Pursuit of Better Classroom Data: Is It Improvement of Teaching or of Classroom Surveillance?

Perhaps there's a truth here about accountability and testing that we have ignored: the use of standardized testing, value-added models, and growth models in teacher evaluations is all about subjecting the classroom to techniques of surveillance. To put it bluntly, they are spy tactics. Their purpose is to peer into the classroom to see if teachers are teaching the "prescribed" curriculum, and to see if teachers are adhering to the "rules of best practice" as they teach. These surveillance techniques are based on a fundamental mistrust of teachers' professional judgment regarding how they should be teaching and how their students perform.

The current efforts to perfect the evaluation of teachers aren't really just about improving teacher effectiveness: they are about sharpening the gaze into the classroom. They are about making the classroom more visible to those higher up the administrative chain. They are about finding the means to "objectively" determine whether teachers are teaching in the manner prescribed by "best practices" and whether they are teaching only the content that can be subjected to testing.

What testing and accountability experts have discovered though, is that tests are imperfect. The image they project of the teachers' performance is at best blurred and opaque. Even with new-fangled "value-added models," seeing teachers' effectiveness is foggy and unreliable. Now, they are seeking other ways to increase classroom surveillance. They are seeking other "spies" which might provide them with a clearer gaze of what's happening in the classroom. What are those new techniques for gazing into classrooms? They are called "student surveys."

Interestingly, student surveys turn students into 25 or 30 pairs of eyes that can report back to administration regarding whether classrooms are conducted in the manner dictated by the laws of "best practices." The student survey becomes another instrument with which the administration and government can sharpen its gaze into the classroom to make sure teachers' conduct adheres to "best practices." Underlying the use of student surveys is the assumption as well that if teachers know that 25 or 30 pairs of eyes are watching that might potentially report deviance back to the administration, those teachers will engage in the expected teaching behaviors. Thus, the control of the classroom becomes more complete.

We need to perhaps realize that the push to ever better classroom data is maybe more about control and transformation of the teaching and the teaching profession into a non-profession where teachers are simply "technicians of learning" whose professional judgment means nothing. The next generation of teachers will not need to exercise professional judgment: they will only need to conduct their classes in the prescribed manner by the "sciences of teaching." The question then becomes, "Are we really producing the kinds of students that our world needs?" Students newly manufactured and stamped with the US Department of Education's approval as being "Globally competent."




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

What’s the One Thing That Will Fix Public Education? Here’s an Answer for You!

“What’s the one thing that we could so to fix public education?” Lily Eskelsen Garcia answers this question asked by a businessman so effectively. I’ll let the video speak for itself.

Value-Added Models Aren’t Settled Science No Matter What Ed Leaders Say

The American Education Research Association (AERA) has released a new statement about the use of value-added models (VAMs) in educator evaluations and to evaluate educator preparation programs. It is no secret that as an experienced educator of twenty-six years, I do not find VAMs very useful or fair indicators of teacher effectiveness. The results are often only available three or four months into the school year, so even if they were in a useful form that could inform specific classroom instruction, they arrive much too late, at least for first semester students to be of use.

But the AERA clearly points out that using VAMs as indicators of teacher effectiveness are still too deeply flawed to be used in that manner. (See the AERA statement for yourself here.) Many states, including North Carolina, have charged full speed ahead after being blackmailed by the Obama administration into adopting VAMs. This has occurred in spite of concerns over the limitations and flaws with their use.

There is certainly no disagreement from me that there is always room for improvement in teacher effectiveness, but I also think our false faith in the objectivity of value-added models sees these statistical models as some kind of “savior of public education” for which they are not, nor will ever be. Their limitations are too great to be useful for anything except as a small piece of data schools can consider about how their students are doing.

Here’s limitations outlined by the AERA statement:

• Current state tests are too limited to measure teacher effectiveness, and most were not designed for that purpose anyway. They cover only a limited amount of content teachers teach and they are too imprecise to be used in determining teacher quality. They also only measure grade-level standards so they fail to measure the growth of students above or below those standards.
  
• VAM estimates have not been shown to effectively isolate estimates of teacher effectiveness from other school fators or outside of school factors. To expect VAMs to do this entirely is unrealistic and foolhardy.

As usual, the adoption of VAMs illustrates one very bad flaw education leaders and education policy makers have: they adopt what they see as “common sense” measures without conducting critical and empirical explorations about whether the policies will work as they intend them. The history of public education is littered with these actions, and you would think a wise education leader would learn that what just seems “common sense” or “conventional wisdom” is perhaps nothing of the sort.

My #Whatif for Secretary of Education Arne Duncan

US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan recently posted this tweet on Twitter:

In response educators and parents everywhere are posting their own “Whatifs” using the hashtag, #whatif,” and attaching @arneduncan. Judging by the #whatif stream, I suspect many educators are expressing quite a bit of frustration regarding Duncan’s education policies. But I wanted to just take a moment and look at what’s problematic about Duncan’s tweet.

First of all, it clearly indicates that he is still in “silver-bullet” search mode. He thinks that out there somewhere are some magical measures that will magically transform schools from being “unsuccessful” to “successful.” Time and again, his entire career as a secretary of education has been one long search for the magic of school reform. What he has never uunderstood was that reform on a national scale can’t be imposed from his office. He should have taken those lessons from No Child Left Behind; instead, he’s imposed a much more severe “measure and punish” tactics that have elevated testing above everything else that matters in public education. Schools are struggling for a variety of reasons. Some of those reasons aren’t due to education policy; they’re due to economic policies that are leaving many in this country behind in income. When Duncan asks the question about identifying what made 5 best schools successful, he automatically assumes that what those schools did to make them successful will automatically apply to all schools. That is at the heart of his “silver-bullet” search, and that’s why there has been nothing out of this Department of Education that will survive once they vacate the premises. Duncan has only searched for quick-fixes without really helping school districts get down to the hard work of improving education.

Secondly, I suspect, Duncan identifies “successful” as those schools with the highest test scores. For the length of Duncan’s tenure, he and his department have repeatedly made it known that high test scores and value-added measures equal success, so why would we believe he would suggest anything different? The problem is that Duncan’s definition of success requires reducing teaching and learning to statistics, when everything we know about learning as educators tells us that tests only measure a miniscule portion of what students learn. Duncan’s Twitter question is actually a statement of his faith. We all know what his “identify” entails. It entails subjecting kids at all levels to tests and then using those tests to judge the quality of everything in a school. Once again, Duncan failed to see the lessons of No Child Left Behind.

Perhaps Duncan was attempting to truly rally educators with his Tweet, but unfortunately, this late in his tenure that’s not going to happen. There are too many educators who have absolutely no confidence in his ability to lead. Judging by all the #whatifs posted since Duncan’s, there are a great deal of educators angry about his education policy. His federal mandates, though he avoids calling them that, have forced states to do more testing than ever. Perhaps Duncan’s tweet should be:

“What if I have been wrong about all this testing? What if my measure and punish education culture I’ve created has actually harmed schools?"

I won’t wait to see this Tweet; however, because it will not happen. Duncan believes in everything he’s done. Why else would someone tour the country and spend so much time promoting what they’ve done? He has repeatedly made the mistake of thinking himself a salesman instead of an education leader.

The 21st Century Principal Blog Anniversary and 1 Millionth Page View

Today, The 21st Century Principal shares two milestones: its 1 millionth page view, and its 5 year anniversary. 

About five years ago, I started this blog with the intention of sharing my own thoughts, ideas, reading, and opinions regarding the public education issues of the day. I have purposefully tried to share my own ideas about technology, teaching, and education policy, and I think I was successful. Over the years, I also think its clear I have not hidden my views because they might be deemed off limits politically. Many times, I have received messages from people who hold different views than myself who want to remind that I "must be impartial" or somehow fair. Unfortunately, that is not my intention for this blog. I'll leave being fair and balanced to the cable news channels MSNBC and Fox News. Personally, I think educators do too much deferring on political topics for fear that they might upset someone else, or maybe even hinder their chances at getting a job in the future. We must question these ideas and policies, and my job as an educator is not to blindly accept everything that comes down from the US Department of Education, nor the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. If an idea or policy can't stand up to scrutiny or criticism, it should die a quiet death, no matter who supports it. 

I have also tried to share my encounters with technology as well. Quick reviews of new software or new tablet apps have been common, as well as the occasional review of new hardware and technological devices. Over the years, I have tried to make sure that I only reviewed technology that I myself have tried, and as far as I know, I mostly did that. I know of less than a handful of situations where I reviewed items that I myself did not specifically try. This was in spite of the countless offers, which I appreciate, from companies wanting me to review their product. It's just difficult for me to honestly write about something I have not tried.

In addition to technology review and tips, I have also tried to share my own reviews of books I have read. I am an avid reader. Though I have been unable to share every item I've read, I have shared reviews of those I felt might offer educator readers something of value.  I have also tried to share my own ideas about leadership and sometimes just plain being human in the clothing of an educator.

Though lately, there haven't been as many posts on the The 21st Century Principal Blog, I assure you there will be this year. My own education in a doctoral program has consumed much of the time I used to spend blogging.  Once again, thanks to everyone who has read this blog. I look forward to sharing more during the next school year. Happy New Year to everyone!

Breaking the Silence: Why It's the School Leader's Responsibility to Speak Out

"The silence of thoughtful people creates a vacuum filled by extremists." Margaret Wheatley, Find Our Way; Leadership for an Uncertain Time

In her book, Finding Our Way: Leadership for an Uncertain Time, Margaret Wheatley asks the question:

"Why is silence moving like a fog across the planet? Why is it growing in us as individuals, even as we learn of more and more issues that concern us? Why do we fail to raise our voice on behalf of things that trouble us, and then regret what we didn't do?" 

Why do public educators and school leaders largely remain silent while politicians and government bureaucrats bash public schools and inundate them with harmful school policies? Why do teachers, principals, and district leaders automatically ask the question, "How can we implement this educational measure?" rather than asking the tough questions about implementation issues and possible harmful effects on the public education system, its students, and its employees? Is it fear? Has our public education system become so hierarchical, with emperors and kings sending down mandates, and the educator's job is to unquestioningly accept whatever those mandates are and carry them out? My question is not intended to encourage that we should break the law, or be insubordinate. Legally, we're often bound to doing some things while holding our noses, and hoping that no one is harmed by those laws or policies. Still, if we quietly move to implementation mode, without expressing our concerns and opinions, then those in power take that acquiescence as consent and total support.

In the current education climate, our silence on issues like standardized testing, accountability, education budgets, and poverty does create the vacuum into which the enemies to public education, sometimes allied with well-meaning education reformers have poured their ideas. They have captured the marketplace of "what's-best-for-kids" because educators and school leaders choose to be silent, and in this, when it comes to our current educational climate, we've only ourselves to blame.

It is time, time for us to speak up. It is time for us to let our politicians know how their budgets and laws affect lives and our education mission. It is time for us to let federal bureaucrats know how their programs and policies are undermining our efforts to bring sound education to our students. It is time, for us to break the silence. While our speaking up may not change minds, laws, or policies, at the end of the day, we will not regret that we allowed all these anti-public education reforms occur.

Of course, those in "power" might see our speaking out as "insubordination" and "not being a team player." But since when does being on a team mean you check your expertise and opinions at the door? Since when is contributing your own concerns and objections deemed insubordinate? We do have a responsibility to be respectful when expressing our concerns and objections. And those objections and concerns expressed may do nothing to change the course of events. Still, we've not been insubordinate, and we are being the ultimate team player. We are contributing our expertise and ideas and experience when we do not remain silent. We are in the practice being "thoughtful people" who are trying to keep in check those whose agendas may not be in the best interests of our students and public education, and to help our leaders make sound decisions.

Arne Duncan Announces New-Old Policy---Tying Teacher Prep to Test Scores

The Obama Administration announced its latest plan today that would tie federal funding of teacher preparation programs to test scores. Duncan and the Obama Administration are seeking to place the federal government in the middle of teacher preparation. I suspect this measure will only make it more difficult to convince young people to become teachers and educators, and it will likely have some perverse affects on teacher preparation in this country just as the use of testing for high stakes decisions has had on schools and classrooms.

On closer examination, this proposal contradicts research, logic, and common sense.

• There is no evidence that using high stakes tests as a means to improve teacher preparation programs will work. There is plenty of evidence that using tests (as has been done under NCLB and Race to the Top) to make high stakes decisions has had quite a few unintended consequences in schools and classrooms. These consequences have included things like the over-emphasis on test-prep, teaching to the test, narrowing the curriculum to test content, cutting of arts programs, use of programmed instruction, and cheating, among many others.  One can only imagine what those effects will be on teacher preparation programs when tests are used to determine continued federal funding. For example, teacher candidates will now perhaps be well-versed in things like test-prep and teaching to the test, as opposed to engaging students in authentic instruction. Perhaps teaching candidates can also learn how to narrow the curriculum so that it focuses only on what is tested . The effects of using high stakes testing to make high stakes decisions is well-documented in the research, and adding testing stakes to teacher preparation will most likely affect those programs in adverse ways just as it has in schools and classrooms.
• Surprisingly, the Obama administration's idea of tying test scores to teacher preparation programs comes even after the American Statistical Association recently stated that value-added formulas should be used with caution, because teachers only account for less than 15 percent  (or even less in some studies) of the variability in test scores. In other words, most of what happens in the classroom is beyond a teacher's control. Perhaps the Obama administration is still looking to find "Superteachers" as John Kuhn has called them who are capable of performing miracles. Unfortunately, I am afraid there are so few, if any, especially in an environment, which his policies have created, that is so hostile to teachers and the education profession in general. The important tenet of accountability is that you hold individuals accountable for that which is in their direct control. This policy violates that tenet in many ways.
• Many state tests aren't of high enough quality to be even considered for using in this high stakes manner, and the use of commercial tests like ACT and SAT makes little sense because they haven't been designed for this purpose. Add the fact that, once again, there are entirely too many teachers not subject to test scores. That's the same issue with his Race to the Top and NCLB waiver policy. State tests were mostly designed to tell what students know, not tell how well teachers are teaching. Once again, Arne Duncan and the Obama administration are pushing for using tests in still another way for which they weren't designed.
• This new policy of using test scores to evaluate teacher prep programs should also have some interesting implications in practice. I could easily see this policy exacerbating the problem of getting good teachers in high needs schools. In addition, I could also see this policy affecting which school's graduates choose to teach in as well. It's common sense. Are you going to select teaching in a school where test scores are abysmally low, and your job is to somehow miraculously to raise them? As a teacher prep program, are you going to encourage your graduates to teach in schools with historically low test scores? Perverse education policy often brings about perverse practice.

 As this Politico article points out, Duncan is expecting a great deal of opposition to this latest plan, (See Barack Obama Cracks Down on Poor Teacher Training.) How could he expect things to be different? Educators and parents grow tired of all the testing and emphasis on testing. What will be more interesting to see is whether he and  the rest of the Obama Administration will be willing to listen to educators on this matter. Sadly, the history of this administration and Arne Duncan probably provides that answer even as I ask the question.

North Carolina's NCLB Waivers: Recipe for Educational Disaster

A veteran teacher once told me in the early days of my career as an educator, "Be careful what you wish for. When federal and state agenices do away with one policy, they almost always come up with something much worse." In my naivete, I obviously did not believe that. I still had an unwavering faith in the system, and that those who make the rules always mean well and often know more about those things than I do. Now, 20 some years after that conversation, I have to admit, my old friend had many things right. When our policymakers and politicians do reform, revise, revamp, or scuttle an education policy, the result is always something much worse. Our current example of this? The Obama administration's transformation of No Child Left Behind to Race to the Top and the whole series of waivers states can apply for to escape the sanctions of NCLB, which most everyone agrees is a bad law, but a paralyzed federal government can't agree on how to fix. Take North Carolina as an example.

My state won a waiver from the Obama administration from the sanctions of the No Child Left Behind law. Under No Child Left Behind, our schools were on the same precipice many schools were: we were approaching that impossible 100 percent proficiency mark, and all the sanctions in the world weren't going to fix that. So North Carolina applied for its pardon from the US Department of Education so that our education system did not have to drive off that cliff. Instead, we chose another cliff, one that states like Florida have already plunged over. In the process of getting its respite from NCLB, North Carolina policymakers have instituted a series of "reforms" that are certain to destroy public education in our state. Here are two of the most heinous of these measures.

• Every subject in school, from art to Physical Education, grade K-12, will now be tested. Our state has carefully called these "Measures of Student Learning" but lets not be stupid here. They are "Tests" and changing their name does not change what they are and what they do. We will basically be adding an endless list of tests.
• Teachers and principals will be evaluated in part based on test scores. Those "Measures of Student Learning" which are really tests, will provide growth, value added data, to determine whether I and the other educators in North Carolina are doing our jobs. North Carolina now treats its children like raw materials running through factories where the job of teachers is to "add value" to them. Test scores will become the focus, and the education of children will become secondary.

Just these two measures betray the shallow and sycophantic thinking of North Carolina education policymakers. North Carolina has cowardly bowed to pressure from the Obama administration and instituted reforms that fly in the face of common sense and sound education policy. 

People far removed from the classroom who still hold the antiquated factory model view of education are pushing the same, tired ideas we've seen for years. Instead of focusing on educating kids, we climbing on board the Obama administration's train, headed for a massive train wreck.

Sure, North Carolina has received a reprieve from the Obama administration when it comes to No Child Left Behind, but we're in the process of implementing even worse policy, a massive increase in testing that is sure to make "Teaching to the Test" our priority. North Carolina once had the phrase "First in Freedom" on its license plates. Perhaps now we can put "First in Testing" because we have now made a commitment to subject our children to even more testing than ever before.

Our Test-Centric Approach to Education Reform Ignores the Real Problems

The one lesson politicians should have learned from No Child Left Behind, is that when all of your energies and resources are turned to just improving test scores, failure is the result.  As education historian Diane Ravitch states eloquently in her book, The Death and the Life of the Great American School System, ”Our schools will not improve if we rely exclusively on tests as the means of deciding the fate of students, teachers, principals, and schools.” Sadly, I’m not sure our current political leaders have learned the lesson yet that schools will not improve by solely focusing on using test scores and standards to improve them.

Our national education policy is still dominated by a “test-centric” approach to reform that ignores so many other factors that impact education such as poverty, inadequate health care, and lack of gainful employment. According to education scholar Linda Darling-Hammond, “The United States has the highest poverty rate for children among industrialized nations,” (The Flat World and Education, Linda Darling-Hammond, 2010). We want to “Race to the Top” but we’re looking for short cuts to get there. We want standards and “better tests” but we don’t want to engage in the hard, difficult work of addressing poverty, lack of health care, lack of good, affordable housing, and lack of opportunity for jobs with living wages. As long as national education policy is driven by a blind belief in test results and national standards, 10 years from now, we will be either staring at the same dismal  conditions both educationally and economically if we’re lucky, or we will be much worse with a society with an even wider gap between those that have and those that have not.

What then is the answer? Just how bad are things in different parts of the country? This morning I stumbled upon a 5-year initiative by the American Federation of Teachers and partners like Cisco, Blue Cross Blue Shield, College Board, among many others, that focuses on the educational improvement of an entire community ravaged by unemployment, lost opportunity and lost promise. McDowell County West Virginia has not fared well at all since 1980 and that community is the focus of this initiative.


While it is easy to become entangled in the debate about the role of teachers unions in education when debating education policy, I think it is admirable that the AFT and its partners are putting into practice what they’ve been trying to make politicians understand all along; education reform must do more than focus on test scores and standards. It has to also address the dreadful conditions some of our fellow US citizens find themselves living in.

With this post, I am not taking sides in the debate about unions per se. I do believe, after 20+ years experience, and seeing countless students struggling to live in forgotten communities without the basics most of us take for granted, that the answer to our problems as a country lies, not in investing in more and different tests, or in national standards, but in focusing on the crushing problems facing our poorest students.

After watching the video below about “Reconnecting McDowell” I was reminded of an incident that happened in one of the schools where I once worked. I walked by a table during lunch one day, and a young 11 year old girl sat there with her head down. She had enormous tears in her eyes. I walked up, leaned down and asked her to step out the lunchroom for a minute. Once out of the hearing of others, I asked, “What’s wrong?” Through her tears, she blurted, “I don’t have any lunch money. My parents didn’t have any to give me.” She proceeded to tell me that when she went through the lunch line, the cafeteria took her plate away and refused to serve her lunch because she owed so much money. I took her back through the lunch line and told her to get anything she wanted, and that it would be taken care of. You can debate all you want about why a child does not have money to eat. You can accuse her parents of not taking care of her, but the reality for her is she was not going to be able to eat that day, and a focus on raising her test scores was not going to change that reality.

As I understand it, Reconnecting McDowell is an effort to try to improve the education of a community, and not do it by just focusing on test scores. It is an effort to focus on poverty, healthcare, housing, and  a broken community. I have been to McDowell County West Virginia and have seen firsthand all that the video describes. That is why this effort caught my attention. Poverty is real, and those of us who have worked in schools where it exists know its faces.


Link to Reconnecting McDowell Web Site.

NC Governor Bev Perdue’s Career and College (Empty) Promise

As a high school principal, it is glaringly clear to me that we’ve got to find a way for high school students to earn college credit while still enrolled in high school. Before the imploding of the economy, and massive budget cuts, my students had several options to earn college credit both online and through a local community college. Now, there are no opportunities for my students to earn college credit.

When Governor Bev Perdue announced a few weeks ago her Career and College Promise program, I was excited because perhaps now,  there was a way for the students at my school to earn college credit. Alas, it was not to be. Governor Bev Perdue’s Career and College Promise program is heavy on the “promise” but weak on the “delivery.”

According to her own web site, the main components of Governor Perdue’s Career and College Promise initiative includes:

• Students can earn tuition-free course credits toward a four-year degree through North Carolina’s community colleges.
• Students can earn tuition-free course credits at a North Carolina community college toward an entry-level job credential, certificate, or diploma in a technical career.
• Cooperative innovative high schools (limited availability) Students begin earning tuition-free college credits as a high school freshman by attending a cooperative innovative high school.

Students may not be paying tuition, but they are still paying “fees” and for textbooks. But let's even look at a more deceptive statement right from the governor's web site:

“Eligible high school students can begin earning credit at a community college campus at no additional cost.”

What is wrong with this statement? It’s the “no additional cost.” According to my local community college, there are additional costs. There is a $26.25 “fee” for each course, and students pay as much as $150 for textbooks.


I understand that my students still are getting college courses much cheaper, but my real problem is how governor's rhetoric misleads the public and especially the parents of my students. I’m the one who has to tell them that Governor Perdue’s “promise” is not entirely true.