“3″ Is Not Enough: School Progress Reports That Delude Students, Parents, Teachers and Principals Are Morally Indefensible.

 The release of this year’s iteration of the School Progress Reports has been greeted with dismay if not outright anger in spite of the flag waving of the administration.

 

Incredibly 97% of elementary and middle schools received grades of “A” or “B” and 75% of high schools also fell into the “A” and “B” category.

 

In the recent 100 million dollar plus mayoral campaign the Bloomberg folk bombarded us with self-adulation, how the policies of the Mayor and his Chancellor have improved the schools, based on “data,” as evidenced by School Progress Reports.

 

As an inveterate note taker I leafed back to the meeting, what was it, four years ago, in an auditorium in Queens when I listened to Jim Leibman describe the Report Cards … after calculating raw scores the Department would allocate grades with the bottom 5% receiving grades of “F” and the next 10% up from the bottom a grade of “D.”

 

In the just released High School Progress Reports  only one school received an “F,” that’s not one percent, that’s one school!

 

School Progress Reports are deeply flawed tools. Rather than inform parents and the pubic they delude parents and the public. As Aaron Pallas calls to our attention on the Gotham Schools blog (“Comparing Small Apples to Large Apples“) the tool itself does not pass muster.

 

… the student progress measures that make up 60% of a school’s overall score were highly unreliable from one year to the next.  As long as these reports are tied to year-to-year changes in state test scores, they’re likely to be fatally flawed.

  

Shael Polakow-Suransky, the DOE Chief Accountability honcho replies to Pallas, it reads more like a press release than an informed reply.

 

In fact, the Progress Report is a much better school evaluation and performance management tool than anything we’ve ever had before in New York City and has become a model for other districts nationally and internationally. We’ll continue to work to improve it and look forward to a continued dialogue on the best ways to do that.

 

Prior to NCLB we used average grade level reading and mathematic scores in elementary and middle schools. We ranked schools within districts, ranked districts and ranked schools across the system. District xx might be near the bottom of the city, a school in District xx might be doing better each year than other schools in the district. It was a useful way of measuring progress. The current progress based raw scores converted into letter grades are giving the false impression that a school may be an “A” or a “B” when it is actually doing poorly.

 

The NYC School Progress Reports, the NYS ELA and Math Standardized Tests and NAEP describe the same kids in sharply differing ways.

 

The Department uses “progress,” improvement from year to year as the core indicator, NYS use the NCLB rubric dividing student in grades 3-8 among four levels with Level 3 defined as “proficient.” The State will be including a progress metric, different from the City metric in this year’s tests. NAEP allows us to compare test to test both within geographic areas and among geographic areas.

 

Let’s take a look at a random school, IS 166K, they received a SPR grade of “B” in 07-08 and 08-09, you might say, not bad for a school in East New York with many students coming from neighborhood projects. However, take a look at the New York State School Report Card for 07-8 (latest one available)

 

Students at or above Level 3 (proficient):

 

ELA:       18% in grade 8

Math:      44% in grade 8

Science:  21% in grade 8

 

Shael, can you honestly laud the NYC Progress Reports with a straight face?

 

As Diane Ravitch points out mayoral control cities have not shown any discernable advantage over non-mayoral control cities, in fact one can make the argument that progress is greater in non-mayoral control cities, using NAEP scores as the metric.

 

What is so distressing is that schools across the city are patting themselves on the back, congratulating teachers and parents and children, a decidedly false impression.

 

According to the Department only 57% of students who receive a 3.0 (proficient) on the 8th grade ELA test graduate high school in four years.

 

CUNY Community College freshman dropout rates are in the 60-70% range.

 

Admission to a four year CUNY school requires an advanced diploma, earned by less than 10% of graduates.

 

Too many times I’ve watched a teacher say, “Johnny that’s good answer, next time give it a little more thought,” when the answer was just plain wrong. I asked the teacher, “Why praise a wrong answer?” and the teacher replies, “I didn’t want to discourage him.”

 

Praising unsatisfactory work is morally reprehensible.

The UFT Contract Negotiations, the RttT Funding and the State Budget Debacle: How Do You Agree to Teacher Salary Increases in a Time of Potential Drastic Budget Cuts? Can the Mike(s) Craft a Win-Win?

 

What happened to the UFT Contract negotiations?

 

Is the hand across the aisle to the Mayor being caressed or bitten?

 

The UFT flip-flopped on their own internal Governance Task Force Report and supported the reauthorization of mayoral control and stayed on the sidelines for the hotly contested Bloomberg/Thompson contest. The surprising, to some, not to others, closeness of the vote leads to “what if” speculation, what if the UFT had endorsed Thompson and turned out the troops? Alas, all “woulda, coulda, shoulda,” idle meanderings.

 

The election is over, Mike is ensconced in Gracie Mansion for another term; teachers are sophisticated, they understand the quid pro quo realities of politics and anticipate a contract announcement, an announcement that may not be in the near future.

  

Can the Mayor agree to a contract at the same time that the State faces a huge deficit and the union is fighting possible midyear budget cuts?

 

Would a contract settlement and school cuts look like a funds transfer from classrooms to teacher pockets?

 

The UFT has joined with a wide range of parent and advocacy organizations to fight midyear cuts.

 

November 9, 2009 – CFE joined parents, community members, and major education organizations from across the state in urging legislators to oppose Governor Paterson’s proposed $686 million mid-year cut to New York schools. The group broke pencils in unison to symbolize the broken promise, and then delivered the broken pencils – inscribed with the slogan, “No more broken promises!” – to Governor Paterson and legislators. Download the full press release.

 

In addition to working with other organizations the union is blitzing Albany legislators with emails from members through their powerful political action arm.

 

The legislature will be back in session Monday and Tuesday, and the NY Times reports legislators appear to be backing off on cuts, pushing the problem into the next legislative session that begins in January. The State fiscal year begins April 1st and the budget is usually approved about that date.

 

The Mayor might be telling Mulgrew, “Mike, I really, really appreciate your support, and I did put aside dollars for a raise, but let’s wait a while, if Albany can’t plug the holes, and I face drastic cuts I’ll have to use the dollars I put aside for your raise to avert cuts and layoffs, just be patient.”

 

Another scenario might be a share of the $4 billion in RttT funds, the first application is in January, the second in April. If the City and the UFT agree to a contract that is “innovative,” a possible national model, the feds could drive substantial dollars to NYC, An “innovative” contract contains risks, what is “innovative” to Obama-Duncan and the NY Times might be viewed as give backs or weakness by members.

 

The July MTA-TWU arbitration award did grant the Transport Workers Union (TWU) raises in spite of the fiscal circumstances of the Metropolitan Transit authority (MTA). The MTA went to court to try and invalidate the award. If the court rejects the MTA and supports the award perhaps the court decision could boot strap the UFT predicament

 

State law does provide for intervention by PERB, the mediator, impasse and fact-finding process. Fact-finding is a  lengthy process at which the Department could place merit pay, termination of ATRs, etc. on the table, and the union, the abolition of the ATR pool, etc. The key salary issue would be “pattern bargaining” versus “ability to pay.”

 

The Department has been spending freely, $100 million to sustain the ATR pool and endless contracts. (See November 12 contracts here) At a fact-finding hearing the union would certainly point to the allocation of contracts and say, guys, who says they have no money! Could be quite embarrassing to the Department and the Mayor.

 

Perhaps a Latin proverb controls, vincit qui partitur, “he prevails who is patient.” But let’s not forget that other proverb, when the rich and powerful say “trust me,” the weak and powerless tend to get pregnant.

Will the Race to the Top Drag Obama Down? Is the $4 Billion the Gold At the End of the Rainbow or the Proverbial Thirty Pieces of Silver?

 

The US Department of Education has released the much anticipated regulations (read Executive Summary here) that will determine the distribution of the $4 billion in Race to the Top (RTTT) funding, ending the tea leaf reading and the parsing of every little word uttered by Ed Secretary Duncan.

 

The New York Times describes the process,

 

The $4 billion is the most money Washington has ever given to overhaul schools. It is to be awarded in two rounds, in April and September, to about a dozen states that propose bold schemes to shake up the way they evaluate and compensate teachers, use data to raise achievement and intervene in failing schools. With $16 billion in school budget shortfalls projected for next year, states are hungry.

Experts say the process is like watching dozens of states bid for the Olympics.

In August of 2008 I listened to a video feed of a 12-minute Obama speech to the American Federation of Teachers convention, to be polite the response of the delegates was tepid, better than the booing he received a month earlier at the National Education of Teachers convention.

The Obama-Duncan policies: encouraging the opening of more charter schools (no state imposed caps), pay for teacher performance, using data to evaluate teachers, aka “getting rid of bad teachers,” and national standards are viewed by teachers as assaults on their professionalism. While Obama makes vague comments about collaboration he is clearly is moving forward, with or without teacher unions.

 Across the country, different groups are coming together to bring about change in our schools — teachers unions and parents groups, businesses and community organizations.  In places like New Haven, educators and city leaders have come together to find a smarter way to evaluate teachers and turn around low-performing schools.

The public understands much of the healthcare debate: cover all Americans, no rejections for pre-existing conditions, more choice of carriers and lower costs for insurance., The nuances are many but the basics of the proposed law, in spite of Republican bricks is popular among Obama voters.

The Obama-Duncan educational reform policies are obscure to the public and alienating to teachers, among his strongest supporters. There simply no evidence that any of his education policy will “turn around” the national education system.

Gerald Bracey, a well regarded educational icon (who recently passed away) has written a superb critique of the core Obama dicta.

 This year’s Bracey Report identifies and discusses the research support for what the author considers to be three of the most important assumptions about how to reform public education:
1. High-quality schools can eliminate the achievement gap between whites and minorities.
2. Mayoral control of public schools is an improvement over the more common elected board governance systems.
3. Higher standards will improve the performance of public schools.

 

Bracey concludes: there is no research support.

 

Pay for performance is the touchstone of the Obama ideologues, and research is scarce, a collection of research shows some successes but clearly the jury is still out.

 

What we do know is that collaboration does work, we do know that teachers are experts, and using teacher-experts to work with their peers is a highly successful strategy.

 

 A staff of hardworking teachers with access to basic technology could learn much more together than they would under the tutelage of an imported expert. Rather than hiring external presenters, schools can see much better results by putting the responsibility for, and the control of, professional growth in the hands of their own teachers.

 

Teachers increasingly see the $4 billion as a biblical “thirty pieces of silver,” the feds using the lure of dollars to drive states to embed the Obama-Duncan weltanschauung, even if their view is a  slight of hand rather than research-based.

 

The selection of twelve or states to receive the four billion means 38 or so states will not receive funding. Pressure from teacher union members will grow and any chance of an Obama slanted reauthorization of No Child Left Behind may be bleak. In fact, the reauthorization could undo Obama policies.

 

When Rahm Emmanuel picks up the phone to call Randi Weingarten and asks for her minions to beat the bushes for democratic candidates he may find Randi in her Al Shanker mode, the “tough liberal.”

“V,” Ayn Rand and the Direction of Education Policy: Does the Chancellor Matter? Is It a Question of Style Over Substance?

 I wonder whether the revival of the ABC sci-fi series”V,“ which rolls out an alien reptilian plot to dominate and consume mankind is actually a thinly veiled description of the Department of Ed Leadership Academy?  Is the Academy the “mother ship” attracting the innocent and using them as tools of the plot for world-wide domination? Am I being too paranoid? And remember, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean people aren’t plotting against you.

 

We never cease being amazed by the vision of Obama, Duncan and Klein and their acolytes, including University of Penn President Amy Gutmann, they continue to view competition as a key to school improvement, with charter schools driving the competition with public schools, seemingly ignoring a recent internal Department powerpoint showing public schools outperforming charter schools, in spite of the “darling” status of charter schools, as described by Chancellor Meryl Tisch,

 

Speaking at Hunter College, Tisch said that charter schools have benefited from being the political “darlings” of the city and state, blessed with the most qualified teachers and some of the highest-achieving students.

 

Competition, leadership totally in the hands of principals without restraints provided by labor contracts, or school boards, or parents, a sort of libertarian climate emphasizing the power of the individual. Maybe the recent interest in Ayn Rand has morphed into the philosophy driving ed reform? ( “Ethical egoism … endorses selfishness, …”)

 

Randi Weingarten, American Federation of Teacher struggles to parse Obama’s words, trying to find a glint of “collaboration” in his speech,

  

“If we embark on a course of shared responsibility and collaboration, we will be much closer to reaching the ultimate goal of providing a great education to all students,” Weingarten says. “When teamwork, trust and respect become ingrained in the fabric of a school district and are incorporated into all decision-making—not just used during contract negotiations—the outcome is good for kids. Teachers want their students to do well, but they need the tools and resources that will create the conditions to help their students succeed.

“President Obama cited just a few of many recent stellar examples where collaborative partnerships are making a tangible difference for students and teachers.”

I’m not so sure that the Prez has moved away from his stance, in spite of his “tip of the hat” to the New Haven contract, his November 4th speech avers,

Now, before a state is even eligible to compete, they’ll have to take an important first step.  And this has caused some controversy in some places, but it shouldn’t be controversial.  Any state that has a so-called firewall law will have to remove them.  Now, here’s what a firewall law is:  It basically says that you can’t factor in the performance of students when you’re evaluating teachers.  That is not a good message in terms of accountability.  So we said, if you’ve got one of those laws, if you want to compete for these grants you got to get rid of that law.

And we’ll encourage states to take a better approach when it comes to charter schools and other innovative public schools.  When these schools are performing poorly, they’ll be shut down…

 Across the country, different groups are coming together to bring about change in our schools — teachers unions and parents groups, businesses and community organizations.  In places like New Haven, educators and city leaders have come together to find a smarter way to evaluate teachers and turn around low-performing schools. 

So guys, does it matter who is chancellor? Do we have a national agenda, from Obama to Duncan to Regent Tisch to Commissioner Steiner to the NYC Chancellor?

David Bloomfield, in a puckish blog begins to speculate on the next NYC Chancellor, but, is it a matter of personality rather than policy?

Will the educator chancellor be any different than the businessman/lawyer chancellor?

Joel Klein chose to be confrontational, the “in your face” litigator, constantly taking on his critics while Arne Duncan is the suave, charming Secretary of Ed, with pretty much the same agenda. Then again it is nicer to be romanced before being seduced.

 

What’s Happening With the UFT-DOE Contract Negotiations? Is Mulgrew the Nimble Leader Who Can Avoid the Abyss and Deliver for his Members? Can Bloomberg Emerge as a National Education Mayor Who Can Work With Unions?

 Labor negotiations, especially for public employees, tilts toward management. Strikes are almost always not an option. New York State law imposes strict penalties both on the strikers and the union. The employees are fined an additional days pay for each day on strike, and the union incurs substantial fines and the loss of dues check off. “Work stoppages” are broadly defined as any concerted action, i.e., “blue flu,” not going to open school night, etc.

 

The Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) has been around for forty or so years, the law establishes regulations for the unionization of public employees, labor or management can appeal to the Board and claim “improper practices,” and the Board monitors and guides contract negotiations.

 

The UFT, DOE, and City labor negotiations have been characterized by a deafening silence. The NY Times printed a story saying there was no news to report.

 

Some aver that the contract was done months ago and are awaiting the end of the mayoral election to announce a straightforward contract with salary increases and no surprises. Others urge the Mayor to demand substantial changes eroding benefits and eroding core union values.

 

If the parties are unable to reach a settlement  PERB assigns a mediator. If, after the mediator works with the parties s/he feels the parties are far apart an impasse can be declared and PERB appoints a panel of three arbitrators, the panel conduct a fact-fining review. The parties provide evidence to the panel, through testimony and the submission of evidence. Salary is determined by “pattern bargaining,” the raises that similarly situated employees have received from the employer and “ability to pay,” the economic situation of the municipality. (See 2002 UFT-BOE Fact-Finding here and 2005 UFT-DOE Fact-Finding here. Either party can assert any issue into the process.

 

In July, at the Municipal Transit Authority/Transport Workers Union fact-finding the chief city negotiator testified that the City has put aside 4 + 4 (four percent for each of the next two years), however, in the last few months the budget situation has eroded, if the State cuts its budget now, the City will have to impose midyear budget cuts.

 

Could the City justify raises for teachers at the same time it is cutting school budgets?

 

The union “bargaining goals” are moderate, the weighty issues of ATRs, Rubber Rooms, pay for performance are thorny and may not be at the table.

 

I constantly hear members scrie that the union should be tough, they should endorse Thompson, the non-Bloomberg, attack Klein, mount a campaign to “win-over” the public.

 

The mediation, impasse, fact-fining process takes from 9-12 months, and there is no guarantee about the report. Fact-finders could support “ability to pay” over “pattern bargaining” and not support any increase. The City will certainly argue about terminating ATRs after a period of time. We have no idea how a fact-fining panel will respond. And, the report is not binding.

 

What are the options for the union?

 

Endorse and fight for Thompson, understanding that should he lose you will face four year of open conflict, possibly without a salary increase. Are the risk/rewards worth it?

 

Endorse no one, try to work with Bloomberg where you can and negotiate a contract with a 4% + 4% with little else.

 

A glum outcome is you try to work with Bloomberg, unsuccessfully, and the months go by without a contract and without much movement on either side.

 

In Washington the union (WTU) has confronted Superintendent Michelle Rhee, maybe it had no choice. Many, many months have gone by, layoffs not in seniority order, with no contract agreement and a bitterly divided and weakened union.

 

On a national scene the Obama-Duncan agenda seems eerily similar to the Klein agenda, and the $4 plus billion in Race to the Top funding will require the inclusion of Klein-like policies.

 

If it wasn’t for the Obama stimulus package NYC would have faced many, many thousands of layoffs. The no layoff clause is void if the City declares a fiscal emergency. This is Year One of a two year stimulus infusion with absolutely no guarantee of another stimulus.

 

How would the union respond if an additional stimulus package required the inclusion of policies with which the union is uncomfortable?  And let’s not forget that “No Child Left Behind,” the law that provides Title 1 funding, is up for reauthorization, and, pay  for performance etc., are in play.

 

It’s easy to bitch and complain, it really, really hard to produce results with so many missteps possible. Is Mulgrew the nimble leader who can navigate the yawning abysses scattered over the landscape?

 

Mike is going to earn his paycheck over the next weeks and months.