CCSD's McGinley a Goner?

Please, oh please.

Pay Attention, CCSD: It's Teacher Pay, Stupid

Yes, Kay Haun's Letter-to-the-Editor solution will be expensive, but so is the edublob! In the recent Charleston County School District's pay raise, administrators got 75 percent of the funds! Does anyone believe that will improve student outcomes?

Attract teachers 

Our state Senate Committee on Public School Teachers could save lots of time and money if it simply did what it really takes to get and keep effective and inspiring teachers. 

Increase S.C. teachers' pay dramatically, and do it right now. 

The most important factor in producing students who can compete in the world has always been each individual teacher. 

It's not beautiful buildings, laptops on every desk, hordes of support staff and administrators. Socrates never had a classroom; he taught on the porticos of Athens without textbooks. 

A good teacher is intelligent, creative, self-confident. Want to know how to evaluate our teachers? Ask the students - they know exactly which of their teachers knows his stuff, can control the classroom, and provides challenging and interesting lessons.

Worried about paying too much to ineffective teachers? No problem. As more and more bright and talented young people come out of college and see a competitive salary waiting in the teaching field, they will come. And the chaff will be winnowed inexorably.

Many would love to go into teaching as a career. It's a wonderful experience for those who have the right combination of skills and smarts. 

But they have to be compensated and recognized as valuable contributors to their communities. Also, they should direct the support staffs and administrations in their schools. 

They should determine the core learning standards as well as learning materials. Wonderful results would occur. 

Kay M. Haun
West Liberty Park Circle
North Charleston

 Amen.

Respect Teachers' Labor, Too!

While the rest of the world seems to have decided that what's wrong with education is its teachers, teachers, unionized or not, are not at rest on this Labor Day.

Teachers, as professionals, do not get overtime pay, yet most of them are at work more than sixty hours per week. Think of the typical high school English teacher, or any teacher, for that matter, who assigns essays and papers to students. Most have student loads of 100 to 150; that's 100 to 150 papers for every assignment. What percentage of those teachers will sit down tonight (if they haven't already done so) and grade papers for hours? A low guess would be half, and the other half are planning their lessons for the coming week.

A creative teacher's mind is always at work figuring out what to do with his or her students on so many levels. And everyone who's ever sat in a classroom thinks he or she can expertly tell a teacher what he or she has done wrong. Baby boomers are retiring in droves, and they are the last generation whose numbers were boosted by the lack of opportunities for college-educated women.

While English teachers work the same long hours as executives for half the pay, if that, and American society gives little respect to any job that doesn't pay well, HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

Who would be a teacher?

SC State Board of Ed Stubbornly Approves Discredited Sham VAM

How many edublob members does it take to change a lightbulb? None, apparently. They would still be arguing over the merits of changing to wind turbines to power the light.

Despite the presence of level-headed Larry Kobrovsky and the prevalence of studies discrediting the practice, the State Board of Education, top-loaded with edublob members, voted to approve using VAM (value added measurement) for teacher evaluation. The practice treats students as though they are vehicles on a Ford assembly line. You know, one teacher adds the brake pads, another checks that the screws are tightened properly.

Here we have a situation where the assembly-line model of schooling has been discredited for decades, perhaps even a century! But schooling must now use the models provided by business.

VAM will not improve student outcomes. Where it has been used so far, the results have been erratic, to say the least. No study has shown that it has improved teaching, and year-to-year results for individual teachers have been ludicrous. Unmotivated teachers are not the problem. If someone proposed using VAM to evaluate parents instead, imagine the uproar and reasoning put forth as to why it would be unfair.

To top off its pig-headedness, the Board also voted to support Smarter Balanced testing. Let's hope the state legislature has more sense.

Moffly's Three Planks Make Sense for SC

Wishful thinking? In the continuation of the hard copy of  Thursday's paper, Elizabeth Moffly is labeled "ex-board member."

Perennial candidate Elizabeth Moffly runs again for the post of state superintendent of education. This is not an endorsement, but we could do worse. Moffly narrowly lost to Mick Zais last time around in the Republican primary.

1. Eliminate the Common Core standards. These were adopted willingly by our last Democrat State Superintendent in 2010. The costs associated with implementation are horrendous, from teacher training to new educational  materials to development of new aligned testing on computer. CC is a boondoggle for the edublob. Developed by business interests and the Gates Foundation, it won't deliver what it promises.
2. Provide a variety of diploma plans. Why do we go for one-size-fits-all? President Obama to the contrary, not every graduate should attend a four-year college. Think of all the outstanding student loans burdening non-graduates who cannot get a job. Many states already have several diplomas. Look at Texas; it has at least three. 
3. Change the grading system. What is the rationale for the standard A = 93 to 100 when other states use A = 90 to 100. If you haven't dealt with the numbers converting to a four-point system, you don't realize how our system hurts students applying to competitive colleges out of state.

Let's see how the other candidates respond.

NJ Broad-trained Superintendent Runs Amuck--McGinley Should Take Notice

Those familiar with Montclair, New Jersey, know it as a beautiful suburb of New York City with an excellent, well-integrated school system, hardly what passes in the minds of most as "urban." Nevertheless, some wiseacre school board hired a Broad-trained superintendent whose actions have set the whole town on its ear.

Here is a letter to the local paper that complains about some of Broad's policies. The complaints should sound familiar [reported by Diane Ravitch].

Ira Shor wrote the following letter to the editor of the Montclair Times to complain about the influence of the Broad Foundation in Montclair:

Dec. 29, 2013
Is Billionaire Eli Broad Running Our Schools?​
Why is the District refusing to release items regarding the Superintendent’s relation to the Broad Foundation? On October 31, 2013, I filed a request under NJ’s Open Public Records Act(OPRA) for documents regarding Supt. MacCormack’s financial disclosure that she received “more than $2000” in 2013 from the Broad Foundation. We need to know how much “more than $2000” Broad is paying her and for what services. Contrary to OPRA law, Mr. Fleischer, her COO, provided no requested documents and did not explain why he refused. OPRA requires district officers to meet legal requests in 7 business days or explain in writing why not. Mr. Fleischer had 35 days but provided no Broad items and explained nothing.

What is the Superintendent hiding? Who does she work for--Montclair’s families or billionaire Eli Broad and his campaign to standardize public schools? She attended the unaccredited Broad Academy whose “grads” follow Broad’s playbook, imposing one-size-fits-all curricula, endless bubble-tests, and high-priced consultants and testing technology. We have a right to know if she answers to Broad or to us.

The Superintendent and our Board have recklessly disrupted our good schools and squandered taxes on ridiculous subpoenas, while refusing to spend yet another huge surplus on things our kids need: smaller classes, foreign language, aides in all classes, librarians in all schools, instrumental music, and after-school mentoring for at-risk kids. Listen to our over-tested kids reporting fear and stress; listen to our under-supported teachers at monthly Board meetings; then, you’ll agree we should roll back the Broad agenda and its assessment train wreck. The refusal of my OPRA request joins other illegal refusals from Mr. Fleischer and the Supt.’s office. Stop hiding from those you should be serving. Open your books and files.
Ira Shor
302 North Mountain Avenue
Montclair, NJ 07043

Autocrats at Charleston's Breakfast Table: Budig and Heaps

The op-ed commentary appearing in Thursday's paper purports to pinpoint the errors of today's attempts at educational reform as seen through the eyes of a former university president and a former College Board vice-president. Basically, Gene Budig and Alan Heaps complain that efforts are too disparate and too messy because so many voices contribute to the national discussion. 

What our two "experts" really hate is the democratic process. As they succinctly put it, "In most countries, policy is made by a central authority." They decry the American process: "Here, school policies are made by a wide array of actors, all with their own ideas and agendas: federal, state and local governments, public and private schools/universities, unions, think tanks and foundations, book publishers and test makers, and student and parent groups." Imagine. Even bloggers express opinions.

Golly. If only Budig and Heaps could control reforms in education, its problems would be solved.

The writers do not mention the Common Core, but, given its supposed standardization of what students learn, they must favor its implementation. After all, the College Board is positioned to gain millions from changes in curriculum and testing that Common Core demands.

Apparently we need an educational Stalin in this country to set us all straight.

EdFirstSC Finally Comes to Its Senses over CCSD's BRIDGE

Blame Bill Gates and the Obama administration.

Even though EdFirstSC finally sees the train headed for the wreck, its spokesman tries to blame SC Education Superintendent Mick Zais for the genesis of value-added teacher compensation. Zais visited the Charleston County School District to discuss Superintendent Nancy McGinley's plan to change the way teachers are compensated. EdFirstSC's members must lean heavily towards teachers who are Democrats. Yes, Republicans want teachers to be accountable, but the machinations behind BRIDGE must be laid squarely on the shoulders of the edublob and the Obama administration, especially U.S. Education Department head, Arne Duncan. They're all liberal Democrats.

Blame McGinley for applying for Race to the Top funds and accepting them. Federal money always comes with strings attached, and she knew full well what they would be. As a result of winning the grant, the district must follow Common Core standards AND implement a teacher evaluation system based on the fatally-flawed value-added model pushed by the Gates Foundation and Arne Duncan. In preparation McGinley sent Audrey Lane to the Broad Institute just to learn all about the new teacher-evaluation system and then rewarded her with a nice fat retroactive raise. And the edublob, in the form of Mathematica, got a nice $2 million (of Other People's Money) contract to figure out how to make the system fair, a goal that even those mathematicians must know is impossible.

This new system will never be fair to teachers or students. Look at the abundance of research on just this topic that Duncan, and McGinley, choose to ignore. Going after these funds and implementing the value-added compensation system in CCSD is McGinley's personal effort at her own "race to the top."

If you think testing is overrated and too important now, wait till teachers' jobs hang on these unfair results.

P & C Ignores Sen. Scott's Points About Parental Responsibility

Read the State's account of Tim Scott's speech on education; then read that published by our own cherished rag. You'll wonder if they're writing about the same speech!

While the former's account emphasizes Senator Scott's emphasis on parental responsibility, using his own life and rise from near-poverty as an example, Charleston's reporter ignores this topic entirely. Instead, if you read the local paper, you'll think Scott spoke about the need to look abroad for fixes to our educational system.

Somebody's got it wrong. Why do I think it's the anti-Scott Post and Courier?

P & C headline: "Sen. Scott says education improvements can be learned from overseas."

State headline: "Tim Scott says parents, not government, hold key to education success."

CCSD's Stacking the Deck Decoded by BRIDGE Opponents

BRIDGE--another program introduced by the Charleston County School District that is directly encouraged and funded by federal grants in the Race to the Top national competition.

Whether you agree or not with Sarah Shad Johnson's opposition to standardized testing, her Letter to the Editor published Saturday shows she understands how Superintendent Nancy McGinley guarantees her intended outcomes in CCSD. Long-time watchers know how she has stacked community committees for her entire tenure.

Johnson's analysis shows that the Bridge steering committee deliberately omits "parents who are not CCSD employees" and "independent community members," while including only four teachers, one of whom represents StudentsFirst. The rest are administrators, and we all know whom they answer to in fear of their jobs.

CCSD claims to "'welcome input of our teachers, principals, parents, and community partners.'"

BRIDGE's goal is to replace current salary structures for teachers with value-added merit pay based on standardized test scores. In other words, each child is a product on the assembly line of schooling, and each teacher adds value until the student reaches the end of the assembly line, or graduates. Furthermore, that value can be measured from year to year.

What's wrong with this picture?

CCSD Feeds Millions to Edublob in New Teacher Evaluation Scheme

"Will Teacher Evals Tied to Scores Work?" queries the front page headline.

YES!

The Charleston County School District's aptly-named BRIDGE initiative will work--to funnel millions of dollars to waiting members of the edublob. You know, a bridge of tax dollars.

The Princeton-based Mathematica will receive $3 million to create an algorithm to treat each student as a product. Each year what the student learns will be dubbed, "value added." It's the assembly-line, factory model of education, teachers as workers on the assembly line whose worth is measured by how much value they add to each product, i.e., child.  Somehow Mathematica will magically adjust for "other factors, such as poverty, which could affect scores."

No wonder most teachers who are brave enough (or secure enough) to speak up are skeptical.

Let's see. Will the magic formula adjust for pot use? parent in jail? homelessness? parental neglect? How much personal information on each "product" will CCSD garner?

More importantly, will the formula produce reduced expectations for the progress of that child identified as poor? Surely someone else can see where this model logically heads: high expectations for the rich; low for the poor; high for whites; low for blacks and Hispanics. Is that really what Charleston County residents want?

Meanwhile, CCSD is licking its chops after receiving a $24 million five-year grant from the feds to provide incentives to teachers. Michael Ard, former Hunley Park Principal and BRIDGE project director, promises that "no teacher will lose money" when the district switches in three years to a new salary structure based on "quality and effectiveness." The district promises to reward with bonuses even after the grant runs out, but not lower any salaries for "low" performing teachers. The grant money for bonuses will run out after two years. Then what?

Superintendent McGinley has already primed the public relations machine by using another edublob organization, Battelle for Kids of Ohio, for public relations at the low cost of $1.3 million. Battelle will also be useful to blame if implementation of the new salary scheme becomes rocky.

Everyone (well, almost everyone) agrees that good teachers are underpaid and bad ones should be fired. No one will lose a job under this proposal, and in spite of Mathematica's formulas, no one will know under this system which teachers are really superb.

No one seems to be considering the elephant in the room: good teachers don't need incentives. They are already highly motivated, bonuses or not. Who does need incentives, then?

a) parents to then encourage their

b) students to learn.

If any teacher had the magic formula that motivates students, he or she would have retired on his or her millions long ago, and we wouldn't be having such problems in our schools.

Meanwhile, this taxpayer can easily think of many more effective ways for our government to spend $24 million.

CCSD Setting Reading Goals Too Low

While the Charleston County School District laments that the percentage of entering high school freshmen who read below the fourth-grade level has crept upwards this year, the rest of us wonder what percentage can actually read their high school textbooks.

High school materials are available to assist students reading at the sixth-grade level, at least for some courses, such as biology.  Therefore, what statistic would really reveal what percentage of entering freshmen potentially will drop out because they can't read their textbooks?

Sensibly, CCSD should publish the statistics for ninth-grade students reading below the sixth-grade level.  A student reading at the fourth-grade level in the ninth grade faces a virtually impossible task in deciphering his or her textbook. Further,  the subject teacher faces a virtually impossible task teaching specific subject matter and must teach reading instead.

What about comparing the reading scores of tenth-graders with their reading scores entering the school?  How about the reading scores of seniors? Are any of them still reading at the fourth-grade level, or have all reading-deficient students dropped out prior to senior year?

"Chipping away" is not solving the problem; it requires major intervention in those high schools where non-readers (and that's really what we're talking about) constitute more than a quarter of the entering class.

Charter Schools Get Some Respect

Don't you wonder why the new law assisting the formation of more public charter schools has a provision that "prohibits reprisals against district employees who are involved in an application to establish a public charter school"? Our state legislators must have met Superintendent Nancy McGinley!


Charter schools now may be single sex. Institutions of higher learning (such as the College of Charleston and the Citadel) may decide to organize their own charter schools. Charter school students who wish to play a sport not offered at their charter school can participate at the school in their residential district. Virtually everything needed has been added, except additional funding.

All of these schools take away power from local elected school boards and the edublob and give it to independent charter boards and parents. Given the bootlicking behavior of CCSD's board majority, is it any wonder that charter schools are so popular?

Between those and on-line education, expect to see multi-million-dollar white elephant school buildings in CCSD in about two decades.

McGinley Article Well-Meant But Flawed

Summarizing Charleston County Schools Superintendent Nancy McGinley's decisions and lack of them should be a service to the taxpayers who do not usually follow the twists and turns at 75 Calhoun. Yet--why do articles such as Monday's "Flexible or Flawed" inevitably sound as though they were written by McGinley herself?


I leave you to ponder that thought.

Meanwhile, a piece should follow that analyzes the effects of her decisions and non-decisions on the students involved and the community. Too often McGinley prizes appearance over reality. She has seven years in the district, seven years that should show some progress. The reporter needs to find out if the progress cited by McGinley is real and, in addition, if any progress results from the superintendent's policies or from outside factors.

That piece would be a community service.

Literacy Forges Ahead in CCSD

Another in Courrege's series on literacy in CCSD appeared in Sunday's P&C. Too bad this one is marred by one-sided sourcing from those who have the most to gain by looking good. [See Literacy Initiatives Show Progress.]

By even this biased account, as the lead states, "Dozens of Charleston County students are reading better as a result of the school district's newest literacy initiatives, and hundreds more will be given the same chance next year." Let's hope that "dozens" means at least seven or eight dozen (84 or 96) and not two or three dozen (24 or 36) after all this time and effort!

See, here's the administrative attitude that's led to the present state of affairs: "Students who needed the extra help this year could refuse it without consequence, but next school year those who turn it down will not be allowed to go on to the next grade." Why were they allowed to "refuse it without consequence"? This practice equates to telling a child to go to bed and then ignoring his or her staying up all night. Neither scenario promises the student will be in good shape to learn in school.

Amazingly enough, for once I find myself in agreement with Gregg Meyers's statements about continuing the third-grade academies:

". . .board member Gregg Meyers told the superintendent at a recent board meeting that the board couldn't have made it any more clear that making sure every child can read is its highest priority. If the third-grade academies are needed and working, he said the superintendent should make sure that program happens, as well as the one for first-graders.

"This is the most important thing we do," he said. "Let's make sure we do it. … If we get nothing else right, we want to get this right. I think we need to stay aggressive about this."

Gepford said officials have been working since then to find money so the third-grade academies can continue.

I vote for furloughing two of Superintendent McGinley's associate superintendents and gutting her transportation allowance. That should help considerably.

Despite sugar-coating from Doug Gepford (he wants to keep his job), the Sixth-Grade Academy is not doing as well, at least if you count in students whose reading scores fell during the program.

What's that, you say? How can reading scores go backwards? Actually what's not clear is why CCSD chose to place students who were "higher performing" "better readers" into a remedial program with the district's worst readers. Why not have an even smaller academy instead? Were the parents of these students even aware of what was happening? Were those parents so desperate to get them out of another school that they presumed anything else would be better?

Is there some reason that the reporter couldn't ask these questions?

Finally, for all of you who have struggled through algebra out there, I have a great quote:

"Gepford said math is easier to teach than reading because it's more concrete and easier to understand. Learning to read is a more complex process that involves multiple skills, he said."

What Gepford means is that math is more objective, not more concrete, at least not once you leave the realm of 2 plus 2! However, perhaps he misspoke and meant that math is easier to learn? Or easier for the teacher to understand how to teach?

Ask anyone who's tried to raise SAT scores whether it's easier to raise the verbal or math components, and you will get the same response as the Sixth-Grade Academy's results.

Math tests measure skills; reading tests measure skills and common knowledge. If CCSD seriously wants to raise reading scores, it must teach both.

Step Forward for Teaching Knowledge

For those of you who wonder why students don't seem to "know" anything about their world, many like me would cite the lack of a common core of knowledge that is taught along with reading.

Thus, the news from the Core Knowledge Foundation is great: "After more than two decades of publishing and distributing its K-8 Core Knowledge Sequence exclusively to Core Knowledge schools, the Foundation is planning to make its proprietary curriculum available for free online."

This breakthrough comes at a time when the Common Core State Standards are about to be released. The Core Knowledge website will be relaunched at the end of February. To read more, go to The Core Knowledge Blog.

Stay tuned.

Democratic Stealth Campaign in CCSD

Under the radar. Well, at least it was under my radar, but as usual one commenter has made sense of Tuesday's results for Charleston County School Board.

Here's a snippet plus my take on why the analysis makes sense:

"Good old fashioned dirty politics based on rumor and fear[. . .]. Add Altman to the ballot and he became a target in an already high profile election. The others just became collateral damage."

"Despite this being non-partisan, the two political parties are working openly for certain candidates. This only causes further partisan divisions."

Those of us who don't travel in educrat or partisan circles wouldn't realize how carefully Mayor Riley managed to get the word out. Certainly the P & C wouldn't cover that. It's believable because of the GOP-sponsored ad in the P & C just before the election for four recommended candidates--Stewart, Engelman, Kandrac, and Lecque.

When I saw it, I was a bit mystified why it had appeared. I didn't view all these candidates as Republicans. Now I know they simply were the ones not being pushed by the Democrats.

Do voters in Charleston realize that, in the large majority of states, non-partisan positions are voted upon on a different date than partisan ones?

How did South Carolina arrive at this crazy "system"?

"It really is ironic that the Democratic Party has gone out on a limb by backing the candidates they have. [. . .] Why any political party would want to claim 'ownership' of this board is beyond me. Maybe we should give out the personal contact information so parents with problems might be able to reach the party leadership and the mayor at home. They can’t expect Toya Green or Greg Meyers to be much help."

Maybe the question should be, what does the Democratic Party have to gain by backing these candidates? Unfortunately, corruption comes to mind.

Where do Mayors Summey and Hallman stand in this "non-partisan" effort? Were they on board as well? Do they care?

"To some extent the Republicans have painted themselves out of the picture by never having gained any real influence on the school board. AR’s isolation on the current board proves the point."

Now, here I must disagree. They never had a chance. Republicans have never gained any real influence on CCSD's School Board because any school board is the last refuge of Democrats in a generally Republican area. Democrats can run as "non-partisans," and most Republicans are none the wiser. I saw this disguise work all too well in the New Jersey suburbs.

Add to the previous remarks another commenter's observation that the North Charleston results reflect two black versus one white candidate, and the total finally make sense.

How someone as sensible and well-educated on school policies as David Engelman could be defeated while at the same time Chris Collins, a novice who thinks that the student population in Charleston County is down because some students have decided to attend schools in Berkeley County instead (well, that's what he said!) is, in fact, an example of the world turned upside down.

How school board trustees are elected needs to be reformed if the Charleston County School District, especially its downtown schools, is to become truly excellent.