National Attention for Washington State Education
I have been reaching out to a number of national media. I was able to make my case to The Washington Post and wrote this column for Valerie Strauss' The Answer Sheet, their education column.
It's entitled "A State that Just Says 'No" to charters, other reforms."
It is important that other states, other cities and other districts know that ed reform is NOT inevitable. And, that it is possible to fight back and win.
I honestly believe if we stay the course with what our Legislature has started - innovation schools laws, lighthouse school laws, and other ed reform of our own making - plus the start of flexible thinking from our teachers union, the WEA, we CAN do better.
In 5-10 years, we will look like the smart state while others will look at their educational landscape and ask why they chose to embrace ed reform mantra that is just that...words.
It's entitled "A State that Just Says 'No" to charters, other reforms."
It is important that other states, other cities and other districts know that ed reform is NOT inevitable. And, that it is possible to fight back and win.
I honestly believe if we stay the course with what our Legislature has started - innovation schools laws, lighthouse school laws, and other ed reform of our own making - plus the start of flexible thinking from our teachers union, the WEA, we CAN do better.
In 5-10 years, we will look like the smart state while others will look at their educational landscape and ask why they chose to embrace ed reform mantra that is just that...words.
Comments
What other journalist is willing to do so? I'm so proud of you (even though I don't know you) and pleased with the power of the internet to make your voice heard.
(zb)
Oh, don't forget to mention Stand on the Kids (DC PAC funded by union busters), "Dems" for Reform (hedge fund NYC billionaires) and a special shout out to failed charter operator and "edupreneur" Tom Van Der Ark who is everywhere behind the scenes in WA.
It would be ever-so-pleasant to have those names permanently affixed to Melissa's awesome article.
****Corporate Reform Buster****
--FedMomof2
Lines of influence related to Bill and Melinda Gates, LEV, Alliance for Children, DeBell, Tim Burgess, Frank Greer, Jon Bridge and others have been enormously helpful.
Thanks everyone.
Pettigrew also said he didn't tie his vote for any piece of legislation to the money and noted that he's managed to include multimillion-dollar provisos in past budgets. "Maybe I'm good at it," he said.
I am gratified that my positive comment, during last night's public testimony welcoming our new Super, got some press. Finally, something to make up for the crapola being thrown around.
I strongly suspect Burgess will seek higher office- and this information needs to be made public to the Democrats that support him.
Also, it wouldn't surprise me if Burgess would take a stab at getting mayoral control of our district. Documentation is extremely important.
BTW_ Hi to Ms.McFarland, Korsmo and Morris. Nice day we're having.
He will not be forgotten.
1. capacity management and school/program placement (where to put everybody; what to build; now to finance it; how to expand access to language immersion, Montessori, high school options, accelerated learning, IB opportunities, alt opportunities);
2. achievement (better not forget to work on raising achievement levels and closing gaps -- including dropping or curtailing use of MAP testing, changes in math books for schools that want to include more "mastery" learning and less fidelity to "all discovery, all the time," online options for kids for whom it will increase achievement (either because they need a faster pace, a slower one, or a different pedagogy), and increased emphasis on "exporting" successful methods from schools doing well (I STILL want to know what Franklin is doing in math that Garfield is not -- and if the Garfield folks are not all over this, I STILL want to know why not);
3. Restoration of a legitimate SPED program (what we have now is so broken, I don't even know where to start -- but I bet there are others who do); and
4. An honest assessment of teacher support and evaluation. Am I the only one that feels like this entire new teacher evaluation thing may be a big lie? That while everyone knows a story or two about old cranky teachers with tenure who no longer seem to love teaching or kids, and whose classes are avoided by kids who pick better teachers, the new system is not designed to, nor used to, identify these folks and either help them improve or move them out, but instead is used for other, unspoken purposes? Like moving virtually ALL senior teachers out as a "cost savings" device? Or moving out all older teachers whose confidence and skill sets "threaten" immature and untested new principals who don't want any possible challenge to their authority? Or simply getting rid of anyone a new principal doesn't like? Good teachers are hard to come by, and it is horrible if we are squandering that asset.
Two other parents and I met with Burgess in early 2009 when Goodloe-Johnson and board were closing and splitting schools and creating general chaos, and I asked him then what he thought of mayoral control of school districts.
At that time, I didn't know much about the subject, so my question was presented neutrally. He didn't jump on the idea with enthusiasm, but did say: "It depends on who the mayor is."
That was quite a few astroturf encroachments and ed reform battles ago, here in Seattle.
Since then, he seems to be hanging with the corp. ed reform clique, who tend to like to consolidate power and weaken or do away with school boards, so I suspect that he might entertain the idea if he were mayor.
Unless, of course, it was widely unpopular among the voting citizenry, who still believe in the principles of democracy.
And here's a link to the KUOW report featuring Cecilia's welcoming comment to Mr. Banda.
I can see how, in a situation with a long-time corrupt or inept group of board members, you might need a short term takeover to clean up and reset the governance function. (And yes, in THAT case, it would depend on who the mayor is). But Burgess's comment seems to entirely miss this major point. I cannot see how, under any other circumstance, his position is in any way acceptable. It is already obvious that influence from the mayor's office leads to horrible, political decision-making like the inclusion of an SLU school in BEX IV, ahead of so many other school rebuilds/renovations that are so much more critically needed. You can see how that might work from downtown -- where all the political 'horse trading' goes on. (I give you a new school and a trolley, you give me an increased tax base, campaign contributions, and other things X, Y, and Z). But things like that are precisely why we should keep school governance in the hands of a school board that has NO OTHER ISSUES AND NO OTHER CONSTITUENTS -- and not entangle it with other city politics.
Reader
(I worked for several years for an Aussie, so I'm allowed to affect that expression without censure!)
We parents---I'm one of them---thank you from the bottom of our hearts.
Could you imagine if we who want to HELP our public schools had the same amount of money as those who are organized to destroy them?
It wouldn't even be a close contest...until then, the truth will win over the money. Keep the faith and keep up the good work.