An excellent video from AFT about PISA and education reform lessons to be learned. Watch it. Share it. #reclaimit
An excellent video from AFT about PISA and education reform lessons to be learned. Watch it. Share it. #reclaimit
It has become obvious over the past decade that the mainstream media not only doesn’t care when black and brown children are harmed by misguided education policy, they typically accept the claims of those inflicting the harm. They report without any criticism the policies that bounce black and brown children around the school district as if they were checkers on a checkerboard. They ignore the protests of the parents of these children when their local school is closed to make way for a privately managed charter or for a condo. It is obvious to everyone but the media that they don’t hear the voices of these children or their parents.
So, yes, it took a condescending comment directed toward white suburban mothers by Secretary Duncan to get the attention of the media. You can bemoan that fact, as Paul Thomas does, or celebrate it as the beginning of coalition politics.
It is beyond argument that those in power will not listen to the poor. But when the black and brown moms (and dads) form a coalition with the “white suburban moms,” they are a powerful force that cannot be ignored.
Robert Shepherd says:
As a member of the Billionaire Boys’ Club, or as one of the paid associates of the BBC, you . . .
1. believe that extraordinarily complex skills like reading and writing ability can be validly and reliably measured by simple, objective
Explain how that could possibly be so. Please draw upon your extensive knowledge of the relevant scientific literature.
2. believe that innovation comes about when free persons conceive of varied goods and services that compete with one another in a free market in which users choose the goods and services that they wish to purchase and use.
Explain how this belief can be reconciled with a) a single set of mandatory national standards for all students, b) a single set of mandatory high-stakes national tests, c) a single national database of all student test scores and responses, and d) scripted literacy lessons that all teachers must follow to the letter.
3. believe that all students should follow the same standards and take the same tests.
Explain how this belief can be reconciled with the fact that students differ enormously in their backgrounds, in their developmental levels, in their gifts and interests and propensities, and in the goals that they and their parents have for their futures.
4. believe that national standards do not narrow and distort curricula and pedagogy.
Please answer the following questions:
If standards do not drive (and so narrow and distort) curricula and pedagogy, why create them?
If they do drive curricula and pedagogy, how can a single set of predetermined standards be better than ANY alternative set that might be developed by ANY OTHER expert or group of experts in education and particular subject matter?
5. believe that our schools are failing.
Explain how can this belief can be reconciled with the fact that, when results on internationally norm-referenced exams in reading, mathematics, and science are corrected for the socio-economic levels of students taking the exams, U.S. students consistently score at the top or very near the top?
6. believe that a small group of persons appointed by a committee of politicians should be empowered to create standards that overrule and render irrelevant the judgments about desirable outcomes in particular courses of study made by professional teachers, curriculum developers, and curriculum coordinators.”
Jonathan Lovell says:
in a somewhat more nuanced study in January of this year entitled “What do international tests really show about U.S. student performance?” economists Martin Carnoy and Richard Rothstein come to a similar conclusion:
“The share of disadvantaged students in the U.S. sample was the largest of any of the [post-industrial] countries we studied. Because test scores in every country are characterized by a social class gradient—students higher in the social class scale have better average achievement than students in the next lower class—U.S. student scores are lower on average simply because of our relatively disadvantaged social class composition. . . [I]f we make two reasonable adjustments to the reported U.S. average, our international ranking improves. The first adjustment re-weights the social class composition of U.S. test takers to the average composition of top-scoring countries. The other re-weights the distribution of lunch-eligible students by the actual intensity of such students in schools. These adjustments raise the U.S. international ranking on the 2009 PISA test from 14th to 6th in reading, and from 25th to 13th in mathematics. While there is still room for improvement, these are quite respectable showings”
To put it succinctly, the “achievement gap” between American students and their foreign counterparts is largely a red herring.
Amy Prime says:
I know of another administrator who sent out a happy email to her staff because the school had some extra funds and was able to purchase a classroom set of tablets for the teachers to use for classroom testing. How many of you parents out there, upon discovering your child’s school had extra funds available, would want that money used to buy test-taking devices?
There are those who don’t believe in the fundamental purpose of public education. They are not interested in the developing the “democratic citizen,” one who understands and is committed to the core values and principles of democratic governance; one who is imbued with the “character of democracy.” There are certain people and groups and special interests who’ve felt threatened by education for “the masses,” especially Mann’s view of public education as “the balance-wheel of the social machinery” in a democratic society. And this begs the question, is the Business Roundtable committed to the core values and principles of democracy? The Chamber of Commerce? Bill Gates? Jeb Bush? And what about Arne Duncan?
Jack Schneider and Heather Curl say:
Policy elites defend their work and attack their critics as misguided, out of touch, or concerned only with adult interests. Yet how many would send their own children to schools where narrow standards have driven out play and discovery? How many so-called reformers would enroll their children in schools where young people are endlessly assessed, where the arts have been slashed, where teachers have been demoralized, and where the shame of low scores is borne like a scarlet letter?
Reformers need to understand that their narrow efforts to close the quantifiable “achievement gap” are creating another kind of educational inequity. In other words, as they seek to close one gap they are opening up another.
we need not accept a narrower vision of what it means to educate. We need not accept schools focused myopically on basic skills to the exclusion of all else.
In August I blogged about the intersection of money, politics, and educator evaluation here in Iowa. Today, reporter Mike Wiser quotes me in his Sioux City Journal article about the growing presence of StudentsFirst, Michelle Rhee’s advocacy organization, in our state:
We have seen the rise of influence of outside advocacy groups that are essentially buying access to the political process. There are lots of good ideas out there in the marketplace of ideas, but what worries me is when those ideas come attached to a big donation check, well, we know money talks in politics. [this should not be read as me saying that StudentsFirst has good ideas!]
During my interview with Mike, he asked me if I thought StudentsFirst deserved a place at the policy table. Brain-fried from a long day of working with principals, I think I mumbled that I don’t know how organizations get selected for statewide committees or what the criteria are (or should be). But maybe it’s best to turn the question around…
If an outside advocacy organization
but is more than willing to lavish large contributions around so that it floods local school board elections with unprecedented monies and is the biggest contributor to state legislative races, do you think it deserves a seat at the policymaking table?
Dan M says:
[Is] there a country on earth with a successful education system that has ever operated the way [Michelle] Rhee insists this country’s education system should be run? Does Finland, the model for the world, have any of the following: Teach for Finland? KIPP Finland? the Finnish Parent Trigger? the Finnish merit pay system based on student test scores? union-busting organizations like Students First / Finland? No, it has none of this. No. The country that has a system closest to the one pushed by Rhee, Broad, Gates, Walton and others… is Chile… which has, thanks to a CIA coup and decades of ZERO democracy, instituted all of Rhee’s beloved practices. The result? The education system there is an unmitigated, free market disaster… with stratification, low academic achievement, zero democratic oversight of the privatized system… with the only folks benefiting being the “bosses” of these Walmart-ized chains of schools. Every other subgroup – students, parents, teachers, citizens – are worse off, and thus, the protests in that country are ramping up every year.
Seriously, IS THAT WHAT WE WANT FOR OUR STUDENTS AND FOR OUR SCHOOLS HERE?
Kathleen Porter-Magee says:
While there is no shortage of programs that are emblazoned with a shiny new “Common Core Aligned!” sticker, the reality is that anyone can claim alignment. And while the Common Core is a convenient and politically expedient scapegoat for programs that lack coherence and rigor, it is up to school boards, principals, teachers, and parents to choose the curricula and the texts that will guide daily teaching and learning in the classroom. Indeed, parents have exactly as much input into the curricular decisions made at their children’s schools as they did prior to 2010.
let’s not forget that on the math side, prior to Common Core adoption, only 11 states required students to learn standard algorithms and only 7 states required students to memorize their basic math facts. Thanks to the Common Core, 45 state standards now require mastery of these essential content and skills. Indeed, the Common Core is unambiguous in its expectation that students learn arithmetic content and skills cold before moving on to more rigorous content.
Similarly, on the English language arts side, let’s not forget that there is no “required reading list” attached to the Common Core. . . . the standards themselves include only 4 “required readings”: the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, and a Shakespearean play. Every other text selection is made at the state or local level. If your child is reading a text you don’t like, it’s not because the Common Core demands it.
Of course, this also means that parents … are right to be concerned about curricula that do not emphasize mastery of critical math content. And they’re right to try to push schools to assign appropriate reading that includes classic works of literature. But those are concerns that still need to be brought to local school boards, principals, and teachers. After all, even in the Common Core era, it is these local leaders and school-level educators who will determine the programs that get taught and the books that get assigned in schools across the country.
Switch to our mobile site