A Teacher Speaks Back to Daniels & Bennett

An Indiana AP teacher speaks back to the reckless spin of the Daniels/Bennett machine.  And look!  She actually brings data to a question about education!  Daniels lack of understanding or even concern for public education never ceases to amaze (and how Bennett can sleep at night is beyond us).  AP isn't the answer and it wasn't designed to be.  Historically, AP classes where for those top 2% students that might be ready to take college level classes.  For Daniels (and apparently Bennett) all education is for is a piece of paper that leads to a job--if that's true then rush these kids through, put them in classes that they're not ready for, and make it look good for the paper.

Cheers to this brave and thoughtful teacher!  We need more to speak out!!

AP classes don't always equal upward mobility

Lynette Enz Liberge

Posted: June 13, 2010

In a recent ceremony honoring 12 Indiana high schools for having at least 25 percent of their students pass an Advanced Placement exam, Gov. Mitch Daniels praised the schools for "preserving the opportunity for upward mobility in our state and our society." That seems an odd choice of words, given the socioeconomic data of those schools.

According to the Indiana Youth Institute, the percentage of Hoosier students receiving free and reduced lunch was 42 percent in 2009. By contrast, the school corporations of the 12 high schools in question averaged only 16 percent. In fact, seven of the 12 schools are in districts with the six lowest percentages in the state.

Similarly, the website STATS Indiana reports that in 2000 only 19 percent of our state's adults had a bachelor's degree or higher. In the same year, 58 percent of adults in Carmel had four-year degrees, as did 60 percent of adults in Zionsville and Fishers and 70 percent in West Lafayette.

The fact that these 12 high schools have such a high percentage of advanced students is laudable. It is not, however, a sign of upward mobility. At best, it shows maintenance of the status quo. It might even be argued that Martinsville High School's 9 percent AP pass rate in a district with fewer than 12 percent of adults with four-year degrees actually shows more promise of upward mobility than does Carmel's 31 percent pass rate in its more highly educated township.

I do not mean to diminish the great things going on in those 12 schools. Daniels was right to praise the schools, teachers, principals and superintendents. However, his admonition for other educators to "take notice" is not only insulting, but may ultimately be detrimental to the very students he wishes to help.

The Indiana Department of Education has a goal of doubling the number of students passing AP exams in the next two years. It wants all schools to meet the 25 percent benchmark. This is unreasonable. The governor can't simply will a mediocre student to be prepared for an AP-level class from one year to the next. The skills, knowledge, work ethic and mind-set of an advanced student develop throughout the student's life, both at home and at school.

In many school districts, a majority of parents do not value education, rarely read to their children and never help them with their homework. Just as the high expectations displayed in Zionsville and West Lafayette are passed from generation to generation, these negative patterns are also entrenched in families and in certain areas. Short of some sudden and vast societal change, these districts will not have a 25 percent AP pass rate in 20 years, much less two.

In order to meet state expectations, school administrators and counselors are likely to push students to take classes for which they are not qualified. In order not to lose those students, the teacher will be forced to move at a slower pace or water down the course, hurting those students who were prepared for the class in the first place.

(If the quality of the curriculum falls low enough, the College Board could even pull the school's right to call it an AP course, thus depriving all students of the opportunity to take it.)

Through this unrealistic goal, the state is already cheapening Indiana's AP program in word; its implementation could cheapen the program in substance.

I only wish that educators had the power that Daniels and the DOE seem to believe we do: that with a little more work, a little more training, a little more researchinto the best methods and a little more accountability, teachers can turn things around for all students. Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of many dedicated people throughout the state, the path to true upward mobility seems to be a little more difficult to find than that.

Indiana DOE Hostile to Teachers

The word is out.... Tony Bennett hates teachers.  Another embarrassment for Indiana and its reputation in education.  "Hostile" is too nice a word for what has been a administration rife with thoughtless policy changes, aversion to research and data, and a tendency for shady processes.  Bennett keeps trying to call himself a "reformer"....hopefully Hoosiers are smarter than to fall for that.

Teachers union chief chides state Education Department

One of the nation's most prominent teachers union officials has called out Indiana's Department of Education as one of three in the country most hostile to teachers.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten cited Indiana, Virginia and Minnesota as especially egregious in failing to include teachers in their applications for the federal Race to the Top competition for $4.4 billion in money for education reform. "State officials in Minnesota and Indiana failed to include teachers in the application process -- and then scapegoated teachers to deflect attention from the decision not to file applications," Weingarten said in a statement released nationally Tuesday.

"What is especially troubling about the states that failed to work with teachers unions is that, as teachers well know, the common denominator for all good schools is an environment where the adults work together on behalf of the students."

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett has tangled with the Indiana Federation of Teachers and the Indiana State Teachers Association, blasting them as being out to protect adults at the cost of educating children.

The federal grant process required dramatic changes, including a willingness to tie teacher job reviews to student performance. But Indiana pushed harder than many other states, and teachers unions were not allowed to see the proposals until after they were filed.

Indiana did not apply for a second round of funding, citing the teachers unions' lack of support.  Bennett said the positions of the IFT leadership have been at odds with some of the positions of its own locals and with the public statements Weingarten has made at the national level. He said he was surprised at her comments Tuesday.

"That statement is unfounded on her part," he said. "It's obvious that the leadership of the state unions doesn't reflect Ms. Weingarten's openness to reform."

Challenging Bennett's Argument

Oh, my goodness--a letter to the editor at the IndyStar that points to the obvious scapegoating going on from Tony Bennett and Mitch Daniels.  This blog is in no way meant to be an apologist for the unions (there are clearly problems there) but the union leadership has started to stand up to the mistruths and procedural wrangling of this administration.  After all, if a union won't stand up for it's members, then what's if for?  The other thing this points out of course is how through one side of the mouth folks will talk about the need for "data", they'll also, through the other side, advance policies that have no support in data or educational research.  Once again, what's most exciting is that the people are waking up to the hypocrisy and speaking out.

June 3, 2010

What negative impact?

Posted by Duane S. Nickell

In his recent "My View" piece, Dr. Tony Bennett talks of "the negative impact teacher unions can have on classroom instruction . . ." Extending Dr. Bennett's logic, one would expect that a negative correlation should exist between teacher unionism and student academic achievement. In other words, a higher level of teacher unionism should result in lower academic achievement. But when one looks at the countries that perform well on international tests, some (Finland, for example) are highly unionized while others (some of the Asian countries) are not.

In the U.S., the region of the country that performs worst on achievement tests is the South, where teacher unions have historically been the weakest. Massachusetts, where teacher unions are strong, always ranks near the top academically. I challenge Dr. Bennett to cite any educational research that clearly demonstrates a negative correlation between teacher unions and student achievement.

Falling for the "Tough Love" Spin

It's been noted here before that the Indy Star's Matthew Tully needs to be commended for bringing public education into the spotlight (although somewhat problematically) but here he shows some ignorance.  Bennett clearly sees where his bread is buttered and he's laying it on thick for Tully.  Some questions might be: what does one make of policies that "don't make sense"?; what do we make of cutting professional development support, time, and opportunities that make teachers better? how do you possibly defend education policy decisions with literally NO data behind them?  how do you defend a process that cuts out public comment, parental views, and due process?  how does responsible journalism allow politicians to spin failures as victories?

But perhaps most important, at what point is tough love not love anymore?  Indiana Citizens likes what you do Tully but.... you're falling for it again.

Tony Bennett's tough love

I've heard many complaints about state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett during months of conversations with teachers and school administrators. In fact, the easiest way to guarantee an eye roll from a public school educator is to simply mention Bennett's name.

He hates teachers, some insist. He's arrogant and too blunt, others argue. He's the governor's puppet, many believe. Or, critics say, his reform plans just don't make sense.

As much as I like teachers as a group, and as much as I respect the difficult challenges they face, I could hardly disagree more.

Bennett's tenure hasn't always been pretty. But he's done exactly what Indiana needed him to do during his first 17 months in office: He has put the debate over improving public schools at center stage. He's stood up to the entrenched education establishment. And he's made clear that neither baby steps nor the status quo is acceptable.

Still, there is a valid concern that Bennett's increasingly bitter battles with teachers unions, as well as his criticism of bad teachers, has left many good teachers feeling like collateral damage.

"That's a very fair observation," Bennett said Thursday morning during a meeting with editors and reporters from The Indianapolis Star. "Frankly, at times good teachers get lumped in with bad teachers, and that is unfortunate. Do I regret the dynamic that has occurred? Yes. Do I wish we had done a better job of messaging the sincere appreciation we have for great teachers? Yes. And I take full responsibility for that."

That's a good thing to say. There aren't many people who deserve more appreciation than those who do a good job of teaching children.

Still, Bennett's best trait is his willingness -- eagerness, even -- to take the punches that come with fighting the education bosses throughout the state. It's a trait some of his supporters argue clouds his message. Although they might be right, there's much to be said in praise of an education leader who lives in constant frustration with the state's current education climate.  "I will have no remorse for calling out the things that do not serve Indiana's children," he said.

As for his hard-charging early days, he's not apologizing, saying, "We had to drive home the fact that we were going to push for excellence." Union leaders have kicked back fiercely at Bennett. Those who apologize for the poor performance of districts such as Indianapolis Public Schools suggest that leaders who push for big changes cannot by definition be supporters of public education. The forces that attempt to protect the status quo in public schools are as powerful as anywhere else.

That's why I've appreciated Bennett's willingness to expose the harm caused by some union contract rules, and to say things state education superintendents before him refused to say.

Without question, he needs to reach out to rank-and-file teachers. But remember, his aggressive style has raised the profile of the education debate in Indiana, and led more people to take seriously talk that the state might finally force dramatic changes.

"If schools are not performing," Bennett said, "the state has a moral imperative to intervene. The state has to have the political courage to step in and help these kids."

I just spent nearly a year closely observing a public school, and I still find it hard to believe this country allows so many of its children to attend schools that do not offer an education even remotely comparable to better schools only miles away.

Bennett has occasionally stumbled. And, no doubt, he has angered many in the education business.

Good.

Let's hope he keeps it up.

No reform without trust...no trust without the truth

the tricks and spin continue from Bennett.....this guy has no shame and has got to go.  Luckily a few reporters like up in Fort Wayne and concerned citizens are starting to speak out.

No reform without trust

In Washington, public school teachers are reeling after the revelation that a multimillion-dollar deficit used to justify the layoffs of 266 educators last fall was actually a $34 million surplus.

Not unreasonably, the union questioned the credibility of the schools’ leader, placing on hold a contract agreement that would have changed the way they are paid and evaluated.

“We want to have a first-class school system,” Frazier O’Leary, a 40-year English literature teacher, told National Public Radio, “Reform is needed, but reform without trust doesn’t work.”

Sadly, that’s the same climate created in Indiana, where Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett has attacked the Indiana State Teachers Association and the Indiana Federation of Teachers for refusing to sign off on the state’s application for the second round of federal Race to the Top funds.

He issued an ultimatum this month:

“While the labor unions have bemoaned the difficult financial status of Indiana’s schools, it doesn’t appear they are willing to support any change that could bring an additional $250M to our state,” he stated in a news release. The superintendent goes on to invite leaders of ISTA and IFT to discuss “specific reform plan components.” Bennett has invited the media and states that he will post video of the meeting on the department’s website after the session.


It’s a well-staged publicity stunt, given that he’s set up conditions to ensure the unions won’t play along. Bennett wants the organizations to endorse legislation requiring teacher evaluations based on student test scores. Those evaluations would be the basis for decisions on hiring, salary, retention, transfers and layoffs.

Evaluating teachers based on student test scores is a complex issue. The task of developing sound evaluation procedures isn’t impossible, but teachers would be foolish to trust the process sight unseen to the Indiana Department of Education, which eliminated more than 100 positions last year and is struggling to handle its current responsibilities.


Union representatives met with Bennett and his staff in at least four two-hour meetings before the first-round application, but each side left with a different impression of what the teachers’ associations had agreed to support. ISTA President Nate Schnellenberger said the union believed it had “sort of an umbrella agreement.”

“Our intent was always to sit down and hammer out details,” he said Wednesday.

“He (Bennett) thinks there were some tenets we agreed to that we really didn’t. For example, in order for a (Race to the Top) proposal to be considered by the U.S. Department of Education, it would require 51 percent of evaluations to be based on test scores. That’s not even the case with the states that won.”

Schnellenberger said Bennett’s directive for him to attend without any ISTA staff suggested the state superintendent wasn’t serious about working out the details.


“I do not believe a single meeting in your office, with the media in attendance, can begin to produce the kind of work that needs to be accomplished to create a viable plan for funding in the program’s second round,” he wrote in a letter hand-delivered to the superintendent’s office.

In a letter to ISTA members, Schnellenberger explained that the state, in spite of repeated requests, never shared with ISTA or any other education organization the contents of Indiana’s plan to overhaul education.

“Yet now, when time is short and pressure is deep, Dr. Bennett expects me to give an unequivocal agreement on his (Race to the Top) demands,” Schnellenberger wrote. “In Delaware and Tennessee, the two states that received round-one funding, state education leaders solicited and included meaningful input from their teachers’ association leaders through collaborative meetings and work sessions at every step of the process. That type of collaboration did not occur in Indiana.”


Bennett made an end-run around the unions and sent an e-mail message to all Indiana teachers, criticizing the ISTA president and attacking union rules regarding reduction-in-force. If Bennett’s intent was to divide the teachers association from its membership, it’s not working.

A Fort Wayne teacher said his co-workers are “incensed” by Bennett’s remarks about teachers.

“When you treat teachers and their representatives badly, do you think we will trust you more?” wrote another teacher in response to Bennett’s request for feedback. “When you insult veteran teachers, do you think tens of thousands of private-sector people will quit and line up and replace us so they can receive that kind of abuse?”


Indiana’s poor showing on the first round of Race to the Top funding – 23rd out of 40 states – can’t be blamed entirely on the unions, as the scoring clearly demonstrates. Bennett is wrong to use the promise of federal money to force an agreement with teachers.

As the individuals in the classrooms and closest to students, they deserve a bigger role in developing key policy. Bennett needs to restore a broken trust before any reform can take place.

More on Race to the Top & Bennett's Failure

Tony Bennett has been alienating and berating folks in education since he got elected and the Feds have noticed.  Indiana will never get the massive federal money if all the stakeholders aren't working together--given the reckless and misguided approach, it doesn't seem like this is even possible.  As for the Union response, when the DOE misleads the public and uses the media to spin and distort the truth, speaking back to the abuse is the only recourse.

Bennett, teachers take fight outside

Public spat threatens 2nd chance at stimulus funds for state schools

Relations between the state Department of Education and the state's two teachers unions have never been cozy, but they have been cordial. These days, a better characterization would be outright war.

That war is taking place mostly in public: press releases with ultimatums, attacks in local newspapers and an exchange of e-mails landing in the inboxes of every teacher in the state.

And the potential loss could be very high: The state's second chance at a piece of $4.4 billion in "Race to the Top" stimulus funds might be in jeopardy.

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett said he is passionately making a case for reforms he considers crucial to improve the well-being of the state's children.

The presidents of the Indiana State Teachers Association and the Indiana Federation of Teachers say Bennett is trying to steamroll teachers in the process and is using unfair tactics. Both have increased their own rhetoric against and criticism of the state.

The debate has come to a head over whether the unions will sign on to the state's second attempt to win stimulus funds.

Bennett has advocated tying job reviews for teachers to their students' test scores, and he has advanced policiesthat would allow teachers to be paid or dismissed based on job performance rather than years of experience.

The unions find that onerous.

"We've never been invited to be full partners," IFT President Rick Muir said. "I hope he wakes up and changes his course of action, but I'm not holding my breath."

Read More: IndyStar