-
Arbitrator’s Order to Rehire 75 D.C
-
Study: Single-Sex Education May Do More Harm Than Good
-
Obama to Issue No Child Left Behind Waivers to States
- States Can Seek Way Out of No Child Law
Arbitrator’s Order to Rehire 75 D.C. Teachers is Upheld
The Washington Post
By Bill Turque
September 22, 2011
The District’s labor-management relations board has upheld an arbitrator’s decision ordering the D.C. Public Schools to rehire 75 new teachers fired in 2008 by then-Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee.
The Public Employee Relations Board, which rules on disputes between city agencies and labor unions, said in a Sept. 15 decision that arbitrator Charles Feigenbaum acted appropriately in February when he ordered the teachers reinstated with back pay, which could total as much as $7.5 million.
Feigenbaum said the dismissals were improper because the teachers, who were in their two-year probationary period, were not told why they were let go. He called it the “glaring and fatal flaw” in Rhee’s action.
The 75 teachers were among the approximately 1,000 educators terminated during Rhee’s 31 / 2-year tenure, which ended with her resignation last fall. She considered the dismissals a priority in her effort to upgrade the quality of teaching in the system.
These dismissals predate the 2009 launch of the IMPACT evaluation system, under which all teachers are subject to dismissal or a one-year grace period if they receive poor ratings.
The District argued that the arbitrator acted outside his authority and that the school system had the right to fire the teachers during probation because they had received negative recommendations from their principals.
The city could continue to appeal the case to the D.C. Superior Court and D.C. Court of Appeals. Schools spokesman Hassan Charles said Thursday that the school system’s attorneys are discussing the options.
Washington Teachers’ Union President Nathan Saunders noted that the standard for overturning an arbitrator’s decision is difficult to meet and said that if the city does decide to appeal, it is likely in an effort to delay the reinstatements as long as possible.
“It is time to stop stalling and put good teachers back to work with deserving students and parents,” Saunders said.
The negative recommendations from the principals, excerpted by the arbitrator, include one teacher who was late 24 times and had 20 days of absences after returning from two months of sick leave. After the initial leave, most of the absences were on Mondays and Fridays, the arbitrator’s decision said.
Another teacher received warnings from his principal about playing movie DVDs and gospel songs during class time, as well as using inappropriate language with students. One teacher had poor classroom management skills and had been AWOL for the final two months of the 2007-08 school year.
Probationary employees generally have fewer job protections than those with permanent status. But the union’s contract with the city at the time made no distinction between probationary and tenured teachers. The arbitrator said they were denied the due process accorded to tenured teachers.
Study: Single-sex Education May Do More Harm Than Good
The Washington Post
By Michael Alison Chandler
September 22, 2011
The push for more single-sex instruction in public schools is based on weak, “misconstrued” scientific claims rather than solid research and may do more harm than good, according to a study published in the journal Science on Thursday.
The authors, a group that includes psychologists, child development specialists and a neuroscientist who specializes in gender, argue that while excellent single-sex schools exist, there is “no empirical evidence that their success stems from their single-sex organization,” as opposed to the quality of students, the curriculum or short-lived motivation that comes from “novelty and belief in innovation.”
Evidence is more clear that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutionalized sexism, the authors write. They call on President Obama to rescind regulatory changes spurred by the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law that made way for more single-sex classes in public schools.
Civil rights debates have raged in recent years over whether single-sex classes in public schools represent a backslide in gender equality, or an opportunity for poor families to access promising gender-specific instruction typically reserved for rich families paying private school tuition. This latest study represents a new front in the battle by challenging varying interpretations of burgeoning brain research.
About 500 public schools nationwide offer single-sex classes, according to the National Association for Single Sex Public Education, based in Exton, Pa. That’s up from a handful a decade ago.
No Child Left Behind cites single-gender classes as one “innovative” tool to boost achievement. But anti-discrimination laws banned widespread use of such classes, allowing them only in certain instances, such as sex education lessons. A change in federal regulations in 2006 gave schools more flexibility, allowing boys and girls to be separated as long as classes are voluntary and “substantially equal” coeducational classes are offered.
The approach has gained popularity during an era in which school choice and experimentation are hallmarks of reform. Budget cuts have curtailed demand, though, with few schools able to invest in training or extra teachers to make the instructional changes, said Leonard Sax, director of the national association that advocates for and tracks single-sex public schools, who was critical of the study.
Despite small numbers, the study’s authors formed the American Council of Coeducational Schooling this year at Arizona State University as the first organization dedicated to advocating for co-ed schools as the best environment to prepare children for a co-ed world.
“Nobody is talking about how there’s no evidence to support” single-sex public schooling, said Richard A. Fabes, a director of the new council and an author of the Science article.
The authors cite as unfounded work by Sax that boys and girls, for example, respond to classroom stress differently because of differences in their autonomic nervous systems, which make boys thrilled by loud, energetic or confrontational teachers, such as “What’s your answer, Mr. Jackson? Give it to me!” while girls prefer to be approached by a gentler touch, such as “Lisa, sweetie, it’s time to open your book.”
Sax, a former medical doctor who has a doctorate in psychology, said he was looking for scientific explanations for differences in teaching styles he has observed in hundreds of single-sex schools, not offering fool-proof scientific justifications for single-sex education.
The best arguments for single-sex schooling are social justice arguments, he said.
“We live in a sexist culture,” Sax said. “Writing poetry and keeping a journal is something girls do. Boys are going to need something different than what girls need . . . to deconstruct that.”
Obama to Issue No Child Left Behind Waivers to States
The Washington Post
By Lindsey Layton
September 22, 2011
President Obama will excuse states from key parts of No Child Left Behind, the federal education law, if they adopt certain education reforms in exchange for greater flexibility in deciding how to measure school performance.
The Obama administration offered the first details Thursday of the highly anticipated program, with as many as 45 states expected to participate.
States are chiefly interested in exemptions from a provision of the law that calls for every student to be proficient in math and reading by 2014, with the risk of escalating sanctions for schools that do not comply.
State officials and local educators call that goal unrealistic and its penalties unfair, and they have been clamoring for relief. Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said that by next year, more than 80 percent of schools across the nation will be labeled as failures under the law, although some experts dispute that figure.
In Virginia, where 40 percent of schools were considered failing under the law in 2010, state education officials said Thursday that they intend to seek a waiver. Maryland, where one-third of schools fell short in 2010, also plans to apply for a waiver, said William Reinhard, a spokesman for the state education department.
“We’re really, really looking forward to this,” Reinhard said. “It looks good. We take the requirements of NCLB very seriously and have no interest in turning our back on accountability. But for some of those schools that have been branded unfairly perhaps because a couple of kids missed . . . targets in some areas, this will get those schools out from under some unfair labeling.”
In the District, where 91 percent of schools failed to meet targets in 2010, officials have indicated interest in applying but have not made a final decision.
The administration plans a workshop next week to explain the program in detail to states, Reinhard said.
Senior administration officials said waivers will be awarded to states that adopt academic standards that ensure their high school graduates are ready for college or a career, measure school performance not merely by test results but by student improvement over time, and evaluate teachers and principals using a variety of measures, including but not limited to student test scores.
States will be required to launch “rigorous” campaigns to turn around their lowest-performing schools — the bottom 5 percent. And they will have to devise ways to focus on students with the greatest needs in another 10 percent of schools with low graduation rates or large achievement gaps between students of different races. States will also have greater flexibility with about $1 billion in funding for schools attended by poor children.
States will still be required to test all children in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school and report results by subgroups — including race, English learners and students with disabilities — so it is clear how every student is faring.
But Margaret Spellings, education secretary under President George W. Bush, said she worries about backsliding. “I’m skeptical about states’ ability or will to do great reform or close the achievement gap,” she said. “The reason this whole waiver issue is before us is [the states] told us they were going to do something and didn’t do it. And now they want a waiver against their own promises.”
“We need more accountability, not less,” Spellings added. “Implicit in this situation is the idea that it’s unreasonable to expect children to perform on grade level and we need to find a way to let the adults get out of that.”
States Can Seek Way Out of No Child Law
The Washington Times
By Kimberly Hefling
September 22, 2011
The Obama administration is offering states a way around provisions of the once-heralded No Child Left Behind law, contending many elements of the Bush-era law have become unintentional barriers to learning and that too many schools, even those showing modest progress, risk being labeled as failing.
States will be allowed to ask the Education Department to be exempted from some of the law’s requirements if they meet certain conditions. They include enacting standards to prepare students for college and careers, and making teachers and principals more accountable.
President Obama planned to discuss the changes Friday at the White House.
“To help states, districts and schools that are ready to move forward with education reform, our administration will provide flexibility from the law in exchange for a real commitment to undertake change,” Mr. Obama said in a statement Thursday. “The purpose is not to give states and districts a reprieve from accountability, but rather to unleash energy to improve our schools at the local level.”
The administration says it is acting because Congress has been slow to address the issues by rewriting the law.
But Rep. John Kline, Minnesota Republican and chairman of the House Education Committee, has questioned whether the Education Department has the authority to offer states waivers to the law. He’s said that the president has allowed “an arbitrary timeline” to dictate when Congress should get the law rewritten and that the committee needs more time to develop its proposals, which it is doing.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Thursday that the emphasis will be more on growth than on test scores.
“We can’t have a law on the books that’s slowing down progress, that’s slowing down innovation,” he said in Joplin, Mo., where the schools were left in ruins after a tornado in May.
The No Child Left Behind law passed in 2001 with widespread bipartisan support and much fanfare. It sought to hold schools more accountable for student performance and get better qualified teachers in classrooms. It also offers school choice and extra tutoring to students attending schools deemed failing.
Critics say the law created too much of an emphasis in classrooms on standardized tests, driving the stakes so high that it may have even fostered an environment where school officials in some districts cheated.
The requirement that all students be on grade level in math and reading by 2014 has been especially unpopular. Mr. Duncan has warned that 82 percent of schools next year could fail to reach proficiency requirements and thus be labeled “failures,” although some experts questioned the figure.