What Happened to the Vote in New York?

Without fair voting, we have no democracy. Without a fair democracy, we see special interests ruling our political establishment, and we have an oligarchy. We have witnessed this firsthand as billionaires use their money and influence to push untested Common Core curriculum on our children, to push forward an education reform agenda that threatens to fire teachers and close schools, to push us closer and closer to going over the cliff and destroying public schools in favor of a privatized system that will be the next great profit market for the 1%. We have hope that our votes will matter, that we will be able to elect representatives who will listen to our voices. This is why each and every election, each and every vote, matters and we must zealously guard against those who would rob us of this constitutional right. 

I have voted in New York State for more years than I'd like to admit.  Never have I seen the irregularities that occurred during the recent presidential primary. What was most striking to me, is that the problems were not confined to a single type of error, but that there were multiple levels, different types, of errors that had the apparent singular effect of vote suppression.Yet when people discuss the events of April 19, comments are usually focused on the purging of voter rolls in Brooklyn and miss the bigger picture. Here is why I believe this to be a larger pattern of vote manipulation and suppression:

• Voter purges were widespread and not limited to Brooklyn, though that is where the largest number of voters were wiped from all records, with reports of entire buildings and city blocks being erased. Media reports try to placate us with the public shaming and possible firing of the person held responsible. Diane Haslett-Rudiano, the Brooklyn Board of Election's Chief Clerk, apparently "skipped a step" in cleaning the rolls of those who had died or moved, leading to a "chain reaction" and wiping out 102,717 active voters. I do hope someone is investigating her financials to see if she has received any unexplained windfalls recently, because she has had this job for a number of years and it is hard for me to believe she could make such an egregious error without noticing her folly. News reports also tell us that this is "the only county that lost voters," in an apparent attempt to have us disregard the scattered reports coming from other areas. A friend of mine in Queens tweeted that her 90-year old Democratic mother, who votes regularly, had been purged from the rolls. One of my friends in White Plain witnessed a woman, who had proof of her registration with her, being denied the chance to vote and also being denied an affidavit ballot.
• There were widespread reports coming from throughout the state, of voters whose party had been changed without their knowledge, including those who upon investigation discovered a forged signature on the form making the change. A friend of mine in Albany witnessed her neighbor being turned away because her registration had been changed without her consent. This is the same pattern of election fraud that occurred in Arizona, and my prediction is that this will continue to be a problem in all states with closed primaries (the only states where such a change would matter). How could this happen, and how could it be a pattern carried on from one state to another? How could forged signatures appear on forms that are filed with the Board of Elections? From these reports we can deduce that someone is hacking our political databases, doesn't that demand an immediate all-out FBI investigation? What political candidate or party benefits from these changes? Is there a way to track the hack? Are our voter records vulnerable? We know that in December 2015 a whitehat hacker discovered 191 million voter registration records on the internet, left open to anyone. An estimated 300GB of nationwide voter data that included name, address, phone number and party affiliation would have made it very convenient for those who wish to orchestrate a targeted attack on voter registrations. 
• New York's archaic voting laws require people who wish to change their party to vote in the primary to have done so in October, six whole months before the primary date. That means that if in March you discovered, as so many did, that your party had been changed without your knowledge - you were out of luck pressing for a correction. This was partly the basis for a lawsuit filed by Election Justice USA on behalf of New York voters.
• As if the voter registration/records problem is not enough, there are also reports of polling places in Queens and Brooklyn that were still not open HOURS after their 6 am opening time. Those who had to vote before work were out of luck. There were reports (at least two) of polling sites in Queens that had NO WORKING VOTING MACHINES, and one where there WERE NO MACHINES AT ALL. At these sites people were forced to make out a paper ballot and put them in a box, hoping someone would be honest enough to eventually feed them into a scanner in the right way and without tampering with the vote. There were also reports of people being notified of the wrong polling location. The locations of several polling places on the upper West side were changed.
• Mailers that went out in March from the Brooklyn Board of Elections told people that the primary date was in September.
• Election officials at the polling places gave out incorrect information. Some were told they did not have to vote for delegates. Erroneous information on the ballot in some locations told voters to select six delegates, when Bernie Sanders only had five. This would have persuaded voters to vote for one of the Clinton delegates.

As we have been told over and over, when voter turnout is high, progressive candidates have a better chance of winning. Voter suppression works in the interest of the status quo establishment, whether you are a Democrat, or a Republican. Though there were admittedly some issues with Republican voters, the majority of problems seem to have occurred in those who identified themselves as Democrats, and from the reports posted on the internet, many of those voters were Bernie Sanders supporters. Brooklyn, where most of these problems were centered, was Bernie's home ground and a place where he had overwhelming support. 28,000 people gathered at Prospect Park in Brooklyn to see Bernie speak, with a reported additional 20,000+ overflow. Don't tell me that voter suppression did not have something to do with the outcome of the race, at least in Brooklyn and perhaps in Queens as well. If you truly believe that, I've got a Brooklyn bridge I can sell you.

UPDATE April 24 2016: Regarding my comment that someone should investigate the financials of Diane Haslett-Rudiano: I was intrigued by internet reports that in 2014 she sold an upper West side property to Dana Lowey Luttway, the daughter of Representative Nita Lowey. Lowey is a Democrat and also a superdelegate pledged to Clinton. I did some light investigating and found some troubling things that deserve to be thoroughly investigated (Preet Bharara where are you?). First of all, the property, on 118 West 76th Street, stood abandoned for decades and was an eyesore that the neighbors called "the rat house." Secondly, according to Zillow the average price for similar housing (that are not rat houses) in that area is $4.7 million. Yet, Haslett-Rudiano sold this one for $6.6 million!  

Another puzzling piece. Haslett-Rudiano was involved as owner of another property, at 44 West 73rd Street. The property was reportedly sold to Kojo Global Property Developers. The ownership records are very confusing. Haslett-Rudiano bought the building, which was close to foreclosure, in 1975. A local blog gave an apparently erroneous report not too long ago that Haslett-Rudiano was seeking $5 million for the building, but others said she no longer owned it. The history of this property is very murky and confusing, with various owners and corporations claiming to own it and apparently two deeds created - one for the land and one for the building. John Kojo Zi was indicted on June 18, 2015 for deed transfer fraud. Apparently his MO is to go in and steal abandoned properties right out from under the legal owner, register it in someone else's name, and then buy the property from the new owner of record. Something else to investigate...

..

Why This Education Activist is Voting For Bernie

I think most people will agree with me that the energy and activism in this presidential primary is unlike any in recent history.  It has also increasingly polarized the Democratic party.  As a retired teacher, I stood by aghast as both teacher unions, the NEA and the AFT, made early endorsements for Hillary.  They both claimed that they polled their membership, but I do not know of one person, in active service or retired, who participated in such a poll.

Why am I an education activist?  I have been a Democrat for most of my life.  I engaged in sit-ins against the Vietnam War when I was in high school, planted a tree for the first Earth Day, marched against unsafe nuclear plants at the time of Three Mile Island, and more recently protested fracking.  I first heard of the desire to privatize schools in the early 90's, but did not at that time realize what a threat it was nor how bad it could get.  Who could envision a world in which students sat for tests that were deliberately designed to fail them, designed to close schools and fire teachers?  Who could envision a world where teachers new to the profession had the cards stacked against them in a crap-shoot lottery of test scores and junk science evaluation math that could destroy an entire career in as little as two years?  Who could possibly have seen the harm that could come to children whose academic self-esteem is irreparably harmed because they are told they are failures by a measure that is grade levels beyond their ability?  Or that there would be generations of students who would not know the joy of learning, who would not have access to arts and play in school, who would be focused on test prep instead of authentic, engaging lessons and projects?  That for-profit charter schools would be allowed to take valuable space and financial resources away from public schools who need it the most, and not be held in the least way accountable for what they do with our finances or our children? That there would be a world in which "school choice" would be the mantra of those seeking the complete and total end of public schools, and with it the diversion of our public dollars to those who have rich portfolios.  Yet this is the nightmare world that has been unleashed and like the proverbial frog in the pot, we watched it come forth so slowly that we barely noticed, until the day the pot began boiling.

So back to Bernie.  As the events in education unfolded, teachers understood that the real problem behind the so-called "failing schools" scenario was income inequality.  The schools who needed financial resources the most were denied them, to the point that they could no longer offer a quality education to their students.  We know that the problem is not "bad teachers" as they would have the public believe.  Are there some teachers who could benefit from mentoring and other support?  Of course.  Are there some who should be removed?  As in every profession, the answer is yes, but there is already a system in place for that.  The problem is real and tangible inequality, yet this reality is treated as if it were an invisible non-factor by all those who seek "education reform."  The problem of inequality is caused by wealth that is accumulating to the top 1% of society, at the expense of the poor and middle class.  How does that affect schools?  When I was a student I learned about Maslow's pyramid - that self-actualization (learning and growing) cannot take place until the basic needs, like food and safety, of the individual are met. Have you ever tried to pay attention to a lecture or tv show when your stomach was growling, or when you were frightened?  Yet children in our schools come through the doors hungry and frightened.  Many are homeless.  Others have parents working so many jobs that they have no supervision at home.  Clothing is inadequate for the weather, health care negligible. These children are living harsh lives, and become hardened themselves, to the point of anger and apathy.

The point is, that unless someone desires to make real change in that inequality, to funnel money back into the middle class and poor, to raise the level of existence of those who struggle and falter, then nothing that is done will save our public schools.  Nothing.  And if our public schools go, then our very culture of democracy and all of the ideals this country has been built on, will go with them.  We will be taught what the wealthy want us to know, and that is all.  We will be indoctrinated by a "competency-based, individualized learning" model that has students sitting in front of computers for all or most of their learning time, while every action they take is data mined and recorded -- with the intent of knowing students better so they can be controlled and manipulated easier, so that they can be targeted with products for their consumption.  If you think this is a sci-fi pipe dream, do some research.  See how some states are already controlling curriculum and rewriting history courses.  See the elimination of arts and recess.  See what those who seek a profit from our children say as they develop "anytime/anywhere learning pathways" and implement policy changes that will severely restrict the experiences we need in order to become critical thinkers.  Bernie seeks that economic change, from plans to tax the wealthy and offer free public college, to the raising of the minimum wage to $15 (not $12, as Hillary has stated).  Bernie seeks to build our infrastructure with a substantial one trillion dollar investment -- that infrastructure includes our crumbling school buildings as well as our roads, bridges, airports, etc.

So if you are worried about Common Core, good for you. It is one of those reforms perpetrated by the wealthy, without real input from teachers and educational psychologists.  But Common Core is just the tip of the iceberg.  Without real, substantive economic change, Common Core may go away, but it will just be replaced by something even worse as the myth of "failing schools" continues.

Though Hillary has given lip-service to the support of public schools, regretfully I must inform you I've heard the same promises from Obama.  Obama has been as destructive to public education as any president in history.  Yes, I said it.  That doesn't mean I haven't applauded as he has sought change in other areas and it doesn't mean that I believe he has accomplished nothing during his presidency.  But the truth is the truth.  Under Obama, education reform took over.  Bush's No Child Left Behind became Obama's Race to the Top, which not only furthered NCLB's goals but put them to the forefront as teachers were evaluated and their livelihoods threatened, all based on faulty tests and a value-added evaluation methodology that they could not help but know was faulty in its conception and design.  One can only surmise that the plan was to fire teachers, so that they could be replaced by computers and "facilitators."  They furthered the growth of charter schools that are not accountable, nor transparent, yet are treated to a massive influx of public monies.  They turned a deaf ear to the pleas of educators and researchers from across the nation.

I am sorry to disappoint teachers who are "wearing the H" but Hillary will do more of the same, "Obama 2.0" so to speak.  She is entrenched in the reformer camp.  Her campaign manager, John Podesta, is one of those at the front of the education reform movement. Read Steven Singer's assessment  https://gadflyonthewallblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/08/hillary-clintons-campaign-manager-is-a-longtime-corporate-education-reformer/ for more on Podesta.  She has backed education reform since her time in Arkansas.  She and Bill both fully backed charter schools during his administration.  She supported the end of tenure and wanted to make it easier to fire teachers.  When asked during the Flint debate whether she believed unions "protected bad teachers" (again perpetrating the myth of the bad teacher being responsible for failing schools), instead of giving accurate information in response to this loaded question, she said, "...we've got to take a look at this because it is one of the most common criticisms."  In the November Town Hall in South Carolina, she seemed to turn around on charters, stating that they do not take the hardest to teach children.  She immediately received flack from the education reform/charter movement and then fell silent on the issue.  Her website has no mention of charters.  Has she evolved?  She says so, but I no longer listen to campaign promises.  I look to past actions to decide, and her history of flip-flopping is too troublesome for me to ignore.

Bernie has come out strongly against privatization of any public service, from prisons to schools.  He is against taking public dollars for private schools.  He supports "public charter schools" that do not seek to profitize our children.  This is a huge distinction.  The problem, though is that charter schools use the labels of private or public as it suits them, claiming privacy when asked for transparency in auditing, and claiming they are public when applying for funds or seeking space in public schools. Bernie is also very pro-union, the only candidate who has actually marched in a picket line.

Though education (and therefore economic inequality) is my number one issue, I am also very much behind Bernie in his commitment to measures that will combat climate change, his no-fracking position, and his health care reform.  One of my sons has spent most of his adult life without health insurance, because he could not afford it.  The plan that he was offered at work had very high monthly premiums, but also an outlandish yearly deductible that he would (outside of a prolonged health crisis) never be able to meet.   My daughter and her husband cannot afford health insurance for him (she has it through work but the cost is prohibitive for her spouse).  That same daughter is deeply in debt for her education, yet pays higher interest rates on her school loans than most people pay on their mortgages. So yes, these are issues that I believe in, issues that affect my family and their future.

So, I am with Bernie to the end.  I refuse to believe (or listen) to most of what the media tells me about his chances.  I am with him because he is right, I am with him because he is ethical, I am with him because he wants to end Citizens United so that we can take back our government, and I am with him because he is our one best chance to stop the education reformers who want to destroy our public schools.  I invite you to research his positions, and join me in the political revolution that will give us a Future to Believe In.

Sad Day for Teachers in NY

My response to an editorial by the Albany Times Union, stating it is "Time to End the School Fight." No.  It is not.  Here's why:

Oh goodness.  Where do I start?  TU Editors, how would you like your job to hang on how well citizens understand your articles?  They could take a test to determine your overall effectiveness as an editor.  We'll make the test impossibly hard, with reading levels years beyond the ability/age of your readers, and there will be no transparency so you will never get to see the test. Oh and answers on the test will be "equally plausible" choices (see EngageNY test directions). Don't worry, we'll notify the public that 70% of people will fail this test.  But that won't save your job.

The tests are designed for failure.  In my last response to an editorial here, I said they were calibrated to a 1500+ on the SAT.  Upon more research I found it is actually a score of 1630, higher than the score College Board uses (the 1500 number) to define college readiness.  Under the Governor's direction, State ED and Regents inflated those scores impossibly high so that 70% of our students were guaranteed to fail.  How did they know that ahead of time?  70% of SAT test-takers fail to get a 1630.  Then just in case, they set the cut scores after the tests are taken to give the Governor his failure rate and fire teachers.

THE GOAL of our Governor, and his hedge fund privatizers, is to use these tests to demolish our public schools and teaching force.  Our high-quality master's degree teachers are to be fired and replaced with lower wage workers or "facilitators" who watch children learn online.  It is happening in other states (see Chicago for ex).  And now the fight has come to New York.  The reason we have an abundance of "effective" teachers in NY is because this is one of the few states to require a master's degree, tough entrance exams for certification, and ongoing professional development - not to mention three years of probation on the job.  Are there a few ineffective teachers out there that need to be removed?  Sure.  That's why in 2008 the legislature made it easier to get rid of bad teachers, and it is working.  But that's not good enough because they want the whole system gone.  You don't get rid of a quality workforce unless that is your intent.  Fire teachers, close public schools, and replace them with privately operated, for-profit charter schools.  Oh, and let's not forget - charter teachers are not held accountable by these same "teacher evaluations."  And their financial accounts are not examined thoroughly as are our public school accounts.

What our governor bribed his way to with our democratically elected legislature, is that our NYS teachers now have to fight their way through tests every year to keep their job.  Oh, you're buying the soundbyte that there will be no evaluation percentage tied to a test?  Yes, that's true.  No percentage.  In the new matrix that is proposed, score TRUMPS everything. You have a bad class or teach to a population that can't show growth on testing (special education teachers, English as second language teachers, gifted teachers, teachers in impoverished communities) and you are gone after two years.  Gone.  It doesn't matter how loudly you are extolled in observations or how well you serve your students.  You.  Are.  Gone.

And for new teachers - even worse.  You have to, as Peter Greene stated, "Get snake eyes on the VAM dice" every year for three years out of the four.  If those numbers don't line up for you - you are gone after four years.  If you somehow miraculously get effectives the first three years and then have a rough class the fourth year and get a developing - well as Assemblywoman Nolan said, "you get another bite at the apple" for a fifth year.  But if that is not effective, you are gone.  No recourse. All the years and expense to get a master's degree so you can put your passion for helping children into a teaching career?  ALL HOPE GONE! You will never teach in NY again. But you will still be saddled with school debt. Enrollment in NY teacher prep programs is already down 20-50%.  What will happen when we can't find teachers to teach our kids?

All this WILL double down on test prep and hurt our children. Kids are already pulling out their hair or eyelashes, deliberately scratching themselves, shaking, crying, and vomiting during tests.  Students with identified disabilities, some of whom are tested at grade level, no matter what their intellectual ability sometimes cry through the test. I personally witnessed it. Enough.

This is child abuse.  This is teacher abuse.  This is war against those who see our children as a profit market.  No we will not give up.  We cannot.  REFUSE THE TESTS.

Sad Day for Schools in NY

Today was a very sad day for public schools in NY.  The legislature went along with most of what Governor Cuomo advocated as his "education reforms," really his thinly disguised plan to "break public schools" and fire teachers.

Most of us who care about our schools, our teachers, and our students are grieving today. We are having a hard time understanding how legislators could ignore the public outpouring of thousands of people marching and chanting against these reforms.  We are having a hard time understanding how money can buy a government, how corruption can win over democracy.  We will continue to fight.  I posted the following email, which was sent to my State legislators, Senator George Amedore and Assemblyman Angelo Santabarbara, today. It received a lot of attention in some of the facebook groups in which it was posted, so I am including it here in my blog.  Feel free to share, use or adapt however it suits you.  If I sound angry, I am.  But we can't get so angry that we stop working.  Keep fighting.  We have no other choice.

"I am asking as your constituent that you vote no on the proposed budget that is coupled with Cuomo's education 'reforms,' that will surely destroy public education in our state. Local control of our schools is NOT for sale and we expect you, as our representatives, to make sure of that.

A supermajority of NY voters have rejected Cuomo's plan for our schools. The deal that has been announced this morning, is simply unacceptable. Tying teacher evaluations to tests, instead of meaningful assessment and feedback, will lead to the firing of quality teachers. A plan to fire them after two years of unsatisfactory test ratings, based on an INVALID TEST and VAM that has been thoroughly debunked and called 'junk science,' by professional statisticians, education researchers, and professionals is nothing short of 'CRAZY.' Cuomo's disdain for teachers is palpable and his tirade makes no sense unless he wants the destruction of our public schools, firing of all union teachers, and replacement by nonunion lower quality workers. As a retired teacher, and a grandparent, I will not stand for this and thousands upon thousands of New Yorkers agree with me.

Those teachers most at risk are the ones we need the most. Special education teachers selflessly give to our neediest students. Because these students are often tested at grade level (regardless of their intellectual age) these teachers will never show progress on test evaluations. Their students show progress in a thousand different ways, but these ways are not going to show on a grade-level test. Also at risk, teachers of English Language Learners. Only 3% of these students show proficiency on the test because - duh - they do not speak the language yet. And gifted teachers or teachers of highly able students in excellent districts that have won national awards - these students often max out the tests and so do not show growth. Teachers in high-poverty communities, where psychological and social problems abound - these students are not going to show growth unless they have the resources of well-funded, well-staffed community schools where they receive social services as well as instruction.

A plan for 'drive-by' evaluators who do not understand the community in which a teacher works, and are at the control of our New York State gestapo-like State Ed Department which is filled with right-wing privatizers, is not acceptable. Your vote for this is not acceptable. My tax dollars being spent on evaluators who will demolish our teaching force is not acceptable.

If I sound outraged, it's because I am. Outraged and just plain flabbergasted that an unethical, corrupt, bully of a politician who has allowed hedge fund billionaires to buy his platform - that he can get his way with our own elected representatives is maddening. I am outraged that you have not stood up against this in a louder way, and so I am asking you to Vote No! on the budget with these "reforms." A good budget that is late is a million times better than a bad budget on time.

I have phoned to request a meeting with your office and I hope to hear from your scheduler in the near future."

Refuse the Test

When I was in third grade, I took the Iowa standardized tests.  Within a short amount of time, we received the results in a teacher-parent conference.  Because my mom was told that I needed "a challenge," she immediately bought me the Encyclopedia Brittanica.  I read them for hours, lingering on zoology, nature, and history entries.  When my interest started to wane, a set of Greek Mythology books appeared.  I spent hours curled up in a chair, reading and pondering each myth.  Then, a set of classics – Tom Sawyer, Black Beauty, Little Women, Treasure Island, and others…all books that broadened my world and my background knowledge.  I was given access to a typewriter so I could write my own newspaper.  My zest for learning, reading, and writing exists to this day.  My guess is that little of that would have happened at home without the feedback that was received because of a standardized test.  It quite possibly changed my life.

Fast forward to today, because the tests our children take in school are nothing like the Iowa’s.  Here are my best reasons (there are lots more) why refusing the test is the right thing to do, for your student, for your schools, and for the teachers in our state.  

#1.  Analysis of the text and questions on the Pearson-created exams show that reading lexile levels are sometimes three, four, or five grades beyond the student's age.  Kevin Glynn, a former test developer with Pearson and NYSED, does an outstanding assessment of third grade ELA tests here.  Russ Walsh, a literacy expert, has found similar reading levels on the PARCC ELA and math tests.

#2.  According to a teacher test instruction manual on the EngageNY website, questions for the third-grade ELA test are written with "equally plausible" answer choices.  What that means, is that students have to use abstract reasoning skills to discern between answers to pick the "one best choice."  Cognitive research based on the work of Jean Piaget states that abstract reasoning does not develop until age 12.  Simply, these type of questions are not developmentally appropriate for those under 12.

#3.  Even if the tests were written fairly and on grade level, which they are not, there is the huge matter of cut scores being manipulated.  According to a letter written by 500 New York State principals, "New York State Education Department used SAT scores of 560 in Reading, 540 in Writing and 530 in mathematics, as the college readiness benchmarks to help set the “passing” cut scores on the 3-8 New York State exams. These NYSED scores, totaling 1630, are far higher than the College Board’s own college readiness benchmark score of 1550. By doing this, NYSED has carelessly inflated the 'college readiness' proficiency cut scores for students as young as nine years of age."

As if that were not enough, cut scores are manipulated after the tests are scored to give the state the results they want.  John King announced in 2012 that 70% of students would fail the test, and after cut scores were set, that's what he got.  Last year, cut scores were adjusted downward very slightly in order to show a small amount of "improvement" from Common Core reforms.  The bell curve that they use to set these scores means that NO MATTER HOW WELL STUDENTS DO, there will be a bottom standard deviation, a middle (which is the average), and a top.  Even if all students scored above 90 on the tests, they would still rank them with a bottom 16%.  And NYSED adjusts that bell - to get the deviations they want.  The main point, is that scores are worked by NYSED to prove whatever they want them to prove.  And right now we seem to have a governor and a State Education Department, that want to prove public schools are failing, so they can privatize and push their charter school agenda.  

#4.  There is no transparency.  Pearson protects the questions to maximize their profit, even though NYS has paid for the questions.  A test cannot be valid without transparency.  A test cannot "inform or assist instruction,” if the item analysis is never given to teachers.  Test creators cannot be held accountable for poorly written questions and misleading answer choices if we never see the questions.   Anyone who tells you that these tests are to help your teachers teach students better, is blowing hot air.  It is simply not true.

#5. Pearson embeds product placement within the tests.  New York State Ed claimed this was because they were “authentic text.”  Not true.  I did research on the 2012 exams that proved a financial interest between Pearson and the companies that were mentioned.  The product mentions are disjointed and do not flow with the text.  Have you ever read a children’s story where the waiter dropped MUGS Root Beer?  No. 

#6.  According to the NYSED ELA Educator Guide, provocative and "emotionally charged" passages are used in the tests.  Normally, a teacher would have a class discussion around such passages and help students to analyze various perspectives and come to an understanding about the meaning of such literature. Our State Ed Department, however, has a gag order preventing teachers from discussing questions, even after the test is completed.  What this means, is that students never get to ask questions about this content and therefore never get a chance to pursue full understanding.  This has the potential for skewing student opinion and could potentially be manipulated for a political purpose.  We have a right to know what our students, the captive audience, are being led to believe.

#7.  Students are being data mined by the tests.  As students complete the tests, personal information, and each click during the time they are online, records data points on the student.   In OH in 2013, the state contracted with PARCC and that contract allowed PARCC to ask personal noneducational questions about the lives of students.  Questions like, “Does anyone smoke in your house?”  Or “Do your parents get along?”  True this is an extreme case, but federal FERPA laws are being weakened to allow data collection on children, and the sharing of that confidential information to “third parties."  Pearson also apparently monitors the social networks of students before, during, and after the test to check for “test breaches” or “brand mentions,” as apparent during a recent event in NJ. This is not okay. 

#8.  The tests are too long.  NY Reading and Math tests in 2014 took about 7 hours.  In comparison, the GRE and SAT takes less than 4 hours, and the MCAT for medical school – about five hours.  Test fatigue becomes a factor in student performance.  The length of the exams also leads to greater student stress.

#9.  Teachers are unfairly assessed using test results, and according to Cuomo's education reform proposals, may lose their jobs if rated "ineffective" for two years in a row.  These assessments are produced using what is called VAM - Value-Added Measurement.  VAM has been called "junk science," and has been criticized by the American Statistical Association and in a joint statement by the American Educational Research Association and the National Academy of Education.  Fully one-third of teachers vacillate from one effectiveness rating to another, from year to year.  There is no rhyme or reason to the outcomes, and it does not do the job of giving verifiable feedback regarding a teacher's aptitude for their job.  Our best knowledge tells us that teachers have at most, only a 1-14% influence on standardized test results of their students.  VAM results are highly correlated with the poverty of the district, with teachers in impoverished communities receiving the lowest evaluations. Teachers most at risk of being fired based on faulty test scores, are those who are most needed - special education, teachers of English Language Learners, and of course, teachers in impoverished communities.  What new teacher will want to go into these jobs, knowing they have absolutely no job security.

#10.  Schools are labeled failures and targeted for takeover by the state, absolving locally elected boards.  School districts that have been taken over in other states have been doled out to for-profit charter investors, with little oversight or accountability.  There are many cases of charter fraud nationwide.  Cuomo's plans for "receivership," will eliminate local control.

#11.  As teachers strive to retain their jobs, more and more emphasis will go to test prep, reducing the amount of time that students can be engaged in projects, authentic assessment, and creative activities.  What do you remember most about school?  Taking a test, or perhaps a medieval fair your class acted out?  Sadly, there is little time left in the schedule for the all-day learning and enrichment experiences that my own now-grown children have as memories.  Test prep is crowding out the humanities and arts - social studies and even science are relegated to second or third fiddle status, with classes usurped for the almighty test prep.  Life is more than just ELA and Math.  So much more. And our children are missing out.

#11.  Perhaps the most compelling reason in my mind – and I think about my grandchildren – is the emotional/psychological component.  What does it do to our youngest learners to sit and take a test that is much too difficult for them?  Children know when they “don’t get” something.  Do they feel like failures?  Do they feel like they are letting their teacher or the school down?  Do they blame themselves and believe they “aren’t smart enough?”  These are questions that I know are first in the minds of parents and grandparents, because we want our children to grow up as confident learners who know they can grow, and who have the motivation to try.

For all these reasons and many more, REFUSE THE TESTS.  Starve the beast.   It may be our one best hope for our public schools and our children.  Write a letter, and/or send a note in with your child stating that they refuse the test and their test should be scored as a "999" refusal.  For more information, and forms, visit NYSAPE.

New York's Backdoor Voucher Proposals

Both the Republican-led NY State Senate, and Governor Cuomo, have proposed an Education Investment Tax Credit for this year’s budget.  Cuomo’s plan would give a tax credit of 75% of any contributions made to school scholarship funds, while the Senate plan would credit 90%.  What this means, is that individuals or corporations could give money to public schools, private nonprofit schools, and educational scholarship organizations.  Under Cuomo’s plan, any qualified contribution would net the donor back 75% of their gift on their taxes, up to one million dollars.  Basically, it lets individuals or corporations take money away from the state treasury, and requires taxpayers to bear the burden of a three-to-one matched donation.  The worry is that, even though Cuomo’s version of the proposal also includes public schools as qualified recipients, the scheme will divert tax dollars to private schools and thereby threaten the money available for public schools.

A criticism of both the Senate’s plan and Cuomo’s proposal, is that the term “education programs” is much too vague.  The definition of a “non-public school,” though making a point of including schools that are only not-for-profit, defines such a school as one that “provides instruction at one or more locations to an eligible pupil.”  An, as in one.  So could this be used for the purpose of home schooling as well?  Imagine if this were the case – everyone’s family members donating a scholarship to the home school, and receiving back 75% of what they gifted. 

And what about those charter schools?  Though Cuomo’s plan is worded to leave those that make a profit out of the picture, what about charters that have been calling themselves public schools?  Could charter schools rebrand themselves to fit the criteria of non-public not-for-profit schools while still paying hefty salaries to their CEO's? 

The massive lobbying for vouchers and tax credits across the nation is headed by the “Coalition for Opportunity in Education,” with hedge fund billionaire Bruce Kovner at the helm.  Even though the name of the organization sounds all social justicey, I rather doubt that they have altruistic motives.  The aim of all those who push for privatization is nothing less than the destruction of public schools.

Perhaps the most bothersome issue at play in this scheme is that in the case of religious schools, this “backdoor voucher” system is a way to bypass the constitutional principle of separation of church and state, with the state subsidizing a parochial education.  Political Research Associates reports that “In Florida and Pennsylvania, the two states with the largest private school choice programs (both are corporate tax credit programs or neovouchers), many of the students who receive neovoucher money attend fundamentalist Christian, conservative evangelical, or nondenominational schools.”  In Florida, 81.5% of the scholarships go to religious schools.  While many of those schools are excellent schools, some are Christian fundamentalist, teaching Young Earth creationism, climate change denial, or revisionist history.  Some schools openly teach hostility to other religions. 

Alan Singer of Hofstra University says, “Religious groups could charge the state for all sorts of “non-religious” services and outsource delivery to group members who would then donate money back to the organizations to subsidize their religious programs.” 

Of course, the tax credit is strongly endorsed by Orthodox Jewish and Catholic groups that are seeking to bolster their school funding in times of waning student enrollment.  Though I have sympathy for the plight of parochial schools, it is clear that the intent of our constitution is to separate church and state, and there are good reasons for that.  Should our tax dollars go to teach religion?  I think not. 

As Diane Ravitch warns, “Do not be fooled: this is not a conservative plan.  This is a radical plan.  It will send public dollars to backwoods churches and ambitious entrepreneurs.”

Open Letter to President Obama

This post was originally written on my personal blog in December 2014.  I never received an answer to my letter, which was mailed.

Dear President Obama:

Why are you taking New York State’s failing educational leadership into your administration?

I am one of your supporters, though I do not agree with everything that you do.  I think you are a good man and leader, and I voted for you in both elections.  I thank you for your service, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart.

However, on your educational policy and administration, you unfortunately get a failing grade from this retired teacher, as well as from many other educators.  The reason I am writing to you today is the recent announcement that you will take NYS Commissioner John King into your administration.  My question is, WHY?

As Commissioner of NYS Education, King has had an administration full of controversy and failure.  Criticisms of his reign are many.  Foremost, the members of the NYS United Teachers (NYSUT) voted No Confidence and called for his removal in January of 2014.  Their press release stated that his rollout of Common Core had failed… “The commissioner has pursued policies that repeatedly ignore the voices of parents and educators who have identified problems and called on him to move more thoughtfully,” said NYSUT President Richard C. Iannuzzi. 

King’s response to criticism has been defensive and contentious, proving that he has little ability to listen and learn from others, and few political skills.  When criticized that he was unwilling to listen to the voices of those who had issues with the too-rapid and botched rollout of core curriculum, as well as testing that caused the “failure” of  70% of NYS students, King scheduled parent forums in October 2013.  When parents attended the forums in large numbers and pressed him for answers that he did not have, his fear of contention caused him to cancel additional planned events.  Parents were astounded at his lack of respect for the input he himself had sought, and the NYS Allies for Public Education, an advocacy group of over 42 parent organizations, called for his resignation.

He is also not an effective manager or leader.  He led the effort to create the EngageNY core-related curriculum, but once more instead of planning an effective process by involving teachers and pedagogical leaders, he funneled $12.9 million dollars of RTTT money to private corporations.  The lessons have been widely criticized by educators, students and parents.  Even NYSED has acknowledged that the lessons are weak, and they have now backpedaled and created a plan for teachers to revamp the curriculum for 2015-16.  In addition, directives and materials that have come to educators from his office have been filled with grammatical and other errors.

He is the second NYS education official to take a job with your administration this year – Amy McIntosh, who oversaw teachers evaluations, is now a deputy assistant secretary.  Under the individuals that you have taken into your camp, New York State schools and students have suffered, and educator morale is at an all-time low. 

Most vociferous in praise for Commissioner King is the StudentsFirstNY, a pro-charter reform group that seeks to privatize education.  In spite of the fact that Commissioner King lived within the boundaries of one of the best public schools in New York State (the school and staff  have received numerous national recognitions for its excellence), King chose to send his own children to a private school that does not require the abusive testing he foisted on NYS students.

President Obama, I am very disappointed at your apparent lack of care for public education, and that you have apparently bought into the pro-charter, pro-privatization line of propaganda.  The fact that you are filling your administration with individuals who are pro-charter and who by all appearances are most deliberately causing the public education system to fail, causes me great concern.  The present system of testing is abusive to students.  Common Core curriculum has many errors and is not developmentally sound for students.  The VAM and APPR evaluation model for teachers is flawed and I have no doubt that will be proven so in court cases, but my fear is that before it is, we will lose too many valuable prospective and in-service teachers to recover easily from the blow.  Some states have already begun teacher recruitment efforts in other countries.  Please educate yourself about the true needs of public education before your administration leaves a negative legacy of damage that will take generations to become fully known.

What Education Warriors Can Learn From NY Fracktivists

This post was originally written and published on my personal blog, on December, 2014.  This has been edited.

On December 17, 2014, the anti-fracking community received an early holiday gift with the announcement that New York State would ban fracking.  This victory was an astounding turnaround from the situation just a few years ago.  There have been some news articles that have analyzed how/why this success occurred.  It made me wonder how those lessons could be applied in support of public education, which has been under attack from both pro-privatization government and business interests.

1.  Many small grassroots anti-fracking organizations sprang up in New York.  They had the good sense to unite their efforts to work together with not only state groups, but national groups as well.  We are also seeing this in the fight for public education, with outstanding groups such as the Badass Teachers Association, Save our Schools, United Opt Out, New York State Allies for Public Education, Alliance for Quality Education, etc.  So far, however, AFT and NEA, along with state organizations like NYSUT, have not matched the efforts of the smaller organizations and have not reached out to create a united front.  In fact, they have accepted money and defended Common Core. In my opinion, a change in union tactics and/or leadership is essential to combat the money and political clout of the reformers.  Political change does not happen until opposition becomes a united movement.

2.  Activation of the public is essential, and is a direct result of grassroots efforts.  This was particularly difficult in the movement against fracking because at the start of the movement, the majority of citizens did not even know what fracking was.  There was much scientific and research-based information that had to be disseminated.  Some of this information was/is difficult for the layman to understand.  Documentaries like Greenland, which were screened in homes and small cinemas, as well as on social media and video channels, were essential to the building of this understanding.  Even The Simpsons had an episode where their water was on fire, indicating that anti-fracking points were being integrated into our cultural media.  Once people understood, they began protesting.  Signs on lawns, rallies, and (thanks to the coordinated efforts of organizations) ONGOING continual protests at Cuomo appearances also helped to spread the word.  Social media was essential and letters, petitions, phone calls and/or visits to legislators were vitally important.  In the public education fight, most citizens do not understand what is really happening in our schools, and misinformation that comes from media attacks, teacher-bashing, "failing schools" soundbytes, etc., has convinced many that teachers are to blame for the "failure" of the public school system.  We are somewhat hampered by (understandable) teacher reticence to speak out, because they are in fear for their livelihood.  Creating a new public and social understanding of the web of deceit and misinformation that has been deliberately and carefully crafted by reformers is difficult, but not impossible.  Allying with parents in this struggle is essential.

3.  The movement did an excellent job of supporting the efforts of small governments to resist fracking.  Towns and cities passed prohibitive zoning ordinances that would keep fracking out of their communities.  When big oil and gas money and lawyers descended on them, communities were helped with fundraising efforts that enabled them to defend their resolutions in court, and they won.  This was a "pivot moment" in the fight.  We need local governments, school boards, and school districts to speak out and pass resolutions against the so-called reforms that are destroying our schools.  Defenders of public education need to be willing to go to court over unfair school/teacher evaluation procedures, civil rights violations that occur in testing (see http://badassteachers.blogspot.com/2014/12/bats-send-open-letter-to-secretary.html), unfair funding of public schools, and practices that favor for-profit corporations. A true partnership with teacher unions, public education alliances, local school boards, parent groups, and school districts should develop that would financially support the crucial legal plays that need to occur.  Everyone who is a part of the pro-public education movement should be attending and participating in their local school by attending board meetings, as well as joining and working with any number of activist groups.  We also need more representation on boards of education, parent associations, and other local government groups.

4.  Never underestimate the role of research studies, bloggers, and expert opinion. Scientific studies were crucial in combating erroneous and misleading industry studies on the "safety of fracking."  Pro-public education also has science and statistics on their side.  Studies that have decried the use of Value-Added Methodology (VAM) in teacher evaluations have been publicized, and solid evidence is building.  For example, the joint statement of the American Education Research Association and the National Academy of Education on the failure of VAM models used in teacher evaluations shows that solid research is on the side of educators (https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/getting-teacher-evaluation-right-challenge-policy-makers.pdf). Likewise, evidence that US schools are not a failure is out there (see http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/education-uprising/the-myth-behind-public-school-failure), as well as the effect of poverty on school/student performance (http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/12/10/education-poverty-international-student-assessment-column/3964529/).   Statistics and articles like this need to be relentlessly front and center in our efforts. Thankfully, the public education movement has many outstanding professionals who have produced and shared a prodigious amount of information on their blogs, and their voices are being picked up by newspapers like the Washington Post and Huffington Post.  Facebook groups are sharing this information and communicating it to the public at large.

5.  Politicians need to be called out and made to define their position in public statements.  Wherever there is a chance for questions and answers, on public record, the right questions need to be asked.  Some people feel Cuomo painted himself into a corner by continually referring (for political reasons) to the need to wait on scientific studies before making a decision on fracking.  When the science came in against fracking, he therefore could not make a case on an economic level.  Cuomo seems not to be shy about voicing his goal to destroy the "monopoly" of public education.  That is why we need to follow the money trail that is behind such positions, and publicize efforts like that of Zephyr Teachout to call out the hedge fund manipulators (https://greatschoolwars.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/corruption_in_education.pdf), as well as the recent work by the Hedge Clippers.  Wherever there is a pro-privatization fight, there is dark money and political contributions.  Groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have people working full-time to advance their privatization goals, and they often write the legislation that shows up in our state and federal system.  Where political contributions are swaying public education policy, we need to find out, and shout it out!

I believe we can win our fight to save public education.  The future of our children depends on it.