Anonymous passed on this message:
"Pennsylvania friends: HIGH ALERT: Word is Senator Toomey (R-PA) might vote no on DeVos. Call first thing. People are getting through to his Allentown office 610-434-1444. Also try his Philadelphia office 215-241-1090.
#resist"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
In today's PG article about Miss Betsy was this quote:
"In addition to the statements of opposition by the two Republican senators, billionaire philanthropist and public education backer Eli Broad has also come out against her."
Did I miss something here? Aren't Broad and DeVos birds of a feather? Why the opposition from Eli? Is she his competition? I can't figure this one out! Anyone????
Perhaps Eli Broad is a Democrat while DeVos might be a Republican? Could it just be that simple.
No Broad is a Republican. He keeps saying "she isn't qualified." They both support charter schools, but I think she is very involved in the "corporate for profit charter schools"- definitely the making of money out of public schools. I dont think that is where Broad's interests lie. Those schools are also the ones that failed miserably so yeah it is competition that is bad for his cause
I read an article that said Broad supports public education. DeVos supports charters and vouchers which would seemingly take money from public education and put it into the pockets of private investors. Plus, charters don't have the same oversight as the public schools.
Eli Broad - advocate for success in public education (one can agree to disagree on his methods to reaching that success)
Betsy DeVos - advocate for privatizing education (school vouchers/choice, federal $ directed away from "failing" public schools)
It's not so simple!
Eli Broad is an advocate for public education??!! Lololololololol. The graduates of his superintendent school school (Roosevelt, Lane and all of the super villians friends including the consultants)were trained to destroy public education from the top down. Betsy and Eli are cut from the same cloth, they just have different approaches.
Not sure if DESTROYING public education was Broad's motive. Not that the controlling factors of ties to Broad monies, teacher eval requirements, school board requirements, consolidating and closing schools, etc etc didn't feel like destruction was happening! It wasn't apparent that Broad's approach to training folks as supers within a 12 month period and running districts in a cookie-cutter fashion was aimed at eradicating the institution of public education. Eli Broad just thought he could do it better than the educators themselves. Unfortunately, the business model doesn't work for education nor, as we are witnessing currently, does it work for government.
DeVos has NO clue about the value of effective free public education nor the history that supports its inception. Hers is a stance of exclusion rather than inclusion that's based not on alternative facts but the lack of facts!
So what is the right approach in seeking effective free public education?
You can't take the 'business' out of that which is supported by the taxpaying public.
7:36
It's more about supporting than seeking - recruitment and retention of qualified, committed teachers through relevant teacher training degree programs in colleges/universities, continuous district professional development and incentives, equal resources and programming for students in all school buildings, resources that enhance and sustain community involvement, legislative decisions that direct significant funding focused on promoting sustainable educational growth, etc...the wish list is long but not out of reach.
8:19
Businessmen/women, lawyers and other non-educators lack the expertise and background that immerses teachers, principals, superintendents in years of educational training, policies, strategies, etc. Obviously it makes sense that the "business" of these educational professionals is to come together as think tanks that create well run districts that are financially sound and satisfy the wants and needs of its taxpayers but how that plays out depends heavily upon many of the components of that
aforementioned wish list.
Seek
Find
Support
The American Public is looking.
As for the Hamlet Administration it is hard to say whether the aforementioned wish list is his.
We are watching to see if we have found the leadership for effective public education that we can support.
Tax payers certainly want fiscal responsibility- that is why it was decided long ago that school boards are made up of citizens, shop keepers etc- biz folks. Then they hire education professionals to do the job. And 30 years ago, charter schools- experimental, parent-run etc made sense. Ideas would be tried, mainstream public schools could copy the good. Enter the "business of education-- FOR PROFIT schools and the hustle began. There are charter schools for profit, snake oil salesmen that sell canned curriculum to public schools, home schoolers etc. In Pittsburgh, some companies have indeed sold their ware to PPS. But if you put a company shill at the top, the situation gets rough to fight- even by good school boards and good administrators. The whole testing movement is part of the snake-oil sales. Now the shill in charge wants to dismantle the IDEA- give it back to the states-- where it WAS and where children with special needs were easily forgotten for the "majority"
Snake Oil sales woman who buys legislators- educators are trapped. Maybe it is true in Michigan there was "no oversight" -but here in Pittsburgh we have active personnel and parents and rules have been being met and exceeded.
And so enters "clueless, could-care-less" Betsy DeVos.
I hope all the teachers in public schools that voted for Trump are happy with his choice of Betsy DeVos. Will they feel any responsibility for what's to come to public education? Probably not.
I think the hardest part for those who didnt vote for 45 is that no matter what- we never expected him to surround himself with "no so bright " people. Even the idea of running it as a business, might have meant hiring the best and brightest... but sadly Betsy's lack of knowledge is frightening.
I'm just thinking out loud here.
From what I've read, DeVos will not be good for public education. But consider this. Arne Duncan was Obama's Secretary of Education for seven years. Duncan was very pro-public education. Pittsburgh's schools were an underperforming mess when Duncan started. And they were an underperforming mess when Duncan left.
I'd prefer someone else as Secretary of Education. But DeVos can't make things much worse than they already are. Remember, Pittsburgh did not improve while Duncan was Secretary. All he did was give us that terrible Common Core curriculum.
Arne Duncan isn't responsible for PPS becoming an "underperforming mess." Lack of state and local funding (not federal funding that only contributes roughly 10%), Eli Broad and Gates funding deals with guideline constraints on those dollars have affected PPS progress. Pittsburgh needs to have the right administrative people in place in the District who know what it takes to improve our schools. How about turning your focus on our PA Secretary of Education to blame for our decline and for the decline of many urban districts in Western PA. What has he done???
Also, you are misinformed. Common Core are K-12 standards for learning and not a curriculum. PPS has adhered to standards-based learning long before this PURE Reform blog was even created. Common Core Standards are much like the PA Standards but just more specific.
Take some time to look at them and use your time wisely to vent your concerns with our PA Dept of Ed.
2:18,
I believe that the buck stops at top. So yes, Duncan, the Governor, the PA Secretary of Education, the Pittsburgh Schools Superintendents, they all share part of the blame for the underperforming mess that is Pittsburgh. They all have power. So they all have responsibility. Duncan in particular set the tone for the entire country. What did he do to help troubled urban schools like Pittsburgh? Nothing that I can tell.
As for Common Core, I see it as a curriculum, because its standards absolutely drive what is taught in Pittsburgh. If you choose to define "curriculum" more narrowly, I respect that.
But I'm a veteran PPS teacher. I think my view of Common Core should carry some weight.
Do you also see the PA Standards and Eligible Content as a curriculum? They have set the foundation for the District's teaching, learning, AND testing for years. As a respected veteran teacher, I'm not weighting your view - I value your view. But check the facts: Compare Common Core Standards and PA Standards and you will see how, aside from the grade band groupings, the inclusion of more informational reading and argumentative writing (ramped up persuasive writing), they are similar in the expectations for student learning . We are into 21st Century learning outcomes now. How you try to empower your students to achieve those 21st Century skills is up to how effectively you teach YOUR curriculum.
I'm confident that your energies are directed toward the success of your students!
BTW, my reply to 2:36 post was from an ELA (Eng Lang Arts) perspective of Common Core. I can't speak to the Common Core Standards for Math/Science/Social Studies and how they are similar to their respective previous standards.
Post a Comment