Teacher World

A Department of Education release by Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, bemoans the fact that the 2009 results of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development shows that America scored average in reading and science and below average in math. In his latest release, Duncan made the following statement:

“Today’s PISA results show that America needs to urgently accelerate student learning to remain competitive in the global economy of the 21st century. More parents, teachers, and leaders need to recognize the reality that other high-achieving nations are both out-educating us and out-competing us. Our educational system has a long way to go to fulfill the American promise of education as the great equalizer.

Being average in reading and science — and below average in math — is not nearly good enough in a knowledge economy where scientific and technological literacy is so central to sustaining innovation and international competitiveness. The results are especially troubling because PISA assesses applied knowledge and the higher-order thinking skills critical to success in the information age.”

What he failed to report was that only six countries scored higher than the U.S. on reading, and we were on a par with the average for science. Additionally, we have shown improvements compared to past PISA results. We have stopped dropping in the international rankings, and, according to Bob Wise, the president of the Alliance for Excellent Education: “there has been some improvement in the mean scores of all three subjects since the last assessment.”

Now, clearly, we have a ways to go, but I wish Mr. Duncan had at least mentioned the improvements which have been made. I also wish that in his statement, he would have taken a little time to talk about the elephant in the room. Let’s face it, in the countries which score so high, education is viewed very differently than it is by many here in the United States. It is the number one priority, and children learn that early on from their families. Working hard and doing your best at all times is a concept that is not just taught in the schools but at home as well. As a result, these countries have an advantage right off the bat.

When comparing data, scientists know that the variables which influence that data must be consistent and controlled. When studying test data from different countries, there are clearly no fixed or controlled variables other than the test itself. Therefore, the test results from the latest PISA are more an indictment against our country and its values than it is against those in education who work to prepare students to perform well on these constant tests which have little to no meaning for so many in the U.S. And it is an indictment of many in our society whose attitudes are openly disrespectful and critical toward public education in general.

Teacher-World's Blog Arne Duncan, Department of Education, PISA, school testing

I’m all for the child nutrition bill, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which is pending in the House. This is one priority of President and First Lady Obama’s which I think many of us involved in education can embrace as its goal is to improve what is being offered to our students for school lunches and breakfasts. At a time when child obesity is increasing drastically and so many are struggling economically, schools need to be held accountable to improve what they are serving our students.

Many children either choose not to eat breakfast before coming to school or are on Free and Reduced Lunch which allows them to receive free breakfasts, too. Last year when our school started serving breakfasts, few of my students took advantage of this option. The ones who did tended to be the ones who qualified to receive breakfast for free. But I have noticed this year that about half of my students are either buying or receiving breakfasts. What is the difference? I think it’s what is being served. Breakfast usually consists of a choice of sweetened cereal, a donut or sweet roll of some kind, cinnamon bread, yogurt (which is rarely chosen), milk, and juice. Most of what they are eating is empty calories with minimal nutritional value. I don’t think I have ever seen fruit or anything which would provide protein being served for breakfast. Sugar and carbs! That’s our school breakfast, and this is supposed to fortify our students and get them physically ready and mentally alert for learning!

Lunches aren’t much better. A little lighter on the sugar, but the carbohydrates and grease are unreal! Our most coveted lunches are pizza, nachos, chicken fries or nuggets, breadsticks filled with cheese served with dipping sauce, and breakfast for lunch, which is French toast sticks and potato patties. Then, after filling up on all of these carbs, students can buy two extras. These include chips, cookies, fruit snacks, and candy. Rarely is fresh fruit available, and while vegetables are served, they are rarely eaten. Students can opt to order a salad, but the salads are made with iceberg lettuce so there is little nutritional value to them either.

Therefore, I am happy to report that the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, is being heartily supported by many, in fact, “more than 1000 organizations from all 50 states—representing public health experts, private sector companies, and faith-based and anti-hunger organizations—wrote to the House of Representatives urging passage of this legislation.” It has already passed in the Senate, and will hopefully pass in the House of Representatives as well. If passed, it would do the following (according to the Department of Education website):

* Increase access to meal programs.
* Improve nutrition standards.
* Increase education about healthy eating.
* Establish standards for competitive foods sold in schools.
* Increase physical activity.
* Train people who prepare school meals.
* Enhance food safety.

I thoroughly support the efforts to pass this important bill. We need to teach our children to eat better, and we need to provide healthy food for those students whose best or only meals are those they are receiving at school. If the members of the House of Representatives were to randomly visit schools in the states they represent, I am quite sure this bill would pass by a landslide! Let’s get this bill passed and provide meals that will improve the health and physical well-being of our children.

Teacher-World's Blog child obesity, Department of Education, free and reduced lunches, Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, school lunch programs

The rest of the letter which I have been reporting on from the Office of Civil Rights found on the Department of Education website is a rather stern warning to schools to address bullying directly and firmly. It clearly states that investigating and addressing known incidents of harassment is the responsibility of all schools, and addresses the need for well-publicized policies which would prohibit harassment.

The letter addresses the need to investigate and deal with all suspected incidents, not just ones reported by parents. “When responding to harassment, a school must take immediate and appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred.  The specific steps in a school’s investigation will vary depending upon the nature of the allegations, the source of the complaint, the age of the student or students involved, the size and administrative structure of the school, and other factors. In all cases, however, the inquiry should be prompt, thorough, and impartial.” Interestingly, I caught a local news report regarding bullying and how our local schools measure up when it comes to handling the incidents that are occurring. What they found from the reports being sent to the state by districts regarding these incidents is that the stronger the bullying policy implemented in the school and the more consistently it is followed, the less cases of bullying there seem to be.

Now, you are probably thinking, “Duh!” Yes, it seems so obvious, but let’s explore the ramifications of this report more thoroughly. This report should tell us all that we can stop bullying if we make a concerted effort to do so. Some school districts are decreasing the occurrences through tougher policies, so every school district needs to do the same.

The letter, which I encourage you to read, lays out the proper procedures to follow to correctly deal with reported or known incidents. By the time I got to the end of this letter from OCR, I got the impression that we, who are in education, are being warned in no uncertain terms that we need to get it together where bullying is concerned. We have been warned now through the Ohio Civil Rights program and the Department of Education to take this seriously. If we choose to minimize the message, we will have only ourselves to blame if we are publically called on the carpet for allowing bullying to continue unchecked. And if that means a lawsuit, well, we’ve been warned! Bullying is the hot topic right now and rightfully so. So, readers beware and let’s crack down on harassment and bullying!

Bullying, Teacher-World's Blog Bullying, bullying policy, Department of Education, harassment, Ohio Civil Rights

Awhile ago, we received an email from our superintendent which included a link to the Department of Education website. The letter, written from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Ohio Civil Rights,  is both a dissertation regarding what constitutes bullying, what form of bullying specifically violates one’s civil rights, and a strong warning to school systems everywhere to tighten up their anti-bullying policies. In light of all the recent lawsuits against school systems, it is a timely letter to all of us. Since it is such a critical topic which concerns each of us, either as students, parents, teachers, or administrators, I thought I should break it down over the next few blogs and take some real time with this sensitive issue.

The letter begins by defining bullying as behavior that “fosters a climate of fear and disrespect that can seriously impair the physical and psychological health of its victims and create conditions that negatively affect learning, thereby undermining the ability of students to achieve their full potential.”

Sadly, we have all seen it. Maybe we have felt it. Maybe there was something different about you, something that stood out and caused you to be noticed. And the teasing started, and it hurt. But then the teasing got more brutal, and you didn’t want to go to school and face it one more day. Maybe it wasn’t you; maybe it was a friend, and you wanted to stand up for them when the bullying began, but you were afraid it would turn on you so you stood silently by and then hated yourself afterward for not defending someone you care about. Maybe you were the one doing the bullying, and you felt some power that had previously escaped you but somehow took away some hidden pain of your own as you inflicted pain on someone else. And perhaps even as you felt that burn of power, you also felt a deep sense of disappointment in the person you were becoming.

Yes, we’ve all experienced it in some form. We were either the one hurt, the one powerless to help the one who was hurting, or the one doing the hurting. Either way, we were all powerfully affected by what we experienced. And for that very reason, we all need to take a stand when it comes to bullying. We can no longer sit back and say that bullying has always been around. Too many have been damaged or worse because of this malignant meanness. It is time to stand up to the cancer that threatens us, our children, or our grandchildren. It is time to say no more. We owe it to all those who have been hurt to say, NO MORE!!!!!!

Bullying, Teacher-World's Blog Bullying, Department of Education, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Ohio Civil Rights, schools

The Department of Education released the names of the ten winning applicants in the Phase 2: Race to the Top competition in their August 24th release. They include the following: the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Rhode Island.

Even though these applicants had the highest scores, apparently other states were not far behind. The number of winning applicants was determined by the quality of their applications and the available funds. According to the release, “The 10 winning applicants have adopted rigorous common college- and career-ready standards in reading and math, created pipelines and incentives to put the most effective teachers in high-need schools, and all have alternative pathways to teacher and principal certification.” Hmm…sounds a little scary to me. I’m not sure what pipelines are, but I have a feel for what incentives might be used. Does merit pay ring a bell? Also, if you check out the release from the Department of Education, you will get a feel for the intended budget for each state, as well as the District of Columbia. We’re talking a lot of money here, gang!

 If you are from any of the above winning areas, it would probably behoove you (as it would me since I am a teacher in Ohio) to read your state’s application. Let’s face it; even if your school is not a participating LEA, the writing is on the wall that your whole state will eventually be adopting the same reforms. So, take the time to read through a summary of your state’s application at the very least, and get a preview of what lies ahead. Pre-warned is prepared!

Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog Department of Education, Educational Reform, Race to the Top Phase 2

On June 30th, and again on July 7th, press releases from the Department of Education itemized states which would be receiving funds through grants, the 2009 budget, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. I confess to being awestruck at the amount of money being earmarked to states to protect teachers’ jobs, to turnaround low-performing schools, and to comply with the guidelines of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The further I got into the two press releases, the more questions I had. My hope is that someone from the Department of Education might read this blog and be able to answer these questions which I am respectfully putting out there:

* When our economy is so crippled and money is so tight, where is all of this money coming from, or are we all just going to be paying it back in taxes for years to come?
* Is this money earmarked for specific purposes, and are those purposes public knowledge?
* How can citizens attain this information as it pertains to their state?
* In what ways are states being made accountable for how the money they receive is being utilized?
* Is money being allocated equally to all school districts within each state or are funds mainly being funneled to low-achieving schools?
* Many of the states listed already received money from ARRA. Why are they receiving more money, and how can interested citizens be informed as to what was achieved from the first round of funds their states received?

Again, I am asking these questions as a concerned citizen as well as an involved educator. When we are talking about this much money, I think we would all agree that a high level of accountability and transparency are critical to ensure a successful result.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, Department of Education, teachers' jobs, turnaround schools

Have you heard that Pennsylvania is receiving $141 million to turn around its persistently lowest achieving schools? The announcement was made on June 9, by Arnie Duncan. According to the Department of Education, this money is part of the $3.5 billion made available to schools this spring as part of the 2009 budget and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. According to Duncan, “When a school continues to perform in the bottom five percent of the state and isn’t showing signs of growth or has graduation rates below 60 percent, something dramatic needs to be done. Turning around our worst performing schools is difficult for everyone but it is critical that we show the courage to do the right thing by kids.”

So, what does this mean for states like Pennsylvania who qualify for this money? Well, they have to follow one of these models in order to radically improve the educational systems in their states:

* TURNAROUND MODEL: Replace the principal, screen existing school staff, and rehire no more than half the teachers; adopt a new governance structure; and improve the school through curriculum reform, professional development, extending learning time, and other strategies.
* RESTART MODEL: Convert a school or close it and re-open it as a charter school or under an education management organization.
* SCHOOL CLOSURE: Close the school and send the students to higher-achieving schools in the district.
* TRANSFORMATION MODEL: Replace the principal and improve the school through comprehensive curriculum reform, professional development, extending learning time, and other strategies.

All of these, to varying degrees, are extremely radical steps which will ultimately be considered as threatening to the individuals involved in the affected schools. There are drawbacks to each, but let’s try to break it down. My first concern with the broad assumption that a school has to be turned around is precisely this: Is the school the problem, or is it the environment or the social decay in which the school is located that is the real culprit here? I continue to state, without equivocation, that until the environment these children live in changes, and it is not only acceptable but safe to go to school and get an education, no amount of intervention within the schools will be completely successful in turning these schools around. Having stated this obvious fact, for the rest of this blog, my purpose is to look a little deeper into these four methods to discern the pros and cons of each.

Clearly, the assumption of all of these approaches is that the principal has contributed through negligence or mismanagement to help create an environment which is not conducive to learning. In my opinion, principals should only be removed if careful examination of their record were to reveal inadequacies and failures. Otherwise, keep the administrator and work from there. And I have a real problem with the implied assumption with the Turnaround Method that the problem is the majority of the teaching staff. Why else is there a restriction that, at the most, only 50% of the teachers should stay on staff?

The School Closure method seems very unfair for so many reasons that it is hard to zero in on just one. First, it implies that everyone in that school was ineffective in the performance of their job. I find that impossible to fathom, let alone believe. And I can’t even imagine the navigational nightmare involved in redistributing all of these poor school-less children to other schools, not to mention what such an increase in student numbers would do to the schools which would have to accommodate the new arrivals. It just sounds like a total nightmare to me.

I refuse to address the Restart Model, so that leaves the Transformation Model. Of all of the above, I feel that this is the method that seems to be the fairest, although I wouldn’t feel that way if I was the principal. Let’s face it, is there any school anywhere that wouldn’t benefit from some transformation? What school would not turnaround with “comprehensive curriculum reform, professional development, and other strategies”?  (Notice that I took out the “extended learning time” because I have said in past blogs, and continue to maintain, that I think a longer school day is counterproductive. If any additional time is going to be tacked onto learning time, let it be adding on days to the school calendar not hours to each day.)

True turnaround of a school, in my humble opinion, can and should be accomplished with the original staff working together to bring about necessary change. Give teachers who have not been effective the opportunity to improve and grow. Then if they continue to be ineffective, let them go. Imagine the pride and solidarity that a successful transformation would create! These schools would serve as models to other schools that change is possible when there is money to support it and people working together to make it happen.

So, let the transformations begin! And good luck to all of you in Pennsylvania.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, Arnie Duncan, Department of Education, Educational Reform, turnaround schools

Let’s talk about other reasons why so many school systems in Ohio chose not to be a part of Race to the Top. I already stated in my last blog that it was poorly publicized. But I will discuss three other reasons why I believe so many school districts in Ohio turned down this opportunity.

First, something I touched on a little in my previous blog, there were rumors circulating that this new plan would probably change the way teachers are currently compensated, based on years served and graduate classes and degrees achieved, and replace this with merit pay. This is a troublesome issue for teachers for a variety of reasons, which I have addressed in previous blogs. But let me lay out a few concerns that I have with merit pay. First, I do not feel that it is appropriate or fair to link merit pay to test scores as there are so many factors, over which teachers have no control, that influence student achievement on state tests. Home issues and the degree of parental involvement are two major factors in student performance. Second, I feel that merit pay creates competition between teachers when what we should be striving for is collaboration. If Joe Teacher has a system that is highly effective, and he knows he will be paid more bucks for his effectiveness, is he likely to share his techniques if that might mean sharing the bucks as well? Some certainly would, but I am afraid many would not. I can see using merit pay to reward schools which have consistently been effective in showing AYP in all areas of their student population.  That makes sense because it inherently builds a network of staff working in unison to be as productive as possible across the board. That is what is best for students. But I do not believe merit pay for individual teachers will create better schools.

Another item which I believe made it virtually impossible for many school systems to participate in RttT, including my own, was the requirement that all LEAs who joined in had to agree to match the funds that they would receive from the government. In our current economy, how likely is that? At a time when so many schools are operating in the red, this seems like an impossible stipulation, and I am sure it kept many school districts like ours from participating.

Finally, I believe some school systems bowed out when they learned that Ohio is proposing to allocate more than $35 million to hire 50 new Ohio Department of Education staffers, including some with annual salaries in excess of $100,000 per year. Again, at a time when districts throughout Ohio are being forced to make drastic cuts just to stay solvent, this is almost a slap in the face. Let’s put that money where it belongs and where it can do the most good. It just seems mismanaged to me, but what do I know?

Educational Reform, Funding Education, Merit Pay for Teachers, state achievement tests, Teacher-World's Blog Add new tag, Department of Education, LEAs, merit pay, Race to the Top, school reform

First, I am curious to know how many of you out there even knew about Race to the Top. I think it was one of the best kept secrets. And I’m not sure why that would be the case. This should be a good thing, right? So why wasn’t there more publicity about it?

The only reason I knew anything about RttT was because I am always searching the internet for important education news that might be interesting to blog about. So I read about it quite awhile ago and blogged about my excitement that possibly, for the first time, the Department of Education was going to get it right, since one of the goals was to align the math and reading standards nationally from elementary school up to college. I was very excited about the prospect of common standards and what that could mean for teachers. Aside from that, I heard nothing about RttT. We received no information at our schools about it. Such an important venture that would involve school systems throughout our state, and we were never adequately informed? I don’t get it!

A few months ago, we got an email from our union president asking us if we wanted to be a part of this plan. The first problem I had with this was that it was hard to commit to a plan that you had never seen. One of our concerns was that it might involve merit pay, something most of us do not support, and that it also might interfere with the union and its rights. Due to these issues, we voted down the opportunity to participate in this contest. But, admittedly, I don’t think most of us even realized that what we were turning down was the Race to the Top. I didn’t connect the two events either because it wasn’t expressed clearly in the email.

Recently, I explained to some of my co-teachers what we had turned down and what it means for our careers. That will be the topic of a future blog, but my point in this blog is this: why was the opportunity to be involved in educational reform, which is supposed to be so important, so poorly explained and why was there so little publicity? Every school system in participating states should have been showered with information about Race to the Top long before we were ever asked to take a vote. Additionally, it seems ridiculous to sign on to a plan that you have never seen. The order seems convoluted. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to study the proposal before committing to it? Am I crazy or does it feel a little like a trap to you? Would you ever sign a legal document that would affect your future without reading it over first?

I am hoping that before states enter into Phase 2, some of these issues will be ironed out and school systems will be better equipped to make the decision to either accept or decline the opportunity to be involved in Race to the Top. We will just have to wait and see.

I am also curious how many of you who are reading this are in a school system which is currently participating in Race to the Top. Please let us know, and tell us how you were informed about RttT,

Educational Reform, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog Department of Education, Educational Reform, Race to the Top, teacher unions

I have been blogging about the upcoming meetings which will be held to discuss the assessment process currently in place and ways to improve it. I wish I had seen anywhere in the statements made by either Arne Duncan or the Department of Education the need to revamp the social studies achievement tests. Let me state my case, and feel free to tell me if you agree or not.

One of the issues we have in Ohio, which may or may not be true of all states’ achievement tests, is that so much of our social studies test at the fifth grade level is a fourth grade test, in that it is based on material covered in Ohio history in fourth grade. Now, I understand the rationale that students should remember what they learned the year before and build on that knowledge the next year. But Ohio history and United States history involve two completely different curriculums, and the only time they converge is when we talk about the Mid West region or historical events that occurred in Ohio. Therefore, to ask students on a fifth grade achievement test to recall very specific information about Ohio inventors or battles and other events that occurred in Ohio seems both unfair and unnecessary. How many of us could remember specific details about events we learned about a year ago? Does this really test mastery of the social studies standards?

These tests contain many questions which, in my opinion and other teachers I have spoken to as well, have little or nothing to do with understanding the foundations upon which our nation is built. We should be assessing students’ broader knowledge of important concepts pertaining to:
* the exploration and colonization of our nation and how this affected the Native Americans who lived here
* our fight for independence
* the formation of a workable government through the Constitution of the United States
* the branches of government and how they effectively check and balance each other
* citizen’s rights and responsibilities
* a basic knowledge of economy
* immigration; reasons for it and how it shaped our nation
* how industrialization, transportation, and expansion changed our nation

If our social studies test would address these issues in a broad way, I believe it would be a truer test of how well students understand the country in which they live. Shouldn’t the goal in teaching social studies be to educate the younger citizens to have pride in their country and instill a desire to be responsible, contributing members of the society they will play an active role in when their education is complete? If that is our goal, then shouldn’t our test reflect that goal? Or would we prefer citizens who can recall the Battle of Fallen Timbers and what the most important outcome of that battle was?

Don’t get me wrong. I think it is admirable to have the ability to recite specific and detailed information about the past. I am just not sure that this is the criterion upon which we wish to base mastery of social studies. The time has come to revamp these tests with the true goal in mind; to create citizens who have a solid understanding of their nation and a strong desire to serve it as contributing members. Otherwise, I think we’ve missed the mark.

Educational Reform, state achievement tests, Teacher-World's Blog Add new tag, Arne Duncan, assessment testing, citizens, Department of Education, Educational Reform, social studies achievement tests