Think Progress is "baffled"

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Jul 31, 2010 at 16:00


President Obama almost broke his arm patting himself on the back over "Race to the Top" (RTT), so Think Progress is baffled that Congress cut it.  But the logic here is all over the map:

As Obama Praises Race To The Top's Success, Congress Cuts Its Funding In Half

Earlier this week, a coalition of civil rights groups blasted the Obama administration's Race to the Top program - which provides competitive grants to states that implement education reforms - saying that "by emphasizing competitive incentives in this economic climate, the majority of low-income and minority students will be left behind and, as a result, the United States will be left behind as a global leader."

Today, Obama responded at the National Urban League Centennial Conference:

    I know there's a concern that Race to the Top doesn't do enough for minority kids, because the argument is, well, if there's a competition, then somehow some states or some school districts will get more help than others. Let me tell you, what's not working for black kids and Hispanic kids and Native American kids across this country is the status quo...So the charge that Race to the Top isn't targeted at those young people most in need is absolutely false because lifting up quality for all our children - black, white, Hispanic - that is the central premise of Race to the Top. And you can't win one of these grants unless you've got a plan to deal with those schools that are failing and those young people who aren't doing well.  Every state and every school district is directly incentivized to deal with schools that have been forgotten, been given up on.

Of course, closing the achievement gap between white and minority students is a huge part of making the education system more effective. The College Board has set the goal of having 55 percent of 27-34 year olds holding a college degree by 2020 (currently 40 percent do), and "by eliminating the severity of disparities between underrepresented minorities and white Americans, it is estimated that more than half the degrees needed to meet the 55 percent goal would be produced."

But Race to the Top has been a key driver for education reform across the country. So far, 32 states have implemented reforms in order to compete in the program. "While Race to the Top has only been in existence for a short time, it has yielded some of the most dramatic state education reforms the country has seen in many years," said CAP's Cindy Brown. "These changes include a new law in Colorado that ensures all teachers receive a meaningful evaluation, a raise in standards for teacher tenure, and measures that ensure that ineffective teachers who don't improve are not teaching students."

So it's completely baffling that the Senate has seen fit to slice the program's funding in half for 2011, after the administration itself requested far less than it had in 2010. The House cut the $1.4 billion request down to $850 million, and the Senate reduced it further to just $675 million. This year's program had $4.3 billion, and with the country's economic future at stake, it makes little sense to slice a program that's showing tangible results.

Just one of the things that's totally missing here--as the civil rights group tried to point out--is any realistic reason to believe that minorities will be helped rather than hurt--as seems to be far more likely.

In fact, this week one of the showcase high-stakes testing systems--NY City--was revealed to be a disaster, once realistic test evaluations were instituted. From GothamSchools.org: Rise & Shine: Racial test score gap as wide as before Bloomberg, links to ten stories, while Rise & Shine: Test score drop even larger at charter schools links to an even dozen (both reproduced on the flip).

In short, there's no mystery here if you just put down the Kool Aid and take a look at the evidence.

Paul Rosenberg :: Think Progress is "baffled"

Rise & Shine: Racial test score gap as wide as before Bloomberg

  • The gap between black and white students' test scores is as wide as it was in 2002. (NY1)
  • And because scores were inflated, there's no way to know whether students are doing better. (Times)
  • Tenure denials are on the rise, slightly. (GothamSchools, Times, Post, WSJ, NY1)
  • The tenure and evaluation decisions were made with help from faulty test scores. (Daily News)
  • Thousands of students were promoted or retained on the basis of the scores. (GothamSchools)
  • Juan Gonzalez says misled students lose biggest in the test score recalibration. (Daily News)
  • The Daily News says it stands by its praise for city students, despite the lowered scores.
  • Joe Williams of Democrats for Education Reform says state Dems are better on ed policy. (Daily News)
  • President Obama said his education policies are meant to help, not castigate. (Times, L.A. Times)
  • PS 87 in Middle Village will get a new gym and classrooms to help with crowding. (Queens Chronicle)

Rise & Shine: Test score drop even larger at charter schools

  • New standards cut state test pass rates. (GothamSchools, Times, Post, Daily News, NY1, WNYC, WSJ)
  • The drop was disproportionately large at city charter schools. (Daily News)
  • Nearly 2,000 students assigned to summer school scored high enough to stop attending. (Insideschools)
  • Columbia professor Aaron Pallas says the scores show that city students need more help. (Daily News)
  • The principal of Brooklyn's McKinley JHS says the scores will make him work harder. (Post)
  • The Post says the lower scores are only a first step toward strengthening education in New York.
  • A new charter school opening in the Bronx's District 10 takes a progressive approach. (Riverdale Press)
  • The path to create new charter schools is likely to be crowded and bumpy this year. (The Capitol)
  • Joel Klein and Michael Mulgrew will tout New York's Race to the Top bid in D.C. (GothamSchools, NY1)
  • As in NYC, the least jarring school change plan is the most popular nationally this fall. (Education Week)
  • President Obama is responding to criticism that his reforms haven't helped minority students. (AP)
  • Major changes in the Philly schools include the end of the city's region divisions. (Philadelphia Inquirer)

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Providing a qualify education for disadvantaged (4.00 / 6)
students is as easy as $62,000 a year in tuition.  To act like its broken, and they don't know what to do to fix it, is ridiculous.  There are models everywhere - if you want to pay for them.  Throwing money at the schools is bad.  Throwing money at banks is good.  Got it?

The profit motive behind New Markets Tax Initiatives (4.00 / 2)
will thrive. It will be 'the silver bullet,' whether it works or not. (The silver bullet for the silver spoons...a disgrace.)

Cost-benefit analysis should have already disproven the value of charter schools - by process of elimination alone - but it's a BFD for hedge funds, so it must roll out.

The long term objective is union busting, and that's not done yet.

They only call it class war when we fight back.


Robber Rubin arranged some funding for CAP. And Rubin's Hamilton project (4.00 / 2)
endorses the right wing Education Deform plan. So, not at all surprising CAP spews crap.

Plenty of people believe this stuff (4.00 / 2)
who aren't getting anything.  This is boiler plate neoliberalism - with its belief in the power of competition to solve all problems.

Of course, that doesn't mean the funding doesn't matter...

Support the Youth PROMISE Act


[ Parent ]
The talking points: (4.00 / 5)
"Race to the Top has been a key driver for education reform across the country." This is the mantra being chanted right now by both the Obama administration and the neoliberals in the Dem party. Never mind that what these "reforms" are really producing is test-taking factories where poor kids are going to be put into lock-step, brain dead schooling delivered by near-volunteer and low-paid teachers.

In the meantime, Duncan is going off the rails in his promises to be education's great savior. As Rick Hess (someone who I don't generally find a whole lot to agree with) points out, Duncan has promised nonsensically that "We will ensure that all schools--public, private and charter--serve the kids most in need." How indeed can Duncan ensure that private schools -- that receive no public funds -- "serve the kids most in need?"

It's getting really hard to decide whether these people are clueless or conniving. But when people who claim to be progressives shrink from their duty to stand up for the welfare of the most vulnerable in our society -- particularly children -- it's downright shameful. More about this in Left Ed tomorrow . . .


More and More I'm Thinking That These Are The Folks We Need To Be Targetting (4.00 / 2)
They're providing so-called "progressive cover" and they're utterly, totally clueless.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Agree (4.00 / 1)
Most live in the Beltway, have no kids, and don't know educator positions outside labor issues (something I will address tomorrow). So yes, they are generallly cluless and feel that if they align with the Obama administration then alll is okay.  

[ Parent ]
want to point out that the NEA has opposed RTT as far as I know (4.00 / 3)
so it might be worthwhile to work with them / take a lead from them.  The fact that these initiatives are almost always anti-teacher (as if teachers are the problem and not dumbass ideological politicians) is atrocious.  So too is the idea that schools can function outside a comprehensive national education system.

And the goal?  To have more kids with college degrees?  exactly where are those kids going to work? And what about the 45% that won't be in that category?!  And the 60% who aren't now!

And how are they measuring 'achievement'?  Is it by test scores?  Or is it by a genuine measure of progress?

And finally there's the never ending problem of 'disadvantage' measured entirely in terms of race/ethnicity/language.  What about LGBT pupils?  Working class or poor pupils?  female pupils?  Kids with SEN?  Are they going to do anything about their education, let alone the jobs market they face afterwards?

No.  That's why this is all bullshit, from start to finish, and I'm glad it's getting cut, even if for the wrong reasons.  It was a cynical move (or maybe idiotic, but I prefer cynical) and it deserves to die.  It induced negative reforms in dozens of states that, I think, don't receive any money for it in the end because of the competitive winner-take-all model.

I could be wrong about some of the specifics above, and would appreciate corrections - I think, though, the general point that I'm pissed about the overall strategy has come through :)


Oh Yes (0.00 / 0)
The whole competitiveness argument is totally bogus, as the late Gerald Bracey never tired of pointing out.  That's why I wrote, "Just one of the things that's totally missing here" (emphasis added).

This is supposed to be my day off, but I'd meant to write something about this on Friday, and just couldn't get to it, so I basically just stitched together the three items I wanted to connect, with a minimum of commentary.  Had I gotten to it on Friday, I would have taken that entire complex of lies apart piece by piece. It's like a "greatest hits" compilation.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
well, it takes a village to take apart an entire complex of lies :) (0.00 / 0)
also to educate children :)  not entirely unrelated subjects :)

thanks for the post, in other words.


[ Parent ]
Reality Check (4.00 / 3)
I swore I would not write any more as it is so frustrating to even acknowledge how clueless so many "progressives" are on education.

I could write on so many things, but let's stick with why competitive grants don't really work to improve conditions in poor schools, and why they rarely get them or implement them well.  Although I get that these grants are given to states not districts or school, in the end who gets them is also a competitive, political game.

So I will explain my theory based on competitive grants for schools.  I have gotten a few small ones myself when I worked at what was essentially a middle class school.  But when I moved to the lowest performing, highest free lunch school in the district, things changed.
PREFACE
The first few years our school and another got a lot of "urban renewal' monies for technology.  It brought us up to par with the other elementary schools in the district.
Meanwhile, the year before I came a fourth grader had set a fire in a trash can during lunch, and it got out of control.  He had sneaked back into the building (it was 1998, before Columbine when doors to the building were not all locked).  Luckily he ran out and told the teachers what he did.  The fire department was able to get it out, no injuries; however, the entire library and all classrooms in that wing had total smoke and water damage.  In a bizarro way, it was a good thing.  The library was old, books outdated, few new books over the years.   Anyway, I was hired as the first professional media center person.  Our schools had up until 1999 paraprofessionals running the libraries.  Since 1999 one had to have a MA in education tech/media library.  So, although most of my career had been in the classroom, now I was taking on a new role.
After a year in a trailer, with old books donated by the public library in the city, I got to set up a brand new library with ALL NEW BOOKS and lots of them courtesy insurance money.  With the help of one wonderful supervisor who had been a librarian all her life, we did it, in the summer, before school started, (not paid because that's life in education). I knew if I waited until the scheduled days before school it would be weeks before we were ready. I wanted the library up and running when school started.

Fast forward a few years.  Beautiful library, a networked computer lab, computers in every classroom, and my job in 2001 was to teach students and teachers how to use the internet.  This was in a school where at that time, less than 10% of the families in that neighborhood had computers...even less were wired.

We worked hard, we learned. Grants were being offered all over the place for power libraries.   We, the library educators, had to write them if we wanted the money.  I could not find the time, not just for the writing but for the classes in "how to write a grant."  

FF again to now.  A retiree, I now sub in a school two blocks from my house.  My new education begins.  The person in that school who did what I used to do is a colleague I have known for years.  He has gotten many grants....the latest making his school the most tech advanced library in the district.  From observation, from conversations, here are some of the ways he got grants, became a power library.  
 * This school has the least amount of free lunch students and is one of the three highest performing schools.  It is about a half mile from a liberal arts private college.  Many of the professors' children, grandchildren go there.
My block also has our children attend.  My block is the poorest side of the neighborhood, consisting of mostly teachers, police officers, firefighter families.  Three blocks over from us are the doctors, lawyers, architects...etc.  So middle class there is the "poor".
   *Besides all my teaching when I was at the library in the poor school, I had to troubleshoot equipment daily, and shelve books daily. I truly was a stickler for shelved books because how else could kids find them, learn how to use a library if books were not shelved daily.  My friend at this school never shelves his books.  He has parents, educated parents who know and use libraries, in every day to do that.  
  *Grants.  When grants come in, I had to read them, figure them out and learn how to write them.  The small grants I could handle.  The really big ones took professionals, or took a class to learn.
My friend has parents on staff who wrote grants professionally.  As well he had so many volunteers, he can leave the library, go to classes, come back and no worse for wear.  

Implementation for grants

Staffs often have to take classes, go to meetings, all aimed at implementing the grant correctly.  A lot of grants takes tons of paper work documentation to prove the money is being using correctly etc etc.   When you are in a poor school, staff is already taking all kinds of classes demanded by the district to "get those scores up."  Because of NCLB, the paperwork a classroom teacher has to do depends on how many students need and ILP (individual learning plan for students who are not special ed but are not on grade level).
So in a low performing school in a class of 25, a teacher easily has between 15 and 20 ILPs to write.  In a high performing school, maybe 5 ILPs.   These are mostly done now electronically on the network.  They are time consuming and it was my job to check them all and make sure they were correctly done before they were submitted. It was also my job to do the paperwork for the grants.

In the end, my point is this. It is not a fair competition when it comes to grants, writing them, implementing them.  President Obama is being badly informed.   RTTT is not going to help the schools most in need, unless they are singled out by a state or a district to make them a showcase.  Then they pour all their administrative grant writers, resource persons, into that one school.  
Most districts are like the one in which I lived and taught.  There were out of 39 elementary schools (less now that when I was there as they have closed some "poor" schools), about 20 who qualified for Title I funding, based on school lunch programs.  About six of those schools were like the one where I worked, with a percentage of 70% or higher on free lunch.  So if they targeted one school, there are still many, many children left behind.

Sorry this was so long.  But educators know the games that are played and the daily inequalities that affect everything.

Do I have a solution? YES.   Not merit pay. Not grants.  
Commitment pay, coupled with low class size, higher FTE (teacher to student ratio).  Offer large bonuses to teachers willing to commit five years or more to a low income, low performing school.  Go to the schools overflowing with parent volunteers and get them to volunteer in schools other than their child's.   It will educate and enlighten parents.   Create incentives for that.
The competitive part should be about making those poor performing schools so much more rewarding, financially as well as emotionally, that the best teachers compete to be there.

As it is now, when I go to the school where I sub, I wonder if I would ever have gone back to the school from which I retired.   He gets to work on a level where I could only dream about doing.  Because the tedious, clerical stuff, like shelving books, printing overdue notices, going through journals for hours looking for appropriate books to buy with the limited dollars, running book fairs, is done by volunteers, he concentrates on researching the newest, most innovative ways to use the web to enhance, enlighten, educate.  The turn over in teachers there is non-existent. Unless someone retires or gets pregnant, or move, few leave.  In my old school, burn out was overwhelming, and turn over in large numbers was the norm. Why wouldn't it be?  You work hard, often much harder than teachers in high performing schools, and most of the time you are scolded by administration, trashed by the media and rarely rewarded with anything from parents. The rewards for those of us who chose those schools are the kids.   Older, idealist teachers like myself, stayed because we wanted to make a difference. Young people with young families rarely did, as it took a toll.  Since many young teachers often have young kids they did not have the time to commit or the emotional energy to give unless they took it away from their own kids.
Let's be honest, given their druthers, who wants to work where their best efforts are ignored or scorned.  I could take a kid from the second percentile to the 20 percentile.   Another teacher took a kid from the seventieth percentile to the eightieth.   My achievement mattered ZERO in NCLB.   The latter was praised for getting a kid from proficient to advanced. It is what it is.  Even teachers are human.  After a while, even though you know you have helped profoundly, the lack of any kind of support, acknowledgment, wears on humans. We all need to be acknowledged occasionally.

Hope this helped give some insight.  And did not bore.  But it is frustrating to read how simplistic some are when it comes to education.


Oh Dear! (0.00 / 0)
This is far too logical, thoughtful and intelligent.

Can't we just use slogans instead?  Slogans make people feel good.  And feeling good is very important.  Then we can all eat ice cream.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Well, it certainly helped me. (0.00 / 0)
Thank you very much for this.  

"How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it."   -- Henry David Thoreau

[ Parent ]




USER MENU


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you

Donate to Open Left

Senate Forecast
With Rasmussen


Without Rasmussen


QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search