There are two national initiatives that are set to be implemented in Louisiana. One federally promoted initiative links teacher evaluations to student performance. The other initiative proposed by the National Governor's Association will set up a national standard curriculum for all elementary and secondary schools. Louisiana is already well on its way to adopting both programs. Proponents believe that these initiatives will finally result in a world class education for Louisiana students. Sadly we have demonstrated in Louisiana in the last ten years of Accountability and No Child Left Behind efforts, that approving goals and standards for student learning and micromanaging teaching practices do not necessarily equate to desired student achievement.
Both of these initiatives are based on flawed assumptions and because of these flaws will again result in a disappointing outcome for Louisiana students and educators. These latest “reforms” will only continue the endless cycle of public school bashing and lead to more calls for privatization of public schools. Einstein said the definition of insanity is to continue pursuing the same incorrect theories and expecting different results. That's what we continue doing in Louisiana; and it is damaging, not improving, our educational system.
Governor Jindal recently signed into law HB 1033 which will require that 50% of a teacher's evaluation will be determined by the educational progress of students. The assumption seems to be that the classroom techniques of the teacher are the primary factors determining the educational attainment of the students assigned to that teacher for that one academic year. The teacher will then either be retained, retrained or ultimately dismissed based on the “effectiveness” of the teacher in producing academic results. The State Department of Education will set the minimum “effectiveness” criteria based on various socioeconomic factors of the group of students assigned to the teacher. These factors are supposed to level the playing field in the evaluation of teachers. But there is an inherent contradiction. The state and federal authorities now totally controlling education are demanding a narrowing of the achievement gap between socioeconomic groups of students. The only way that can happen is if teachers are expected to “produce” at least one year of academic growth in student performance in each school year, particularly for disadvantaged students. Everything we have learned in the last ten years of accountability in Louisiana tells me there will be an inevitable clash and failure of these incompatible theories. The result will be that teachers will scramble to escape the schools serving disadvantaged students. Instead of providing an incentive for effective teachers who want to work with challenging students to stay with these students, teachers who want to preserve their careers will be forced to seek transfers to the more advantaged schools. I fear some teachers will be driven out of the profession. To see the most recent study on linking teacher evaluation and pay to student performance simply click on this link on Performance Pay models. This study of Chicago schools transformed by U.S. Education secretary Arne Duncan leads me to question why such an unproven model would be promoted by our federal government?
I have already addressed the other initiative to upgrade and standardize the curriculum in previous posts on this blog. I would summarize my opinion of this effort by saying it is absolute folly to standardize the curriculum thereby making it essentially a college prep curriculum when no student comes with a standard brain or a standard home environment. As I have said a hundred times before, not all students can or should be trained for college. Our work force needs for at least the next 20 years in Louisiana indicate that less than 50% of good jobs require 4 year college training. There is a desperate need for skilled workers whose education can be completed in two years or less beyond high school. The present push of college prep for all has seriously degraded the career and technical offerings of our high schools. At the same time, by placing students who are not academically inclined in our college prep courses, we have watered down the instruction in these courses. Teachers are forced by practical considerations to teach basically to the median aptitude of the class resulting in lower standards. By continuing to push college prep for all we demean jobs and careers that are vital to our economy and to many of our students. By basically communicating to children that anything less than a college education is considered a failure, we place many of them in a “no win” situation.
Having said all this, I believe there is value in establishing a set of critical concepts and skills to be taught in a logical progression by all schools in the areas of English, Math, Science and Social Studies. Good reading skills are fundamental to other content areas and to almost all career choices. It is absolutely critical that our educational system prepare all students to their greatest potential in all of these basic areas. What our present educational plan naively fails to recognize however, is that students cannot all be educated to the same level of proficiency and at the same rate of instruction for all subjects. We have absolutely no "plan B” and we have no effective safety net for students who do not fit into our standardized system of education. Until we design an educational system that addresses differences among our students, we will continue to practice the “insanity” Einstein warned against.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Important Notice: Call Your Congress Member Today!
Superintendent John Bourque of Acadia Parish has requested that we urge all supporters of public education to participate in a national lobbying effort in support of a special appropriation of 23 billion dollars to go directly to local school systems to prevent the layoff of teachers. Simply click on this link to connect with the American Association of School Administrators website to help connect you to your member of congress so you can urge his/her support for this special appropriation.
This would be a "no strings attached appropriation". It is simply designed to help local school systems keep its dedicated teachers on the job. To get this money your school system would Not have to:
This would be a "no strings attached appropriation". It is simply designed to help local school systems keep its dedicated teachers on the job. To get this money your school system would Not have to:
- Close any schools or convert schools to privitized charter schools
- Fire any principals or teachers
- Agree to tie teacher evaluations to student test scores
- Submit to any State Department of Education mandates on how school funds should be managed or how teachers would be hired and fired
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
The Title of Education Legislation "Misleading"
The title of the legislation proposed by HB 1368 is: RED TAPE REDUCTION AND LOCAL EMPOWERMENT WAIVER PROGRAM.
This title could be misleading because it will not necessarily reduce red tape for local school systems and it certainly does nothing to empower any local school system, while it greatly empowers the State Department of Education to dictate various actions to local school systems.
The legislation allows local school systems to apply for a waiver of various state laws and BESE regulations such as class size maximums, pupil-teacher ratios, and instructional time requirements provided that the school system submits a plan for improvement of academic achievement of the students of any schools exempted from such laws or regulations. The law actually seems to be aimed at providing an alternative to state takeover of low performing schools. It basically would allow a local school board to maintain authority over its low performing schools if the local superintendent agrees to make state mandated changes to such low performing schools. To avoid state takeover the school system must choose one of the following reorganization plans for any of its low performing schools it wishes to have exempted from state takeover:
1. Turnaround: Replace the principal and a majority of the teachers and give more power over the budget and teacher selection to the new principal
2. Restart: Turn over the school to a charter or outside management organization
3. School closure: Close the school and send the students to another school that is a high performing school within the district
4. Transformation: Replace the principal and implement various changes to the management of the school. This option can be used for no more than 50% of the schools receiving waivers for that school district.
The law would also require that any school that fails to improve according to state mandates over a period of time regardless of any waivers, would eventually have to be converted into a charter school. This legislation would establish charter conversion as the final solution for any school that is judged to be chronically low performing. What would happen if such a charter school still failed to perform satisfactorily? The law would mandate that it be turned over to another charter organization. In this legislation we finally have an answer to the question: Who would take over a takeover school if it still failed? Answer: It would simply be another takeover organization. It would never go back to the local school board.
How will this law actually affect local school systems?
The law is obviously intended to apply only to school systems that have “low performing” schools as defined by BESE. This year it would focus on schools that have been assigned a School Performance Score of 65 or below and have not met state mandated improvement goals. Next year the minimum score will go to 75. At least 20 of Louisiana's local systems would not be affected at all because none of their schools have SPS scores below 75. Here's how it will affect some systems:
For example, if we use the School Performance Score of 75 to determine which schools could possibly be affected, a large school system such as East Baton Rouge Parish could have approximately 40 of its 80 schools affected. That means that if school scores do not improve sufficiently, the school system would have almost half its schools subject to state takeover. If it wants to retain some control of its schools, EBR would have to apply for the waiver described in this legislation.
If the school system does not want to close any of these schools it would have to turn some over to charter organizations or fire at least half the faculty or at least fire the principals and find replacements and then follow the dictates of the State Department of Education as to how to run these schools. This certainly does not look like red tape reduction and local empowerment!
With the passage of this law, the state will be mandating to local school systems what may be considered draconian measures in all schools classified by the state to be low performing. And as we have seen, the definition of low performing can be changed at any time by BESE. What could be some of the other effects of such new rules?
A school system with several low performing schools could face the following problems:
1. Some principals would have to be fired or transferred even if the local superintendent believes he/she is doing the best job possible under the circumstances. The state does not consider extenuating circumstances such as high poverty communities served by a particular school. It is assumed that all schools can and should perform at a certain level. If it does not do so, the principal and teachers must be blamed.
2. If none of the low performing schools are to be turned over to Charter Management Organizations, and if closing schools is not feasible, then at least half of the low performing schools would be required to replace at least half of their teachers. Would the local school system be forced to fire these teachers, or would it switch them with teachers from higher performing schools? How would teacher and administrator morale be affected by such mass firings or transfers?
3. A few of the smaller school systems serving high poverty districts may be forced to turn over almost half of their schools to Charter Management Organizations or try to implement massive teacher firings and replacement or just turn over such schools to the state.
If both this legislation and HB 1033 (the law mandating teacher evaluations based on student test scores) passes, Louisiana can expect major disruption in the operation of many local school systems. Sadly, based on the performance of schools in the Recovery District, there is no reason to believe that such disruptions in the lives of many dedicated educators will actually bring improvements in the education of our students. There is no evidence that taking schools away from democratically elected school boards and handing them over to outside charter management organizations will improve instruction. In my 44 years of involvement with public education, I have never before seen such a drastic experiment with the lives of thousands of students and educators.
This title could be misleading because it will not necessarily reduce red tape for local school systems and it certainly does nothing to empower any local school system, while it greatly empowers the State Department of Education to dictate various actions to local school systems.
The legislation allows local school systems to apply for a waiver of various state laws and BESE regulations such as class size maximums, pupil-teacher ratios, and instructional time requirements provided that the school system submits a plan for improvement of academic achievement of the students of any schools exempted from such laws or regulations. The law actually seems to be aimed at providing an alternative to state takeover of low performing schools. It basically would allow a local school board to maintain authority over its low performing schools if the local superintendent agrees to make state mandated changes to such low performing schools. To avoid state takeover the school system must choose one of the following reorganization plans for any of its low performing schools it wishes to have exempted from state takeover:
1. Turnaround: Replace the principal and a majority of the teachers and give more power over the budget and teacher selection to the new principal
2. Restart: Turn over the school to a charter or outside management organization
3. School closure: Close the school and send the students to another school that is a high performing school within the district
4. Transformation: Replace the principal and implement various changes to the management of the school. This option can be used for no more than 50% of the schools receiving waivers for that school district.
The law would also require that any school that fails to improve according to state mandates over a period of time regardless of any waivers, would eventually have to be converted into a charter school. This legislation would establish charter conversion as the final solution for any school that is judged to be chronically low performing. What would happen if such a charter school still failed to perform satisfactorily? The law would mandate that it be turned over to another charter organization. In this legislation we finally have an answer to the question: Who would take over a takeover school if it still failed? Answer: It would simply be another takeover organization. It would never go back to the local school board.
How will this law actually affect local school systems?
The law is obviously intended to apply only to school systems that have “low performing” schools as defined by BESE. This year it would focus on schools that have been assigned a School Performance Score of 65 or below and have not met state mandated improvement goals. Next year the minimum score will go to 75. At least 20 of Louisiana's local systems would not be affected at all because none of their schools have SPS scores below 75. Here's how it will affect some systems:
For example, if we use the School Performance Score of 75 to determine which schools could possibly be affected, a large school system such as East Baton Rouge Parish could have approximately 40 of its 80 schools affected. That means that if school scores do not improve sufficiently, the school system would have almost half its schools subject to state takeover. If it wants to retain some control of its schools, EBR would have to apply for the waiver described in this legislation.
If the school system does not want to close any of these schools it would have to turn some over to charter organizations or fire at least half the faculty or at least fire the principals and find replacements and then follow the dictates of the State Department of Education as to how to run these schools. This certainly does not look like red tape reduction and local empowerment!
With the passage of this law, the state will be mandating to local school systems what may be considered draconian measures in all schools classified by the state to be low performing. And as we have seen, the definition of low performing can be changed at any time by BESE. What could be some of the other effects of such new rules?
A school system with several low performing schools could face the following problems:
1. Some principals would have to be fired or transferred even if the local superintendent believes he/she is doing the best job possible under the circumstances. The state does not consider extenuating circumstances such as high poverty communities served by a particular school. It is assumed that all schools can and should perform at a certain level. If it does not do so, the principal and teachers must be blamed.
2. If none of the low performing schools are to be turned over to Charter Management Organizations, and if closing schools is not feasible, then at least half of the low performing schools would be required to replace at least half of their teachers. Would the local school system be forced to fire these teachers, or would it switch them with teachers from higher performing schools? How would teacher and administrator morale be affected by such mass firings or transfers?
3. A few of the smaller school systems serving high poverty districts may be forced to turn over almost half of their schools to Charter Management Organizations or try to implement massive teacher firings and replacement or just turn over such schools to the state.
If both this legislation and HB 1033 (the law mandating teacher evaluations based on student test scores) passes, Louisiana can expect major disruption in the operation of many local school systems. Sadly, based on the performance of schools in the Recovery District, there is no reason to believe that such disruptions in the lives of many dedicated educators will actually bring improvements in the education of our students. There is no evidence that taking schools away from democratically elected school boards and handing them over to outside charter management organizations will improve instruction. In my 44 years of involvement with public education, I have never before seen such a drastic experiment with the lives of thousands of students and educators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
