Showing posts with label education commercialization complex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education commercialization complex. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Cuomo Has Written Off the 2016 Primary / His Common Core Missteps Will Let Hillary Clinton Bury Him

The earlier drafts for this piece had the headline, Has Cuomo Come to His Senses Early Enough on Common Core or Will Hillary Clinton Overtake Him?

POSTSCRIPT: GOP leading Democrats for the 2014 elections --front page of New York Times.

POSTSCRIPT: 13 GOP-controlled states are pushing universal pre-Kindergarten; while Cuomo's pre-K program is questionably universal.

Obviously, the answer to the first part of this sentence is a resounding "no."  Following three years of stolid, unquestioning support for the Common Core States [sic, more like, "National"] Standards and the powerful program for data mining of New York State schoolchildren, inBloom (run by Wireless Generation, which is owned by Murdoch's News Corp. education subsidiary, Amplify; speaking of Education Commercialization Complex, Amplify runs ARIS, New York City's parental link to student "acheivement data"), New York governor Andrew Cuomo has been one of the strongest devotees to the Common Core. His gestures aimed at appearing like he's back-pedaling from the Common Core, will fool no one. Suspicions are that the panel that he chose to "study" the Common Core is stuffed with CCSS allies.

Sure, he will be able to coast into reelection, with his campaign donation war-chest that he's been stuffing since day one in the governor's mansion in Albany. And helping him is that has generated no serious effort to build a campaign for a credible Republican opponent.

Yet, consider how he'll look, coming into the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. This won't be 1996. Millions of Internet-savvy primary voters will be Googling "Cuomo Common Core." And of course, they'll encounter his early unbridled enthusiasm (from 2010 to early this year) for Common Core, and his later disingenuous attempts to distance himself from Common Core and New York State educational policy, putting the blame on the State Education Department or the Legislature. The upshot of all of this is that Common Come-skeptic parents and educators will see straight through his spin and Cuomo's name will be mud. Cuomo probably never realized how politically toxic the Common Core is. He probably never gave much thought to how his silence in the face of the town hall uproars captured in video might not sit well with voters.

As I've argued previously in "Is Gov.Cuomo Trying to Dodge the Common Core Ball," the Common Core and all of its ancillary testing and commercialization ramifications will be THE domestic snake in the grass issue for voters nation-wide in the 2014 off-year reelections. My prediction is that smart Republicans will be able to mercilessly tar Democratic politicians with this issue (even though the hatching of Common Core began before pres. Obama took the oath in 2009). This issue means that the Democrats can kiss good-bye any gains they expect to make in state and national legislative races. Watch out for critical partisan realignment as it could get worse with Democrats losing seats to Republicans on a grand scale.

Odd, with all the rumored desire that Cuomo has for the White House, you would think that he would have considered this. We can imagine that the Gates, Pearson, News Corp., etc. money was just too inviting. In the quid pro quo department, just remember this report of Cuomo's giving a plum place in the State Education Department to Pearson: a five year contract at $32 million for Pearson Education to administer state tests.

The Hillary Clinton factor
If Hillary Clinton can just keep mum about the Common Core, except to just say scathing things about it, she should have a cake-wake of a time in the 2016, letting Cuomo self-immolate. You think that CCSS has been a hot issue for the last half year? Just wait, until more state legislatures and Congress hold hearings on the travesty of Common Core.

Remember the 2008 presidential primary races? Clinton said no to No Child Left Behind. Obama? He gave us Race to the Top, which has been NCLB on steroids.

It is an important reminder to return to 2008 to see how Obama was to the right of Clinton on NCLB. Nicolas Lemann in The Washington Monthly noticed this back then. If she had the good principles to oppose NCLB, it is conceivable that she will have the sense to oppose Common Core, and, we would hope, Race to the Top.
Barack Obama could have called for eliminating No Child Left Behind, as Hillary Clinton did (although she voted for it in 2001), for liberal reasons: too much testing and teaching to the test; too little funding and teacher autonomy. He didn’t.

Her talk at a Keene, NH primary campaign gathering in 2007 is tremendously refreshing. She "gets it" about the tested subjects, English and Math, crowding out other subjects, and the need for more projects instead of a singular focus on testing. It is not too surprising that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) endorsed Clinton for the 2008 presidential contest. Her 2007 Keene talk makes it clear that she would be able to utterly crush Cuomo into chalkdust on education "reform" --if she chooses. Unfortunately, she does give a pitch for broad (national?) standards. Though this last point is a misstep, we would hope that in the 2016 campaign she would realize the disaster that Common Core and Race to the Top have been.

Big reservations about the Clintons
Of course, there's little love for the Clintons from this spot. After all, it was on her husband's watch that the US economy moved toward the Dowton Abbey we economy we have today.
Some of this, particularly the ascendant financial sector, to the neglect of other sectors, such as manufacturing. Note this summary cited in Democratic Underground:
It progresses through the Industrial Revolution to a late-Victorian English ruling elite that was smug, narrowly educated and scientifically illiterate, rich from the financial sector but with a manufacturing base that had been increasingly starved for the capital to keep up with the technological pace of change.
(Bill Clinton's Treasury Secretary Larry Summers warned recently that the U.S. economy is moving in the Downton Abbey direction. I've got news for you, Larry. We've already transitioned into that condition; and odd that you bring this issue up, as others have noted it happened on your watch.) Bill Clinton initially criticized NAFTA, but soon after supported it and other free trade moves, such as granting Most Favored Nation status to China, joining the World Trade Organization, signing onto the 1994 General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs. For these reasons and others Jane White rightly termed Clinton the Outsourcer-in-Chief. And of course, we cannot forget that Bill Clinton signed the bill repealing the Glass-Steagall Act.

All told, it would be nice for Cuomo to remain in the race. Let centrists Cuomo and Clinton battle for the unprincipled corporatist center. This way Elizabeth Warren or Howard Dean would stand a better chance as the progressive dark horse candidate.


POSTSCRIPT: GOP has an edge over the DP for 2014 elections, so the New York Times tells us on front page of February 27, 2014 edition. Gee, do you think that Common Core "State" [National] Standards will do anything to help the GOP this fall?
You wonder how many opinion poll and voting booth losses it will take for Democratic Party bosses to realize that they have a toxic monster on their hands. (Yes, CCSS was due to start regardless of whether John McCain or Barack Obama won. But Obama put huge emphasis on it with the Race to the Top program.)

POSTSCRIPT: 13 GOP-controlled states are pushing pre-Kindergarten; while Cuomo's pre-K program is questionably universal.
Think Progress has reported that 13 Republican-controlled states, including Deep South states as well as reliably Republican plains and western states such as Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas.

Yet, Cuomo is pushing a program that turns out not to be truly universal. He is channeling pre-K funding to municipalities through a competitive grant program. The only twist is that as Capital New York reports, "Few districts apply for Cuomo’s competitive education grants."

Saturday, January 4, 2014

What If Progressives Sit Out the Common Core Protests at NYC's Rockefeller Center Monday, 1/6?

There is a statewide Common Core protest against New York Governor and his Common Core policy, at Rockefeller Center, it is at WNBC-TV, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, Monday, January 6, 2014, 4 to 6 pm.
See the press release with media protest centers, by city, at the end of this blog.

Do we shy away from big box developer protests because there might be some wealthy NIMBYs in the crowd?
In the 1960s would we avoid participating in civil rights legislation advocacy because Republicans were often more reliable than Democrats (who were laden with the reactionary segregationist southern Dixiecrats) because Republicans represented big business?

We should participate in the protests because this is the opportunity to present, to the public and to the media, the progressive perspective on the Common Core States Standards.

If progressive education unionists and other education progressives do not speak, the public will not hear the progressive points:

Common Core represents the neoliberal corporatization of curriculum and high-stakes testing, as few other issues do; even CCSS architect David Coleman has cited the tests as inseparable from Common Core
Common Core's fundamental education crisis premise offers us the opportunity to raise the undiscussed very real issue of poverty that greatly determines educational outcomes --see here, here or chapter 10 of Diane Ravitch's instant classic, Reign of Error
Common Core represents the further disrespecting and deskilling of the education profession; see this latest beaut of pre-packaged scripted lessons
Common Core represents the displacement of funds for school staff and legitimate resources --creating great strains on district budgets-- by unneeded coaches and curricular guides for a hyped curriculum
Common Core deadens student interest and engagement; the developmentally inappropriate standards are already building a generation of students demoralized and demoralized from school; see here and these videos by a teacher union local president charging that the Core is child abuse and by this Long Island therapist and this PhD. child psychologist attesting to the deleterious execution of the Common Core
Common Core's chief New York State mouthpiece, John King, has no understanding for parents' concerns with the Common Core as evident in his recent letter resolutely standing by the Common Core, this much is even conceded to by the New York State United Teachers' spokesperson
Common Core does not have the support of rank and file teachers; it only has the support of Weingarten, Mulgrew who only think a bigger and better curriculum will resolve the problems of the Common Core.

And we reached this place undemocratically, as the Gates Foundation paid for this, and engineered the CCSS creation with unprecedented evasion of the democratic-republican process. Bill Gates' manipulation of the media and the government reflect the process described in the above cartoon. But what if the left refuses to defend democracy and education? How will the public hear our critique?

What if we never make these points, some people amenable to the last point might stray to the right instead of the left, because the left never spoke to their concerns of the corporate highjacking of democracy? Not everyone arrives, easily swingable to the left; they have to be drawn there.

So, in the face of all the protest, why are John King and Board of Regents Chancellor obstinate on the Common Core? Could they be on the take? Plenty of the shills, liberal or conservative, are on the take from the Gates Foundation, as Mercedes Schneider has documented, here on education organizations and unions, here on lobby organizations, here on school districts, here on universities and here on a range of foundations. So, should we not protest Monday? Our silence Monday might suggest acquiescence to Gov. Cuomo, Comm. King and Chanc. Tisch.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Re: Governor Cuomo Common Core Media Rally

Date: Monday January 6th, 2014
Time: 4:00PM - 6:00 PM
Location: Statewide locations (listed below)

Contact: Deborah Lang 631-331-8546 or Sara Wottowa at No Common Sense Education: www.nocommonsenseeducation.com

Details attached:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dh5UUcnMMIFNO77kWcfKpflgkPuWOdHUH4__vgK3bFc/edit

AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS T
HROUGHOUT NEW YORK STATE - MONDAY JANUARY 6, 2014: Now that the holidays are behind us and our legislators are planning to return to Albany for the 2014 session next week, we’ve noticed media coverage of Common Core has quieted down significantly. Our mission is to ensure this quiet time is not misinterpreted as complacency. 

Governor Cuomo is scheduled to deliver his State of the State Address on January 8th. We need to apply statewide pressure on him to specifically address the failures of education reform in New York. Doing so would get this issue front and center in the media again.

Starting on Thursday, January 2, we begin the New York New Year Blitz on Governor Cuomo and the Legislature. We will call, fax, email, Tweet, and snail-mail Governor Cuomo and ask him why he has turned a deaf ear on our voices, why he refuses to acknowledge the failure of Common Core in New York State, and why he has not spoken one word about education reform in response to our testimonies and appearances at NYSED’s and Senator Flanagan’s hearings around the state. We will do the same to our legislators (Assembly and Senate) and remind them that we are still here, we are still not happy, and that they work for us! They need to ignore Senator Flanagan’s proposed legislation and do something that throws Common Core out of New York.

Public protests and picketing at local/regional television news stations across the state would put us front and center with a unified message to the Governor that this issue isn’t dead, and that Senator Flanagan’s report of his statewide hearings was an abysmal misrepresentation of the shortcomings, experiences, and objections presented by parents, educators, administrators, and early childhood development experts. On Monday January 6th beginning at 4 p.m. outside each TV news station listed below, we will make our voices heard. We will call on the media to get our message out. We will bring signs, placards, and bullhorns. We will apply as much pressure and generate as much noise as humanly possible. We will post this activity to every social media outlet and make it go viral. After the Governor’s Address on the 8th, we will get on the phones, we will get on our computers and we will flood every New York State Senator’s office (both locally and in Albany) with the message to get this fixed and not stop until it is. We will keep the heat turned up high until someone steps forward with a REAL common-sense solution to this mess. It is only the majority of people statewide that will show Senator Flanagan how wrong he has been about the Common Core and his interpretation of the message we have been sending. 

Governor Cuomo’s Contact Info
Governor Andrew Cuomo 
Office of the Governor
NY State Capitol Building
Albany, NY 12224
Phone: 518-474-8390
Fax: 518-474-1513
Email: Gov.Cuomo@chamber.state.ny.us
http://www.governor.ny.gov/
www.facebook.com/GovernorAndrewCuomo
www.twitter.com/NYGovCuomo @NYGovCuomo Use #StopCommonCore and #fixNYschools
NY State Senate: http://www.nysenate.gov/
NY State Assembly: http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/

TV Station Rally Locations for January 6th:

Albany
WTEN (ABC Network)
341 Northern Blvd
Albany, New York 12204
518-433-4286

Binghamton
WIVT-TV (ABC Network)
203 Ingraham Hill Road
Binghamton, NY 13903
607-771-3434

Bronx & Brooklyn
News 12 Bronx/Brooklyn
930 Soundview Ave
Bronx, NY 10473
Phone:(718) 328-7504 

Buffalo 
WGRZ (NBC Network)
259 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo,NY 14202
716-849-2222

Elmira
WETN-TV (NBC Network)
101 East Water Street
Elmira,NY 14901
607-733-5518

Long Island (Nassau & Suffolk Counties)
News 12 Long Island
1 Media Crossways 
Woodbury, NY 11797 
516-393-1200
E-mail: LIDesk@News12.com 

Lower Hudson Valley
(Rockland & Orange Counties)
News 12 Lower Hudson Valley
235 West Nyack Road
West Nyack , NY 10994 
Phone: 845-624-8780
Fax: 845-735-1601 
E-mail: news12hv@news12.com

Manhattan
WNBC-TV
30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA
NEW YORK,NY 10112
212-664-4444

Plattsburgh
WPTZ (NBC Network)
5 Television Drive
Plattsburgh, NY 12901
518-561-5555 

Rochester
WHEC-TV 10 (NBC Network)
191 East Avenue
Rochester,NY 14604
585-546-5670

Syracuse 
WSYR-TV (ABC Network)
5904 Bridge Street
East Syracuse,NY 13057
315-446-9999

Utica
WKTV (NBC Network)
5936 Smith Hill Rd
Utica,NY 13502
315-733-3477

Watertown
WWTI-TV (ABC Network)
1222 Arsenal Street
Watertown,NY 13601
315-785-8850

Westchester
News 12 Westchester
6 Executive Plaza
Yonkers, NY 10701 
(914)378-4800

Friday, January 3, 2014

Missing, Drowned, Burned Students, Bloomberg's Leadership Policies / How Avonte's Case was a Disaster Waiting to Happen

Mayor Michael Bloomberg's leadership of New York City schools has had a disturbing number of students beset by tragedies. The New York Post has a story on how a chemistry teacher accidentally started a fire, burning two students. We educators, for the safety of students have to call out schools on the importance of having seasoned professionals at the top and in key positions. Bloomberg in his mania to do more with less has cut laboratory assistants along with other key positions in schools. Accidents such as the one at Beacon School on the Upper West Side are the result of corner cutting. Proper leadership means having department chairs in the given subject, a science chair overseeing science teachers and their courses. The Nicole Suriel drowning, tellingly happened with cutting corners on parental approval and in the fateful small school trip to Long Beach, which included a first year teacher and a 19 year old teaching intern as adult supervisors. Another analysis connects her death to the new leadership model. These accidents were preventable: just compare the record of drowned, disappeared or maimed students to before Bloomberg. May the new chancellor Carmen Farina pursue a different course.

Original title for article: Missing Avonte Case, Waiting to Happen Under Bloomberg's Reform
There are cases that individually call attention to larger ills beyond the individual case in question. Alfred Dreyfus, and anti-semitism in a modernizing France; Charles Guiteau's assassination of Garfield, and political spoils; Rosa Parks, and America's racist segregation. The disappearance of Avonte Oquendo, if properly recognized, will be noted for inherently raising several issues as to how schools are run in this city, in this era of the intrusion of commercialized prerogatives and institutional mindsets.

In sum, I view the case as representing institutional misconduct that could warrant criminal proceedings against those at the top.

Avonte Oquendo alert in Manhattan
New York City has had a number of missing child cases. Yet, the case of Avonte Oquendo is distinct by the fact that he slipped out of the direction of school authorities. Absolutely, there should be the amount of attention given to him. Indeed, there ought to be much, much more. I applaud the Metropolitan Transit Authority for assigning construction workers to support the search for Avonte. The fact that he slipped out while under school supervision is inherently an indictment of the leadership of mayor Michael Bloomberg. The unprecedented attention, the unprecedented reward (again, warranted, absolutely) make me a little suspicious that the mayor might be quivering in the idea that in the larger analysis there are grounds for a million dollar liability lawsuit against him and the New York City Department of Education. Alas, the media is starting to isolate the blame on the school-level staff, insulating the mayor from responsibility.

In loco parentis
Prime consideration in public schools, before metrics, and even before education itself, should be the physical welfare of the child. Under compulsory education parents yield control and oversight of their child with the understanding that their child will return to their care and supervision of the school day. In the case of Avonte Oquendo, that guarantee, that implicit contract, had been broken.

We must look to the institutional errors that run rampant in the system that in great likelihood played into his disappearance. This is not a vulgar attempt at politicization. Those of us that work in the city's schools, particularly those serving students of the socio-economically weaker part of society, know of the almost routine hazards that happen in school. Just as mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio opined that it is divisive not to speak about economic inequality problems that the city is having, it is an error for those of us with the daily bird's eye view of the situation of school administration, and how these errors pose potential risk, not to speak out.

Let us note the risk factors. And as we study these factors we should note how certain institutional mindset are at work behind these risk factors.

First off, there is the inadequate supervision of school exits. In far too many instances, there are school exits that are not monitored continuously. This, among the issues discussed here, is the greatest issue. Additionally, while not all agents do this, there are far too many school safety agents that spend too much time gazing at their cellphones. Oquendo's particular school building has just two standard entrances and two emergency exits. Certainly this is not that difficult a building to monitor. And just what kind of considerations were made in placing Oquendo in this school? Given that he had a train obsession, was it good judgment to place him in a school a couple of blocks from the Long Island Railroad train yard with plenty of open access points?

Capital New York in "Memo: Safety measures weren't in effect the day Avonte Oquendo disappeared" reported on specifically negligent features of Oquendo's school building monitoring practices on October 4:
The Queens school that a severely autistic teen walked out of earlier this month lacked key safety features that could have prevented him from leaving the building—including working video surveillance, alarmed panic bars and doors with windows, Capital has learned.
None of the administrators or staff at Public School 277 had passwords to access live security camera feeds on Oct. 4, the day Avonte Oquendo, 14, left the brand new Long Island City school through a side door, according to an internal memo written by a teachers' union official that was obtained by Capital.
According to the memo, school employees didn't have the codes to access security footage until after Oquendo's disappearance.
"One administrator said that none of the administrators had the password to log onto the cameras at the computers as of the 20th day of school," which was Oct. 4.
But getting to institutional decisions and institutional irresponsibility, we must identify and indict the city's parsimoniousness with staffing resources. School safety agents ideally serve, among other things, to monitor school exits. In far too many schools there are inadequate numbers of agents and every door is not constantly monitored.

Then, we have numbers of instructional staff: teachers, para-professionals and school aides. Their numbers are far too often inadequately low. Investigation into the case of Oquendo may well reveal that ratios for his classes were insufficiently low. We have already seen other instances illustrating the city's parsimoniousness with staffing. Look at the United Federation of Teachers (UFT's) having to lead a special education law compliance campaign, to agitate for proper staffing levels. What does it say about a school system when the teachers unions are needed to enforce compliance with education laws? Despite the UFT's initiative there are too many schools that drag their feet in making teachers aware of the Individual Education Plans (IEPs) of their students.

But the city's school administering prerogatives alone cannot be faulted. Added blame must be placed on federal policy makers of the last fifteen years that decided on the increased mainstreaming of special education students. True, there are some students that are better served with a level of mainstreaming. Yet, in the hands of excessively frugal city administrations mainstreaming in New York City too often means putting high ratios of special education students in classes taught by general education teachers. With gaps in staffing with properly licensed special education staff, improper education can result and improper handling of students can result.

This is part and parcel a core value that is in violation with the ethical obligation to protect and to educate children. The city, viewing staffing with more paras and school aide as a nuisance drag on the budget, inherently makes a definitive choice to staff on the cheap. And there are many known cases when there are school aides tending to children in contexts when a certified teacher should be filling the spot. It takes a tragedy such as the present instance to become aware of the ramifications of the profound safety risks that result from tight-fisted budgeting.

School administration improper handling of the discipline issue probably did not factor into the present case, but it could play into similar cases that might arise. Namely, some school leaders, reflexively blaming teachers for everything, actually take retribution against teachers that report students leaving. Too often there are fearful teachers that feel damned if they make such a report. School leaders should be collaborative, not predatory towards teachers. Alas, in Avonte's case, it appears that he slipped away during a transition between classes, suggesting short staffing and inadequate safety agent monitoing on the exits.

Co-location at what cost?
Beyond city policies, the trend towards school funding stinginess is not merely a Bloomberg prerogative, it is a feature of national education trends. And aside from this trend there is the trend of co-location of schools with other schools in a single building. What on earth was a speechless autistic child doing in a school co-locating with a regular high school population? Just a week ago Chapter Leader John Elfrank-Dana spoke at a hearing on the safety risks of placing schools with entirely different age ranges in a single building.

In a breakthrough report by WNYC the anxieties over co-location were expressed. This is remarkable because the radio station usually just parrots the pronouncements of Bloomberg, Walcott and Suransky as though they were received gospel; for example, this summer Suransky revealed the truth to the public that new technologies make school libraries and librarians (dismissed as curators) obsolete, with no dissenter following for equal time to this outrageous claim. The local news reporters usually state "____________ [one of the above education "leaders"] tells us . . ." And these echoes of official pronouncements are rarely followed by community or union critiques of the policies.

I usually excerpt such pieces, but given the gravity of the situation I incorporate more. [Italics mine] I strongly differ from the last attorney cited. This case demonstrates the risks of co-locations. Additionally, I take issue with the teacher at the end. Even those these things can happen, policies ought to be in place to make sure that they do not happen.
For families of children with special needs, the week-long search for a missing 14-year-old boy with autism has many wondering what went wrong in a public school created to serve some of the city’s most vulnerable children. One of the concerns in the special education community is that his school – like many special education programs – shares space with another school, an arrangement that may make security more challenging.
Anyone with leads on Avonte Oquendo should call police at 1-800-577-TIPS.
Avonte Oquendo is a student at the Riverview School, a District 75 program for children with special needs. A high school, the Academy for Careers in Television and Film, also occupies the new building on 51st Street Avenue in Long Island City.
District 75 schools rarely get their own buildings. This is largely because the programs are required to provide individualized education plans, or IEPs, for the children which in turn means small classes and extra rooms for therapy and other services. With space as a premium, it is common for the children of one District 75 school to be scattered among several different public school buildings.
According to the family's attorney, David Perecman, a school security guard did not stop Oquendo from leaving on Oct. 4 because she may have confused him for one of the high school students. 
Joe Williams is the former president of the city’s District 75 parents council. He said almost all of these District 75 programs share space with other schools. His own 14-year-old son is autistic and attends the program located inside Sunset Park High School.
“Most of the time they’re on an entirely different floor,” he said. But they don’t have their own separate security guards. “The security guards are for the building,” he said.
Nonetheless, Williams said everyone in the building is supposed to know which students are where, and when the students from one school are using the gymnasium or cafeteria.
Williams said the schools are generally treated like "stepchildren" and that they are feeling more pressure now because the city is opening more schools inside existing buildings. One former school official agreed. Adding a school doesn’t mean the building gets an additional security guard, the official told WNYC, meaning security can be stretched “very, very thin.”
Safety agents are trained by the police department. Gregory Floyd, president of Teamsters Local 237, which represents the safety agents, issued a statement:
“Our school safety agents are highly trained and effective. Keeping our children safe while they are at school is always our top priority. We are heartbroken that Avonte left the school without notice and are determined to do everything we can to ensure he is found safe and sound.”
Chancellor Dennis Walcott said Thursday that he remains confident in the safety procedures, but that something went wrong in this case and the D.O.E. will investigate in conjunction with the police department. Neither the Chancellor nor anyone else interviewed by WNYC could recall a child who disappeared from school and remained missing for more than a few hours.
Walcott also said Avonte was supposed to be in a class setting of no more than six students per teacher, plus one paraprofessional (school aide). These settings are for students with the most serious disabilities.
But Williams said teachers or paraprofessionals are supposed to accompany the students to and from lunch, and other activities such as speech therapy.
"So that child should have not been out of the class alone,” he said, referring to the lawyer’s statement that the boy disappeared during a transition.
He said he wants to know whether the other children in Avonte’s class had their own paraprofessionals, and whether they were all present last Friday, in order to determine whether there were enough adults watching the boy in the hallway.
Gary Mayerson, an attorney who has represented many children with autism, said he has met many families who claimed their children were not safe in public school buildings and requested a transfer to a private school. However, he said this does not mean co-locations, or shared schools, are inherently unsafe.
He also said he supports the goal of inclusion, mixing children with special needs in the same building as general education students so they are not isolated in their own schools.
But Mayerson acknowledged children with autism are at risk of slipping away from school, because they have a tendency to wander. One special education teacher in a New York City public school, who did not want to be identified, agreed.
“Unfortunately, it’s a common occurrence with kids with autism,” the teacher said. “What frightens me is that this could happen to any teacher, in any school, no matter how many procedures are followed. These kids are quick and it does happen. What's important is to realize their missing quickly, so they can be located quickly."
There are additional factors we should consider. Teachers and staff working in "tough" schools are aware that even conscientious, pro-active principals can have their hands full. School leadership means not only supervising instruction but also meeting with parents and being a presence in the halls and being familiar with the students, taking a first had role in guiding the "school tone." So, already, principals have had enough to do. Now, with Race to the Top's beefed up evaluation dictates and the state level version of it, the new APPR law, principals' traditional role of school steward and leader is high-jacked by that of constant watchdog over teachers. And we have not even considered the time that it will take to write the summative analyses for the teachers in the school.

Just as we recognize Dwight D. Eisenhower's adviso in his 1953 speech now cited as his "Guns or butter" speech,
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone.
It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
We ought to recognize the disservice we are doing by supplanting proper education objectives with the Danielson Frameworks and Bill Gates' Common Core prerogatives, goals that were not sought by parents and local community leaders but by a shock doctrine false emergency concocted by Gates, Broad and other malanthropists. Too many principals will have to scrimp on time meeting family and students needs and instead served Gates and their other commercial masters.

The teachers union must be faulted at some level also. With chapter leaders well distributed through the system they see these trends and must surely conceive of their risks. Conscientious teachers that express concerns such as those expressed on this page are treated as alarmists and are told by administrators and too often by union leaders to not "rock the boat." The union should play an important part in agitating for better staffing of the schools. Furthermore, the union should have put a sincere effort at fighting co-location which poses extreme risks to special needs students. It is the kind of adequate levels staffing to properly educate and to guard students that is the conception of what social justice means to many of us in the UFT's MORE caucus.

At the school supervision level we have the problems of the bureaucratic competency. Veterans of the school system, from the days before the Board became the Department of Education, recall that school leaders rose through the ranks, from master teacher, to assistant principal, to principal. These professionals took supervision courses at actual academic institutions, not Eli Broad's "leadership academies" for quick training of hardly seasoned educators to become principals. Before Bloomberg's mayoral control superintendents, themselves veterans in the same fashion as principals of yore, had to approve principal appointments. Now, these are a new kind of political appointments, where pretenses of ambitious plans for meeting statistical goals are the main hiring criterion.

How, then have we reached this situation? We have a union that is afraid to cross hairs with school administrators and with the city's school leadership as a whole. Forget for a minute about squabbles over Common Core. Children's safety is at stake. (I am not blaming the union overall. Dissidents, and even some members of the dominant caucus do sincerely endeavor towards proper school-level policies and broader school funding. What I do fault is the union leadership's consciousness of the risk level in the schools and its failure to aggressively challenge the city on this.)

Moreover, we have the conscious decision of the political class and all of the commercial media to support the negation of the public voice in school administration. In the absence of any parent or community voice, the kinds of concerns or question raised in this article never get raised. The factors raised in this article and others never get raised or listened to in the current autocratic regime. Both candidates Bill de Blasio and Joe Lhota are committed to perpetuating mayoral control. They must shed this attachment to personal power and must give up their opposition to democratic governance. The Panel for Educational Policy is as democratic as the Electoral College. Are we still in the 18th century with its ambivalence about popular power?

If this were a situation that could be pinned on one teacher, we can bet that that teacher would be in the rubber room. It will be a tragedy if in this case, the only media consciousness in this case were in the blogosphere, and if the commercial media and the politicians did not consider how the city's top administrators bore responsibility and betrayed their responsibility. Michael Bloomberg will never be in a rubber room.

May this situation turn out well for Avonte and his family. UPDATE: Village Voice: School principal was out of building on day of Oquendo's disappearance. Mother had unsuccessfully requested for Avonte to have one-on-one supervision; and we might add that this is something that New York City schoolteachers know is a commonplace provision available for students. Link for the New York Times report on release of investigation of his disappearance.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Why is NYSED's John King an Urbanphobe?

New York State Education Department commissioner John King has apparently and scheduled twelve more public meetings on the Common Core State [sic, more like Gates] Standards.

But already there is bad news that he is omitted big city locales-- New York City, Buffalo, Yonkers.

Why is he avoiding big cities? Did the Poughkeepsie experience give him too much of a scare? Why his reservation? The pollution? The traffic?

Or is it that the Buffalo parents are fighting mayoral control (See "Why a mayoral takeover of Buffalo schools is so unpopular"), the Buffalo teachers fighting a terminations tie-in coming from the evaluations (see older post, "Buffalo Teachers (BTF) President Rumore: CCSS, Evaluations Driving Down Teacher Morale"), while on the other hand commissioner King is trying for a state takeover of the district?

Another post this summer:
And in Buffalo, the Teachers Federation has talked lawsuit to protect APPR side agreements with their school district not to link evaluations to teacher termination. (See Buffalo Teachers Fed.'s Evaluations Suit - MOU Too Embarrassing for Mulgrew to Let NYC Teachers See) And yet, here in New York City, United Federation of Teachers (UFT) president Michael Mulgrew agreed to a plan with a quota to terminate seven percent of teachers yearly, even before John King imposed the plan on the city. Contrast that with "Buff. Teachers Fed. Motion Slams APPR Toxic Stew of SLOs, LMAs, Overwork." Other countries? Linking students tests scores to teacher evaluation, advancement or punishment is RARE. See my post from late June, "International Studies of Teacher Evaluation: Student Tests Seldom Cited, Portfolios Carry More Weight." And statistics show, time and again, between districts of different levels of poverty in the United States, and between the United States and other countries, that student test scores rise and fall with levels of income.

Or is he avoiding New York City because he's afraid that liberal parents along with Movement of Rank and File Educators (UFT) members might chafe at his characterization of Common Core skeptics as Tea Partiers?

When these new town hall fora happen watch King and his handlers cherry pick the questions and otherwise control the audience by forcing them to submit their comments ahead of time.

Tests and transparency issues

*Education Commercialization Complex parallel to permanent war economy
*UFT failure to broadly attack, on principle, the test-regime
We see that this permanent war against teachers economy, just as the military has had "black budget items," items that were kept secret, "for the good of the people," we have Common Core questions that are kept secret-- NY's State Education Department is only selectively disclosing some questions. Since the government cannot use the national security excuse, what excuse could they use? -Corporate private security or copyright. Baloney.

The real reason is that publicization of the tricky questions, hello, will expose what illogical, inappropriate questions the Common Cores brings into English and math, as At the Chalk Face reports in "New York ELA day 2 disaster #FAIL #Pearson #NYSED." The blog site reports several substantive issues with the Common Core questions. This is the negative consequence of privatization of test publishing functions by the international corporate giant, Pearson PLC, away from what historically had been a public function under the aegis of the New York State Education Department.

However, from the organization that we would expect to hear much criticism, the United Federation of Teachers, whose members were in touch with the tests, we have heard limited anecdotes of trouble, mixed with praise for the Common Core, as indicated in this April op-ed column in the Daily News by the UFT president, Michael Mulgrew. The leader mentioned the lack of a curriculum, the fact that test prep is not teaching and that teachers are over-burdened with paperwork. The union should issue a broad, comprehensive critique of the way that tests are hijacking the purpose of education, are vulgarizing the learning experience and are degrading teachers. Contrast this limited critique with the multiple details from the Chalk Face blog a week earlier.

This is reflection, once again, of the detachment of the union leadership from rank and file (regular non-officials) teachers on the ground. Contrast the union's alternating complicity or silence with this regime with the on-going critique launched by the union's MORE caucus, on their website and in person, for example at the union's delegate assembly. (The union's pretenses at critiquing the evaluation system are ephemeral window dressings.) Otherwise, we would have heard fire and this depth of detail from Mulgrew, and probably less enthusiasm for the Common Core.

Diane Ravitch mentions in "What is the Goal of Common Core testing?" that Rick Hess predicts that Common Core anxiety, prompting some parents "to demand “reforms” and an escape from their neighborhood schools." As she says, reformers will gloat over failing scores (no doubt to continue the failing schools line).

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

USDE Deprives Your Child's Privacy; inBloom, Education Technology and the Murdoch-Klein Connection: A Son-of-Frankenstein B-movie Sequel?

Business and education blogger Andrea Gabor addresses Amplify [nee Wireless] story parts that the New York Times omitted from its story.

Aside from the filling in gaps there are reminders about the personal legacy of Sharren Bates going back to the creation of NYCDOE's ARIS system.

But first, let's note an important post today at Stop Common Core on Arne Duncan, the Common Core State Standards and Data mining:

SIXTHINGS THE US DEPT OF EDUCATION DID TO DEPRIVE YOUR CHILD OF PRIVACY

Key excerpts:
The story of Common Core and data mining begins as most stories do, with a huge, unmet need.
Self-appointed “stakeholder” know-it-alls at the federal level (also at state, corporate, and even university levels) determined that they had the right, and the need, for open access to personal student data– more so than they already had.
So, without waiting around for a proper vote, they did it. The CEDS (Common Education Data Standards) were created by the same people who created and copyrighted Common Core: the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). No surprise.
. . . .

SIX SNEAKY THINGS THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DID TO DEPRIVE YOUR CHILD OF PRIVACY:

1. Sneaky Thing Number One: It bribed the states with ARRA Stimulus monies to build 50 linkable, twinlike State Longitudinal Database Systems (SLDS). This act created a virtual national database.


These SLDS’s had to be interoperable within states and outside states with a State Interoperability Framework. Utah, for example, accepted $9.6 million to create Utah’s SLDS. Think about it. All states have an SLDS, and they are built to be interoperable. How is this not a de facto national database?

2. Sneaky Thing Number Two: It altered the (previously privacy-protective) federal FERPA (Family Educational Rights Privacy Act) law to make access to personally identifiable student data –including biological and behavioral data– “legal”.
So now, the act of requiring parental consent (to share personally identifiable information) has been reduced from a requirement to just a “best practice” according to the altered federal FERPA regulations.
. . . .
3. Sneaky Thing Number Three: The US Department of Education partnered with private groups, including the CCSSO (that’s the Council of Chief State School Officers –copyright holders on Common Core–) to collect student data nationally.


The CCSSO, or “Superintendents’ Club” as I like to call it, is a private group with no accountability to voters. This makes it in-valid and un-American, as far as governance goes. The CCSSO has a stated mission: to disaggregate student data. Disaggregate means to take away anonymity.
. . . .

4. Sneaky Thing Number Four: It used private-public partnerships to promote data linking among agencies. The Data Quality Campaign is one example. The National Data Collection Model is another example. The Common Educational Data Standards is another example.
. . . .

5. Sneaky Thing Number Five: The Department of Ed created grants for Common Core testing and then mandated that those testing groups synchronize their tests, report fully and often to the U.S. Department of Education, share student-level data, and produce “all student-level data in a manner consistent with an industry-recognized open-licensed interoperability standard that is approved by the Department”.
So federally funded Common Core tests require Common data interoperability standards.
. . . .

6. Sneaky Thing Number Six: The Department of Education directly lied to the American Society of News Editors. In a June 2013 speech given to the American Society of News Editors, Secretary Duncan mocked the concerns of parents and educators who are fighting Common Core and its related student data mining:

Despite what the state school board and the federal Department of Education claim, corporations do know that Common Core and student data mining are interdependent.
CEO of Escholar Shawn Bay spoke at a recent White House event called “Datapalooza.” He said (see his speech on this video, at about minute 9:15) that Common Core “is the glue that actually ties everything together” for student data collection.
And President Obama himself has called his educational and data related reforms so huge that they are “cradle to career” -affecting reforms. Secretary Duncan now refers to the reforms not as “K-12″ but as “p-12″ meaning preschool/prenatal. These reforms affect the most vulnerable, but not in a positive way, and certainly not with voters’ knowledge and consent.
. . . .

Go to the original Stop Common Core article for the analysis of the Six Things, further drawn out.

Key excerpts from the Gabor blogpost on inBloom:

Last Sunday’s New York Times ran a fascinating story on the controversy surrounding inBloom, which promises to serve as a one-stop warehouse-in-the-cloud for student data, but which many educators and parents worry might compromise the privacy of kids in grades K-12. Like a number of major education-reform ventures, this one was launched by a group of funders led by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Now that most states have signed onto the Common Core State Standards, which will use computerized assessments, the allure of creating a central repository of student data is more compelling than ever.  The NYT lays out the potential benefits of the inBloom system, including the ability to store large amounts of student information and provide tools for analyzing the data–information that will be available not only to educators, but also to education-technology developers who can tailor products to student and school needs. The article also explores the privacy concerns raised by the easy access that large numbers of companies will have to a vast array of information, ranging from academic achievement to disciplinary problems, for potentially tens of millions of students.
The story touches, though only obliquely, on important questions about the balance-of-power between commercial vendors and public schools and school districts, which inBloom is supposed to facilitate.
But one of the most intriguing aspects of the story is one that the NYT does not address at all. No where does the NYT mention that the operating system for inBloom is being developed by the Amplify division (formerly Wireless Generation) of Rupert Murdoch’sNews Corp. This is a striking omission given that that the NYT is the paper of record in New York City where the CEO of Amplify/Wireless Generation, Joel Klein, recently served as schools chancellor. And this despite the fact that New York is one of only three states out of an original nine that, according to the article, “continues to pursue the service.”
In a brief phone conversation, Natasha Singer, the author of the article, explained that the aim of her story was to focus on “one small district in Colorado” and how technology and privacy concerns associated with inBloom play out in an area with much fewer resources than New York City. She also noted that, as is often the case, much was cut from her original story during the editing process.
inBloom itself seems eager to downplay News Corp./Wireless Generation’s involvement, in the venture, even though it was a key partner in the Shared Learning Collaborative, which gave rise to inBloom. (inBloom was launched earlier this year with $100 million in funding.)  Although a March press release announced that Wireless Generation would be one of 24 software providers, the  “partner” and “provider” tabs on the company’s website lists 21 providers, but NOT Wireless Generation or Amplify.
For New Yorkers, inBloom may seem like something of a son-of-Frankenstein B-movie sequel (non-New Yorkers will want to know why…) inBloom traces its roots to a technological lemon. Several years ago, IBM and Wireless Generation developed ARIS(Achievement Reporting and Innovation System), a portal for the New York City Department of Education, which was widely seen as a failure.
Then Cisco began building a rival prototype portal that the company offered to the NYCDOE and that many teachers and principals said was much more useful than ARIS; but the city killed the project in August of 2010.  At the time, officials at the NYCDOE said that when work on the Cisco portal fell behind schedule, the education department pieced together an in-house version and took over the professional training that Cisco had been providing for schools that were part of the much ballyhooed innovation-zone (or izone) initiative. More recently, NYCDOE insiders have said that the department pulled the plug because of investments it had already made in ARIS, which came to total about $100 million.
The Murdoch connection, then and now
 In 2011, The Daily News disclosed that Wireless Generation was poised to win a no-bid $27 million contract to build an ARIS-like portal for New York State as part of the requirements for the state’s Race-to-the-Top bid. Joel Klein had just left his post as schools chancellor to become CEO of Wireless Generation. (The company noted that it had been in talks with the state long before Klein officially departed the NYCDOE for News Corp. in November of 2010.)
Following the hacking scandal at News of the World, a News Corp.-owned British tabloid, New York State declined to approve the Wireless Generation contract.
But by then, the Gates Foundation had already announced plans to help fund and develop the data-collection platform that would become inBloom and that would have a Wireless Generation-developed operating system. At the time, Sharren Bates, the official who had “launch(ed)” and “led” NYCDOE’s ARIS, was working as a Senior Program Officer at the Gates Foundation. Earlier this year Bates became the chief product officer for inBloom.
Much of the NYT’s story focuses on the privacy concerns of both Coloradans and New Yorkers (including the indefatigable Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters, one of the leading crusaders for children’s privacy rights) about inBloom’s plans to store student information in the “cloud” (on Amazon’s cloud servers, it turns out, though this is not mentioned in the NYT) and to allow private companies access to that data.
These concerns include the fact that new laws no longer require states to obtain a parent’s permission before sharing information in a child’s records:
“Recent changes in the regulation of a federal education privacy law have also helped the industry. That law, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, required schools to obtain parental permission before sharing information in their children’s educational records. The updated rules permit schools to share student data, without notifying parents, with companies to which they have outsourced core functions like scheduling or data management.”
  .  .  .  .

And while information gleaned from individual students is supposed to provide the vital information need to develop and hone products, schools will pay dearly not only for the products that are made possible by inBloom, but for using the portal itself. As Leonie Haimson notes, starting in 2015, inBloom says it will charge states and districts between $2 and $5 per student each year for storing data on the site.
Nor do technology companies need inBloom in order to innovate and “customize” software. As part of New York City’s technological push during the Klein years, the city purchased masses of software for online learning. As the largest urban education market, that presented a unique opportunity to examine, and customize products to, the needs of city kids. Yet, one of the major complaints about the NYCDOE portal and the education software available to New York City public schools was that most software developers did nothing—and the NYCDOE did not use its clout to force them—to tailor programs, which were originally designed for the home-school market, for the needs of inner-city kids.
Common sense suggests that states and school districts should be championing both the educational and privacy interests of their students—especially if they want to benefit from the technology synergies of products like inBloom. But that doesn’t seem to be happening—at least not without considerable public pressure—in part because of the close ties between government officials and industry.
Consider the strange case of Louisiana, where Joel Klein’s former NYCDOE deputy, John White, is the superintendent of schools. This article describes a remarkable string of email exchanges among White, Amplify/Wireless Generation, the Gates Foundation and New Schools for New Orleans, a leading charter-school gatekeeper. It shows how the close ties among state officials and the private sector led Louisiana to become one of the first to give inBloom access to all of its student’s data. Four months later, following widespread protests, Louisiana removed the kids’ information from the inBloom database.
Meanwhile, during the last legislative session, the New York State legislature failed to pass bills that would have protected student privacy.
Indeed, New York has a history of making hasty education decisions. It was one of the first states to push through a new “common core”-focused standardized test last spring. Theassessments were rushed through before teachers had any meaningful training in the new standards and before students had much exposure to them. The result was much anguish on the part of students, families and teachers; a huge drop in test scores without much apparent benefit; as well as an open rebellion by principals.
 .  .  .  .
Click the link for the complete "inBloom, Education Technology and the Murdoch-Klein Connection: A Son-of-Frankenstein B-movie Sequel?" article.