Kathy:
As president of a local teachers association, I can state categorically that
neither Barbara Kerr nor any other CTA officer or official has told us to
"forbid" our members to sign the petition. The absurdity of such a
report should
be evident on the face of it, since local union presidents have no
way to enforce
such a prohibition if we were to decree it. Furthermore, Barbara has no
authority to order local presidents to take any such action. We are elected by
the members of our associations and are answerable to them.
I attended a meeting with Barbara Kerr and several dozen other local union
presidents on Monday. As usual, Barbara spoke of the harms caused by the
so-called No Child Left Behind Act.
So how did this rumor begin? In February, Barbara Kerr wrote to chapter
presidents pointing out that NCLB, the so-called "No Child Left
Behind Act," is
now the official name for the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act, which since
1964 has been a major source of federal funding for public schools.
"Dismantling"
NCLB means dismantling ESEA. That is inconsistent with the policy we
adopted by a
sizable majority vote, after extensive debate, at the 2006 Representative
Assembly. She concluded by saying, "We ask CTA members not to sign
this petition.
Instead, members are encouraged to write or email their members of
Congress and
support our Positive Agenda for ESEA Reauthorization."
CTA is supporting NEA's legislative priorities for ESEA reauthorization,
including.
1. Inclusion of multiple measures in a revised AYP
accountability system so
that AYP is not based solely on standardized test scores.
2. Use of growth models to measure changes in student performance.
Allow every state to implement a transparent growth model methodology that
recognizes continuous improvement for all students, grants
schools credit for
improving student achievement at all points on the achievement scale (for
example, credit for schools that move students from below basic to basic or
from proficient to advanced), and for improving student
achievement over time.
Such systems could track individual student performance or cohort
performance.
The Federal government should not designate the specifics of such
a system, but
should grant states flexibility to develop growth models, subject
to state peer
review and review by an independent expert body, such as the
National Council
on Measurement in Education, the American Psychological Association, the
American Educational Research Association, or the Joint Committee
on Testing
Practice.
Data from growth models in an accountability system should be
used exclusively
to improve instructional and curriculum decisions and
professional development
for educators.
3. Shift AYP from a system that labels and penalizes schools to one
that rewards
success.
A school that falls short in just one or two criteria would
be required to
develop and implement a targeted improvement plan for the
specific subgroup
of students.
If a parent exercises his or her rights to have their
children opt out of
taking required tests under state law, then eliminate any associated
penalties against schools and districts.
Provide supports and assistance for schools, including
financial support
and technical assistance, with assistance targeted to those schools and
districts most in need of improvement.
Allow districts in need of improvement to be approved as supplemental
service providers.
Target both Supplemental Educational Services and public
school choice to
students in the particular subgroups that do not make AYP.
Provide a separate funding stream for public school choice
and supplemental
educational services requirements so funding for these
programs does not
divert funds from classroom services.
Improve the quality of SES services by allowing school
districts to monitor
provider quality, ensure that SES providers serve both students with
disabilities and ELL students, and require that they be fully
covered by
federal civil rights laws.
4. Provide additional common-sense flexibility for assessing and counting test
scores from both students with disabilities and ELL students.
Allow the IEP teams to determine the appropriate assessment
and standards
(regular, alternate, or modified) that the assessment should
be based on
for each child; remove the current arbitrary 1 percent and 2 percent
limits.
For newly arrived immigrant ELL students, for whom native language
assessments in the required core content subjects are not
available, extend
to three years the period of time before their test scores
are included in
AYP.
5. Add a separately funded class size reduction program with class
size limits of
15 to improve student learning, with priority given to high poverty
schools and
which could be phased in over time.
6. Increase flexibility for meeting the "highly qualified" teacher
requirements, including teachers of multiple subjects, special education and
rural educators.
Deem fully licensed/certified special education teachers as highly
qualified.
Recognize social studies as a core academic subject.
Expand current flexibility provided for rural education teachers.
7. Advance teacher quality at the highest poverty schools by providing
funding to attract and retain quality teachers and improved teaching
and learning
conditions.
When Abraham Lincoln was urged to replace George McClellan as
commanding general
of the Army of the Potomac, he asked who his visitor would name instead.
"Anybody," was the reply. That, Lincoln said, was the crux of the problem.
"Anybody will do for you, but I must have somebody." The same thing is true of
federal education law. "Dismantling" NCLB is not enough. We must propose
something. The debate now should be about what best to propose.
Harold Berlak's
suggestion of a Family and Student Testing Protection Act is a good
start, but in
my opinion federal policy on education must also include all the positive
elements that will enable ESEA once again to promote student achievement,
especially for disadvantaged students.
To view NEA's comprehensive Positive Agenda for ESEA Reauthorization, go to:
http://www.nea.org/lac/esea/images/posagenda.pdf
At 12:58 PM 3/19/2007 -0700, Kathy Emery wrote:
The educatorroundtable petition is an excellent organizing
tool. organizing
teachers in your school to sign it will lead to direct
confrontation with the
state's union leadership. Barbara Kerr has apparently told CTA union
presidents to forbid their union members from signing the
petition -- this is
the kind of position you want to unmask when organizing. such a ridiculous
response reveals how the highest union leadership has been
coopted -- making
the powers that be and their tools respond in this way is the beginning of
radicalizing teachers to rethink their positions.
kathy
George Sheridan
**************************************************
Only the individual sender is responsible for the content of the
message, and the message does not necessarily reflect the position
or policy of the National Education Association or its affiliates.
---------------------------------------------------------
If you want to help support the operation of Ca-Resisters,
visit http://interversity.org/donations.html and pitch in!
-----------------
Thanks in advance!
-Eric Crump