We're Back to Faith-Based Education - Charter Schools Will Work If We Hope They Do.
By Susie Madrak Monday Oct 19, 2009 12:00pmVia Paul Rosenberg at Open Left:
According to leading "education researchers" (sub required), the draft guidelines that the Obama administration has published for federal economic-stimulus money and Title I aid for schools "have no credible basis in research."
The researchers point to two regulatory priorities in particular that are lacking in research evidence: evaluating teachers based on students' standardized test scores and promoting the growth of charter schools.
"One theory of action seems to be that holding teachers more accountable for the gain in their students' test scores will induce them to become better teachers," writes Duke University's Helen Ladd. "At this point, I am not aware of any credible evidence in support of that proposition."
And research on the performance of charter schools has shown that their track record is "highly variable."
The article points out that the Bush administration was famous for insisting that schools adhere to policies and programs that were based on "scientific research" while it promoted an agenda that had nothing "scientific" about it.
Now, the Obama administration is insisting that schools make decisions based on "data that shows what works," while it pursues mandates that have no data to support them.
What's the difference?
The difference is, the investors who run these new charter schools will be donating to Democrats! Next question?
Paul comments:
Due to the Great Recession, state and local governments are suffering massive cut-backs, and since education spending is generally their largest single budget item, schools are getting hit especially hard. This need not have been the case if Obama had either (a) asked for a $1.3 trillion stimulus, the size that many economists said was needed back in early 2009, or (b) altered the mix of tax cuts vs. spending through the states. And the blow could certainly have been softened if he had opposed the Snowe/Collins/Nelson/Scrouge "compromise" that cut something like $50 billion in school funding from the stimulus, rather than hailing those piggy-bank robbers for their "leadership." Whether or not it was all planned from the beginning, what's eventually shaped up out of this is that there's a small package of stimulus funds available for states and schools that jump through the federal education reform hoops--the exact nature of which is still being determined, although states that lift restrictions on charter schools will go to the head of the line.
It's really hard to see this as anything other than a Shock Doctrine-style deal, since it's a way to force cash-starved states and schools to change education policy and practice, regardless of what they might normally and democratically choose to do. And not only that--because the funds are limited, they could make the changes, and still not get a dime for doing so.
Yes, but we're much more inspired now and that will change everything.
Login or Register to post comments.
"One theory of action seems to be that holding teachers more accountable for the gain in their students' test scores will induce them to become better teachers," writes Duke University's Helen Ladd. "At this point, I am not aware of any credible evidence in support of that proposition."
Nor will any such credible evidence be forthcoming since it's a false preposition.
The point of our educational system is not to help children realize their full potential, it's to create a work force with a minimum level of functional competency. If you accept this premise, then the "teach to the test" approach makes perfect sense.
but I have my children in a public charter school and I like it pretty well. We get an alternative democratic (I think, lefist) education for our children that the public schools don't provide.
To be fair and balanced, why don't you let your kids try Jesus camp for one summer?
I don't want to be fair and balanced. I want a good education for my kids and one that reflects my values.
Sorry mike I was just kidding
I'm not a big fan of college these days and I think it is extending to lower education as well. I recently bought the book "Shop Class as Soul Craft" about the importance of working with your hands and causing a physical transformation in something else.
with one hand, haven't you?
Biggest problem with college: First two years of general ed are a repeat of the curriculum you had in highschool. Expensive and meaningless.
Bad college!
stay out of the "school funding" business.
public schools should be "locally run and operated"
...nothing wrong with sending a little cash (for poorer school districts) but...
..if that were to happen, say goodbye to special education.
That's silly.
No no. YOU'RE silly.
...only as good as the locals who staff it.
Don't get me wrong...I wanna see schools "well funded", It's just that "Federal Standards" always seem to "lower the bar".
Schools in America (for most of last century) ...were funded locally, from local taxes...
As a result of local funding--coming mostly in the form of property taxes--there are HUGE descrepancies between per-pupil spending from inner city to suburban schools. So in truth, we've never really had "public" schools, we've had community schools. Federal standards, which you decry, is the ONLY force that creates some parity across rich and poor districts.
...are worse than ever!
education standards (and test scores) have done nothing but drop for the last 30 years...
...something is wrong! I just thought maybe going back to the old way...(with a few changes maybe)
I'll admit Fed govt school money (isnt the bad thing)...it's the strings attached that are bad!
1) Educational "standards" have not dropped; rather, schools are confronted with increasingly troubled kids who are not getting the kind of care they need from their homes and communities. For example, public schools are now the de facto mental health care system for children under 18 because community services are cut to the bone. In truth, public schools are actually outperforming what would otherwise be predicted (see Bracey Report; http://www.america-tomorrow.com/bracey/EDDRA/...). We have a national perception problem.
2) The "strings attached" to federal money is the only hope we have as a nation that the weakest among us will be treated fairly. Take that out of the equation, and we go back to 1974.
Administration is near 50% of the cost of running a school. That's silly.
The federal gov't regulates SPED through the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and actively funds about 7% of the SPED expenditures in your local public schools. If the fed stopped doing that, local schools could (and would) stop educating the disabled and we would go back to pre-1975 schools, where the "uneducable" were left behind. If you still think I'm "silly," watch Forrest Gump--the movie does a good job of showing what it used to be like, only most kids don't have a hot mom (Sally Field) to sleep with the school psychologist.
That was my point. I was replying to Milquetoast.
...sorry! Misread the thread!
they want their failed Randian wet dreams back.
Kind of glad he died before this policy will be put in place. Sorry you can have the best teachers in the world doesn't mean the student will learn if they don't want to. My father had student commonly tell him they didn't need to know about technology, computers, and such because they were going to drop out at 17 and become bricklayers and earn more then my dad. This idea that it's the teachers fault is the cover many tell themselves because they don't want to face the fact that there perfect little angle is the problem.
My father was a teacher for over 25 years collage, high school, and middle school if there was one thing the said that he learned was that some kids don't care and there's no parent behind him forceing them to care then not much can be done.
More then any teacher the problem is policy, the kids, and the administration of the school.
The urban high school where she teaches has been flagged as a non-performing school under NCLB. All she has to do to be a "good" teacher is transfer to a suburban school. The same teacher is penalized for choosing to teach at an urban school when they could be getting bonuses at a suburban school under this ridiculous "incentive system."
And then we all wonder why urban schools are filled with new teachers and long term substitutes.
May I be the first to congratulate your wife on her promotion!
... but my wife will not be taking the "promotion." She will continue to work with the kids she loves, at least until Obama defunds the school, fires the teachers, and gives the money to a charter school. No good deed goes unpunished.
English, half the kids would go down to Mexico for 3 months, many only came to school for about a month. My dad still tried with everyone doesn't mean the students wanted to learn. That the sad truth a school can fail NCLB simply because a large minority of the students don't care that's how it was damn near every year that the schools my dad taught at (2 by the way. One school because two same students different buliding). And now not only are they going to punish school districts and single schools there going to go after teachers now. Are the policy makers going to start punishing bus drivers before many of them realize the problem is students/parents more then school staff.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7120003/Compulsory-...
This is an old read, A Compulsory Mis-Education. The link is to the whole book but there is a paragraph that summarizes his thesis at the top. His basic jist is organized mandatory schooling sucks.
Another good read that describes colleges as "Churches of reason" is Robert Pirsig's "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"
Schools are another opening for private contractors to rip the government off. Homeschooling, charter schools and community involvement, along with all the resources the web has to offer, show promise.
Show me evidence--not essays or anecdotes--that shows that charter schools, homeshooling, and "community involvement" outperforms public education. REAL evidence--not some crappy politically slanted website, but a peer-reviewed, academic study.
As an educational researcher, let me save you a little time: You can't.
The truth is, charter schools and all the other "alternatives" only look good until they open to the PUBLIC, and are required to teach a wide range of students from all backgrounds for extended periods. Your comparison is like comparing folks who voluntarily go to a counselor to people who are court-ordered into counseling--who do you think generally does better???
I'll show you a better example and that is the European model where high schools are not bent on the BS idea that everyone is destined for college. They emphasize trade education for those that choose not to hit the books for four more years. Here if you don't go to college, you won't make as much money. I hope that BS isn't still being hammered into kid's heads.
I was just going to point that out.
Also that shows how superficial and closed minded you are. The site I linked to was merely a pdf of a book that was written in the 60's and was an observation on the over-bureaucratization of education. To state the website is slanted because it is carrying without commentary a perspective from 40 years ago is shallow.
I don't care when the book was written--it is an essay. I am a researcher. A real, honest-to-goodness researcher who publishes on a regular basis in education and psychology journals. So spare me your outrage and show me evidence.
Stop oppressing him with stuff like references, and facts, and peer reviewed articles and all that stuff designed by the man to put free thinkers down.
Don't be such a square!
J/K
For what it is worth, having taught several undergrad classes and gone through many research assistants, let me tell you that the rate of failure by homeschooled kids (not just academic, but social aspects) is appalling. And there is a very good reason why it is illegal in most industrialized countries.
"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"
On my list of all time favorites and a book all should read.
...the Dems are stupidly walking down the same worn path as the Repubs when it comes to education, not seemingly aware that the road leads to the total destruction of public education. That's not a conspiracy theory--it's fact. Reagan was very open with his plan to disband the federal department of education.
If we open wide the floodgates of so-called "charter schools," the profit incentive will creep into the picture, and the same problems we see in health care will come true for K-12 education. Instead of greedy health insurance agencies holding dominion over your future, however, we'll have private education companies who can pick and choose their students, name their price, and discourage competition rather than promote it. If you think that is tinfoil hat thinking, who do you think writes those performance tests that are now mandated as part of No Child Left Behind?
That quote from the only named "leading education researchers" in this post indicates that there seems to be "no credible basis" in fact for anything in this post.
of an ailing education system.
The post totally fails to offer anything other than generalized BS.
"It's really hard to see this as anything other than a Shock Doctrine-style deal"
"What's the difference?
The difference is, the investors who run these new charter schools will be donating to Democrats! Next question?"
What a bunch of opinionated hooey that reaches much farther than any facts presented merit.
By the way, the leading credential touted for the one identified "leading researchers" was her service in the first Bush administration. Not that that proves anything other than it was all that was given.
There are a few "Charter Schools" that do well and have positive results.
They have been mentioned by the WH or the president (maybe the first lady?) in a speech (unless I'm mistaken)
stupidity is a rampaging nation’s greatest asset.
"stupidity is a rampaging nation’s
greatestONLY asset.http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/...
Although the funding is used for some promising developments that have a proven track record such as providing social support services such as counseling and community-based initiatives, the main element of this "reform" effort is privatization. One of the rules mentioned by the U.S. Department of Education is that states (usually against their own will) are being forced into raising their charter caps so that more public schools can be partially sold off to the private sector. This has happened in Indiana who wanted to impose a moratorium on charter expansion so they could evaluate its efficacy. Similar things happened in Illinois and California. Its called the "carrot and stick" approach.
Imagine denying states badly needed funding for improving academics and school safety. This hurts every child in that state and shows where the real priority is. Make no mistake, this "reform" effort is more about money than about kids. As we have seen at Fenger H.S. and with many other examples that do not make the news, the "turnaround" strategy has created not only some performance and labor issues, but also some very serious safety issues. Part of this strategy involves selling public schools to charter orgs who want to be able to pull in students from all neighborhoods in the a given city. This helps raise school's test scores, but also completely ignores the fact that it is obviously a bad idea to facilitate a situation where kids have to cross through gang territories to get to and from school rather than being able to attend a school in their own neighborhood. As indicated by his press conference to the City of Chicago, Arne Duncan does not plan on taking any responsibility for this even though it was his idea when he ran Chicago's public schools.
This whole "reform" effort with its "carrot and stick" policy seems a little authoritarian and top-down from an administration that promised change from the bottom up. I am afraid we are in for a long period of public education deterioration where corporate sponsors will have more influence that members of the affected community. We all know how difficult it is to make something publicly funded after years of taxpayers getting used to saving money by not investing in our future.
Anyone interested in real reform should read Horace Mann. His work is over 100 years old, but extremely prophetic.
Login or Register to post comments.