening the Ship</i>: The problem is not that we don't know or aren't trying the right things, it's just that we aren't doing it well. We just need to do the same things, but do them the way they are supposed to be done.<br />
<i>Z. Revolution</i>: What we are doing is not even close to what should be done. We need revolutionary and fundamental change.<br />
<br />
Again, this is far from complete. And there are a ton of overlaps. But it should give you a framework for examining policies, their advocates and even yourself. If you have any ideas for suggestions or clarification (or to correct mistakes), let me know.<br />
<br />
<i>(Edit: Section IX (i.e. standardized tests) added to after original publication.)</i> Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-1753772116228469372013-01-31T08:49:00.002-05:002013-01-31T10:44:14.920-05:00How many tests are too many?How many tests are too many?<br /><br />How many tests did you take through your school years?<br /><br />How many chapter tests did you take in your 9th grade math class? How many quizzes? How many spelling tests in second grade? How many pop quizzes in 10th grade science? How long were your midterm and final exams? <br /><br />I don't know how many class periods I spent just taking a test in high school. I don't know how many times I spent part of the period taking a test. I don't remember how many of the classes had midterms, and how many had formal sit down final exams. I think I know how many AP exams I took, a half day each. I took the SATs twice, a full day each time (I think). I took the PSATs, and I think that was much shorter than the SATs. My state had POS and SRA tests, mostly before high school. I think the POS tests were annual, but I don't remember how long it took to take them. I think the SRAs were every few years, but I do not remember how often or how long they were. And there were the Achievement tests, too. There were three of those, and they took one hour each. <br /><br />I am sure that I had to take the "Minimum Competency Test" in 11th grade, and that although my friends and I literally raced through that to see who could finish first, we did not return to our regular classes when we finished. And I do not remember how long was allocated to that test. <br /><br />If I had grown up in New York, I might have had fewer final exams, but I would probably remember how many Regents exams I took, at a half day, each. <br /><br />I don't know how much time I spent taking tests, exams and quizzes in school, not even in high school. Was it two full weeks? Was it four weeks? More?<br /><br />I do remember some tests that I thought were unfair, even ones that I did well on. I remember some teachers loved trick questions. I remember one final exam for math class that everyone thought covered what the class covered, and even people who did poorly on it thought it was a fair test. I also remember a final exam for a math class that had nothing to do with what we covered in class, and no one thought that was fair. I still remember a particular question I got wrong on a standardized test because my AP Chemistry teacher did not think that that one thing was important enough to teach us -- it was about permanganate ions, MnO4-. But other than that, I do not think I ever had a good idea of how well what my teachers taught me matched what they were supposed to teach me. <br /><br />I don't know the right amount of school time for students to spend taking tests, exams and quizzes. Though I know the strengths and weaknesses of teacher-made assessments, of high quality standardized tests and of low quality standardized tests, I do not know the right ratios of teacher-made tests, locally made tests and commercially created standardized tests. <br /><br />Do you?<br />Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-74783145494641220422012-09-12T00:05:00.002-04:002012-09-12T00:05:45.596-04:00Understanding Teacher Strikes
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-language:JA;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">Teacher strikes are
horrendous. They are a challenge for families, who have to scramble for
childcare. They can be a nightmare for families who cannot afford to pay for
additional childcare. They can be disruptive to students, and life disruptions
can seriously impair student learning. They cost teachers paychecks -- at least
in the short term. And almost all teachers actually love children -- else
they could not bear to work them with all day every day -- and striking is not
nearly as psychically rewarding as teaching. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">So, why do teachers
strike? Why don't school boards do what they need to do to prevent strikes?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">Well, it is quite
complicated, and often needs to be examined on a case-by-case basis. But there
are some big historical and/or ongoing issues that you need to understand in
order to understand the individual context. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* Teacher union
contracts are not imposed on school districts. They are negotiated between the
two parties and agreed to by both parties. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* The compensation
model and teacher tenure <i>predate</i>
collective bargaining rights for teachers and union contracts <i>by decades</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* An enormous amount of
what is covered in union contracts is a product of neither the union nor the
central office trusting principals. This has always been true. Today's
decentralizing movement should not hide the fact that districts have
historically pushed just as hard as unions to tie principals’ hands and deny
them discretion over policy and procedure in their own schools. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* There has been a
problem all across the country with principals failing to observe and evaluate
their teachers according to the procedures laid out in the contracts -- even
when it takes less than three hours and occurs less often than every year. This
failure of evaluation and documentation is what makes it take so long to remove
teachers. This does not simply fall on principals, as they are held responsible
for so much, are so poorly trained and so poorly supported that it is no
surprise that they can have trouble finding time to do this work. And when a
new principal comes to a school, s/he may inherit a situation where his/her
predecessor failed to observe and evaluate teachers for years. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">(When I work with
principals closely, I always ask them if they personally have ever been unable
to remove a teacher they needed out of their building. They tell stories about
their peers, but I've yet to speak to a principal who admits to being unable to
do so him/herself. Not a single one, yet, in scores of conversations.)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* The recent
"accountability" movement looks to place blame for student
performance on teachers, schools and principals. However, it rarely -- never?
-- gives them the discretion over how to accomplish those goals that was
originally promised. It certainly fails to provide the capacity that makes
those goals even possible -- thus violating Richard Elmore's Principle of
Reciprocity. The centralizing tendencies of those who like the idea of
"accountability" runs counter to requirements of accountability. For
example, if Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the CPS system want to hold principals
"accountable" for test scores, as they say, they need to give principals
control over their budgets and over staffing. They claim that they that are
fighting to give them control over staffing. However, they want to tie the
principals' hands when it comes to evaluating their own teachers.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* Most individual
teachers get raises above and beyond those highlighted in media coverage of
teacher contract disputes. They get raises for advancing in their careers, as
defined in the salary schedules in the contracts. Whether you agree or disagree
with that approach, there are raises in there. The public disputes are about
shifting that entire salary schedule -- to adjust for inflation, to make the
profession more attractive, and to pay teachers closer to that a professional
salary. If you believe that teachers are underpaid or that starting teacher
salaries need to be higher -- as most do -- then you should be in favor of
these overall shifts. On the other hand, teachers should not claim that their
individual raises depend entirely upon these shifts.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* We all know that
teaching is hard, hard work. Working in front of dozens of children everyday,
being minutely observed by them and trying to act like a role model every
minute is incredibly draining. After classes are over, teachers have papers to
grade, lesson plans to write or revise, meetings to attend, phone calls to make
(e.g. to parents), classrooms to clean and the next day's lessons/activities to
set up. Teachers work long after the children leave school.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* Teachers do not have
three months off every year. They generally have 10-month contracts, yes. Some
teachers -- especially well-experienced teachers -- do not have to spend their
summers planning curricula, learning more about their subjects, attending
training and professional development. But many teachers do. Furthermore, many,
many teachers (most?) try to get back to school before they are supposed to, to
begin setting up their classrooms --which may have moved -- or prepare for
their new classes and grade-levels. Most teachers need multiple weeks before
the students arrive at the start of the year to get ready, and they are only
paid for one.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* All professionals
need insightful feedback to build on their strengths and to address their
weakness. And yet, it is an entirely human reaction to resist criticism. Amid
the traditional <i>close your door and do
your own thing</i> culture of schooling, there can be even more resistance to
evaluation. (To be honest, I was quite resistant to the obviously stupid
criticism I received as a teacher.) But there are legitimate reasons to want to
compare teacher performance, even across schools (e.g. targeting professional development,
identifying model teachers, etc.).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* Student test scores
do <i>not</i> measure school quality.
However, there are efforts to use statistical techniques to combine test scores
and other data to get closer to teachers and school quality. Yet these products
-- called "value-added analysis" (VAA) -- are not even close to being
ready for primetime. To take two disparate examples, VAA does not account for
the presence of known disruptive students or for HVAC issues in a particular
classroom -- both of which can significantly impact student learning. Until far
more of the known relevant factors are accounted for, VAA systems simply do not
achieve their goal. (Though, given valid tests that appropriately sample from
the content domain, fuller models, and sufficient data, VAA can be an <i>incredibly</i> useful tool.)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">* Despite the rhetoric,
the United States has never led in the international comparisons of student
performance. PISA and TIMMS studies have consistently shown that US to be in
the middle of the pack of industrialized nations -- for their entire histories.
More recent research has show that when you control poverty levels, however,
the US is today first in the world on these tests. We have not declined, but we
have social problems that impact student performance. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">Many (most? all? nearly
all? including myself) believe that our schools need to do better. Certainly,
we want our students to come out of school better prepared for citizenship,
their future careers and their lives as adults. Many parents need to learn how
to better support their children's' education. Societally, we need to value
education and scholarship more. We need better teachers and better teaching. We
need better leadership of our schools. We need better leadership of our school
districts. The visions have been lacking. The support for those in schools has
been poor. The necessities of creating engines of continuous improvement have
not been met -- either for students or for educators. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-family: Helvetica; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: JA;">When reading or
thinking about the Chicago Teachers Union strike, keep all of this in mind. The
next time you hear about a teacher contract negotiation, keep all of this in mind.
And if you care to know more any any of these points, there is a ton of good
work out there to learn from.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-56872201738167312402011-02-14T13:19:00.001-05:002011-02-14T13:46:10.331-05:00Putting Children FirstObviously, when it comes to education policy, we need to put <i>children first</i>. That is why when we are faced with the potential of teacher layoffs, we need to make sure that we abolish seniority as a criterion. Because we value children and education so much, we must make sure that the least “effective” teachers are laid off first, not the least senior. After all, <i>children first</i>.<br />
<br />
Or so say an enormous number of people, relatively few of whom actually work in classrooms every day.<br />
<br />
Most of the arguments against this line of argument address the question of teacher effectiveness and how we might recognize it. And there are a lot of good objections there. But I want to address the ridiculous idea of putting the needs of students ahead of the needs of adults. I want to question this idea of <i>children first</i>.<br />
<br />
Over at Gotham Schools, I <a href="http://gothamschools.org/2011/02/10/education-reform-now-debuts-anti-seniority-television-ads/comment-page-1/#comment-346775">challenged</a> commenters to come up with a workable alternative to seniority for layoff decision-making. That meant an alternative that would cover all teachers, would not be subject to easy manipulation (e.g. from favoritism or backlash), and would produce to unambiguous priorities in layoffs. The only response was a Bad Attendance First Out (BAFO) plan.<br />
<br />
As I wrote over there, BAFO is legally unworkable. It could run afoul of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act Family and Medical Leave Act, the federal Uniformed Servicemembers Employment and Re-Employment Rights Act and the New York Human Rights Law. That's a problem. But in my view, that's not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is the <i>children first</i> thinking behind this proposal.<br />
<br />
Should teachers be allowed to take sick days? Should they be allowed to take their own children to doctor's appointments? Should they be allowed take a day off to attend a funeral? What about their parent's funeral? What about -- god forbid -- their own child's funeral? Or, should they suffer the punishment of being higher on the layoff list if they do any of these things?<br />
<br />
What about being stuck on a train that has had mechanical problems? What about their car being broadsided by a car that ran a red light? What about having a heart attack and therefore being hospitalized? Should these teachers be held responsible for the time they miss and be put higher on the layoff list?<br />
<br />
If you want to suggest that teachers get too many vacation days in addition to the scheduled school vacations, I might agree with you. But sometimes, teachers need personal days. Sometimes they really need sick days.<br />
<br />
The <i>children first</i> thinking of so many non-teachers is premised on the idea that teachers should have less rights than any other workers in this country, because -- after all -- <i>children first</i>. Unlike other workers, they should not be able to take vacation. Unlike others, they should not be allowed to get sick. Unlike others, they should not be allowed to go to funerals. Unlike others, nothing in their own personal lives should <i>ever</i> be more important than their jobs. They should take pay cuts, give up the pensions they were promised, suffer arbitrary (and often capricious) judgments at the hands of their undertrained and undersupported supervisors. Unlike others, they should give up their lunch hours and work beyond any reasonable number of “work hours.”<br />
<br />
According to non-teachers, the laws that protect all other workers and the rights of all other workers should not apply to teachers. The contracts that schools and districts sign with teachers should not be binding on the schools and districts. The standards for workplaces and treatment of employees that matter in other contexts should not apply to schools and teachers. After all, <i>children first</i>.<br />
<br />
I'm sorry, but we cannot always put children first.<br />
<br />
Oh, wait......I'm not sorry.Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-68924616678911346982011-01-19T11:15:00.006-05:002011-01-19T14:25:36.432-05:00Race, Class & Politics: What is going on at John Jay<!--StartFragment--> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">There is a lot of </span><a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Black-and-Latino-Students-Cry-Segregation-Over-Plans-for-New-Brooklyn-School-114183689.html">sturm und drang</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> about the proposed new school in the John Jay building in the middle of Park Slope. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of substance or thoughtfulness to go with it. We should all understand what is being said and why, rather than fly off the handle in a knee-jerk sort of way, because the issues here appear elsewhere is the city, too. They just do not get this much attention in other neighborhoods.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span><b>Racism</b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">I have been most disturbed by the </span><a href="http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/34/2/ps_johnjayrally_2011_1_14_bk.html">accusations</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> of racism, segregation and even apartheid (?) that are being associated with the proposed school by those who oppose it. These are real issues for the schools in the John Jay building, but they are <i>not</i> products of the proposed new school.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">The students at the Secondary Schools </span><a href="http://schools.nyc.gov/SchoolPortals/15/K462/">for Law</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">, </span><a href="http://schools.nyc.gov/schoolportals/15/K464/">for Research</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> and </span><a href="http://schools.nyc.gov/schoolportals/15/K463/">for Journalism</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> generally do not come from the surrounding neighborhood. Moreover, </span>they do not look like<span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> the kids in </span>the surrounding neighborhood<span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> either; the building's students are </span><a href="https://www.nystart.gov/publicweb-rc/2009/95/AOR-2009-331500011462.pdf">predominantly black and Latino</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">, whereas the neighborhood is </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Slope,_Brooklyn">predominately white</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">. Having taught at Law, I can tell you that the students are very aware of this issue and that they feel judged and excluded by the neighborhood.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none">My students told me about how shopkeepers, when it is warmer, will close their doors when they walk by, after school. They are literally <i>shut out</i>. And I have seen this happen myself. Of course, the kids think it is racism. Of course, there is some kernel of truth in that, but it is not the whole story -- or even most of it. The fact is that adolescents and teenagers are loud and boisterous when they get out of school in the afternoon. When they leave school by the hundreds at the same time, the shouting, yelling, profanity, professions of love and all the rest are, well, loud. <i>Really</i> loud. So, the shopkeepers want to keep the noise out. </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">But that is not everything. I've made a point of talking to the shopkeepers about this, from the jewelry stores to </span><a href="http://www.cupcakestop.com/">the cupcake truck</a><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">. They talk about the noise, but they also talk about the behavior. The kids do not act respectfully, in their eyes. And they are right. Too many of them drop their trash on the ground and some are even are little destructive with the shops' wares. Of course, this is the students’ own ego-defense from a neighborhood that they feel excludes them, and it is not many of them. But it <i>does</i> happen.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">So, yes, the shopkeepers close their doors, and some even lock them from 2:45pm to 3:45pm. That ain't cool. But it also ain't racist, mostly. More importantly, this is an issue about the neighborhood that has nothing to do with the proposed new school. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><i><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">Even if the implied accusation that the new school is just for white kids were true</span></i><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">, it would not be any more “racist” or “segregated” than the status quo. Having a “white school” elsewhere would be just as segregated. Actually, it would be <i>less</i> segregated if the school were in their building. The kids at the three schools already mix to some degree. They would certainly get to know each other better in the same building than spread blocks or miles apart. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">The </span><span style="font-family:Times;"><a href="http://gothamschools.org/2011/01/11/park-slope-high-school-students-call-new-school-plans-racist/">accusations</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> of “apartheid” being associated with the new school are even more ridiculous, and I would hope that schools focused on law, research and journalism would be more clear on this. Perhaps there already is a form of apartheid in the schools, with largely white administrations and faculties in charge of a much larger largely black student body. But the new school has nothing to do with this common dynamic. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">To be fair, there <i>are</i> idiots in the community, yes. Allison Perrnell, <a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Black-and-Latino-Students-Cry-Segregation-Over-Plans-for-New-Brooklyn-School-114183689.html">who last night assured us on the 11 o'clock news</a>, "Not that we're necessarily racist," has <a href="http://www.fuckedinparkslope.com/home/is-john-jay-going-apartheid.">likened</a> the existing schools to the plague and worried about how they could "ghettify" her children. However, even she has a point about how the new school is actually <i>good</i> for the students already there. If they get more resources or a renovated building, that is a <i>good</i> thing. And she is really addressing – however inartfully – SES differences, rather than racial difference.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">When Kanye West <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIUzLpO1kxI">accused</a> George W. Bush of not caring about black people, he was wrong. Bush had no problem with black people; it was <i>poor</i> people that he did not care about.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;"><b>Class</b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Times;"><a href="http://homes.point2.com/Neighborhood/US/New-York/New-York-City/Brooklyn/Gowanus-Demographics.aspx">Park Slope</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> is one of the wealthiest neighborhood in Brooklyn, with ridiculous property values and high levels of educational attainment. However you measure SES (i.e. socio-economic status), the neighborhood in which the school is located has more of it than the neighborhoods in which the students live. Class <i>is</i> a big issue here.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">The fact is that the former principals were charged with changing the building's reputation to attract more families from the neighborhood <i>eight years ago</i>. I know this because one of them told me this himself. This proposed new school <i>is</i> aimed at attracting the families in Park Slope and other high-SES neighborhoods, but so were the existing schools in the building.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">We need good public schools for students of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">all</i> backgrounds. We need schools that leverage the time and effort that many parents put into preparing their kids for reading, for school and for their work in schools. We also need schools that can educate children from families who do such things less often or not at all. We need good schools for high-SES families and for good schools for moderate- and low-SES families. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">All of these schools should be </span><span style="font-family:Times;"><a href="http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=rigor+relevance+relationships&fp=9a6a61114e7dc301">rigorous</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">. All of these schools should be welcoming to families and supportive of their children. Students should feel valued, respected and that they belong at every one of them. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">The problem is that too many schools serving lower-SES families are of low quality. Be it issues with their own leadership, issues with their faculties or issues with support from the DOE, they are not serving their students well. I have taught in <a href="http://schools.nyc.gov/SchoolPortals/02/M615/default.htm">such</a> <a href="http://schools.nyc.gov/SchoolPortals/15/K462/default.htm">schools</a> myself, and that experience drove me to education policy so that I could work on finding systemic answers to address these issues. These kids deserve far better.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">But they are not the only ones who deserve better. There are no public schools that higher-SES families find attractive in this part of Brooklyn. These families look at the low quality of schools (i.e. low academic performance, low attendance rates, discipline problems, etc.) and then look further to find something better for their children. This is not about rejecting the <i>students</i> at these schools; it is about rejecting the educators.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Times;"><b>Politics</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">None of the students at these schools are being threatened by the new school. Their schools are <i><a href="http://gothamschools.org/2011/01/11/park-slope-high-school-students-call-new-school-plans-racist/">not</a></i> closing down. They get to keep their schools and their classmates and all the rest. Even though these schools might lose their middle grades (i.e. 6-8), the kids who are already there will continue there. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;">Unfortunately (in my view), these schools are <i>not</i> community schools. The local community is not invested in these schools. The local political and business leaders are not threatened by the proposed new school, either.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">On the other hand, the employees of these schools <i>are</i> threatened by this action. Some teachers will lose their jobs and administrators will surely lose headcount and money from their budgets. This <i>is</i> an assault on them and their status. My own experience, however, shows me that it has been a long time coming. While I taught there, I was told by my principal <i>not</i> to teach critical and analytical thinking to my students, and told by my assistant principal <i>not</i> to teach my 11th grade students -- who would be taking the Regents exam in the spring --<i> </i>how to write essays. Months after I had left, another principal in the building sent me letters at home warning me that if I continued to work late in my classroom that my pay would be <a style="mso-comment-reference:DM_1;mso-comment-date:20110119T1246">docked</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">The faculties that these principals have hired remain in the building, and most of the administrators are the same as when I left. All of them are threatened by this new school. And their students are crying "racism." I wonder how <i>that</i> could happen.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Times;"><b>Solutions, Not Grievances</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">We should all be perfectly willing to acknowledge that the building has been neglected. I do not believe that the families whom the current schools in the John Jay building has served in the past have been <i>well</i> served. There have been real issues with the leadership in the building and support from the DOE. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">But what is the problem with adding a new school if we look <i>forward</i>? We can agree that the building should have been fixed up long ago. I should not have had to deal with a broken window in my classroom for the entire time that I worked there. I should not have had to paint my classroom myself. The students and teachers who are still there should not have had to put up with the decaying of the building around them.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">But if the new school comes with new funds to fix up the building, why is that something to <i>complain</i> about? Complain about the past but embrace this solution! It is good for the kids. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">Furthermore, I know that the leadership of the new school (disclosure: I know Principal Gioe well and have spoken with her <i>at length</i> about this proposed new school) has a track record of <i>supporting</i> students who traditionally have struggled in conventional schools, and applied those lessons to the rest of her programs. This proposed new school would be an additional option for the families who have traditionally sent their kids to the Secondary Schools for Law, for Research and for Journalism. The research, from </span><span style="font-family:Times;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Samuel_Coleman">Coleman</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> in the 1960's all the way through the more recent work of </span><span style="font-family:Times;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/All-Together-Now-Creating-Middle-Class/dp/0815748116/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1295457941&sr=1-1">Kahlenberg</a></span><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"> and others, shows that mixing students from lower-SES families with those from higher-SES families can help the former without hurting the latter. The proposed new school would give priority to Brooklyn students, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">without</i> giving preference to any particular Brooklyn neighborhood.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none; text-autospace:none"><span style="mso-bidi-;font-family:Times;">The final vote on the proposed new school is tonight. What are we arguing about here?</span></p><div style="mso-element:comment-list"><div style="mso-element:comment"><div id="_com_1" class="msocomtxt" language="JavaScript"> </div> </div> </div> <!--EndFragment-->Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-91734974347725420272010-12-20T19:11:00.003-05:002010-12-20T19:13:37.130-05:00What is Tenure?<!--StartFragment--> <p class="MsoNormal">In this country, most of us can be fired from our jobs for virtually any reason – however dumb, inane or counterproductive. We can be fired because of our taste in music, because we made a bad joke, because we are too good at our jobs, or because someone just doesn’t like us. If you do not have a contract, you can even be fired for no reason at all. You boss can fire you simply because s/he feels like it.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">If you do not have a contract, there is a short list of reasons why you cannot be fired (e.g., gender, race, age, disability and in some places sexual orientation) but an infinitely long list of reasons why you <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">can</i> be fired.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">It makes some sense that private employers should be able to set their own standards for employment, and that such organization’s supervisors be empowered to make all kind of decisions. That is kind of what it means to be a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">private</i> business.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">However, public organizations have a different moral calculus. They operate for the public good and serve as a sort of trust on behalf of the public. We empower their management to make decisions in the furtherance of those public goals, but those managers do not own the organizations, divisions, departments or work groups. There are any number of reasons that might be acceptable for a private organization to fire someone that are inappropriate for a public organization.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The only acceptable reason for a public organization to fire someone is that they are unable in some way to serve the public goals of the organization. Obviously, such inability could take many forms, but fundamentally that’s it. (A chairman of the EEOC in Washington DC who does not believe that that law should be used to combat discrimination against minorities is one such (purely) hypothetical example. A meat inspector for the USDA who is both color blind and has a poor sense of small probably could not support the USDA’s mission. And school workers who cannot handle children or fulfill their roles in supporting the educational process also should be removed.)</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Tenure for K-12 public school teachers is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">not</i> a guarantee of lifetime employment, despite what many would have you believe. Rather, it is a right to contest termination in some kind of formal and binding way (i.e. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">due process</i>). It is certainly not as complicated as a death penalty trial, but it is more detailed than merely begging your boss to reconsider his/her decision.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Tenure means that if a principal or a district wants to terminate a teacher, the teacher gets to challenge them on the reasons. It forces the district to make the case – to present evidence and make the argument – that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">this</i> teacher cannot do the job. Because tenure is only granted after multiple years of positive job reviews, there is a certain level of presumption in favor of the teacher. After all, the district is claiming that something has <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">changed</i>, something that their own managers and records said was fine in the past.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">That is all tenure is. It is an earned right for experienced teachers to say, “If I have years of good evaluations, why are they firing me now?” and to have an impartial judge (i.e. a mutually agreed upon arbiter) weigh the evidence.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Does that seem unfair to you? Or does it seem like something that every worker should be able to earn?<o:p></o:p></p> <!--EndFragment-->Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-43945063277081419082010-12-02T11:10:00.001-05:002010-12-02T11:12:07.196-05:00I come not to bury Cathie Black...well...ummm...maybe I do<p>Ms. Black's supporters have suggested there are many non-educational/non-pedagogical aspects to the Chancellor's responsibilities. Rhetoric and hyperbole aside, what does New York City need from the Chancellor of its public school system? Are there things that we can agree on? Truly evaluating her fitness for the position requires us all to consider what those might be.</p> <ol><li>The Chancellor is a very public figure in New York City, just as superintendents and chancellors in other districts are. This means that the Chancellor must be adept at dealing with the public in various ways. S/he must be able to deal with being an object of scrutiny by the media, and at using the media effectively to communicate with the public, both to inform and to persuade. S/he really is the chief spokesman for the public schools, like it or not. S/he must also be adept at dealing with politics, through the various layers of elected and appointed officials who think that they should have some say on educational matters. We have community boards, individual city council members, the collective city council and the mayor himself. We have the Board of Regents, the Governor and our State Assembly and Senate. That is a lot of groups in which the public invests some level of responsibility (at the very least moral responsibility) for our schools.</li><li>The Chancellor must run the largest school system in the country, an enormous bureaucracy with tens of thousands of employees, over a million "customers" to be served daily, and over 1500 branches. Its sheer size means that there are a surprisingly large array of <i>kinds</i> of services and departments that s/he must oversee.</li><li>The Chancellor must continually prepare the system for declining revenues, and then manage the system once they have declined. There is nothing that s/he can do to reverse that decline, and the causes of that declining revenue happen also to pull in more "customers," without bringing in more revenue. Furthermore, there is no level or quality of service that will attract more revenue. In fact, delivering higher quality service will likely attract <i>more</i> customers -- again without attracting more revenue!!</li><li>No one is satisfied with the quality of the service that the organization provides. There is universal agreement that we want the organization to do better, even if there is disagreement about the current level of quality or the ultimate causes of issues. We all want better schools, and the new Chancellor will be charged with delivering them. However, as noted above, increases in quality will NOT lead to more revenue, despite attracting more customers, and there will not be additional funds to pay for new programs.</li><li>The Chancellor must lead a system that is responsible for educating EVERY child. There have been historical problems with meeting the needs of certain groups (i.e. special needs students, English language learners, minorities, the poor, (children of) immigrants), and the last decade has focused on uncovering the extent of those problems (e.g. with subgroup reporting of NCLB AYP scores). The next decade, no doubt, will be focused on addressing them.</li><li>Though it appears that the federal government will be backing off the pressure it has applied to schools in recent years, the reauthorization of the ESEA (i.e. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, dubbed NCLB by President Bush) is said to focus on the bottom 5% of schools, a group that will consist primarily of those serving poor, urban and minority populations. Far more than 5% of the Chancellor's schools will be in that group, meaning that federally inspired pressures on schools will be far greater than anything than her predecessors had to deal with -- with just the exception of her most immediate predecessor.</li><li>The Chancellor must deal with a largely unionized work force of professionals, but one that has been under severe public and political pressure to change long standing practices. Those changes will require changes to union contracts and to state law, if they are to go through. Perhaps uniquely, her 1500 branch managers -- many of whom manage over 100 workers -- are all unionized as well. Those branch managers -- the principals -- are as much a part of the system as the teachers, and the kind of improvement that people call for requires changes to their practices as well.</li><li>There are calls for increasing the role of computer technology in education, especially from the reform crowd that Cathie Black might represent (i.e. that of the Bloomberg & Gates types). Be it the School of One, greater use of the Internet, distance learning, slate/tablet computing or anything else, many want new computer and communications technology to entirely transform schools, students' experiences and education itself.</li></ol> <p>Does the new Chancellor need to know about pedagogy or curriculum to deal with these basic challenges? It's not obvious to me that s/he does. Or rather, I do not think that this is an open and shut case. Perhaps s/he does not. But I happen to think that understanding the core work of the organization IS important. I happen to think that it is impossible to manage a system for improvement or excellence without knowing deeply about the product or service that organization provides.</p> <p>But let us assume for a moment that s/he does not need to know about pedagogy or curriculum. Is Cathie Black otherwise prepared for the basic challenges of the job of New York City Schools Chancellor?</p> <ol><li>Cathie Black has never worked in government or public service. She has run media outlets, rather than been the object of interest of so many media outlets. She has never been responsible to elected officials, let alone multiple layers of officials with overlapping jurisdictions. She has never had to sell the entire public on the appropriateness or quality of her organization's product or services.</li><li>She has never run an organization even remotely as large and complex as the New York City Department of Education. By orders of magnitude, there are more employees, more branches and more kinds of issues to be dealt with.</li><li>Cathie Black has always worked in the for profit sector. She could close down money-losing outlets or operations without <i>having</i> to serve their former customers (i.e. subscribers) in some other fashion. She has been able to justify money spent on new products or outlets with the greater return in increased revenue they would bring. One of her goals in the private sector was to increase revenue, something that would be entirely outside her control as Chancellor. She has absolutely no experience leading an organization in such a circumstance.</li><li>I do not know enough about Hearst Magazines to be sure, but I have not read anything about Black leading a remarkable increase in the quality of its publications. Yes, she launched some very successful magazines, but did she actually improve the quality of any pre-existing titles? Is the overall quality of the journalism, the writing and/or the photography notably better than it was before she got there? Did US increase in journalistic quality during her tenure? Has the quality of her organizations' publications improved under her leadership?</li><li>In the private sector, Black's organizations identified target markets in which they could be successful (i.e. make a profit). They could close down a publication, if they could not be successful with it -- without any obligation to provide a new and better title to meet its former readers' needs. She has never been morally and legally obliged to meet the needs of all potential customers. She has always been able to -- to at least some degree -- simply walk away from the most challenging problems her companies might face. I do not mean to imply that she did anything that was not right or appropriate for those organizations. However, she is entirely unprepared for the kind of challenge that she faces in leading an organization that must educate <i>every</i> student.</li><li>Having worked in business since the Reagan era, Black has worked during a period of deregulation of private industry. Having worked in print publishing, her organizations have been subject to the extraordinary protections of the First Amendment. As we can see in her nomination process, there are serious state regulations that impact the Chancellor, in addition to the recently expanded federal role. She has absolutely no experience working in such an industry.</li><li>Black euphemistically <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2010/11/09/2010-11-09_new_york_city_schools_chancellor_joel_klein_resigns_after_8_cathie_black_is_repo.html">told the press</a>, "I've had limited exposure to unions." There is no reason to believe that knows how to work with union leadership as a partner. She certainly has no clue as to how to work with a union to help it modernize and give it cover to challenge some of its own members.</li><li>Clearly, the publication industry is in a state of flux -- one far greater than that of schools. Print might not be dying, but its dominance is long since over. The iPhone, other app phones, the Kindle, the Nook and iPad together present a serious new challenge to all newspapers and magazines -- even as they are still struggling with how to remain successful while the Internet provides alternatives that undermine print's basic business models. Hearst Magazines has not figured out how to use any of these new platforms, despite the fact that we are at least three years into this new mobile computing age. In fact, Hearst seems more focused on selling print subscriptions over the Internet than on figuring out how to be successful delivering content to customers over the Internet. Rather than embracing the Internet as a transformative force, her organization has marginalized it.</li></ol> <p>Clearly, even if the Chancellor does not need to know about pedagogy, curriculum, school or education, Ms. Black is entirely unprepared for the challenges she would face in that role. The issue with Ms. Black, therefore, is NOT her lack of educational sector experience or her lack of personal experience with public school. Rather, the issue is that Ms. Black is not <i>otherwise</i> qualified or prepared to New York City’s Department of Education, and No Chief Education Officer can make up for that.</p> <p>Ms. Black's prior background and experience required her to seek a waiver of the legal requirements for qualification for the position. However, that waiver was only supposed to be granted if her experience had given her some substantial equivalent to those prerequisites. Overruling the advisory panel, State Education Commissioner David Steiner has granted her that waiver. I would like to know why. She clearly is unprepared for any aspect of the job.</p>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-1133037567676996642009-09-22T14:30:00.009-04:002009-09-23T00:05:47.046-04:00What is "The Gold Standard"?<div><br /></div><div>Did you hear about <a href="http://www.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/how_NYC_charter_schools_affect_achievement_sept2009.pdf">the big report</a> that came out this week? You know, the one that "shows" that NYC charter schools are better than traditional non-charter public schools? It has gotten a <i>ton</i> of attention, probably because it uses "'the gold standard' method[ology]." The report is <i>not</i> subtle about this. It is right there in the very first sentence of the executive summary, "The distinctive feature of this study is that charter schools' effects on achievement are estimated by the best available, "gold standard" method: lotteries." It even uses the term "gold standard" four more times throughout the report.</div><div><br /></div><div>Everyone wants to follow <i>The Gold Standard</i> -- or at least be able to say that they do. Of course! I mean, who wouldn't? But I do not think that we actually have a gold standard in education research. In fact, I am quite sure that we do not, and appropriating biomedical research's gold standard does not make it appropriate for us.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, if we <i>are</i> going to borrow their standard, can we not at least get it right?</div><div><br /></div><div>The biomedical standard uses double-blind experimental studies with random assignment. That means that some research participants get the experimental treatment and some get a placebo, and both are assigned randomly. It also means that neither the researchers nor the participants know who is getting which treatment. After all, expectations are important, and the mind can set us up for all kinds of things. </div><div><br /></div><div>*****************</div><div><br /></div><div>One of the latest ideas about <i>The Gold Standard</i> in educational research concerns charter schools. </div><div><br /></div><div>We all want to know whether charter schools are better than traditional non-charter public schools. On one level, we certainly do want to know about individual schools. But on the policy level, we want to know about the average charter school, because we want to figure out if "charterness" helps a school be better. If it does, then we want more charter schools. If it does not, then we want fewer or none. And if we cannot be sure, we want to keep checking.</div><div><br /></div><div>Let me say this quite clearly: Some charter schools are better than most non-charter public schools, and some are worse. And some non-charter public schools are better than most charters, and some are worse. </div><div><br /></div><div>The <i>Gold Standard</i> crowd have a favorite method for comparing charter schools to non-charter public schools, one of which they are quite proud, but one that is so full of problems that I am shocked that they keep using it. </div><div><br /></div><div>They rightly want to control for self-selection bias among charter school students. We know that children and families that apply to charter schools are different from those who do not, even if we do not know what all those differences are. This seems like the perfect time to do a randomized assignment, because that is the best method to make sure that these differences cancel out between groups. Luckily, we have some randomized assignments. Oversubscribed charter schools are virtually always supposed to accept students using a random lottery. This allows researchers to compare the outcomes of those were were randomly accepted, and those who were not. </div><div><br /></div><div>Sounds good, right?</div><div><br /></div><div>Well, it does <i>sound</i> good. But serious issues remain. Some are more obvious than others, and some are correctable by those interested in getting the correct answer, rather than the one that fits their pre-ordained conclusions.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Issue #1: No Placebo</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Biomedical research does not just include randomization of treatment. It also is at least single blind. If some patients know that they are getting the new treatment, they might react differently. The mind is a powerful thing. They might be more diligent. Perhaps do their rehab exercises more often. Maybe pay more attention to diet. Who knows? And those who know that they are getting the new treatment might not lose hope.</div><div><br /></div><div>If a student and/or his family do <i>not </i>get into the school of his/her/their choice, how might they react? I know from my own experience teaching that students who get their choice of schools take a bit more ownership. If they get their second choice, or last choice, or somehow do not get their choice, that's a big hurdle for their teachers and parents to overcome. If parents do not get their choice of schools for their students, are they going to be as supportive of their child's teachers? Of the assignments? Are they going to have the same kind of faith in their child's school? I think that the answer is really quite obvious.</div><div><br /></div><div>The problem with these studies is that the students and families who "lose" these lotteries are <i>no longer</i> like the students and families who "win" these lotteries. There simply is no basis for thinking that their views of their schools are like those of the lottery "winners." In fact, one could quite simply argue that this method of analysis <i>ensures</i> that the "winning" charter school students are being compared to students who did <i>not</i> want to go to the schools they attend.</div><div><br /></div><div>Obviously, that's not an even comparison.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Issue #2: Peer Effects</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div><div>We all know that peer effects matter. Research, experience and common sense back this up. If you put a student in a class with a "better" group of peers, s/he will do better than s/he would have done in a class with a "worse" group of peers. The other kids all do their homework, or their parents were more likely to read to them, or they are somehow smarter, or harder working, or bring more cultural capital to school with them, or however else you think "better students" might be defined. </div><div><br /></div><div>We also know that charter school students are not, as a group, like non-charter school students. That is how the <i>Gold Standard</i> crowd justifies their approach here. So: trying to control for applicant differences, but not controlling for ongoing peer effects? I don't know if that is just lazy or actually dishonest. The importance of peer effects is so well recognized that I tend to think it is the latter, especially because techniques to control for them are so well established. </div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, there <i>is</i> another way to look at this. From a personal level, if you have a child, you don't care about controlling for peer effects. Actually, you want the effects to be left in so that you can take advantage of them. If charter schools have "better" students, that's a reason to send your own child to a charter school. However, if this analysis is done for policy purposes, to influence policy-makers, then peer effects do matter. If you are thinking about all students, not just the select few who can get into the "better" school, you need to control for peer effects.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Issue #3: Selection Bias on the School Level</b></div><div><br /></div><div>The goal of this lottery-based study design is to avoid self-selection bias in the data. However, those who use it do not acknowledge the additional selection problems they create. </div><div><br /></div><div>The most important problem is that not all charter schools are oversubscribed, so not all charter schools can be included in these studies. This wouldn't be a problem if we had good reason to believe that a random selection of charter schools were included, but that is obviously not the case. Clearly, the "better" charter schools are far, far, far more likely to be oversubscribed than the "worse" charter schools. This biases the sample rather severely towards better charter schools.</div><div><br /></div><div>Unfortunately, the sample bias problem doesn't stop there. </div><div><br /></div><div>A really strong traditional non-charter public school is not going to lose a lot of students to a simply above-average charter school. In order to be oversubscribed, a significant number of students and/or families have got to believe that the charter school option is superior to the non-charter public school option, which suggests a level of dissatisfaction with the local traditional public schools. This biases the sample towards inferior non-charter schools.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Issue #4: Generalizability</b></div><div><br /></div><div>The hardest thing in educational research -- and perhaps research overall -- is to be able to generalize one's results to the broader population or wider world. And yet, that is usually the end goal of policy-oriented research. </div><div><br /></div><div>These kinds of lottery-based studies only include the kinds of students and families that apply to charter schools in the first place. Even if the previous issues could be corrected, how can one know that other sorts of students and families would see the same benefits? The fact is that different populations might benefit less or more from going to a charter school. It is simply impossible to know from this kind of study. Of course, if you are only concerned about benefitting the kids of families who already opt for charter schools, then this is not a problem. But if you aim to help a broader population than that, you need a better methodology. </div><div><br /></div><div>These generalizability concerns also apply to schools. Oversubscribed charter schools might well be better than average non-charter public schools, and I do not really question whether they are better than their local traditional alternatives. But on a policy level, we need to be concerned with charters more generally than that. If we raise or lift caps on charter schools, or approve new charter schools, we have to expect an average charter school to result, not an exceptional one. But these studies really tell us nothing about the majority of charter schools that are not oversubscribed. Nor do they tell us anything about the relative quality of non-charter public schools that lack charter school alternatives.</div><div><br /></div><div><div>*****************</div><div><br /></div><div>I understand the desire to find a <i>Gold Standard</i> for educational research. But simply grabbing that label because a methodology has some resemblance to biomedical research is not good enough, despite what Prof. Caroline Hoxby may <a href="http://www.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/how_NYC_charter_schools_affect_achievement_sept2009.pdf">claim</a>. Moreover, the <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2009/09/new_ammo_for_charter_debate.html#more">popular press</a> really must do a better job of examining these claims critically, rather than <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/education/22charters.html?partner=rss&emc=rss">cheerleading</a> <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2009/09/22/2009-09-22_charter_school_students_fare_better_academically_than_noncharter_pupils_claims_n.html">for</a> <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/study_bares_charter_advantage_for_9lNSjeZXu8JRonHATZiumJ">them</a> like <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125358513141729871.html">this</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This, of course, means that researchers, journalists and the rest of us must be sure to take a more thoughtful stance than has become our habit.</div></div></div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-63230353067165267232009-08-27T17:23:00.002-04:002009-09-10T11:45:51.341-04:00Engagment is not enough<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.swissarmy.com/images/ProductCatalog/vm/vm_53504_sol_a02.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 280px; height: 320px;" src="http://www.swissarmy.com/images/ProductCatalog/vm/vm_53504_sol_a02.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />School is starting, in most places either last week or this wee. Like any other sort of new year, it's a time for resolutions, for setting new expectations and resolving to do the right thing. <div><br /></div><div>The president spoke to the nation's children, or tried to, with this in mind. Time to think about hard work, finding your strengths and persevering through the challenges, he said. </div><div><br /></div><div>Children are not the only ones who begin a new year around labor day. Parents, too, begin a new cycle. They see their children off to school, to a new grade, and know that themselves are beginning a new year. For many of them -- perhaps most and eventually we hope for all of them -- one of their own issues each year is figuring out how to support their children's learning. Buying school supplies is easy. What about the rest?</div><div><br /></div><div>Obviously, parents can help their children with their homework. They can set aside a quiet place and time for them to study. Is there more? </div><div><br /></div><div>Well, traditionally, parents would ask their children "How was school, today?" Maybe they'd ask "What did you learn in school today?" Trite questions, to be sure, but powerful nonetheless. How better to signal to their children that they care about education and are invested in their learning than this sort of thing?</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, those questions get old. Kids hear them too often, and they don't feel genuine. Parents feel silly asking the same question every day. And engagement in this sort of important conversation fades.</div><div><br /></div><div>With all of this in mind, Will Richardson has <a href="http://weblogg-ed.com/2009/what-did-you-create-today/">written</a> about the kinds of questions he hopes to ask his children this year, and offer 13 examples. His readers have offered dozens more in the comments. Together, they make an interesting collection.</div><div><br /></div><div>But I'm not satisfied.</div><div><br /></div><div>In fact, I am troubled.</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't have a problem with any of the questions, I don't think. But taken in their totality they seem a bit thoughtful and random. Yes, they are good questions, but so what? What is goal of these questions? What are they meant to accomplish?</div><div><br /></div><div>You see, I think that one of the great problems with American schooling is the muddle. We do many things, with not real focus on plan on the deeply meaningful long term goals. We do little things to satisfy everyone, but never really focus on what we want to accomplish. Taking a bunch of ideas and throwing them together does not necessarily make for a great combination. Too many cooks can spoil the soup, right?</div><div><br /></div><div>I think that we see this in technology. Most tech companies design products with lots of features, to meet the needs of a broad swath of the potential market. More features, they seem to believe, leads to broader appeal. But like the <a href="http://www.swissarmy.com/MultiTools/Pages/Product.aspx?category=everyday&product=53504&">big swiss army knife</a>, american schools has gotten unwieldy and hard to use. </div><div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Apple has taken a different approach with its products. They often have fewer features, but a much greater sense of cohesiveness and purpose. More integrated, and even thoughtful. Never the only way to do a great product, but almost always a great product. </div><div><br /></div><div>So, I am not saying that any of Will's questions are poor, or even any from his commenters. But I really do not know what they are seeking to accomplish. These questions have different goals and assumptions behind them. And my real issue with his post and the comments is that they are mindless of these issues, of the goals and assumptions that their questions represent. </div><div><br /></div><div><blockquote>What Did You Create Today?</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div><blockquote>What did you learn about fairness today?</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div><blockquote>What will you now do tomorrow because of what you did today?</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div><blockquote>What was the coolest/most interesting question someone else asked today?</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div>These are great questions, as are the others in will's post and the comments. (Really, they <i>are</i> good questions. Go and <a href="http://weblogg-ed.com/2009/what-did-you-create-today/">read</a> them.) I am not challenging that. But they have different goals. When it comes to education, we really do need to be mindful of goals, and make sure that what we do meets the goals we have in mind.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, if parents goals are merely to have engaging conversations with their children about their school days, any of these questions might do. Switching among them might work, too. Yes, that is a worthy goal. But if parents want to reinforce some aspect of learning or schooling, encourage particular kinds of behaviors or habit of mind, selection from among these questions requires them to be more thoughtful. </div><div><br /></div><div>And the exercise of uncovering the assumptions and goals of these questions would be a good way for any parent or PTA to get a hold on some of the hardest and most important questions in education.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-3171835048450602562009-08-26T12:49:00.003-04:002009-08-26T16:15:27.494-04:00My Senator Died: What Ted Kennedy Meant to an Educator<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/us/politics/27kennedy.html">My senator died</a>. I think that a lot of educators can say that today. Only a small fraction of us ever voted for him, or have ever lived in Massachusetts, but Ted Kennedy stood for what we stand for.<div><br /></div><div>Sen. Kennedy served for so long -- 47 years -- that from the time I first got a clue about what the senate really was and what senators really were until today, he has been my senator. When I really became politically aware as a teenager, the President did not reflect my views or values. It was important to me to have a national voice that represented me, and Senator Kennedy was that national voice. I only had the chance to vote for him once, but he has always been my senator.</div><div><br /></div><div>*****************</div><div><br /></div><div>Looking at the education landscape today, it is easy to conclude the NCLB has a stronger impact on schools than any other federal legislation. It is easy to say that Sen. Kennedy got rolled when it came to NLCB. He thought that the money it authorized would actually be budgeted and spent, but the Bush administration's budgets only called for a fraction of it. </div><div><br /></div><div>Obviously, there are lots of aspect of NCLB to hold against President Bush, and also against Senator Kennedy (D-MA) and Representative George Miller (D-CA). Without their credibility and their cover, this bill would not have passed. </div><div><br /></div><div>But we should keep in mind the positive aspects of NCLB, too. Senator Kennedy did not like the whole bill, but he thought that the attention it would bring to urban education was worth its costs. In hindsight, I think he was right.</div><div><br /></div><div>NCLB has required subgroup reporting of test scores. Though statistical rigor seems to run afoul of moral considerations, this has been a revolutionary change in the way we examine schools. And it is federally mandated!! Every school must examine how its minority students perform, and report it publicly. Every school must report how its low income students perform, and report it publicly. No longer can schools can schools hide poor performances of some groups with superior performances by others. Schools are now have real incentives to pay attention to <i>all</i> of these groups. </div><div><br /></div><div>Does anyone think that this is going away?</div><div><br /></div><div>Senator Kennedy was right, I think. We are paying more attention to the performance of minority and low income students than ever before. That is no small thing. The federal spending on education is at an all time high, and its hard to imagine that being possible with NCLB. That's no small thing. </div><div><br /></div><div>Furthermore, for all the problems with NLCB's "highly qualified teacher" provision, the fact that we are even having a debate about it is enormous progress. </div><div><br /></div><div>There is a lot of stuff to dislike about NCLB. But it has prompted some revolutionary shifts in how we, as a nation, talk about students in schools. And that has been wonderful.</div><div><br /></div><div>*****************</div><div><br /></div><div>However, Senator Kennedy was not my senator because of NLCB. He was my senator long before NCLB, and I spent years thinking quite a bit less of him for NCLB. He was my senator because he stood for things that I believed in. Most fundamentally, he stood for fighting for those unlike himself, less fortunate than himself, and doing so simply because it was the right thing to do.</div><div><br /></div><div>I think that all educators understand devoting our lives to helping others. In fact, educators understand working to help those with less power and privilege than we do. Children inherently have less power than adults, and helping them does not help us to get ahead. None of us expect the favors to be repaid, even if the love and compassion is. We do it because it feels like the right thing to do, because it means more to us than maximizing our own power and position. </div><div><br /></div><div>Senator Kennedy did not have to be the senator he was. He stood forward to fight for what he believed in, making himself a target for criticism and mockery -- when he knew that he had major personal failings to be mocked. He took unpopular stands because they were right, not because they would help him or his career. Most teachers know about fighting to do the right thing for their students, even when it makes their lives harder.</div><div><br /></div><div>*****************</div><div><br /></div><div>Last, I want to address Senator Kennedy's longevity. </div><div><br /></div><div>He was in it for the long fight. There were some tremendous victories along the way, but they came after a lot of work. He was not looking for silver bullets or miracles, and he knew that that each legislative victory was but a single step in a very long road. </div><div><br /></div><div>NCLB was an important step, but just a step. If we had him in Senate for the rest of his term, we would see him address its strengths and and its weaknesses. </div><div><br /></div><div>We need to remember this. The big problems that Senator Kennedy worked his whole career to address -- education, poverty, the rights of the disempowered -- are not solved easily, or perhaps even ever. Rather, they are addressed as best we can today, so that we can address them even better tomorrow.</div><div><br /></div><div>Perhaps this is an easier lesson for those of us who work in education than outside of it. We know that the our students' educational journeys last much longer than our own time with them. I hope that those who do not work in schools can learn this, too. Especially when trying to address education.</div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-39349487509445868862009-08-25T17:31:00.003-04:002009-08-25T17:41:36.475-04:00Incentives and TEDDo you know about <a href="http://www.ted.com/">TED</a>?<div><br /></div><div>TED is this annual conference where people make these really great 20 minutes presentations. They come from all walks of life, but they are all smart. The presentations are intended for a small general audience, not a group of experts. TED's tagline is "Ideas Worth Spreadings," and they generally are. </div><div><br /></div><div>Fortunately, the folks who run the conference have posted all of the talks online. For free, and going back years!! What's not to love?</div><div><br /></div><div>TED is certainly more thoughtful than 99% of what you'll find out there on the Interwebs. High quality speakers with high quality content.</div><div><br /></div><div>While I was thinking about my <a href="http://morethoughtful.blogspot.com/2009/08/understanding-incentives.html">previous post</a>, I came across a TED talk on the same subject (i.e. incentives and performance). Of course, it is better than anything I could write. So, <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html">go watch it</a>. </div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-86668681133907401612009-08-25T16:27:00.003-04:002009-08-25T17:26:30.938-04:00Understanding IncentivesThere is a big debate in education right about incentives. Sometimes it is explicit, and sometimes it is implicit, but it is a part of quite a few of the button issues and policy questions. There are those who believe that intrinsic motivation is key, and others who believe that extrinsic motivation is a powerful and untapped force that we need to make better use of. The former group believes the opposite, that use of extrinsic motivation is powerfully destructive and we need to beware of it.<div><br /></div><div>What should we do about this difference? How do we evaluate the question, so that we can made pedagogical and policy decisions?</div><div><br /></div><div>One way, the least thoughtful way, perhaps the most common way, is to go by our gut. That really just means going by what we already believe on the question, without examination or consideration. The problem with this approach is that no one ever learns anything, and there is no way to convince anyone -- not even ourselves -- of anything new. </div><div><br /></div><div>I am a big of another way: the thought experiment. I like other approaches, too. But the thought experiment strikes me as the essence of the more thoughtful approach. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment">Wikipedia</a> tells me that its origins are different than I had thought, and that my understanding of it might not be archetypal. But I'll stick with my approach. </div><div><br /></div><div>Think about what you are proposing. What would that imply down the road? What does it rely upon or assume? If it were true, what else would have to be true? How would you test if it were true (that's more archetypal) and has that test already been done? Does any of this contradict what we already know to be true?</div><div><br /></div><div>I suppose that this a mathematical approach to proving something -- not surprising, considering that math was my first discipline. Work through the proof, and if you find a contradiction, the supposition must be false. </div><div><br /></div><div>This has usually been my approach to merit-pay for teachers. For this to work as a reform, teachers would have to motivated by financial reward. The problem is that the given the widespread belief that teaching is a poorly compensated job -- what that is true or not -- it is hard to believe that the kinds of people who go into teaching are likely to be motivated by financial rewards. In fact, those that are would already have chosen another profession, for precisely that reason. Some supporters then counter that this would attract those very people to teaching. So, I ask whether the level of financial rewards that people discuss for merit pay would be sufficient to attract such people. I mean, are they likely to attracted because of the size of merit-based bonus, or the size of total compensation? Obviously the latter, right? So, how large would these bonuses need to be such that, when added to the base salary, they attract such people to the profession?</div><div><br /></div><div>I like this approach, but it is not the final answer. A though experiment can be quite useful, but it does not always lead to a final answer, and even when it does others may not be convinced. </div><div><br /></div><div>Luckily, there often are real studies, or even real experiments. When it comes to motivation, the work has already been done. For example, my attention was recently brought to a <a href="http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2005/wp0511.pdf">paper</a> by a bunch of researcher who have nothing to do with educational policy or pedagogical issue. Actually, the paper is published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, and is by a bunch of business school professors. </div><div><br /></div><div>Ariely, Gneezy, Lowenstein & Mazer (2005) looked the impact of external financial motivation on performance. They considered tasks with requiring varying degrees of concentration, creativity and problem-solving. They found that for high rewards actually tended to degrees performance. That's right. <i>Decrease</i>.</div><div><br /></div><div>First, let me point out that that is a problem. Teaching requires a lot of creativity and problem-solving. If high contingent financial rewards hinder performance with such tasks, we would not want to bring to to our schools. </div><div><br /></div><div>Second, this experimental finding really poses a problem for offering merit-pay at a high enough level to attract the sorts of people motivated by financial rewards. It is like being between a rock and hard place. Attracting them takes a lot of money, but a lot of money decreases performance. </div><div><br /></div><div>Third, I want to add a bit more discussion. Why is there such fervent belief in the power of of financial rewards for performance? I can think of two ones, one which the research literature addresses, and one which it does not -- or at least I have found it. </div><div><br /></div><div>Clearly, in some situations extrinsic rewards <i>can</i> make a difference. When it comes to effort and narrow concentration, we often see an impact. Simple tasks, repetitive task, physical tasks. All of these can be very responsive to extrinsic motivation. But creative and problem solving tasks? The kinds of things where we need to wider our focus, in order to find solutions -- or at least next step? The research has made clear the extrinsic motivation does not really help there, and can even hurt.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, why do we believe in it so? I think that there's another issue. I think that it might work in some cases. I think extrinsic motivation (i.e. rewards, prizes or even avoiding punishments) can help to identify the absolutely best performers -- at least best at performing when in such environments. But the fact that they might even be able to raise the performance of those who do best in such environments does not actually make them a good idea. If they make some small fraction of performers a bit better, but make most performers worse, that is a problem. Obviously, there are some configurations of that dynamic where the tradeoffs are worth it, not that is not always the case. </div><div><br /></div><div>So, the more thoughtful approach means we consider not just the benefits, but the costs as well. In the case of merit pay for teachers, is it likely to help most students or help those student most in need? Or will it help a random minority of students at the expense of the rest? </div><div><br /></div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-76146780019954619052009-08-20T15:57:00.003-04:002009-08-20T16:52:23.595-04:00From Findings to Implications<div>One of the most significant reports to be published this year is from the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (<a href="http://credo.stanford.edu/home.html">CREDO</a>). Their <a href="http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf">National Charter School Study</a> carefully examined achievement gains by students in charter schools to those in traditional non-charter public schools.</div><div><br /></div><div>This report is so significant, in large part, because of the breadth of their sample. They included roughly 70% of charter schools students in their study, students spread across many states with different charter school laws. Furthermore, they look at data in the level of individual students, comparing each charter student to another student from their same feeder school -- one matched on grade level, gender, race/ethnicity, free or reduced price lunch status, English language learner status (ELL), special education status and prior test score on state achievement test (p. 16). </div><div><br /></div><div>This is good stuff. Yes, it is limited, but all researcher face practical limits. In this case, they could not address home or family factors (e.g. number of adults in the home, parents educational level, etc.), because legally they could only get access to certain data. From what I can tell, they did a great job. </div><div><br /></div><div>My concern stems from how people read their findings and extrapolate too far to implications, something that happens quite often.</div><div><br /></div><div>In this case, the reachers found that "Two subgroups fare better in charters than in the traditional system: students in poverty and ELL students." I do not question their methodology or their quantitive analysis. However, I think that they are thoughtfully presenting the limits of their sampling strategy -- limits imposed by the nature of the issue they are addressing.</div><div><br /></div><div>One critique of charter school studies is that they do not account for self-selection bias. The authors of this study acknowledge the issue, and directly address how they attempted to deal with it. But I think that the problem is a bit more nefarious than they let on. Self-selection is only a problem if the self-selectors might be different than the non-selectors in other relevant ways. When it comes to charter schools, this might well be the case. I believe that charter school self-selecting families have a greater commitment to education/schooling than the general population, and a greater sense of agency (i.e. "something that I can do can make a difference"). Transmitting these sorts of values to their children is one of the many ways that families help children to succeed in school. </div><div><br /></div><div>I think that this difference is especially pronounced among families in poverty and families of English language learner students. When these families step up and find what they believe is a better school for their children -- regardless of whether or not they are making a good decision -- they are modeling important behavior for their kids. This is not to say that demographically similar families who do not choose charter schools necessarily lack these traits. Not at all. Rather, I believe that they are significantly more common among those self-selectors.</div><div><br /></div><div>I truly believe this finding (i.e. that ELL students and students from poverty do better in charter schools) is merely the self-selection issue at work. Unfortunately, the report's authors fail to address the issue of self-selection in their own implications section (pp. 49-51). </div><div><br /></div><div>Before this report game out, I believed that charter schools would -- in the long run -- perform just about the same as traditional non-charter public schools. However, various findings in this report have convinced me otherwise. I do not know if leaving out the remaining effects of self-selection was merely an oversight on their part, or some kind of misguided attempt to boost their own credibility by providing supports for charter proponents' claims. But I am concerned that those proponents will latch on these particular findings without acknowledging the real dynamics at play. </div><div><br /></div><div>And so, I wish that CREDO had presented their implications a little more thoughtfully. </div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-27169311147094188382009-08-18T12:22:00.002-04:002009-08-18T12:33:15.470-04:00Recognizing a Difference in What Is Being Talked About<div>It is nice when the world or the Internet provides a perfect example.</div><div><br /></div><div>NPR has a <a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&partnerId=30&id=290783428">podcast</a> and a <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/">blog</a> on the economy called Planet Money. In <a href="http://public.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/pmoney/2009/08/podcast08.17.09.mp3">yesterday's</a> podcast, they had a little debate about whether financial innovation over the last twenty-give years has been, on balance, good or bad.</div><div><br /></div><div>Starting at about the 21:30 mark, the participants start to address the question of what they are talking about. At around 22:25, one of them goes so far as to say that by his opponent's definition he would have to agree. When they begin to address their different understandings of the question at hand, we start to see the real disagreements between them -- and the larger areas of real agreement. </div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, it's NPR, which has has made its reputation on being more thoughtful.</div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-87613952331487983362009-08-17T12:30:00.004-04:002009-08-18T12:34:03.423-04:00What Are You Talking About?Quite a few years ago, I got into a friendly argument with a friend's much older husband. Well, he and I had quite a few friendly arguments, but this one was fairly specific: who was the best running back in NFL history?<div><br /></div><div>I'm a Barry Sanders guy, though I respect the Jim Brown argument. I don't care for the Emmitt Smith argument at all, though I'm a bit more sympathetic to the Walter Peyton argument. My friend's husband did not advance any of these candidates. He argued for Gale Sayers.</div><div><br /></div><div>I was floored! How could he say that!? </div><div><br /></div><div>Well, there were two big reason that I did not think of. His first reason, the one he consciously espoused, was that Gale Sayers was the best return man in NFL history, and that meant that you got two great players in one package. This was a hard argument for me to make sense of at the time. I thought that this guy had gone senile or something. We were not talking about that, so why was he bringing it up? I found his point to interesting, but largely irrelevant. He truly believed his argument, and did not see any way that anyone could answer it. </div><div><br /></div><div>I think that this sort of situation if found throughout our education debates, both on the policy level and on the pedagogical or curricular level. We think we know what we are discussing, but it turns out that the participants in the discussion/debate/argument really are talking about different things. Neither side is convinced by the others' arguments because they are truly engaging on the same topic. </div><div><br /></div><div>In my example, I was arguing about who did the best job at running back, and he was arguing about which guy who played running back was the best player overall. I've got to say, each of those seems a valid interpretation of the original question ("Who is best running back in NFL history?"). </div><div><br /></div><div>In our educational debates, sometimes those differing interpretations of the questions at hand are both truly valid, and sometimes they are not. But how often do people stop arguing against their opponents to figure out what those opponents are arguing for? I believe that the best ways to counter someone's arguments always begin with understanding them, that requires understanding their goal -- in this sort of case, understanding their interpretation of the question. </div><div><br /></div><div>Obviously, there is lots of disagreement about the aims and goals of schooling. I think that people would generally agree, however, that preparing students for their lives as citizens and members of society are among them, and that that includes preparing them to understand and participate in public debates. I believe that that is not a controversial idea. Well, I wonder about how well we can do that if we are not so capable ourselves. Can we teach habits that we do have, or are not even inclined to use on a less-than-habitual basis?</div><div><br /></div><div>I am not sure about the answer to that last question. More thoughtful schools, however, would address that question for themselves.</div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-80274458413751391812009-08-14T17:03:00.003-04:002009-08-14T17:26:36.860-04:00Who can pass tests?<div><br /></div><div>There is a great great book call <i>Tinkering Towards Utopia,</i> in which the authors look at the history of school reform in the United States. One of the many interesting things they point is the the resiliency of the "grammar of schooling." That is, we all know what school is, what it looks like and what it feels like. Something like thirty students in desks, probably in row. One teacher, probably in the front of the room. A blackboard and chalk. Perhaps some sort of overhear projector. Chapters or units. Homework. Tests. Final exams. 95 is an A, and 55 is an F. Bells ringing to signal motion. </div><div><br /></div><div>This is an idea I go back to a lot. I wonder how much of this is truly worthy, and how much is merely deeply ingrained habit.</div><div><br /></div><div>For example, what about those tests? Be they unit or chapter tests, or final exams, what are they for? What do they mean? (To be honest, and I much more a high school educator than an elementary school educator, so the following should be taken in the context of high school life, high school students and high school tests.)</div><div><br /></div><div>Do you think that you could go back and pass all your old final exams? What about the unit tests? Probably not, right? So, if you could not pass them later in life, what was the significance of giving them those tests and grading them as they did? And as we still do! In the long run -- and I hope the we think about education in the context of the long, in addition to thinking about the short and medium run -- what was the purpose of those tests? What does it mean that we demand students perform at a level that their parents cannot? What does it mean that we know that these students will only have this kind of mastery or skill for a short while?</div><div><br /></div><div>It goes even further than that. Of course, the Algebra teacher can pass all of the algebra tests. But can s/he pass the Calculus test? Can the Calculus teacher pass the geometry test? Can s/he pass the French Revolution test? </div><div><br /></div><div>What does it mean that we demand that students do things that their teachers cannot? And what does it mean that the students know probably know this? (I mean, how many students ask their English teachers for help with the math homework, or their science teachers for help with their social studies homework?)</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't have answers to these questions, though I've been thinking about them for over twenty years. I remember when I first starting thinking about how I might be able to assess my students in a way that would better tap into their longer term retention, before I realized that such a thing would cause outrage from students, parents, colleagues and supervisors. This was, of course, decades before I reading <i>Tinkering Towards Utopia</i>.</div><div><br /></div><div>I wish there was a place in our debates about education policy to address these sorts of questions. I deeply wish that there was a place in our pedagogical debates, teacher pre-service training and/or professional development to discuss matter likes this, and this one in particular. It would indicate a more thoughtful approach to education, one capable of truly revolutionary improvement. </div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-82378741452486464402009-08-12T16:26:00.001-04:002009-08-12T17:54:04.671-04:00Because It's Hard<div>Did you see Ami Novoryta's <a href="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/08/12/37novoryta.h28.html">commentary</a> in Education Week? It is about selection of school district leadership, and it is <i>not</i> self-serving. </div><div><br /></div><div>It is far more thoughtful than most commentaries you read about what districts should do when selecting superintendents. </div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-83938263418862757332009-08-12T15:10:00.003-04:002009-08-12T15:31:52.120-04:00Wrong-Headed Comparisons to Other ProfessionsA favorite tactic in debates or discussions about teachers is to compare teaching to other professions. Wrong-headed, ill advised and perhaps even flat out dumb comparisons abound. Today, I got into an <a href="http://weblogg-ed.com/2009/raising-the-profession/#postcomment">argument</a> with Eric MacKnight on Will Richardson's <a href="http://weblogg-ed.com/">Weblogg-Ed</a> about a bad comparison, but it is hardly the first time I have seen this, or the even the <a href="http://www.neatorama.com/2009/08/12/math-mom-if-ive-told-you-n-times-ive-told-you-n1-times/">thousandth</a>. <div><br /></div><div>For example, some like to point out that that only teachers are unionized, among the professions. Alas, this is just wrong. Unionization depends far more on your industry and/or employer than whether you are a member of a profession. Many lawyers and doctors who work in the public sector are unionized, example. More importantly, one should acknowledge that nurses and airline pilots are generally members of unions. So, the next time you hear that unions are incompatible with high quality professionals, just respond "Airline Pilots."</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, it is not just teacher bashers who make poor comparison to other professions. Have you ever hear teachers complain that they are not being treated like professionals? For example, strictures on what or how they teach are not befitting their professional status. What they seem to miss is that they work for someone else. Young attorneys are closely supervised and their work is checked. Clients can dictate strategy and tactics, even overriding their attorney's professional judgement. Doctors have layer upon layer of oversight, both during their residency periods and later (e.g. insurance companies who second guess their treatment plans). </div><div><br /></div><div>I am all for comparisons to other professions. I think that we can learn a lot by looking at parallel situations, because it is often quite difficult to get a good perspective on our own. We can learn from the experiences of others, both stealing the good and trying to avoid the bad. </div><div><br /></div><div>The problem, however, is when these comparisons are based on fantasies. Some of them are literally based on fantasies, such as when people's knowledge of how law firms work are based upon what they've seen on television. Others are a bit more personal. But all of them could be addressed simply by talking to people to ask them about their work. All of them could be addressed by doing some research or some reading. </div><div><br /></div><div>Instead, however, too many people love the facile and uninformed comparison. </div><div><br /></div><div>Being more thoughtful means interrogating your own thinking and your own examples, comparisons and analogies. It means trying to verify your claims with people who are in a position to know, and looking to see if there already exists clear overwhelming counter-arguments. We want to encourage our students to do this, no? Whether it is a mathematical argument, a historical argument, a literary argument or a scientific argument, we want them to be more thoughtful than that. </div><div><br /></div><div>So, why can't the adults who argue about to improve education do the same? </div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6875848404510517685.post-84144896916013686692009-08-11T11:36:00.005-04:002009-08-11T13:09:40.161-04:00Social Promotion: Research vs. "Common Sense"<div><br /></div><div>Unfortunately, many of the most public policy debates in education come down to research verses common sense. But common sense is like <a href="http://wikiality.wikia.com/Truthiness">truthiness</a>, in that it does not have a lot of regard for what is <i>actually</i> true or require any sort of real basis for belief. Being more thoughtful, in this sort of case, means looking beyond "common sense" to figure out what we really need to do. The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/education/11promotion.html">issue of the day</a> in New York is social promotion.</div><div><br /></div><div>First, what is "social promotion"? Well, it is the practice of promoting students to the next grade, even though they have not "passed" the last grade. "Retention" is the policy of holding back kids who did not pass a grade to repeat the grade again. There's a lot of intuitive appeal to retention policies. A <a href="http://gothamschools.org/2009/08/10/bloomberg-announces-an-end-to-social-promotion-in-grades-4-6/comment-page-1/#comment-168908">commenter</a> going by the name insiderknowledge on <a href="http://gothamschools.org/">Gotham Schools</a> -- my favorite education blog -- addresses most of the common objections to social promotion.</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px; font-family:sans-serif, sans-serif;font-size:12px;"></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px; font-family:sans-serif, sans-serif;font-size:12px;">What message is being sent to failing students who are promoted to the next grade? That we care more about your self esteem then your education? Why even bother with the diploma at the end of 12th grade if one has to do almost nothing to earn it? Students earn grades and those that EARN passing grades should get promoted those that don’t shouldn’t plain and simple. This country started its decline in educational performance when it got into the self esteem management business. Failing is the natural way that we learn. When we fail we learn what not to do or what to do that will make us successful.. i say that those who eventually drop out as being kids with very low character. And that’s what this nation has become. A nation of low character quitters who toss in the towel when they are not instantly gratified whether they deserve it or not. If we recognize after a certain level that a student simply cannot meet the criteria academically to pass to the next level we should be steering them into vocational training so that they have a career to look forward to. That’s the real reason they drop out.. Not everyone is cut out for academia but we have this silly notion that everyone has to go to college to get a liberal arts degree.</span></div><div></div></blockquote><div>Not to pick on insiderknowledge, but this is a classic "common sense" kind of response. Social promotion is not a high school issue as much as it is elementary and junior high school issue. I have no reason to believe that insiderknowledge favors a vocational track for 4th gaders, but s/he has clearly conflated potentially wrong-headed expectations about universal college attendance with the issue of social promotion. On the substance of this issue, s/he worries about the "message being sent," rather than what actually happens to children. </div><div><br /></div><div>The other side of this debate take quite a different tone. I do not know of anyone who likes the idea of social promotion -- after all, it is rather counter intuitive. However, actual research has clearly shown that retention does not work. Kids who are held back drop out in much higher numbers than those who are not. Kids who are held back twice are overwhelmingly likely to drop out before graduation. The sense I have gotten from the research is that if they are not held back, they are less likely to drop out. (That is, this is not just a self-evident find of "kids who do poorly in school drop out more"), and holding them back actually increases their chances of dropping out above and beyond what doing poorly in school might predict. There is other research out there, too, about other negative impacts from being held back, thinks like violence, teen pregnancy, drug use, etc. -- though the causal link is less clear in those cases. In fact, it is virtually impossible to find anyone who has actually researched student outcomes and how this stuff actually works who is against social promotion policies. </div><div><br /></div><div>Pedagogically, I believe the only question should be "Does repeating grades help students more than the dangers caused by holding them back." If you believe that it does, then you have must believe that repetition of the same material, taught in the same way, at the same pace is going to make a difference. Richard Elmore calls this the "more, louder" approacher. When I teach and my student does not understand something, I try to find another way to explain it. I believe that if the long schooling endeavor is to worth anything to students, it is in part based upon repeating ideas in different ways, manners, contexts and usages. To put this more plainly, if it didn't work the first time, why do you think that it is going to work the second time? </div><div><br /></div><div>(Of course, insiderknowledge makes an important point: what is the value of a high school diploma if we do not know what kind of mastery it might indicate? This gets to a broader issue, I think. That is, what do our external signal of educational attainment (i.e. grades, transcripts, courses, diplomas) actually indicate? In the future I will address this a bit more, but for now suffice it it say that social promotion is the least of our problems in this area.)</div><div><br /></div><div>So, the research is clear. Retention does not work for students, even if it does "send a signal." Social promotion helps kids -- and not just their self-esteem. Social promotion contributes to kids staying in school longer. It might means that some kids graduate with less mastery that the rest, but it seems that they graduate with more mastery than they would have had had they they dropped out years earlier. </div><div><br /></div><div>You see, the false debate is one that assumes that the alternative to social promotion is a retention policy that assures the repetition of a grade leads to mastery of the material that enables students to complete the rest of their education just like the other kids. That is simply not the case. Those against social promotion are in favor of fantasy, and do not pay enough attention to reality to even be aware of it. The reality is that we do not have sufficient special programs to grade repeaters to help them differently the second time. </div><div><br /></div><div>So, which approach to such issues should we take? Should we go with our gut? Or should be look at the research and realities of the programs on the ground? Surely it is easier to go with our guts, but don't our children deserve a more thoughtful approach? </div><div><br /></div>Ceolafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15038872543333554227noreply@blogger.com0