Archive for the ‘Commentary’ Category

Sexually Explicit Lyrics’ Impact on Young People

Tuesday, January 24th, 2017

Back in 1949, “Baby, It’s Cold Outside,” won an Academy Award; in 2016, it made it big again, this time because Minneapolis singer-songwriter Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski found the lyrics to Frank Loesser’s 1944 classic song provocative–and, apparently, they  weren’t alone.

While The Huffington Post‘s Jenna Amatulli called it ” a really screwed-up tune,” The Daily Beast went so far as to describe it as “Everyone’s Favorite Date-Rape Holiday Classic.” Along those same lines, Urban Dictionary lists it under the “Christmas Date-Rape Song” heading.

And so, while many just mindlessly sing along when it pops up on Christmastime radio, Liza and Lemanski dissected its lyrics and then wrote their own version. It put them on the map, so to speak, and earned them the regard of like-minded folks.

But perhaps it would be more effective to target today’s music than a 72-year-old classic. After all, the airwaves are filled nowadays with with songs titlled “F*ck and Run,” “How Many Licks,” and the like.” Along those same lines is the first stanza of Ciara’s “Body Party” which goes like this:

“My body is your party, baby
Nobody’s invited but you baby
I can do it slow now, tell me what you want
Baby put your phone down, you should turn it off
Cause tonight is going down, tell your boys is going down
We in the zone now, don’t stop…”

And those words are actually comparatively tame.

Indeed,”A Feminist Analysis of Popular Music: (more…)

Obama’s Costly Education Legacy

Wednesday, January 18th, 2017

Writes Education Week’s Alyson Klein, “Obama swept into office in an enviable position for pushing his school agenda. His education secretary, Arne Duncan, had fans on both sides of the partisan aisle. The Democrats had hefty majorities in both chambers of Congress, where lawmakers were itching to update the No Child Left Behind Act. Obama hadn’t gotten the teachers unions’ endorsements, but won the Democratic nomination anyway, freeing him to push for policies the unions opposed, such as evaluations tied to test scores.”

Dreamstime ObamaShe goes on to remind readers that, thanks to his American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to jump start the sluggish economy, he started with $100 billion to spend just on education–and that included $4.35 billion for his Race to the Top grant program. The initial one offered up to $700 million each to states if, in their applications, they went along with Obama’s education priorities: standardized tests, teacher evaluations based on student performance, turnaround policies for dealing with struggling schools, expanding data systems, and the Common Core Standards, too. Oh, yes, to win, states’ applications also had to be deemed praise-worthy all around by the powers that be.

Not surprisingly, hungry for money, just about every state (more…)

America’s Priorities & Who Comes in Last

Tuesday, December 6th, 2016

This crossed my desk the other day and comes under the heading of worth sharing:

  • The salary of retired U.S. Presidents: $180,000 a year for life
  • Salary of House/Senate members: $174,000 a year for life
  • Salary of the Speaker of the House: $223,500 a year for life
  • Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders: $193,000 a year for lifes
  • Average salary of a teacher: $40,065
  • Average salary of a deployed soldier: $38,000

Your tax dollars at work…

Obama’s Race to the Top’s Non-Academic Impact

Monday, November 28th, 2016

According to a report by the Institute of Education Services, an arm of the U.S. Department of Education, there’s little evidence that the Obama administration’s initial $4.35 billion Race to the Top (others followed) had much, if any, impact on student achievement or state policy. If you remember, this signature grant program of his and then Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s–in  essence a government bribe–rewarded states for adopting such priorities of theirs as rigorous standards (think Common Core), updated data systems, turnaround policies for “failing” schools, and value added measures to evaluate teachers based on student test scores.

Not surprisingly, just about every state applied and at great expense, but just 11 and D.C. went on to win and receive good-sized shares of those billions; 7 almost-winners got smaller awards…

Your tax dollars at work…



George Will on Academia

Monday, November 28th, 2016

In a USA Today commentary, George Will wrote, “… Campuses create ‘safe spaces’ where students can shelter from discombobulating thoughts and receive spiritual balm for the trauma of microaggressions. Yet the presidential election came without trigger warnings?” He continues to note that on November 7, whether elated or despondent, most “normal” folks got back to the business of their lives, but not so many college students, too traumatized to get on with their studies on campuses that are no longer bastions of free thought and dialogue among those with opposing views. No, not at all.

As Will notes:

  • A Yale professor made the day’s exam optional for students distraught by the election’s result.
  • A University of Colorado student wrote “free speech matters” on 680 posters that warned about politically incorrect speech.
  • Catholic DePaul University decried an “Unborn Lives Matter” poster as bigotry.
  • Bowdoin College offered counseling services to students “traumatized by the cultural appropriation committed by a sombrero-and-tequila party.”
  • Some Oberlin College students suffered breakdowns because schoolwork interfered with their political activism.
  • Cal State University, Los Angeles, provided “healing spaces” to help students handle a speech made 3 months earlier.

And on and on it goes , with esteemed professors (more…)

Pre-K For All Is No Cure-All

Tuesday, November 15th, 2016

fotosearch-kindergarteners-paa186000022So is universal pre-school the great equalizer politicians claim, the silver bullet that ensures academic success for at-risk children? That certainly has been the hope and the justification for schooling our youngest learners and spending a whole lot of money in the process.

Indeed, as reported by Lilliam Mongeau for Education Week, “The 42 states with public preschool programs and the District of Columbia spent $6.2 billion to serve 1.4 million 3- and 4-year-olds in the 2014-15 school year.” And that bears repeating: In just one school year, taxpayers shelled out some $6.2 billion on pre-K education alone.

So, how much bang are we getting for our bucks? Certainly not nearly as much as Obama and his Secretary of Education John B. King, Jr. would have us believe.

As pointed out in an article by Esther J. Cepeda, a 2013 study of 3,000 Tennessee children randomly assigned to either attend pre-K or not, found that, short-term, those attending were more prepared for kindergarten, had better work skills, and enjoyed more positive attitudes toward school than the non-attenders. However, 2015 data showed that…

  1. By year’s end, their first grade teachers rated them as possessing “weaker work skills, less prepared for and more negative about school.”
  2. Moreover, at the end of both 2nd and 3rd grade, they did not perform as well on academic tests as those who never attended pre-K.

Concludes Cepeda, “Maybe for the youngsters in question, two extra years of high-stakes education and testing cast school as a drag to be endured rather than experienced happily.”

A better bet, she suggests: effective anti-poverty programs and parenting classes for their moms and dads. Oh, yes, a whole lot less screen time, too. Maybe throw in more book reading and family time, as well.

Kids Are Smarter Than We Think

Monday, November 14th, 2016

Fotosearch Test Taking 26734All along, the powers that be have said American kids come in either above or below the all-mighty grade level mark when it comes to academic performance–but not apparently on it. Really. Meanwhile, it was also determined that just 5% to 15% of our students scored in at that “above” range. Yikes, right?!

But then Johns Hopkins researchers recently went to work analyzing performance results in three key states to definitively answer the question: “How many students perform above grade level?” and targeted three states:

  1. Florida because it opted out of the Common Core State Standards adopted by most states in one form or another.
  2. Wisconsin because it adopted the Common Core but not its related SBAC  online assessment’s adaptive features, which is known there as the Badger Exam.
  3. California because it went all in for the Common Core and its related SBAC online assessment.

And here’s what they discovered:

  • In Wisconsin,  32% of 3rd graders and 45% of 8th graders scored 1+ years above grade level in English/Language Arts. When it came to math, 38% of 3rd graders and 26% of 8th graders did so. Plus, more than 33% of the 8th graders scored at or above the 11th grade proficiency level.
  • As for performance on the SBAC in California, 21% of 3rd graders and 37% of 8th graders scored 1+ years above grade level in English/Language Arts; 19% of 3rd graders and 34% of 8th graders did so in math.
  • And in Florida that has not relied whatsoever on the Common Core, 30% of 3rd graders and 42% of 8th graders scored 1+ years above grade level; 36% of 3rd graders and 38% of 7th graders did so in math. Eighth grade scores were not available.

The researchers’ conclusion: Our kids are far better off academically than that previous 5% to 15% figure.

Another interesting take-away: California, with its Common Core curriculum and related standardized test, by no means outdid the other two states…

Education Week Takes on Virtual Charter Schools

Saturday, November 12th, 2016

The special report, “Rewarding Failure,” starts off by saying, “With growing evidence that the nation’s cyber charter schools are plagued by serious academic and management problems, Education Week conducted a months-long investigation into what is happening in this niche sector of K-12 schooling…” and found that:

  • “Collectively, online charters receive more than a billion dollars in taxpayer money each year.”
  • “Online charters serve more than 200,00 students across 26 states; many are run by for-profit companies.”
  • “Stanford researchers say cyber charters have an ‘overwhelmingly negative impact’ on student learning.”

All on its own, highly touted K12 Inc. has:

  1. Hired 321 lobbyists over 14 years;
  2. Incurred lobbying expenditures of $10,585,177 since 2000;
  3. Donated $2,124,002 to candidates, party committees, PACs, and ballot measures.

Not far behind in spending your money is Connections Education which:

  1. Hired 212 lobbyists over 13 years;
  2. Incurred lobbying expenditures of $3,784,818 since 2002;
  3. Donated $62,500 to candidates, party committees, PACs, and ballot measures.

The report goes on to say that, despite their poor academic results, “Online charter advocates counter that the schools provide a safe haven for students who would not otherwise succeed in regular public schools and offer flexibility that some students and parents want. They argue that cyber charters should not be evaluated by the same measures as regular public schools.”

What measures one would wonder then, even as your tax dollars continue down the charter school drain…

More Federal Guidance from Education Secretary John B. King, Jr.

Monday, October 24th, 2016

Almost every day, U.S. Secretary of Education does his best to rework the Every Student Succeeds Act or ESSA to his liking. Signed into law by Obama in December, it replaced No Child Left Behind. Last month, he actually released his proposed education funding regulations while Congress was recessed. Known as “supplement-not-supplant,” the debate revolves around its implementation. As Jason Russell explains, “The idea is that federal aid to schools and districts should be in addition to what they already get from state and local funding, not a substitute for other aid.”

That then promoted Senate education committee Chair Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) to say at the time: “His proposed regulation would give Washington, D.C. control over state and education dollars that is has never had before. Federal law gives him zero authority to do this. In fact, our new law [ESSA] specifically prohibits his doing this.”

Indeed, Alexander went so far as to add, “If anything resembling [the proposed regulation] becomes final, I will do everything within my power to overturn it.”

Meanwhile, a few Secretary King quotes:

  • “The USA is fortunate, I think, as a country to have some high-performing charters that are doing a great job providing great opportunities to students–charters that are helping students not only perform at higher levels academically but go on to college at much higher rates than students at similar neighborhood public schools. That’s good. We should have more schools like that, and I think any arbitrary cap on that growth of high-performing charters is a mistake.”
  • “Teachers should prepare students to become more involved in their communities, to volunteer, and to think beyond our own needs and wants… Educated citizens who take part in society will push to curtail racial profiling and end discriminatory practices by prosecutors and courts that have a dire impact on poor people.”


Parents Across America Speaks Out about Education Technology

Friday, October 21st, 2016

Parents Across America, a non-profit boasting 44 chapters in 25 states, has taken a stand about the education technology that is changing the face of American education. Along with the flawed Common Core Standards, our children are now subjected to countless hours of classroom screen time, along with too many standardized online assessments, all coupled with increased data collection.

Unfortunately, it seems that many parents applaud all of this, believing not only that it benefits their children but that the test-based, “concrete” information they receive about their kids’ academic performance is valid.

Parents Across America knows better. Yes, the organization agrees that technology has its place, but asserts that it has no place before third grade and is against 1-to-1 devices before high school. It also quite simply espouses more vigilance when it comes to ed tech and how it’s used in our classrooms. Another of their concerns is (more…)

Professional Development for Teachers: A Revealing Study

Sunday, October 16th, 2016

This just out: A study recently published by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Science determined that a fourth grade teacher’s general math knowledge does not necessarily translate to better outcomes for students.

For the study, 221 fourth grade teachers from five states were randomly chosen to either participate in 13 hours of professional development, meetings, coaching sessions, and analyzing student work, plus an 80-hour summer workshop to deepen their knowledge of K-8 math, not jut fourth grade–or not.

This, of course, matters even more in this Common Core age where rote memorization and procedures have been superseded by an emphasis on conceptual understanding of math and critical thinking.

As for the upshot:

  • On a test of math knowledge, participants bested non-participants by 7 points: 258 vs 551.
  • On an assessment of teachers’ ability to explain math concepts, participants scored 23 percentile points higher than the non-participants.

Sounds about as expected, no?

And yet, it turned out that those teachers now so well-grounded in K-8 math had NO actual impact on student achievement–at least no positive impact. That’s right: The students of the the participating teachers actually scored 2 percentile points LOWER than those of the control group.

So: Maybe it’s not just knowing a whole lot about numbers–or any other subject for that matter, either–that makes the difference, but how information is presented/shared. Content knowledge is essential, of course, but just maybe a teacher’s passion for that content, personality, patience, and heart need to be in the mix, as well?

That’s the ultimate question and possibly the key to effective instruction.


“Watson” Takes on Teaching 3rd Grade Math

Monday, October 10th, 2016

This goes under the heading, “You can’t make this stuff up!” You see, there’s a new man in town, but only sort of… Named Watson, “he’s” actually a computer platform created by IBM. Thanks to artificial-intelligence, it’s not only capable of answering educators’ questions but also helps build lesson plans for them that are personalized–and, come January, will be available, at no cost, to all third grade teachers!

Ultimately–and not that long from now and regardless of grade level or subject–all teachers will have access to this latest “revolution” in education.

Heralded as a “personal assistant,” it not only comes up with great lessons but ones that are customizable. Plus it’s a font of information related to the Common Core State Standards and can help ensure they’re part and parcel of everything that’s taught. And that, after all, is the aim of the current administration.

No human error; no human touch.

Indeed, Watson is so smart, it even knows what skills and background knowledge are essential to the new learning to be understood and take hold. It also solves the pressing problem of diversifying teaching, so that the needs of every child are appropriately met–no easy task for us mere mortals.

Makes one wonder what the next step will be. An army of Watsons in every classroom, not just assisting teachers but taking their place, the perfect educators and data collectors?

You can almost hear Obama, Education Secretary King, and other education reformers clapping, can’t you? After all, in one fell swoop, no more teachers so no more unions, shortages, substitutes, salaries, or pensions.

No chance of nurturing nurturing role models in classrooms, either, but that’s the cost of progress, right?

Maybe in your book, but sure as hell not in mine!


The Growing Teacher Shortage

Monday, October 3rd, 2016

fotosearch_teacher_ks124863According to the Learning Policy Institute led by Stanford University’s Linda Darling-Hammond, in the 2015-16 school year, America was short some 60,000 teachers:

  • 48 states and D.C. were in need of special education teachers;
  • 42 states and D.C. were in need of math teachers;
  • 40 states and D.C. were in need of science teachers;
  • 50% of our schools reported shortages; 90% of those servicing high-poverty neighborhoods;
  • More than 30 states were in need of teachers of English-language learners.

Moreover, LPI estimates that, if the trend continues, by 2018, the 60,000 figure will increase to 112,000, with no end in sight.

Why all of a sudden are we running out of educators?

One reason is that teachers are leaving in droves, many within their first five years of service. Indeed, the annual attrition rate is currently 8%, twice as high in other high-performing countries, such as Finland and Singapore.

And while 30% of that figure is the result of retirement, many others leave because of unsatisfactory teaching conditions and administrators, along with such policies as high-stakes testing, evaluations based  on student test scores, relaxed discipline guidelines, too little teacher input, and on and on.

Plus, enrollment in teacher-preparation programs has slipped by 35% in the last 5 years.

No wonder, right?


Government Charter School Expansion to the Tune of Another $245 Million

Sunday, October 2nd, 2016

123rf-education-21508154The U.S. Department’s continued support of charter schools–financial and otherwise–goes unabated. Last year, it chose to give $71 Million to Ohio through the Charter School Program despite evidence of fraud and other issues. Last month it released those monies, feeling justified because Ohio lawmakers passed a bill to overhaul its charter school law…

And now comes word that the department is doling out another $245 million to eight states and 15 charter schools to expand these so-called public institutions.

Among the beneficiaries of such largess–in other words, your tax dollars–are:

  • $58,454,516 to the Florida Department of Education
  • $30,498,392 to the Texas Education Agency
  • $27,329,904 to the California Department of Education
  • $24,447,229 to the Georgia Department of Education

As for those charter schools, their numbers include:

  • $29,799,050 to the KIPP Foundation in Consortium with KIPP Regions, California
  • $6,338,769 to IDEA Public Schools in Texas
  • $4,591,801 to the Democracy Prep Public Schools, N.Y.
  • $4,043,361 to Denver School of Science and Technology in Colorado

Meanwhile, to date and according to their own accounting, the U.S. Department of Education has already invested some $3 billion in charters and helping to start up 2,500 of them.

All that generosity, then, begs the question: Why not some of those dollars heading, instead, to such public school districts as those in Philadelphia and Chicago which are all but drowning in debt?

Brian A. Jacob’s Take on Student Test Scores

Monday, August 22nd, 2016

The study, “Student Test Scores: How the Sausage Is Made and Why You Should Care,” was written by Brian A. Jacob, a University of Michigan professor and senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. What he figured out is definitely worth noting in this day and age of school reform,  data collecting, and accountability and where teacher effectiveness is based on the standardized test scores of students:

“Contrary to popular belief, modern cognitive assessments–including the new Common Core tests–produce test scores based on sophisticated statistical models rather than the simple percent of items a student answers correctly. While there are good reasons for this, it means that reported test scores depend on many decisions made by test designers, some of which have important implications for education policy.

For example, all else equal, the shorter the length of the test, the greater the fraction of students placed in the top and bottom proficiency categories–an important metric for state accountability. On the other hand, some tests report ‘shrunken’ measures of student ability, which pull particularly high- and low-scoring students closer to the average, leading one to understate the proportion of students in top and bottom proficiency categories.  Shrunken test scores will also understate important policy metrics, such as the black-which achievement gap–if black children score lower on average than white children, then scores of black students will be adjusted up while the opposite it true for white students.

The scaling of test scores is equally important. Despite common perceptions, a 5-point gain at the bottom of the test score distribution may not mean the same thing in terms of addition knowledge as a 5-point gain at the top of the distribution. This fact has important implications for the value-added based comparisons of teacher effectiveness, as well as accountability rankings of schools.

There are no easy solutions to these issues. Instead, there must be greater transparency of the test creation process, and more robust discussion about the inherent trade-offs about the creation of test scores, and more robust discussion about how different types of test scores are used for policy-making as well as research.”