on charter schools

If you are unfamiliar with the nuances of charters, you are sorely behind in understanding education in the United States. When I tell people that I work at a charter, they sometimes ask me to explain what exactly a charter is. I usually answer with something like, "It's a public private school: students apply to go, but it's free." I usually use the word "choice." If there are more applicants than available seats, the school is required to hold a lottery.



Money
More specifically, charter schools operate on the idea that every child is eligible for a certain amount of federal money and families should be able to take that money and patronize whatever school they choose. The charter exchanges some money and benefits associated with the public school system in exchange for autonomy from rules as regulations imposed on regular public schools.

In the charter where I work, we are always short of money. Teachers are paid about $10K less than public school teachers, educational resources are sparse, and money for special services is hard to find. Yesterday, a mother came to the school to fill out an application for her son who is entering Kindergarten with some very serious needs. I talked to him for about a minute and all I could think was, we are not equipped to educate this child. For example, our speech therapist only comes in once every two weeks. She typically meets with students for 10-15 minutes. This young boy couldn't pronounce his name. Yet legally we are not allowed to turn him away, so he will be entered into the lottery.

Theory
When charter schools were first conceived in the late 1980s, the purpose was to set up laboratory schools outside of the regular education system. Superior veteran teachers would be recruited to work with students who were not successful in the regular system. Then, teachers would be able to come in and observe new ways of educating the most challenging students.

Reality
Since the first charter school laws were passed in the 1990s, the number of schools has rapidly increased, and the theory behind them has rapidly changed. Under No Child Left Behind, failing schools could convert to charters as one method of restructuring. Many of the big players in education are proponents of charter schools (Obama, Arne Duncan, Jean-Claude Brizard, Michelle Rhee, etc.).

However, the purpose of charters has changed drastically. Now, when community schools are failing they are often shut down. Charters move in as an alternative. Some districts, such as New Orleans, are almost entirely charter. Most advocates of charters believe that we should convert the entire education system over to charter schools to create a free market in which parents are the consumers.

In the words of Diane Ravitch:

Closing a school should be only a last resort and an admission of failure, not by the school or its staff, but by the educational authorities who failed to provide timely assistance.  

Our schools will not improve if we entrust them to the magical powers of the market. Markets have winners and losers. Choice may lead to better outcomes or worse outcomes. 

teacher fired for encouraging activism

What do you do with a teacher who provides students with authentic learning opportunities? A teacher who invests her own resources to support students? A teacher who was voted Teacher of the Year two of the last three years?

- Teaching Tolerance

This woman saw a beautifully rare teachable moment, some good that could come out of the Trayvon Martin tragedy, and she was punished for it. This woman worked in a non-unionized charter, much like the one where I am employed. This is why teachers need protection. 

contract renewal

The email just went out from out principal stating that we have roughly two weeks to turn in a self-evaluation. We are required to turn it in to her and only her. Electronically.

After spring break, I will have a meeting with her. If my evaluation is not in on time, then I will have no say at the meeting. This is the meeting in which she will inform me whether or not she has decided to keep me for next year. Presumably, she will also inform me of my grade-level assignment, if I am asked to renew my contract. In other words, I will have no say either way.

This situation is another example of how teachers are treated, even within the field. This meeting will not focus on my strengths and areas for growth, leaving me with a firm sense of where to head next in terms of professional development. Instead, I will likely be embarrassed, shamed, and belittled by someone who has not been inside of my classroom since the week after Christmas break. And even if the meeting does go well, I will still leave frustrated by my perceived powerlessness over my own situation.

I thought that the point (and strength) of having "at will" employees at a charter was that principals would be allowed to fire bad teachers. However, based on the very little information I have so far, the only benefit is that if you are a principal you are free to hire on fire based on your personal needs and preferences (whims).

on nyc's recent data reveal

In case you haven't heard, New York recently published ratings for all teachers in the five boroughs of the city based entirely on test scores. Since each teacher is placed on a bell curve within their school, and then all teachers are presented as equal out of context, there is little value to the data. The message, however, is alarming. Is this where we are going with education?

Why would any sane person want to teach? Also explore the problem with humiliating teachers.

cps

Yesterday I had the opportunity to meet the CEO of Chicago Public Schools in a small informal meeting with some other teachers.

I arrived at the main office at exactly the appointed time, but the security guard did not let me pass until I finally said, "...with TFA?"  "Aha, I've heard the magic word. Up the elevator and take a right." When I arrived in the CEO's office I was led through a labyrinth of white cubicles to the conference room, which was vaguely  reminiscent of a hospital waiting room.  Apparently, those first few minutes were critical because they had already launched into a full-fledged description of the new teacher evaluation tool that will be based on three different kinds of student test scores.

I tensed. Most of my questions were already negated. How could I ask anything about progressive ed reform when they opened with accountability?

Next, they talked about the announcement of the school closings from earlier in the fall. I was heartened by their explanation of the strategy they used to decide on the failing schools to be closed. According to them, they only chose schools in areas where another (decent) school was within walking distance.

They talked about developing principals into leaders. They believe that good leaders will be the answer to the need for better schools. 

Then, charter schools came up. I was shocked at how immediately defensive they became. "The point of a charter is that you don't want to see us." With that, all of my remaining questions were thrown out.

Overall, I am glad that I went. I gathered a lot of information about the culture and climate of public ed reform in Chicago. On the other hand, I left feeling that we will continue to get more of the same from education leaders until it gets so bad that we have hit something lower than were we are now. The current feeling is that we just have to work harder, smarter, more and these same things that other people have been doing with magically manipulate into a solution under our guidance.

Reason #829: teacher attrition

We have lost four teachers since we came back from the holiday break. Four teachers in less than one month, and that's not even counting all of the teachers we lost before the break. There is one class that is getting their FOURTH teacher on Monday, and that's not even counting the substitutes in-between each teacher that left.

The expected lifespan of a teacher within my district is three years maximum. In other words, they never expect to keep a teacher for more than three years. Apparently, we are notorious for losing teachers.

At a PD the other day my principal begged that no one else "jump ship. At least until June." After that, she is happy to write us a good recommendation and send us on our way. Without the few staff members who have stayed on since the opening of the school, I would not know the history. I would not be able to find out information about families. There would simply be no order, no culture.

For me, the worst part is my principal settling for such a high teacher attrition rate. She preaches that we need to have high expectations for our students, but at the same time has accepted as fact some very low expectations for her staff. I wish that she was willing to fight for us to stay.

Theory of Change

A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death on the installment plan. -- MLK

           

Studying education in college all of the answers seemed so clear. If teachers just did this… If parents just did that… I was energized by all of the possibilities. By four months into my Teach for America experience I thought I would have some answers, but instead I only have questions and disillusionment. Our system is so broken. We as a country do not meet the needs of children and families living in poverty. I know now that the problems go far beyond the classroom. I know that education should be seen as an opportunity, not a requirement.  

            What is the achievement gap? The standard definition accounts for the academic differences among different groups of people in the U.S. The reality is that the achievement gap is just one symptom of a system of injustice. Instead of focusing on how we can “fix” the achievement gap, we should be focusing on what is causing the achievement gap. Different people have different theories: schools, teachers, parents, curriculum, educational approaches. All of these possibilities are both the cause and the effect of the systemic inequalities in our country, but in reality our biggest challenge is racism. People of all colors are still suffering because of systematic structures of inequality, and in education it becomes even more visible than in any other aspect of life. Until everyone in our country accepts the truth about racism in our country, we will continue to ignore the biggest challenge that we face. Are we ready to commit to quality education for everyone, regardless of race or socioeconomic background?

            What can we do right now to help students living in poverty areas? On most days, the challenges facing students today feel like too much to me. My students struggle with violence, lack of food, poor sleeping conditions, and insufficient adult support. Their basic needs are not being met. On those days I crave a radical new system. A system that does not rely on test scores as a measure of student achievement, but rather uses data to strategically plan for success. A responsive environment where schools in poverty areas are seen as social equalizers, tasked with helping students overcome the daily challenges that they face. Schools that operate more like community centers, working with parents to help their children succeed. Are we ready, as a country, to invest in all of our students?

            Is education enough? Programs like Teach for America show us that students can be lead to success within the current educational system by an extraordinary teacher. Are those gains lasting? Is all of the hard work worth it? Instead of creating more programs like Teach for America, where inexperienced young adults exhaust themselves in service for two years and then leave, drained, why are we not looking to eradicate some of the bigger problems with education in the U.S.? Why are we not asking what would happen for that classroom, with that extraordinary teacher, in an extraordinary education system?  More importantly, what is our vision for children in America? How important are our children? What do we want for them? The only thing scarier than radically changing education in the U.S. is the place our children are going to be in 20 years if we continue on the same destructive path.


______________________________________
* Please forgive the long post. This is an assignment that I completed for TFA, and I thought it would be helpful to share. 

reasons #700-800, see: finland

An excellent article comparing the U.S. (and Norway) to Finland.

"There's no word for accountability in Finnish," he [Sahlberg] later told an audience at the Teachers College of Columbia University. "Accountability is something that is left when responsibility has been subtracted." 

...Since the 1980s, the main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location. Education has been seen first and foremost not as a way to produce star performers, but as an instrument to even out social inequality.

Reason #699

One teacher per room is not enough.

I realize that schools cannot always afford to put a full-time aide in every room, and that not all teachers want another person in their room. However, when two people understand each other and enter a room with the same goals, the same priorities, it is a beautiful thing.

Today I was lucky enough to have one of the best aides in the building in my room for the literacy block. She did two guided reading groups while I worked with students one-on-one. She cut things and stapled things (tasks I normally do at home or during my prep). I cannot say enough what an enormous difference it made in my room. Everyone was more on task. Everyone was more accountable. Sixteen children got specialized attention in just an hour.

The amount of learning that happened this morning, one day before the break -- Christmas Eve Eve Eve no less -- is a testament to the fact that every teacher should have help.

reason #693 education is messed up

The people who make the rules are apparently ignorant of any actual classroom experience, and also have never spend a single hour with a child. 

How is it that I never noticed the tension between standards and developmentally appropriate practices before? How is it that I have taught Kindergarten for nearly four months and I'm just now getting really angry?

And all almighty, I am angry.

You know when my kids are happiest? When they're playing. You know when I have the fewest behavior problems? When they're playing. You know when I see the most enthusiasm for learning? When I'm lecturing at them while they sit still in their chairs. When they're playing.

We as a country are falling behind fast because we are FAILING at educating. So how do combat it? More standards. More tests. More of the same. Quantity over quality, America. That's your specialty.

reason #546 education is messed up

It's never actually about the children.

In my experience thus far, teaching is about meeting deadlines and impressing adults. According to the teacher incentive program at my school I am a good teacher if:

• I meet lesson plan deadlines
• I meet unit plan deadlines
• I take attendance everyday by 8:30am
• I do not call in sick, ever.

The other day, grow-ups came into my room. Important grow-ups. And the feedback I got? Went something like this:

"You do not have enough charts on the wall."

"You're right, I could definitely create more charts. The challenges are 1.) They cannot read, so I struggle to make them really meaningful, and 2.) I don't have a lot of wall space and I worry about putting them up high because they can't see them and therefore don't actually use them."

"Well, it's important that you have them so that when observers are in the room they can look around and see what is happening in the class."

If they would like to know what is happening in the class so badly, we have an empty seat. They can join us.