In This Issue:
 |
| • |
TESTING A NEW CURRICULUM: 'Trial run' for Common Core |
|
| • |
CALIFORNIA ACCELERATES SHIFT TO COMMON CORE TESTING; DEASY, “A BIT GREEDY”, BALKS |
|
| • |
13 SCHOOL WORKERS, LIBRARIANS INDICTED IN TEXTBOOK THEFT RING |
|
| • |
GUESSES AND HYPE GIVE WAY TO DATA IN STUDY OF EDUCATION |
|
| • |
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T FIT: The Rest (but
not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other Sources |
|
| • |
EVENTS: Coming up next week... |
|
| • |
What can YOU do? |
|
Featured Links:
|
|
|
|
Last week journalist Howard Blume tweeted:
● Poll gives middling marks to Calif schools, writes @larrygordonlat of PACE/USC Rossier release. http://ow.ly/owSaT
…And journalist Barbara Jones tweeted:
● New poll finds people mistrust polls. I wonder if the results are skewed? http://bit.ly/18suRHI
The L.A. Times v. The Daily News. Who to believe? Who to trust?
Let’s just say that the public thinks more highly of schools than
pollsters. (Politicians and hedge fund managers fare even less well.)
________________________
THE POLITICIANS IN SACRAMENTO - the “Lege” and the “Gov” (who
may-or-may-not-be ‘lickspittle toady’ collaborators in thrall with the
megalithic all-powerful teachers’ unions and other education special
interests like principals and parents) have had difficulty in the past
two legislative sessions with LAUSD-sponsored “bad teacher” child abuse
legislation, passed AB 449.
AB 449 is not a “Teacher Misconduct Bill”, it is a Superintendent
Misconduct Bill - directed specifically at the incumbent LAUSD
Superintendent – whose failure to report child abuse as required by law
may have gone unnoticed by the board of education – but not by the
Commission on Teacher Credentialing, the state auditor, legislature or
governor. Seeing as AB 449 has been signed by the governor, it is now a
Superintendent Misconduct Law.
THAT SUPERINTENDENT: DR. JOHN DEASY – initially an indefatigable
supporter of the Common Core (both the Standards and the Tests) has now
flip-flopped – if he can’t have the new test on his terms then he wants
both tests – essentially clinging to the old, cold, dead, STAR Test like
Charlton Heston with his beloved warm gun …which the nanny-state Lege
is threatening to take away. Dr. Deasy wants to administer both tests in
the coming year. One to “teach-to”, one to score. One for practice, one
for real. Even though STAR and Smarter Balanced test widely different
curricula.
Deasy’s objection – which a LA Times editorialist characterizes as “a
bit greedy if not somewhat unseemly” - is that he (Deasy) will have no
way to assess teacher performance next year without the old STAR
tests, To put words into Dr. D’s mouth: “How can Teachers teach to the
test if there is no test?“ How can the superintendent enforce his
Academic Growth Over Time regime – or live up to the terms of the deal
he made to secure the CORE NCLB Waiver from the US Department of Ed?
This is what can happen when you make a deal without all your
partners+stakeholders at the metaphorical table – in this case w/o the
State of California and The Board of Education of the City of Los
Angeles. Deasy didn’t the need the State or the Board of Ed when he
made this deal – he went around them. When asked whether Dr. Deasy
could make such a deal without the board’s approval, a boardmember asked
back “Can He? Probably not. But did he? Yes.”
Dr. Deasy has not ingratiated himself to the Governor, Legislature,
State Auditor, Commission on Teacher Credentialing, California
Department of Education or the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
That cooing sound? The pigeons – come home to roost.
“You can’t have your Kate and Edith, too.
You, rascal, you. Yodel-ay-hee-hoo.”
-The Statler Brothers
And now Deasy isn’t quite the same enthusiastic supporter of The Common
Core Testing as when he committed LAUSD to put an iPad into the hands of
ever student in the District at the cost of one billion dollars. $1
billion not counting the “oops we forgot the keyboards” … or the high
school math curriculum. The rush to deliver all those iPads was to have
them available for the Common Core Tests – which in California and 24
other states will be called “Smarter Balanced” …a brand that challenges
the meaning of both adjectives.
With Deasy no longer the unqualified supporter does that mean the pressure to meet the deadline/timeline is off?
AGAINST A BACKDROP OF CORPORATE GREED and the fight-at-the-food-trough
to privatize all those public education dollars some real old fashioned
local greed has materialized in the sale-of-textbooks to resellers – and
resale to back to the Districts in LAUSD, Bellflower, Lynwood and
Inglewood revealed by the District Attorney last week. This is, on the
face of it, insider petty criminals preying on mindless bureaucracy.
Sticking it to The Man you work for. Lead-us-not-into-temptation Crimes
of Opportunity. It is also stealing from the voters and taxpayers. And
from the children.
What this points to (besides larceny) is a lack of inventory control and
library and textbook management within LAUSD. Didn’t someone run the
numbers? How did those missing books not turn up missing at the end of
the school year? LAUSD has a state of the art Library and Textbook
Management System – but no one at the school sites and no one at the
central office is in charge of it. Yes the principal is accountable –
but the principal is also in charge of teacher performance, school
safety, the bell schedule, alphabet-soup compliance, classroom
assignment and the playground balls. All the moving parts.
Typical elementary-school textbooks cost more than $100 each, some
Physics and Science texts cost two-or-three-times that. But now every
single student is going to be given an iPad with a cost to the District
of $699. Every high tech effort is being made to make those iPads -
which are attractive targets for theft and resale - unattractive to the
bad guys+girls. They will be trackable+traceable, report their position
to law enforcement whenever they are turned on, and can be made remotely
inoperable when lost or stolen. Pawn shops have been warned, street
criminals have been informed and every law enforcement agency and
computer reseller in the U.S. and Canada know what they look like and
that LAUSD will be relentless in tracking them down. However LAUSD is
136 miles away from the border with Mexico – and once there LAUSD iPads
will have resale value when reconfigured.
REPEATING MYSELF: The District needs to create a policy and protocol for
textbook, library book and device inventory control. We have the
technology; we are short the human component. We are short the person
who raises their hand and “That’s my job.”
We can expend the money and effort now – or we can expend more of both later.
¡Onward/Adelante! - smf
●●And thank you Nancy Franklin. You walked the talk. You were never shy ...retiring seems extremely of character!
You built the pyramid and showed the way to the promised land. How mixed-metaphorical is that?.
TESTING A NEW CURRICULUM: 'Trial run' for Common Core
TESTING A NEW CURRICULUM: 'Trial run' for Common Core: A COMPLICATED BILL IN THE LEGISLATURE ON STANDARDIZED TESTING HAS SOME
IDEAS THAT ARE BOLD AND FORWARD-LOOKING AND SOME THAT AREN'T.
by The Los Angeles Times Editorial Board | http://lat.ms/1cVj1ZY
September 8, 2013 :: A proposed bill to overhaul California's
standardized school testing system includes some provisions that are
bold and forward-looking. After all, there is no point in continuing
with the old tests of student progress in English and math this year
when teachers are supposed to be preparing for the switch to the new
Common Core curriculum in the 2014-15 school year.
But in other ways, AB 484 is a step backward.
The complicated bill, pushed by state Superintendent of Public
Instruction Tom Torlakson and authored by Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla
(D-Concord), originally called for a one-year hiatus on all standards
testing except what's required under the federal No Child Left Behind
Act. The idea was to give schools a year to adjust to the new Common
Core curriculum in English and math. The new curriculum is supposed to
foster critical thinking over rote memorization. It will require
different teaching methods and use more sophisticated tests via
computer.
A new version of the bill, unveiled last week, is smarter in certain
ways. The existing state standards tests in English and math — the
subjects covered by the new curriculum — would be replaced with tests
based on the Common Core curriculum. This would be a trial run only for
districts that want them and that have the computer equipment to
administer the digital version.
Because neither schools nor teachers would be held accountable for the
trial run results — and because they wouldn't have to waste time
teaching to a now-irrelevant test — they would be able to concentrate on
mastering the skills needed to teach the new curriculum. The state
would need federal permission to go forward with this plan. The U.S.
Education Department should grant that much, though it should require
the state to provide pencil tests for districts that lack computer
equipment so that all students could take them.
But the bill would also suspend all the existing tests for history,
which are not affected by Common Core, as well as science tests that
aren't specifically required under federal law. That's a bad idea given
that schools tend to give short shrift to subjects that aren't tested.
Also falling by the wayside are tests in English and math for grades
two, nine and 10. Those also aren't federally required, but they have
been part of the testing system in California since 1998. These tests
wouldn't necessarily disappear for just this year; there is no
commitment to when or whether they would return.
Missing out on one year of data is a worthwhile trade-off for better
instruction in the future. But dropping accountability standards for an
unknown number of years is a matter that calls for a more thoughtful
debate than can be had in the one remaining week of the legislative
session.
CALIFORNIA ACCELERATES SHIFT TO COMMON CORE TESTING; DEASY, “A BIT GREEDY”, BALKS
►CALIFORNIA ACCELERATES SHIFT IN STUDENT TESTING: THE PLAN TO HASTEN
USE OF COMPUTERIZED EXAMS WOULD UPEND LAUSD EFFORT TO USE SCORES TO
EVALUATE TEACHERS.
By Howard Blume, Los Angeles Times, http://lat.ms/1580bwT
September 4, 2013, 6:50 p.m. :: In a major shift in how California's
6.2 million public school students are taught and tested, state
officials plan to drop the standardized exams used since 1999 and
replace them with a computerized system next spring.
The move would advance new learning goals, called the Common Core, which
are less focused on memorizing facts. They are designed instead to
develop critical thinking and writing skills that take formerly separate
subjects — such as English and history or writing and chemistry — and
link them. Forty-five states have adopted these standards.
California is moving up its timetable for the new computerized tests by a
year, leaving some school districts scrambling to prepare.
Schools must have enough computers available on each campus to handle
the testing, for example. Until now, state standardized tests were
conducted entirely with pencil and paper.
The new exams also would upend plans in the Los Angeles Unified School
District to use student test scores to evaluate teachers. Such
performance reviews would be impossible because the results could not be
compared to previous years.
The plan emerged in written form Wednesday afternoon, after intense
negotiations that included the governor's office, state Supt. of Public
Instruction Tom Torlakson, legislative leaders and the state's powerful
teacher unions.
The legislation "shows California's commitment to implementing Common
Core standards and helping every student succeed," said Evan Westrup, a
spokesman for Gov. Jerry Brown. "The governor strongly supports this
legislation."
The state hopes the cost will be covered by money saved from suspending
the old tests, for which California budgeted about $64 million.
Still to weigh in is the Education Department of the Obama
administration, which is expected to scrutinize the proposal because
elements violate current federal law. Specifically, scores for students
and schools will not be released, making it more difficult to assess
whether schools are improving.
The test is not yet ready for that purpose, officials said.
"These tests next year are not about scores," said Deputy Supt. Deborah
Sigman. "This is about testing the test and giving students and teachers
experience about what this test will look like."
Certain questions, for example, might prove to have biased results
depending on a student's gender or could have ambiguous wording. A new
feature of the computer-based test is that it will get more difficult or
easier depending on student answers.
Districts won't even receive the results, which bothers some advocates.
Moreover, there will only be a limited menu of exams. The new tests, in
math and English, would be given in grades three through eight and 11th
grade. The old tests would still be used, for now, to measure science in
three grades.
Teachers and school systems need the breathing room to make the
transition, said state Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla (D-Concord), author
of the legislation.
"As a former teacher I feel this will really help the morale of
teachers," Bonilla said. The message is: "We're going to make your job a
little easier by letting you focus on what we say is the priority."
In the process, the state would drop tests in social studies and
end-of-year subject exams for older students, such as the test in
algebra. The state plans to tackle how to assess such subjects at a
later time.
"I'm troubled by the notion that you wouldn't provide parents with
information on their children's performance, or educators with
information on their students' performance for an entire year," said
Arun Ramanathan, executive director of Education Trust-West, an
Oakland-based advocacy group.
He thinks the results of the new test could be shared. Another option
would be to keep the old tests in place and use the new tests on a
limited basis, simply to determine what adjustments are necessary.
That was the original plan: 20% of California students in all were to
take either the new math or English test. But some school systems,
including L.A. Unified, objected.
L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy didn't want instructors teaching to the
old test while also having to prepare for something new. For weeks, he's
pushed behind the scenes for permission to move the nation's
second-largest school system entirely to the new test and students would
take the new exam on iPads that he intends to provide to each of them.
The state's new approach is sound, provided that California pays for all
students in a district to take the new tests in English and math, Deasy
said.
"The smart thing and the right thing is to make sure students and
teachers have experience with the assessment before it counts," Deasy
said.
But the proposal also means that another hard-fought initiative is
potentially derailed for at least two years. Deasy had pushed
relentlessly to make student standardized test scores a significant
factor in teacher evaluations.
That would not be possible next year and the following year might only
be useful to establish a baseline for future years. The district also
has talked of needing three years of data for a full picture of a
teacher's effectiveness.
"It will leave me with a potentially incomplete evaluation," Deasy said.
But Deasy added that teacher evaluation will not go on hiatus in any
scenario. Principals will observe teachers, for example, and a wide
range of measures can be used to get an accurate picture of a teacher's
performance.
"This doesn't mean we take our eye off of what happens in schools at all," Deasy said.
Some school districts may have a problem simply giving the tests because
of out-of-date computers or a shortage of those that work at all.
Officials acknowledged this would be a challenge to work through.
But the goal, said Torlakson, is "not to look in the rear-view mirror...but to really move ahead."
______________________________________
►L.A. SCHOOLS SUPT. DEASY WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FOR NEW TESTING PLAN
By Howard Blume, latimes.com http://lat.ms/15DTcZ8
September 5, 2013, 5:40 p.m. :: L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy has
withdrawn his endorsement of legislation that would speed up the
overhaul of the state standardized testing system.
The current plan, he said, imposes unfair cost burdens on school
systems, especially those that serve low-income, minority students.
He raised concerns Thursday after more details emerged about a pending
major shift in how California's 6.2 million students are taught and
tested. State officials plan to drop the standardized exams used since
1999 and replace them with a computerized system next spring. The move
would advance new learning goals, called the Common Core, that have been
adopted by 45 states.
California is moving up its timetable for new computerized tests by a year, leaving some school districts scrambling to prepare.
Deasy had supported the rapid changeover, provided that the state funded
the testing of all students on the new exams this year. However, a
proposal to make that commitment went nowhere Wednesday and Thursday in
the Legislature.
So far, officials have pledged only to pay for students to take either the new math test or the new English test, but not both.
In its present form, “the legislation is incomplete in serving students,” Deasy said.
The L.A. superintendent, whose district is the largest in the state,
said it’s crucial for students and teachers to get practice on both
exams. This year’s tests are a trial run — no scores will be reported to
students and schools.
Still, Deasy said it was “troubling” that students could not take the
entire test when districts are being asked to “trade away” the ability
to see and analyze test scores for a year.
Districts could choose to pay for giving the entire test, but that would
give an advantage to wealthier school systems, Deasy said.
In Los Angeles, the extra testing cost would be $1.7 million, Deasy said.
______________________________________
►L.A. UNIFIED'S DEASY SOUNDING A BIT GREEDY ON NEW TESTS
Commentary by By Karin Klein, Los Angeles editorial writer covering education, environment, religion and culture.| http://lat.ms/17ICFmB
September 6, 2013, 11:14 a.m. :: In the give-him-an-inch category,
could L.A. Unified Supt. John Deasy really be refusing to support a new
testing bill solely on the grounds that he wants the state to pay for
both English and math testing this year? The bill calls on the state to
pay for only one, districts’ choice. Districts that want both subjects
tested can do that, but they have to pay for the extra.
In the case of gargantuan L.A. Unified, that would come to a one-time
payment of $1.7 million. Under the bill, the state would be trying out
the new Common Core tests this year, before they become official in
2014-15. At that point, the state will start paying for both.
According to a report by my colleague Howard Blume, Deasy says he’s
withdrawing his support for the bill solely over the money. It’s his job
to look for more funding for his schools, and $1.7 million isn’t chump
change.
But the state is giving L.A. Unified $113 million in one-time funds
solely for the purpose of implementing Common Core. Deasy is welcome to
use $1.7 million of that -- well under 2% of the funding -- to have
students take both kinds of tests.
The complaining seems a bit greedy, if not somewhat unseemly. The state
budget sets aside more than $1 billion for districts across California
to get ready for Common Core. Would Deasy rather the state kept more of
the money to pay for the tests? It could have given the L.A. Unified
$110 million in one-time funds, paid for both kinds of tests and had
more than $1 million left in its pocket.
This way, Deasy gets a very impressive sum of money to use as he wishes,
with plenty to pay for whatever additional tests he wants. And he’s
complaining why?
The Time’s editorial board will be weighing in on the bill in a couple
of days. It finds plenty to applaud, though it has its own reservations
about the legislation, which will transform the testing landscape in
California. But none of those concerns has anything to do with Deasy or
his schools not getting enough money.
13 SCHOOL WORKERS, LIBRARIANS INDICTED IN TEXTBOOK THEFT RING
PROSECUTORS SAY THE DISTRICTS – LOS ANGELES,
INGLEWOOD, LYNWOOD AND BELLFLOWER UNIFIEDS, INCLUDING THE MAYOR’S
PARTNERSHIP & GREEN DOT SCHOOLS – SO LACKED ANY ORGANIZED TRACKING
SYSTEM THAT THEY CANNOT SAY WITH ANY CERTAINTY HOW MANY BOOKS WERE
STOLEN
By Richard Winton. Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/19sHkMN
September 5, 2013, 4:18 p.m. :: L.A. County prosecutors have charged
13 employees in four of the region's most financially strapped school
districts with stealing thousands of textbooks for a book buyer, who
allegedly paid them $200,000 in bribes.
A 37-page indictment unsealed Thursday tells of a book-selling scheme in
which book buyer Corey Frederick recruited two librarians, a campus
supervisor and a former warehouse manager, among others, to allegedly
steal thousands of books from schools in Los Angeles, Inglewood and
Bellflower.
The scheme ran from 2008 to December 2010, prosecutors said.
In return, the operators of "Doorkeeper Textz" in Long Beach would pay
the employees from $600 to $47,000 for acquiring textbooks, which were
district property.
In some cases, prosecutors allege Frederick would resell the books
through other intermediaries back to the institutions from which they
were originally stolen weeks before.
Prosecutors, according to court records, allege the participants
pilfered at least 7,000 textbooks from the Los Angeles Unified School
District alone.
“Taking books out of the hands of public school students is intolerable,
especially when school employees sell them for their own personal
profit,” Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey said in announcing the corruption
probe.
She called it a "web of deceit at our children’s expense.”
Prosecutors uncovered the scheme after Inglewood Unified School District
police notified prosecutors of an alleged embezzlement in their
district.
At the center of scheme was Frederick, a Long Beach book buyer who
during a two-year period beginning in 2008 paid a dozen school employees
to steal textbooks in literature and language arts, economics, physics,
anatomy and physiology, prosecutors said.
The indictment alleges Frederick paid out more than $200,000 in bribes
to the school employees. They, in return, allegedly allowed him to take
whatever books he requested, even some new textbooks.
Frederick would then allegedly resell the stolen new and used books to
various textbook distributors, including Amazon, Seattle book
distributor Bookbyte, and Follett Educational Services in Illinois.
Prosecutors on Thursday said the districts so lacked any organized
tracking system that they cannot say with any certainty how many books
were stolen.
As the alleged mastermind, Frederick is charged with 12 counts of
embezzlement and 13 counts of offering a bribe. The individual school
employees face charges of embezzlement and accepting a bribe.
Among those accused of accepting bribes was :
● Veronica Clanton-Higgins, 36, a librarian in the Lynwood Unified School District who allegedly accepted $14,214.
● Shari Stewart, 46, a librarian at Crozier Middle School in the Inglewood Unified School District, allegedly received $4,200.
● Vincent Browning, a now-retired Bellflower Unified School District warehouse supervisor, allegedly received $47,728.
● Frank Fuston, 54, worked as a plant manager in the Inglewood Unified
School District when he allegedly received $1,100 in checks and cash.
● Sandra Williams, 58, an office technician at University High School in
the Los Angeles Unified School District, allegedly received $34,718.
● Denise Hill, 57, an office technician at Webster Middle School in LAUSD, allegedly received $4,003, and
● Dinah Goodlett, 53, an office technician at Locke High School in LAUSD, allegedly received $6,099.
● Adrienne Dozier, 62, an office technician at LAUSD's Venice High School, allegedly received $12,798.
● Sherry Calloway, 60, an office technician at Audubon Middle School in LAUSD, allegedly received $1,191.
● Stephanie Baurac-Holmes, 48, an office technician at LAUSD's Peary Middle School and Narbonne High School, received $4,675.
● Olalekan Animasaun, 37, an office technician at Santee Education Center in LAUSD, allegedly received $21,573
GUESSES AND HYPE GIVE WAY TO DATA IN STUDY OF EDUCATION
By GINA KOLATA . The New York Times | http://nyti.ms/17y4cuO
Tuesday, September 3, 2013 :: What works in science and math education?
Until recently, there had been few solid answers — just guesses and
hunches, marketing hype and extrapolations from small pilot studies.
But now, a little-known office in the Education Department is starting
to get some real data, using a method that has transformed medicine: the
randomized clinical trial, in which groups of subjects are randomly
assigned to get either an experimental therapy, the standard therapy, a
placebo or nothing.
The findings could be transformative, researchers say. For example, one
conclusion from the new research is that the choice of instructional
materials — textbooks, curriculum guides, homework, quizzes — can affect
achievement as profoundly as teachers themselves; a poor choice of
materials is at least as bad as a terrible teacher, and a good choice
can help offset a bad teacher’s deficiencies.
So far, the office — the Institute of Education Sciences — has supported
175 randomized studies. Some have already concluded; among the findings
are that one popular math textbook was demonstrably superior to three
competitors, and that a highly touted computer-aided math-instruction
program had no effect on how much students learned.
Other studies are under way.
Cognitive psychology researchers, for instance, are assessing an
experimental math curriculum in Tampa, Fla. The institute gives schools
the data they need to start using methods that can improve learning. It
has a What Works Clearinghouse — something like a mini Food and Drug
Administration, but without enforcement power — that rates evidence
behind various programs and textbooks, using the same sort of criteria
researchers use to assess effectiveness of medical treatments. Without
well-designed trials, such assessments are largely guesswork.
“It’s as if the medical profession worried about the administration of
hospitals and patient insurance but paid no attention to the treatments
that doctors gave their patients,” the institute’s first director,
Grover J. Whitehurst, now of the Brookings Institution, wrote in 2012.
But the “what works” approach has another hurdle to clear: Most
educators, including principals and superintendents and curriculum
supervisors, do not know the data exist, much less what they mean.
A survey by the Office of Management and Budget found that just 42
percent of school districts had heard of the clearinghouse. And there is
no equivalent of an F.D.A. to approve programs for marketing, or health
insurance companies to refuse to pay for treatments that do not work.
Nor is it clear that data from rigorous studies will translate into the
real world.
There can be many obstacles, says Anthony Kelly, a professor of
educational psychology at George Mason. Teachers may not follow the
program, for example. “By all means, yes, we should do it,” he said.
“But the issue is not to think that one method can answer all questions
about education.” In this regard, other countries are no further along
than the United States, researchers say.
They report that only Britain has begun to do the sort of randomized
trials that are going on here, with the assistance of American
researchers.
As Peter Tymms, the director of the International Performance Indicators
in Primary Schools center at Durham University in England, wrote in an
e-mail: “The wake-up call was a national realization, less than a decade
ago,” that all the money spent on education reform “had almost no
impact on basic skills.” Suddenly, scholars who had long argued for
randomized trials began to be heard.
In the United States, the effort to put some rigor into education
research began in 2002, when the Institute of Education Sciences was
created and Dr. Whitehurst was appointed the director. “I found on
arriving that the status of education research was poor,” Dr. Whitehurst
said. “It was more humanistic and qualitative than crunching numbers
and evaluating the impact.
“You could pick up an education journal,” he went on, “and read pieces
that reflected on the human condition and that involved interpretations
by the authors on what was going on in schools. It was more like the
work a historian might do than what a social scientist might do.” At the
time, the Education Department had sponsored exactly one randomized
trial.
That was a study of Upward Bound, a program that was thought to improve
achievement among poor children. The study found it had no effect. So
Dr. Whitehurst brought in new people who had been trained in more
rigorous fields, and invested in doctoral training programs to nurture a
new generation of more scientific education researchers.
He faced heated opposition from some people in schools of education, he said, but he prevailed.
The studies are far from easy to do.
“It is an order of magnitude more complicated to do clinical trials in
education than in medicine,” said F. Joseph Merlino, president of the
21st Century Partnership for STEM Education, an independent nonprofit
organization. “In education, a lot of what is effective depends on your
goal and how you measure it.” Then there is the problem of getting
schools to agree to be randomly assigned to use an experimental program
or not. “There is an art to doing it,” Mr. Merlino said.
“We don’t usually go and say, ‘Do you want to be part of an experiment?’
We say, ‘This is an important study; we have things to offer you.’ ”
As the Education Department’s efforts got going over the past decade, a
pattern became clear, said Robert Boruch, a professor of education and
statistics at the University of Pennsylvania.
Most programs that had been sold as effective had no good evidence
behind them. And when rigorous studies were done, as many as 90 percent
of programs that seemed promising in small, unscientific studies had no
effect on achievement or actually made achievement scores worse.
For example, Michael Garet, the vice president of the American
Institutes for Research, a behavioral and social science research group,
led a study that instructed seventh-grade math teachers in a summer
institute, helping them understand the math they teach — like why, when
dividing fractions, do you invert and multiply? The teachers’ knowledge
of math improved, but student achievement did not.
“The professional development had many features people think it should
have — it was sustained over time, it involved opportunities to
practice, it involved all the teachers in the school,” Dr. Garet said.
“But the results were disappointing.” The findings were added to the
What Works Clearinghouse.
“There was a joke going around that it was the ‘What Doesn’t Work’
Clearinghouse,” said John Easton, the current director of the Institute
of Education Sciences. Jon Baron, the president of the Coalition for
Evidence-Based Policy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, said the
clearinghouse “shows why it is important to do rigorous evaluations.”
“Most programs claim to be evidence-based,” he said, but most have no
good evidence that they work.
Now, though, with a growing body of evidence on what works, researchers
wonder how they can get educators and the public to pay attention.
“It’s fascinating what a secret this is,” said Robert Slavin, director
of the Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins
University. “If you talk to your seatmate on an airplane,” he continued,
“100 times out of 100 they will not have heard of it. Invariably they
will have loads of opinions about what schools should or shouldn’t do,
and they are utterly unaware and uninterested in the idea that there is
actual evidence.”
Educators often are not much better, Dr. Slavin said. Too often, they
are swayed by marketing or anecdotes or the latest fad. And
“invariably,” he added, “folks trying to sell a program will say there
is evidence behind it,” even though that evidence is far from rigorous.
Dr. Merlino agreed. “A lot of districts go by the herd mentality,” he
said, citing the example of a Singapore-based math program now in vogue
that has never been rigorously compared with other programs and found to
be better.
“Personal anecdote trumps data.” There are solutions, Dr. Slavin said.
The federal government or states could require school districts to use
programs that work — when sufficient data are available — or forfeit
funds. But “there is very little political drive for that to happen,” he
said. Yet he retains a grain of optimism because the Obama
administration — as well as the Bush administration, which established
the Institute of Education Sciences — says its goal is to enable schools
to use programs that have been shown to work. “Sooner or later,” Dr.
Slavin said, “this has to become consequential.”
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T
FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other
Sources
Student Endangerment: HEAT SENDS 8 HIGH SCHOOL
RUNNERS TO HOSPITAL DURING REGIONAL CROSS COUNTRY MEET | SGV Tribune | http://bit.ly/15boJoV
SCHOOL IS A PRISON – AND DAMAGING OUR KIDS: Longer school years aren't the answer. The problem is school itsel... http://bit.ly/13tN4oR
Twitterpated: POLLS SHOW THAT PEOPLE THINK POLLS SUCK: Howard Blume @howardblume 3 Sep Poll gives m... http://bit.ly/169sxXt
WHY ARE HEDGE FUND MANAGERS SO INTERESTED IN SCHOOL ®EFORM? by Diane Ravitch | http://bit.ly/1afA4oo
CALIFORNIA LIFTS ONE-YEAR CAP ON TEACHER-PREP PROGRAMS: Biggest single change made to teacher preparation in t... http://bit.ly/19up71t
AOL's PATCH HYPERLOCAL NEWS SITES, HEAVY ON SCHOOL NEWS, FACE RETRENCHMENT - Many to shut down | http://bit.ly/19ulCrK
STATE ALLOCATION BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE CONTINUES WORK TO PRESERVE CA’S SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM: By Kimberly B... http://bit.ly/1e2U2bb
EARLY EDUCATION ADVOCATES SEEK MORE SUPPORT FROM GOVERNOR | EdSource Today http://bit.ly/18DjT2h
TEACHER MISCONDUCT BILL SIGNED BY GOVERNOR+ smf’s 2¢: Bill in response to an L.A. Unified scandal, requiring t... http://bit.ly/1cSDI8W
APPARENTLY IF WE IGNORE MICHELLE RHEE SHE WON'T JUST GO AWAY ...ignorance is like that! | http://bit.ly/UXHVhZ
Textbookgate: INGLEWOOD UNIFIED SAYS MORE EMPLOYEES UNDER INVESTIGATION: Adolfo Guzman-Lopez | | Pass / Fail |... http://bit.ly/1cSsQrv
Promise Neighborhoods: SAN FERNANDO VALLEY, HOLLYWOOD FAMILIES TO GET TECHNOLOGY, JOB-TRAINING PROGRAMS TO BRE... http://bit.ly/168NZMn
CALIFORNIA ACCELERATES SHIFT TO COMMON CORE TESTING: Deasy, “a bit greedy”, balks: CALIFORNIA ACCELERATES SHI... http://bit.ly/1e2vizS
LAUSD HIRING PROFESSIONAL INVESTIGATORS FOR ABUSE CASES + Educator Gives Glimpse Inside "Teacher Jail": By Pat... http://bit.ly/1dPWK2P
LAUSD STUDENT RECOVERY DAY 2013: Attendance counselors, volunteers and administrators visit the homes of of ha... http://bit.ly/1fI1ggb
LAUSD HIT BY UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINTS BY 12 TEACHERS: Huffington Post from Los Angeles Daily News | ... http://bit.ly/1cRAFxE
Textbookgate: 13 SCHOOL WORKERS, LIBRARIANS INDICTED IN TEXTBOOK THEFT RING: Prosecutors say the districts – Los Angeles, In... http://bit.ly/167V6oj
FUNDING “EDUCATION REFORM”: The Big Three Foundations: By Jonathan Pelto | Public School $hakedown | http://bi... http://bit.ly/167SoPx
"No one, however smart, however well educated, however experienced, is
the suppository of all wisdom." Australian Prime Minister-elect Tony
Abbott
DON'T MISS IT UNLESS YOU POSSIBLY CAN: Michelle Rhee at the LA Central Library | 6PM Thurs, Sept 5 | http://bit.ly/1cIGLjW
UTLA: LAUSD, DEASY VIOLATED TEACHERS’ RIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE IN UNION ACTIVITY: PERB Filing United Teachers Lo... http://bit.ly/1cIFglL
Save the Dates: DIANE RAVITCH “REIGN OF ERROR” BOOK TOUR IN L.A.: The Network for Public Education | http://b... http://bit.ly/1cIADYM
U P D A T E D: GUESSES AND HYPE GIVE WAY TO DATA IN STUDY OF EDUCATION + smf’s 2¢ http://bit.ly/1a5tssQ
GUESSES AND HYPE GIVE WAY TO DATA IN STUDY OF EDUCATION + smf’s 2¢: By GINA KOLATA . The New York Times | http... http://bit.ly/17M0LD0
Beyond the Headlines: THE N.Y. TIMES TAKES A DEEPER LOOK AT MATH & SCIENCE: Posted on September 3, 2013 by LA ... http://bit.ly/17LgemC
POLL FINDS CALIFORNIANS REMAIN UNHAPPY ABOUT PUBLIC SCHOOLS +smf’s 2¢: All politics being local - “our” local ... http://bit.ly/13azS8a
STATE BOARD OF ED CONSIDERS KEY QUESTIONS SURROUNDING LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA REGULATIONS: By Tom Chorne... http://bit.ly/13akl8i
LAUSD's $1-BILLION iPAD-FOR-EVERY-STUDENT PROJECT COULD NEED A FURTHER OUTLAY FOR KEYBOARDS: By Howard Blume, ... http://bit.ly/13a4BlP
4LAKids Foreign Policy Extra: A LOOK AT THE UNPLEASANTNESS IN SYRIA FROM ALMOST-ALL-THE-WAY ACROSS THE POND - by John Cleese... http://bit.ly/17pnCxZ
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
*Dates and times subject to change. ________________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213-241-5183
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213-241.8700
What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member:
Tamar.Galatzan@lausd.net • 213-241-6386
Monica.Garcia@lausd.net • 213-241-6180
Bennett.Kayser@lausd.net • 213-241-5555
Marguerite.LaMotte@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Monica.Ratliff@lausd.net • 213-241-6388
Richard.Vladovic@lausd.net • 213-241-6385
Steve.Zimmer@lausd.net • 213-241-6387
...or your city councilperson, mayor, the governor, member of congress,
senator - or the president. Tell them what you really think! • Find
your state legislator based on your home address. Just go to: http://bit.ly/dqFdq2 • There are 26 mayors and five county supervisors representing jurisdictions within LAUSD, the mayor of LA can be reached at mayor@lacity.org • 213.978.0600
• Call or e-mail Governor Brown: 213-897-0322 e-mail: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these
thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child.
• If you are eligible to become a citizen, BECOME ONE.
• If you a a citizen, REGISTER TO VOTE.
• If you are registered, VOTE LIKE THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT. THEY DO!.
|
