NCTAF News Digest:

A Weekly Digest of News Articles & Reports

Thursday May 15, 2008

In this Issue:

--NCLB Watch

--Report: School Funding's Tragic Flaw

--Returning to the Classroom

--Opinion: Student Tests and Teacher Grades

--Other States Woo California Teachers Amid Uncertainty Over Schwarzenegger's Budget Plan

--Mississippi to Superintendents: Fix Districts or Lose Jobs

--Non-profit Group Teach for America Sees Big Growth

--Gov. Signs Marquee Education Measure

Greetings,

This is the NCTAF News Digest, a timely news service provided to our partner states, commissioners, and the education policy community. This Digest is for the personal educational use of the recipient. At publication time, all links were active. Some publications may require free registration. You may wish to bookmark links for future reference.

Report: School Funding's Tragic Flaw

-Center on Reinventing Public Education; May 2008

Federal, state, and local policies designed to distribute education funds systematically provide more money to higher-income students and wealthier schools. This is the conclusion of “School Funding’s Tragic Flaw,” a report by the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE) and Education Sector. To illustrate how this three-layered K-12 funding benefits students and schools that are better off, authors Kevin Carey and Marguerite Roza examine two schools that from the outside appear the same but inside are quite different: Cameron Elementary School in Fairfax County, Virginia, and Ponderosa Elementary School in Cumberland County, North Carolina. Both schools educate a large number of low-income students. Yet, because of a number of circumstances, federal, state, and local policies play out such that Cameron has more than twice the money per pupil than Ponderosa, $14,040 vs. $6,773. The report offers a series of policy ideas to help remedy the problem of funding disparity at the three levels of government. The study was funded by the Spencer Foundation.

To download the full report, click here.

Returning to the Classroom
-Teacher Magazine; May 13, 2008

Is it true you can’t go back? I’m about to find out. Six years ago, after a 26-year career as a classroom teacher, I opted to become a middle school literacy coach in the Los Angeles public school system. It was a stimulating career change in many ways. For the first time I had some breathing room. I was able to gaze out beyond the four walls of my classroom and the immediate needs of my own students and examine the educational world at large. In my role as a supporter of other teachers, I’ve had the opportunity to immerse myself in the “best practice” literature and to carry out action research. Much to my delight, I’ve learned that many of the instructional practices I figured out along the way have been judged effective by education researchers. And they actually have names: constructivist, performance-based, inquiry-based, active learning, student-centered learning, choice, differentiation. In my emerging role as a teacher leader, I was also fortunate to be invited to join the Teacher Leaders Network. For the past three years, I’ve participated in a virtual professional community filled with smart, insightful teachers. I’ve learned a great deal about education policy and found public and private venues to give voice to what I value in curriculum and instruction.

Now I am ready for another challenge. I can feel my passion for coaching other teachers is waning. It seems my heart never left the classroom, and I’m in need of a new creative outlet, having accomplished everything I could figure out to accomplish in my role as literacy coach. I want my own classroom again—my own students, my own daily classroom routines, my own opportunity to make a difference with individual children who find themselves within my personal sphere of influence.Interestingly, because of my many years as an educator, my recent tour of duty as a professional developer, and the fact that I have a Master’s in administration, almost everyone I talk to about this career-shift wonders what has gotten into me. It seems that stepping back into the classroom is most often perceived as a step backwards. I’m hearing, from colleagues and supervisors alike, questions like: Why are you returning to the classroom? You really want to teach again? Your perspective is so much broader than the average teacher; don’t you think you belong at the district level? You should be a principal! Why?!

To view the full article, click here.

Opinion: Student Tests - and Teacher Grades

-The Wall Street Journal; May 9, 2008

Suppose a swimming instructor told his 10-year-old students to swim the length of the pool to demonstrate what he'd taught them, and half of them nearly drowned? Would it be reasonable to make a judgment about his teaching ability? Or suppose nearly all the 10-year-old students in a particular clarinet class learned to play five or six pieces well in a semester? Would it be reasonable to consider their achievement when deciding whether to rehire the music teacher? These questions answer themselves. Only an idiot would overlook student performance, be it dismal or outstanding. However, suppose test results indicated that most students in a particular class don't have a clue about how to multiply with fractions, or master other material in the curriculum? Should that be considered when the math teacher comes up for tenure? Whoops, the obvious answer is wrong. That's because public education lives in an upside-down universe where student outcomes are not allowed to be connected to teaching. Ten years ago, I encountered this view in an interview with Jack Steinberg, the vice president of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers. Here is the exchange: He said, "You're asking, can you evaluate a teacher on the performance of the students?" I said, "Yes or no?" He said, "No, you cannot." I, incredulously, said, "You cannot evaluate a teacher on the performance of his or her students?" He said, "Right."

Today, the notion that student performance cannot be used to judge teacher performance is the law in New York. Until recently, New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein could consider whether teachers successfully used "analysis of available student performance" to improve their teaching when he was deciding whether to grant tenure. This isn't the same as using student test scores to judge a teacher's performance, of course. But the mere hint of connecting student performance to teacher effectiveness caused fits at union headquarters. Richard C. Iannuzzi, the president of the New York State United Teachers, complained that "Student assessments are designed to assess students, not teachers." State and city teacher unions lobbied the state legislature, and last month Albany gave in to the pressure. Today, the law reads, "The teacher shall not be granted or denied tenure based on student performance data." Celebrating the victory, United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said, "There is no independent or conclusive research that shows you can accurately measure the impact of an individual teacher on a student's academic achievement."

To view the full article, click here.

Other States Woo California Teachers Amid Uncertainty Over Schwarzenegger's Budget Plan

-Los Angeles Times; May 10, 2008

Drawn by pink slips issued to thousands of teachers, recruiters from school districts nationwide are wooing California teachers with greater fervor than usual. Districts in Arizona, Nevada, Hawaii, Kansas, Virginia and Texas have been buying newspaper ads and renting billboard space, calling teachers unions and sending recruiters to regions facing the biggest school budget crunches. The trend worries some Sacramento officials, who fear talented young teachers will be lured away from a state that already expects one-third of its 300,000 teachers to retire over the next decade. "We have raiding parties from other states coming into the state of California to lure away many of our outstanding young energetic teachers," state Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell said Friday. "We must stop the era of teacher poaching and make sure we fully compensate, respect and value our teachers." The recruitment comes as California faces a budget shortfall of up to $20 billion. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed budget would cut about $4.8 billion in education funding this year and next. As a result, as many as 24,000 teachers, librarians, nurses and other school employees have been issued "pink slips" warning that they may be laid off. Districts must issue final layoff notices on Thursday.Historically, many teachers laid off in the spring are rehired over the summer after the state finalizes its budget and district finances become clear. But the current uncertainty is causing distress in classrooms, and recruiters are capitalizing on that angst.

After seeing California's woes, the 80,000-student Fort Worth Independent School District stepped up plans to place billboard ads in California reading "Your Future is in Our Classroom." In addition to the two billboards in San Diego, the Texas district is holding a three-day job fair there next week, and is expanding their billboard efforts to the Bay Area."It became obvious there was a ready-made market there in California, so we just latched onto that because we know there are teachers who are looking for jobs," said district spokesman Clint Bond. "San Diego also has a similar lifestyle to Fort Worth -- the only thing missing is the ocean." The district's message of a cheaper cost-of-living coupled with $44,500 starting salaries, $3,000 signing bonuses and annual stipends in certain specialties appears to be resonating. More than two dozen teachers have booked appointments with recruiters in San Diego next week, and others have flown to Texas for interviews.

To view the full article, click here.

Mississippi to Superintendents: Fix Districts or Lose Jobs

-Education Week; May 14, 2008

Mississippi is sending a strong message to its superintendents: Fix your low-performing school districts within a two-year period, or you’re out. Under legislation signed May 12 by Gov. Haley Barbour, local superintendents would lose their jobs if their districts were labeled “underperforming” as measured by the state accountability system for two years in a row. Elected superintendents would be removed by the governor and barred from running for re-election; appointed superintendents, who already are subject to dismissal depending on their contracts, would be automatically fired. One hurdle remains before the law can go into effect: The U.S. Department of Justice must approve it because Mississippi is covered under a section of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 that seeks to protect minority voting rights in areas of the country with a history of discrimination in voting. Most Southern states are still covered by the law, and must get federal approval when they seek to make any changes in election or voting procedures. Since 65 of Mississippi’s 152 local superintendents are elected, the law could override the wishes of voters by barring them from retaining certain superintendents and removing the officials from office during their elected terms. Such changes trigger the federal review. Such a review could take months: Between 15,000 and 24,000 applications for review are submitted to the civil rights division of the Justice Department each year. According to the department, about 1 percent of applications a year are rejected.

The Mississippi Association of School Superintendents is opposed to the law, which grows out of an effort by the Mississippi board of education and other education leaders to turn the superintendent posts currently filled by election into positions appointed by local school boards.“We’re removing the rights of the electorate based on student test scores. It’s undemocratic,” said Sam Bounds, the group’s executive director. Mr. Bounds pointed out that in 1988, voters in each of the 65 counties with elected superintendents were asked on a ballot whether they wanted to keep an elected superintendent or switch to an appointed one. A majority of voters in each of those counties voted to stick with their elected superintendents, who serve four-year terms.Mississippi is one of just three states, along with Alabama and Florida, that have any elected district superintendents, according to state officials. Supporters of the push to have all superintendents appointed say elected leaders are, by the nature of how they get their jobs, forced to be more political. The elected-chief system, its critics say, also poses a challenge in recruiting candidates for some districts because well-qualified administrators may not want to wage campaigns to get the jobs. And elected superintendents must live in their districts, a requirement that tends to limit the geographical diversity of candidates. “Clearly, we have some excellent elected superintendents,” state school board Chairman Claude Hartley said in March, when the legislation was introduced. “However, this system limits the pool from which you are able to draw. We want to be able to attract the best of the best, which means we may have to recruit across the state and across the nation. Districts with appointed superintendents are able to do just that."

To view the full article, click here.

Non-profit Group Teach for America Sees Big Growth

-The New York Times, May 14, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Backpacking in Europe? Nah, the dollar's too weak -- and for some, the needs closer to home are too great. More than ever, graduating college seniors are signing up to spend two years in America's poorest communities as part of Teach for America, the nonprofit organization that recruits and trains top college students for teaching jobs. The group saw applications jump by more than a third this year from about 18,000 to nearly 25,000. Of those, about 3,700 are expected to step up to the blackboard as new teachers this fall. That's up more than 25 percent from the 2,900 who did so last year. Several factors appear to be behind the trend. In a slow economy, teaching often becomes more attractive because it is generally considered stable. Still, Teach for America's growth can't be attributed just to economic conditions. The group, around since 1990, increased its recruiting staff this year and arranged one-on-one meetings with 30,000 students at about 400 colleges, up from last year. ''We are not in the business of just going after anybody,'' said Elissa Clapp, who oversees recruiting. ''We are looking for a very specific person.'' That has given Teach for America ''cachet,'' says Harvard University education professor Susan Moore Johnson. ''The status of the program has grown steadily among college students,'' she said.

Healthy fundraising helped pay for the additional recruiting efforts. The group's annual budget grew from about $40 million in 2005 to about $110 million this year. Philanthropists like Eli Broad, whose foundation has given $16 million to Teach for America, say they are increasingly motivated by studies showing the program has a positive impact on kids' learning. ''The results speak for themselves,'' Broad said, adding that he plans to make a larger contribution soon. ''It's one of the best investments our foundation has made.'' Several studies have found Teach for America corps members are as effective or more effective than educators who come through traditional teacher preparation programs within colleges of education. The latest study, by the Urban Institute, found that Teach for America high school teachers have a particular edge in boosting math and science test scores. But Johnson, of Harvard, cautions that there isn't enough research to make definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of Teach for America's teachers. The studies also haven't quieted critics, who say Teach for America recruits are far too unprepared for the challenges of teaching, particularly in poor communities with low-performing schools. Recruits often have no prior education experience or course work. They get five weeks of intensive training the summer before they start teaching, and then they get professional development during the school year provided by Teach for America and the districts in which they work.

To view the full article, click here.

Gov. Signs Marquee Education Measure

-The Rocky Mountain News; May 14, 2008

Gov. Bill Ritter signed a landmark education bill Wednesday designed to streamline Colorado public school curriculum and better prepare children for graduation, telling Arvada High School students it's no longer "business as usual." Ritter said the bipartisan Colorado Achievement Plan for Kids will require major changes in the way students are taught and the way they learn by completely reorganizing content and assessment standards in public schools. He said he also would sign a bill to create more openings in preschool programs for at-risk children and expand full-day kindergarten for 22,000 children over five years. Ritter told the students that too many of their peers fail to graduate, and the state needs to take a bigger role in education. "We rank 45th in the country for the percentage of native-born residents who earn college degrees. And as a nation, we are one of just two industrialized countries in the world whose college-completion rate is actually declining. We can do better. We must do better. And with these bills, we will do better," Ritter said. Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, said the bills signify major changes for public education from preschool through college. "This can truly be the blueprint for a revolution," he said. Michelle Trujillo, who had children in schools in Denver, Adams and now Jefferson counties, said her children are doing better in Jefferson County with progressive curriculum than they did in other counties. She said education levels should be the same, no matter where parents live. "I think setting standards is the best way to go. There shouldn't be any difference," she said.

To view the full article, click here.