Getting Teacher Evaluation Basics Right - Or Not

Oh, Laura...
Here's four challenges that face New Jersey's public school system as it implements new procedures under a harsh spotlight. None of these challenges are insurmountable, but all will require careful oversight and strong leadership.
[...]
Refine Teacher Evaluation Rubric: Last year, the DOE rolled out a pilot program of value-added teacher evaluations under the heading of Excellent Educators for New Jersey. Participation was limited to 11 districts (including Newark), plus 20 low-performing schools that received federal grants. Original plans called for statewide roll-out in 2012-2013; that's been pushed back a year until the kinks are worked out, although all districts will tiptoe towards the new system in September. Districts are also allowed to use their own templates, as long as they conform to the minimum standards in the bill, which include evaluating teachers based on "multiple objective measures of student learning." [second emphasis mine]
Yeah, uh, no. The DOE rolled out a pilot program not of Value Added Modeling (VAM), but of Student Growth Percentiles (SGP):
Q: How does New Jersey measure student growth? 
A: New Jersey measures growth for an individual student by comparing the change in his or her NJ ASK achievement from one year to the next to that of all other students in the state who had similar historical results (the student’s "academic peers"). This change in achievement is reported as a student growth percentile (abbreviated SGP) and indicates how high or low that student’s growth was as compared to that of his/her academic peers. For a school or district, the growth percentiles for all students are aggregated to create a median SGP for the school or district. The median SGP is a representation of “typical” growth for students in the school or district. [emphasis mine]
Why does this matter? Bruce Baker explains:
But what about those STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES being pitched for similar use in states like New Jersey?  While on the one hand the arguments might take a similar approach of questioning the reliability or validity of the method for determining teacher effectiveness (the supposed basis for dismissal), the arguments regarding SGPs might take a much simpler approach. In really simple terms SGPs aren’t even designed to identify the teacher’s effect on student growth. VAMs are designed to do this, but fail.
When VAMs are challenged in court, one must show that they have failed in their intended objective. But it’s much, much easier to explain in court that SGPs make no attempt whatsoever to estimate that portion of student growth that is under the control of, therefore attributable to, the teacher (see here for more explanation of this).  As such, it is, on its face, inappropriate to dismiss the teacher on the basis of a low classroom (or teacher) aggregate student growth metric like SGP. Note also that even if integrated into a “multiple measures” evaluation model, if the SGP data becomes the tipping point or significant basis for such decisions, the entire system becomes vulnerable to challenge.* [emphasis mine]
Yes, that's right: the NJDOE is proposing to use a method of evaluating teachers - SGPs - that does not even attempt to estimate how much influence the teacher has on student growth!

This is critically important to understand in the days ahead: the NJDOE is not proposing to use an inaccurate method like VAM to evaluate teachers; they are proposing to use SGP, a method that is completely inappropriate to the task!

Let's hope Laura Waters figures out the difference before her next column.

$100 MIllion Just Don't Buy What It Used To

Remember when Zuck's bucks were going to completely change everything in Newark? How's that going?

When Anderson unveiled the plan last February, however, she was heckled at public meetings by residents who accused her of trying to rob them of their neighborhood schools. “Cami Anderson, I have not seen such trickery since the devil took over the Garden of Eden,” one of her detractors told her at a budget hearing [ed note: Man, that's funny!]. Naturally, the teachers’ union has happily stoked the outrage. “I’m all for school reform,” Del Grosso chuckles. “But this is the Dr. Kevorkian approach.”
The budget crunch has also forced Anderson to cut arts and music programs at some schools. Residents find this bizarre at a time when so many philanthropic dollars are flowing into Newark. “I don’t understand why you are doing this,” a frustrated Newarker asked at the budget meeting. “Where’s the Facebook money?” Good question. The money pledged to the Foundation for Newark’s Future is supposed to be spent on “high-impact innovations” rather than plugging holes in the district’s operating budget. Anderson also notes: “The large investments haven’t happened yet. Those require additional matching funds.” Booker has raised $54 million to date. So far, the Foundation for Newark’s Future has committed only $16 million to a variety of small bore projects like $600,000 in small grants for teachers who come up with interesting projects, and $176,000 for elementary school students so they can treat themselves to some books.
The district’s financial troubles will likely deepen. The number of teachers in the excess pool is expected to hit 200 in the coming school year, and the superintendent is reluctant to resort to layoffs. New Jersey’s tenure law has a strict seniority clause that forces districts to let go of new hires first. That means Anderson would lose many of her new recruits before she could dismiss any of the veterans in the pools. That’s the last thing Booker wants. He has talked to Zuckerberg and Christie about using philanthropic dollars for buyouts of teachers in the excess pool. But it might very well exhaust much of the funds he has raised for school reform, and it is sobering to imagine Zuckerberg’s pledge going to pay off the least desirable teachers in the Newark school system. On April 30 the three of them had a conference call to discuss this. “What can I do to help?” Christie recalls Zuckerberg saying.
Christie assured him that he’d done all that he could: “The rest is up to us.”
As of June 2012, no teachers have been fired, and the administrative staff remains the same size. [emphasis mine]
First thing: let's find out more about these excess pool teachers, shall we? I'm talking to you, Lisa Fleisher, or Jessica Calefati, or Bob Braun: it would be a great story if you went out and told us who these teachers are. All we know is that their current  administrators didn't want them - but does that mean they're bad teachers?

I'm serious about this: let's find out if these "bad" teachers are really the problem Anderson says they are. All it would take are a few phone calls, right?

Next: hey, I have a crazy idea! Instead of having billionaires come in and drop money wherever they decide to put it...

... let's tax them! And turn control of the schools over to... get ready for a shocker... the people who actually live in Newark!

Why, it's just so crazy, it actually might work!

Democracy for Newark? Yeah, we don't think so...

Do They REALLY Care About Parents?

Regular readers will recall that Chris Christie's favorite local superintendent these days is a young fellow by the name of Steve Engravalle, INTERIM Superintendent in Fort Lee. The fresh-faced Engravalle was happy to accept the accolades of the governor; in exchange, he trashed the teachers union on national TV. Engravalle has been further rewarded with a position on a state school aid task force, despite his relative lack of experience in these matters.

Keep all that in mind as we check in on the latest news from Fort Lee:     
Four educators found themselves without jobs on June 18 after the Board of Education decided to uphold the interim superintendent's decision to not renew their contracts.
Lewis F. Cole Middle School teachers Christina Martelo and Ian Zellman, School No. 1 Principal Kristine Cecere and an aide from School No. 4 were let go despite vehement opposition from parents, students and colleagues who pleaded with the board to keep the educators in the district.
[...]
Many parents emphasized the "life-changing" nature of the decision the board was faced with — for all involved.
"Why lose these good teachers to another school district?" asked one woman. "This isn't about Mr. Zellman and Ms. Martelo. This is about our school district. This is about our children."
Interim Superintendent Steven Engravalle deflected criticism of his contract review process, which did not include personal observation of the two teachers in question, and stood firm in his decision. [emphasis mine]
Contrast this story to Chris Christie's words from 2011:
I mean, let me as the question: Do-- You know, you talk to any parent who has children in a school. Within weeks, they know if they have a good teacher or a bad teacher. Within weeks. And the rumor mill in the school tells them, too. "Oh, you got Mrs. Smith for third grade, uh-oh, not good. Yeah, 'cause she's not good, you know. Stay away from her." Or, "You got Mrs. Jones. She's fabulous. You're kid's gonna have a great year." 
We know how to do it. It shouldn't just be about test scores, but student performance has to play a part in it. And then teaching, I still believe, is a craft, and so you have to also have teachers reviewing other teachers to say, "Are you staying up on your craft of being a person in front of the classroom who children are listening to and learning from? 
"It's not a science, it's an art, as well. And both things should be part of the evaluation. But don't tell me that this is the only profession in the world where we can't effectively evaluate people. It's just impossible for me to believe that, especially because I've had four children in the schools. And I know when he has, when my children have a good teacher or a bad teacher. And, you know, so does everybody else who's listening to this. They know. We can figure it out. [emphasis mine]

So they love parental input... except when the parents say things they don't like.

I have no idea why Engravalle dismissed teachers who had good evaluations; maybe he has good reasons for doing so. But let's take away a few things from this story:

- Teacher evaluation is not as simple as Chris Christie makes it out to be; even his favorite super will tell you that.

- The notion that good teachers have nothing to worry about if they lose their tenure is absurd.

- These folks love to say they are on the side of parents. But are they?

'Give her something to eat'. Sunday Reflections, 13th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

Christ Raises the Daughter of Jairus, Friedrich Overbeck, painted 1815.

Readings(New American Bible: Philippines, USA)

Readings(Jerusalem Bible: Australia, England & Wales, India [optional], Ireland, New Zealand, Pakistan, Scotland, South Africa)

Gospel Mark 5:21-43 (Revised Standard Version – Catholic Edition)

When Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered about him; and he was beside the sea. Then came one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name; and seeing him, he fell at his feet, and besought him, saying, "My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live." And he went with him. And a great crowd followed him and thronged about him. 

And there was a woman who had had a flow of blood for twelve years, and who had suffered much under many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was no better but rather grew worse. She had heard the reports about Jesus, and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment. For she said, "If I touch even his garments, I shall be made well." And immediately the hemorrhage ceased; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease. And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone forth from him, immediately turned about in the crowd, and said, "Who touched my garments?" And his disciples said to him, "You see the crowd pressing around you, and yet you say, ' Who touched me?" And he looked around to see who had done it. But the woman, knowing what had been done to her, came in fear and trembling and fell down before him, and told him the whole truth. And he said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease." 

While he was still speaking, there came from the ruler's house some who said, "Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the Teacher any further?" But ignoring what they said, Jesus said to the ruler of the synagogue, "Do not fear, only believe." And he allowed no one to follow him except Peter and James and John the brother of James. When they came to the house of the ruler of the synagogue, he saw a tumult, and people weeping and wailing loudly.  And when he had entered, he said to them, "Why do you make a tumult and weep? The child is not dead but sleeping." And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside, and took the child's father and mother and those who were with him, and went in where the child was. Taking her by the hand he said to her, "Talitha cumi"; which means, "Little girl, I say to you, arise." And immediately the girl got up and walked (she was twelve years of age), and they were immediately overcome with amazement. And he strictly charged them that no one should know this, and told them to give her something to eat.

St Mark, Donatello, c.1411

Lyn was someone I met when she was about 15. Three years later, when she was only halfway through her four-year college course, she quit to marry Roberto. (I’m not using their real names). Lyn was madly in love with Roberto, who had a good job and came from a relatively wealthy family.  Lyn’s family could not be described as poor either. I celebrated the wedding Mass and attended the reception in a classy hotel. Here in the Philippines it’s the groom’s father who foots the bill for the reception. the young couple went to live in Manila, where Roberto was from. About a year later a daughter, whom I’ll call Gloria, was born. She had a mental disability. Another daughter, ‘Gabriela’, arrived a year or two later.

Then tragedy struck. Roberto discovered that his kidneys weren’t working properly and that he needed dialysis. Over the next couple of years Roberto and Lyn spent practically all they had on this and it ended in Roberto’s death. Meanwhile, Lyn’s parents both had serious illnesses and had to spend most of their resources on treatment.

Lyn returned to her own city with her two young daughters. She couldn’t find a job and had no qualifications since she hadn’t finished in college. With much embarrassment she came to see me and asked if I could give her an ‘allowance’. She was able to survive the next few years with help from her siblings and friends and eventually remarried.

I’ve met so many ‘Lyns’ in the Philippines who are like the woman in today’s gospel, who have spent all their resources on doctors and medicine and are still sick. I’ve met families who have pawned their little bit of land in order to enable an aged parent to have surgery that ultimately leaves the whole family impoverished and the person on whom, out of a perhaps misplaced love,  they had spent the money ending up in the cemetery.

Most Filipinos have little access to good health care. Even those who have government health insurance, unlike in Ireland or the United Kingdom, have to come up with ready cash if they go to hospital. They are eventually reimbursed but have to pay interest on money they have borrowed in the meantime. I’ve heard people in Ireland and in the UK complain about the poor health services they have and their complaints are often justified. I have also heard many unsolicited words of praise for nurses from the Philippines working in hospitals in those countries.

Bu the sad reality is that most of those nurses, if they were still in the Philippines, wouldn’t have access to the kind of care they provide in Ireland and the UK. They would be like the woman in the gospel.

I met a Filipina in Reykjavík in 2000 who told me that she had had a kidney transplant in Denmark, paid for by the taxpayers of Iceland, a country of only 300,000 people or so. Had she been at home she would probably have ended up like Roberto.

19 years ago in a parish in Mindanao I buried Eileen, like the daughter of Jairus,  a 12-year-old. Again, poverty was a significant factor in her illness and death, despite the efforts of the doctors and nurses in the small government hospital where she died.

So the two stories interwoven by St Mark are stories that many Filipinos have lived or are living.

But sometimes persons experience healing. I once gave a recollection day to a group of 11- and 12-year old children. We reflected on the story of Jesus staying behind in the Temple when he was 12 and that of the daughter of Jairus. Before the afternoon session a group of the boys and girls came to tell me that Maria, one of their classmates, had a bad toothache and asked if we could pray with her. Maybe Jesus would heal her as he had healed ‘Talitha’. They thought that that was the name of the girl in the gospel! We prayed with Maria – and her toothache disappeared. The children were delighted.

St Mark gives us illustrations of the humanity of Jesus more than do St Matthew and St Luke when they recount the same stories. Scholars tell us that St Mark’s was the first gospel to be written and that the other two drew on his in writing theirs. St Matthew omits the detail of Jesus perceiving in himself that power had gone forth from him. This shows us that Jesus wasn’t a ‘magician’. When he healed a sick person he gave of himself.

Both St Matthew and St Luke leave out another beautiful detail about the humanity of our Saviour. Jesus says to the people in the house, Give her something to eat. I can imagine the joy of everyone, including Jesus. I picture him with a smile on his face, a smile that reflects his joy – and his awareness that the girl’s family had forgotten the very practical detail that she was starving, as is anyone who has come through a serious illness. This detail of St Mark brings home to me the great reality that St John expressed in his gospel and that we pray in the Angelus, The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14).


Missa Papae Marcelli (Mass of Pope Marcellus) by Palestrina

Kyrie (Lord, have mercy)

Sung by the Tallis Scholars directed by Peter Phillips




NJDOE: Broadies? What Broadies?

If you can square these two stories, there's probably a job at the NJDOE waiting for you!

Story #1 (6/29/12):
State education officials are denying that they had any role in the Jersey City Board of Education’s decision to select as its new superintendent a Delaware woman who graduated from the same controversial superintendents academy as acting state Education Commissioner Chris Cerf.
The board voted 6-3 Thursday night to begin negotiating a contract with Marcia V. Lyles, a schools superintendent in Delaware’s largest school district, to become the city’s newest chief school administrator.
Opponents of the move, including two BOE members, believe Lyles’ association with The Broad Superintendents Academy, an education training ground set up by billionaire Eli Broad, amounts to evidence that Cerf, also a Broad graduate, had a hand in her selection.
Barbara K. Morgan, spokeswoman for the state Department of Education, said the state has been “following” the BOE’s search process, but denied the state played a role in tapping Lyles.
“The selection of a superintendent is a local one being directed by the Board of Education,” Morgan said. [emphasis mine]
Story #2 (12/28/11):
Some 40 people were stuck on the outside looking in for more than an hour on Dec. 22 when acting state education commissioner Christopher Cerf met with the school board in a closed session to discuss the ongoing superintendent search.
Cerf and board members conferred at a special meeting in the board’s central office on Claremont Avenue. The closed session received mostly negative reviews from the citizens present, a group made up of primarily parents and community activists. Some criticized the board for not allowing residents the chance to address the commissioner — the public-comment portion of the meeting was scheduled for after Cerf’s appearance.
Seriously: do they think we can't Google this stuff? How can the NJDOE claim they had no role in the search when the ACTING Commissioner met in a closed-door session with the board!
As for the closed portion of the meeting with Cerf, Board President Sterling Waterman originally estimated it would last about 45 minutes. Yet Arnold B. Williams, a harsh critic of the commissioner who says he’s organized a group to support the district against the state, said his cellphone clock showed Cerf kept residents waiting about 90 minutes.
An impatient Williams and others occasionally peered through the windows of the board’s first-floor conference room to mark the time. Williams periodically displayed his phone clock from behind the window, trying to remind the participants they were far exceeding Waterman’s original estimate.
The focus of the meeting stemmed from a controversial Dec. 2 email Cerf sent Waterman in which he claimed the board was ignoring his efforts to offer input in helping find a successor to departing superintendent Charles Epps.
Cerf also wrote in his email that the board needs to act in a way which assures the next superintendent will bring “transformational change” to the state’s second largest school system. In an email sent before the meeting, Cerf’s spokesman Justin Barra declined to elaborate on what the acting commissioner meant specifically, telling JCI he would do so in the closed session.
“The commissioner is meeting with the board tonight to discuss his thoughts,” was all Barra would say.
Further, Cerf wrote in the email that it is his “obligation to explore all the options the law empowers me with” to defend the interests of city schoolchildren. This statement has caused some to fear the commissioner might be looking into trying to reassert the state’s authority by retaking full control of the school system. While the state retains its power over approving personnel and curriculum matters, the board has regained control of governance issues. The latter allows it to search for its own superintendent.
Upon leaving, Cerf did not rule out coming to Jersey City for a community meeting to address questions, but told JCI, “I’m going to follow the board’s lead on that.”
When he was told that some residents felt he deliberately wanted to avoid hearing them, the acting commissioner seemed unconcerned, saying, “If that’s their opinion, then go ahead and report it.” [emphasis mine]
If you can say with a straight face that meeting in a closed-door session and asserting authority over personnel matters doesn't qualify as "having any role" in a superintendent search, you have a promising career ahead of you as an NJDOE spokesperson!

Only the truly naive would believe that ACTING Commissioner Cerf hasn't exerted pressure on the Jersey City BOE during this search. Only the most gullible of the gullible would think it was a happy coincidence that a fellow Broadie wound up with the job.

It's bad enough they want to work in the shadows. But do they also have to insult our intelligences?

Uh... forget you saw this, OK?


ADDING: Another happy coincidence, I'm sure:
For the past month there has been speculation that Cerf and others at the state Department of Education were lobbying behind the scenes for Lyles to be selected. At a June 28 Board of Education meeting school trustees seemed to confirm these allegations.

Waterman said that people from Cerf's staff had contacted some board members and made clear, "pick Lyles, and the school board will regain control from the state." The selection of Brathwaite, Waterman stated, would mean the state would continue to monitor the local school district.

The fact that Lyles tendered her resignation from her current job in December also suggested to some, including Valentin, that she was promised the superintendent job in Jersey City. Of the eight semifinalists who were considered for the job, Valentin said, only two did not apply for other vacant superintendent jobs around the country: Interim Superintendent Franklin Walker, who has been the acting super for the past school year, and Marcia Lyles.
Sure, people quit their old jobs all the time before they get their new ones! Why are you people so suspicious?

If We Treated Lawyers Like Teachers

UNDERGRADUATE #1: Hey, fellow best-and-brightest type! What do you want to do when we graduate with our insanely expensive college degrees?

UNDERGRADUATE #2: Well, I was going to go to law school and become a lawyer. But I heard the bar exam was too easy, so that just doesn't sound like the right career path for me.

UNDERGRADUATE #1: Why, haven't you heard the news? They're going to make the bar exam more difficult! Doesn't that make you want to be a lawyer even more?

UNDERGRADUATE #2: More difficult? Gosh, that sounds great! But will I have any more prestige in my career, or have any more say in my profession, or make any more money when the bar exam becomes more difficult?

UNDERGRADUATE #1: No way, pal! Lawyering will be a low-paying, dead-end, highly-maligned job with bad working conditions, where your salary, benefits, and even deferred compensation, no matter how modest, can be cut whenever a politician feels like it!

UNDERGRADUATE #2: Awesome! Sign me up to be a lawyer today!

We should have become teachers; then maybe we'd get respect...

More Vouchers Won't Save Anyone

Tom Moran, via Twitter:
Real pity that Opp Scholarship Act is dead. Imagine having to send your kids to skul in Camden, with no escape.
That would assume there are private schools in Camden to escape to. From Gordon MacInnes:
There are not enough places in private schools with the experience and interest to enroll the number of students funded in the bill.
The 22,500 students attending "failing" schools in Newark, for example, can look to only seven Catholic schools (two of which are already filled), two independent schools and three evangelical schools offering perhaps 500 places (the evangelical schools do not teach to the New Jersey science standards and thus should not be eligible). The same paucity of opportunity prevails in Camden, Paterson and Trenton -- the cities with the largest enrollments in failed schools.
And there is no guarantee that those private schools would do a better job than the public schools, when accounting for student characteristics.


The "real pity" is that we continue to dither around the edges of actually doing something for kids in urban schools. Vouchers may be a nice way for some folks to assuage their guilt, but OSA won't "save" even a small fraction of the children that Abbott & SFRA have. So if we want to have an adult conversation about school environment and whether students should be segregated on behavior, let's go ahead and do that.

But cheerleading for vouchers and weeping for OSA is little more than a substitute for that conversation.

Rhee Gets Drill & Kill Wrong

I wrote earlier this week about the drubbing Michelle Rhee got on the BBC from the British teachers union leader, Mary Bousted.

One of the difficulties in debating Rhee is that when she opens her mouth and the spin comes flying out, it's hard to know what to debunk first; I mean, there's just so much of it, so where do you start? But here's one claim she made that Bousted never got to rebut I'd like to put to rest right now:
(3.24) The research is very clear that teachers who teach to the test actually... don't... their kids don't do better academically. The kids who do the best academically, on tests, as measured by tests, are the teachers who teach a broad base of skills... and critical thinking skills and analytics. So teachers who are really paying attention to what works are never going to teach to the test.
Hmm... what research is that? Well, in this video, Rhee tells us:


(3:40) The Gates Foundation put out a study about a year ago that showed that teachers who teach to the test, meaning they do the drill-and-kill with the kids, actually those kids do not do as well on the test, don't do as well academically, as those teachers who teach high order thinking skills, and critical thinking and analytical skills.

Rhee is clearly talking about the Gates MET Project, which came out in 2010. She is claiming that the study shows that teachers who do not drill-and-kill have students who do better on standardized tests.

Is it true? Do teachers who don't train their students to pass bubble tests get better results on those tests? Has common sense been suspended?

The New York Times reported on these findings Friday and repeated the following strong claim:
But now some 20 states are overhauling their evaluation systems, and many policymakers involved in those efforts have been asking the Gates Foundation for suggestions on what measures of teacher effectiveness to use, said Vicki L. Phillips, a director of education at the foundation.
One notable early finding, Ms. Phillips said, is that teachers who incessantly drill their students to prepare for standardized tests tend to have lower value-added learning gains than those who simply work their way methodically through the key concepts of literacy and mathematics. (emphasis added)
I looked through the report for evidence that supported this claim and could not find it.  Instead, the report actually shows a positive correlation between student reports of “test prep” and value added on standardized tests, not a negative correlation as the statement above suggests.  (See for example Appendix 1 on p. 34.)
The statement “We spend a lot of time in this class practicing for [the state test]” has a correlation of  0.195 with the value added math results.  That is about the same relationship as “My teacher asks questions to be sure we are following along when s/he is teaching,” which is 0.198.  And both are positive.
It’s true that the correlation for “Getting ready for [the state test] takes a lot of time in our class” is weaker (0.103) than other items, but it is still positive.  That just means that test prep may contribute less to value added than other practices, but it does not support the claim that  ”teachers who incessantly drill their students to prepare for standardized tests tend to have lower value-added learning gains…”
In fact, on page 24, the report clearly says that the relationship between test prep and value-added on standardized tests is weaker than other observed practices, but does not claim that the relationship is negative:
The five questions with the strongest pair-wise correlation with teacher value-added were: “Students in this class treat the teacher with respect.” (ρ=0.317), “My classmates behave the way my teacher wants them to.”(ρ=0.286), “Our class stays busy and doesn’t waste time.” (ρ=0.284), “In this class, we learn a lot almost every day.”(ρ=0.273), “In this class, we learn to correct our mistakes.” (ρ=0.264) These questions were part of the “control” and “challenge” indices. We also asked students about the amount of test preparation they did in the class. Ironically, reported test preparation was among the weakest predictors of gains on the state tests: “We spend a lot of time in this class practicing for the state test.” (ρ=0.195), “I have learned a lot this year about the state test.” (ρ=0.143), “Getting ready for the state test takes a lot of time in our class.” ( ρ=0.103) [second and third emphasis mine]
Apparently, Jay Greene got some crap for pointing out that the Gates study does NOT say what Rhee claims it says: there most certainly is a positive correlation between test prep and test scores. May I also point out that surveying 13-year-olds about their teachers' practices probably isn't the most accurate way to gauge whether the teachers are actually drilling-and-killing or not; after all, it's not like the kids have had many other teachers to judge their teachers against.

What it all comes down to is this: teachers teach the test when the test tests teachers. Duh.

I've asked this before, and I'll ask it again: why does anyone listen to anything Michelle Rhee has to say?


Oh, yeah, right...

Broadie Infestation of NJ: Part I

Heads up, national readers: if you have any interest in the Broadification of American education, you need to check this one out, complicated as it may be.

We'll start with this: looks like old Eli got his girl installed in Jersey City:
The Jersey City Board of Education tonight voted 6-3 to start negotiations with Delaware woman Marcia V. Lyles, who the board hopes will become the city’s new schools superintendent.
The three objectors were Marilyn Roman, Angel Valentin and Sterling Waterman. Board member Carol Harrison-Arnold called Lyles a “remarkable woman,” and disputed protester’s claims that the new superintendent should come from within the 28,000-student school district.
"We need to have some outside talent along with that talent that is here,” said Harrison-Arnold, to jeering from the crowd of about 100.
Board member Carol Lester added: “We want people who are experienced and excellent educators."
Lyles’ prospective appointment has roiled a group of local officials, teachers and parents, many of whom wanted the board to select interim Superintendent Franklin Walker as the district’s new chief administrator.
Valentin called the superintendent selection process “a disgrace for our children.” [emphasis mine]
Wow, sounds testy. Why are people so suspicious of Lyles?
Lyles’ appointment has been controversial from the start, with a contingent of local officials, teachers and parents objecting to her because of her association with The Broad Superintendents Academy, a training ground for superintendents that has been criticized by teachers unions.
The academy, critics say, is in favor a slew of education reforms like merit pay for teachers and emphasizing standardized testing. Broad spokeswoman Erica Lepping said the academy, funded by billionaire Eli Broad, is widely misunderstood, and favors “a wide variety of tools” to help teachers.
Chris Cerf, the state’s acting education commissioner, is a Broad graduate, which fuels suspicion among Lyles’ critics that the state has had a hand in tapping her to replace Epps. [emphasis mine]
You know what really else fuels their suspicions? The fact that Cerf met in closed session with the board to discuss the superintendent search!
The focus of the meeting stemmed from a controversial Dec. 2 email Cerf sent Waterman in which he claimed the board was ignoring his efforts to offer input in helping find a successor to departing superintendent Charles Epps.
Cerf also wrote in his email that the board needs to act in a way which assures the next superintendent will bring “transformational change” to the state’s second largest school system. In an email sent before the meeting, Cerf’s spokesman Justin Barra declined to elaborate on what the acting commissioner meant specifically, telling JCI he would do so in the closed session.
“The commissioner is meeting with the board tonight to discuss his thoughts,” was all Barra would say.
Further, Cerf wrote in the email that it is his “obligation to explore all the options the law empowers me with” to defend the interests of city schoolchildren. This statement has caused some to fear the commissioner might be looking into trying to reassert the state’s authority by retaking full control of the school system. While the state retains its power over approving personnel and curriculum matters, the board has regained control of governance issues. The latter allows it to search for its own superintendent. [emphasis mine]
Of course Lyles was Cerf's choice. Of course he has been involved in getting his people into the Jersey City central office, just like he has been doing in Newark and Paterson and Perth Amboy and Trenton and all over the state. Why do you think Eli Broad has been funding his meddling? This is all about getting their troops into the right places so the education coup d'etat can smoothly progress.

But there's even more to this story:
Three Jersey City Board of Education members should not be permitted to vote to appoint a new schools superintendent because they received campaign cash from a hedge fund billionaire who backs controversial education reforms, a city man claims in a new court filing.
Riaz Wahid, 45, says in the filing that the contributions to the three BOE members – Vidya Gangadin, Sangeeta Ranade and Marilyn Roman – represent a conflict of interest that should preclude them from supporting Delaware woman Marcia V. Lyles, whosources say will become the city’s new schools superintendent.
Lyles is a graduate of the controversial Broad Superintendents Academy, and Wahid alleges that Livingston billionaire David Tepper “directly” and “indirectly” offers financial support for Broad. Tepper funds education-reform group Better Education for Kids.
Given Tepper’s $7,800 contribution to the three Jersey City school board members, and the $7,800 contribution from Jeffrey Kaplan, who runs Tepper’s hedge fund, the school-board trio should not be allowed to vote for Lyles’ appointment, Wahid says.
“For me, it’s a clear conflict,” he said. [emphasis mine]
Well, the judge disagreed and dismissed the lawsuit. It's certainly true, as far as I know, that David Tepper does not fund the Broad Academy. But it's also true that both Tepper and Broad financially back Students First, Michelle Rhee's astroturfing, anti-union, reformy outfit, which lists Tepper's B4K as its New Jersey "partner." Broad and Tepper definitely have aligned interests, and their donations show it.

(A side note: given what's happening in Jersey City and in Perth Amboy, it's time for Students First and B4K to come clean once and for all: what, exactly, is their relationship? How has money exchanged hands between the two groups? Open up your books once and for all, folks, so we can see who is paying to influence educational policy in New Jersey.)

So, even if the lawsuit was dismissed, I find these campaign contributions to be plenty interesting:
Ranade, who stressed that she speaks for herself and not for Gangadin or Roman, said she never met Tepper, and the trio only agreed to accept his donation after they stressed to his “team” that they do not favor charter schools, school vouchers or public-school privatization.
It's worth noting that Tepper isn't much interested in those things either: his big focus is gutting teacher workplace protections.
As for Broad, which critics allege supports all those controversial items, Ranade said Lyles was very “open” about her relationship with the academy.
“It was an opportunity for her to develop herself,” she said, adding that Lyles is “an advocate of public education.”
Tepper spokesman Eric Shuffler said the charges are "a stretch."
There is a "broad" segment of the population that supports the reforms Tepper supports, Shuffler said, adding that it's "ridiculous" to allege that the BOE members can't support a Broad graduate because Tepper gave them financial support as candidates.
"Mr. Tepper's support and advocy for pro-education reform policies and candidates who benefit kids over the status quo are well known," he said. "These three candidates, in our opinion, are pro-education reform and they're pro-kids. Mr. Tepper was proud to support them."
You have to wonder, then, how Tepper feels about one of the board members he backed not supporting Lyles. Is he fine with them not voting as a bloc?

Because, believe it or not, there's yet another wrinkle to this story: this trio of board members was backed by JC councilman and mayoral candidate Steve Fulop. One would think Tepper would be appreciative of Fulop's efforts to get his people on the board, especially since the Deputy Director of Tepper's B4K is Shelly Skinner, Fulop's former campaign director.

Well, the thrill is gone:
While saying she thinks he is well-intentioned, leading Jersey City school choice advocate Shelley Skinner tells JCI she anticipates not working so closely with Ward E Councilman Steven Fulop on education reform issues moving forward, citing an unspecified “disagreement” that has arisen since the summer.
“Steven and I have not worked together since June, and we’re not working together on issues anymore,” says Skinner. “As can happen in any long-term professional relationship, some bumps have developed along the way.”
[...]
Skinner is deputy director of Better Education for New Jersey Kids (B4K), a job she took last year after working at Jersey City’s Learning Community Charter School. She also co-founded the Jersey City Parents for Better Schools Coalition and assisted then-Republican Gov.-elect Chris Christie’s transition team, following his election, regarding education policy. Fulop has told JCI he is on board with Christie’s reforms.
Other examples of cooperation include their co-sponsoring a 2010 City Hall event featuring Wesley Tilson, a wealthy hedge fund manager and national proponent for school choice, and Fulop’s sponsoring a council resolution a year ago demanding the state provide what he and Skinner view as more equitable funding for the city’s charter schools, compared to such schools elsewhere.
Fulop’s resolution, approved 8-0, came at Skinner’s urging.
On the city board’s effort to find a new superintendent, Skinner says B4K has not organized in Jersey City or taken any official position on the matter.
“Our organization is focused right now on enacting reforms to teacher tenure laws in New Jersey,” she says. “I am involved in the search, but only as one member of the community.” [emphasis mine]
Yes, all B4K's founder has done is give money to JCBOE candidates who wound up voting for a Broadie superintendent. Sure, they're barely involved...

(And how in the hell did Tilson show up in all this? Do all reformyists now move in packs?)

Let's recap:

- A Broadie is now going to be the next Jersey City superintendent, at the obvious urging of the ACTING Education Commissioner, a fellow Broadie.

- The new super is being installed by a group BOE members that include two who were backed by the founder of B4K, which is the "partner" of Students First.

- Eli Broad is a major contributor to SF, and, possibly, B4K (we'd all like to know that exact relationship).

- A prominent member of Tepper's B4K staff, long steeped in Jersey City politics, is publicly distancing herself from the political patron of those same board members. I guess they will have to choose who they are loyal to: the cash-strapped mayoral candidate? Or the billionaire?

 Folks, I think it's well past time I updated this:



New Jersey is now Eli Broad's home away from home; he needs to take the top banana spot from Rupert (don't worry, sir, you'll still be way up there!). Broad has taken over Jersey City and Newark and Camden... but how's he now going to spread out all over the state?

I think we have a clue; more in a little while.

On Vanity

Those of us in the vintage community are used to being over dressed. In general, I enjoy being the best dressed person at an event but sometimes I just feel, well, vain. Perhaps it is my chosen profession. Chemists are among the people expected to have the least amount of fashion sense.


See, it's all lab coats and safety goggles. It's not that chemists can't look nice. I know some who do, but with wardrobe limitations due to safety and the natural hazard to anything you might wear due acids and other gnarly chemicals, it doesn't exactly encourage a trendy wardrobe.


I often fear that I will be perceived as less serious when I dress in such an overtly fashionable way. And it is true that the bulk of my wardrobe is completely inappropriate for work. *sigh*

Yet there is another arena of my life where fashion is utterly inappropriate. I go to a very active and involved church, which is not a problem in itself, but we meet in a riding arena. Dust, dirt, cats, horses, no ac, no central heating and an entire pit of sand to walk in. Don't get me wrong. It's a nice riding arena and there have been loads of improvement since we first moved our church there, but most people dress appropriately for the conditions.




And then there's me who can't remember the last time she wore a pair of sneakers. And I wouldn't wear them to the arena anyways because they are suede.

But all of these are really just reflections of the attitude prevalent in modern society. People marvel at me when I wear hats but for hundreds of years, no woman would dare leave the house with her head uncovered. Even in the 50s hats were a regular part of a woman's wardrobe. Oh, for the days when showing your ankle was scandalous! Now I can barely walk out the door without seeing some shirtless, overweight middle aged shirtless man and the undergarments of 9/10 of the young women I see.

Compared to the low standards of modern society, I don't see myself as vain at all just putting in a bit of effort, but that doesn't keep me from feeling that way.


I like nice things. I have pretty and impractical shoes. My one pair of rtw shorts come from White House Black Market. I adore giant poofy skirts. I pin curl my hair. I wear red lipstick and winged eyeliner.

And tonight, I will be going to my church's 4th of July fireworks event. It will likely break 100 F and it will be crazy humid. I will be wearing a dress and a crinoline and red lipstick. But I will be practical and leave my hat at home.

And mostly, I'm ok with that. What the average person doesn't realize is that it doesn't really take that much effort to look great. A cute dress is easier to slip on than jeans and a t-shirt. I spend less time on my hair than most teenage girls. And red lipstick is not hard to wear. It just takes courage.

So here is my message to all of you whether you are already a fashionista or if there is a stylish woman inside of you who has been too scared to break out of her shell. This is the message that I have to tell myself sometimes when I look in the mirror.

It's ok to be fabulous. It's ok to be different. It's ok to be beautiful.





This is how I feel fabulous and different and beautiful. Sometimes, other people may make you feel bad for being fabulous and different and beautiful but you can't let them keep you down.

And now I have to go do my hair and put my lippy on.

Who Has More Secrets: CIA or NJDOE?

Oh, my:
The Education Law Center is suing the state to obtain documents about two private educational reform foundations and their funding of the Department of Education and some of its employees. 
The suit, citing the state’s Open Public Records Act, comes after the ELC was either being denied access to records or strung along with repeated requests for extensions that remain unfulfilled more than two months after the original request.
State law requires that open records requests be fulfilled as soon as possible, but no later than seven business days after receiving the request.
The Education Law Center has unsuccessfully sought information from the Department of Education about the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation, William Cox, a former DOE employee paid via funds from the Broad Foundation, and Bing Howell and Rochelle Sinclair, two Broad Foundation Residents who are employed by the DOE, yet paid in-part by the Broad Foundation. [emphasis mine]
Broadies? In the NJDOE? Why, I'm just shocked...

Well, I'm sure the NJDOE has a good reason for all the Nixonian behavior:
The DOE denied access to requested emails because the ELC had not identified their content or subject matter.
“OPRA does not require the ELC or anyone else to specify the content of government emails they have requested records, which are already identifiable public records,” said Thomas MacLeod, the Open Governance Project legal fellow for the ACLU-NJ.
“If such a requirement existed, it would undermine transparency in government by unnecessarily and improperly narrowing the scope of many valid OPRA requests.”
“It is disturbing that the DOE wants to keep the public in the dark when it comes to making decisions and forming partnerships that involve our children’s education,” said Sciarra of the ELC.
Disturbing? Yes. Surprising? No. Remember, ACTING Commissioner Cerf has been following the Omerta code since his days in NYC. Remember the report the NYCDOE released about Cerf's involvement in a shady stock deal?



Nice - hope Bloomberg bought enough charcoal pencils for the staff at Tweed.

Further, Cerf sits on the Government Records Council, the group that handles appeals of rejected requests for public information. Did the GRC review ELC's requests? Did Cerf recuse himself?

Don't bother filing an OPRA request to find out...

NJDOE ACTING Commissioner Chris Cerf (artist's conception)*

* Totally stole that joke from Atrios. Sue me.