Will KIPP's Levin Be the New British Inspector of Schools?

The Independent reports that the British Secretary of Education, Nicky Morgan, is considering hiring Mr. Positivity, Dave Levin, to direct inspections of British schools.  No, I am not kidding. 

As you might imagine, British educators are ready to move with torches and pitchforks. 

. . . .Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, suggested Ms Morgan should take her search to Finland.

“[Finland] is universally agreed to have an excellent education system, characterised by co-operation, collaboration and trust,” she said. “A far cry from the charter school ethos of the US.”

The hunt for a replacement for Sir Michael Wilshaw, who stands down from Ofsted in December, is said to have taken in the US, Canada and northern Europe.

New York City’s schools watchdog and three bosses of American school groups are understood to be under consideration for the job.

Ms Morgan is said to be looking for a chief inspector with a history of forcing through education reforms against resistance from unions.

Her favourite candidate is said to be Mr Levin, co-founder of the KIPP group. The group, which was praised by Ms Morgan’s predecessor Michael Gove, runs a network of US “charter schools”. Like academies, these are publicly funded but operate independently of local government. . . .

Tested to Destruction

A clip from The Guardian:

With the demise of the "big society", the coalition's claims to be anything more than an unimaginative deficit-cutter are in tatters – except in education, where it has been extraordinarily radical. Last year saw, among other things, plans to impose performance-related pay on teachers, the development of the EBacc exam, and the introduction of£9,000 university tuition fees.

What lies behind this hyperactivity? Critics accuse the government of softening up the sector for privatisation. But the education secretary, Michael Gove, and the universities minister, David Willetts, insist that ensuring accountability for taxpayers' money and driving up academic standards are their goals. Gove's own fogeyish style completes the picture of the old-fashioned, no-nonsense grammar school headmaster. But the government is not simply stuck in 1950s "3Rism", nor is it planning wholesale privatisation (yet). Rather, it is still stubbornly pursuing a discredited 1980s ideology of quasi-markets, even though 30 years of experience shows that far from improving quality, it is destroying it.

At the root of the reforms is a doctrine that, though unfamiliar to most outside thinktanks, still dominates policy circles: "new public management". According to this view, the best way to ensure high standards and accountability in public services is to force them to mimic the market. Old centralised systems were inflexible and captured by selfish "producer interests" – teachers and academics; schools and universities therefore have to be made more "competitive", by taking power from professionals and giving it to "entrepreneurial" managers who will be more responsive to "consumers' demands, be they parents, students, or taxpayers".

The problem, of course, is that education and research are not straightforward consumer services. Unlike a haircut, their quality is not simply an issue of personal taste, and the consequences for the individual and broader society will not grow out in six weeks. The new public managers accept this up to a point, and their solution is to insist on rule by league table. Children's tests, student satisfaction surveys and a five- to six-yearly exam of the nation's academics (the "research excellence framework" – REF) seek to capture the quality of education or research, and turn it into numbers. These are then published and managers strive to move up the tables, theoretically by improving quality. . . .

What the "Free" Means in Free (Charter) School

I am beginning to think "free" school is a better descriptor than charter school.  For Brits looking at the American model for inspiration, "free" most often means

free to collect public dollars without public oversight, 

free from democratic governance, 

free to not admit special ed or ELL children, 

free to push out low scorers or those who challenge the totalitarian regimen, 

free to not offer children libraries or gyms or lunch rooms or school nurses or art facilities, 

free to hire and fire at will with no due process rights for teachers, 

free to pay CEO principals 4 to 5 times as much as public school principals, 

free to set up penal pedagogy systems that middle class parents would never allow for their children, 

free to offer the lowest cognitive levels of test prep curriculum, 

free to hire teachers who aren't certified or qualified, 

free to ignore accounting rules that public schools must abide by, 

free to engage in open nepotism and preferential treatment of employees, and 

free to thumb their noses at citizen requests for openness and transparency.

Here's proof that the Brits have learned something from the American and Swedish experiences with "free:"

Posted by Mehdi Hasan - 03 November 2010 13:01

Don't buy the hype from Michael Gove - or Arne Duncan. 

Arne Duncan, Obama's education secretary and the man who invited the US military to run local schools during his controversial tenure as chief executive of the Chicago state school system, is in London visiting our very own Michael Gove. The latter, of course, has been ultra-keen to push his agenda of academies and "free schools" since taking office in May, and has become fond of citing the Obama administration's support for so-called charter schools. (Interestingly, on a side note, Gove and the Tories have very little to say about Obama's position on deficit reduction, which is closer to the Labour Party's view than the coalition's).
From the Guardian:

Gove said: "America is a bigger country and there are differences between us, but I have been impressed by what Race to the Top has done, and impressed by many of the things that President Obama and Arne Duncan have been fighting for."

It's worth noting the cynicism, however, of Gove's approach. At first, the Education Secretary championed free schools by pointing to the supposed successes of the Swedish version, which is said to have been the original inspiration for the Tories' education reforms. But, as emprical evidence emerged over the summer that challenged the Swedish model, Gove and his outriders began pointing instead to America's experiment with charter schools. Hence today's visit by Duncan to the UK.

As the Americans reject the Obama administration, the coalition embraces one of its worst ideas. Peer-reviewed academic research suggests charter schools ain't as good as their well-funded and high-profile advocates make them out to be. Here's what the CREDO National Charter Schools Study at Stanford University discovered last year:

While the report recognized a robust national demand for more charter schools from parents and local communities, it found that 17 percent of charter schools reported academic gains that were significantly better than traditional public schools, while 37 percent of charter schools showed gains that were worse than their traditional public school counterparts, with 46 percent of charter schools demonstrating no significant difference.

Hmm.

It's also worth bearing in mind the view of Diane Ravitch, a leading historian of the US education system, former assistant secretary of education in the administration of George H.W. Bush and one-time supporter of "school choice". Writing for the Wall St Journal in March, in a piece entitled "Why I Changed My Mind About School Reform", Ravitch observed:

Charter evaluations frequently note that as compared to neighboring public schools, charters enroll smaller proportions of students whose English is limited and students with disabilities. The students who are hardest to educate are left to regular public schools, which makes comparisons between the two sectors unfair. The higher graduation rate posted by charters often reflects the fact that they are able to "counsel out" the lowest performing students; many charters have very high attrition rates (in some, 50%-60% of those who start fall away). Those who survive do well, but this is not a model for public education, which must educate all children.

So please don't buy the hype about charter schools - not from our Education Secretary or, for that matter, Obama's.

UPDATE:
If you're looking for more information on US charter schools then I highly recommend the website, Charter School Scandals. My favourite story from that site is the Denver charter school which "broke a new state law by offering families $400 worth of gift cards if they brought new students to the school before the day the state takes a student census" because "state money follows students into the classroom -- an average of about $6,600 per pupil across Colorado, according to the Colorado Department of Education."

Tory Policy Turns Upside Down on Charters, er, Academies

In the U. S., we have two kinds of charter schools, even though both are segregated.  In the urban centers of the North, we have the "no excuses" behavioral chain gangs that contain the children of the black and brown poor in order to perform that special KIPP style brand of cognitive sterilization.  In the South and Southwest, we have the exclusive high-performing white charters located in white neighborhoods, with curriculums fit for the Seths and Caitlins and with no transportation provided for the black or the brown who live in the slums.

Back in 2007 when David Cameron's chances of becoming PM were slim to none, he was preaching the virtues of the former charter variety, all under the banner of justice for the poor.  From the Telegraph, May 23, 2007:

In a newspaper article yesterday, he said: "In Wisconsin, for example, a new generation of charter schools is bringing the highest standards of schooling to the poorest kids in the poorest neighbourhoods. I believe we can do it here too."

Well, being PM is different than talking about becoming PM.  Already Cameron has rolled out a plan to create a whole bunch of publicly-financed private academies that look almost exactly like the U. S. Southern charter gated model that favors walling off the white middle class children to prepare them with everything they need to know to take over the reins when their white parents retire on their BP-funded pensions.  The word "charter" has become so toxic and synonymous with corruption that Cameron's Tories have opted for the Southern term, too--academies.  The unwashed will remain in the publics, at least for now.  From the Observer:

. . . .The government's education plans have been criticised after it emerged that hundreds of schools being offered a fast-track to academy status are the most socially exclusive.

An analysis by the Observer found that secondary schools judged as "outstanding" by Ofsted are taking 40% fewer poor pupils than the national average. Michael Gove, the secretary of state for education, has written to all schools inviting them to apply to become academies, a move that will free them from local authority control.

However, he is particularly urging "outstanding" schools to join the scheme and has approved them all in advance. "We specifically want to provide opportunities for outstanding schools to open as academies as early as September 2010," he wrote to headteachers.

Campaigners are warning that the policy risks creating a two-tier system in which resources and attention are focused on the most middle-class schools.

"The figures do suggest that the new cadre of academies will be more socially exclusive than schools as a whole," said Dr Lee Elliot Major, director of research and policy at the Sutton Trust, a group that works to improve the educational opportunities for young people from non-privileged backgrounds.

Major argued that the "admissions code", which is supposed to stop schools from selecting middle-class children in an attempt to improve behaviour and results, needs to be strengthened.

"The freeing-up of state schools makes it even more important that strong checks and balances and incentives are in place so that school intakes reflect the social mix of the communities they serve – and that any education reforms benefit all children, not just the most privileged," he said. . . .

Three Cheers for Three Days of Testing Boycotts By British Teachers

The British love their traditions, but this Spring's naming and shaming ritual based on standardized test scores has finally been interrupted. The infamous "league tables" are being thrown into disarray, and if Brits want to know this year how to avoid schools with the poorest students, they will have to drive around the neighborhoods, rather than flipping through the handy league tables that classify schools based on test scores that reflect, as Alfie Kohn once quipped, the size of the houses in the neighborhoods, rather than the quality of the instruction or curriculum. I say, three cheers ole' boy, for the moral courage of British teachers. From the Telegraph:

Pupils across England are taking alternative exams instead of being entered for government-backed Sats tests for 10 and 11-year-olds.

Senior teachers said it would enable schools to judge pupils’ progress while ensuring results could not be checked against targets or used to publish league tables.

The disclosure came on the first day of a week-long boycott of Sats.

Up to 300,000 children were prevented from sitting an official reading exam on Monday, with tests in spelling, writing and mathematics being targeted later this week.

The action is being led by the National Union of Teachers and the National Association of Head Teachers.

Unions claim Sats tests narrow the curriculum as schools are forced to drill children in the three-Rs to hit targets and inflate results. It is also claimed that the tests threaten head teachers' jobs.

Mick Brookes, NAHT general secretary, said the protest could be repeated next year unless the new government abolished Sats altogether.

A survey of councils by The Daily Telegraph suggested between a third and half of schools were boycotting the tests this week.

Birmingham Council – England’s biggest urban authority – said 153 out of 275 primaries confirmed they were taking action but actual numbers could be even higher.

Other councils including Calderdale, Barking and Dagenham, Darlington, Hartlepool, Kirklees, Middlesbrough, Stoke on Trent and Torbay indicated that the majority of schools were also taking part.

In many areas, schools are allowing children to sit alternative exams.

In Preston, 33 primaries are setting their own tests, which will be marked in school before being externally checked.

David Fann, head of Sherwood Junior School and a member of the NAHT national executive, said: “We are not opposed to testing per se, just the way these results are used to humiliate and demoralise schools, pupils and the communities they serve."

Schools in Bristol are allowing pupils to take old test papers, which are then moderated by neighbouring schools.

A similar system has been set up by primaries in Scarborough.

David Evans, head of Barrowcliff Primary School, said: “We need to remove this pressure cooker atmosphere that Sats create for children as young as 10, because it's just not reasonable and it doesn't make sense to pillory schools for the standard of the children that they teach.”

Mr Brookes said: "We think Ofsted will think this is a perfectly valid thing to do and parents are likely to be quite happy with this."

He insisted that the industrial action could be repeated in 2011 and 2012 if the incoming government refused to axe Sats.

Christine Blower, NUT general secretary, said: “Thousands of schools across England have decided that enough is enough and have taken the decisive step of boycotting this year’s SATs.

“There are reports from many areas that a significant majority of primary school pupils will not be sitting [Sats] tests this week. This will make the annual ritual of naming and shaming schools through league tables impossible.”. . . .

Learning Breaks Out in Britain During Testing Boycott That Affects 300,000 Children

Half of the 600,000 10 and 11 year-old children this morning (in Britain) will be reading books, poetry, and telling stories, rather than taking another meaningless standardized test. The boycott will continue through Wednesday. What joy, and what joy if only the prostisuits who run the NEA and the AFT would honor their Code of Ethics against child abuse here in America? From The Independent:

By Richard Garner, Education Editor

As many as 300,000 11-year-olds will find their national curriculum tests cancelled this morning.

The estimate of the amount of disruption caused by a boycott of the tests - in maths and English - increased yesterday. Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said that the number of schools backing the boycott ranged from 30 per cent to 75 per cent from local authority to local authority. Overall, about half of the 17,000 schools due to sit the tests are set to abandon them.

Ms Blower added that, if no agreement could be reached on reviewing the tests and scrapping exam league tables derived from them, the boycott could be repeated next year.

"We would have to consider that," she said. "The purpose of the boycott is to get rid of the SATs (national curriculum tests). If we had a different series of tests and a categorical agreement there would be no league tables, then obviously that would be different."

Both Labour and the Conservatives are committed to the test going ahead. However, teachers' leaders are pinning their hopes on Liberal Democrat involvement in the new government because the party spoke out against the tests and exam league tables during the election campaign.

The NUT - along with the National Association of Head Teachers - has voted in favour of boycotting the tests because they believe the importance placed on them - with performance tables based on their results - has forced schools to teach to the tests at the expense of the broader curriculum.

It will mean headteachers refuse to distribute the test papers to pupils but otherwise remain at work.

Teachers' leaders believe the rise in the numbers of heads boycotting the tests could be down their feeling less fearful of the the threat of reprisals as a result of the stalemate over the formation of the new government.

The Schools Secretary Ed Balls had urged school governors to consider sending heads home if they refused to administer the tests - and said they should consider appointing another "competent" adult to ensure they went ahead.

However, the National Governors' Association - which represents school governing bodies - warned of the dangers inherent in such action.

"The NGA would not advise any governing body to go ahead without considering how they could fund any legal dispute which arose from this request," it says. "The unions are highly likely to challenge any employer who requests an employee be sent home (who is only carrying out part of their duties as a result of industrial action)."

Meanwhile, at an anti-SATs rally in London's Jubilee Gardens yesterday, children's authors revealed they would be going into schools to read poetry and tell stories to provide pupils with an alternative to the SATs.

The author Alan Gibbons said at the rally: "We will be conducting poetry sessions, reading books and doing story-telling activities - trying to show an alternative approach to SATs."

More than 90 children's authors and illustrators signed an open letter to the Government warning that the tests were switching pupils off reading because they concentrated on learning excerpts from books for the tests rather than reading the whole story.

Ms Blower told the rally: "We are standing up and saying we must get rid of the SATs and the league tables. Let's make sure that every child has a great year unencumbered by ridiculous tests and make schools a SATs-free zone."

The first test - English reading - is due to take place today and will be followed by three more days of tests. These include a writing test and two maths tests, one concentrating on mental arithmetic.

94 Percent of British Teachers Vote to Boycott Testing Next Year

It's official and not close. Thank God for the moral courage of these teachers to act on their convictions. The boycott is happening unless British officials agree to entirely new assessments.

Will the NEA and AFT suits notice, or are their swollen heads too far up their arses to have any hope of extraction? From The Telegraph:

Head teachers have voted overwhelmingly to back a boycott of national tests for seven and 11 year olds, rounding off one of Labour's worst weeks in office.

The move is a personal blow to Ed Balls, the children's secretary, whose speech to the National Association of Head Teachers annual conference just before the vote failed to placate school heads who want to see "an end to the tyranny of annual testing".

A joint boycott by heads and classroom teachers could spell the end of Sats, taken by about 1.2 million primary schoolchildren every year.

Despite warnings from the Government that the action would be "unlawful" and urging from Mr Balls to "act responsibly", 94 per cent of delegates at the conference in Brighton voted to support a ballot of members for the disruption of next year's tests.

Heads believe the papers in English, maths and science have narrowed the curriculum and damaged teaching and learning.

Sue Sayles, a past president of the Association, said: "It is our moral duty to show Ed that we have balls."

Steve Iredale, a primary head teacher from Barnsley, who proposed the motion condemned the ritual of annual testing and the use of flawed data to judge schools and heads.

"It is a mechanistic education system which reduces children's learning to numerical nonsense," he said. . . .

British Teachers Plan to End National Testing

While the spineless AFT and NEA join the Business Roundtable hustle to up the testing ante and thus continue the push to turn American children in helpless drones, the British teachers' unions have made it clear the child abuse through testing is about to come to a screeching halt in Britain. Thank God for professional teachers' organizations somewhere with guts. From The Guardian:

Polly Curtis, education editor
Thursday 26 March 2009

Teachers are threatening to bring the Sats system in England to a halt by boycotting next year's tests.

Two of the biggest education unions will ask their members to refuse to take part in the tests, which they say have become "unacceptable for the future of children's education".

It is a significant escalation in the teaching profession's opposition to the testing regime, and comes after ministers scrapped the tests for 14-year-olds last year. The two unions, representing more than 300,000 teachers and heads, say they will conduct this year's tests of all seven and 11-year-olds in May only on condition that they will be the last.

The National Union of Teachers will put the plans to its annual conference over Easter, while the National Association of Head Teachers will consider an identical plan at its conference at the end of April. Both organisations say the tests have damaged primary education and put children under unnecessary stress.

Mick Brookes, the NAHT general secretary, said: "Testing narrows the curriculum and makes learning shallow, because the tests are simply regurgitative. Then the results are published in league tables, and schools in the toughest areas, where you've got hardest to teach children, are ridiculed on an annual basis. There is high stress for children; some will already be spending up to 10 hours a week rehearsing these tests. It's a complete waste of time. It is unconscionable that we should simply stand by and allow the educational experience of children to be blighted."

Christine Blower, the NUT's acting general secretary, said: "Primary schools' patience in enduring the damage caused by the tests has been stretched to the limit, and beyond. Our deadline for the end of Sats by 2010 is reasonable, and our alternative is one that will enhance teaching and learning. Above all else, the government needs to understand that this year's national curriculum tests will be the last. . . . .

Will American Testaholics Notice That Some Parts of the World Are Getting Sober?

The Brits have already dumped testing for 14-year olds. Now they move to do the same for 11 year olds. From The Guardian:

National tests for 11-year olds in England should be scrapped, says the government's advisory committee on mathematics education.

Sats are helping create an "impoverished" curriculum, with teachers spending months preparing pupils to answer test questions rather than building deeper understanding, says the committee. It suggests that the results generated in this way may overstate children's true abilities.

The committee, which was set up seven years ago to represent maths teachers and educationists in talks with ministers, wants the tests phased out in favour of allowing teachers to reach their own judgments on the quality of pupils' work over several years.

Its comments come in a paper submitted to a government review of testing, which is being carried out in the wake of last autumn's decision by Ed Balls, the schools secretary, to scrap Sats tests for 14-year-olds.

The biggest inquiry into primary education for 40 years concluded last month that the tests – the basis of school league tables and targets – were helping to marginalise the teaching of non-tested subjects such as history, geography and the arts.

The committee's paper said: "There is a view that in many Year 6 classrooms between January and May, pupils experience a less than broad and balanced curriculum because of preparation for testing towards the end of their final year in primary school. These high-stakes tests serve more to provide national benchmarks than to aid pupils' learning.

"It is our belief that the preparation for testing at key stage 2 is disproportionate to the educational outcomes for the individuals taking the tests. If a broad and balanced curriculum is to be encouraged, then schools need advice that supports them to make judgements about their pupils without the pressure of single snapshots of attainment. . . .