The troubling lack of public will for reform of Washington schools
Community leaders are taking a closer look at the crisis-ridden Seattle and Washington public schools, where the achievement gap is widening. A key problem is the lack of sufficient pressure from parents and citizens to demand better schools.
Seattle Public Schools
With Seattle Schools Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson’s ouster over a financial scandal in February, community leaders are taking a second look at the structural challenges facing a beleaguered school district. Some of the leaders have begun to conclude that the district cannot make the needed changes without considerable pressure from a public demanding better schools.
The reassessment has taken on a new urgency as School Board elections approach and interim Seattle Schools Superintendent Susan Enfield tries to help an untested new school administration regain its footing. Long-simmering issues such as governance, teacher evaluation, student test scores, and teacher-union demands have received new attention from community leaders.
Even before the crisis atmosphere created by the sudden departure of a superintendent in the state's most populous school district, the facts documented cause for concern in Seattle and Washington. According to a 2010 report by the Center on Reinventing Public Education, over the past decade the achievement gap between low-income and non-low income Washington students has widened.
“On state tests, only one third of our state’s minority students are meeting standards in math and science,” the report states. Only 68 percent of the state’s students graduate from high school, a figure below the national average, the report continues. The numbers for minority students are even lower — 40 percent for Native Americans, 50 percent for African Americans, and 55 percent for Hispanics.
The challenges facing Seattle Public Schools reveal a troubling lack of political will at the statewide level for educational reform. Washington was ranked 32nd out of 36 states competing for Race to the Top federal grant funding.
Lisa Macfarlane, senior advisor at the League of Education Voters, a statewide reform coalition, faults the state’s historically weak record on educational reform. “We finished poorly in the competition for several reasons, including the lack of an actionable plan to address our growing achievement gaps,” Macfarlane said. “Most states are closing their gaps. Ours are widening.”
“While we made some important policy moves at the state level to make us more competitive, we did not put forth a compelling plan on how we take our schools from where they are today to where they need to be,” she said.
In far too many instances, the state’s commitment to strategic reform was lacking in long-term vision, added Sara Morris, president and CEO of the Alliance for Education, a Seattle support group for education and education reform. “We desperately need to consider huge changes to a system that has existed as is for over 100 years. That’s scary, and it takes real courage among policy makers and relentless drive from parents and community leaders,” she said.
League of Education Voters executive director Chris Korsmo sees the problem of closing the achievement gap as systemic. “Frankly, it hasn’t been a priority. People talk a good game, but there is not a statewide plan to close the gap,” she said. “We need a plan that makes it a priority to close the achievement gap, and then we need to align resources to it.“
Korsmo and Macfarlane believe that lack of public support is a major part of the state and city’s inability to align those resources more effectively. “If we can get more people to understand the fierce urgency of changing outcomes for kids, we can create pressure for change,” Korsmo said.
“That is the most difficult part — creating public will and the urgency. Right now, we are creating a pipeline to poverty, or worse, to prison, for nearly half our children of color in Seattle,” she added. “We can and must do better, and the community has to get engaged to get it done. “
The $231 million 2011 Families and Education Levy that Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and City Councilmember Tim Burgess have proposed, in Korsmo’s opinion, is a key part of the solution. “The levy is a good example of how to support closing gaps and getting more kids ready for college.”
Beyond targeted resources, there are a host of other issues that worry community leaders. School district governance, for some, is another structural impediment to beneficial change that has drawn the ire of education reformers and continues to generate heated controversy.
Ex-Microsoft executive and philanthropist Scott Oki is convinced that centralized decision-making is part of the problem. “Forty-three cents on the dollar is spent supporting a central bureaucracy,” he said. Oki decries the waste and inefficiency of school bureaucracies statewide.
“Washington state has 295 school districts. Sixty-two have less than 200 students, and each district has a superintendent.” Oki proposes a decentralized business model, where principals would manage their schools, reporting to their own board of directors, each appointed by the governor. “The boards would become a catalyst for substantive debate on issues of public education,” he said.
Oki’s proposals echo those of an earlier proponent of decentralized, school-based management, the late Seattle Schools Superintendent John Stanford. Arguing that principals should be CEOs of their schools, Stanford, during his tenure in the mid-1990s, challenged conventional wisdom by advocating “market-based schools” that compete for customers through excellence, and developing systems in schools, such as parent involvement, to support academic achievement.
Some local education observers question the assumptions about governance, however. “Structural changes in governance will not increase classroom effectiveness,” said former Seattle School Board member Dick Lilly. “Governance is not the problem, though I tend to favor more autonomy and power for principals within a clear and rigorous curriculum.”
For Morris, striking the right balance between centralization and decentralization is the core issue facing the Seattle Public Schools, noting that there are examples of success with both models nationally. “I’d say we need a blend of consistency [i.e. of standards, assessment tools, and accountability metrics] and flexibility [i.e. school-based staffing authority, and enhancements to core curriculum],” Morris said.
Paul Hill, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education, concurs that while some decentralization is good, it is not sufficient in the long run. “We also need experimentation, new schools, performance-based accountability, experimentation with technology, new providers, and new sources of teachers,” Hill said.
On one point, Macfarlane and Oki are in agreement, namely that community ownership of schools has been faltering and needs to be bolstered. “When communities insist — really insist — on quality schools, they get them,” she said. “One size does not fit all, and building leaders who model and insist upon high expectations want and need flexibility to innovate.”
Raising the bar of expectation for all students by staffing schools with the most talented teachers is a key ingredient, Macfarlane said. In her opinion, one school district has implemented such a strategic staffing initiative and become a national model: the Charlotte-Mecklenberg Schools in Charlotte, North Carolina. The initiative, launched in 2009, provides a mix of financial and hiring incentives for principals and the staff they bring with them to a new assignment. The strategic staffing initiative’s aim is to put new leadership in struggling schools as part of a district-wide goal to improve academic achievement.
“In our poorer neighborhoods, there is a cycle of poor performance that is hard to break,” McFarlane continued. “The poor performance leads to declining expectations on the part of everyone — educators, students, and families — and that leaves teachers and families with fewer options. And that leads to the remaining students falling further behind and a mismatch between resources and needs, so that leaders and teachers have less capacity to collaborate and improve instructional practices. So you end up with the same low academic achievement.”
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 8:20 a.m. Inappropriate
Wasn't there an article earlier along with comments that said that the District has a track record of NOT listening to parents with concerns? The District NEEDS the informed commentary and community experience of its parents and guardians--from the communities whose children aren't so successful on standardized tests AND the folks whose children are in APP/Spectrum, at Salmon Bay and other more specialized programs; these parents and guardians are often influential and system-sophisticated. Parents and guardians from all parts of the socio-economic and ethnic spectrum need to have their voices heard--and LISTENED and responded to. Now.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 8:31 a.m. Inappropriate
"'That is the most difficult part — creating public will and the urgency. Right now, we are creating a pipeline to poverty, or worse, to prison, for nearly half our children of color in Seattle,' she added. 'We can and must do better, and the community has to get engaged to get it done.'"
The "community" is the parents of the schoolchildren. And parents became angry and fed-up with the system a long time ago - but nothing changed. So they did get "engaged" and made changes on their own:
Those who could afford it, after having their pockets fleeced to pay property taxes to pay for the so-called "free" public schools, decided to send their children to private schools. Others, decided they could try to make it on one income instead of two for the sake of their kids and are educating their children at home, or through cooperative education shared by like-minded parents. Others left Seattle for greener pastures elsewhere - the suburbs or out-of-state - realizing their children will be grown-up before even any incremental change in the Seattle school system is realized.
Gary Locke wanted to be known as the "education governor." George Bush, "the education president" with "no child left behind." Remember the high hopes and platitudes touted when John Stanford was named Seattle schools superintendant? That was 16 years ago. His handpicked successor, Joseph Olchefske, resigned after he could not adequately explain, after an audit, why millions of dollars were misspent, misappropriated, squandered, unaccounted for. Every new leader comes on the scene, there is great initial enthusiasm, but the entrenched tax-gobbling bureaucracy does not change. Each new "visionary" comes in from somewhere else, demands and receives an astronomically high compensation package - yet, the system remains the same.
Bureaucratic inertia, political correctness, and teacher's unions control the system. Parents are apathetic because after years and years, a Pavlovian response-like lethargy has set in. They do not want to hear more "edu-babble" or guilt-trips laid on them for not ponying up and voting for more taxes. The only way there will be appreciable change is to empower families with real choice as to where their education dollar goes - starting with a for-real, dollar-for-dollar voucher program. Let parents decide, not government bureaucrats, where to spend the money. Only then will we start to see any meaningful change in the system.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 11:45 a.m. Inappropriate
“Most states are closing their gaps. Ours are widening.”
This is actually not true. States are pretending to make progress, but aren't actually doing so. Race to the Top has become Erase to the top / Race to the bank. RTTT isn't working and was VERY poorly conceived. This is a nice background piece on the randomness of the rating system of RTTT.
http://www.theseattlejournal.com/2011/06/02/rttt-lets-do-the-numbers/
The achievement gap starts at home and is exacerbated by education reform strategies that not only make it worse for kids at the bottom, but also hurt kids in the middle and at the top. We can't leave any group behind while we blindly follow unproven strategies for kids at the bottom. Holding the top down is an incredibly punitive way to treat the kids who arrive at school prepared. Public education is for everyone, after all.
Also, notable, is the lack of emphasis on social skills and emotional competencies in favor of an obsession with bubble test scores in the narrowed curricula of math and language arts.
Ironically, kids arrive at school on a fairly level playing field in math, but then the math curricula (and text books) do more to confuse and confound than help kids learn a basic foundation of math skills.
Also, there is no science to back the concept of tying teacher evaluations and principal evaluations to bubble test scores. We need to amplify the gifts and remediate the deficits that each child brings to the table and we need a collaboration between school and home that results in completely exposing and educating kids to wide and rich curricula and experiences. We don't need to blame teachers for things they have no control over. Holding administration responsible for endless bad and faulty ideas would be refreshing though.
http://www.katemartinforschoolboard.com
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 12:09 p.m. Inappropriate
Mr. Tong's idea of who the "community leaders" is seriously messed up. These Education Reformers, such as the League of Education Voters and the Alliance for Education, do not represent the community at all. They represent the interests of national foundations such as the Broad Foundation and the Gates Foundation.
Perhaps they are not finding the political will or the community interest in supporting their ideas because the community doesn't support their ideas.
The solution to disappointing student academic outcomes won't be found in the teachers' contract. It will be found in early and effective interventions for students working below grade level.
Here's a reform that will find support in the community: students who don't meet the Standards - in grades K-10 (there are no state standards after grade 10) - will be assured of support that will quickly get them to grade level.
I see a lot of teacher-blaming and union-busting from the LEV and the Alliance, but I don't see them coming out to support an extended, intensive, and enriched program to accelerate instruction for students who are behind.
Real people know that it is teachers who teach students, not administrators in the headquarters. The solution doesn't require re-organizing schools so much as it requires a narrowed and focused mission for the central administration. The District headquarters needs to focus on just three things:
1) The non-academic functions of the District: enrollment, transportation, food service, HR, finance, facilities, legal, technology, etc.
2) District-wide planning: enrollment, program placement, capacity management, etc.
3) Quality control: they need to provide assurance that the schools are meeting minimum standards: teaching the state standards as a minimum, providing early and effective interventions for struggling students, providing appropriate challenge for advanced students, providing instruction that engages higher order cognitive skills, providing the necessary range of classes, etc.
A district headquarters organized around these three functions will be lean and effective. It will not be bloated with bureaucratic fiefdoms and driven by internal politics.
The Education Reform movement, as it has be promoted, has not found traction with the community because the community disagrees with the self-appointed leaders of this movement.
The community doesn't think the problem is in the schools but in the central administration. Check the survey results. People voice strong approval of their children's teachers and schools and low approval of the District management.
The community thinks the problem is in a bloated and wasteful bureaucracy that squanders money on pet projects instead of investing that money in teaching students.
The focus of Education Reform is totally out of whack. Too bad they never consider the possibility that they could be wrong about anything.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 1:44 p.m. Inappropriate
If Mr. Tong is puzzled by the lack of public support for education "reform," he might want to speak to a member of the public. Everyone here is on some rich foundation's payroll and there's not a legit community leader in the bunch.
A very lazy piece of reporting.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 1:44 p.m. Inappropriate
"43 cents on the dollar goes to a central bureaucracy"...what other information do we need to know ? The problem has been identified.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 2:25 p.m. Inappropriate
Mr. Oki's idea about decentralization is the first step toward correcting our school problem. As I've seen in other comments, we in the United States typically do the opposite of what other countries do where the schools are highly successful. In Finland, for instance, the school system (usually ranked as the best in the world) is decentralized in exactly the way Mr. Oki suggests.
If you think about it, it's absurd that decisions are made in Seattle on a district-wide basis. As the Finns have found, a one-size-fits-all approach simply does not work. If we dismantled central administration and set up each school as its own minidistrict, then principals would be empowered (and forced) to LISTEN to parents and their local board.
I think it would make sense for the board for each individual school to have, say, 3 members elected by that school's parents, 2 appointed by that school's teachers, 1 appointed by the mayor or county executive, and 1 by the governor.
One other issue that no one talks about: until low-income kids all have access to some kind of health insurance and health care and reliable source of nutritious food, it's not realistic to think the performance gap can be closed by much. That's one advantage Finland has over us: it's social security net.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 2:35 p.m. Inappropriate
Mr. Tong you've missed talking about the extremely low quality of "Supposed Research" by Colleges of Education. The University of Chicago had the good sense to close its school of education. The UW should do the same.
The UW CoE has an absolutely abysmal record when it comes to advocating and supporting programs that produce improvement, especially in Mathematics, in the Seattle Public Schools. It does have quite a record for pulling in Federal Grants from the NSF/EHR as well as backing the ideas from "Big Buck" Foundations.
The recent unanimous approval of "conditional certification" for the all members involved in the UW's Teacher for America program by the Professional Educator Standards Board was another "bizarre example" of a violation of state law by those appointed to make Education decisions. Shame on the PESB.
As there is no Teacher Shortage in Seattle, UW CoE Dean Stritikus and TfA guru Wendy Kopp adopted an attempted "end Run" around state law claiming TfA would reduce the achievement gap.
Here are the problems with that;
#1 TfA has never closed achievement gaps in situations in which an adequate supply of highly qualified certified teachers was available. In Seattle 199 out of 200 classes is taught by HQ teachers and that ration is the same for both low income and non low income schools.
#2 The request for "TfA Conditional Certification" was based on a "Circumstance that warrants issuance of a conditional certification" .... (this is normally used to certify one individual with a special instructional skill, like automotive that is not produced by Colleges of education certification programs).
In this UW - Seattle Schools case the legal "Circumstance" are the Seattle Schools Achievement gaps.
The WAC (181-79A-231) on Conditional certification contains this section:
---
The purpose of the conditional certificate is to assist local school districts, approved private schools, and educational service districts in meeting the state's educational goals by giving them flexibility in hiring decisions based on shortages or the opportunity to secure the services of unusually talented individuals. The professional educator standards board encourages in all cases the hiring of fully certificated individuals and understands
that "districts will employ individuals with conditional certificates only after careful review of all other options".
The professional educator standards board asks districts when reviewing such individuals for employment to consider, in particular, previous experience the individual has had working with children.
===================
This "Circumstance" for conditional certification is a straight up 100% falsehood being perpetrated by the SPS, UW CoE, and the PESB ....
........ as there has been no "careful review" of all other options.
In fact the SPS has repeated made bone-head moves that increase achievement gaps.
There is plenty of "statistically valid" controlled research available that will actually stand rigorous scrutiny (unlike most of the UW CoE fluff) which shows that certain instructional materials and practices are highly effective in closing achievement gaps.
The SPS and the UW CoE regularly ignore such research.
The "Ed Reform" movement championed by Collin Tong in this article ignores such education research while pushing .... "Politically driven practices to transform education" ... transform it because ... Big Money Backers want it transformed in a particular way.
Count me among those "Who do NOT support the Ed Reform movement".
I want the current Education system "Transformed" by the intelligent application of relevant data ... not Transformed by violating laws to do what the "Monied Oligarchs" want done to education USA.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 3:05 p.m. Inappropriate
A key problem is the lack of sufficient pressure from parents and citizens to demand better schools"
ha! The parents have made their pressure known and decamped to the suburbs.
Cliff Mass spent a heap of time/money to try and derail the worthless discovery math program and to no avail. Look, all the math a kid can learn in high school (calculus if they are smart) was known by Newton who did his work in the late 1780's! If in 200 years we haven't figured out how to teach math, I give up. But in fact we do know how to teach it. Trouble is it doesn't require a new textbook every year. So we get lobbied for some new program which is designed not to teach math, but to sell new textbooks.
Blaming teachers unions, another red herring. Coming from a family with two teachers in it, I can attest they cared about their students were totally frustrated with the district administration that to their mind got in the way with every change in the curriculum. Then loaded up their classrooms with more kids who had no support system outside of school. Fix their home life and scores improved. (That would include a strong social net like healthcare.)
Decentralization might help but it's not the fault of parents for this mess.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 3:11 p.m. Inappropriate
How do you close the achievement gap? Just end the apartheid. Low performing schools need better facilities and more money per student than high performing schools.
Teachers at low performing schools need a 5K per year bonus to teach there. The principle needs to have the authority to transfer them for any reason. This is an incentive system to bring the best teachers to the struggling students and empowers the principle to deliver results.
Whose got the best baseball team? Whoever's got the biggest budget.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 3:32 p.m. Inappropriate
I agree with Smacgry ... and Scott Oki
There is a huge need especially in the Seattle Public Schools for decentralization.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 3:39 p.m. Inappropriate
I'll put it succintly: the public doesn't support the ideas of the Education Reform industry because the ideas stink and the public knows it.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 4 p.m. Inappropriate
Hilarious is the word for this article.
First, not one real community member or parent. I'm with Mannix's comments on this one.
Second,
"..community leaders are taking a second look at the structural challenges facing a beleaguered school district. Some of the leaders have begun to conclude that the district cannot make the needed changes without considerable pressure from a public demanding better schools."
Pressure? Are you kidding me? Ask the parents and the hard-working members of the Rainier Beach PTSA about putting pressure on. Ask parents who are unhappy with the resources and time around MAP testing. Ask parents how they feel when the district hands out raises - in a recession, no less - when they cut teachers and elementary counselors and maintenance workers from our schools.
Third, decentralization? Didn't Scott Oki's friend, Joe Olchefske, the former and disgraced superintendent, bring that in during his tenure? How did that work out? It is a very, very delicate balance between headquarters and principals running schools so don't just take up the cry of "decentralization" and think that will solve anything.
The problem with our district really isn't in the schools - it's the management and oversight of the district. You can put pressure on teachers and principals all you want - if the headquarters is a mess, that's what you'll see at our schools.
This is not about anyone wanting to keep the status quo - NO one is happy. But this is about listening to what PARENTS and COMMUNITY what from their schools. This is what needs to happen.
I have no problem looking at national trends but they should be viewed with an eye to what is best for OUR district and no other. I don't care what the cool kids in D.C. education are doing - I care about our district.
What would help is really oversight from the School Board something that has been sadly lacking in the last 4 years but can be remedied this fall. There are good and solid challengers and voters should give them a good, long look.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 4:49 p.m. Inappropriate
westello raises an important point: the School Board is largely to blame for many of the failures in Seattle Public Schools because the School Board has refused to do its job.
The Board has not represented the community.
The Board has not provided governance.
The Board has not overseen the management of the District.
If the Board had done its job over the past four years we might be in a much better situation and we might have made progress instead of slipping backwards.
What are they spending money on that is more urgent and a higher priority than supporting struggling students? $700,000 to upgrade the district web site. $800,000 for NTN for project-based learning software. $1,000,000 for brand-new Dell laptop computers for every student at one high school. Millions to close schools just to turn right around and re-open them. The Board has squandered our resources, they have squandered the good will and trust of the community, and they have squandered four years of our children's lives.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 4:55 p.m. Inappropriate
I volunteered at my kids 1st grade class once a week for a morning and one thing I noticed was that good architecture can make volunteering better & easier. The school had class rooms laid out in "quads", ie at one corner all 4 class rooms were open to a small space that could be used by the volunteer to help a kid. Thus they were in the class room but not disturbing the classroom.
Also I noticed that when the teachers needed bathroom breaks, they could easily look into one another's class rooms and see that all was still quiet.
Vs the hallway and single class room, where do the volunteers work? They don't that's what.
As a concerned parent my goal was not to keep an eye on the teacher but to give the teacher a break in any way I could. I corrected papers, filed stuff, ran messages to the head office, whatever. And when I was done with that, I did one-on-one with students going over homework and helping the kids catch up on lessons. It was one of the, most rewarding volunteering jobs I did.
And it was easy for the kid to get sent over to me, for the teacher to see that we were doing what we were supposed to, and for the kid to feel like they were still part of the class even while getting extra instruction.
But then my kids moved to a new school and well it wasn't set up for parents to help. So guess what? No help appeared.
Good Architecture may not solve all the problems in a school but it can help a lot.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 7:36 p.m. Inappropriate
If the measure of a school system's success is whether it can make poor kids perform as well as rich kids, the schools are doomed.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 9:08 p.m. Inappropriate
Uh, Mr Tong? Isn't it usual and proper for reporters to note any affiliations they have or had with stories or with those they interview for them?
Why didn't you tell us you were once the Public Affairs Director for the Alliance for Education? Isn't this pertinent?
Man, all you Reformers ARE in bed together. I know Crosscut got hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Gates Foundation to spew its message via this outlet, but I had no idea that an ex-Alliance employee was also given a job reporting here.
What a shame: What has happened to unbiased reporting?
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 9:40 p.m. Inappropriate
@coolpapa
The School Board is elected by parents, so, eo ipso, the School Board knows what is right for the children, right? The parents must know who is best to run the district, right? But why do we think that parents know what's best for their children's education? Their intuition? Training? Biology? I know parents WANT to believe this of themselves, but does that make it so? If public education stinks, then it 'stank' for the parents who got the same education. Do parents know how best to treat a child's medical condition? Should they overrule doctors' prescriptions and treatments ("No, I don't want my child to be immunized because it causes autism, and I know what's best for my child.")? Why is education any different than serious medical care?
Parents are just as much a product of the school system as their children are.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 9:42 p.m. Inappropriate
@coolpapa
The School Board is elected by parents, so, eo ipso, the School Board knows what is right for the children, right? The parents must know who is best to run the district, right? But why do we think that parents know what's best for their children's education? Their intuition? Training? Biology? I know parents WANT to believe this of themselves, but does that make it so? If public education stinks, then it 'stank' for the parents who got the same education. Do parents know how best to treat a child's medical condition? Should they overrule doctors' prescriptions and treatments ("No, I don't want my child to be immunized because it causes autism, and I know what's best for my child.")? Why is education any different than serious medical care?
Parents are just as much a product of the school system as their children are.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 9:52 p.m. Inappropriate
I don't have any children in SPS, nor am I a teacher. But, I know one thing I am so sick and tired of the education reformers beating up on teachers and teacher unions. In any workplace there are ways to get rid of incompetent people, but it does take documentation and time and effort--otherwise known as work.
I feel sorry for teachers. I believe they one of the most difficult jobs ever. It has to be particularly disenheartening for them when kids come to school without ever being read to and otherwise ill-prepared for learning. And yet we sit back and kind of watch and point fingers and pontificate. I am sure teachers would dearly love to have all their students engaged and eager to learn--but that's not always the case.
And I'm not going to point fingers at the School Board. We should be glad they have stepped up and at least tried. Remember that the Board is somewhat hindered by the fact that they are dependent on what the school administration tells them. It's not as if the Board is paid anything more than a pittance for their efforts.
For the person who cited the Finns, remember Finland is a homogeneous country unlike ours where we have a little bit of this and a little bit of that. Then there is the taxation system in Finland. We, who want everything but want someone else to pay, would cry 'Uncle' quickly. Therefore, comparing us to Finland is a non-starter.
I wish we had had the guts to vote in the Income tax as well as keeping the tax on soda. Perhaps then we would not be so strapped that the state cannot adequately fund education. Instead of beating up on teachers, we would better spend our time supporting additional taxes so that every school district would have a fighting chance, and the city of Seattle could fund as many Head Start slots as there are children in need of them.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 10:19 p.m. Inappropriate
SeattleCitizen, thank you for revealing this important information that the editor omitted.
bkochris, no, the school board is not elected by parents. It is elected by the voters of their district. Something over 1/2 of the voters in Seattle do not have a school-age child. Thus, most don't spend the time to become informed about school issues.
As a parent with a child in school, I say hurrah for the teacher's union. The District already puts 30 kids in elementary school classrooms. Why stop there, why not 35 or 40? Not because of District administration. Not because of the superintendent. Not because of the Board. It is thanks to the union.
Posted Tue, Jul 12, 10:26 p.m. Inappropriate
We need a new School Board to pull us out of crisis mode and redirect the district so that we're devoting our time and resources to helping students. I'm running in District 1. Kate Martin who commented earlier is running in Dist 2. Support us!
I've never met a parent that didn't want the best education for their child. The problem isn't public will. The problem is the public has been cut out of the decisions that the district has been making. It's all top-down with hidden agendas driving the decision making. Then the public is informed and no surprise, there's outrage.
We need governing bodies in every school that are elected from the community. These bodies need to be engaged in all decisions that impact their school and children. All district docs should be posted to a website for easy public access, review and input. There should be a citizen oversight committee that reviews district finances and decisions. They have this in Bainbridge -- 25 citizens.
SB members should be required to work with the governing bodies of their schools in forming their positions on major decisions. These are concrete steps we can take to dramatically increase parent involvement and cut through all the hidden agendas and top-down decision making.
We also need to get rid of curricula that discriminate against disadvantaged learners. All math curricula need to be replaced with texts that engage all students. There's no way we're going to reverse the achievement gap in math until this is done. We need to review LA, Science and other curricula to be sure they are meeting the needs of all students. And teachers need the flexibility to use whatever works for their students. The policy of mandating curricula needs to go. Standards are already mandated. That's enough.
We also need an assessment system that is accurate and that doesn't intimidate or fail students. Check out ALEKS.com. It's a remarkable example of a learning program that continuously assesses. And because students work at their own level and pace it can be used for remediation or acceleration or independent learning or in a normal classroom. Far superior to MAP.
But we need a new School Board to make all the changes that are necessary. Please support those of us who are running against incumbents!
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 1:43 a.m. Inappropriate
A friend of mine is a teacher in the Seattle Schools and her school is located in the south end. As one might expect, her class reflects the diversity of that neighborhood and consists of a large number of minority and immigrant children. She states that it is quite common for there to be immigrant students in her class who tower over their fellow students. It is obvious that they are 2- to 3-years older than the other students. But they've been well coached and always insist that their birthday is exactly where it should be for that grade level.
She also states that with the Somali kids that discipline seems to be a problem. It is not that Somali parents don't value education, it is that the expectation in Somali culture is that teachers have much more leniency in their ability to discipline students.
Perhaps you saw this article in the Seattle Times today which discusses the changing demographics of American society. Just like the south end of Seattle where my friend teaches, our entire country is facing a rising population of minority students with the largest growth occurring in immigrant families.
"Since 2000, the increase for children in the U.S. - 1.9 million - has been due to racial and ethnic minorities. Currently, 54 percent of the nation's children are non-Hispanic white, compared to 23 percent Hispanic, 14 percent black, and 4 percent Asian. Over the past decade, the number of non-Hispanic white children declined 10 percent to 39.7 million, while the number of minority children rose 22 percent to 34.5 million. ...
"The `minority youth bulge' is being driven primarily by children in immigrant families," said Mark Mather, associate vice president of the Population Reference Bureau... "They are transforming America's schools, and in a generation they will transform the racial-ethnic composition of the U.S. work force."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015585804_apusagingamericafewerkids.html
So when one discusses the crisis in Seattle schools and the urgent need for reform, I wonder whether the real issue is that we are failing to recognize the challenges that teachers face in dealing with kids whose parents don't speak English, whose parents have multiple and evening jobs and can't become engaged in the schools, and where cultural differences can keep kids from learning.
Under these circumstances, I have a difficult time believing that any type of reform--whether it be charter schools, merit pay, computer instruction, or any of the other market based reforms--can show the immediate improvements that the proponents claim.
It is almost as though the reformists see one set of problems and those within the schools see an entirely different set.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 10:01 a.m. Inappropriate
In regard to seattlecitizen's comment: Collin Tong indeed worked as public affairs director for the Alliance, 1996-98. It's something I'm aware of but not something that occurred to me as relevant. In my experience, it would be unusual to make a point of stating a decade-old association with a group, especially one that has gone through as many changes as the Alliance has. But everyone is free to make of it what they will. And, as has been discussed before, Crosscut receives Gates' funding.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 10:55 a.m. Inappropriate
Mr. Copeland,
Given the pro-Reform tenor of the article, its citation of only Reform organizations, and the Alliance as one of those organizations, it is absolutely relevant that Mr. Tong did not disclose his apparently continuing support of the Alliance of Education. Because he was once in a high position in that organization and because he (here in this article) evidences a bias towards presenting only Reformers' perspectives, one can only conclude that Mr. Tong entered into this story from a biased perspective he's held since his association with A4E, interviewed only A4E and its clones (apparently interviewing candidate Kate Martin, a smart and articulate candidate aware of many issues in the district, but did not use any of HER less-Reform manipulated responses in this piece) and is thus merely mouthing the usual Reform boilerplate and couching it as journalism. One wonders what percentage of his salary, once paid by the Alliance, is now paid by the Gates grant to Crosscut.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 11:28 a.m. Inappropriate
Another comment, Mr. Copeland:
As you indicate, the Alliance has indeed gone through a number of changes since the late 1990s: It is now almost exclusively an arm of the Gates Foundation, which has given it great wads of cash lately. The Alliance used to be more a home-grown, local operation, set up (purportedly) to help organize and solicit donations for school and classroom needs. It is currently, due to huge influx of Gates money, much more than that: It is a strategic middleman between District and Gates. Gates gave the district millions to fund the "Strategic Plan" (Reform). This money is managed by the Alliance. Gates wanted to influence contract negotiations last summer, to get more Reform in there (the "SERVE" proposal the Broad Foundation's superintendent, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, concocted at the last minute to enact Gates/Broad Reforms. To accomodate their Gates benefactors, the Alliance created the Our Schools Coalition, with the help of Straegies 360, a PR company. They then asked for the District to give them the private contact information of families and teachers in order to create a push-poll "survey" to influence the public opinion about what should be in the teachers' contract. (Not coincidentally, Strategies 360 has also worked with Gates, and a Strategies 360 staff member is now employed by the District as THEIR PR flack.)
So Coll was being paid by the Gates Foundation back in the late nineties, because he worked for the Alliance. This was right at the beginning of the Reform program to deprofessionalize educators. Now he's being paid by Gates again, through money given to Crosscut, to further the Reform agenda.
Unfortunately, Crosscut has taken the Gates Foundation's money, a huge chunk, and is thereby suspect in its reporting on education. That it publishes a piece by Coll that is pro-Reform only confirms this suspicion.
It's unfortunate that our major media outlets have become, sometimes, tainted by those that pay their salaries. I guess this has always been the case, but it is still unfortunate that we public have to rely, instead, on unpaid bloggers and other sources for our unbiased news.
(I suggest that people go to
http://saveseattleschools.blogspot.com/
for good, diverse discussion and news about Seattle schools. There one will find Reform discussed from all angles, and find information that is not tainted by association with the deep pockets of the Reformers.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 11:34 a.m. Inappropriate
"We should be glad they have stepped up and at least tried. Remember that the Board is somewhat hindered by the fact that they are dependent on what the school administration tells them. It's not as if the Board is paid anything more than a pittance for their efforts."
Wait a minute. Yes, anyone who steps up to run for public office and serve deserves credit. But they know what they are getting into when they run for this office so, no, they don't get off the hook on being responsible. It's their elected JOB to do oversight. If they don't think they are getting complete information from staff, they should ask questions. Pottergate didn't just fall at their feet. They all had multiple opportunities to do something and just didn't.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 11:57 a.m. Inappropriate
I can agree with seattlecitizen on one thing here: I second the recommendation of the Save Seattle Schools blog as a good place for news and discussion of Seattle Public Schools. Crosscut has had the pleasure of publishing a number of articles this year from one of their leaders, Melissa Westbrook, and we value her work highly; we look at Collin Tong's work with similar regard, though they come very different perspectives.
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 1:08 p.m. Inappropriate
"Crosscut has had the pleasure of publishing a number of articles this year from one of their leaders, Melissa Westbrook, and we value her work highly; we look at Collin Tong's work with similar regard, though they come very different perspectives."
True, Mr. Copeland, Melissa Westbrook has no connection to the Gates Foundation, so is not beholden to them, whereas Mr. Tong does have connections to Gates. So Ms. Westbrook's perspective is not tainted by affiliations to Reform, where Mr. Tong's is.
Noting these two different perspectives, one independent and one Reform, is probably a wise thing for your readers to do. It makes all the difference, no? It's a question of agenda: Who is more believeable, someone coming from a biased perspective or an independent thinker?
Now I'm wondering if the International Examiner, Tong's regular employer, recieves Gates funding...It would be just like Gates to fund that organ, as Reform likes to try and convince minorities of its righteousness, because the Achievement Gap is used to justify Reform. Hmm...
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 7:09 p.m. Inappropriate
Seattlecitizen, We're not in agreement on a lot of this, but you've put good deal of thought and effort into your comments here. And you bring a great deal of background on education. So, thanks much for sharing your thoughts with our readers and us.
Joe
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 8:15 p.m. Inappropriate
Thanks, Joe, I have been following the Reform movement for quite some time, and it is distressing: It seeks to whittle education down to mere basics, it seeks to deprofessionalize educators (and thereby make room for mere "warm bodies" that are cheaper and replaceable when they get more expensive with seniority), it seeks to break the union, and it seeks to privatize as much of public education as it possibly can.
There's money to be made: Tests, curriculum, technology, school management, hedge funds on tax breaks given to charter schools in impoverished areas....the list goes on.
This piece by Tong was just more evidence of the incestuous relationships Reform breeds. For instance, Tong worked for the Alliance, as noted. He interviewed the Alliance, League of Educaton Voters, and Scott Oku, among others. Turns out that Scott Oki gave $85,000 to the League of Education Voters last year.
Gates, Broad, NWEA...they're all in bed together to enact the Grand Reform, and they've got money and pull. Heck most of these people have only spend a year or two in a classroom, if that, yet they earn their cred, and get high-paying jobs, by pushing Reform because there's big money behind it.
For instance, my favorite story:
Reform wants a test to fire teachers with. NWEA is a company that makes tests. Gates and Broad Foundations wants a test. They give the district (through the Alliance) money to buy it. The superintendent is on the board of NWEA (and the Broad Foundation) and also on the board of the Alliance. Not disclosing that she is on the board of NWEA, she sells the board on the idea of buying NWEA's MAP test (even though NWEA's own literature says MAP is only to give a general idea of student progress, NOT to use in evaluating teachers.) THEN the Alliance spins off Our Schools Coalition, an astro-turf group formed only to do a "survey" and push-poll slamming teachers (managed by Strategies 360, an employee of which goes to work for SPS...) It's just so intertwined the way these non-educators all "work" with each other to Reform education. They think they know best, they say that anyone who criticizes them just doesn't get it, and, worse, "doesn't care about poor children."
They are manipulating public opinion, buying political favor, using the poor to push forward their agenda...(You won't see any Teach For America five-week-wonder, uncertified, non-teachers in front of wealthy classrooms, now will you? They are evidently good enough for poor children, but then their parents won't complain, or don't know the poor quality of education TFA non-teachers will supply them...)
It's a huge scam, and lots of people are making big money. The CEO of NWEA pulls in half a million dollars a year, the superintendent made over 250k annually (and walked with a fine golden parachute), people at the Alliance, Gates, LEV et all make fine salaries...all pushing the same simplistic lines.
Luckily, people are waking up and seeing the charade for what it is. Parents Across America, Save Our Schools (upcoming rally in late July in DC, and locally, too) and others are daylighting this charade for what it is.
I'm curious, Joe, what you disagree with?
Posted Wed, Jul 13, 8:20 p.m. Inappropriate
So please, Joe, publish Kate Martin's omitted ideas. Tong interviewed her and then didn't use her stuff. Most savvy people understand that this is because it didn't fit the narrative Tong was spinning. Let's have some additional commentary from informed citizens who are NOT tied to Gates, Broad, Walton and Boeing Foundations: Let's have some honest ideas from people who are smart about public education, have no grand agenda to buy, and take note of and respond to other ideas and criticisms.
You've published Melissa Westbrook before, good job, she's one of these people without foundation money in her pocket. More of her, and also her co-blogger Charlie Mas. Sue Peter, Meg Diaz (her budet analyses will knock your socks off: She should be hired by the district). Please engage all the different ideas out there on how to help students. It's not hard: It's mainly individualized attention, not the canned, standardized, digitized crap Reform is selling.
Posted Thu, Jul 14, 1:10 p.m. Inappropriate
Oki decries the waste and inefficiency of school bureaucracies statewide. “Washington state has 295 school districts. Sixty-two have less than 200 students, and each district has a superintendent.”
Those 62 districts have some of the highest graduation rates in the state, and the most recent JLARC study said that school district consolidation wasn't a justifiable idea.
Further, stating that each district has a superintendent might be technically true, but the reality is much different than the impression is Oki is trying to give. Steptoe, a small district in Eastern Washington, pays their superintendent about $5,000 a year. Sprague and Lamont share a superintendent, and Lind/Ritzville is about to. The Supe in Valley, near Chewelah, is also the Superintendent of Onion Creek, a ways to the north. Harrington has a half-time person. Benge has nobody.
His point is not an honest one.
Posted Thu, Jul 14, 6:08 p.m. Inappropriate
This is your address. This is your School. Thanks for playing.
If you want real parent involvement, then true neighborhood schools is the only way to get it. If you want neighborhood pride, then you need neighborhood schools. Period. No Charter School nonsense. No home schooling garbage.
This is your address. This is your School. Thanks for playing.
Posted Fri, Jul 15, 7:33 a.m. Inappropriate
Thank you, martin7341. You alone seem to realize that all of the schools are the same so it doesn't matter which one your child attends. They are all the same. They have the same principal, the same teachers, the same classes, the same group of peers, everything is the same - or nearly the same at all of them. There are no good schools or bad schools. It wouldn't help your child at all if they attended some other school a few blocks further away.
You alone, martin7341, seem to understand the futility of school choice when all of the schools are the same. You alone understand that people become involved in their child's school not when they choose it, but when that choice is taken from them. Students and schools should be matched by zip code, not by academic needs or learning styles. Families should not be allowed options or participation in the school choice because that would diminish their involvement in the school... somehow.
Unless, of course, all of the schools are not the same. Then school choice might matter. If one school offered a special instructional program, such as International Baccalaureate, that your local school didn't offer. Then it might make sense to go outside your neighborhood for school. Or, if one school had a positive school culture that actually valued academics instead of a school culture that did not. That would be a reason to choose some other school.
Posted Fri, Jul 15, 9:21 a.m. Inappropriate
Well said, coolpapa. Students are different (unless we want, or force, them to be the same.) Choice allows for these differences. Vibrant programs can be built that serve students styles and interests, instead of forcing them all into the same box.
Unless we want to them to all be the same, "ready for college and work," demanding not unique, visionary, entrepreneurial citizens but rather interchangeable warm bodies ready to be dropped into place on the assembly line (unless they demand too much: Then they will be kicked to the curb in favor of some more docile warm body.
Choice is good: It's one of the things that drives a vibrant world (culturally, economically, politically...) No choice - the same program in similar schools in the cookie-cutter district - is bad. Bad for citizens (it limits their abilities); bad for the economy (it limits creativity); bad for the world (it lets the Man win.)
Posted Fri, Jul 15, 1:10 p.m. Inappropriate
Let's get back to what is really stupidly hilarious about this biased, misguided article by Mr. Tong.
1. The folks he calls "community leaders" are neither representative of the community nor are they leading anyone. Rather than community leaders they are followers of national interests.
2. His fundamental question: "Why aren't people actively supporting Education Reform ideas?" has a simple answer that he overlooked: Because the ideas stink.
3. He doesn't interview any actual community leaders such as Melissa Westbrook, Meg Diaz, or the Rainier Beach High School PTSA. This shows that he has no real connection with the community. He did interview Kate Martin, but didn't use any of that interview because her story didn't sync with his chosen narrative. Real community leaders are in the grassroots and of the grassroots; not funded by national foundations.
4. We get the usual arrogant line from the Education Reformers: the people who don't agree with us just don't understand the issues. That's not true. The people who disagree with the Education Reformers DO understand the issues. That's why they disagree.
The net result is another laughably weak effort by the Education Reform business to monopolize the media and the narrative about schools. These folks take up a lot column inches, but they don't have anything to say.
Posted Fri, Jul 15, 5:50 p.m. Inappropriate
I know, coolpapa, ain't it the truth? The Reformers say, the people who don't agree with us just don't understand the issues. Yet the Reform blogs, at least for League of Education Voters and Stand For Children, are moderated (they review your comment before they post it) and at least some anti-Reform commenters just haven't been posted. Yes, LEV has posted a couple, but overall it's a rah-rah session on their blogs: What GREAT work you are doing!
Now that I think about it, Stand For Children's blog has NO comments on ANY of the threads. Why? Because no one in the community who is informed about local education would bother posting there, they have no parent/guardian/stakeholders of their own to post some rah-rah...heck, Stand For Children has NO community, except the community of Reformers (who I guess can't be bothered to comment about education issues: They're too busy telling the minority communities whose "achievement gap" Reform needs to survive that "it's for the kids!"
Reform is big business with no community interest. It would be laughable if it wasn't having such an impact on public education by narrowing curriculum and demonizing public educators.
Posted Sat, Jul 16, 7:20 a.m. Inappropriate
Seattlecitizen,
Thank you for sharing your comments about my story. Although we have different perspectives, I appreciate your taking the time to express your concerns about Seattle Public Schools. To set the record straight, I wanted to clarify a few points. The International Examiner, where I am a staff reporter, is not, to my knowledge, a recipient of Gates Foundation funding. While I did work briefly for the Alliance for Education fifteen years ago, my article does not reflect a particular bias towards the organization or other individuals interviewed. Like many other Crosscut writers, I am an occasional freelance contributor and take seriously my professional obligation as a journalist to be objective. Finally, while it's true that I did interview Kate Martin, in the interests of fairness and equal time for the other candidates running for school board, I decided not to include her remarks in my story. Kate did pen a very thoughtful comment to the story, which echo what she said to me. To do justice to all the school board candidates would require a separate story. Again, thank you for your thoughts.
Collin Tong
Posted Sun, Jul 17, 4:34 a.m. Inappropriate
Dear Collin:
You say: "While I did work briefly for the Alliance for Education fifteen years ago, my article does not reflect a particular bias towards the organization or other individuals interviewed."
I am sorry to tell you that statement does not pass the smell test. Your article is in fact biased toward that organization. Every bit of it is, from beginning to end. I am forced to conclude from reading it that either you do not "take seriously" your "professional obligation as a journalist to be objective," or you have no idea what that means.
You appear to have swallowed whole the basic assumptions behind the "educational reform" movement, and that movement's conclusions. There seems to be no intellectual curiosity on your part to examine whether these assumptions, or the conclusions drawn from them, are valid.
"Although we have different perspectives" is hardly a sufficient disclaimer. And "thank you for your thoughts" indicates to me that you aren't very interested in examining the "reformers'" basic assumptions, or their conclusions, but instead intend to continue reinforcing them.
If at any time you had asked Morris, or Macfarlane, or Korsmo, or Oki, "how do you know that is true?" or "have recent developments caused you to modify that opinion?" or certain more specific questions I could mention, I might be able to take this article seriously. I hope you have learned something from the comment thread. For now, I'll just echo coolpapa's comment that "the public doesn't support the ideas of the Education Reform industry because the ideas stink and the public knows it."
Posted Sun, Jul 17, 4:25 p.m. Inappropriate
Mr. Tong, you write that you "appreciate your taking the time to express your concerns about Seattle Public Schools."
That is a total twisting of my words and I resent it deeply. I am not concerned about Seattle Public Schools, did not indicate dis-satisfaction with SPS, yet you write that that was the gist of my comments? This is the exact sort of twisting of facts that I resent about the Reform movement, and I resent you do it here.
As you well know, I am concerned about Reform writ large, the conspiracy by some small group of foundations, "coalitions" (like the ones you interviewed, to the exclusion of all other perspectives) and businesses.
You know damn well I'm not "concerned" about SPS, I'm concerned about the profiteers who would Reform it.
Shame on you. First you don't interview anyone but reformers, then you say that I am concerned about our public schools, which I'm not. This is how Reform works: Gin up a bunch of ideas about how concerned we should be about schools, heck, even tell us we ARE concerned when we're not, then sell us the snakeoil.
Posted Sun, Jul 17, 7:57 p.m. Inappropriate
"Finally, while it's true that I did interview Kate Martin, in the interests of fairness and equal time for the other candidates running for school board, I decided not to include her remarks in my story."
You knew she was a candidate before you interviewed her, you shouldn't have interviewed her at all, then. What a waste of her time.
Furthermore, in the interest of an unbiased perspective and honest reporting, you should have talked some of the actual parents/community members who are the subject of your piece, rather than just the usual reform suspects.
THAT is why your piece smells of salesmanship of the Reform snake oil. Intended or not, that is what it is. The same ol' same ol' line from Reformers: Why, oh why, won't parents/guardians rise up and demand Reform? Of course it is because they KNOW what Reform is and they abhor it. No wonder you didn't interview anyone but Reformers: They would have spoken truth to Reform's "power," which is merely its media mouthpieces.
Posted Sun, Jul 17, 8:26 p.m. Inappropriate
Tong had this article recently published which quotes Sara Morris and Oki extensively and the photo credit on the article just happens to be Education for Alliance. The article makes the same points as this article. How many places is this going to be published?
http://www.iexaminer.org/news/education-leaders-reexamine-strategies/
Posted Tue, Jul 19, 12:07 p.m. Inappropriate
When the Alliance for Education was first formed, I phoned my school board rep, Al Sugiyama, to suggest that the Alliance create an all-city fundraising system to supplement/replace PTSA fundraising inorder to mitigate the income inequity between different schools/neighborhoods. The response was that the Alliance for Education had no interest in involving parents, as they just got in the way. That was all I needed to know about ANY of their ideas.
Posted Tue, Jul 19, 3:51 p.m. Inappropriate
"Kate did pen a very thoughtful comment to the story, which echo what she said to me. To do justice to all the school board candidates would require a separate story."
A little disingenuous or a little lazy, which is it Mr. Tong? Because there are many education activists in Seattle (not just me but Joanna Cullen, Carol Simmons, Charlie Mas, Sharon Rodgers, etc.) who could have added perspective to this piece and yet you chose to interview and quote the usual suspects from the usual places.
When "regular" folks, people in school communities who are the feet on the ground for education, get shut out of the discussion time and again and then there is this hand-wringing over "why doesn't the public get it?", then someone needs to go look in the mirror. Let's start with Bill Gates and move down the line.
There cannot be just one way to better education. Saying over and over that if some don't like the ed reform mantra, they want the status quo is wrong (and will never get those people to listen to you). All voices need to be at the table, not just a hand-picked few. And the more the hand-picked few keep trying to shut out the many, then you will never see the change you want.
Posted Tue, Jul 19, 7:55 p.m. Inappropriate
I didn't think that I would have to respond to the moronic post by bkochis. I reckoned that it was so plainly wrong that it didn't require a response.
Then someone at Crosscut had to go and mark it as an Editor's Pick.
bkochis wrote: "The School Board is elected by parents, so, eo ipso, the School Board knows what is right for the children, right?"
No. Wrong. That is not in any way proven. First of all, all registered voters participate in the election of school board directors, not just parents. Second, winning an election is no proof of anything other than the ability to win an election. If you think it means something more than that, then you are exactly and objectively wrong.
bkochis wrote: "The parents must know who is best to run the district, right? But why do we think that parents know what's best for their children's education? Their intuition? Training? Biology? I know parents WANT to believe this of themselves, but does that make it so?"
It's amazing how bkochis knows exactly what is in the hearts and minds of all parents, isn't it? Statements like these make it perfectly clear that bkochis is talking nonsense. I thought this might be intended as sarcasm, but that level of nuance appears to be beyond bkochis' rhetorical skills. Along with logic and reason. Parents do know their children better than the superintendent. Can bkochis accept that premise?
bkochis wrote: "If public education stinks, then it 'stank' for the parents who got the same education."
No, that's not necessarily the case. It could have started stinking just recently. Say with the introduction of inquiry-based math. The parents did NOT get the same education. Education is constantly changing. There's no way that two generations get the same.
bkochis wrote: "Do parents know how best to treat a child's medical condition? Should they overrule doctors' prescriptions and treatments ("No, I don't want my child to be immunized because it causes autism, and I know what's best for my child.")? Why is education any different than serious medical care?"
Does bkochis really not see any difference between education and serious medical care? Does bkochis not know that Seattle Public Schools and the superintendent regarded as the infallible leader of the District want to hire newly graduated Teach for America corps members with five weeks of training to teach in our most demanding schools? Would bkochis allow a recent college graduate with five weeks of training to issue prescriptions and treatments?
bkochis is an idiot and so is the editor of Crosscut who picked this loser's comment.
Posted Wed, Jul 20, 9:59 a.m. Inappropriate
Oh! Just in case anyone thinks it inappropriate of me to call people stupid here on Crosscut, I refer you to this article:
http://crosscut.com/2011/07/17/urban/21113/Memo-to-state-officials:-It-s-the-cities%2C-stupid!/
Memo to state officials: It's the cities, stupid!
Apparently it is perfectly appropriate to call people stupid here in Crosscut.
Posted Fri, Jul 22, 5:56 p.m. Inappropriate
Will everyone who hasn't spent time, preferable a full day, in a public school classroom, as a volunteer, room parent, or chaperone in the past 5 years please step away? The rest of you, stay where you are.
As I see it, that's part of the problem: everyone has an opinion or agenda (down with unions! fire bad teachers, even if we have no objective criteria to identify them! test more! test less! smaller classes! market-based solutions! standards! decentralization!) but how many of these pundit/experts have seen the inside of their local school?
Let's break it down. Kids spend 6 hours a day of the 24 in school, for 180 days out of 365. They don't see the inside of their school til they're five. But the teachers and school staff are to blame for any lack of progress or preparation shown by students? And there is nothing magical about being five: your brain doesn't suddenly start working at a higher level or anything.
What are kids expected to know when they enter kindergarten? Should they know their letters? Numbers? Colors? Shapes? What if a child is reading already (I have two who were)? What should each child know before they go on to 1st grade? Or middle school? What should they know when they graduate? And more important, how do we find out what they know?
The issues of Finland's homogeneous and smaller population are noted but the biggest difference between their way and ours is that teachers there are respected and trusted. The reason why we have so much testing is because we don't trust teachers. Scientific management/Taylorism took hold in schools, including Seattle, in the early part of the 20th century and that means testing. I don't even like to use the word 'testing' around school kids: I call it an assessment, just like going to the doctor for your height and weight. That's what it should be, a measurement, no more. We decided to replace oversight and genuine interest in our kids education with testing.
We should assess kids before they enter school but ideally, we would offer pre-K to help them get ready. But assess them all and find out what they know and need help with *before* they start, so they can get off to a good start. If we want to get out of the cycle of despair over testing, let's go back to teachers doing assessments through the year, based on their own understanding and judgment. If a teacher knows a child can read at or above grade level, why have them sit at a computer and dink around with some poorly designed testing system? (If you really want to see waste of time and money, you need look no further than the computerized testing we're making kids deal with.) If you really don't a teacher can tell if a child can read or do simple math, may I suggest you get your %*&^%*& behind in the classroom and help? Take one out of the 250 work days in a year and help evaluate how well kids are learning. Have a kid read to you. Ask them to sort things or count. See if they can work out the order of operations for a math question. A couple of benefits, right off the top: kids see that education matters if you, a total stranger, come in to help; you learn what really goes on, what you're getting for your money; and I bet they do better on those assessments than they would on a bubble sheet or computer system. Not that they would be graded higher but they would be able to demonstrate what they know to a person who is genuinely interested in them.
In the classroom, you'll get a sense of the challenges teachers face on a daily basis. For all the griping about how we need to get rid of bad teachers, no one says anything about helping unprepared or unruly kids: the public schools have to take everyone, no matter their fitness or willingness to learn. Even a fast food joint can turn away people who aren't able to meet their minimum standards.
The day we decide to value education, to treat teachers like professionals (they are all college-educated, and many go on to earn Masters degrees and have to take continuing ed, just like lawyers, CPAs and doctors), and get involved in the schools as partners/owners, not as dissatisfied consumers, we may see some improvement.
If you want to know more about how Seattle schools started and how Taylorism crept in and undid a lot of good work, read "Good Schools" [http://goo.gl/O4wtb]. You'll learn that the small local school idea dates back to the early 1900s and even the idea of using the auditoriums as public space (that's why many of them have street entrances that don't lead you through the school) was part of making the schools part of public life.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.