Talk Priority Schools

A nice piece on PSC in the September edition of Worlds of Education, the magazine of Education International, based in Brussels. EI is a global union federation, including NEA, of 348 member organizations in 169 countries. One of the largest labor organizations in the world, EI advocates for quality public education for all, defends international human rights standards with a focus on labor rights, and helps generate understanding and action regarding the lives and working conditions of more than 30 million teachers and other education employees around the world. The piece was written by Tim Walker, a staffer with NEA Interactive Media, who has covered international affairs extensively for NEA, including reporting on the ground in Morocco covering educator efforts to rescue students from child labor situations.

NEA leads on tackling low-performing schools

By Tim Walker

The National Education Association (NEA) in the USA believes that public education should help all students reach their full potential. However, persistent problems  much as academic achievement gaps and high truancy and drop-out rates continue to  effect far too many students, especially those from lower-income backgrounds or  minority communities.

To meet this challenge, the education union launched a  priority  schools Campaign, a multi-year multi-million dollar commitment to bring  permanently transform and improve America’s lowest-performing schools. Through the Priority Schools Campaign, NEA has united educators, administrators, parents, community members and policymakers in a collaborative effort to improve academic achievement in struggling schools.

The Priority Schools Campaign held its first national conference in March 2010, where it brought together teachers and  education union activists from some of the nation’s lowest-performing schools to  discuss how to work together to ensure all students could have access to a quality public education.

NEA President, Dennis Van Roekel, said: “If we work together, we can open opportunities for tens of thousands of students – day by day, one building at a time, and one student at a time.”

From Columbus Education Association

National Education Association President Dennis Van Roekel stopped in Columbus on Wednesday, Aug. 25, as part of his week-long, multi-city, back-to-school tour. The veteran high school math teacher arrived at West HS at 6:20 a.m. on the first day of the new school year to meet and greet the staff.

West HS is one of seven CCS Priority Schools designated by the Ohio Department of Education. The seven schools could receive a total of $20 million in additional federal funding over the next three years as recipients of School Improvement Grants (SIGs). President Van Roekel spoke with teachers and administrators of West’s Innovation Team tasked with using SIG monies to facilitate the transformation of teaching and learning at the school.

NEA President Dennis Van Roekel, OEA President Patricia Frost-Brooks and CEA President Rhonda Johnson traveled from West HS to join Gov. Ted Strickland, Supt. Gene Harris and other dignitaries at South Mifflin STEM Academy to announce the award of a $550,000 service learning grant from the federal government.

Awarded by the Corporation for National and Community Service, the “Bringing Learning to Life” grant partners include NEA, OEA, CEA, CCS and The Ohio State University College of Education and Human Ecology.

“Teachers will receive professional development to help them create more effective hands-on learning opportunities for students,” stated Van Roekel. “We look forward to seeing the work that comes out of this project; it is our hope that we will be able to replicate it in other places.”

“The grant is vital to the Columbus community,” agreed President Johnson. “It will allow the members of the Columbus Education Association to receive professional development that will help them continue to lead the way in restoring schools to their traditional roles as community hubs.”

After a tour of South Mifflin STEM Academy, Van Roekel, Frost-Brooks and Johnson traveled to Champion MS. The visit to Champion MS illustrated NEA’s Positive Agenda and Priority Schools principles. Teachers recruited to staff this high-needs school are paid an extra $4,000 a year.

From Columbus Education Association

Negotiations continue in Seattle between the Seattle Education Association and the school district. Negotiations continue today (Thursday) according to a post last night:

“Much progress has been made at the negotiation table this week. As you know, Monday was added this week and the teams met for a half of a day. Both Tuesday and Wednesday, the teams met for full days and intense discussions.

“The teams will again meet on Thursday for another full day that may even extend into the evening. There has even been talk of adding more days if tomorrow does not provide enough time.”

The following from SEA’s website explains the situation and the details the historic change already negotiated by Seattle educators. Click the link below for a video on the situation in the school district.

Why the Professional Growth and Evaluation Joint Proposal is Better for Students and Teachers

For the past two years, Seattle educators have worked hand in hand with top district administrators to create a new model for growth and evaluation that focuses on helping Seattle’s students succeed. Now our superintendent is attempting a last-minute end-run around that collaborative process by demanding that teacher evaluations be tied to student test scores. So what’s in the Professional Growth and Evaluation plan (PG&E) that was developed jointly by SEA and the district? Why is it a historic change, how does it benefit students and help close the achievement gap?

It makes student progress the foundation of teachers’ professional growth

• All certificated teachers will set annual student achievement goals which are specific and measurable.
• Using the Professional Practice Standards as a guide, teachers will set professional growth goals to help obtain student achievement goals.
• Recognizes clearly that “Student growth data shall be relevant to the teacher and subject matter, and must be based on multiple measures that may include classroom based, district based, and state based assessments as well as, attendance, discipline data, mobility and completion (course or year) rates of students. Student growth means the change in student achievement between two points in time.”
• The joint PG&E plan focuses on student achievement goals AND linking Professional goals that enhance our professional teaching practice. SERVE sets student achievement goals without accountability for enhancing professional practice.

It helps take the guesswork and bias out of educators’ evaluations

• Uses clear standards based on four domains from the research of Charlotte Danielson that have been tried and tested in other districts where improvement has been documented. The four domains are: Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instructional Skill and Professional Responsibility
• Sets clear indicators of acceptable performance based on standards within each domain.
• Culturally relevant practices are integrated in all four domains.
• Establishes a four-level rating system: Innovative, Proficient, Basic and Unsatisfactory.

It increases the level of accountability for educators with a focus on great teachers in every classroom

• For newer educators, it increases the number of required observations and conferences by administrators.
• Requires any teachers not in the top two levels in any domain – Proficient or Innovative – to be on a Plan of Support.
• Improvement plans are clearly defined for administrators and educators.
• Establishes a support system in the form of Human Resource Consulting Teachers to assist educators who are on Performance Improvement Plans.
• Maintains probationary process for either improvement or dismissal for those deemed Unsatisfactory in any of the four domains.
• PG & E would be phased in beginning this year to replace the current evaluation system while ensuring that it is implemented with fidelity. It would be fully implemented by 2013-2014.
• All teachers will participate in collaborative groups called Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s).
• Enhances collaborative work amongst educators focused on the academic achievement of students with an emphasis on culturally relevant practice.

It uses student test data for teacher growth, not punishment

• Educators are professionals and believe in accountability. The joint plan negotiated with the district mirrors the state’s goals to use test data correctly to improve teaching, and it has the support of Seattle’s educators.
• The big difference? The state plan means teachers will be evaluated on their ability to use the student data to modify their instruction (which happens every day in the classroom) and, unlike SERVE, would not misuse student assessment results to deem teachers “good or bad.”
• In addition to test data, SERVE would also rely on student surveys at the high school level. This ignores that some students may lack the sophistication to provide detailed qualitative feedback on instructional techniques. For instance, is a teacher “mean” or does that teacher simply set high standards and hold students accountable? In an era of instant communications, students could easily organize a negative evaluation for even great teachers whom they simply don’t like. The likely outcome of SERVE is skewed data that would not be reliable for high-stakes personnel decisions.

Click to see video:

http://www.washingtonea.org/content/video/10/searally/frame.html

Steve Snider

By Steve Snider

Recent reporting in the Los Angeles Times linking standardized test scores to individual teachers and threatening to label thousands of teachers by name as “effective or “ineffective” based on the scores, has ignited debate far and wide. NEA President Dennis Van Roekel’s letter to the editor in Friday’s Times, called the paper’s plan “irresponsible” and “misleading.” A former high school math teacher, Van Roekel said the value-added approach to measuring effectiveness is “famously inconsistent. In one case, 30% of math teachers who ranked in the bottom quintile one year were above the median the following year.”

Cynthia McCabe’s excellent reporting on the controversy at NEAToday.org found a wide range of critics across the spectrum. A little closer to the ground in LA, the United Teachers Los Angeles held their Leadership Conference over the weekend. While presenting information about NEA’s Priority School Campaign, we had a chance to catch up with a UTLA member who provided real 101 on the controversy and the issue beyond.

Alex Caputo-Pearl is Lead Teacher at the Social Justice and the Law Academy at Crenshaw High School in West LA and here’s what he had to say about the LA Times, about measuring teacher effectiveness and more importantly, about using evaluations to make a real difference in students’ lives:

“In a nutshell, the Los Angeles Times is an institution in the city of Los Angeles that has typically and historically been anti union, using a tool, this value added measure, which uses standardized tests in a high-stakes way to say whether a teacher is quote, unquote effective or quote, unquote ineffective. The problem with it is that we know standardized tests are one important thing to look at in student development, in teacher formative assessment; they can’t be used in a high-stakes way with kids or teachers. Every study that’s been done on that says that you can’t just rely on that single measure because it’s not reliable and it’s not even made for that purpose.

“What we’re trying to do at UTLA – we have a teacher effectiveness group that’s been working since this spring. We are trying to come out with policy for the UTLA House of Representatives to adopt in the Fall and then move into a plan and political strategy. What we want to do is take a proactive approach to this issue and we take the best of what’s out there in terms of Linda Darling Hammond’s work up at Stanford, Diane Ravitch’s work, work that we have here in LA like the Institute for Standards, Curriculum and Assessments; take the best elements at work and propose a real plan for teacher support, development and evaluation. And we’ve got some real allies in that fight – we’ve got West Ed working with us. It’s not an issue of us not wanting to put something out there; it’s going to happen. It’s complicated to put that together; it’s a complicated issue.

“The way the Los Angeles Times spins it and the way that some of the most anti-union board members spin it is that this issue is only about teachers who need to be dismissed, the so-called ‘bad teachers.’ One of the things we have to do is reframe it and say that’s actually not true at all; this is an issue about the 10 percent 15 percent, 20 percent of teachers who are exemplary and how they can help others; the few on the bottom end who are right now ineffective but need support and then the huge number in the middle. The real question for teachers and for kids is ‘how do we move the mediocre teacher to a place where they’re good? How do we move the good teachers to a place where they’re very good?’ – those are things that will make a difference. It’s not going to be dismissing 200 teachers out of a system of 45,000 – so we’re trying to take a comprehensive view and really talk about what kind of formative evaluation for a teacher over time supports their development and what kind of ultimately summative evaluation do we need to put in place where in fact you can dismiss teachers if they haven’t responded to support.”

By Kevin Hart

Last week, Talk Priority Schools reported on a New York Times story that exposed the shaky qualifications of some firms marketing themselves as school “turnaround specialists.” Some of these companies have practically sprung up overnight, as they try to get a share of billions in federal School Improvement Grants being awarded to some of America’s lowest-performing schools.

Now, Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chair of the House Education and Labor Committee, has announced that he intends to hold hearings to review companies that contract with school districts to help improve schools. In a statement, Miller said that ”it seems some companies with little or no expertise in education are purporting to be experts in school turnaround to try and take advantage of available federal money.”

read more »

By Kevin Hart

WANTED: School turnaround specialist to boost achievement at struggling school with history of academic, social problems. Will be responsible for guiding major personnel and instructional decisions. NO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE REQUIRED!

Doesn’t exactly inspire confidence, does it? But according to a recent article in The New York Times, the opportunity to tap into federal dollars through the School Improvement Grants process has turned many individuals and organizations with little or no experience into overnight school turnaround specialists.

read more »

The Priority Schools team had a chance to sit down with Melissa Spencer, president of the Des Moines Education Association in Iowa and talk about the School Improvement Grant (SIG) process.

Spencer explained how the legislature in Iowa mandated that superintendents and the administration bargain with the local associations and work collaboratively to choose the best reform model. The union assured the district they wanted to be partners in the process, and from there the superintendent and association president visited each identified school to explain what SIG is and to answer questions about the process.

In this video clip, Spencer talks about how that made members feel more comfortable.

Spencer also talked about what the schools receiving SIG funds in Des Moines will do. read more »

Education Week reporter Stephen Sawchuk just posted a great article about the Priority Schools Campaign on his Teacher Beat blog. Sawchuk learned more about PSC while covering NEA’s Representative Assembly in New Orleans earlier this month. He reports that the  campaign “will focus on four core tenets for improving low-performing schools: increasing staff effectiveness; developing family and school partnerships; increasing district and local-union collaboration; and leveraging community assets. Those tenets aren’t groundbreaking in and of themselves, the directors noted. What’s new is that they are being put together in a comprehensive reform approach.”

Click here to read Sawchuk’s article and interview with Sheila Simmons and Steve Snider, the director and associate director, respectively, of the campaign.

By Kevin Hart

Should cafeteria workers be held responsible when students fail to meet academic standards? Believe it or not, that is exactly what is happening in several Chicago schools, were dozens of cafeteria workers are being fired by schools implementing the “turnaround” model as part of the federal School Improvement Grants process.

Schools receiving SIG funds must choose between one of four school improvement models. The turnaround model requires the firing of half the staff, and several Chicago schools have put cafeteria workers on that list, according to a recent report from radio station WBEZ.

The cafeteria workers say they have received excellent evaluations and are good at their jobs — so why , as food servers, are they being held responsible for their schools’ academic performance?

But it’s happening, and many of these workers are likely headed to the unemployment line. To read the full story, click here.