PESB Pretty Much a Clone of the Seattle School Board
I attended the School Board meeting last week and the PESB (WA State Professional Educators Standards Board) meeting and, at both, testified about Teach For America. (The PESB is the agency that "establishes policies and requirements for the preparation and certification of education professionals. " This includes teacher certification testing and routes as well as alternative certifications.) I said pretty much the same thing at both meetings. Namely:
Then we came to UW-Seattle's presentation. It was a lot of edu-speak that boils down to a lot of on-line classes and guidance from a program director and not a lot of face time with professors. In contrast with the other presentations, Board members peppered the two presenting UW professors with many questions. Several of the Board were people of color and they questioned them closely about TFA recruits being culturally prepared to go into high-minority classrooms.
Additionally, just as SEA President Olga Addae had at the Board meeting, one member expressed concern over the mentor teachers. Olga's point was that the TFA recruits will take a lot more hand-holding than a first-year teacher coming out of UW's Master's program. She had expressed concern that the need to give TFA recruits more attention might mean less time for other first-year teachers. The PESB member's point was that it was difficult to get mentor teachers as they are volunteers (who do get paid extra) and how would this be addressed? The professors had no real answer as this is SPS's job (and naturally SPS pays for it).
Then there was public comment. Three of us expressed our concerns against TFA. (I also pointed out that it was somewhat dismaying to hear one of the professors just sigh and say "We'll just have to see how well this works" as if the students were lab rats.) Harium Martin-Morris came forward in support of TFA and said he was an SPS SB member but was speaking as an individual. There was also a couple of TFA alums, someone from LEV and a manager from Federal Way (the other district where TFA will be).
Then they took a motion to pass the proposal. What was interesting was the woman who put forth the motion said she felt strongly about passage but then lamely said that UW had fulfilled all the requirements and should get approval.
Basically, UW had dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's so they did their job as far as the PESB is concerned. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. There was no talk about the plan itself.
Then several other members, in the discussion, again expressed concerns over how the TFA recruits could be trained in cultural competency in such a short time. One member said she felt it "in my gut" that this is wrong but she was going to vote yes because UW had done what was asked for in the proposal application.
I have no idea why this member even said anything. Was it to cover herself later on if the program wasn't working in high-minority schools? Why, as a member of an oversight board, would you say that you felt deeply that a program was not fleshed out (and could possibly hurt kids) and not vote no? When would a person vote their conscience? I was completely perplexed.
Naturally, they all voted yes but I swear during the questioning period for UW's proposal, given the concern expressed in the questions and the number of questions, I thought a few people would vote no.
So that got done for TFA but as Yogi Berra said, it ain't over until it's over. There are yet more public disclosure documents that have been received (and they make for fascinating reading) and more in the works. I'm sure TFA will be in SPS this fall but the whole thing is not going to look good. This might be one more thing the incumbents in the School Board race might have to explain or defend.
- TFA has never closed the achievement gap at any school or district where their teachers are placed. While it is a noble goal (and the goal of EVERY school), they haven't done it.
- Second, there is NO teacher shortage in Seattle. In fact, one of the UW College of Education professors stated at a meeting in June that if she were on the Seattle SB she would have voted no to TFA because "there is no teacher shortage in Seattle."
- Third, this proposal gives a special tuition break to TFAs recruits. (In fact, this point gets hazier by the minute. I will have an update on it but the fact that it is unclear exactly what TFA recruits will get means a lack of transparency on the part of UW.)
- Fourth, no one who would like to become a teacher via UW's program can access it unless they are in TFA. That makes it a fairly exclusionary program for the overwhelming majority of Washington State residents. We need to be creating more Washington teachers for Washington state.
- Dean Stritikus told his Master's students in May that if he had to choose between one of them and a TFA recruit for his own children, he'd choose a Master's student. There's a ringing endorsement.
- Also, according to a Seattle Schools document, the TFA recruits would only marginally increase the diversity in the teacher pool and only in two groups. (In fact I found an error when I was reviewing the chart and it's even lower for Latinos.) This so-called broadening of the pool is not happening in any huge way.
- Lastly, what are we giving to the students at these high-poverty, high-minority schools? Are we giving them the best teachers we have trained? People who, because of this training, are committed to teaching as a career? Or do we give them 5-week trained college grads who provide a revolving door of teachers at schools where students need continuity?
Then we came to UW-Seattle's presentation. It was a lot of edu-speak that boils down to a lot of on-line classes and guidance from a program director and not a lot of face time with professors. In contrast with the other presentations, Board members peppered the two presenting UW professors with many questions. Several of the Board were people of color and they questioned them closely about TFA recruits being culturally prepared to go into high-minority classrooms.
Additionally, just as SEA President Olga Addae had at the Board meeting, one member expressed concern over the mentor teachers. Olga's point was that the TFA recruits will take a lot more hand-holding than a first-year teacher coming out of UW's Master's program. She had expressed concern that the need to give TFA recruits more attention might mean less time for other first-year teachers. The PESB member's point was that it was difficult to get mentor teachers as they are volunteers (who do get paid extra) and how would this be addressed? The professors had no real answer as this is SPS's job (and naturally SPS pays for it).
Then there was public comment. Three of us expressed our concerns against TFA. (I also pointed out that it was somewhat dismaying to hear one of the professors just sigh and say "We'll just have to see how well this works" as if the students were lab rats.) Harium Martin-Morris came forward in support of TFA and said he was an SPS SB member but was speaking as an individual. There was also a couple of TFA alums, someone from LEV and a manager from Federal Way (the other district where TFA will be).
Then they took a motion to pass the proposal. What was interesting was the woman who put forth the motion said she felt strongly about passage but then lamely said that UW had fulfilled all the requirements and should get approval.
Basically, UW had dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's so they did their job as far as the PESB is concerned. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. There was no talk about the plan itself.
Then several other members, in the discussion, again expressed concerns over how the TFA recruits could be trained in cultural competency in such a short time. One member said she felt it "in my gut" that this is wrong but she was going to vote yes because UW had done what was asked for in the proposal application.
I have no idea why this member even said anything. Was it to cover herself later on if the program wasn't working in high-minority schools? Why, as a member of an oversight board, would you say that you felt deeply that a program was not fleshed out (and could possibly hurt kids) and not vote no? When would a person vote their conscience? I was completely perplexed.
Naturally, they all voted yes but I swear during the questioning period for UW's proposal, given the concern expressed in the questions and the number of questions, I thought a few people would vote no.
So that got done for TFA but as Yogi Berra said, it ain't over until it's over. There are yet more public disclosure documents that have been received (and they make for fascinating reading) and more in the works. I'm sure TFA will be in SPS this fall but the whole thing is not going to look good. This might be one more thing the incumbents in the School Board race might have to explain or defend.
Comments
They are experimenting on children in poverty--specifically, children of color in poverty. Look at the list of schools they have targeted and have the TfAers tell us otherwise.
This immoral experiment is being used to further a political agenda.
I would like the discourse to reflect the reality--This is a experiment on a vulnerable population, which is nothing new in this country (think Tuskegee Experiment).
--if it were effective, they'd be using it in all neighborhoods
TFA could send its wunderkinds to Quincy where there is a shortage of math-science teachers. They could attend CWU's alt rte 4 program and probably get a better education than at the UW's hallowed halls.
There are numerous ways to stand against this: Media, transparency, sit-ins, etc. Hopefully, the RB community will invite the citizens of this city to help them fight this, and organize some resistance.
"Let resistance be your motto!"
(Henry Highland Garnet, c 1850)
Now THAT would be interesting.
I think, based on the studies we've been pointed to from this and other blogs, that the results are in on TFA: while the kids are energetic and enthusiastic, they're just not an effective substitute for real teachers. What more is there to "experiment" on?
Since this experiment has not yet proven sucessful, tinkering with variables (currently in the form of alternative certification while teaching--see UW) is occurring as long as lab results are showing that the current TfA approach produces wholly inferior products--i.e. short-term teachers whose students learn less that certificated teachers of the same experience-level.
--in the meantime, the students of color who are living in poverty continue to be the subjects of this experiment
As happened at Tuskagee, the experiment is run on the powerless. Syphilis would not be injected into the wealthy, without their permission or knowledge, to test for vaccines: The children of the wealthy will not have poorly trained, non-professional instructors placed before them to see which cheapened, simplified, more "efficient" sort of training works best.
Anon 11:15's comment:
"The main hypothesis being tested is whether or not routes to teaching can be successfully reframed.
Since this experiment has not yet proven sucessful, tinkering with variables (currently in the form of alternative certification while teaching--see UW) is occurring as long as lab results are showing that the current TfA approach produces wholly inferior products--i.e. short-term teachers whose students learn less that certificated teachers of the same experience-level.
--in the meantime, the students of color who are living in poverty continue to be the subjects of this experiment"
So I posit that once the experimentation finds a "suitable" combination of simplified skills and standards to teach and cheapest way to train warm bodies to teach them, the whole of public education will swing that way, for to maintain the gulf would be cold and heartless.
But then, we don't see a lot of support for poor schools from the wealthier citizens now, do we? Maybe there could be such a thing, a city with the poor schools getting transitory warm bodies in front of the classrooms and the wealthier ones getting real teachers...
I hope not. Let resistance be OUR motto.
One key element in good teaching practice is collaboration amongst colleagues. SPS, in fact, believes this is so important that it is built into professional development time.
Now imagine for a moment that you are sitting in one of those collaboration meetings, planning coursework and strategy for the year with your well-educated and highly-trained colleagues. Your goals for the year are difficult to achieve and critical to student growth.
What role will the TfA upstart play in those collaboration sessions? But, more importantly, who will be willing to collaborate with this individual?
Three scenarios arise:
1) The TfA recruit will be ignored...after all...he or she is just passing through.
2) The TfA recruit will be treated like a scab and shunned.
3) The TfA recruit will be enjoined in a professional educator love-fest. 'We are so glad you are part of the team.'
Depending on the school, the first two are most likely. As for #3...that will happen the day pigs fly. (Only a fool would collaborate with a scab.)
What say you StopTFA?
Dumping a bunch of highly-privileged college grads...
Real teachers have been asked to work longer and harder for less pay. Their resistance to coddling these demanding and presumptuous upstarts is totally understandable in my view.
"is this going to be on the test?"
Well, yes, that's what TFA believes. They believe most in their method of direct teaching (intensive study followed by hands on teaching with mentoring). They believe they bring energy and "relentless" focus.
What is the experiment? To see how big they can grow this thing. To see how they can help dismantle the teachers' union (yes I know they are members once they are teachers but I'll be they wouldn't do it if they didn't have to). To prove that ed departments could run leaner and meaner. For UW to do "research" on TFA. It's an endless circle.
Zulu, the party line from SEA is that the TFA recruits will be colleagues and be treated as such. That said, I don't think many teachers will want to (or have) the time to handhold these teachers. TFA recruits have to fly out of the building after school because they have to be working on their certification/master's AND meet with the UW program manager AND meet with their TFA manager.
(This three-part management - SPS, TFA and UW - was a part of the PESB discussion; meaning, how to make sure the TFA recruit doesn't get varying directives and answers to questions.)
I doubt these TFA recruits will be in the school as much as the regular teachers.
I also doubt that regular teachers will take what they have to say with much interest.
But people have good hearts so who knows? But it is good to keep in mind that Seattle is a union town. You don't have to be in the SEA to be in a union.
The way the recruits get taught is to strip out things like child development, differentiation, etc. and strip the lesson to the bare bones. What is the goal of the lesson and how can you teach it? They don't want to have to learn a lot of what TFA considers extraneous material. It is a direct challenge to teaching institutions.
They may be right on some points but this stripping away leaves you with a teacher with a narrow (but "relentless") focus.
-Watch for it, it's all theater ( or WV theardia)
I can also speak with confidence and firsthand knowledge that many of SEA members find the whole TfA thing gross. Olga's days are numbered if TfA gets a strong (or any) foothold in the District. This is the last straw on her camel.
My question has a sarcastic bent, but I am actually quite curious as to what the official line is on this. Either classroom teachers deliver intense, narrow focus material, or wide-ranging, semi-individualized material. It is simply impossible to do both.
New to SPS
"Curiouser and curiouser, said the rabbit..."
- equal access to TFAs
As opposed to the typical teaching college program, which is a year, then a quarter or so of student teaching, then (often) a masters thesis or project, THEN into the classroom with a full certificate.
The way TFA sells these people, given that they have little training is through two oft-repeated statements:
1) They can bridge the achievement gap! Singlehandedly! (or at least better than those ol' nasty certs);
2) They are young, shiny, energetic, and THEY COME FROM THE BEST COLLEGES! (As opposed to those creaky, cranky certs, who graduated from Whattsamatta U or something.
What a con their game really is...
There was an Episcopal priest crossing the western mountains to start a mission back in the 1870s. He wrote, "While the [Native Americans] will never reach my level, I will do my best to make good farmers of them."
It's like that. TFA deigns to send "the brightest" to the ghettoes to narrowly instruct poor children in just Math and Reading, tests in just those narrowed subjects, and calls it good enough. As if that education is as rich and deep as the education provided "the brightest." How freakin' paternalistic.
it takes a few years for collaboration with other teachers to start to work because our collaboration consists of fast conversations running to the bathroom or waiting in the copy room or dashing up the stairs or running down the hall - we're not in some ivy'd halls introspecting and reflecting and ruminating and cogitating - we're running, running and running. it takes a few years to figure out who has which strengths and how their interests and strengths compliment my 5000 weaknesses and inadequacies -
there are people in my building who I don't see for 4 or 9 weeks at a time because we're tooooooooooo busy.
my concern for the kids in my school will out weigh my disgust with the kopp-kipp kryme syndicate - and by the time I remember the name of the 5 week wonder, they'll be off to wall street ??
realityisnttheoretical
One of the professors, Cap Peck, has repeatedly said the following:
1) that all people don't learn the same way. This is true but his point is that UW can teach different people different ways to be teachers. Okay, but almost no one is going to say 5 weeks AND earning your certification while you work the job you are getting the certification for is optimal.
2) he told the PESB that these students are exceptionally bright and probably learn faster than other students. Basically, the best and the brightest which is pretty much an insult to already accredited teachers as well as those going thru the UW Master's program.
So how is it that these TFA students are somehow different once they grow up? What magic happens then between elementary school and college such that these TFA students need their own Spectrum-style program at UW?
New to SPS
New to SPS
Four new SPS Board members in November and stopping TfA with a January vote sounds like a great idea and here is why....
Simply put the UW, the PESB, and the SPS have either accidentally violated state law and the constitutional rights of many students.... or conspired to push this approval forward. .... So what do all those who testified for TfA UW-Seattle have to say about the law? ..Oh yes I forgot this is about Education in Seattle where laws do not matter, because pushing "Ed Reform" forward trumps existing state laws and the constitution.
The WAC governing Limited certificates (WAC 181-79A-231) contains the following:
"The professional educator standards board encourages in all cases the hiring of fully certificated individuals and understands that districts will employ individuals with conditional certificates only after careful review of all other options. "
It is time for the SPS to face the facts .... a careful review of options to close achievement gaps in the SPS has never been undertaken.
In this application the SPS Board by making the application ... made a bogus claim that a careful review of all other options to narrow achievement Gaps had been made... this is complete and total BS.
The SPS has done the exact opposite of what is needed... approving misguided selections of materials and practices produced pathetic results and widen the achievement gaps. In fact the UW "help" (??) made things even worse
The UW has assisted in the creation of the ridiculous math debacle over the last several years..
=======
Next move should be to require each of the four directors running for reelection to disclose ... when "the careful review of options to close achievement gaps" took place and to list what was learned.
As each of these four directors approved the TfA application back in November of 2010 ... it should be easy for them to tell us... unless they were lying to the public.
========
Josh is right....
This is not an experiment ... like a lot of UW math actions ... this will be a disaster rerun.
"I really don't understand these boards that don't want to do their jobs."
Well the interesting thing is that a lot of members of state boards are NOT elected... they are appointed.
So now we know why they are appointed. .. Appointed because they are expected not to do the job required.
========
The State Board of Education Math Advisory Panel no longer meets .... (is that because it came up with wrong answers?) ... Oh I forgot there was no money for an all volunteer panel to continue meeting.... well certainly no money for a panel that questioned OSPI math actions and the UW.
Or worse, the job they were appointed to do was to git that Reform in there.
The fix is in.
save our schools march DC
and closer to home:
Washington Save Our Schools
SOS info state and regional
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2011/07/jonah-edelman-spills-oligarchs.html?spref=fb
The stuff about the Washington State takeover will make you ill.
Oh yes ... it makes me plenty ill.
It is certainly imperative that all four directors up for reelection be defeated. Can knowledge trump big money campaign dollars in a school board election?
If not, we can finally be assured that the public schools are no longer operating in a Republic.
Michael DeBell and Kay Smith Blum are on the bandwagon for TfA.
Susan Enfield has championed TfA.
--keep them all accountable
"In Caesar's Gallic War a cohort was a unit of soldiers. There were 6 centuries (100 men) to a cohort, 10 cohorts to a legion (therefore 6,000 men).
A century, then, would correspond to a company, a cohort to a battalion, and a legion to a regiment.
Because of the word's history, some critics insist that cohort should be used only to refer to a group of people and never to an individual.
In recent years, however, the use of cohort to refer to an individual rather than a group has become very common and is now in fact the dominant usage.
Seventy-one percent of the "Usage Panel" accepts the sentence: 'The cashiered dictator and his cohorts have all written their memoirs', while only 43 percent accepts: 'The gangster walked into the room surrounded by his cohort.'
Perhaps because of its original military meaning and paramilitary associations, cohort usually has a somewhat negative connotation, and therefore critics of the President rather than his supporters might use a phrase like the President and his cohorts."
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition Copyright © 2010 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Traditional certification programs have their place, but if we really want to attract the best and brightest to teaching as they do in Norway (and that means the APP and Spectrum students of today), there need to be some fundamental changes to the content delivery mechanisms in colleges of education. I felt infantilized, like the instructors were condescending and was amazed at the other students sitting there like sheep.
I totally get why the traditional college of ed students offered one positive, then a neg, then a positive comment to end their remarks. That kind of uncritical, please everyone and hurt no feelings approach was modeled by the professors every day. I suppose that works well with most K-12 students in the clasroom but not so much with high-achieving gifted students who learn to expect and require a challenge. That need doesn't change when you graduate high school.
Actually, any kid (regardless of their abilities) with a little common sense can spot bullshit for what it is faster than most well educated adults. Which is why false praise is meaningless to kids who know their worth and how much work they put in (or not) in their learning. True confidence comes when you know you've earned it.
*your average tiger mom
I just found funny reading the comments from the above link b/c I could see myself saying the same things with the same snark at that point in my life.
I don't think TFA teachers get enough effective training before taking over a classroom of kids with challenges but agree wholeheartedly with their assessment of the training options currently available. Modyfying the typical teacher training program, even condensing it, is not enough and I'm at least glad to see the folks at UW recognize that.
Mr. Ed
Finland values teachers and that is why they get the best and brightest. I went through Mr. Rogers hell and got my certificate the traditional way. It was the experience with the veteran teacher during my internship that separated me from the TFAers. The work in the classrooms prior to teaching, with an experienced master teacher, is the ticket. TFA skips the real essential step entirely.
By the way, some of the best teachers I have ever met or known were not the best students (or in what Seattle pretends are gifted programs), in the traditional sense, because they are able to think beyond the program and approach learning from all the different perspectives a room full of real children bring.
--experimenting on children of color in poverty is immoral
I am no fan of TfA -- I think they are dishonest (in terms of what they are really doing -- they are really an "educational policy leadership" organization -- with a pro-charter, anti-union, anti-colleges of education bent. I am astounded that they get all this federal grant money, and "placement" fees from districts, and commitments from districts to "mentor" their recruits -- at the expense of student time -- all to provide a pretty "blah" product -- (in terms of teaching at least -- it may be a GREAT product in terms of the politically motivated, ed reform leaders that they want).
I am beyond "fed up" with schools boards, faux "community" leaders, and political hacks, both left and right, who pander to them and spread their pr around.
Obviously, we want "smart" people to go into teaching. But teaching is a profesiion, like nursing, medicine, etc. The BEST professionals in it also have a calling -- to help EVERY child in their classes reach his/her greatest potential. They mentor and inspire kids. They collaborate like crazy. They innovate constantly, as new materials and technology become available.
But I don't think that Finland gets "the best and the brightest" only because it "values teachers." I think it gets the best teachers (whether they are the brightest or not) because it values great teaching. In a truly professional environment, where outstanding teaching is both expected and valued -- folks like the two teachers I mentioned above either develop the passion and the skills to teach ALL their kids -- or they leave, because lazy "teaching to the best and ignoring the rest" is just not tolerated, any more than hospitals would tolerate nurses or doctors who ignored the patients whose conditions they didn't like and feel like treating.
Yeah, the fix was in. Do they realize that there are many who are content with letting lazy sleeping dogs lie? Apparently. I would hope those that exhibited a touch of conscience, are relieved to have an excuse to bow the hell out of this charade and get back to real efforts to expertly teach children.