Saturday, March 10, 2012

Common Core Snake in the Grass - District 2 Forum on Common Core

Many people have been warning about the next snake in the grass being promoted by the Gates crowd and being sold by Tweed and 52 Broadway -- the perfect tandem that provides a warning to be ready to oppose it. With Debbie Meier on the panel and CEC head Shino Tanikawa we can expect to see an honest expose. 

I would go but there is another interesting event at the Brooklyn New School on the evaluation system. (See below Shino's announcement). This a real good sign of increasing parent activism on a number of fronts.

Please circulate as widely as possible.  You need not be a D2 parent to attend this event! Shino


District 2 Community Education Council & Presidents Council
present
Common Core Standards:
from Theory to Practice


 
Understand how the implementation of the new learning standards
will impact your child’s education
Monday, March 19, 2012
6:30 pm – 8:00 pm
Spruce Street School Auditorium (PS397)


12 Spruce Street in Lower Manhattan

The panel will address:
·         How the Common Core standards enhance or limit the curriculum
·         What schools need to successfully implement the Common Core
Panelists include (list in formation):
·         Deborah Meier, Senior Scholar at NYU Steinhardt, recipient of McArthur genius award, founder of Central Park East
·         Sophia Pappas, Early Childhood Division, NYC Department of Education
·         Adele Schroeter, Principal, PS59
Please join us for a lively evening and bring your own questions to the panel! 
Childcare and refreshments available starting at 6:15pm. This event is free.
For more information, contact Linda Lumpkin at 212- 356-3915 or LLumpkin@schools.nyc.gov

===============
HIGH STAKES 101

Brooklyn New School Mar. 19, 6:30

Got an email from Liza Featherstone, an excellent writer for The Brooklyn Rail:

save the date save the date save the date save the date save the date save the date
HIGH STAKES 101

What does high stakes testing mean for
our children? 
our teachers? 
our schools?

MONDAY, MARCH 19 at 6:30pm 
Education reporter Meredith Kolodner (Daily News, InsideSchools) will moderate a panel discussion with distinguished guests.
Shael Polakow-Suransky Chief Accountability Officer of the NYC Dept. of Education

Sean Feeney Principal of the Wheatley School and Author of the New York Principals APPR Position Paper

 Elijah Hawkes, Former Principal of The James Baldwin Expeditionary Learning Schoo 
Q&A TO FOLLOW 
If interested in CHILDCARE and PIZZA (starting at 6 PM, $5 suggested donation), RSVP to rsvp@bns146.org 
THE BROOKLYN NEW SCHOOL AUDITORIUM 
610 HENRY STREET @3rd PLACE 
F or G to Carroll St. station, exit 2nd Place 
presented by PS 29 & the Brooklyn New School

Friday, March 9, 2012

That Cheat'n Principal: Passarella Removed from TAPCO

Daily News: Principal of once top-rated Theatre Arts Production Company School removed for faking way to success:  Lynn Passarella has lost her $25k bonus and faces firing

"The behavior uncovered in this report is dishonest and disgraceful, and shows a blatant disregard for principal responsibilities," said Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott, [the lying weasel who knew full well what was going on and could have had the investigation speeded up].
Finally!  Why this investigation took 17 months I have no idea; DOE dragging its feet as usual.  There’s been so much evidence of malfeasance for so long…the fact that this was the top-rated school in NYC shows how blatant the data manipulation has been.
-----Leonie Haimson
What? The Daily News hasn't sent a reporter and photographer to ambush Passarella at her home for the years this investigation took like they did to teachers (including a good friend of mine) on the data reports?

I posted an article on this school at Ed Notes many months ago.
http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2010/11/another-doe-scam-tapco-theatre-arts.html
Over this time there have been 81 comments and comments have continued to flow in. A perfect example of the double standard at the DOE where a teacher sneezes without a handkerchief and is put in the rubber room for corporal punishment.

Given this news it is interesting that his batch came in last night. Imagine leaving the school under her charge and allowing her to ruin more careers over 2 years --- the 17 months is since the investigation began but the stories have been floating around way longer than this. Will the UFT gather these people together and get them a lawyer? Don't bet your hat.

Reading these comments provides a real picture of what was going on at the school.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Another DOE Scam - TAPCO - Theatre Arts Production...":

PAGE 1
AN OPEN LETTER TO CHANCELLOR DENNIS M. WALCOTT AND THE DOE INVESTIGATORS OF TAPCO

I am a former staff member at the school MS/HS225, also known as TAPCO. Although I have not worked at this school for several years, I am intimately familiar with the workings of the school and its principal, Lynn Passarella. I am still in regular and close communication with my students and former colleagues, and have a very strong relationship with a few staff members who are currently employed there. I believe the information contained in this communication is accurate and reflects the current state of the school. It was written after extensive conversation with present and past staff members. Any discussion with a current staff member would support this contention.

It has been over a year since the DOE commenced an investigation into the school and its principal. Countless articles and blogs have appeared. A simple GOOGLE of the name Lynn Passarella reveals many of them:

A Scandalous Success: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/scandalous_success_ki54PlpauYSAIo391kzQFN
Grade A Fraud: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/grade_fraud_sEpJqX8d5dg5l88B9S7RZJ
Bronx School’s Top Ranking Stirs Wider Doubts About Rating System: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/education/21grades.html
Nobody Ever Fails At NYC’s ‘Top School’: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/nobody-ever-fails-at-nycs-top-school
Scam Checker: Another TAPCo Fraud: http://www.scamchecker.com/report/lynn-passarella-another-tapco-fraud
Ed Notes Online, Another Scam: http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2010/11/another-doe-scam-tapco-theatre-arts.html
Do Not Apply: http://jd2718.wordpress.com/do-not-apply/

Yet despite the investigations and negative press, TAPCO continues on with Passarella at the helm.

So what IS going on at this school? How has the investigation and bad PR affected things? Why is Principal Passarella able to continue running this school despite evidence that she has cheated, falsified documents, mismanaged funds, and is incapable of running the school?

It is the goal of this posting to address these questions, accurately, fairly, and without bias.

When the school opened its doors in September of 2011, many questions remained from the previous years. A handful of teachers had left, but surprisingly many of the core teachers had remained. Discussion with some of these teachers reveals that they believed that Lynn Passarella would be removed, and that they were optimistic that a new, more talented and ethical principal would replace her. Others expressed a loyalty to the students and the community, with a hope that the year-long investigation would have provided a valuable lesson to their principal, and that things would improve. Teachers who left were unanimous in their opinion that as long as Passarella ran the school, things would never improve, and that the process to remove her would take far longer than they could bear.

As the year unfolded, it seemed that this hope that the school would improve, was actually being realized. Passarella displayed a new trust in her staff, supported a new discipline policy run by a former TAPCO teacher (who was pursuing an administrative career), and some of the new hires showed promise.

The new discipline policy (called ARC... not sure what it stands for) seemed to be having a positive effect. Students who came late or misbehaved in class were sent to a designated room monitored by teachers, calls were made home, and students were required to make up any work that they missed. This was in stark contrast to the way things were run at TAPCO before where students virtually got away with everything without consequence. The improvement was noticeable. (CONTINUED BELOW).

PAGE 2

Other improvements included the expansion of the school into the areas of the building formally occupied by MS391 (with whom they share the building), and moving the middle school to its own floor. These were great moves. This allowed more teachers to have their own space, and a physical separation of the middle school and high school. Logistically it was now easier to control the flow of traffic between classes, and identify students who were cutting or hanging out in places they shouldn't be.

Another change was the promotion of a new school vice principal, Ms. Janice Acosta (although the school received criticism for not following due process in this promotion). The move was met with mixed opinions. Acosta was perhaps the least liked person in the building, both from students and staff, but at the same time there were some that were willing to give her a chance. Despite her angry disposition and history of backstabbing and manipulation, she was by no means an unintelligent person, and perhaps she too, like her boss, could learn from past mistakes and work toward the betterment of the school. Even though few liked her and even fewer trusted her, she could at least be counted on to help manage a school that had been severely mismanaged since its inception.

But as the first few months passed the signs of inconsistency resurfaced. The discipline program, which was so instrumental in the success of September and October, was neglected and the students took advantage immediately. A few of the new hires began to appear grossly incapable of managing their classes and providing a quality education. The burden to fix these problems fell to experienced teachers who were asked to coach, mentor and push-in with these teachers, further stressing their already over-crowded schedules. Acosta also had problems. She fought with staff, targeted teachers she didn’t like and attacked their pedagogy, and resumed what was perceived as a witch hunt for teachers the principal wanted to get rid of. Staff was also witness to several emotional outbursts, including rages of anger and outbursts, often accompanied by hysterical weeping. Needless to say, this did little in the way of instilling confidence in the school’s leadership. This person, like her principal, seems to bring a lot of her own issues and weaknesses to her job, and it only contributes to the instability and dissention that prevails throughout the school.

Communications were confusing, incomplete, and inconsistent. The first Parent/teacher night was announced a day before the event. Rapid dismissals would happen without notice and students were sometimes stranded without transportation. Town meetings would happen without notice or announcement, and would often be chaotic and without proper planning. Most annoying, Passarella would often grab the school’s microphone and make loud, raucous, celebratory announcements of college acceptances while completely disregarding the fact that lessons (sometimes tests) were in progress. Teachers were constantly caught off-guard. Nobody dared complain.

Breakdowns in the coverage system led to entire classes floating the hallways unsupervised when teachers were absent. Classes were constantly being regrouped and reformed without notice, all without the input of the teachers. Students and staff were left confused, bewildered and unable to see any logic in the sudden regroupings. Teachers have been given new schedules at least 5 or 6 times since September. Once even complained she didn’t even want to waste the paper to print out her new schedule. “Why should I? In two weeks I’ll have yet another one!”(CONTINUED BELOW).
PAGE 3
The 37.5 minutes at the end of the day became a nightmare, as students were grouped and regrouped without explanation or proper notification. Students often cut or left the building early. Few received consequences, and as less and less administrative support was given to ARC, the system of discipline and student accountability eroded completely. A visit to TAPCO in January and February 2012 revealed a chaotic, undisciplined environment, and teacher moral at an all-time low. This was particularly true in the high school.

Case in point. One of the school's high school math teachers has had his room ransacked and occupied by students on a number of occasions. Returning to his room from lunch, he would find his room occupied by students without supervision, many of them cutting classes, and the room totally trashed. Despite reporting this to administration, little was done and the offending students received minimal (if any) consequence.

The school took sharp criticism for a teacher resigning at the end of last year (2011). Closer examination reveals that the teacher did not so much leave because of TAPCo's deficiencies, but more because the teacher was unqualified and overwhelmed by the job. Criticism should not have been levied at the school so much for the teacher leaving, but more for why and how this teacher got hired in the first place. The fact that this teacher was unqualified and incapable of handling a class was apparent to everyone (except the principal) from the start. Another example of horrific judgment on her part.

Of greater concern, this teacher was never replaced after resigning. Instead the classes were divided up among the remaining teachers, something that not only increased their already over-extended workloads, but further damaged the already negative perception of the school and its mismanagement of teachers and finances. If the teacher resigned wouldn't the salary be returned to the school? Why wasn't another teacher hired? If not to just cover the classes of the teacher, then to at least provide some relief to the already over-stretched staff? If no competent teacher could be found to cover the main classes, couldn't the money saved at least be used to hire hall monitors or additional staff to keep students from cutting? Or to provide more manpower to the discipline program? Or a teacher to cover the less critical classes without stretching the staff further?]

The answer of course, is no. The perception is that the principal is so incapable of handling money and budgeting for the year that this teacher's salary became necessary to cover mistakes, oversights and misappropriations that have handicapped the school from the start. Simply put, financial management has been horrendous, furthering a perception that the principal’s values and priorities are completely distorted. Money is spent on meaningless things, while the very systems that are essential to properly running a school are neglected.

And funds continue to be mismanaged. The most egregious example is the money paid to an outside consulting agency. It is reported that over $50,000 is being paid some outside consulting organization and its wily director, yet few within the school can point to any tangible benefits this “arrangement” has brought. Certainly this money could have been put to better use. (CONTINUED BELOW)


PAGE 4
So why does Principal Passarella choose to spend so much of the school's limited funds on a meaningless consulting agency when there are so many other pressing needs? Perhaps for the same reason she decided to elevate the least liked person in the school to the position of assistant principal: She feels she NEEDS them. They tell her what she wants to hear and sides with her regardless of what the issues are (Of course they do! They are protecting their positions and their paychecks!). Passarella is incapable and unqualified to run things herself, and there is a part of her that knows it. She is unable to figure things out and is in way over her head. Acosta may be disliked and mistrusted by the entire staff, but she backs the principal 100% (right or wrong), reminds her constantly of what she should be doing, tells her who is being disloyal, what compliances are pressing, and where she should focus her attention. The consulting firm may be expensive and unnecessary, but it does and says exactly what she wants. This alone is enough to keep them in place. And they give this unstable, unbalanced leader the “spiritual support” she feels she needs. There is even some kind of ex-principal on the pay roll, a woman who has for years been paid to “mentor” Passarella (don’t know her name... but she has been coming for years). Why is this even necessary? And what does the school have to show for all these years of “mentoring.”? A trumped-up number one rating, an unstable and unqualified leader, an unhappy, disheartened staff, and students who are not receiving the education they deeply deserve.

It’s a crying shame.

The after-school sports program was also taken away from long-time teachers of the school and given to this outside agency. This was done without notice or explanation to the teachers involved. How much additional money is being paid to this agency for this service is anyone’s guess. The teachers who have faithfully served the students as athletic coach for many years were simply left out in the cold. It has left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.

If you were to judge this school solely based on their ability to meet Chancellor compliances, the principal’s weekly message and contents of the staff meetings, one would think this is an excellent school. They seem to know how to play the “quality review game” well. But the truth is there is little resemblance between this “fantasy school” she presents and the reality. The reality is that the school is mismanaged and people still operate out of fear of incurring her (or Acosta’s) wrath. No one DARES speak their mind. It can only lead to trouble.

This is not leadership. This is tyranny.

Even the hiring of the school secretary is an embarrassment. The staff seems virtually unanimous in their dislike of this person. She is angry, uncooperative, unqualified, unfriendly, and seemingly incapable of performing the basic tasks of a school secretary. So why is she allowed to continue? Because she guards the principal's door like a pitbull, keeping "intruders" and problems away. She faithfully protects Passarella, keeps problems far from her doorstep, and for this, she is greatly valued (shades of Marilyn Arroyo?). It does not matter what the staff thinks. Does not matter if she knows how to fill out a purchase order or that she shows up to work so late teachers cannot clock in. What matters is her blind loyalty to a corrupt, incompetent leader. And everyone knows it.

How about TAPCO's high college acceptance rate? Clearly among the highest in the 5 boros. How is this done? And how are these students doing once they get to college? (CONTINUED BELOW)
PAGE 5
Many of TAPCO’s graduates have dropped out or have changed schools. Most have had to take remedial classes. Some are saddled with huge student loans that they are trouble paying back and seem in crisis. Simply, they do not graduate high school with the skills necessary to thrive in a college environment. Is it possible that the school’s mindless pursuit of EVERYONE getting into college has actually harmed some of these kids? Did anyone ever stop to consider that some students are served better by learning a technical skill or craft? How did the school expect these kids to pay back these loans, especially if they have dropped out? Ask ANY student who comes back to visit TAPCO… Did your high school prepare you well for college? The answer is almost unanimously NO. The picture is disheartening.

It is easy to conclude that students have been betrayed by TAPCO. They have contributed to the school’s high college acceptance rate, helped make the school and its principal look good. But attending college for some was only in the school’s best interest. Now, saddled with debt, their futures are being written. Some are even considering the military.

Another interesting area? TAPCO’s uniform policy. The past 4 years have seen the school so inconsistently enforce this policy that few know whether or not it is still in effect. The school will go months without saying anything about it, then suddenly penalize a few students for not observing it. Why is this worth mentioning here? Because it is yet another window into how this school is run and its inability (like ARC) to stick to a policy or system. Make no mistake about it. The issue is NOT whether TAPCO should have a uniform policy. The issue is its inability to enforce it or stick by it. It serves as yet another glaring example of its inability to govern itself.

Another area of mismanagement: Dealing with the Special Education students of the school. Schools receive extra money for each special ed student they take in, but close examination of TAPCO's special ed program will reveal that students do not receive the support that they need. Not by a long shot. This can be seen throughout the school, grades 6 – 12. So where does the extra money that the school receives go to? It is not clear. But logic and history would tell us again that the money is needed to cover other mistakes and misappropriations, while the students continue to be denied the services they are mandated to receive. (CONTINUED BELOW)

PAGE 6
NOTE: Michael Berkowitz seems to receive an unfair amount of criticism in this regard. Truth be told, Michael's hands are tied. He has been criticized for being compliant and complacent in the matter, and that he either lacks the courage or ability to take on Passarella and Acosta and fight for what is right. Can he be blamed for that? Not really. He is a capable person, but surely he has to think about his family and his career. And administration seems to work against him. And it must be hard for him to be witness to the incompetency and the poor use of school money while his students continue not receiving the services that they are mandated to have. Some feel that if he would be a little less obsequious and a little more courageous, he would be more effective in advocating for his students, but this too seems unfair. He may know what is right, but to be able to effect change with this kind of leadership in this system is a lot to ask. Safe to say that if Michael leaves, it would be another great loss to the school. Like some his colleagues (Casper, Buchbinder, Sandrowitz, Mudrick, Konisberg, Krakauer, Wold... to name only a few), he represents what is right about TAPCO, and another glaring reason why things need to change before the talent flight begins.

It will happen for sure.

One very important question remains. How is it possible that despite what is known about this principal and her tactics that she is allowed to continue? How is it possible that the investigations have not resulted in her removal or suspension? It is hard to imagine that the DOE and its investigators are unaware of the problems and level of incompetency here. One can make guesses. Here are a few:

1. It is going to happen, but the investigators are waiting until their case is fool proof. Many a crooked administrator has escaped justice because of a case contained too many errors or incomplete investigations. The investigators KNOW they have her, but do not want to take the chance of her union or lawyer finding a hole in their case, or getting her off on a technicality despite her obvious guilt. It’s happened before.

2. The DOE, its chancellor, the former chancellor, and the Mayor himself all have too much to lose on how this story unfolds. Indeed it is not just Passarella who is on trial here. So is the system for rating schools, the Regents system, and the politicians who back these systems. Careers and legacies could be lost or damaged. The DOE has to find a way to spin this story where Passarella takes the fall, and the system (or themselves) end up looking good. She needs to be portrayed as the bad apple that fell far from the healthy tree, and not like the whole tree is compromised and corrupt. And despite her shortcomings, these people may fear that Passarella will not leave quietly. She may try to take a few down with her.

3. Passarella represents the tip of the iceberg. She is far from being alone in her manipulation of grades, Regent scores, attendance data, finances, and parent, teacher and student surveys. To indict her would be equivalent to opening a Pandora's Box of problems for the DOE, and the deeper one investigates, the more it is apparent that this is not just one bad apple, but the inevitable product of a system that is broken and in desperate need of major overhaul. Care must be taken in how she is dealt with. Entire careers are at stake. And no one wants to rock the boat, or be held accountable.

4. They are waiting for her to resign or make a mistake that would make if easy for them to fire her. Again, it needs to appear as if it is SHE who is the problem, not the overall system itself. (CONTINUED BELOW)

PAGE 7
REFLECTION
When it is all said and done, perhaps common sense and good judgment can still prevail. TAPCO is very much worth saving. It still has a core group of talented, hard-working devoted teachers (the main reason the school has stayed afloat this long) and staff members (including some of the administration), and the students are decent, reasonable kids who deserve a lot more than they are getting. And the community NEEDS a successful, well-run middle school/high school for its children.

But looking at the situation objectively, this cannot happen if Lynn Passarella is the principal. She simply is not qualified. Personal feelings aside, she doesn’t have what it takes. She cheats for a reason. She has to. She has people like Acosta and expensive (NON DOE) advisors around her for a reason. She is incapable of making things work otherwise.

As someone stated earlier in this blog, she is more consumed with looking good, than being good. And in the system she operates this is entirely possible. (In fact, she looked SO good that she brought much of this unwelcomed attention upon herself. Outranking Stuyvesant High School, Bronx Science and the High School For Math, Science and Engineering (CCNY) has cast her into the spotlight, and the facade is clearly not holding up under the scrutiny). And she continues to take little responsibility for her actions. When things go wrong it is the fault of her teachers and staff (and her “non-Acosta” APs). She seems incapable of realizing that the problem lies squarely on her shoulders. And for this reason she will continue to press on indefinitely, blaming her teachers, blaming her APs, blaming the parents. Blaming anyone that might negatively affect her own ranking. Never accepting responsibility herself.

The DOE and its investigators need to operate quickly. It is now time to pull the trigger. To wait will bring upon a talent flight out of TAPCO that has never been seen before. This is for sure. The staff has had it. The very best will leave for sure... many have gone on record as saying so much. It is the hope of almost that she will be replaced soon and the school can finally begin to realize its potential.

This posting is an appeal to what is right, what is just, and what is necessary to help this school and its community. It was written with great care, thought and a desire to avoid being mean-spirited or vindictive. It is the product of extensive discussion with current and former staff at TAPCO.

It also represents an opportunity for the Chancellor, the DOE and its investigators to recognize and correct a problem that should be within their grasp and ability to fix. In short, it is a plea. A plea to act swiftly and effectively.

The students deserve it. The community deserves it.
Agree with this posting. I don't think people are out to insult anyone. I think people are frustrated, disheartened, and believe they are working for incompetent, angry people. This blog is merely a forum to express this without punishment. I just stumbled in on this blog, and except for a few immature entries, it seems overall a genuine expression of dissatisfaction with a school's administration, particularly the principal and one of her APs. And so many people are saying different versions of the same thing, it seems unlikely that they are all wrong. Apparently this school is in bad shape, but is some how able to play the game so well that everything seems rosy to the DOE. This blog seems to be lifting the veil. Seems to be the only tool these people have available to them to tell the world what is going on.

I wish them luck.


See full article below

Breaking: Mass Student Walkout at John Dewey HS Protesting Threat to Close School

UPDATED: Sunday March 11, 10PM

Here is the link to the NY1 story with a quote from Walcott threatening disciplinary action. Gee, maybe he can threaten them with closing their school. Right now he said kids would be marked absent. I wonder what would happen if teachers couldn't manage keeping track of that.

Gotham story: Students defend Dewey from closure in afternoon walk-out
Interesting point made giving GEM initiative Fight Back Friday some credit:
Today’s walk-out was inspired by a city-wide campaign begun by the advocacy group the Grassroots Education Movement called “Fight Back Friday.” Other school communities have participated in Fight Back Friday protests, including Herbert H. Lehman High School and Schomburg Satellite Academy, a transfer school where teachers and students also planned to walk out today.

Schomburg Satellite Academy in the Bronx -- Students met with Ruben Diaz jr. This walkout is over co-location issue. SEE THE FOLLOW-UP ON ED NOTES:


Satellite Academy students walk out to Protest charter co location.

Monday Mar 12 is the public hearing at the school. 

Follow the blog set up by the school:
Imagine if students at all 33 PLA and other closing and co-loco schools all walked out on the same day!

And then headed over to Tweed! That might shake the tree.



Photo Credit: Susan D'Elia Gunther

MORE PHOTOS







=========

March 10 - STATE OF THE UNION PART 2: TIME TO FIGHT BACK ---- See Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on the right for important bits.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Lois Weiner on Witch Hunt and Differences on How Chicago and UFT Respond

Teachers no longer have the luxury of closing their classroom doors to shut out the world outside the classroom. The witch hunt against teachers shows that it's no longer enough to love kids or your subject to be seen as a good teacher -- or to be one.  --Lois Weiner
These words are almost an exact replica of what I recently heard a decade plus NYC high school teacher say at a recent meeting after putting his toe into activism. It will take an army of activist teachers to make a difference and with a union that attempts to manage and control every aspect of activism rather than empowering people, it is an even bigger battle. In the article below, Lois Weiner defines a few of the different approaches between the Chicago TU and the UFT.

She also points out the assault on a profession dominated by women as a factor in ed deform. (I have pointed out that the attempt especially by charters to make teachers work 10-12 hour days is also anti-women, esp those who are mothers.) We need to make this point time and again in the propaganda war.

Monthly Review: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2012/weiner070312.html
07.03.12

A Witch Hunt Against Teachers
by Lois Weiner

A shameful witch hunt against teachers is underway, a full-blown hysteria being fanned by the media working hand in hand with politicians. In one of the crudest efforts to manipulate public opinion, as Juan Gonzalez reported, Mayor Bloomberg solicited local media to obtain the teachers' ratings under Freedom of Information laws and publicize them.

As detailed in a union official's recent blog entry about a teacher hounded about her rating, the attacks on teachers are quite personally vicious. The vituperation recalls not so much the McCarthy hearings as the Salem Witch Trials. The attacks have a venom generally reserved for oppressed minorities. When women are accused of doing harm to children, there is often a sexual subtext to the charges. So it is worth pondering that the New York media have bombarded the public with exposés about child molestation in schools while the controversy about the publishing of teacher ratings has been percolating.

Teaching is still "women's work." The overwhelming majority of people who work in schools are female. They are mostly an apolitical group who go into the occupation because they love children or they studied in college the subject matters they teach. Like most people, they just want to do their jobs as well they can. For teachers this has meant closing the classroom doors, literally and figuratively.

Teachers have been an easy target, and so, alas, have been the teachers' unions. Though they are cast as shrewd and powerful, nationally both teachers' unions are quite disoriented about how to respond to the assault on them and unwilling to mobilize their members. Used to lobbying and cutting deals with friendly politicians, teacher union officials mostly don't understand what's happening.

As I explain elsewhere, teachers' unions are the main obstacle to creating a new kind of schooling, one that is like a shopping mall . . . or a "retail outlet" as a prospectus to investors phrased the "new mindset." The new economy, it's been decided for us, requires a new kind of educational system, one controlled by corporate chieftains that trains workers to compete against one another throughout the world for low-wage jobs. As Rahm Emanuel's off-hand comments about the bottom 25% of Chicago students illustrate, the rhetoric of equal educational opportunity used to defend standardized testing to judge students and teachers is pure propaganda.

But how should we deal with this hysteria being stirred up? The New York City teachers' union, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), decried the ratings and attempted to suppress their publication. Instead, it should have launched a public campaign to discredit the tests. But UFT officials couldn't do this because . . . the state union, which UFT officials control, signed off on allowing 40% of teachers' evaluations to be based on their students' progress on standardized tests and applauded it as a national model. The union's own poll, however, showed that a vast majority of parents believe there is too much emphasis on state testing in public schools.

In contrast to UFT, the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) has produced a remarkable document describing a vision for schooling that is truly equitable and high-quality. The plan addresses, head-on, the historic inequality in education and refuses to compromise on quality. The CTU's new leaders have also been battling school closings and privatization with parents and students as allies.

In Los Angeles, a divided union leadership has had a divided strategy. Like the UFT, union leaders tried to block publication of the teachers' ratings. As in NYC, they failed -- and teachers were hounded. (One teacher's suicide has been linked to publication of his test scores.) Again, as in NYC, the union is still relying on legal challenges and contractual agreements to stem attacks on schools. But as in Chicago, elements of the union leadership are trying to inform parents and the public about the harmful effects of standardized testing and organizing with parents and community to block school closings.

The opposition that Bill Gates and Michelle Rhee have expressed to publishing teachers' ratings -- but not to the testing -- has been described, accurately I think, as a "good cop/bad cop" strategy. On the one hand, this development signals a success in defending the dignity of teachers as workers and human beings. The media's teacher-bashing in its present form is likely to diminish. On the other hand, new weapons of mass destruction are being launched against public education. Instead of teachers as a group being blamed for children's lack of achievement, only the "bad teachers" are going to be targeted. And who are the "bad teachers" in this new campaign? Those who oppose what's supposed to be right for kids, the use of standardized testing, charter schools, privatization -- and destruction of teachers' unions. Hollywood will once again enter the fray of school politics, with a new propaganda vehicle, Won't Back Down, an action film, funded by the same right-wing think tank that produced Waiting for Superman. This time Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal will carry the message that good teachers don't need or want unions or any of those "selfish" (so un-mother-like!) desires like pensions, good salaries, limited working hours.

Teachers no longer have the luxury of closing their classroom doors to shut out the world outside the classroom. The witch hunt against teachers shows that it's no longer enough to love kids or your subject to be seen as a good teacher -- or to be one.

Lois Weiner teaches education at New Jersey City University and is a member of the New Politics editorial board. She is co-editor with Mary Compton of The Global Assault on Teaching, Teachers, and Their Unions: Stories for Resistance and author of a forthcoming book about coupling the power of teacher unions to the passion for teaching.

-------
March 10 - STATE OF THE UNION PART 2: TIME TO FIGHT BACK ---- See Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on the right for important bits.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Testing: Teacher Letter to Duncan, Parent Opt-Out Call

Overheard at the UFT DA today as I was handing out a blurb for ed notes: A woman who I didn't know says, "Bernie is so cute." And so he is. Made my day.

I've been neglecting the testing issue and here I cram a bunch of amazing stuff on testing. I would do them separately but the poor people who subscribe to this blog would be buried under the weight of the emails.

The GEM high stakes testing committee has been doing such great work with its Change the Stakes campaign. Feel free to join in at this Friday's meeting:
We have a lot to do in the coming weeks considering the impending boycott, the petition, etc so I hope folks can make it.

HIGH STAKES TESTING MEETING NEW ROOM LOCATION
Room 3102 at the CUNY Graduate Center
See the Change the Stakes leaflet at the end of this post.
==========

I saw Matt Frisch at the DA today and he reminded me I promised to post his letter to Duncan.
An open letter to Secretary Arne Duncan,

It’s test prep season in America. My elementary school in NY City will devote a full 6 weeks to nearly non-stop test prep. Despite individual teacher’s personal misgivings, schools all across America will push everything else aside in the service of respectable test scores. This is the inevitable result of the fact that students, teachers, principals and schools are all judged, rated, hired and fired based on these scores. The intensive preparation taking place now is in addition to part-time test prep which goes on throughout the year.

Rather than corresponding to a clearly articulated curriculum, the standardized tests given in 3rd-8th grade have become the curriculum. Students take predictive tests published by the same corporations that produce the actual tests, throughout the year. School districts pay for detailed analysis of students’ performance on these predictive tests. Teachers are told to use the data from these predictive tests to structure instruction.

Test publishers have become very adept at pairing test questions with standards. This is actually quite easy to do because standards are written in the most general terms so that one or more standards can be matched to almost any question. Testing data determines students’ weaknesses in terms of standards and teachers place students in groups in which, theoretically, common weaknesses are addressed. Standardized tests, predictive tests and testing data have become central to classroom instruction. Tests are loosely based on standards; the connection between test items and curriculum, if one can be found, is even more tenuous. For these reasons, standardized tests have become the de-facto curricula.

In today’s educational climate, teachers’ and schools’ fates are determined by test scores. The validity of the tests is rarely questioned by policy makers or the media, despite plentiful evidence to the contrary. Self-described ‘education reformers’ such as yourself must have absolute confidence in test scores since you advocate ending hard-fought careers and even closing whole schools if test scores do not measure up.

I, personally, have very little confidence in the validity of test scores. In my years of administering standardized tests in upper elementary grades, I’ve noticed that questions are often poorly written. Approximately 20% of published standardized test items contain flaws that should have been caught by even the most rudimentary quality control. Too many questions also exhibit sloppiness in their coordination with facts or skills contained in the curriculum. If an item writer cannot articulate the fact or skill a potential item addresses, the item should be discarded. We have to know what skills and knowledge we are testing. Otherwise, we cannot prepare students to take the test and cannot make any judgments based on the results. It’s not enough to say that we are testing ‘thinking skills’ because you would have trouble finding two people to agree on what they do when they ‘think’ let alone an objective way of judging the thinking ability of others.

Since item writers have become very powerful and influential, how is it that we know nothing about them? What are their qualifications for writing the tests by which our students, teachers, principals and schools will be judged? Shouldn’t they be required to have teaching or administration licenses? Shouldn’t they have credentials attesting to their expertise in the curriculum?

I understand that this particular qualification may not be feasible because in all the fervor to reform American education, no one is talking about curriculum. In N. Y. City, with its hundreds of central administrators and budget in the billions, there is no office of curriculum. Mayor Bloomberg exercises unprecedented power over education in our city and has not been shy about using that power to shutter once proud institutions but, unfortunately, he has had nothing to say about curriculum- all the more reason for test publishers to fill the void. But shouldn’t item writers have some credential if they are deciding what students should learn and when teachers should be fired? I’m not saying you have to do this. But if you are going to raise the importance of standardized testing above all else, you should demand that the people who are holding this power over the future of American education have some qualifications for the job.

Sincerely,
Matthew Frisch
Queens, NY 
=============
HIGH STAKES 101

Brooklyn New School Mar. 19, 6:30

Got an email from Liza Featherstone, an excellent writer for The Brooklyn Rail:
save the date save the date save the date save the date save the date save the date
HIGH STAKES 101

What does high stakes testing mean for
our children? 
our teachers? 
our schools?

MONDAY, MARCH 19 at 6:30pm 
Education reporter Meredith Kolodner (Daily News, InsideSchools) will moderate a panel discussion with distinguished guests.
Shael Polakow-Suransky Chief Accountability Officer of the NYC Dept. of Education

Sean Feeney Principal of the Wheatley School and Author of the New York Principals APPR Position Paper

 Elijah Hawkes, Former Principal of The James Baldwin Expeditionary Learning Schoo 
Q&A TO FOLLOW 
If interested in CHILDCARE and PIZZA (starting at 6 PM, $5 suggested donation), RSVP to rsvp@bns146.org 
THE BROOKLYN NEW SCHOOL AUDITORIUM 
610 HENRY STREET @3rd PLACE 
F or G to Carroll St. station, exit 2nd Place 
presented by PS 29 & the Brooklyn New School
=============

Here is the opt-out call from the Change the stakes-- share with everyone. Email me for the pdf.


Dear fellow parents of NYC public school students,

We have two children in public elementary schools in Manhattan, and until this year, when one child entered third grade, we were extremely satisfied with the educations they were receiving. Their teachers and principals have been without exception smart, professional and deeply knowledgeable about our children as individuals. Our experience of our son’s third grade year thus far, however, has convinced us that the standardized testing that has come to dominate our schools severely compromises his teachers’ ability to do their jobs. They have been forced to adopt inferior test-oriented teaching practices and to take too much time away from classroom activities to accommodate endless practice tests. The reward for their efforts from the Department of Education has been a completely unwarranted test-based grade of “D” for their school, which is sapping their morale. Even before the recent disastrous release of flawed teacher evaluations based on test scores, which promises to drive good teachers from the profession in droves, we had come to the conclusion that the current heavy emphasis on testing seriously undermines the quality of public education. 

 As parents, we feel compelled to act. We will be boycotting state-mandated standardized testing of our children for the indefinite future, with the goal of restoring control over education to those who really understand how children learn – parents and teachers. If you would like to join us or just share your impressions, please contact us using the email address given at the end of this letter, or check out the information and resources at changethestakes.org

Here are five basic reasons for our decision:
1) Testing is dumbing down our schools. Placing standardized tests at the center of the curriculum forces the reduction or elimination of subjects like history, science, the arts and physical education, as well as narrowing the ways the “core” subjects of reading and math are taught. (For more on our opinions about this see our piece in Schoolbook: http://www.nytimes.com/schoolbook/2012/01/20/dear-governor-lobby-to-save-a-love-of-reading/)

 2) Testing is unduly stressful for young children. The test preparations, including mandatory afterschool and weekend sessions and practice tests scheduled throughout the year, and the official test itself (six days of testing in the third grade, more in higher grades) are extremely onerous for young students who are compelled to sit through them. Testing often becomes torturous for special-education students, who are given the perverse “accommodation” of extra time. To make matters worse, this year the testing time is being substantially lengthened so that test designers can try out practice questions for future years, using our children as uncompensated guinea pigs.
  3) Using test scores to grade teachers hurts the most vulnerable students. The use of standardized tests as the primary performance measure of teachers and schools creates a powerful incentive for teachers to avoid schools that serve students in need of extra help. Teachers often cannot significantly raise the academic performance of children who do not have adequate support for learning outside of school. Punishing teachers when students are struggling because of factors beyond their control, such as unstable home situations or learning disabilities, is gross social injustice – and it is the children who pay the price.
 4) High-stakes tests force teachers to adopt bad teaching practices. The dire consequences for teachers who do not teach to the test prevent them from doing what they were trained to do: to educate our children based on their best professional judgment. Teachers who must constantly strategize to improve test scores at all costs do not have the time or the intellectual freedom to do their jobs properly, and our kids’ educations suffer. 

 5) Standardized tests are a waste of public money. In an age of scarcity, we should not be spending untold millions of tax dollars on practices that add nothing of value to children’s educations. Many of the finest school systems in the world do without standardized tests entirely,  and such tests hardly figure in the lives of children in the elite private elementary schools that our political leaders send their kids to. We should stop funding the testing industry and use that money to hire teachers, build schools, and restore the arts and sciences to all our public schools.

We cannot allow our children to be used as tools in the enforcement of unjust laws and destructive, wasteful policies. They will be educated in public schools, and they will not take state-mandated standardized tests.

We have not come to this decision lightly. We have considered the central argument for the tests, that they are essential tools for assessing student and teacher performance, and rejected it. If the tests are necessary, why does the most successful school system in the world – Finland’s – do without them? The fact is, teaching is too complex an activity ever to be properly assessed by numerical models, which is why expensive evaluation systems based on test scores keep failing. Teachers know how to assess children’s progress, and principals, fellow teachers and parents know how to evaluate teachers, by observing their work directly.

We have been warned repeatedly of serious consequences that might arise from boycotting these tests: our children will not be permitted to move on to the next grade, or, even worse, their schools and teachers will be penalized because student absence from the tests is reflected in teacher assessments and the school’s grade. It has been suggested, in other words, that we should comply with the tests because our act of civil disobedience will cause the state to harm others. Because this is a very real danger, many parents opposed to high-stakes testing have chosen to petition for the legal right to opt out of the tests rather than to boycott them outright (information about this option is also available at changethestakes.org). However, we refuse to be intimidated by threats coming from the Department of Education into submitting to practices that we consider both unethical and harmful to our children. And we will challenge any actions taken by the DOE to punish our child or his wonderful teachers because of our decision. 

Thank you for reading this letter, and please contact us to share ideas about how parents can play a leading role in restoring public education in our city or to join us in taking a collective stand by boycotting the state tests. 

Sincerely,
Jeff Nichols and Anne Stone

=============
March 10 - STATE OF THE UNION PART 2: TIME TO FIGHT BACK ---- See Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on the right for important bits.

Ed Notes Predicts Mulgrew Response to 10 Questions on Evaluation Deal

The 10 questions below are being handed out at today's UFT Delegate Assembly by reps from the State of the Union organizing crew but Ed Notes has used its clairvoyant powers (with the assistance of Jeff Kaufman) to divine the answers in advance.

(Mulgrew Responses in Red) 
 
Mulgrew: Why is this deal different from all others before it?
Oh, sorry, those are another set of questions.


TEN QUESTIONS FOR PRESIDENT MULGREW ABOUT THE EVALUATION DEAL

1.    When will the text of the evaluation agreement reached on February 16 be released?
Perhaps when the full text of all of the side agreements, grievance arbitrations and hell freezes over (not necessarily in that order)
2.    Unlike the February 16 deal, will the final evaluation deal with the city get put to a vote?
You’re kidding, right? You will vote only when I tell you to vote and no sooner.
3.    Why weren't the turnaround schools part of the deal? What organizing is happening to protect those schools?
What does organizing mean?
4.    How will we prevent the State evaluations from being published in the New York Times? Why wasn't a special exception to FOIA for teachers part of the deal?
We are starting a libel suit as soon as we can. Look to our response to question #1 for the timetable.
5.    Given the inordinately high error rate in TDRs, how is the UFT going to prevent similarly inaccurate measures from being used to rate teachers under the new system? 
We are putting together a curriculum that will teach the finer points of cheating.
6.    Why are only 13% of observations subject to the appeals process? How will the UFT decide who is part of the 13% who get a fair appeals process? 
We settled on 13% because it is an unlucky number
7.    Who hires the "validators"?  Will they be hired in a way similar to the PIP+ evaluators, which have found against teachers in a vast majority of cases?
The DOE. We only hire Unity hacks.
8.    Why did the UFT agree to allow teachers rather than the DOE to bear the burden of proof when they have been deemed ineffective under ANY circumstances? Isn't this like saying that sometimes one can be considered guilty until proven innocent? How is due process possible when this is the case? 
We have redefined the notion of due process. It will now be known as do process. We have won a significant victory for our members. You will see how we do process on our members.
9.    Given the deal mandates one unannounced observation a year, what happens to our contractually protected right for a lesson-specific pre-observation conference for teachers in danger of an adverse rating?
Deal? What deal?
10.  If your goal in negotiating the local 20% is performance based assessment rather than standardized testing, how will you get this approved by State Education Department?  Especially since the state can threaten to withhold the 4% increase in budgeting if an agreement isn't reached.
Look. You worry about teaching. We will take care of the rest. Now stop asking such silly questions.




Fired Teacher Kills Principal, Then Self - soon it won't be referred to as Going Postal

Just yesterday I heard a teacher say that if he saw Joel Klein on the street he would walk over and punch him. Then I just got a call from a livid teacher who had a reporter knock on her door with a photog lurking to ask about her data report. And to top it off, this incompetent reporter from the Daily News didn't get her quote right. I'm meeting with her later to get this guy's info -- maybe even go to his house with a photog to ask why he can't get a quote right. Boy, is there anger out there. And enormous pressure.



From Gawker

Fired Teacher Kills Principal, Then Self

Dale Regan (below), headmaster of Episcopal School of Jacksonville in Florida, was shot and killed today by a teacher at the school. The teacher, who had been fired earlier in the day, then took his own life. According to Police, the unidentified man carried the AK-47 he used onto campus in a guitar case. No one else was hurt in the incident.

STOP THE EVALUATION AGREEMENT

Note: The GEM Conference on the evaluation agreement scheduled for March 15 aimed at formulating a plan to redirect the debate on this issue – with LI Principal Carol Burris, Francis Lewis HS Ch Ldr Arthur Goldstein and Class Size Matters Leonie Haimson is being rescheduled. Look for updated info here and on the gemnyc.org blog.



This post is based on a James Eterno Feb. 16 piece on the ICE blog:

EVALUATION AGREEMENT BAD NEWS FOR TENURED TEACHERS

Vera Pavone modified it for this post to include info on the publication of TDRs.


STOP THE AGREEMENT

The UFT and New York State United Teachers gave away the store in their initial agreements with the city and the State Education Department concerning teacher evaluations. While there’s no final agreement on a new evaluation system in New York City, what is emerging is a system with few safeguards that has the potential to allow the Department of Education to terminate hundreds or possibly thousands of tenured teachers starting in 2014.

The agreement with the state has 40% of a teacher's annual rating based upon student performance on tests. Half of that will be state-wide standardized tests and the other half will be locally developed assessments (whatever that turns out to be) that the State Education Department must approve. The other 60% will be based on subjective measures such as principal observations and possibly some peer review, parent review or student review. However, if a teacher is rated ineffective in the student test score portion, the teacher cannot get a passing grade. Also, if a principal gives a teacher a poor rating even substantial test score gains will not save the teacher. There are so many ways to give teachers a failing grade.

UFT negotiators had been holding out in negotiations with the city for a stronger appeal process—a review before an independent arbitrator instead of the present appeal process for U ratings in which teachers lose over 99% of the time. But the DOE walked out of negotiations during the Christmas break and announced that they would close most of the transformation-restart schools that were supposed to be the first to use the new evaluation system

The “compromise” is a mere face-saving change and will affect only 13% of teachers who the UFT leaders determine were rated ineffective in the first year due to harassment rather than performance. These 13% can have an appeal before a three person panel, one union-selected, one DOE-selected, and one agreed on by both. But given the various ways principals can be unfair to teachers, many of which impact on performance and student outcomes, this is hardly a way to protect teachers. What remains in place for the other 87% of ineffective-rated teachers is an appeals process which will offer them virtually no chance of winning.

UFT leaders tell us not worry because a teacher with an ineffective rating will be monitored by an “independent validator” who will observe the teacher at least three times during the following school year and issue a report rating the teacher. This evaluator is assumed to be independent because he or she cannot be employed by the UFT or the DOE and will be chosen through a joint process. If the validator disagrees with the principal on the ineffective rating, then the burden of proof will fall on the DOE at the 3020A (tenure process) hearing. But if the validator agrees with the principal’s rating, then the teacher would carry the burden of proof in the tenure hearing. Since this is basically a recycling of the Peer Intervention Plus program, which has a history of mostly rubber stamping U ratings by principals, we believe it is highly unlikely for a teacher to prevail over two ineffective ratings by principals.

If this evaluation system is finalized, it will mark the end of tenure. Tenure is the right to due process, which means a teacher is assumed to be competent unless the DOE proves otherwise. In this agreement the burden of proof is shifted. If you are rated ineffective, and the so-called independent evaluator concurs with this rating, you will have to prove that you are not ineffective. Even assuming the validators are independent and neutral they will most likely have neither the capabilities nor the time to fairly evaluate teachers, especially those who principals may have set up for failure by giving them difficult classes and bad programs.


The recent publication of the NY City’s Value Added Model ratings has left teachers, administrators and parents appalled at the shamefulness of the DOE and press, but also astonished at the total disconnect between the “grades” and the actual abilities of the teachers. The newspapers, the DOE and the union were well aware of the research that has shown that the margin of error in these VAM ratings is 75% in math and 87% in English, and that there are large swings in variability for each teacher. Yet the so-called data was published, and according to the agreement similar data (slightly different tests and tweaks in the mathematical equation) will be the basis of evaluating and firing teachers with the process beginning next year. What makes this especially dangerous is the statements of state education political appointees that the teachers’ scores will be projected on a Bell Curve which will target 10% of our teachers to be rated ineffective and terminated. In addition to a wholesale attack on teachers, the entire evaluation system, which will necessitate tests in every subject area, including multiple tests a year to enable value added to be calculated, is a costly bureaucratic nightmare and a fatal blow to teaching and learning.

In the wake of a great deal of anger and fear on the part of teachers as well as parents, community and political leaders, UFT leaders have been reacting on the one hand with concern (Mulgrew stated that he is “not confident” that the state model will avoid the pitfalls of the city reports) and on the other with defense and even celebration of their agreement with Governor Cuomo. High School Vice-President has been working overtime trying to get us to believe that our union leaders, who have caved in on every negotiation over our rights in recent years (longer school day, seniority/SBO transfers, creation and mistreatment of ATRs, letter in file grievances) will prevail in getting the city and the state to be reasonable when it comes to teacher evaluations.

There are still many details to be negotiated by the UFT and DOE. It is entirely possible that there will never be an agreement on the local assessments and this whole new evaluation process will then collapse under the weight of its stupidity. But we can’t count on things like stupidity, unfairness, expense, educational malfeasance, and massive firings of teachers to stop our union leaders from going ahead with this disastrous agreement.

It is up to us to stop them.

================

March 10 - STATE OF THE UNION PART 2: TIME TO FIGHT BACK ----

See Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on the right for important bits.