The Advocate seems worried that accountability will be less pointed and driven-mostly because those unions got involved, I guess. You know unions, those organizations that advocate for workers. Anyway, here is a link to their article and my response (below and on their site)

---

It could be that what happened to the Broad consensus on accountability was that people began to realize it was market-driven as opposed to a well thought out and honestly researched effort towards equity (in opportunity and outcomes). Tests and reams of data don’t mend market-broken homes and families, hire overworked or unemployed parents at a wage that supports a family, or fill the bookshelves and bellies of the children that most often raise our concerns regarding inequitable outcomes. Since when did the loudest voices in reform of anything push for simply measure-and-blame? Since there was lots of money to be made on quantifying the damage done and using power and influence to place blame elsewhere. Imagine if all we were willing to spend money on was thermometers, sphygmometers, and stethoscopes …but we wanted to blame and fire doctors for the failing health of patients. Simplistic? Think about who runs this country and how: big pharma hawks prescription meds for everything from high cholesterol to “restless legs” to limp…well, you know. Yet, where is the investment in prevention? WalMarts, greasy fast food and online ed, ya’ll. It’s cheap, great for the market, and we already know where tomorrow’s leaders will come from. Their children will own those things you buy. They must have had highly effective teachers.

effectiveteachers.

My great grandmother, Ada (Burgess) McConnell taught in a one room school house in Summer Hill, N.Y. Her son (My grandfather Halsey McConnell) served in the army during W.W.II. My grandmother (Lucille) was a woman of faith and family. Her neighbors, her church, all of them and all of us were among her primary concerns.

I remember them all well.

Ada lived to be 96 years old and was always a gracious and clever woman. When I was a young boy, she was adept at keeping me busy looking for four leaf clovers, swatting flies for a penny a piece, or going through photos from long ago-telling me about the people and places in them. She never stopped being a teacher. My grandmother was determined to get us to church. I can recall a few different head pastors in the church, many of the “regulars”and while it wasn’t the most favorite place for a boy to be on a beautiful Sunday morning, that country church was part of my childhood. Sunday church in Sempronius often came with an after church stop at the general store for a candy bar-possibly a slight detour to the rod and gun club for their chicken barbecue. Grandma was good at getting us to church on time, no matter how we attempted to thwart her. She had a comb at the ready. Tissues and grandma-spit were the wet wipes “back in the day”. I remember thinking one time that getting my church clothes dirty would be my ticket to unsupervised outdoor country trouble instead of church.

I had underestimated my grandmother.

From the depths of the house, fashion from the 50’s showed up. Probably having once belonged to my own father or Uncle Denny (his younger brother), the clothes were close enough to my size to get me redressed, far enough away from current trends and my size to get me beat up if I had been going to school instead.

My grandfather was practical and wise about the world, while still being inappropriate in the most awesome ways. If you could have combined W.C. fields, Groucho Marx and Archie Bunker, you would end up with someone like my grandfather. He lived to a respectable age, but it’s likely that lifestyle changes might have added another decade to that life. If I close my eyes and imagine him, it’s with a beer in his hand. A cheap beer. In his other hand is a cigar that was smoked down about halfway, but gone out long ago and more of a placeholder in his mouth to be possibly re-lit at some point, but maybe not as well. Chewed down, black and soggy on the end, I sometimes catch myself wondering why he didn’t just chew tobacco, but then I remember that he simply chewed his cigars.Sometimes there were car rides after the kids came back from church with Grandma, where my grandfather and my father would take the front seat, me and my younger brother would be in the backseat. The trip would often be a long and winding circuit to Moravia to pick up a 12 pack, maybe a watermelon and a Sunday paper, sometimes other things. Often the trip back would stick to the back roads: taking us up behind Fillmore Glenn State Park on an indirect course home.

Dad and Gramp handing back empty cans, us boys handing up the refills.

My grandfather would drive casually, left elbow out the rolled-down window concealing the beer held just out of sight in his left hand. Right hand on the steering wheel somewhere between 12 and 1 o’clock and that cigar/pacifier in between his index and middle finger when it wasn’t in his mouth. Sometimes we’d go by the birthplace of Millard Fillmore. Sometimes we’d stop and see Charlie Peak, who sold discount shoes. Sometimes we’d go by the Summer Hill nudist camp, and my grandfather would say “Keep your eyes open boys-you might see something!” He was the best kind of wise-ass you could ever want to know. He really was laughing with you, not at you.

Gramp used to tell stories about his time in Europe while he was in the army. The German soldiers captured, he said, were decent guys-just doing what they had to do. The officers now, they were the Nazi’s, the arrogant bastards. You could tell they thought they were smarter than you. Not that smart I guess now, were you? The soldiers would try to run to be on the work detail Gramp was guarding. They liked him so much that Gramp could grab a nap and they would work and wake him if an officer was approaching, and he had to tell those prisoners to not be so enthusiastic about running to be on his detail or the  They were, Gramp said, happy to have been captured. Their treatment and conditions as prisoners of the Americans were far better than the conditions they had been in.

Dad tells stories about Gramp. About how when Gramp was a boy the local law was a constable. An honest to goodness man on a horse who would patrol the area, staying the night at one family’s house or another as he made his rounds. Gramp dumped wood-stove ashes in the constable’s boots one time while the constable slept. Another time, skipping school to go pheasant hunting, Gramp encountered the constable. They made an agreement that if Gramp laid low and didn’t get caught, the constable wouldn’t tell. When Gramp returned from the war, that same constable picked Gramp up at the train station. He had moved up from the horse and now had a car. The constable took Gramp out for a drink before delivering him home.

This was a time when it wasn’t who you know, or how high you could climb above them and/or others-it was about how you treat the people you know.

My experiences as a child were interesting, most of the places I spent time at, the things I saw/did, the people I hung around…they are the things you hear about kids today (kids who struggle with the responsibilities of the school day) and shake your head in disapproval. I cannot ever remember a time when my parents were together, but I never once remember seeing them argue, or even have unkind words. I lived with my mother, had bookshelves full of books, family gatherings, lots of cousins to play with…I had this variety of questionable experiences and more within the context of a family of people who were all there for each other, any time, all the time, no matter what. My models were those of responsibilities first, informed by a wide array of people who had little in terms of material wealth but a vast amount of character and integrity, and usually a very colorful vocabulary. Somehow, I seem to have turned out okay.

What has happened in our country that makes it so difficult for people to succeed and why are public schools suddenly being held responsible for citizens’ failure to thrive?

The version of reform being forced upon our system of public education is only advancing the lack of integrity we have seen advancing upon our society. Reality TV portrays a path to success that includes the lowest of low behaviors: the promotion of self-indulgence, greed and dishonesty as the path to success.

I should not even know who Honey- Boo-Boo is.

Or the Kardashians.

Nor should the name Carlos Danger mean a thing.

Lloyd Blankfein and Goldie Hawn get top billing at an Education Nation event, Diane Ravitch is invited to watch the spectacle from the audience.

Is it really schools that need to be reformed?

Is our problem really an achievement gap, or an integrity gap?

Ray Kinsella didn’t just sit on the porch of his Iowa farmhouse shouting at that damn failing cornfield and demanding it start spitting out baseball legends. Our policy makers are failing in their responsibility to “build it”, choosing instead to scapegoat, allow education to be guided by a market-mentality and non-educators. 

“Jobs of tomorrow” is like a fart in the breeze. Smells bad the very first moment, then the farter can shrug and say “woopsie” as it disappears. When does economic and policy reform, sustaining real jobs, and public ed become more important than state of the art nuclear war machines, monitoring and controlling the population?

Good for students: Proven, research based approaches to economic equity and school readiness

• “Grit and Rigor” are not educationally magic words that make developmentally inappropriate and wrong-headed approaches suddenly work.

• Treating annual testing as top priority in the education-as-vehicle-to-equity approach to civil rights, and limiting the scope of the critical lens to teachers and unions is either transparently intentional and diversionary- or unintentionally ignorant.

• To be an educator in this modern time and to not realize that the changing world requires changing approaches in how we prepare young people for that world is dangerous-to yourself and others.

YES our kids need to increasingly be able to grasp more and be able to do more than they once had to, but a large part of why they are not already isn’t because schools are failing or we’re not identifying “bad teachers”-it’s what we’re failing to do collectively. It’s what we allow to happen, and it’s even what we sometimes willingly participate in. To do the “long story short” (out of character for me, I know): our society is failing on the front end to prepare the number of capable learner/leaders it once did- and instead is focused on the priority of manufacturing mindless consumers and capable future workers on the back end. We are failing to hold our leaders truly accountable, rein in our markets and our own participation in them, and to teach our kids true character and responsibility. We’re failing to identify models/examples of the kind of people we want our children to grow up to be.

Little bodies are being poisoned by cheap garbage food, their minds poisoned by smut, and instead of focusing on those endemic and chronic dangers we are driven to serve numbers in various complicated formulas or scores on various standardized tests that supposedly signify value. But more proficiency on standardized tests of academic skills requires brains that process and perform more proficiently, which requires a foundation of healthy habits and cognitive experiences that will support that proficiency.

That means focus on positive cognitive engagement from birth, maybe even before (I would sing to my wife’s belly, and purely anecdotal evidence leads me to believe “You are my sunshine” worked magic on my daughter when she was little). Great books in every home; parents freed from low-wage servitude enough to participate and support academic and emotional development; social networks and experiences away from televisions and gaming screens…

Making these the standards we shoot for would be a difficult goal, for sure- and potentially costly to the garbage dealers, smut peddlers and testing corporations (as well as PACs, non-profits and politicians feeding at their trough).

But entering into this reform battle is true grit, and it’s not just good for students-it’s good for us all.

Earlier today I was listening to a radio news story about the water shortage in California and an interview of Mark Arax, who is writing a book about what was described as the “water war”. It is likely being called a war because there is an obvious disconnect between those who feel an entitlement to all the water they feel they need to sustain an economic expectation (for watering fancy golf courses, almond crops, etc) and those who have the idea that water is a basic freaking need in order to sustain life. While not necessarily the same in it’s immediacy, dire consequence-wise, it made me recall the “all the education you can afford” brand of reform that is creeping up on and into our approach to public schools. Who will be getting the well watered golf courses as well as the well funded and supplied schools? Who will have access to all they could want, and how much will policymakers get perked, comped and jetted off to secure locations to be courted by private interests looking to own the public?

So is the question that’s being put before the court – is it a question of whether water intended for public use can then be diverted into a private underground storage facility?

California “water wars” seem to come with some of the same questions. Should something intended to provide physical and/or economic security for all be diverted, divided and distributed based on wealth and influence?

School Choice further Segregates Society (May 24), inspired comments regarding what I described as “the collective good”. My words may have given the wrong impression. Some responders, printed and online, seemed to imagine a socialist utopia mindset- where excellence is sacrificed in return for evenly divided mediocrity. That is not at all what I mean. The equity in opportunities to compete fairly from the beginning and then demonstrate excellence is what I value- as well as some honesty in the narratives of “choice” and “reform”. To that end, the current state of the economy, school funding, and opportunities available to all public school students should be included in discussions that instead center on how schools struggle to overcome these restraints. This is aside from the elephant in the room: the decay of character and morality fueled by free market absolution of policies that are no good for anyone-children most of all.

If it is profitable, we are made to believe it is acceptable these days-even when the profit is limited and it feels wrong. The good of the market and the never-ending quest for consumers and profit has led to a gauntlet of energy drinks, candy and smut right at the checkout line, 24 hours of trash on TV, and shelves full of video games instead of books in the bedrooms of our school students. This is not supportive of positive academic outcomes for children-but it definitely generates profits. This, as a result, has led to a grand and well-funded misdirection: framing public workers and “failing schools” as the prime suspects while the real culprits get away.

In his 2013 article New data shows school “reformers” are full of it, David Sirota describes it this way:

…the “reform” argument gives them a way to both talk about fixing education and to bash organized labor, all without having to mention an economic status quo that monied interests benefit from and thus do not want changed.

So my “collective good” has less to do with taking opportunity and “choice” from anyone, and is more about working collectively so all can have it instead. This will require hard work and cooperation, and resisting efforts to divide and place a for-sale value on our students.

There is a better way: collective action at the voting booth that

1) removes big money and market motive from public obligations and

2) demands policy that will reduce disparity and build a more supportive economic/social/moral fabric that sends more once-struggling students to school ready to learn.

Or we could just look down shamefully because we’re afraid of that battle, shuffle our feet a little and think of more ways to blame teachers for the state of our nation and what’s being done to it’s people by supposed “leaders” and by political and economic theater.

Yeah…tests are easier to make and data is easier to respect than people are. Plus, campaign donors profit, make more donations, and a governor gets a maybe shot at higher office!

Win-win, I guess. Except for kids. They still lose, but hey-they cost too much anyways and do you know how many of them there are? Gawd!

Our public schools are vital in the development of capable learners and citizens, and they can offer opportunities for the disadvantaged to rise above challenging circumstances. But they have wrongly become the scapegoat for conditions beyond their control rather than an object of respect and the primary focus for support. While public education certainly is an expensive endeavor, it is first and foremost an obligation. As a society, we are obligated to utilize public education for the good of the entire public-not to simply prepare it for the ravages of the market. Imposing a market or “choice” model will only further segregate and separate citizens the way the market does. This is evident both in news about how celebrated and successful charter schools achieve their often manufactured results, and the increasing disparity in wealth and opportunity between the economic classes in our nation.The collective good, therefor, means resisting a free market mindset when it comes to public education.

I have first-hand experience learning from those who know (those working at NYSED and others familiar with regulations) that as many times as regulations say things are available to all students, and as often as we may know in our hearts what is truly the right thing to do: the state of school funding in New York is a powerful determining factor in what opportunities will actually be available to students in our schools. “Our schools” here is a reference to schools that are truly public, and are mandated to accept and serve all students in their area regardless of economic status, family resources, or special needs. It has become fashionable and politically convenient for some charter schools to call themselves “public charters” while having mechanisms in place to shape their enrollment in ways that artificially improve their results on measures of achievement. Instead of quietly being pleased with their “success”, though, leaders of this type of school will sometimes cast critical light on the truly public schools doing the work they refuse to do. Sometimes they even enlist PR firms, lobbyists and politicians at all levels to promote charter schools without promoting the discussion regarding the money behind them, and who they will and won’t serve.

Leslie Yolen, Marybeth Casey,

Barbara Lifton, Cathy Nolan,

John Flanagan, Andrew Cuomo

Re: Education regulations, policy, and lobbying for students, parents, and kitchen tables

---

Dear advocates for public education,

Our public schools[i] are vital in the development of capable learners and citizens, and they can offer opportunities for the disadvantaged to rise above challenging circumstances. But they often become the primary scapegoat for conditions beyond their control rather than an object of respect and the primary focus for support[ii]. While public education certainly is an expensive endeavor, and we are reminded repeatedly of its price tag here in New York, it is first and foremost an obligation. As a society, we are obligated to educate and guide young learners for the collective good, and should resist applying the free market mindset popular in current education reform practice. Imposing a market or “choice” model upon public education will only further segregate and separate the classes the same way the market does. This is evident in both news about how some celebrated and successful[iii] charter schools achieve their results, and in the increasing disparity in wealth and opportunity for the uppermost and lowermost economic classes in our nation.

Having had first-hand experience learning from those who know (those working at NYSED and familiar with regulations) I can say that as many times as education regulations say certain opportunities are to be available to all students: the state of school funding in New York is a powerful determining factor in what opportunities will actually be available to students. The inequity in the funds and opportunities available within public schools and in households across the state already undermines our obligation to educate equitably- more so than unions and bad teachers; more so than bureaucracy within the public education system; far more than the lack of tests or test-related consequences. That inequity and poverty outside of the school have an impact within the school is a reality confronted by dedicated educators every day, and one that is avoided by our leaders and policy makers.

Public schools are ours. We are the public, public schools belong to all of us, and it is important to discuss them that way. Education is what builds an informed and capable citizenry-one that drives and demands strong, honest leadership and works together for change when leadership strays from the collective values and goals. Whether it is at the voting booth or in mass demonstrations of displeasure-such as the recent “opt out” movement, an educated and informed citizenry informs and shapes the best results. When the populace is educated and informed, and understands its civic duty to move collectively for change, the benefit is widespread. The economy, cohesiveness within the society, and character of the nation all benefit. Our public schools are ours. They exist for the good of all.

---

Endnotes:

[i] “Our public schools” here is a reference to schools that are truly public, and are mandated to accept and serve all students in their area regardless of economic status, family resources, or special needs. It has become fashionable and politically convenient for some charter schools to call themselves “public charters” while having mechanisms in place to shape their enrollment in ways that artificially improve their results on measures of achievement. Instead of quietly being pleased with their manufactured success, leaders of this type of education movement will cast critical light on the truly public schools doing the work they refuse to do. Sometimes they even enlist PR firms, lobbyists and politicians at all levels to promote charter schools without promoting the discussion regarding the money behind them, and who they will and won’t serve.

[ii] “Support” here means a variety of things from funding, to policy, to the way those in leadership roles discuss public education. How we support our public schools will determine the degree to which our society benefits. Here, I’ll save on words and get to the point: tests are not the answer, but one of the least significant tools if more equitable outcomes are desired. Tests are not curriculum, they are not true objectives, and they certainly shouldn’t be considered “support”-though they seem to be the go-to for those driving policy and attempting to control the debate and appear supportive. While the testing process and data can inform and guide instruction when put in the hands of educators, it can also be the crutch or the shield people use when they are unable to contend with real life facts that come with real live people; a cheap and insufficient answer to a complicated problem. The time being spent tweaking and safeguarding testing policy and the testing process could be better spent empowering the professionals to handle testing and how tests can be used (since assessment in education is part of a process best understood and implemented by professionals in that field) and turning policy-making on to the funding and opportunity equity issue (since the economy and policy is best understood by those in that field).

[iii] “Successful” is very subjective when it comes to charters. That they are available to only some is fine, that they refuse entry or “counsel out” others is less fine, but that school leaders in these social filter schools would dare presume to compare their results to the community melting pots that real public schools are is simply unacceptable. That politicians would willingly join this theater without openly discussing the play is tragic. That’s not leadership. Just come out and say “These teachers we have been attacking with tests and evaluation are the heroes. They do the job no one else is willing to do. The best we can come up with is a path for the easier, better supported, more efficient to teach and graduate type students. We are still at a loss on the most challenging students in the most struggling neighborhoods and schools…so more tests and evaluations for now.”

Looking back at some past stuff again. It is incredible-the people who are held in ed-policy esteem without having ever put the time in to deserve that esteem.

Mr. Kleine, the teacher is on the front line, there’s no denying it. But why the absolute denial of any other factor in the “battle” to educate children? More to the point, why the unconditional support of reformers comfortable in criticizing with such a narrow scope? It would be one thing if the out front reformers were experienced teachers saying “here are the things teaching real kids in real classrooms has shown me…” but this is not the case. It would be another if these reformers said “our teachers sacrifice a lot to meet ever increasing demands and do what they can for students- even our most challenging. Now is the time to join them in reforming education.” This is not the approach taken. Reformers, many with no significant experience in a classroom,are allowed credibility they haven’t earned. Their arguments have assumed weight they don’t deserve. Teachers not only work together to meet ever changing and often unfunded mandates from above, they give their hearts,souls and spend some of their own wages to make the most needy feel cared for,safe,valued and capable. While outside of school the “free market” rages on, victimizing most families and imposing great negative influence,teachers still push students to prepare them for the future. The reformers do not mention the societal differences between America and the countries we supposedly compare poorly to. They don’t mention the well paid,qualified and unionized teaching forces that prepare kids to become adults in more equitable societies. It is easier to point at schools and teachers than have their backs, pitch in and join in turning eager young kids into capable citizens. Teachers have always stepped forward, voulunteering to climb that hill and take the offensive. We should look at who has stepped back,looked away and weaseled out of their responsibilities.