Keeping US Divided

Posted on June 20, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Follow the leaders!

News from the frontlines of the education reform war!

News! Dateline April 21, 2014: Resistance to Common Core Mounts!

Criticism comes from the right and left, “from tea partyers to union leaders” but, meanwhile, “high-profile friends of the common core are manning the barricades to defend the standards against the ongoing pushback and open new fronts in the battle for public attention.”

So as we united for a cause…. more breaking news…

News! Dateline June 10,2014: Judge Rejects Teacher Tenure in California!

The result we should all be concerned about is the expectation for “the case to generate more like it in cities and states around the country.”

Ten days later, we have something other than Common Core for people to talk about and it just happens to be a hot button, extremely divisive topic that has ordinary citizens turning into vial-mouthed lunatics spewing hatred at each other on social media.

The media set the stage for battle; anti-teacher’s union crowd versus pro-union.

Where does that leave those of us that want to see improvement in teaching conditions and learning climates? …

The think tank groups and policy experts like Marc Tucker think, “War appears to be imminent.”

Tucker needs to get out more. The union versus anti-union fight has been billed as part of education reform for years! The “well funded coalition” has continued their work in a style that can only be bought.

How unions got to be “the single most important obstacle to real education reform,” I confess, I do not know … and I have written extensively about the problems in public schools, experienced numerous issues both firsthand as a student and secondhand as a parent, searched the research and country for solutions, and did my best to put the problems into the context of solutions in my writing. But this one escaped me. In all the years that I tried to improve my local schools, it was never a union standing in my way. Nor were they helpful, but, they were not the barriers to improvement that I encountered.

Update 7/23/19: I do know how unions became the target of the political ed reform charlatans —Lamar Alexander created the campaign.

A RIDDLE IN A PLAID SHIRT by David Jackson, CHICAGO TRIBUNE 3/9/96

Meanwhile, and for a very, very long time, the majority opinion – documented by public opinion poll after poll – is that improving teacher education should be the highest priority when it comes to school improvement…It is the long ignored national priority. Why don’t we focus on it?

Enter: The law of political diversion!

Will we let ourselves be fooled again? Distracted and divided?

Unequal Access

Posted on May 16, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Unequal access to quality education is what used to define the Great American Education “Reform” War. It was a civil rights issue. So now, let’s redefine the sides in those terms — give all of America’s children equal opportunity, or not.

The Brown v. Board of Education decision that went into law on May 17, 1954, stated, “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” That is a truth. At the time the issue was clearly a racial one – the law ended legal segregation of public schools based on color.

The truth stated in law, then, still stands today — “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” And that tendency will always exist. But as James S. Coleman pointed out, inequality exists within schools also. So we must recognize the barriers to equality in our schools and classrooms and fully address those problems directly as well as the inequality between communities.

So what can I say to convince you that federal education law exists because it was the next necessary step in the march towards equal opportunity for children?

Over a decade after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was written because it was recognized that where poverty exists families and communities are less able to offer the quality of education that richer communities can do for their children. Separate facilities are inherently unequal. Without assistance and support, disadvantaged schools are less likely to offer quality learning opportunities.

The chief architect of ESEA, Francis Keppel, felt that equality in education would only become reality when we provide quality education in all our schools. Simple, not easy. Federal law could help but the final solutions can only happen in schools themselves. For the children’s sake, it is in our schools where the barriers to equality must be recognized.

Keppel went on to write The Necessary Revolution in American Education. He meant a “quality revolution.”

If education is the civil rights issue of our time — like many continue to say — and we know that quality matters, what barriers must we overcome to finish this fight? Children across America deserve better. There is nothing acceptable about inaction when we know there are better policies and practices that we can follow.

For the nation’s sake, we must change the test-based accountability education law — No Child Left Behind (NCLB) (update: now called Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA –same problems)— because it is now a barrier; it is nothing like the anti-poverty, quality-based, federal investment in equality that the 1965 ESEA law was.

Take a step back 60 years, then a step forward to 1965. Ask every one of your federal and state representatives and candidates to do the same. Consider the Three R’s . Roll back, Review,and Reaffirm a commitment to quality and equality. Ask your representatives to do the same.

What will it take?

Every decade, every year, that policy makers drag their feet on NCLB is a sign that they don’t care that children are being denied access to quality education.

The proof is their inaction.

Playing Both Sides

Posted on April 21, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Considering the politics of America in general and education reform in particular, it is no wonder progress as a nation is stalled. Ordinary Americans — the real engines of advancement — are being played for fools.

Buzzwords have been used to persuade us into following one reform path or another and to repel us from uniting for our common good.

Here is a non-education “reform” example — “climate change.” Buzzzzzzzz!

Have you heard the buzz?

I’m from Michigan and witnessed first-hand how industry polluted our rivers. Having played frequently in the Kalamazoo River downstream from factories, I’m sure my body must be filled with all kinds of pollutants. We talked about the problems in those kinds of human terms. The problems eventually required federal funds (our tax dollars) to cleanup after the moneymaking polluters.

It was a pollution problem and We the People were making headway in calling the polluters into account …. until it became a “climate change” problem and we all got sucked into a political battle rather than the moral battle of right versus wrong that pollution was and is. And divided we fell prey to the politics of “climate change” because we let the powers that be change the conversation.

In the American education war, three of the big trigger-words have become “equality” (for the right), and “turnaround” and “improvement” (for progressives). Yeah, really. Buzzzzzzz! And off you go!

Please think about this: Do we believe that there are some schools in this country needing improvement and for the sake of the children in them, we should focus support on improving those schools? Are there not schools in your state that have consistently had a bad reputation as far as academic achievement or safety issues? What about schools that parents (even teachers) have repeatedly avoided putting their own kids in? Don’t we somehow need to turn those schools around to make them more acceptable, even desirable?

When the Obama administration decided on four “turnaround models,” do you think ALL the alternatives they could have chosen from have been made known to the public? I know they haven’t, and those alternatives won’t get a fair hearing on the stage of public opinion because they talk about “improvement” and “turnaround” processes. The public’s well has been soured (or polluted).

Please consider this: if I am one of the “good guys” (truly have children’s best interest at heart), will you reject what I say if I use a word that repels you? Or can you choose to stand and fight against your inner feelings recognizing that what you feel has become a conditioned response?

Until we stand strong for better public schools for all, we will go down divided by silly details like our choice of words. Allowing both sides to be played against each other is allowing children to be left behind.

ANSWERS LIE in the TRUTH

Posted on April 8, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Good questions have been asked. The answers only appear elusive while in reality the answers to “education reform” have been overlooked, forgotten, ignored, and/or buried. And oh so many aspects of reform are misunderstood.

Prompted by Thoughts From a Former KIPP Teacher: Testing, Common Core, and Charters are Myths, I now firmly believe we have got to have a “come-to-Jesus” talk about the standardization movement!

Worth Searching For

First, is there a need to improve some schools? Yes, the inequality issue is to die for and least we forget, some have! I think we all know that the “gap” between rich and poor & minority is real – common ground that should be a common cause.

So, here is what pulled my trigger today — a misunderstood word —EXPECTATIONS. I tried to at least partially clarify the concept in a short blog many months ago. (Please read)

Today, I shot forward in this article to read something much more disturbing.

“…focusing on standards as one of many means to bolster achievement in high poverty/high minority schools is a way to strive for equity. Unfortunately, as Diane Ravitch has accurately pointed out, the implementation of the standardization movement over the last 20 years has fallen short.”

Implementation fell short? Yes, but that is not the bigger thing wrong here.

Whoa to standards-based “reforms”!

Overlooked, forgotten, or ignored are the Effective Schools Correlates which seems strange to me given that I very firmly believe the philosophy behind the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act is based on the REAL community education concept which produced the “effective schools” studied by Ronald Edmonds and others.

Why has it gotten forgotten?

The Modern Community Education Movement was shoved to the side of the road and almost completely buried by the Standards Movement that rose to the occasion when the “crisis” in education caught the public’s attention in the 80’s and that movement rolled on unchecked and not questioned enough…even today.

We need to talk about what standards can and can’t do in depth but for the time being, consider this; * effective schools had variable standards*. “Standards” themselves were not the key factor in the high-poverty/high-minority/high-performing schools that were dubbed “effective.” THE standards never deserved THE “focus.”

Why haven’t we talked about all this sooner?

“We can’t. We’ve got internal political problems.”

If we had taken more time to analyze data as the Sandia Research Laboratory engineers did in the 90’s, we probably would have put the brakes on and questioned our focus on standards and testing. It might have occurred to us to discuss what we were doing right to produce the National Assessment of Educational Progress math scores that “had been steady for whites and rising for blacks and Hispanics.”

Talk about buried. I called Sandia Laboratories long ago searching for the Sandia Report. I asked them to put the report up on the Internet. I had a nice chat with a young man and we laughed over the fact that surely with the technology, and engineers at Sandia, they could scan the report and get it online. They never got back with me. Instead, I found a summary on micro phish at a private college library and spent some time copying the 50 page summary page by page.

I appreciate the view of the KIPP teacher that wrote the blog about testing, Common Core, equality and the acknowledgement made that No Child Left Behind-like “reforms” drive the focus to test scores. I’m sure for most people it didn’t open a can of worms like it did for me. It is so important, if you want the right answers to lead us forward, that we understand the history of American education. The history is convoluted but the truth, in my humble opinion, is more politically powerful than the politics of reform IF the truth gets a full and honest hearing.

I want to hear what others see as the truth starting with President Obama and Secretary of Education Duncan. How do we make THAT happen?

As John F. Kennedy said at the 1963 Commencement at American University,

“Our problems are manmade; therefore, they can be solved by man.”….or woman!

Rebutting Rhee

Posted on April 4, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

About the Rhee Opinion of the Opt-Out Movement: [NOTE: if you are not familiar with the Rhee agenda, 2012 critique from Idaho view provided here]

First, let’s clarify “standardized tests.” A standardized test is any form of test that (1) requires all test takers to answer the same questions, or a selection of questions from common bank of questions, in the same way, and that (2) is scored in a “standard” or consistent manner, which makes it possible to compare the relative performance of individual students or groups of students. (From the Glossary of Education Reform – who knew?)

O.K., so then, I’m going to make an assumption that confusion has occurred.

I see standardized tests in two different lights. In many of my large classes in college, college professors wrote up multiple-choice tests (fill in the bubbles), which covered the material they taught or that they expected students to learn, and ran them through machines to score. Those are “standardized tests” by definition but I’d call them “internally developed.”

It is not really “standardized tests” that parents are objecting to; it is externally developed standardized tests that are being misused and their worth is being misrepresented to the public with scores being used for propaganda purposes.

Ms. Rhee is wrong in thinking that externally developed standardized test scores are “critical to improving public schools.” The only period of time during which this country was actually narrowing the achievement gap (judged by standardized tests pre yearly mandated) was the period when the original “Effective Schools Research” was done. External tests were not correlates of those schools. External tests did not improve those schools.

Ms. Rhee is wrong in thinking that “better” design of external tests will “measure how well our schools are teaching our children.” These tests cannot distinguish between a test prep curriculum and the one that is best for the individual student. They cannot accurately judge the quality of a whole school. Study James S. Coleman’s work more closely, Ms. Rhee.

Ms. Rhee is wrong to judge our nation’s education system based on international standardized tests scores. Should we monitor trends? Absolutely, but international standardized tests don’t tell the whole story of the American education system.

The Sandia National Laboratories exploration of education that provided “Perspectives on Education in America” (Journal of Educational Research May/June 1993) explained our seemingly poor international performance based on several “issues.” To really judge our U.S. students based on these tests, we would need to take into account many more factors than the average Jane or Joe “education think tanker” is going to do… So we shouldn’t be basing our decisions on these tests unless we are going to delve into differences in student tracking, curriculum timing, cultural differences, etc. The Sandia brain trust concluded, “…the utility of these assessments to educational improvement in the United States is negligible.” Ms. Rhee, read their work – these were some damned smart people!

So, in general, to continue on the path of test-based reform is barking up the wrong tree. Standardized tests are a monitoring device that we should use sparingly and with cautious interpretation; they should not be the foundation for education reform that they have become.

If the argument I present here gets a hearing, it is only because of the Opt-Out Movement ——- Move on! Let’s hear more!

Slaves to the test?

And halt the confusion. Ask for clarification from the bully pulpit. Sign the Ohanian White House petition.

(Update 10/8/14 —- The petition failed to get enough signatures. So, sadly, the need to end the federal role in yearly mandated high-stakes testing lives on through No Child Left Behind.)

(UPDATE AGAIN – As of 12/4/15, the yearly mandated high-stakes testing lives on through the Every Student Succeeds Act – NCLB 2.0. THIS MEANS that everything written about NCLB still applies.)

STOP!

Posted on March 25, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

We have been on one crazy trajectory for 30 years and it is time to stop!

It was never supposed to be like this in education reform but very few Americans know the history behind No Child Left Behind (NCLB) so they don’t see it as the Core of the problem. There is a very, very brief outline found on the Independent Temporary Education Movement (ITEM) Actions website. But, here is the short of it:

The real problem with the “outcome-based theory” occurred on a national scale when NCLB became the first reauthorization of ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) to mandate yearly standardized tests, for all students in grades 3-8 and once in high school, in order to establish a national accountability structure requiring the labeling of schools based on standardized test scores.

National “accountability”? Really? How did that work out for US?

That is why we must STOP and change the law because it is our duty. Petition the White House for a response (sorry, the petition is gone?). NOW! We only have until April 16th to get 100,000 signatures! (Update: we failed.)

Read more of the story about the petition at EducationNews.org or TruthOut. The issue is non-partisan. All “sides” need to take action.

Congress has not done their duty; we must if we wish to make things better for children in classrooms now. Let the president know that THAT is the fierce urgency of NOW!

Volume Control

Posted on March 13, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Ever testify at a public forum? If you are an education activist, at some point you will have to do so because that is part of how we “govern” schools — based on political decorum.

The Common Core issue in Idaho revealed a whole other aspect of how our representative form of governing education “works” and how the voice of the People is controlled.

Knowing there was growing discontent with the Core, instead of the usual open “hearing,” our Idaho lawmakers decided to convene a panel supposedly based on the idea that it would give “citizens a chance to ask questions on that issue.”

The public was allowed to submit questions ahead of time “so the panelists could research and prepare their answers.” It was reported that over 200 people attended the exhibition and many of us watched online. It was all very controlled. No debate or real discussion ensued and there was not enough time to answer all the questions. That should have made lawmakers wonder.

A week later, a “listening session” was scheduled for lawmakers to hear what the people had to say about upcoming education policies but at that time – no policies had been written — for the public to review. And it was made clear that “People may address the committee on any education topic except Common Core.” Just as it was made clear that at the Common Core session “No public testimony will be taken.”

This type of action by officials is effective volume control. The real pro’s and con’s on Common Core from the People’s perspective has yet to be heard openly for the undecided but caring in Idaho to hear for themselves.

And it seems to have become common practice to limit “speech” to three minutes. On the surface, it seems practical. If there is a multitude of people feeling so strongly about a topic that they come to the statehouse or board meeting, how else do they all get a chance to be heard? Think about it, “a” chance. And in those situations, is the “panel” – be they lawmakers or a school board – really listening?

Instead journalistic glimpses are seen or heard allowing the dissenters to become open prey for the propagandists who have the microphone.

Turn it up!

The only option left for dissenters is to turn up the volume.

“Just” Standards

Posted on February 24, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

“These standards are just that—they are standards.” These are the words used by Luci Willits of Idaho State Department of Education, Chief of Staff to Tom Luna, as she introduced Common Core to our Senate Education Committee (1/19/11). And you will hear that sentiment parroted by others;

“The standards are just that: standards.” Bill Gates (2/12/14)

But when you look further, you can find the claim that,

“When the grant [Race to the Top] was put forth, the State Department of Education went to the colleges to ensure that any student who passes these standards will be able to go to any college without the need of remedial training.”

Standards DON’T “ensure” student success. Somehow, these standards became magical standards. And all of Idaho’s major colleges and universities stood with arms locked in testimony to the Core.

Standards are “just” guides. But these standards —The Common Core Standards — are much, much more. They are the Trojan Horse of systemic transformation.

But Idaho’s department of education went even further in claiming…

“There is also tremendous cost-savings associated with these standards; Idaho will be able to get the test it has always wanted but never been able to pay for.”

Who will pay? The same magician sprinkling fairy dust, or, will we all be paying the pied piper?

Lawmakers across the country are being asked to judge whether this is the change that is best for children, families, and communities. How will they make the call when the horse is so attractive?

Expose what is in the belly of the beast. The foundational principles, or the assumptions that are made by those in power, are what is important to understand.

Look inside!

The State will decide what education outcomes are important based on economic data.
Local control is a barrier that can be gotten around by training school board members properly (decided by the Broad Foundation?).
Lay-citizen participation in governance of schools should be weakened “in favor of control by politicians, especially governors, elected positions in general government.” (Marc Tucker, Governing American Education, page 44)

Real school improvement involves “lay-citizens.” But that is not how it is seen from above.

I know many people believe that private industry can do a better job than public institutions. But please think about what happens when private associations and organizations are using the law to their benefit – monetarily or for political power – what will be the true cost to taxpayers?

In Idaho, as it would seem to be the case across the country, the seemingly innocent policy of strategic planning and training of school boards is being put into law. It is putting the governing of schools at the local level in jeopardy.

Strategic planning is not necessarily a school improvement process; it all depends on who does the “training” and what “curriculum” they are using. What will those in control be “leveraging” our board members to do?

Close the gate (so to speak). Keep the Trojan Horse out!

Decide how schools will be governed. It matters!

Mr. Gates & Common Core Myths

Posted on February 19, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Dear Mr. Gates,

About your “myths”:

Myth: Common Core was created without involving parents, teachers or state and local governments.
In calling this a myth, you are making an assumption that governors and school officials represent parents’ views.
“Each of the 45 states that have adopted them used the same process used to adopt previous standards?” NOT true here in Idaho.

Myth: Common Core State Standards means students will have to take even more high-stakes tests.
It isn’t the number of “high-stakes tests” that we dissenters object to; it is the detrimental effects of high-stakes testing. THAT is the biggest problem with the No Child Left Behind philosophy of “education reform.”

Myth: Common Core standards will limit teachers’ creativity and flexibility.
This is the first I have heard this “myth” worded like this so it must not be far-reaching. Standards do limit curriculum when tied to high-stakes testing so that might be where you misinterpret the “myth.”

If you and all others like you, Mr. Gates, understood the real basis – original findings – of Effective Schools Research, you would see that standards aren’t the deciding factor at all in school improvement and how it is accomplished.

There is value in consistency – in national guiding principles (philosophy of pedagogy, school culture, curriculum guidelines, benchmarks, roles of each level of the governance structure, standards of practice, ethics, responsibilities and expectations of each “player” being defined).

Mr. Gates, when you first began focusing on education, you said you would “read up” on the topic. I tried my hardest to be heard by you but your gatekeepers proved formidable. But the reality is, there is a huge problem here in my thinking that I need to be heard by you rather than by MY OWN government.

Common Core is “inspired by a simple and powerful idea: Every American student should leave high school with the knowledge and skills to succeed in college and in the job market.” That is EXACTLY what was being said here in Idaho prior to No Child Left Behind. I still have the old documents to prove it.

Study harder, Mr. Gates. You missed the history of the failures of reforms. Doomed to repeat them?

Regrettably,

The crucial voice of the people?

Dr. Young – Parent, former public school patron, long time advocate for public schools, researcher, author – and one more voice unheard by the powerful.

Masters of Deception

Posted on February 18, 2014 by Victoria M. Young

Actions speak louder than words.

May 2009 Governor Otter and Idaho State School Chief Tom Luna signed a memorandum of agreement with the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) agreeing to the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) in addition to defining the federal role in education for us.

But they said they did so “with the understanding that these standards are not mandatory.”

August 11, 2010 The Idaho State Board of Education approved Common Core with Mr. Luna in attendance.

Mr. Luna campaigned – not on Common Core and Students Come First laws – but on how good a job he had done and that Idaho was on the “right track.”

November elections Yes, Idaho is one of few states that elect the person to head education (because the politics are so great and politics drives school improvement so well?). Mr. Luna was re-elected.

December 15, 2010: Luna named president-elect of CCSSO with his term beginning in November 2011.

January 2011 – Idaho legislative session begins. Lawmakers and the public heard – for the first time – the introduction of what would come to be hated as the Luna Laws (Students Come First –ha). For our Idaho lawmakers, it began on January 12th with a presentation of The Pillars of Student-Centered Education.

Testimony proceeded with heated debate on both sides of the issues. The pillars – technology-replacing teachers through a one-on-one laptop program with online graduation credits required, pay-for-performance, and limiting collective bargaining.

Among a docket full of rules reviews and hearings on budget items plus the

As our attention was focused on the Luna Laws, the Common Core Standards agreement signed in 2009 was quietly pushed into law. And the Luna Laws held our attention. Image from Boise Weekly.

unfolding of the details of the Luna Laws, on January 19th mid-afternoon in front of ONLY the senate education committee, Mr. Luna answered questions asked previously of him on a variety of statistics including class size, teacher pay, funding for new assessments, internet conductivity issues in rural areas, laptop issues, outsourcing of IT services, and just a slew of concerns…yawn…. Then, after a short story about how Common Core began with “an impromptu discussion about common achievement standards among states,” Luna’s Chief of Staff, Luci Willits, introduced Rules Governing Thoroughness; Common Core Standards (Docket #08-0203-1003).

Ms. Willits is the same person who explained, “When the grant was put forth, the SDE [State Department of Education] went to the colleges to ensure that any student who passes these standards will be able to go to any college without the need of remedial training.” And she said, “These standards are just that—they are standards.” Hum?

Since when can people read a set of standards on math and language arts and say “passing” them (the tests I assume) will “ensure” student success without remediation? Given the information they had at the time. is that possible?

Anyway, very few but good questions followed this brief presentation to the Senate Education Committee prior to adjournment for the day. Without further discussion and no testimony from the public (who knew – those watching the session were caught up in the Luna Laws debate), on the afternoon of January 24th Senator Winder moved to approve Docket #08-0203-1003. The motion passed with unanimous consent.

Mar.-Apr., 2011: Governor Otter signs Students Come First Legislation (S. 1108, 1110 & 1184). Then, the fight in Idaho to remove those laws kept the public’s attention for two years.

I think this is a great example of Card Stacking that employs all the arts of deception by stacking the cards against the truth. It uses under-emphasis and over-emphasis to dodge issues and evade facts. It uses half-truths.

Cards Stacked ; Game Rigged

Truth about Common Core? It is built on a foundation of lies and deceit. And it isn’t just standards; it is a package of reforms of which we have only seen the surface. There is much more below the surface if you care to dig. It includes linking the pieces to the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind (CCSSO again!) and training of all our education “workers.”

I’d rather see us stop a moment.

Public education needs to first fix its foundation of trust and base real reform on proven and ethical principles.

The Crucial Voice of the People

Shining Light on the Truth

Category Archives: American Education Wars