Teacher Appreciation

In honor of Teacher Appreciation week beginning May 6, I am reposting an article about good teachers and bad teachers by David Berliner. Berliner is a Regents Professor Emeritus in the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College in the division of educational leadership and policy studies at Arizona State University. He is a member of the National Academy of Education, a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study, a past president of both the American Educational Research Association (AERA) and the Division of Educational Psychology of the American Psychological Association (APA).

Good and Bad Teachers: So Many More of the Former, So Many Fewer of the Latter

David C. Berliner, Arizona State University

A refereed journal article by colleagues reported on a survey of adults, asking for their beliefs about “good teachers.” The respondents defined good teachers as those who “knew me, cared about me, and wanted me to do well; created interesting activities for us to do; praised me and other students for good grades and improvements; gave extra help or a challenge to students who needed or wanted it; covered a lot of material that was useful; and made learning relevant to me and my life.”

These respondents had little trouble recalling such teachers. Good teachers demonstrated caring and support, along with strong subject matter knowledge. They also estimated that more than two-thirds of their teachers were good or very good teachers, and they believed that only 12% of their teachers were bad or very bad.

​With a different set of colleagues, I studied what students said about their “bad teachers”. In that study we had access to 4.8 million ratings of teachers! Using a 100-point scale, 55% of our respondents gave a maximum rating of 100 (the best score), 75% gave a rating of 80 or more, and 89% gave a rating greater than 50 points. These data are compatible with other studies suggesting that America’s students are exposed to high percentages of “good” teachers, and a low percentage of “bad” teachers. 

From other research, Berliner estimated the number of “bad” teachers in the USA to be about 3%, with “bad” being generally and poorly defined. The well-respected Hechinger report, in 2014,reported that states such as Tennessee, Michigan, Georgia, Florida, and Pennsylvania, particularly in Pittsburgh, all provided estimates of “bad” teachers that were in this same low range. Danielson, who visited and coded hundreds of classrooms, estimated the “bad teacher” percentage to be around 6%. From those who are experienced classroom analysts, that seems to be on the high end of the estimates in the literature—though it is still a relatively low percentage. 

Furthermore, in our study, when we analyzed the comments associated with teachers judged to be “bad,” we found that unanimity among the classmates of those who rated their teachers poorly was quite rare. Nevertheless, we did find a few classrooms where the unanimity and diversity of the charges leveled by students against their teachers made us think that a particular teacher should be dismissed immediately! However, for large numbers of teachers who were rated “incompetent” or “bad” by many of their students, we found other reviews (and sometimes many such reviews) of the same teacher that were positive. Further analysis showed why such disparate judgements made sense. For example, a teacher may be rated poorly because they have strict rules about how essays should be done andgrade them accordingly. And teachers’ who were quite strict about classroom behavior, or who gave out lots of homework, might also be rated low by some of their students. But for other students–say those who make few grammatical mistakes, those who don’t act out in classes, and those who do not find their homework burdensome, ratings of their teachers might be considerably higher. In our study, this seemed to explain why so many reviews of teachers by students were not uniformly either positive or negative. 

​So, what do we know through research–not from publicity-seeking partisan news columnists, irate parents, or the public-school critics among the “Moms for Liberty? Research suggests we can defend a general statement such as this:“Among America’s 3+ million public-schoolteachers, the numbers of genuinely “bad” public school teachers are quite small, while the numbers of “acceptable” and “good” public school teachers is quite large.” Furthermore, both the positive and negative characteristics of these teachers are recognized by adults long after they have experienced them. Given the relatively low pay, low prestige, difficulty of the work, and fairly regular abuse of teachers by some parents and newspapers, how lucky we are to have staff for the public-schools that are generally so well regarded.

1. Haas, E., Fischman, G., & Pivovarova, M. (2023). Public beliefs about good teaching. Research in Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/00345237231207717

2. Valcarcel, C., Holmes, J., Berliner, D. C., & Koerner, M. (2021). The value of student feedback in open forums: A natural analysis of descriptions of poorly rated teachers.  Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29 (January – July), 79. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.6289

One way to show your appreciation for teachers is to support them in the polls. Advocate for elected officials who will support public schools, teachers, and students. Teachers don’t need another mug, or gift card, they need us to stand up for them, and elect people who believe in them. This is done locally in your school board elections, in your state – electing officials who support public education, and at the national level, supporting administrations that will work hard for our teachers. Vote. Vote. Vote.

Would you mind answering a few quick questions about this blog? Your responses are anonymous. https://forms.gle/jxXh7sHMzRzQcpkeA

***This is my last blog for a while. Many great things going on this summer including my son graduating from medical school, and a ten day trip to Italy. Thank you for your continued readership.

These are my reflections for today.

May 3, 2024

If you like what you’re reading, consider sharing and following my blog via email.

@reflectionsined

A MUST read

I don’t often write book reviews but I’ve read a book that might be the most important book for so man of us to read. The book is The Anxious Generation; : How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness (Penguin Press, 2024) written by NY Times bestselling author Jonathan Haidt. He is also the coauthor of The Coddling of the American Mind, an essential investigation into the collapse of youth mental health—and a plan for a healthier, freer childhood.

Dr. Haidt is a social psychologist who is currently the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership at NYU. He holds a Ph.D. in Psychology from UPENN and a BA in Philosophy from Yale. In this book, Haidt explains why smart phones and social media lead to depression and anxiety among children and teens. He eloquently compares his analysis of social media with the decline of free play for children. He defines free play as a time when children are on their own to play with their peers and without adult supervision. Free play is essential to development as it is a time when children learn how to invent fun, set rules, settle disputes and improve their social skills. In the book, Haidt has data supporting that smartphones are the overwhelming cause of the youth mental health crisis. I see it on a daily basis with the college students I work with who are part of the “COVID generation”. In that regard, this book has been eye-opening for me to better understand my students and how to help them.

This is the book review from amazon:

After more than a decade of stability or improvement, the mental health of adolescents plunged in the early 2010s. Rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicide rose sharply, more than doubling on most measures. Why?

In The Anxious Generation, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt lays out the facts about the epidemic of teen mental illness that hit many countries at the same time. He then investigates the nature of childhood, including why children need play and independent exploration to mature into competent, thriving adults. Haidt shows how the “play-based childhood” began to decline in the 1980s, and how it was finally wiped out by the arrival of the “phone-based childhood” in the early 2010s. He presents more than a dozen mechanisms by which this “great rewiring of childhood” has interfered with children’s social and neurological development, covering everything from sleep deprivation to attention fragmentation, addiction, loneliness, social contagion, social comparison, and perfectionism. He explains why social media damages girls more than boys and why boys have been withdrawing from the real world into the virtual world, with disastrous consequences for themselves, their families, and their societies.

Most important, Haidt issues a clear call to action. He diagnoses the “collective action problems” that trap us, and then proposes four simple rules that might set us free. He describes steps that parents, teachers, schools, tech companies, and governments can take to end the epidemic of mental illness and restore a more humane childhood.

An equally powerful review from goodreads:

Haidt investigates the nature of childhood, including why children need play and independent exploration to mature into competent, thriving adults. Haidt shows how the “play-based childhood” began to decline in the 1980s, and how it was finally wiped out by the arrival of the “phone-based childhood” in the early 2010s. He presents more than a dozen mechanisms by which this “great rewiring of childhood” has interfered with children’s social and neurological development, covering everything from sleep deprivation to attention fragmentation, addiction, loneliness, social contagion, social comparison, and perfectionism. He explains why social media damages girls more than boys and why boys have been withdrawing from the real world into the virtual world, with disastrous consequences for themselves, their families, and their societies.

This book may be the most important read for our generation. Parents, young adults, college students, teachers, counselors, coaches, anyone who works with or has a genuine interest in the healthy development of children – this is a MUST read.

These are my reflections for today.

April 19, 2024

If you like what you’re reading, consider sharing and following my blog via email.

@reflectionsined

Paying for test scores

Teachers are leaving the profession at a faster rate than they enter. As many schools look for ways to retain good teachers, signing bonuses have become popular. Some districts in New Jersey are offering $10,000-$15,000 signing bonuses. Another idea that is rearing its ugly head again is merit pay.

Merit pay for teachers, which has its roots in the early 20th century, aims to reward teachers based on factors like student performance, classroom observations, or professional development. Merit pay is based on the belief teachers would work harder to improve student performance if they were paid extra for their efforts. Many early attempts at implementing merit pay faced challenges due to concerns about fairness, subjectivity in evaluation, and lack of consensus on appropriate metrics.

Teachers’ unions resisted merit pay proposals, citing concerns about fairness, potential for favoritism, and emphasis on standardized testing. Union opposition posed a significant barrier to widespread adoption of merit pay systems.

School districts would tie standardized test scores or student achievement measures, however research showed mixed results. While some studies suggested modest improvements in student outcomes or teacher performance, others found little to no impact or unintended consequences, such as narrowing the curriculum or discouraging collaboration among teachers.

One unintended consequence of merit pay systems was cheating. Districts across the country were cited for unusually, and statistically unexplainable gains in test scores, and an inordinate amount of erasures on students score sheets.

In what was perhaps the most egregious violation of cheating on state testing, Beverly Hall, former superintendent of Atlanta Public Schools was among 35 educators who were indicted by a grand jury in a cheating scandal that drew national attention. Hall resigned from her position in 2011 after a state investigation into large, unexplained test score gains in some Atlanta schools. For at least four years, between 2005 and 2009, test answers were altered, fabricated and falsely certified (cnn.com). She denied any role in the cheating scandal.

According to the indictment, Hall placed unreasonable goals on educators and “protected and rewarded those who achieved targets by cheating.” It also alleges she fired principals who failed to achieve goals and “ignored suspicious” test score gains throughout the school system (cnn.com). With her criminal case unresolved, Hall faced up to 45 years in prison, but she died in 2015 of breast cancer.

Most recently, merit pay discussions have continued, as some states and districts are implementing performance-based compensation systems. Advocates argue for greater accountability and incentives for effective teaching, while critics raise concerns about equity, validity of assessment measures, and potential negative consequences.

As John Thompson wrote last week, “…starting with No Child Left Behind and taking off with Race to the Top, test scores were weaponized, and the dangers of performance pay grew dramatically. Output-driven teachers’ salaries, joined at the hip with unreliable and invalid accountability metrics, promoted educational malpractice that undermined meaningful teaching and learning, increasing in-one-ear-out-the-other, worksheet-driven instruction. Teamwork was damaged, trust was compromised, the flight of educators from classroom increased, and the joy of student learning declined significantly” (dianeravitch.net).

Last year, Houston Superintendent Mike Miles said the district would implement performance-based pay for all teachers and an “earned autonomy” model for campuses across the district (houstonpublicmedia.com). The current compensation model for teachers is salaries rise over time as educators gain experience. This will be replaced with a “pay-for-performance” system based largely on standardized test scores (houstonpublicmedia.com).

Oklahoma, after rejecting a proposal to increase teacher salaries, is now proposing a new merit-based teacher stipend plan (tulsaworld.com). According to the plan, “about 100 teachers across the district would be eligible to apply for advanced status under the program, which carries a $6,000 one-time raise, a $3,000 stipend and five extra contract days. Under the terms of the program guidelines, the district has to use student performance, teacher observations and out-of-classroom time as criteria to narrow down which teachers would be eligible” (tulsaworld.com).

While some research supports the effectiveness of merit pay, the success may be linked to teachers teaching only test-taking skills, focusing solely on the incentivized test which results in narrowing of the curriculum, or in the case of Atlanta, cheating. In one study, researchers concluded,  the success “varies by program design and study context, suggesting that teacher merit pay has the potential to improve student test scores in some contexts but researchers and policymakers should pay close attention to program design and implementation Pham, L. D., Nguyen, T. D., & Springer, M. G. (2021)

The biggest problem with public education is not teachers, budgets, school boards, it’s poverty. Does anyone holding public office want to talk about that?

…crickets

These are my reflections for today.

April 5, 2024

If you like what you’re reading, consider sharing and following my blog via email.

@reflectionsined

Celebs and their charter hubris

The ________________ (name of charter school) located in ________________(city) is riddled with controversy over _________ (add list of offenses, complaints, broken laws).

A few weeks ago, I wrote about Russell Wilson and his wife. This week there’s another story of the charter school chain dysfunction.

The Capital Prep Charter chain in New York, created by Dr. Steve Perry, an educational reformer who is a proponent of school choice and an opponent of teachers unions. The teachers unions, he says, are extremely powerful and not empowering to the students who most need them (nypost.com). Perry is known by some as “America’s most trusted educator” (theroot.com).

Back in 2016, Perry and Sean “Ditty” Combs launched Capital Prep Charter in East Harlem.Ditty, according to Forbes magazine was the richest man in hip hop In 2018, Ditty promised $1 million to expand Charter Prep into the Bronx. Also in 2018, Combs was recognized at the Apollo Theater for his work in education. The award was to be given by three graduates. Combs didn’t show up, citing “airplane troubles”, though he accepted his award in a video which was taken from inside his private jet (thecut.com). Aside from the occasional photo op and guest appearance, Combs had very little to do with the day-to-day functioning of the school.

In an interview in 2022, Combs said of his involvement in Charter Prep, “It was something that was always a dream for me and a passion, and I’m just blessed that it was able to happen. I think it’s having an impact. I mean, not I think, I know it’s definitely having an impact on the community, so it’s a dream come true” (theroot.com).

Combs has been accused of abuse, rape, and sex trafficking – charges brought against him by a former girlfriend. Though Combs settled with the woman, there are four subsequent allegations of similar claims (thecut.com). This is what led Perry to sever his ties with Combs and Capital Prep last November.

One parent said, “He [Diddy] was supposed to be an inspiration to those children, coming from what you might consider the hood — and he was not” (theroot.com).

So much for that.

Now it seems the issues with Capital Prep go far beyond bad press with their celebrity investor. Parents, students and former employees describe the school as dysfunctional with a high teacher turnover rate, and incidences of violence (thecut.com). The school, like so many other charter schools, has had seven principals or interim principals in seven years. Teachers complained they were short on chairs and desks. The grading system used resulted in inaccurate grades, transcripts, schedules, and testing data (thecut.com).

Some students were enrolled in courses they had passed years before, while teachers saw class sizes double or triple with children who weren’t supposed to be there. People were in the building, says a teacher, but often they weren’t in a classroom learning: “There were kids who were sitting in the cafeteria receiving no instruction for hours.” Trustees would brag about donors in board meetings, but on the ground, teachers say they were strapped for materials — “None of that money ever translated to any more resources; it didn’t translate to more laptops, to more boards, or chart paper,” says one. The dysfunction only compounded the school’s attrition problem. “People were quitting left and right because there was just no point,” one teacher says. Another says she was working up to 16 hours a day; management told her and other faculty to cover subjects they weren’t hired for as well as after-school activities. Students were taught by a revolving door of substitutes; at one point, a principal was covering class, according to a parent (thecut.com).

While the school boasted that 100% of graduates were accepted into college, the graduation rate is only 70%. Parents compalined that students were barely passing and not prepared for college (thecut.com).

Shenique Coston, director of communications and development for the school’s network, denies the claims against Charter Prep. “We accept and are saddened that some scholars and colleagues were not pleased with their experience, however, we affirmatively state that many of the allegations included in your fact-checking list are fabrications”  (thecut.com).

While it seems the outrage should be on Ditty and his celebrity involvement in a charter school in Harlem, like Russell Wilson and others who have pledged millions in support of charter schools, the greater issue is the idea these celebrities have that throwing money at charter schools will fix education for black and brown children. This is a problem, but throwing money at charter schools, getting a few pictures taken for the press, claiming “We’re all in on this” and I’m just blessed that it was able to happen (theroot.com) is nothing more than hubris, and rarely works.

Someone should keep a tally of how much celebrities spend on charter schools, and what that would offer underfunded public schools.

Support public education.

These are my reflections for today.

March 29, 2024

If you like what you’re reading, consider sharing and following my blog via email.

@reflectionsined

*Much of the information for this blog came from an outstanding article in The Cut, titled, The Chaos Inside Diddy’s Charter School, by Sangeeta Singh-Kurtz.

The greater good

There is a popular meme out there that goes like this:

Say you’re in a room with 400 people. Thirty-six of them don’t have health insurance. Forty-eight of them live in poverty. Eighty-five are illiterate. Ninety have untreated mental illnesses. And every day, at least one person is shot. But two of them are trans, so you decide ruining their lives is your top priority (DailyKos.com).

So why is it politicians think our biggest problems in education are teaching Black history and trans kids?

A Washington Post-KFF poll conducted in late 2022 found that about 1 in 3 transgender adults was 10 years old or younger when they began to understand that their gender was different from their sex assigned at birth. Almost half of these adults said they felt unsafe at school. The isolation and discrimination that many trans people experience can lead to depression, substance abuse, self harm and suicide (WashingtonPost.com).

The Washington Post poll also found a majority of Americans say it’s inappropriate for teachers to discuss trans issues with students in younger grades. In fact, 77 percent of Americans said it was inappropriate to talk about trans identity with children in kindergarten through third grade (including 57 percent of Democrats) — and 70 percent were against it for grades four and five (including 46 percent of Democrats) (WashingtonPost.com).

Across the country, lawmakers have introduced more than 400 anti-trans bills this year, up from about 150 in 2022 (WashingtonPost.com). Max Eden of the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank in Washington DC, argues that it’s not possible to have a gender that differs from sex. Teaching children about gender identity “will invite confusion,”

Parents believe teaching about trans kids is indoctrinating or grooming children, but not teaching about trans kids can cause unnecessary harm. The poll found support for discussing gender identity in high school, but Americans were divided about middle school, and at the same time nearly 7 in 10 Americans supported laws that would ban discrimination against trans people in K-12 schools. In other words, what trans Americans say is needed appears at odds with what many Americans appear comfortable providing (WashingtonPost.com).

Listening and offering advice to students who question their gender identity — and excusing absences for therapy and treatments that students seek on their own — are entirely appropriate. They do not constitute “grooming,” in the current, ugly anti-LGBTQ parlance (edsource.org).

Studies repeatedly show that even one adult providing support to a trans or non-binary student can make a lifesaving difference. This is especially true when such students don’t believe they can find affirmation at home, teachers, counselors and administrators must help them feel supported and safe at school (TheTrevorProject). What’s more, LGBTQ youth who report having at least one accepting adult were 40% less likely to report a suicide attempt in the past year (TheTrevorProject).

Many states are passing laws requiring teachers to report students who confide in them regarding their sexual identity. While in other states, the conversation with students continues, and takes various shapes. Some lessons are direct: “Who can describe what transgender means?” In other classes, the discussion is more subtle: “Remember, families can come in all shapes and sizes!” (WashingtonPost.com). While many districts have resisted efforts to allow transgender students an all-gender bathroom, California becomes the first state to allow for all gender bathrooms in schools by 2026 (mercurynews.com).

In September, Gavin Newsom, Governor of California said, “California is proud to have some of the most robust laws in the nation when it comes to protecting and supporting our LGBTQ+ community, and we’re committed to the ongoing work to create safer, more inclusive spaces for all Californians. These measures will help protect vulnerable youth, promote acceptance, and create more supportive environments in our schools and communities” (mercurynews.com).

As a general rule, any decisions made between a questioning person and his/her/their family is none of our business. Teaching ALL children about diversity, equity and inclusion doesn’t “groom” or harm anyone. If there is research showing otherwise, let’s see it. Otherwise, stay in your lane.

There are more pressing issues to consider; health insurance, poverty, illiteracy, mental illness and gun violence. There are many more students being impacted by one or more of these issues.

The doctrine of utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest number. Just sayin’…

These are my reflections for today.

September 29, 2023

If you like what you’re reading, consider sharing and following my blog via email.

@reflectionsined

Florida – sunny with a chance of ignorance

This week in Florida, while many are enjoying the beaches of the sunshine state for spring break, dark shadows once again lurk over the Department of Education. Of the 132 math textbooks under consideration for state adoption, 54 were rejected (41%). Reasons cited run anywhere from the inclusion of Critical Race Theory to Common Core learning concepts. Of those banned, “28 were rejected because they incorporate prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies, including [critical race theory]” (NPR). The public was not allowed to see the list, the textbooks, or any specific instances in the books under consideration. More than half the disallowed textbooks allegedly incorporate “prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies” (Yahoo News). 

In a math book?

State Democrats condemned the move and demanded the state release the list of banned textbooks.

State House Representative Carlos Smith said “They’re banning dozens of math textbooks they claim ‘indoctrinate’ students with CRT”. They won’t tell us what they are or what they say b/c it’s a lie. #DeSantis has turned our classrooms into political battlefields and this is just the beginning” (NPR). Most of the textbooks not allowed for use by Florida public schools were for students in elementary grades, kindergarten through fifth grade.

Smith also said, “They haven’t shown us what’s inside the books that they claim is critical race theory indoctrination, and there’s a reason they won’t show us, because it’s not there” (NPR).

State Rep. Anna Eskamani called it part of the Republican Party’s agenda to eliminate critical thinking in schools. “They’re accusing some invisible enemy of indoctrination. Meanwhile, they’re the ones indoctrinating students by attempting to censor mathematic textbooks” (Yahoo News). Eskamani, who said she requested the list of banned textbooks, tweeted: “I wonder if these math books highlighted statistics of racial disparities & that’s what they don’t like?” (Yahoo News).

The headline in the press release over the banned textbooks emphasized DeSantis’ stance: “Florida Rejects Publishers’ Attempts to Indoctrinate Students”(USA Today).

In a math book…

In a statement, Governor DeSantis said, “It seems that some publishers attempted to slap a coat of paint on an old house built on the foundation of Common Core, and indoctrinating concepts like race essentialism, especially, bizarrely, for elementary school students” (USA Today).

In 2021, the Florida Department of Education told publishers to align textbook content with state laws by not including culturally responsive teaching. In case you don’t know, Culturally responsive teaching is a student-centered approach to teaching, based on the idea that every student brings unique cultural strengths to the classroom. Recognizing and nurturing those strengths not only encourages success but also promotes an open-minded, supportive environment that celebrates cultural differences.

This is a whitewashing of American history. What’s happening in Florida is riddled with hatred, homophobia, racism, and harmful to all of us. This is pushing an agenda perhaps not seen since Nazi Germany with Hitler’s banned book list.

If we don’t teach history it still happened. If we don’t say gay, there will still be gay. If we ban books from libraries, schools, we will still read them. This is a ridiculous attempt to politicize education, create isolationism, and give parents power that should be shared with trained educators and curriculum specialists.

If Floridians and others are only hearing this story from one news source, then they are equally as ignorant as the people who are trying to sell us this bullshit. Kool-aid for everyone. Who wants some?

These are my reflections for today.

April 22, 2022

Recent publication: William Frantz Public School:  A Story of Race, Resistance, Resiliency, and Recovery in New Orleans Connie Schaffer, Meg White, and Martha Graham Viator. Peter Lang Publishing. Available on amazon.com

Follow me on Facebook

@reflectionsined

Biden to consider charter regulations

A repost of an article from Jeff Bryant at The Progressive. This is a step in the right direction after many years of unaccountability in charter schools.

---

Biden Takes Aim at Wasteful Spending on Charter Schools

For years, charter schools have gotten away with wasting billions in federal funding, but a wave of new proposals would end the grift.

BY JEFF BRYANT 

President Joe Biden is taking steps to ensure that federal education funding will not be squandered on unneeded, mismanaged schools and the operators wanting to profit off of taxpayers.

But these efforts are being opposed by the powerful charter school lobby, which has enjoyed a privileged status in the U.S. Department of Education, granting charter operators exclusive access to an annually renewable grant program established under the government’s Charter School Program, or CSP.

Since its inception in 1994, CSP has awarded an estimated $4 billion to charter schools, charter industry-related advocacy and support groups, and state grant programs that fund charters. This year, CSP’s budget was $440 million. So where has all that money gone? 

As a 2019 analysis of CSP conducted by the Network for Public Education revealed, 37 percent of the program’s grantees—1,779 charter schools—had either never opened or had quickly shut down after getting the federal funds. According to a separate report published in 2021, more than $158 million in grant money from CSP went to charter schools owned by for-profit operators between 2006 and 2017, despite a 2006 court ruling that upheld the decision to ban the program from supporting for-profit companies.  

The Biden Administration’s proposals would address this wasted and misguided spending. (Public comments on these proposals will be accepted through April 13, 2022). To ensure federal funds don’t go to charter schools that never open or quickly close, the education department proposes that a grant applicant proposing to open a new charter school, or replicate or expand an existing one, should conduct an assessment of community needs and submit a community impact analysis demonstrating there is “sufficient demand” for the school. 

Given that the number-one reason charters close is due to financial problems—typically caused by a school’s inability to enroll enough students—it makes sense that any effort to grow charters should be based on some analysis that shows the school will be viable.

---

The Biden Administration is also proposing that any recipient of charter grants should “collaborate” with a public school or school district on critical activities such as transportation or teacher professional development.

Because poor management is the second-most frequent cause of charter school closures, partnering charters with the expertise of local educators can provide helpful oversight. Also, having a district directly engaged with the charter school ensures the local community has sufficient skin in the game to make the effort to help a struggling charter succeed.

Charter school industry lobbyists have responded to these proposals with a campaign of hyperbolic misinformation.

To bring the CSP in line with the department’s requirements, the Biden Administration is strengthening the regulatory language to bar grant money from going to charters in which a for-profit management company “exercises full or substantial administrative control over the charter school.”

Applicants to the federal grant program could still contract with for-profit companies for the wide range of services schools have customarily outsourced, but funds would be prohibited from going to charters that simply hand over the bulk of their  finances, including federal grant money, to for-profit operators who can spend it on whatever they want.

Charter school industry lobbyists have responded to these proposals with a campaign of hyperbolic misinformation.

In an email to constituents, Nina Rees, the president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, calls the proposed regulations “a backdoor attempt to prevent new charter schools from opening.” In an op-ed for The Hill, Will Marshall, the president and founder of the Public Policy Institute, a beltway think tank that advocates for charter schools, called the Biden Administration’s proposals an “attack” on charter schools by “bureaucratic gremlins.”

Rightwing media outlets have taken up the charter lobby’s campaign. The National Review, for example, equated the Biden Administration’s proposals to a “war on charter schools,” while the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal labeled the proposals “charter school sabotage.”

But very few of the roughly 7,700 charter schools or the 3.4 million students enrolled in them will be affected by these regulatory changes. And charter lobbyists have provided no data showing how the changes will slow new charter growth, which jumped by a robust 7 percent in 2020-2021.

Also, it seems odd to see prominent conservative voices who have questioned federal spending on education—and even advocated for the federal government to have no role in education funding at all—to oppose a crackdown on questionable spending by the Department of Education. But that is indicative of the carte blanche status the charter school industry has enjoyed in Washington, D.C., for years now. 

The reason for conservatives’ ire has everything to do with the fact that Biden’s new guidelines are poised to bring that freewheeling era to an end. 

---

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

These are my reflections for today.

April 15, 2022

Recent publication: William Frantz Public School:  A Story of Race, Resistance, Resiliency, and Recovery in New Orleans Connie Schaffer, Meg White, and Martha Graham Viator. Peter Lang Publishing. Available on amazon.com

Follow me on Facebook

@reflectionsined

Still a noble profession

This article is spot on when it comes to the prevailing feeling of teachers and teaching.

---

Teachers Are Done. No, Really

Dina Ley

I’ve been asked often why teachers are fleeing the classroom and while I can’t speak for all teachers, many of our reasons appear to be universal.

Teachers are leaving the classroom for a multitude of reasons. Prior to the pandemic, the system was already very much broken, but teachers were able to hold all the pieces together, often at the expense of their own families, their own mental health, and their own personal lives. Teaching was martyrdom for the greater societal good. In some ways, teachers understood this.

Teaching was martyrdom for the greater societal good. In some ways, teachers understood this.

The pandemic forced teachers to continuously pivot. Teachers were asked to be super flexible but also rigorous (as expected by the districts, parents, administrators, and the fed/state government because: standardized testing). They were supposed to be restorative but also hold kids accountable. They were supposed to accommodate all situations but also set strict boundaries and consequences. They were supposed to be understanding but not “too” understanding.

And, as they accommodated and as they pivoted and as they bent over backwards to be great virtual, hybrid, and in-person teachers amid the pandemic, they received virtually no accommodations or empathy or support. They were held to even higher standards. They were supposed to fix everything, while they themselves were struggling with their own kids and with their own mental health.

Then, on top of it all, parents and politicians began a crusade against public schools and teachers. Teachers were called lazy. “If they are scared to die, they should step out of the way and let others teach,” said many parents.

So, the system broke further. Piece by piece. With every abusive word. With every extra meeting. With every new expectation. The trust between teachers and administrators, teachers and parents, and teachers and the system fractured. Instead of receiving support, teachers received abuse. The martyrdom was finally no longer worth it.

Finally, teachers witnessed a cultural shift in the workplace. The availability of remote, accessible, and flexible work and higher salaries in corporate America became more attractive. Flexible schedules + higher salaries — the stress of teaching (e.g., unrealistic expectations, toxic work environments, verbally abusive parents, and administrators who believe every teacher is replaceable) = why would teachers stay?

Teachers are either burned out, have lost faith in the system, are disillusioned with their leadership, are sick of the constant pandering to parents and politicians, or all of it combined. Teachers are no longer willing to heal a system beyond repair at their own expense. They are done, and it’s universal. They are expected to fix the ills of society, but when they aren’t treated like the experts and professionals they are and when they aren’t paid as much as others with the same education (if not less), they no longer see any reason to stay. The highs of teaching are no longer worth the many lows.

What is the solution? I don’t know. A cultural and societal shift. Admin needs to respect their teachers. Parents need to stop abusing the people who take literal bullets for their children (oh yeah, forgot to mention school shootings, yet another reason teachers are leaving). This country needs to treat teachers like the educated professionals they are. And pay them. Pay them what financial advisors make. Pay them what nurses make. Pay them what they would make in corporate. Support them, and treat them with kindness. Or else schools will close due to lack of teachers and staff, and many will never reopen.

---

These are my reflections for today.

April 8, 2020

Recent publication: William Frantz Public School:  A Story of Race, Resistance, Resiliency, and Recovery in New Orleans Connie Schaffer, Meg White, and Martha Graham Viator. Peter Lang Publishing. Available on amazon.com

Follow me on Facebook

@reflectionsined

This is not transparency

AAron Ontiveroz / The Denver Post

Lawmakers in at least 17 states are promoting legislation that would require public schools to post all instructional materials online for parents to examine. Schools would not only have to disclose what is being taught (which they already do), but also include every book, article, handout, and video that is used in a classroom (Washington Post).

Proponents of the legislation say this would help parents to better support their children’s learning because they would be more informed of what is being taught in school.

Matt Beienburg, director of education policy at the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank is promoting these bills. “The problem is the lack of transparency in schools, increasing infusion of politics into the classroom and the mentality of trying to shut parents out” (Washington Post). As a former public school teacher, I would have loved to shut parents out, but I could not. This is NOT what this bill is about. It’s about rogue parents trying to control what is taught in schools.

Opponents of this legislation say it puts burdensome new requirements on already overworked teachers and administrators, inhibits teachers’ ability to adapt lesson plans to changing circumstances, and may allow conflict rather than conversation about what is taught in classrooms (co.chalkbeat.org).

Jeremy Young, senior manager of a free speech advocacy group said, “You have these groups of activist parents who are going to comb through this and find things to be mad about. It is just breeding conflict between parents and teachers” (Washington Post).

John Rogers, a professor of education at UCLA said, “I believe deeply in the importance of parental engagement and parental involvement in public education. “What we’re seeing now is invoking that, but not for the purposes of creating a shared dialogue between parents and educators but to heighten conflict” (co.chalkbeat.org). Rogers said,

“If you unleash political strife on public schools, it undermines support for public education. It makes teachers feel less confident in leaning into difficult issues. They’ll back away from having important conversations that young people need to engage in if we’re going to build a multiracial democracy” (co.chalkbeat.org).

Parents have access to school curricula, can attend back-to-school night to learn about the curricula, visit school classrooms, meet with teachers, see what their children are bringing home, discuss school with their students. If they don’t, they should. So why, all of a sudden, has school curricula become nefarious? The best kept secret? Like teachers are trying to get away with teaching controversial topics. Who decides what’s controversial? It’s not controversy, it’s history and we don’t get to rewrite it or be selective in what we teach.

Let’s be very clear. This is not about transparency. It’s about politics. It’s about vilifying teachers – again.

The potential outcome of this legislation in 17 states, book banning, academic issues resulting from the pandemic, “don’t say gay” legislation passing in the House in Florida, it’s no surprise fewer people are choosing education as a career. In fact, a survey by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education found that 19 percent of undergraduate-level and 11 percent of graduate-level teaching programs saw a significant drop in enrollment last year (NY Times).

In my state, New Jersey, the number of candidates completing teacher preparation programs has dropped 49 percent between 2009 and 2018. “These declines, which are part of national and regional trends, cut across both gender and race. The dwindling number of teacher candidates creates instability in the teaching profession and jeopardizes the ability of students to learn” (NJPP.org).

In a well-written essay, Tinisha Shaw said, “The tension in the debate on public education is between those who would like to transform it to be more inclusive and those who seek to retain the traditional model that upholds a myopic, hierarchical vision of society. This is political” (EdSurge.com). Shaw said,

The majority of public school students, who are students of color, are impacted every day by political messages that leave them unseen, unheard and unaccepted.

“An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people” (Thomas Jefferson). As a nation, we must consider the repercussions of this legislation.

These are my reflections for today.

March 4, 2022

Recent publication: William Frantz Public School:  A Story of Race, Resistance, Resiliency, and Recovery in New Orleans Connie Schaffer, Meg White, and Martha Graham Viator. Peter Lang Publishing. Available on amazon.com

Follow me on Facebook

@reflectionsined

Let’s start here

Dane Ravitch wrote this week about teachers and what they’re up against. As I have said before, I don’t always like to repost, but this is so powerful.

---

“Last week, I posted my thoughts on “Who Demoralized the Nation’s Teachers?” I sought to identify the people and organizations that spread the lie that America’s public schools were “broken” and that public school teachers were the cause. The critics slandered teachers repeatedly, claiming that teachers were dragging down student test scores. They said that today’s teachers were not bright enough; they said teachers had low SAT scores; and they were no longer “the best and the brightest.” 

The “corporate reform” movement (the disruption movement) was driven in large part by the “reformers'” belief that public schools were obsolete and their teachers were the bottom of the barrel. So the “reformers” promoted school choice, especially charter schools, and Teach for America, to provide the labor supply for charter schools. TFA promised to bring smart college graduates for at least two years to staff public schools and charter schools, replacing the public school teachers whom TFA believed had low expectations. TFA would have high expectations, and these newcomers with their high SAT scores would turn around the nation’s schools. The “reformers” also promoted the spurious, ineffective and harmful idea that teachers could be evaluated by the test scores of their students, although this method repeatedly, consistently showed that those who taught affluent children were excellent, while those who taught children with special needs or limited-English proficiency or high poverty were unsatisfactory. “Value-added” methodology ranked teachers by the income and background of their students’ families, not by the teachers’ effectiveness. 

All of these claims were propaganda that was skillfully utilized by people who wanted to privatize the funding of public education, eliminate unions, and crush the teaching profession. 

The response to the post was immediate and sizable. Some thought the list of names and groups I posted was dated, others thought it needed additions. The comments of readers were so interesting that I present them here as a supplement to my original post. My list identified No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Common Core as causes of demoralization that tied teachers to a standards-and-testing regime that reduced their autonomy as professionals. One reader said that the real beginning of the war on teachers was the Reagan-era report called “A Nation at Risk,” which asserted that American public schools were mired in mediocrity and needed dramatic changes. I agree that the “Nation at Risk” report launched the era of public-school bashing. But it was NCLB and the other “solutions” that launched teacher-bashing, blaming teachers for low test scores and judging teachers by their test scores. It should be noted that the crest of “reform” was 2010, when “Waiting for Superman” was released, Common Core was put into place, value-added test scores for teachers were published, and “reformers” like Arne Duncan, Bill Gates, Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, and other became media stars, with their constant teacher-bashing. For what it’s worth, the National Assessment of Educational Progress flatlined from 2010 onwards. Test score gains, which were supposedly the point of all this “reform” activity, were non-existent on the nation’s most consequential test (no stakes attached).

Readers also blamed demoralization on teachers’ loss of autonomy, caused by federal laws and the testing imposed by them, and by the weakness of principals and administrators who did not protect teachers from the anti-education climate caused by NCLB, RTTT, ESSA, and the test-and-punish mindset that gripped the minds of the nation’s legislators and school leaders. 

Readers said that my list left off important names of those responsible for demoralizing the nation’s teachers. 

Here are readers’ additions, paraphrased by me:

Michelle Rhee, who was pictured on the cover of TIME magazine as the person who knew “How to Fix American Education” and lionized in a story by Amanda Ripley. Rhee was shown holding a broom, preparing to sweep “bad teachers” and “bad principals” out of the schools. During her brief tenure as Chancellor of D.C., she fired scores of teachers and added to her ruthless reputation by firing a principal on national television. For doing so, she was the Queen of “education reform” in the eyes of the national media until USA Today broke a major cheating scandal in the D.C. schools. 

Joel Klein, antitrust lawyer who was chosen by Mayor Bloomberg to become the Chancellor of the New York City public schools, where he closed scores of schools because of their low test scores, embraced test-based evaluation of schools and teachers, and opened hundreds of small specialized schools and charter schools. He frequently derided teachers and blamed them for lagging test scores. He frequently reorganized the entire, vast school system, surrounding himself with aides with Business School graduates and Wall Street credentials. Under his leadership, NYC was the epitome of corporate reform, which inherently disrespected career educators. 

Michael Bloomberg, former Mayor of New York City, billionaire funder of charter schools and of candidates running for state or local offices who supported privatization of public schools. He claimed that under his leadership, the test-score gap between different racial gaps had been cut in half or even closed, but it wasn’t true. He stated his desire to fire teachers who couldn’t “produce” high test scores, while doubling the size of the classes of teachers who could. His huge public relations staff circulated the story of a “New York City Miracle,” but it didn’t exist and evaporated as soon as he left office.

Reed Hastings, billionaire funder of charter schools and founder of Netflix. He expressed the wish that all school boards would be eliminated. The charter school was his ideal, managed privately without public oversight. 

John King, charter school leader who was appointed New York Commissioner of Education. He was a cheerleader for the Common Core and high-stakes testing. He made parents so angry by his policies that he stopped appearing at public events. He was named U.S. Secretary of Education, following Arne Duncan, in the last year of the Obama administration and continued to advocate for the same ill-fated policies as Duncan.

Betsy DeVos, Trump’s Secretary of Education despised public schools, unions, and teachers. She never had a good word to say about public schools. She wanted every student to attend religious schools at public expense.

Eli Broad and the “academy” he created to train superintendents with his ideas about top-down management and the alleged value of closing schools with low test scores

ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council), which writes model legislation for privatizing public schools by opening charters and vouchers and lowering standards for teachers and crushing unions. More than 2,000 rightwing state legislators belong to ALEC and get their ideas directly from ALEC about privatization and other ways to crush public schools and their teachers.

Rupert Murdoch, the media, Time, Newsweek, NY Times, Washington Post for their hostility towards public schools and their warm, breathless reporting about charter schools and Teach for America. The Washington Post editorialist is a devotee of charter schools and loved Michelle Rhee’s cut-throat style. TIME ran two cover stories endorsing the “reform” movement; the one featuring Michelle Rhee, and the other referring to one of every four public school teachers as a “rotten apple.” The second cover lauded the idea that teachers were the cause of low test scores, and one of every four should be weeded out. Newsweek also had a Rhee cover, and another that declared in a sentence repeated on a chalkboard, “We Must Fire Bad Teachers,” as though the public schools were overrun with miscreant teachers.

David Coleman, the architect of the Common Core, which undermined the autonomy of teachers and ironically removed teachers’ focus on content and replaced it with empty skills. The Common Core valued “informational text” over literature and urged teachers to reduce time spent teaching literature. 

Margaret Raymond, of the Walton-funded CREDO, which evaluates charter schools. 

Hanna Skandera, who was Secretary of Education in New Mexico and tried to import the Florida model of testing, accountability, and choice to New Mexico. That state has one of the highest rates of child poverty in the nation, and the Florida model didn’t make any difference. 

Governors who bashed teachers and public schools, like Chris Christie of New Jersey, Andrew Cuomo of New York, and Gregg Abbott of Texas

“Researchers” like those from the Fordham Institute, who saw nothing good in public schools or their teaching

Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, who turned Denver into a model of “reform,” with everything DFER wanted: charter schools and high-stakes testing.

Poorly behaving students and parents who won’t hold kids accountable for bad behavior

Campbell Brown and the 74

The U.S. Department of Education, for foisting terrible ideas on the nation’s schools and teachers, and state education departments and state superintendents for going along with these bad ideas. Not one state chief stood up and said, “We won’t do what is clearly wrong for our students and their teachers.”

The two big national unions, for going along with these bad ideas instead of fighting them tooth and nail. “

---

To read comments from readers, follow this link to Ravitch’s blog.

I began this blog to alert, inform, and maybe entertain readers on issues pertinent to public education. One of the reasons I did this was after having so many conversations with people whom I would talk about public education and they would say I had no idea. Please share this blog with anyone you feel might be interested in public education. Ignorance is no excuse.

These are my reflections for today.

January 7, 2022

Recent publication: William Frantz Public School:  A Story of Race, Resistance, Resiliency, and Recovery in New Orleans Connie Schaffer, Meg White, and Martha Graham Viator. Peter Lang Publishing. Available on amazon.com

Follow me on Facebook

@reflectionsined