CALIFORNIA BUDGET BREAKDOWN: Jerry Brown ends budget negotiations with GOP

Governor Brown Issues Statement Halting Budget Negotiations office of the governor 3-29-2011 SACRAMENTO - Governor Jerry Brown today issued the following statement on his decision to halt budget negotiations: "Yesterday, I stopped the discussions that I had been conducting with various members of the Republican party regarding our state’s massive deficit. The budget plan that I put forth is balanced between deep cuts and extensions of currently existing taxes and I believe it is in the best interest of California. Under our constitution, however, two Republicans from the Assembly and two from the Senate must agree before this matter can be put to the people. Each and every Republican legislator I’ve spoken to believes that voters should not have this right to vote unless I agree to an ever changing list of collateral demands. Let me be clear: I support pension reform, regulatory reform and a spending cap and offered specific and detailed proposals for each of these during our discussions. While we made significant progress on these reform issues, the Republicans continued to insist on including demands that would materially undermine any semblance of a balanced budget. In fact, they sought to worsen the state’s problem by creating a $4 billion hole in the budget. One glaring example is the taxation of multinational corporations. My budget plan requires that gigantic corporations be treated the same as individual taxpayers and not be allowed to choose their preferred tax rate. This is the so-called single sales factor. The Republicans demand that out-of-state corporations that keep jobs out of California be given a billion dollar tax break that will come from our schoolchildren, public safety and our universities. This I am not willing to do. Much is at stake, and in the coming weeks I will focus my efforts on speaking directly to Californians and coming up with honest and real solutions to our budget crisis. Attached is my letter to Republican Leader Dutton last Friday that outlines in greater detail my position." ###

 

 

Wyatt Buchanan,Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau San Francisco Chronicle | http://bit.ly/gcIi94

03/30/11 - Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday said he has abandoned talks with Republicans on closing California's $26.6 billion deficit, a move that effectively ends what has been the governor's primary goal since he took office in January: a bipartisan plan that would include a vote of the people.

After weeks of intense negotiations, Brown released a statement saying that Republicans' demands would make the deficit worse and that he would now focus "on speaking directly to Californians and coming up with honest and real solutions to our budget crisis."

He did not indicate what he plans to do, but a Democratic leader said there would not be a special election in June to allow voters to decide whether to extend and increase taxes to eliminate about half of the deficit. Lawmakers and the governor already have enacted about $11.2 billion in spending cuts and funding shifts.

"Each and every Republican legislator I've spoken to believes that voters should not have this right to vote unless I agree to an ever-changing list of collateral demands," Brown said.

Republicans have said they want changes in pensions, environmental regulations and a spending cap, but they also released last week a long list of other demands, including restoring funding to county fairs and moving the date of the presidential primary.

Brown's statement

In his statement, Brown said, "Let me be clear: I support pension reform, regulatory reform and a spending cap, and offered specific and detailed proposals for each of these during our discussions. While we made significant progress on these reform issues, the Republicans continued to insist on including demands that would materially undermine any semblance of a balanced budget."

Republicans said the blame lies with Democrats and their labor union allies. State Sen. Anthony Cannella, R-Ceres (Stanislaus County), who had been one of the few GOP members to negotiate with Brown, blamed "public employee unions, trial attorneys and other stakeholders" for the breakdown.

Senate Republican Leader Bob Dutton of Rancho Cucamonga (San Bernardino County) said Democrats "are obviously upset and lashing out at their inability to get buyoff from public employee unions" for the changes Republicans sought. He said that a compromise would have to include "more than the Republicans going along with the first, last and only solution of higher taxes offered by the majority party during this budget debate."

Democrats angry

Democrats were fuming over the ending of talks with Republicans, accusing their counterparts of undermining the ability of state voters to determine California's future. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said there would not be a June election and that Republicans "appear to want to be irrelevant."

Like the governor, Steinberg did not offer specifics about what the next steps would be, but he raised the possibility of a signature-gathering effort to put a measure on the ballot. Brown last week raised the prospect of such an election in November. Democrats also are contemplating a legally questionable move of calling an election on the taxes by a simple majority vote.

The Democratic governor also has said that if he couldn't get the taxes on the ballot or if voters rejected taxes, the state faces the prospect of an all-cuts budget, though it probably would be extremely difficult - if not impossible - to win approval for that from the Legislature.

"We're going to consider every option," Steinberg said. "We will use the power of our majority to begin aggressively pursuing a different path. I don't want to get into detail yet on what that may encompass."

Two-thirds majority

Democrats need a two-thirds majority in both legislative houses to put the taxes on the ballot, and have been unable to persuade four Republicans - two in the Assembly and two in the Senate - to support the plan.

On Tuesday, Steinberg slammed the list of Republican demands given to Brown last week.

"The only thing missing from this list is a pony - we'd give them a pony if they gave the people the opportunity to cast a vote," he said.

Assembly Speaker John Pérez, D-Los Angeles, added in a statement that while "Republican rhetoric suggests they are open to working with us, their actions have not reflected their public statements."

As an example of the gulf between Republicans and Democrats, Brown pointed to GOP opposition to changing the tax law for corporations. Instead of allowing corporations to choose between two formulas for calculating the taxes they owe, they would have to calculate what they owe based solely on the portion of their national sales that take place in California. Officials estimate that mandating the "single sales factor" would boost state revenue by about a billion dollars a year.

L.A. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS TO SWITCH READING PROGRAMS

The board drops Open Court, which many teachers said robbed them of independence. California Treasures 'is very supportive if you don't have the expertise and respectful of those who do,' says a review panel member.

By Howard Blume, Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/dWrJ9V

March 30, 2011 -- Los Angeles school officials have scrapped the elementary school reading program that was a centerpiece of local education reform efforts for the last decade, calling it out of date and overly expensive.

The shelving of Open Court, whose adoption generated controversy, caused barely a ripple when the Board of Education voted 7 to 0 Tuesday to instead use a program called California Treasures.

"Open Court was rigid in its instructions to teachers on how to deliver the program," said Tarltonette Binion, a second-grade teacher at 156th Street Elementary School in Gardena. "This new series is very supportive if you don't have the expertise and respectful of those who do."

Scripted Open Court lessons sparked fury among many teachers for depriving them of their independence. Open Court told teachers what to teach and in what order. Coaches and supervisors made sure rules were followed; periodic tests gauged progress.

One benefit was to achieve a base of rigor at all schools, particularly for the thousands of students who moved from campus to campus. If students entered new classrooms mid-year, for example, they were supposed to be on the same page, in reading at least, as at their previous school.

The system also emphasized phonics, replacing the "whole language" approach that taught reading by exposing students to literature.

"I was getting students who could read, who could write, who could spell.... I don't know what we would have done without it as a district," said Binion, who served on the reading review panel.

Former Supt. Roy Romer made the program, which was one of his key initiatives, mandatory across the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Test scores rose notably, but gains faded in the upper grades and progress was not uniform.

The new teacher guide has the goals of the lesson on one side, and offers teaching strategies, if desired, on the other. Although all students are responsible for learning the same vocabulary, there are different approaches and different readings for students learning English, slower learners and gifted students. And readings related to science and social studies correspond, for the first time, to what students are supposed to be learning in those subjects. There's also a better use of computers and more focus on writing and understanding, proponents said.

But teachers will have to design their own lessons, which could take getting used to, said Mark Gendernalik, a fourth-grade teacher at Shirley Avenue Elementary School in the San Fernando Valley who also reviewed reading programs. And gone will be the days when "a teacher is faced with discipline because they used a worksheet that didn't have an Open Court copyright on it."

The district spent huge sums training and supervising teachers in their use of Open Court. Moving to the new program will be comparatively low-budget, paid for with some one-time economic stimulus funds and money that must be used for teacher training.

The purchase price is $40 million over six years. Custom reprinting of the discontinued Open Court series and supplemental materials would have cost about $90 million over the same period, district Chief Academic Officer Judy Elliott said.

Open Court is no longer state-approved, but districts are still allowed to use it. L.A. Unified considered four programs — two by McGraw-Hill, which publishes Treasures and formerly published Open Court. Only Treasures had a state-approved Spanish-language version. One bidder was knocked out for publishing a news release that appeared to announce that it had won the bidding before the decision had been made.

OPEN COURT OUT, TREASURES IN: New elementary reading curriculum is expected to improve learning.

 

EDUCATION: School board votes to replace Open Court program

By Connie Llanos, Staff Writer | LA Daily News | http://bit.ly/enF3XB

03/29/2011 06:34:53 PM PDT - Los Angeles Unified officials on Tuesday approved a new reading curriculum for all elementary schools, replacing the long-standing Open Court program.

While Open Court was credited with improving reading skills, district officials said it was time to replace the 11-year-old program, which was also criticized as too scripted and rigid.

The program was also ineffective for LAUSD's English language learners, who make up one-third of the district's student population.

The new Treasures program - which like Open Court is published by McGraw-Hill - was described as more cost-effective and flexible, allowing educators to improve classroom learning.

Treasures also has a stronger focus on writing and theme-based learning, and includes a website for parents.

"This will allow us to go to the next level of ability and skills for both our students and our teachers," said John Deasy, who will take over in April as superintendent.

The Treasures program was adopted for six years at a total cost of $10 million. The district also expects to save $50 million over the same period - the cost of reproducing out-of-print materials for Open Court.

Some teachers have been skeptical about the district's decision to launch a new program at a time of declining resources. But officials said educators will receive training this summer so the Treasures program can be launched in the fall.

"The ultimate litmus test will be the results we see with our kids," said LAUSD board member Richard Vladovic. "We will sit back and expect those results."

 

L.A. Unified School Board approves new reading curriculum

Matthew Harang | LA City Buzz Examiner | http://exm.nr/eVWJT1

March 29th, 2011 7:34 pm PT - Decision-makers in the Los Angeles Unified School District met Tuesday to vote on important curriculum that will be used in the city’s elementary schools. The board voted to suspend the use of the current lesson plan, known as the Open Court program, in favor of the Treasures reading curriculum, L.A. Daily News reported. LAUSD has used Open Court for the last 11 years, but many felt that it was time for change.

This was an important decision for many reasons. First of all, considering the budget crisis, local school districts must learn to economize while maintaining and increasing the quality of education. The Treasures program is said to me more cost-effective, and the District estimates that it will save approximately $50 million over the next 6 years by changing the curriculum. The decision-makers should be applauded: the more that LAUSD can save on materials, the less faculty they will be forced to lay-off.

Another reason that this change is an important one is the quality of education in L.A. public schools. California and Los Angeles in particular have many schools that are sub-par, and it is essential that improvements are made to the systems. The new reading curriculum promises to be more flexible and effective for elementary-aged children; it is also designed to help teacher better instruct new English learners, who make up one-third of LAUSD students.

John Deasy who will become the newest superintendent of the district in April, hailed the decision to adopt the new program: "This will allow us to go to the next level of ability and skills for both our students and our teachers.”

Time will tell if the new reading program is more effective than the last. Nevertheless it is promising to see that the school board understands the need for changes, for budgetary reasons and for efficacy. Hopefully, this will be just the first of many alterations to the flawed public school system

MIRANDA RIGHTS FOR SCHOOLCHILDREN + Fact Sheet: POLICE INTERROGATION OF CHILD ON CAMPUS + smf 2¢

Children questioned by police in school, though not in formal custody but without doubt in a coercive setting, should be given the Miranda warning.

LA Times Editorial | http://lat.ms/guCdHI

March 29, 2011 - When a police officer says "You have the right to remain silent," the "you" is usually an adult. But what if a child suspected of wrongdoing is interrogated? That question is at the heart of a case argued before the Supreme Court last week. The issues are complex, but the bottom line is clear: Children being questioned in what they experience as a coercive environment must be read their rights.

The case involves a 13-year-old North Carolina boy who was suspected by police in two break-ins. A police department investigator questioned the boy in a school conference room, but he wasn't read his rights — not because he was a juvenile but because no suspect, regardless of age, is entitled to Miranda rights until he's in custody.

By adult standards, the boy wasn't in custody: He wasn't under arrest, the door was unlocked and at one point the police investigator told him he could leave. But common sense suggests that a 13-year-old taken to an office and faced with not only the police but also school officials, as happened in this case, won't feel free to leave or to refuse to answer their questions. And, as often with adults, a coercive environment in this case produced a confession. The boy was then adjudicated delinquent by the juvenile justice system.

The boy's lawyer asked the Supreme Court to rule that the definition of "custody" ought to change depending on the age of the suspect. A judge considering whether to admit a confession by a juvenile would examine the situation in which it was made and whether a reasonable person of the same age would feel confined and therefore pressured to answer questions.

Several justices were skeptical. Justice Antonin Scalia asked if the definition of custody should also be adjusted for the mentally handicapped and whether there should be different standards for children of different ages. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked about situations in which a child's age was unclear. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. questioned whether age is a guide to immaturity. "Some 15-year-olds," he said, "know a lot more than some 17-year-olds."

The court may someday be asked to change the rules for the interrogation of mentally disabled suspects, but it need not reach that issue in this case. As for differences in age and appearance, a clear rule — say, one that covers suspects 15 and under — would resolve most of the ambiguities.

As the American Civil Liberties Union points out in a friend-of-the-court brief, police are an increasing presence in schools, a setting where attendance is mandatory and behavior is closely regulated. For some children accused of wrongdoing, school is like a police station. Miranda warnings should be given in both places when police are questioning children.

 

Fact Sheet: POLICE INTERROGATION OF CHILD ON CAMPUS

A Fact Sheet Prepared by the Youth Law Center | http://bit.ly/gmJuLc

This fact sheet addresses the participation of parents or guardians when police, or any law enforcement officer, question their minor children at school.

Can the police question a child on campus about abuse or neglect at home without parental/guardian consent or notification?

Yes. California law specifically authorizes the police or any representative of a governmental agency investigating a report of child abuse or neglect that occurred in the child’s home or out-of-home care facility to interview the suspected child victim on campus during school hours1. The child has a right to have the interview conducted in private or to have a school staff member present during the interview. The parent has no right to notification before or after the interview.

Can the police interrogate a child on campus without parental/guardian consent or notification?

Yes. Nothing in current law requires school officials or the police to obtain parental or guardian’s consent in order to interrogate a student on campus about criminal activity.2 No notification to the parents is required even after the minor has been questioned.3 The parent or guardian may learn about the questioning only later when the child tells his or her parent or guardian what happened at school.

The police are not required to permit a parent, guardian or school official to be present while the police are questioning a student. This is true even though the child may not have a genuine understanding of his or her rights while being questioned.

Under existing law, a parent or guardian MUST be notified immediately if either of the following occur4.

• The police take the child off-campus for interrogation or questioning. The parent or guardian is entitled to be informed where the child is being taken.

• The police arrest the child at school.

Are school officials obligated to make a student available for questioning at a police officer’s request?

No, except that the school must make the child available for questioning regarding child abuse or neglect investigations as discussed above.5 However, schools are very cooperative with local law enforcement because police provide necessary protection and safety on campus through community policing grants and coordinated school safety patrols.6 Thus, the principal or school official is likely to pull the requested student from their normal school activity to meet with the officer at their request.

What can a parent or guardian do to help prevent the police from questioning a child about criminal activity at school without their consent or presence?

Parents can educate their child about what rights a student has when questioned by police on campus.

• A child can immediately ask to have a parent, or some other trusted adult, present before agreeing to talk to police. The police are not obligated to honor the student’s request, but the school might take steps to notify a parent of the interrogation if the student makes their request clearly, immediately and consistently. 7

• A child has a constitutional right to remain silent when questioned by either school officials or the police about anything including the criminal activity of the minor child, other students, their siblings or parents.8 Encourage the child to exercise that right until their parent or a trusted adult of their choosing can be present during the interrogation.

In addition, a parent or guardian can negotiate individually with their child’s school. Inform the principal that the parent/guardian wants to be notified prior to any questioning of the child, by school officials or police, on campus. While the school is not legally obligated to acquiesce to the request, officials may be more likely to work cooperatively with a parent or guardian if a specific request is made.

What can advocates do?

Advocate groups representing children, youth and parent’s rights can work together to develop school district policy limiting police accessibility to students for interrogation on campus. One challenge will be working around existing agreements schools within the district may have with local police in which police assist in maintaining public safety on campus. For this reason, advocates should develop relationships with school board members throughout the negotiation process in order to support a successful outcome.

Integral to any proposed school district policy are the following provisions:

• A requirement that the principal or school official take immediate steps to seek the consent of the parent or guardian of an elementary school student or minor high school student prior to making the student available to police for questioning.

• A prohibition against making any student available to police for questioning if the parent or guardian requests that the student not be questioned until the parent can be present.

• A requirement that, if a parent is unable to be present within a reasonable time, a member of the school administration, a school counselor or teacher is permitted to be present at the questioning. The adult should be selected by the student to ensure they are comfortable and feel safe in the questioning atmosphere.

• A requirement that the principal inform the student of their right to have an adult present during interrogation prior to making the student available to police for questioning.9

In addition, advocates can educate parents and youth about students’ rights, including the right to remain silent and to request to have a parent, trusted adult or attorney present when questioned by police on campus.

^FOOTNOTES

¹ Cal. Penal Code §11174.3

² Cal. Ed. Code § 48980 – §48985. Covers school notification to parents or guardians; ACLU-NC You Have the Right to...Not Remain Silent (2005). Available at: http://www.aclunc.org/youth/know_your_rights/index.shtml; In general, police do not need to obtain parental consent to interrogate a child in any situation.

³ Id.

⁴ Cal. Ed. Code § 48906. POLICE INTERROGATION OF CHILD ON CAMPUS

⁵ Cal. Penal Code §11174.3

⁶ Cal. Ed. Code §§49350 - 49356 provides for grants to school districts for community policing, coordinated with local law enforcement, to ensure safe and peaceful campuses. §§49300-49307 provides for establishment of school safety patrols around campus, in which schools can execute individual agreements with local law enforcement and CHP to define parameters of police involvement in these efforts.

⁷ ACLU-NC You Have the Right to...Not Remain Silent (2005). Available at: http://www.aclunc.org/youth/know_your_rights/index.shtml

⁸ USCS Const., Amend. 4; Cal. Const., Art. I

⁹ These provisions were included in Assembly Bill 1012 (Steinberg, February 2003). Full text of the bill available at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1012_bill_20040825_enrolled.pdf. Ultimately, AB 1012 was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger on September 30, 2004. Similar efforts have also been unsuccessful

 

 smf: California State PTA has historically advocated and supported legislation on this issue - See CAPTA support for PTA Sponsored Bill SB 660 (KUEHL - 2005). URGENT ACTION ALERT http://bit.ly/eI4UDD

READER VOICES LOVE+HATE SCHOOL BOARD DECISION

My Turn -Diana L. Chapman, CityWatch Vol 9 Issue 25 | http://bit.ly/huMd21

Mar 29, 2011 - About a week back, I expressed my dread with the Los Angeles Unified School Board’s decision to hand over seven schools to outside bidders – a move that makes me brutally concerned over what that does to the disintegrating morale of the district’s staff. (Link to CityWatch story)

With 5,000 more layoff notices  issued last week alone – and more expected to rain down on LAUSD staffers – I couldn’t help but be wary of what ramifications this means to teachers and support staff already awash in massive tsunami of cuts – yes, where many of our kids go to school.

Despite that, LAUSD Supt. Ramon Cortines, who will retire in April, approved most of his employees proposals to breathe new life into 13 campuses, the board discarded many of his suggestions and handed over seven schools to charter operators. The move was made after the board approved an earlier policy of “public school choice.” This allows charters to bid some of LAUSD’S failing and newly constructed schools.

The action disappoints me, because I fear an inequitable form of education branching out amongst the charters and a head toward privatization of public education.

In the meantime, seven LAUSD schools are gone – and only time will tell if the charter is a better provider to students.

Readers immediately emailed me their views, which included one who argued the teachers can only blame themselves and another calling it the avenue the board embraced as a remedy to bust the union.

In one case, a reader said teachers need to look in their own direction.

“I hate to say it, but teachers have brought this upon themselves,” wrote Kim Stevens. “It is not a money issue (the charter teachers are paid the same), but it is a matter of work rules leading to inflexibility and waste. All the nominated schools were a failure under LAUSD operation. Principals had no control over unqualified, unwilling or failing teachers. No way to run a school.

“The UTLA has two choices. Act passively and try to keep what it has and see the jobs dwindle. Or act positively, go back to zero on work rules keeping the same pay, and try again under able management. You  cannot fire a bad teacher. But you can eliminate their job. That is not about wages.”

Martha McKenzie, a former LAUSD teacher for 36 years, argues there are no other motives than one – to break up the UTLA.

“You know as well as I that they (the school board) has ulterior motives,” McKenizie wrote. “They are doing it for one reason-union busting!! They fail to see the LONG term results of their irresponsible actions!!! Shame on the School Board. (School Board Member Richard and former administrator) Vladovic receives his pension because of the union-UTLA. The administrators always fell in suit with the teachers’ bargaining issues. What a traitor!”

Calling it a “giveaway,” of schools, parent Teresa Feldman has other concerns that have nothing to do with the UTLA. She worries about whether the board’s move is  even legal when involving newly constructed schools.

“When the district first proposed allowing charters onto new campuses like Eli Broad’s school for performing arts downtown, I emailed (Superintendent Ramon Cortines) and voiced my concerns. I actually ended up getting a phone call from the man himself and we had a long conversation. At that time, he made it clear that he was not in lock-step with the Mayor, but somehow the district ended up with the “failing schools” giveaway anyway.

“Now that Cortines is leaving, he is showing his real disdain for this move toward privatization, and I applaud him for that. I do wish he or someone familiar with the law would look into whether or not giving away new schools is against the law. I voted for bond issues to build new LAUSD schools for underserved populations that were expecting overcrowding. Now the district has decided that they need to use those campuses to avoid being sued by charters for not providing them access to LAUSD campuses. This is not what I voted for, and unless the charter schools agree to have gifted education, special ed., integration, etc. I do not want charters to go in.

“My kids have friends who lost whole school years because the charters their parents placed them in turned out to be bogus. Others have moved to charters only to have them close up for various reasons. Some educators I know have seen former charter school students pushed back into their neighborhood schools because the children didn’t “fit in”…Someone in the know has to wage a legal battle over the use of these campuses for charters.”

The last writer echoes my sentiments exactly. Let’s not give up on kids who don’t “fit in,” or have special needs beyond the scope of any given charter. All kids deserve a chance at a good education – and not all kids will be equal or receive that at charter schools.

Diana Chapman has been a writer/journalist for nearly thirty years. She has written for magazines, newspapers and the best-seller series, Chicken Soup for the Soul. You can reach her at:   hartchap@cox or her website theunderdogforkids.blogspot.com )  -cw

GREEN DOT & STEVE BARR FINALIZE THEIR “DIVORCE” + CHARTER CHAMPION SHIFTS FOCUS + A UNION SCEPTIC, CONVERTED BY STEVE BARR, BEFRIENDS THE UFT

Alexander Russo | This Week in Education blog | http://bit.ly/dZwRHz

March 28, 2011 | Posted At: 04:27 PM | Sam Dillon reported in Saturday’s New York Times [Charter School Champion Shifts Focus – follows] that Steve Barr's spinoff organization has now changed its name in order to clarify the legal and operational separation between Barr’s current work and Green Dot Public Schools, Barr’s original organization. Dillon describes Green Dot and Barr as “going through a divorce” and is kind enough to mention some of the uncomfortable dynamics that led up to the split that are described in my forthcoming book.

The story behind Barr and Green Dot parting ways is understandably fascinating to education watchers, who rarely get to see any of the internal strife and sausage-making that goes on behind the velvet school reform curtain communicated to them by the mainstream media and reformy blogs. But internal conflicts and partings of ways aren’t really all that unusual in education or other fields (think politics, business, or entertainment). Jon Schnur left New Leaders just a few months ago after having gone through a slew of senior staff over the years. Richard Colvin departed less than two years after having announced the “new” Hechinger Institute. Co-founders Tom Toch and Andy Rotherham fell out with each other and their board and left Education Sector after just four years. The CDF and the Forum have had a lot of turnover.  Tom Vander Ark and the Gates Foundation went their separate ways in 2007, after eight years together. 

The only thing particularly notable about the Barr/Green Dot split is how poorly covered and understood it was for such a long time -- and how long everybody seemed to leave it that way. Marco Petruzzi replaced Barr as CEO of Green Dot in the fall of 2008 and Shane Martin replaced him as board chair in 2009.  The organization formally known as Green Dot America never had much to do with the "real" Green Dot. But no one in the media or among any but the anti-reform bloggers seemed to grasp (or be willing to say out loud) what was happening, and Green Dot and Barr both seemed understandably content at the time to let the circumstances remain vague. [Much the same thing is happening now with Rhee and Klein, whose untimely dismissals are usually ignored in news stories and at conferences.]

The situation would have remained unclear for even longer but a recent NYT article about Barr’s possible expansion in NYC made apparent just how confused everyone was.  (A story in GothamSchools fails to explain the split or the rationale behind the renaming. [A union skeptic, converted by Steve Barr, befriends the UFT – following])

Friday's news was the signing of the final divorce papers after a long separation – and the beginning of what one hopes is a strong future for the work being done by Barr and Petruzzi.

 

CHARTER CHAMPION SHIFTS FOCUS

By SAM DILLON | NY Times | http://nyti.ms/hLoA9V

March 25, 2011 - Green Dot, the schools group based in Los Angeles that challenged conventional practices by staffing its charter schools with unionized teachers, is going through a divorce with its founder, Steve Barr, who is leaving to build a new national charter group.

Monica Almeida/The New York Times  - Steve Barr in 2007 with charter school students in Los Angeles, where he founded the first group of Green Dot schools

On Friday, Mr. Barr and Shane Martin, the college dean who succeeded him as chairman of the Green Dot board in 2009, issued a joint statement announcing that Mr. Barr would no longer use the Green Dot name as he sought to open charter schools in New York and elsewhere.

The Green Dot organization will continue, under the leaders who have replaced Mr. Barr, to run its network of 16 charter schools in Los Angeles.

Mr. Barr’s exit left somewhat unclear the status of the Green Dot New York Charter School, which he helped organize in the Bronx in 2007 as a collaboration with the United Federation of Teachers.

Marco Petruzzi, who succeeded Mr. Barr as chief executive of Green Dot in 2008, said through a spokeswoman that Green Dot had provided curriculum and other educational services to the Bronx school and would continue to do so.

But Michael Mulgrew, the teachers’ federation president, said it would be up to the Bronx charter’s nine-member board of directors to decide whether the school’s future relationship would be with Mr. Barr’s group, or with Green Dot’s management.

Alexander Russo, the author of a coming book on the efforts of Mr. Barr and Green Dot to overhaul the troubled Locke High School in Los Angeles, said, “Steve is a hard-charging visionary, as many founders are, and as Green Dot got bigger, people struggled to find an appropriate place for him in the organization.”

In 2009, Green Dot reported to the tax authorities that an internal review had determined that Mr. Barr had charged more than $50,000 in expenses to Green Dot that were undocumented or unjustified, and he repaid the money.

Mr. Martin said that no evidence had ever surfaced of anything worse than accounting sloppiness, and that the embarrassment caused to Green Dot had nothing to do with Mr. Barr’s departure. Mr. Barr will continue as a member of Green Dot’s board, he said.

“We wish him all the best,” said Mr. Martin, who is a dean at Loyola Marymount University.

Green Dot is one of a dozen or so nonprofit, high-performing charter chains that focus on students from low-income families and have grown rapidly over the past decade with philanthropic financing. Most of the others, which include the Kipp Schools, with 99 schools in 20 states, and Achievement First, with 19 schools in Connecticut and New York, operate with largely nonunion teachers.

But Mr. Barr organized Green Dot schools to operate with flexible contracts for unionized teachers that allow management to seek schedule and other instructional changes not permitted in traditional union agreements.

For more than a year, Mr. Barr has been in discussions with school and union officials in several cities, exploring ways of extending his vision of overhauling schools nationwide.

He has been operating as Green Dot America, and recruited a six-member board for that organization that includes two other directors who also sit on Green Dot’s board: Susan Estrich, the prominent Los Angeles lawyer, and Jeff Shell, the president of programming for Comcast.

On Friday, Green Dot America changed its name to Future is Now Schools. Mr. Barr said the name was inspired by President Obama’s call in the State of the Union address to “win the future” by improving American education.

In an interview, Mr. Barr said that the use of the Green Dot name had become confusing as he sought to build the new organization, which he said would explore using a lot of technology in classrooms to augment traditional instruction in what he called a “hybrid model.”

He also hopes to start some charters in middle-class neighborhoods, while Green Dot focuses exclusively on schools serving low-income students, Mr. Barr said.

Mr. Russo’s book portrays Mr. Petruzzi, a former partner at the consulting firm Bain & Company, as a reserved, by-the-numbers executive, and Mr. Barr as more passionate about organizing teachers and working-class parents than about the details of managing a growing network of schools.

“From the start there had been tensions between these two strong personalities working in close proximity, one getting nearly all the public credit and the other working largely in the shadows,” the book says.

 

A UNION SCEPTIC, CONVERTED BY STEVE BARR, BEFRIENDS THE UFT

by Maura Walz | Gotham Schools |  http://bit.ly/fE2mDm

March 25, 2011 - When Gideon Stein first picked up the 2009 New Yorker profile of California charter school leader Steve Barr, he put the article down without finishing it. The story was all about Barr’s decision to work with the teachers union rather than fight it.

Steve Barr argues that education activists need to move from campaigning to governing.>

“I was like, eh, how great can his schools be?” Stein, an entrepreneur and real estate developer based in Manhattan, recalled in an interview this week.

A board member of at one of Eva Moskowitz’s Success Charter Network schools, where teachers are determinedly not unionized, Stein didn’t believe that anyone working with a teachers union had a shot at turning a school around.

But at the urging of his family, he finished the piece and was so impressed that he asked Moskowitz to broker an introduction. Soon he flew to Los Angeles to visit Locke High School, the school that Barr’s group, Green Dot, took over in 2008. The trip was “transformative,” Stein said.

In Barr, he saw the solution to the problem that troubles many education philanthropists: Successful transformations urban and rural schools are too rare. They have not achieved “scale.”

“While I love my work with Eva, and I think Eva is just an unbelievable educator and advocate for children,” Stein said, “if you really want scale, I think you’re going to have to make some compromises.”

He asked Barr how he could help Green Dot’s mission of re-making schools in partnership with labor.

Now Stein is the president of Barr’s national organization, which changed its name today from Green Dot America to Future Is Now Schools. And he’s rejiggered his social calendar. “I’ve now had dinner and drinks with Randi 10 times in the last eight months,” he said, referring to Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.

Winning the Future

Future is Now, whose name is a play on President Barack Obama’s charge to “win the future,” aims to spread the principles that have governed Barr’s schools in California and New York around the country. Those principles include a simplified teachers contract that trades higher pay for tenure and sets only class size, the length of the school day and year, salary and benefits. Barr said that he also aims to transform the learning experience through technology.

Stein and Barr want to start by expanding in New York City, where they are working with the United Federation of Teachers and the Department of Education on a plan to take over two struggling Bronx schools starting next year. The plan would test a model that has not yet been tried here: removing the schools’ principals and half their teaching staffs.

Barr argues that the path forward has to be endorsed by all sides in the education debate. In a sit-down interview with GothamSchools this week, he repeatedly declared his desire to “gather the tribes.” “We’re not going to solve this with this tribal warfare,” Barr said. “Not only is it boring — we’re not reaching kids.”

The challenge is to bring the positive changes that a small number of schools serving urban and rural students have achieved to the rest of the country. ”You can’t go into a 100 percent unionized industry with non-union labor,” he said.

Organizing parents to support his efforts is also central to the expansion, Barr said. For the two turnaround projects in the Bronx, Barr has promised to knock on every door in the communities where he is taking over schools in an effort to build parent support. He’ll lean on a veteran community organizer he and Stein have hired away from the SEIU for the effort, Mike Dolan.

But it’s far from clear that Barr’s attempt to replace the principal and half the staff of two schools won’t provoke an outcry similar to that sparked when the city has closed schools. Questions linger about the sustainability of Barr’s model, which has proven to be expensive in California. And already critics have grumbled that Barr, the city, and the union are proceeding with their negotiations without identifying the schools they are targeting to their staffs and parents.

(In our interview, Barr and Stein indicated that they had a high school in mind but wouldn’t name it.)

Working Together

The city’s teachers union, however, says it is committed to working with the organization. The two groups, along with the DOE, are already working to find common ground in an area where the city and the union have been stalled for months — a new evaluation system for the schools’ teachers.

Formal negotiations on the evaluations began just this week, but the Barr and UFT Secretary Michael Mendel said that there has been progress, although a new evaluation plan has not yet been vetted by lawyers to ensure it conforms to state education law.

“There is absolutely a willingness on our part and on Green Dot’s part to do this,” Mendel said.

Barr and Stein described a close friendship that has formed between Barr and UFT President Michael Mulgrew — and also between Stein, Mendel, and Leo Casey, the union’s resident big thinker and vice president.

“We met for breakfast and we ended up almost going to lunch,” Barr said of his first meeting with Mulgrew three months ago. He said that he found Mulgrew to be extremely thoughtful about the future of the teaching profession. The two spoke about how to reconfigure schools for a changing workforce, he said.

“I think a lot of this is just the lost art of trust,” Barr said. “Randi and I and Mike Mulgrew and I — we don’t agree on everything. … How do you find the 80% we all agree on?”

With the two sides are committed to moving forward, part of the ease may also be due to the fact that the negotiations don’t have to address one of the sticking points between the city and union on evaluations more generally: how to handle teachers who are rated ineffective this year.

• SEE ALSO: New Strategy Weighed for Failing Schools/NY Times March 9, 2011 | http://nyti.ms/fy9Sta

2011 ED SOURCE FORUM "The Future for Public Education in California" VIDEOS NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE

from Ed Source

If you missed the 2011 EdSource Forum, or if you attended and want to see any of the sessions again, you can now catch all the presentations and discussions online.

With a focus on "The Future for Public Education in California," the Forum sessions included:

• California's Fiscal Crisis and its Impact on K-12 Education and Community Colleges

• California's New Common Core K-12 Academic Standards

• Next Generation Learning and Technology

• View From the Top: New State Education Policy Leadership

In addition to viewing the video, you can also download the speakers' presentation slides and access other resources relevant to the discussion. We hope you'll find the information useful and share it with your colleagues.

View Forum videos now >

EdSource is an independent not-for-profit research organization dedicated to clarifying complex education issues.

DEFIENDEN FONDOS PARA SUS ESTUDIOS / ADVOCATE FOR SCHOOL FUNDING

La Opinión | http://bit.ly/gR0jJh

Spanish to English translation by google translate

Defienden fondos para sus estudios: Estudiantes se unen y aseguran que no hay que desanimarse para ir a la universidad, a pesar de los problemas económicos by Rubén Moreno La Opinión | http://bit.ly/gR0jJh 2011-03-26 - Aunque la mayoría de los alumnos de la secundaria Lincoln de Los Ángeles considera proseguir la educación superior cuando terminen la escuela, la realidad es otra bien distinta: apenas unos 150 estudiantes por cada 500 que se gradúan continúan formándose, según el director del plantel, José Torres. Mientras varios factores desencadenan que un alto número no continúe con sus sueños, la falta de fondos y los recortes que enfrentan tanto escuelas como universidades comienzan a ser motivo de inquietud para muchos cuando se ponen a pensar en su propio futuro. "Quiero ir al colegio, pero estoy viendo que no es fácil lograr lo que uno quiere en la vida", comenta Alexis Cruz, quien ha solicitado cupo en Cal State Northridge para cursar psicología el próximo curso. "Me preocupa mucho todo lo que pasa en el gobierno, de que no haya fondos y me vaya a tomar más tiempo completar las clases". Esa preocupación se ha traducido en acción. Junto a decenas de estudiantes más de la misma escuela, Cruz ha tomado la iniciativa de defender su causa como estudiante para hacerse escuchar entre las esferas políticas a través de diversos actos y manifestaciones, pero también convenciendo a otros alumnos de que la batalla por educarse no está perdida. "Ahora es cuando tenemos que estar más motivados", dijo Iliana Ávila, quien al igual que Cruz es miembro de Estudiantes Unidos, un colectivo de alumnos con raíces en varias escuelas del Este de Los Ángeles que se movilizan para defender sus derechos y asegurar fondos. "No importa qué tan difícil se ponga la situación o cuántos recortes haya, lo que tenemos que dejar saber a los demás estudiantes es que eso no puede impedir que vayan a la universidad, y que no tienen razón para desanimarse", agregó Ávila. Durante el tiempo de almuerzo de ayer en la escuela, varios alumnos identificados con camisetas de la organización fueron preguntando a otros compañeros sus intereses y preocupaciones cuando concluyan la secundaria. El objetivo: unir fuerzas y asesorar a quienes no saben por dónde empezar a buscar ayuda para dar el primer paso a la universidad. Varias instituciones académicas se dieron además cita para responder a las preguntas del alumnado sobre cómo solicitar admisión en los campus universitarios y qué carreras profesionales se ofrecen. "Muchos ni siquiera saben que cuanto mejor sean sus calificaciones en las materias, más dinero pueden conseguir cuando soliciten ayuda financiera", indicó Diana Cárdenas, consejera que prepara a los alumnos de cara a la educación superior. "Y lo que es más importante, solicitarlo a tiempo para asegurarse que tendrán esa ayuda". Otros ochos consejeros trabajan en la escuela Lincoln, cuatro de ellos pagados con fondos de la Ley de Inversión en la Calidad de la Educación (QEIA). Pero el plantel podría dejar de recibir parte de ese dinero si no alcanza el nivel exigido de desempeño académico en las pruebas estatales. "El poco dinero que tenemos hay que estirarlo para aprovecharlo lo mejor que podemos", expresó Torres, el director, luego de que su escuela ha experimentado entre 10% y 20% de recortes en los últimos cinco años. "Ahora nos ponemos dos o tres sombreros para hacer más con menos". "Aun así hemos optado por poner más consejeros con ese dinero [de los fondos QEIA] porque el estudiante necesita una personalización", agregó. "Los estudiantes miran las noticias igual que nosotros, y se quedan pensando qué probabilidad tienen de seguir estudiando cuando están escuchando que hay recortes por todas partes". Con unos 2,180 estudiantes, la secundaria Lincoln bien podría reflejar el mismo escenario que se vive en muchos otros planteles del Distrito Escolar Unificado de Los Ángeles (LAUSD): una escuela donde la mayoría de sus alumnos son hispanos (83%) y el 95% del total califica para almuerzo y desayuno gratis o a bajo precio porque sus familias no ganan lo suficiente. Para Karen García, quien este curso terminará la secundaria, uno de los temores es "empezar la universidad y no seguir mis clases porque no haya fondos". Sabe que no tendrá más remedio que buscar un trabajo cuando llegue el verano para ahorrar con el fin de costearse la educación superior. "Mis padres no ganan mucho para poderla pagar y yo no califico para ayuda financiera", dijo esta alumna indocumentada, a quien le gustaría estudiar desarrollo infantil para trabajar con niños. Ángel Medina en cambio tiene un año más para tomar una decisión. De momento, está indeciso entre si enrolarse con los Marines o estudiar leyes. "Hay muchas leyes malas que están afectando a la educación", dijo el alumno del grado 11. "Me gustaría hacer algo para cambiar eso, porque si recortan maestros, los estudiantes tienen menos empuje y es más fácil abandonar la escuela". Un total de 14 maestros de los 110 que trabajan en la escuela Lincoln han recibido notificación de posible despido por parte de LAUSD ante la falta de presupuesto. "Estos estudiantes son los profesionales del futuro. Tienen que conocer qué carreras pueden hacer, y tienen que conocer mundo, más allá de Lincoln Heights y de terminar trabajando en la tienda de la esquina", apuntó Gilberto Martínez, maestro de historia desde hace cinco años, y uno de los que ha recibido la notificación. "Pero para eso necesitan a los maestros. Yo he llegado a donde estoy porque un maestro me inspiró a mí, y estoy seguro que todo el mundo se acuerda de cuál fue su mejor maestro, el que hizo una diferencia en su vida". Algunos estudiantes tienen claro que quieren seguir esa misma profesión. Lizbeth García, del grado 11, quisiera ser maestra de inglés. "Sé que va a ser difícil, cada vez se necesita más ayuda porque peligran muchos programas", comentó la alumna. "Pero eso es lo que me motiva más para alcanzar mi meta".

Advocate for school funding:  Students come together and say they do not get discouraged to go to college, despite economic problems by Ruben Moreno La Opinión | http://bit.ly/gR0jJh 03/26/2011  - Although most students of Lincoln High School in Los Angeles considered pursuing higher education when they leave school, the reality is quite different: only about 150 students for every 500 who graduate continue to form as the school principal, Joseph Torres. While several factors triggered a high number does not continue with their dreams, lack of funds and cuts facing both schools and universities are beginning to be a concern for many when they start thinking about their own future. "I want to go to school, but I see it is not easy to achieve what you want in life," says Alexis Cruz, who has asked to share at Cal State Northridge to study psychology next year. "I am very concerned what happens in the government, no funds and I will take more time to complete the classes." That concern has translated into action. Along with dozens of students over the school, Cross has taken the initiative to defend their cause as a student to be heard from the political through various events and demonstrations, but also convincing other students that the battle to educate not is lost. "Now is when we have to be more motivated," said Iliana Avila, who like Cruz is a member of United Students, a group of students with roots in several schools in East Los Angeles who are mobilizing to defend their rights and secure funding . "No matter how difficult the situation gets or how many cuts there are, what we have to let other students know is that that can not stop going to college, and have no reason to be discouraged," added Avila. During lunch time at school yesterday, several students identified with shirts of the organization was asking other peers their interests and concerns when completed high school. The goal: to join forces and to advise those who do not know where to start looking for help to take the first step to college. Several academic institutions also gave an appointment to answer questions from students on how to apply for admission to the university campus and what careers are available. "Many do not even know that the better are your qualifications in the subjects, the more money they can get when applying for financial aid," said Diana Cardenas, counselor prepares students facing higher education. "And more importantly, request time to make sure this will help." Other eight counselors work at Lincoln, four of them paid with funds from the Investment Act Quality Education (QEIA). But the school could no longer receive some of that money if you do not reach the required level of academic performance on state tests. "The little money we have to stretch to get the best we can," said Torres, the director, after his school has experienced between 10% and 20% cuts over the past five years. "Now we get two or three hats to do more with less." "Yet we have chosen to put more counselors with the money [funds QEIA] because the student needs a personalized," he added. "Students watch the news as we are, and how likely they are thinking of further study when they hear that there are cuts everywhere." With about 2.180 students, Lincoln High School may well reflect the same scenario that exists in many other campuses in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD): a school where most students are Hispanic (83%) and 95% total of breakfast and lunch eligible for free or low price because their families do not earn enough. To Karen Garcia, who completed high school this year, one of the fears is "start college and do not follow my classes because insufficient funds." She knows it will be forced to find a job when the summer to save to afford higher education. "My parents do not earn much so that it can afford and I do not qualify for financial aid," said the pupil undocumented, who would like to study child development to work with children. Angel Medina instead has another year to make a decision. For now, he's torn between whether to enroll in the Marines or law school. "There are many bad laws which are affecting education," said Grade 11 student. "I'd do anything to change that, because if they cut teachers, students have less thrust and is easier to leave school." A total of 14 of the 110 teachers working at Lincoln have been notified of possible dismissal by the LAUSD to the lack of budget. "These students are future professionals. They need to know what careers can do and must see the world, beyond the Lincoln Heights and end up working in the corner store," said Gilberto Martinez, history teacher for five years, and one that has received the notification. "But that need teachers. I've gotten where I am because a teacher inspired me, and I'm sure everyone remembers what was your best teacher, who made a difference in your life." Some students are clear that they want to follow the same profession. Lizbeth Garcia, Grade 11, would be English teacher. "I know it will be difficult, whenever you need more help because many programs are in danger," said student. "But that's what motivates me to achieve my goal."

Updated - IT'S THE KIDS WHO LOSE OUT: Targeted teachers worry about students' futures and their own

By Connie Llanos, Staff Writer, LA Daily News | http://bit.ly/hcp5cW

Teacher Jolene Kuebler, left, gets a hug from assistant principal Shanna Sarris at Cleveland High, Thursday, March 24, 2011. Both have been notified they are on the list to be laid off. (Michael Owen Baker/Staff Photographer)

Cleveland High School assistant principal Shanna Sarris has been notified she is on the list to...

 

03/27/2011 - Updated: 03/28/2011 09:12:27 AM PDT - Manny Banuelos is known for his ability to motivate kids - both in his fourth-grade classroom at Fullbright Elementary and on the neighborhood baseball diamond, where he volunteers as a Little League coach.

Jolene Kuebler is beloved by students and colleagues, who marvel at the stamina that allows her to teach health classes, coach drill team and lead the school band at Cleveland High School.

Despite their success, the two San Fernando Valley teachers are among 5,200 educators who have received layoff notices from the financially troubled Los Angeles Unified School District. With just seven years each in the classroom, they're unlikely to beat the state-mandated system of using seniority to determine who gets to stay and who must go.

"This upsets me because I'm a good teacher ... I work hard," Kuebler said, breaking down in tears.

"What I'm really concerned about is my kids ... In the long run it's the kids that will lose out."

Facing a $408 million deficit for the fiscal year that starts July 1, the district has notified 7,300 employees that they could be terminated - administrators, support staff and the certificated educators.

A report obtained by the Daily News shows that roughly two-thirds of the district's 952 schools would be affected by teacher layoffs when classes start in the fall.

Cleveland High in Reseda would lose 11 percent of its 150 teachers, while nearly half of the 16 educators at Fullbright would be lost.

The layoffs could be averted, officials say, if a ballot measure Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed for June is approved by California voters, extending a series of tax increases.

However, weeks of budget negotiations in Sacramento have failed to yield a deal on Brown's budget plan, and hopes are fading for an 11th-hour bailout of LAUSD's finances.

"If the state doesn't want to fund public education, I don't know where we get the money to pay staff and keep programs," said LAUSD school board member Tamar Galatzan.

Galatzan, who represents parts of the San Fernando Valley, is also dismayed by provisions of the state law that mandates seniority - not performance - in compiling layoff lists.

"We're talking about potentially thousands of creative, dynamic, capable people losing their jobs and we'll have no one to replace them," she said. "Our children deserve better."

The prospect of losing even one teacher at a school can cause stress on a campus.

"It's devastating to a school community," said Claudia Ruiz, principal of Fullbright Elementary, where 12 of the 26 teachers have been targeted for layoff.

"As a school, you usually spend more time together than you do with our own family. You build a camaraderie and when you lose a part of that family it's very hard."

Ruiz, who has worked as a teacher and administrator at LAUSD for 24 years, said she was taken aback when she heard how many teachers her Canoga Park campus could be losing in September.

After meeting individually with each teacher to discuss their fate, Ruiz said she was struck by the grace of her staff.

"I work with such wonderful professionals," Ruiz said.

"Obviously they were disappointed ... they don't know if they are going to have a job next year, but they haven't let it impact what they do."

Another Fullbright staff member targeted for layoff is preschool teacher Gabriela Fierro, who has been with LAUSD for nine years.

Inside her classroom last week, a crew of 4-year-olds curiously stuck their tiny fingers into dirt-filled flower pots.

"Make a hole in the middle, throw the seed inside, then we'll water them and see how they grow," Fierro instructed, as she handed each of her youngster a handful of marigold seeds.

Fierro's preschool program, which helps prepare low-income students for kindergarten, is among several being cut by the district to save money.

"It was a little shocking, but I'm taking everything one day at a time," Fierro said. "I stay focused on the kids. Every day I spend with them helps relieve some of the pressure."

At Fullbright, teachers have made a concerted effort to avoid talking about the future. They don't want to affect the camaraderie among the staff, or cause undue anxiety among the students.

At home, though, it's difficult not to worry about the the careers the teachers have worked so hard to attain. The stress is especially high for Banuelos and his wife - another Los Angeles Unified teacher targeted for layoff - who are a month away from the birth of their first child.

"The uncertainty is the hardest part now," Banuelos said. "It's a waiting game."

The narrow lobby of Cleveland High is filled with a row of 19 folding chairs. Each chair sports a sign with a name - one for each teacher who could be cut from the campus next year.

"This teacher changed my life," one student wrote on one of the signs.

"Why her? ... She is so smart," another wrote.

"Don't Fire," was printed on nearly almost sign.

With nearly 4,000 students, Cleveland is one of Los Angeles Unified's largest high schools, so the loss of 19 teachers will be sorely felt.

Administrators and colleagues say each of the 19 has been crucial to the turnaround at the Reseda campus, which a decade ago was among the lowest performing in the district and now is among the highest.

"These teachers give everything they have to these kids and this school," Assistant Principal Shanna Sarris said.

Among those targeted for layoff are physical education teacher Carisa Silva, who recently helped win a $100,000 state-of-the-art fitness center for the campus through the Governor's Fitness Challenge. She has just five years with the district.

Cara Blumenfield, a three-year teacher and the girls' basketball coach, led the Cavaliers to their first city playoffs in years.

What brings Kuebler to tears is her work with the drill team, which she revived when she started her teaching career at Cleveland seven years ago.

Then two years ago, when the band director left the school and there was no money in the budget to fill the position, Kuebler also took on the band.

"Without a band there is no drill team and I couldn't let that happen," she said.

Sarris can empathize with her teachers. She also got a layoff notice - like all administrators at LAUSD.

She expects she'll remain with the district, but may be transferred to another school or - as a former history teacher - reassigned to the classroom.

Still, she would miss her job as an administrator and the campus' disciplinary dean.

Most days find her roaming the sprawling Cleveland campus - iPhone in one hand, walkie-talkie in another - searching for truant students.

Out of the corner of her eye, she spots a student rushing into the boys' bathroom.

"Josue ... where's your pass," she hollers. No answer.

"It's OK, I can wait for you out here."

Sarris has launched several new programs at the school in her short three years, including a new tardy sweep effort that targets students who skip the last class of the day.

After school, Sarris is also the volunteer girls soccer coach. She brags about her team's second-place standing in the highly competitive West Valley soccer league.

"I just hope whatever (legislative) bill needs to pass gets passed, because our kids need teachers like these," Sarris said. "They need these critical programs because it's what gets them to school.

"And that's the difference between the graduation rate going up or down."

Value-added: 'GRADING THE TEACHERS' WINS SCRIPPS HOWARD PUBLIC SERVICE AWARD + smf's 2¢

from LA Times Readers' Representative Journal | http://lat.ms/foEs5Z

"A conversation on newsroom ethics and standards"

March 18, 2011 | 12:42 pm - Editor Russ Stanton announced the following honors from the Scripps Howard National Journalism Awards:

Jason Felch, Jason Song, Doug Smith, Sandra Poindexter and Ken Schwencke on Friday were named winners of the public service award in the 57th annual Scripps Howard National Journalism Awards program for their groundbreaking series, "Grading The Teachers."

The judges said the project "involved both sophisticated data analysis and good old-fashioned reporting. A team of Times reporters looked at one of the most vexing questions in education today: how to identify effective and less-than-effective teachers. The Times conducted a "value added" analysis of teacher performance based on how students progressed year to year. It also sent reporters into more than 50 classrooms while other reporters spoke to teachers, administrators and parents. The Times then made all the data public and within hours, more than 200,000 Los Angeles residents logged on to see how their children's teachers rate. The series was a tremendous public service that shined a light on an important issue."

Dr. Robert D. Skeels who blogs as *rdsathene at the Solidaridad blog quips "Have to love that Jason Song still defends his paper's totally discredited VAM nonsense."

smf: Nobody disputes that Value-added Analysis/Value-added Modeling (VAM) of classroom teachers is a hot button issue - and as such is newsworthy. However Grading the Teachers didn’t report the news nor did it analyze the news - it created the news - "Grading the Teachers" was The Story.

Subsequent critiques of the story:  the reporting, the data analysis and the conclusions discredited the wrenched mess - see: National Education Policy Center report: Due Diligence and the Evaluation of Teachers

"The research on which the Los Angeles Times relied for its August 2010 teacher effectiveness reporting was demonstrably inadequate to support the published rankings. Using the same L.A. Unified School District data and the same methods as the Times, this study probes deeper and finds the earlier research to have serious weaknesses."

Yet The Times - employing the reporters to cover themselves - spun the discrediting report and misreported the findings: Separate Study Confirms Many Los Angeles Times Findings On Teacher Effectiveness

See the point-by-point annotated refutation of the ' Separate Story..." report here: Due Diligence and The Evaluation Of Teachers: Fact Sheet Concerning L.A. Times Article Of February 7, 2011

Against the backdrop of this Rigoberto Ruelas Jr., a fifth-grade teacher at Miramonte Elementary School, evaluated poorly in The Times report, committed suicide.

Yet the story won an award for "good old fashioned reporting" and was a was "a tremendous public service"?

And Times trumpets this success in "A conversation on newsroom ethics and standards"?

What is the meaning of "ethics" and "standards"? Does the adjective "Orwellian" go far enough?

'Value-added' teacher evaluations: L.A. UNIFIED TACKLES A TOUGH FORMULA

By Teresa Watanabe, Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/gt0KPl

Los Angeles school district leaders are poised to plunge ahead with their own confidential 'value-added' ratings this spring, saying the approach is far more objective and accurate than any other evaluation tool available, despite its complexity.

John Deasy, incoming superintendent of schools in Los Angeles, says of the change: “We are not questing for perfect. We are questing for much better.” (Irfan Khan, Los Angeles Times / March 28, 2011)

March 28, 2011 - In Houston, school district officials introduced a test score-based evaluation system to determine teacher bonuses, then — in the face of massive protests — jettisoned the formula after one year to devise a better one.

In New York, teachers union officials are fighting the public release of ratings for more than 12,000 teachers, arguing that the estimates can be drastically wrong.

Despite such controversies, Los Angeles school district leaders are poised to plunge ahead with their own confidential "value-added" ratings this spring, saying the approach is far more objective and accurate than any other evaluation tool available.

"We are not questing for perfect," said L.A. Unified's incoming Supt. John Deasy. "We are questing for much better."

As value-added analysis is adopted — if not embraced — across the country, much of the debate has focused on its underlying mathematical formulas and their daunting complexity.

All value-added methods aim to estimate a teacher's effectiveness in raising students' standardized test scores. But there is no universal agreement on which formula can most accurately isolate a teacher's influence from other factors that affect student learning — and different formulas produce different results.

Nor is there widespread agreement about how much the resulting ratings should count. Tensions are all the greater because the stakes for teachers are high as more districts consider using the evolving science as a factor in hiring, firing, promotions, tenure and pay.

"It is too unreliable when you're talking about messing with someone's career," said Gayle Fallon, president of the Houston Federation of Teachers.

She said many teachers don't understand the calculations. The general formula for the "linear mixed model" used in her district is a string of symbols and letters more than 80 characters long:

y = Xβ + Zv + ε where β is a p-by-1 vector of fixed effects; X is an n-by-p matrix; v is a q-by-1 vector of random effects; Z is an n-by-q matrix; E(v) = 0, Var(v) = G; E(ε) = 0, Var(ε) = R; Cov(v,ε) = 0. V = Var(y) = Var(y - Xβ) = Var(Zv + ε) = ZGZ^T + R.

"It's doctorate-level math," Fallon said.

In essence, value-added analysis involves looking at each student's past test scores to predict future scores. The difference between the prediction and students' actual scores each year is the estimated "value" that the teacher added — or subtracted.

The Times released a value-added analysis of about 6,000 L.A. Unified elementary school teachers in August that was based on district data. Before school ends, L.A. Unified plans to release its own analysis, confidentially providing teachers with their individual value-added scores. For at least the first year, the teachers' scores will not be used in formal evaluations; whether they are ultimately used is subject to negotiation with the union.

Deasy and many others argue that value-added analysis is far more useful than the common practice of dispatching administrators to classrooms, where they often make pro-forma observations. These reviews overwhelmingly result in "satisfactory' ratings, which may or may not be deserved.

In designing its model, the nation's second-largest school district has wrestled with myriad questions: whether to tweak the model to account for the students in a class who don't speak fluent English, for example, or for those who moved from one school to another during the academic year.

Should value-added models take student race and poverty into account, even if it means having lower expectations for some races and higher ones for others?

Deasy said these were among the most difficult questions the district grappled with. Theoretically, value-added models inherently account for these differences, because each student's performance is compared each year with the same student's performance in the past, not with the work of other students. But many experts say further statistical adjustments are necessary to improve accuracy.

A 2010 study of 3,500 students and 250 teachers in six Bay Area high schools by researchers at Stanford University and UC Berkeley found that, under their model, teachers with more African American and Latino students tended to receive lower value-added scores than those with more Asian students.

Dan Goldhaber, a professor at the University of Washington Bothell, said that there is no definitive answer on the race question but that most specialists in the field support factoring it in because research overwhelmingly shows that it is correlated with student performance.

William Sanders, value-added consultant for the Houston Independent School District, strongly opposes adjusting for race or socioeconomic status, however. He says that it is unnecessary and that adjustments would camouflage such institutional problems as the inequitable distribution of teaching talent. "I want administrators to deal with this and not sweep it under the rug," he said.

Deasy said that after long internal debate, L.A. Unified decided to control for race, ethnicity, mobility, English proficiency and special education status. He noted that they can affect achievement but "don't determine or predict it."

All these decisions about what to account for in the formula can add to its complexity and affect results.

In an analysis of The Times' teacher rankings last month, Derek Briggs and Ben Domingue, researchers at the University of Colorado at Boulder, began with a similar data set but factored in more variables than used in the Times model, such as the effect of a student's peers on academic performance. They found their changes produced different effectiveness ratings for 54% of teachers in reading and 39% of teachers in math.

"If you change a model in this way and get different results, it raises questions about its accuracy," said Briggs, an associate professor of research evaluation methodology.

Others disagreed. The consultant who prepared The Times analysis, economist Richard Buddin, said the discrepancies that pushed teachers into different categories — for example, from "average" to "more effective" — often were very small. That points to the problem inherent in grouping teachers into categories, not to a fundamental flaw in the analysis.

Even if the value-added method is sound, its application can be flawed. In New York, for instance, several teachers found multiple errors in their value-added reports — teachers scored for students they had not taught or math teachers getting English reports, according to the United Federation of Teachers.

Administrators agree that such errors are unacceptable and say they constantly adjust their methods. The Hillsborough County School District in Florida, for example, has developed safeguards to ensure that teachers are matched with the students they actually teach.

Many teachers and union leaders say they are not necessarily opposed to value-added methods but want to understand them and have a say in how they're used.

Sarah Bax, an eighth-grade math teacher in Washington, D.C., started sending emails to district administrators last September, taking issue with her value-added scores and asking for the algorithm used. After five months, she was told that no written information would be available until May.

"How do you justify evaluating people by a measure [for] which you are unable to provide explanation?" she wrote to a local school official in an email.

In Los Angeles, outgoing United Teachers Los Angeles President A.J. Duffy said he's fine with using the method to offer teachers information but opposes including it in performance reviews and other high-stakes decisions.

"It is off the table as far as we're concerned," Duffy said. "The more complicated a statistical approach to analyzing human behavior is, the more likely it will rely on generalities that are wildly inaccurate."

Nathan A. Saunders, president of the Washington Teachers Union, said he sees a role for value-added data as one of many components in teacher evaluations, given what he called reasonable weight, 20% or less, compared to 50% in the District of Columbia. (Virtually no one supports using value-added as a sole measure of performance.)

"Fifty percent is enough to sink the ship," he said.

As districts choose their models, the concern will only rise.

"The political heat is fixin' to get huge," Sanders said.

Value-added: HAWAIIAN GARDENS MIDDLE SCHOOL ENACTS AMBITIOUS CHANGE. Teachers and administrators are enthusiastic about new evaluation systems at Fedde International Studies Academy in Hawaiian Gardens, but student test scores have yet to improve.

By Jason Song, Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/fNk4VM

John Laird teaches science at Fedde Academy in Hawaiian Gardens. Teachers and administrators have changed the way they are evaluated, and Laird has voluntarily shared his evaluations with his students. (Anne Cusack / Los Angeles Times)

March 27, 2011, 7:24 p.m. - Like almost every teacher at this Hawaiian Gardens middle school, science instructor John Laird posts his students' standardized test results in the back of his classroom.

But right next to them, Laird also put up his own evaluation. "This is my report card. Read the principal's comments," he wrote next to it. Laird also invited comments from the class, and several students did comment; they asked him to post grades faster and be more interactive.

"I decided if I'm going to hold them accountable, I should be held accountable too," Laird said.

Laird and the other instructors at Fedde International Studies Academy have embarked on an ambitious turnaround program that has embraced some of the most controversial measures in education today: evaluating teachers based, in part, on student test scores; allowing instructors to review administrators; and paying teachers more if test scores rise.

While such measures are becoming more common throughout the nation, they have been staunchly resisted almost everywhere in California.

Although test scores at the 350-student school have not improved significantly, the new practices have drawn the attention and praise of federal education officials and national labor leaders, who say Fedde is an example of what can happen if unions and administrators make an honest effort to collaborate.

"They've shown us a third way that isn't about embarrassing anyone or conflict. It's about moving forward," said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.

Under the new evaluation system, negotiated in just three short, cordial meetings between administrators and teachers, instructors are evaluated on 36 criteria, including the progress — or lack thereof — their students make on standardized tests. That analysis uses raw test score data. Also considered is whether teachers are helping improve the school's overall math and English scores. If the school makes enough progress, the staff will split a $100,000 bonus.

The evaluation supplements an earlier practice in which teachers provided administrators with less detail.

"I've never seen anything like this before," said math teacher Daniel Ramirez, who came to ABC Unified a year ago from another district. "It feels like everyone's on the same team."

It wasn't so long ago that relationships between teachers and administrators at Fedde, and within ABC Unified, were tenuous.

In 1993, teachers in the district, which serves Artesia, parts of Cerritos and Lakewood, and the surrounding area, went on an eight-day strike over cuts to their pay and benefits.

Tensions gradually eased, but the atmosphere at Fedde, located next to a casino in a low-income area, remained "typical," according to Supt. Gary Smuts, and test scores remained stagnant. Fedde's Academic Performance Index score, which measures students' standardized test results, also remained low, hovering between 622 and 650 over the last several years. (California schools are expected to score at least an 800.)

In 2006, district officials decided to replace the three campus administrators and brought in a new team, including then-assistant principal Carol Castro.

Castro said she found that teachers were eager to make changes and work together, but she said the real turning point came during a lengthy meeting in the library shortly after she was named principal two years ago. Teachers aired their grievances and "it felt like the air was cleared," Castro said.

Administrators began using a more detailed checklist when visiting classrooms so they could give teachers better feedback.

And teachers began seriously evaluating Castro. Instructors in the ABC district had been allowed to rate principals on their ability to give teachers the right materials and feedback, but it wasn't very useful at Fedde.

"Teachers would just blast away," said Ken Denman, one of two union representatives at the school. "But it changed into something useful."

In her latest evaluation, 19 of the school's 23 teachers answered questions about Castro and gave her generally high marks, including: "The principal is not giving lip service to the staff's needs but is willing to be creative."

The staff last year applied for — and won — a $4.6-million, three-year federal School Improvement Grant. The school had several options under the grant, including becoming a charter school, something staff members did not want, or replacing its administrators, which had already been done. The school decided to revise its curriculum and teaching methods.

The school also elected to try a bonus pay system. Districts in Houston and Florida have offered cash rewards to staffers whose students improved on standardized tests, an idea endorsed by U.S. Department of Education officials and the previous governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, but fiercely opposed by California's largest teachers union.

The staff will receive the additional pay if 10% of students increase their scores on the California Standards Test.

"It's only a pilot program … so it seemed worth a try," Denman said.

Union President Laura Rico said she doesn't think the bonus program will spread to other campuses in the district. She and others also expect test scores to rise at Fedde as the new system matures. And if Fedde staffers want to keep the bonus program or make other changes, she and other union members would support it.

"There's honor in saying, 'What I'm doing is not working, and I can change,' " she said.