(From Seattle Times, February 21st, 2012)

The Washington Education Association's rigid anti-education-reform stance puts the Democratic Party at risk. A longterm political relationship hits a rough patch.

Major Democratic funder Nick Hanauer's recent email blasting Democratic lawmakers for failing to buck the teachers union and push for education reforms will go down as the tough-love message heard around the state.

"It is impossible to escape the painful reality that we Democrats are now on the wrong side of every important education-reform issue," wrote Hanauer, a Seattle venture capitalist, to other party faithful.

"Today, the (teachers union) is literally strangling our public schools to death with an almost infinite number of institutionalized rules that limit change, innovation and excellence."

Hanauer also announced plans to meet with Republican gubernatorial candidate Rob McKenna.

Washington Education Association President Mary Lindquist fired off a public letter criticizing Hanauer for daring to think for himself. (Having the teachers union come out flailing here did not help the Democrats' argument that they're not a political subsidiary of the WEA.)

If Lindquist and Democrats mean to shush Hanauer and other critics, they are purposefully ignoring the donkey in the room, which is this: a growing number of Democrats are unhappy with their elected leaders' refusal to go big on education reforms.

Reformers watched in dismay as Democratic leaders blocked key reforms including exchanging an outdated seniority-based layoff policy for one based on performance and overhauling the billion-dollar health-insurance program for school employees.

By Scott Waldman

(From Times Union, February 20th, 2012)

CLIFTON PARK -- To hear Albany school officials tell it, a well-funded and powerful industry growing in a Clifton Park office building is dedicated to dismantling the city district.

But to Tom Carroll, the man behind that so-called industry, it's not an assault launched on city schools from the suburbs, but simply an effort to encourage educational choice for Albany parents.

Whichever view one takes, it is clear that the battle to fill classrooms in Albany's minority neighborhoods increasingly is being waged between Albany school district administrators on one side and, on the other, mostly white and wealthy conservative activists, many of them hundreds of miles from the city.

Talk about this story in the Schools blog

Albany school board President Dan Egan says the goal of Carroll and the people who finance the 11 charter schools he helped found in Albany is to see the district fail.

"They're trying to privatize education in the same way Blackwater is trying to privatize the U.S. Army," he said, referring to the private military contractor. "That's not good for our community or our society."

Carroll, whose career began in Republican politics before he turned to the charter school movement, says he has opened schools only when they are needed and created organizations to support them.

"The goal all along is to create enough charter schools to meet the demand of parents," he said. "There's always a willingness to open more schools if there is demand."

Carroll has long been the district's most steadfast competitor and helped bring to Albany one of the highest densities of charter schools in the nation. But in the last year, three separate non-profit organizations, all connected to Carroll, have intensified the charter battle with the district. It's a new direction in an old fight. Charter schools and district schools have scrapped over Albany's 10,500 public students for a decade.

Both sides have shown that they are capable of making the brawl increasingly nasty. The Clifton Park groups tried to wound district schools by pumping tens of thousands of dollars into negative ad campaigns; the district cut off some charter tuition payments for months.

And while the district has a $200 million budget and occasionally the backing of the powerful teachers union, the three non-profit groups have proven to be formidable foes, capable of collecting millions of dollars from groups outside Albany, including Wall Street multi-millionaires and hedge-fund billionaires.

Fifteen miles from the Albany city line, The Foundation for Education Reform & Accountability, The Coalition for Education Reform and Accountability and School Performance Inc. all use a bland office complex at 4 Chelsea Place as headquarters.

For anyone who has not yet encountered Students for Education Reform (SFER) this dynamic group is a nonprofit devoted to injecting student voice into education policy. They currently have chapters on over 70 college campuses and continue to grow. By organizing college students, SFER has tapped into an invested and powerful force for change that has long been neglected in the education reform movement. College students, having recently completed the American K-12 education experience, may have the best on the ground information on how policies are shaping education. The rest of us debate the impact of No Child Left Behind on curriculum or the value of charter schools like KIPP, but these students have lived it. And now they're here to tell us what needs to change.

This past weekend, I had the opportunity to help organize a training weekend for some SFER members from campuses across the country. I must say I am impressed. Anyone who is fretting about the quality of modern college students needs to spend some time with these young adults. This group was incredibly intelligent and thoughtful about education policy. For the training we assembled a group of experienced policy and campaign experts to share their knowledge and insights. But these SFER members didn't come to simply absorb and accept what the experts had to say. They asked hard questions of themselves and the presenters, from challenging a study's data collection methods to requesting information on how to ensure their teacher preparation program is preparing them well. And over the course of an intense two-day training, they were more focused and attentive than most groups of professional adults I've encountered (though I'm seriously impressed by their ability to continually tweet without anyone noticing their phones were out).

By Joe Williams

(From NY Daily News, February 17th, 2012)

Weeks after declaring he would be a "lobbyist for students," Gov. Cuomo delivered his 2.75 million young clients a major victory Thursday, using the weight of his office to break through the logjam blocking a common-sense mechanism for evaluating teachers based on whether children are learning.

In addition to helping create a system that prizes quality and performance, Cuomo's leadership here likely saved more than $1 billion in federal funding. The usual suspects in education policy had dragged their feet for so long that even Washington got the message that we had no intention of doing what we promised when we won President Obama's Race to the Top prize.

For students of education reform like me, there are six big lessons here.

Progress, while painful, is possible. For the last century, a teacher rated "satisfactory" was the best we offered to New York State public school students. We have pushed students to strive for A's and B's, but tolerated a system in which nearly all teachers passed and very few were ever deemed "unsatisfactory." It's hard to imagine an evaluation system more insulting to the great teachers who move mountains for the children under their charge.

Getting good teacher evaluations in place will not, itself, take public schools to the higher level where they need to be. But it is impossible to get to that point without basic building blocks in place that allow excellence to win out over mediocrity.

Cuomo is now, officially, the "education governor." Make no mistake about it, the governor took a huge risk when he waded into this mess. One of the reasons politicians -- particularly Democrats -- don't usually attempt to tame the political beast that is public education because the beast fights back. And it fights back hard.

By Mary B. Pasciak and Tom Precious

(From The Buffalo News, February 17th, 2012)

Every teacher in the state soon will be evaluated under a more rigorous system designed to more closely link teacher ratings to student growth on assessments and to reliable classroom observations.

The new state requirements for teacher evaluations, announced Thursday, are intended to more accurately evaluate teachers, provide support for those deemed ineffective and hold up those considered effective as role models. A teacher rated ineffective two years in a row could face termination proceedings.

The governor, state education commissioner and president of New York State United Teachers announced the agreement, which applies to all teachers in the state as of the 2012-13 school year.

During a news conference in Albany, the three men said the agreement would position New York as a leader among other states in the federally driven effort to tie teacher evaluations to student achievement.

"Teachers who are doing well should be rewarded. Teachers who need assistance should get the assistance," Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said. "This [is] not a punitive system. This is a performance management system."

Education Commissioner John B. King Jr. said, "This is not about firing teachers. It's about ensuring a rigorous system of performance management so our students can succeed."

The deal tightens provisions in a 2010 teacher evaluation system that last year was put on hold after the state Board of Regents, bowing to a Cuomo plan, changed the terms of that law. The Regents' regulations were then taken to court by NYSUT.

(From Gotham Schools, February 16th, 2012)

We're still piecing together what Gov. Andrew Cuomo's teacher evaluations announcement today means for the state -- and, even more bafflingly, just what the city and United Federation of Teachers have agreed to.

But the complex nature of today's announcement hasn't stopped education stakeholders from around the state from sounding off about it. We've compiled reactions to Cuomo's announcement from unbridled exuberance to measured optimism to -- in the case of the UFT President Michael Mulgrew -- cynicism about what is likely to come next.

From Dick Iannuzzi, head of New York State United Teachers, which agreed on a new evaluations framework with the state:

Teachers support high standards and accountability for our profession. We believe today's agreement is good for students and fair to teachers. It includes two principles we believe are essential. First, a child is more than a standardized test score. While there is a place for standardized testing in measuring teacher effectiveness, tests must be used appropriately. Secondly, the purpose of evaluations must be to help all teachers improve and to advance excellence in our profession. This agreement acknowledges those key principles. The settlement also reinforces how important it is for teachers to have a voice in establishing standards of professional effectiveness and in developing evaluations that meet the needs of local communities.

From State Education Commissioner John King:

The goal is and always has been to help students - to give them every opportunity to succeed in college and careers. To make that happen, we need to improve teaching and learning. We owe it to our students to make sure every classroom is led by an effective teacher and every school is led by an effective principal. Today, the Governor's leadership and his commitment to our students have helped us take a strong step toward that goal.

(From Capitol Confidential, February 16th, 2012)

You know the drill: We post the reaction statements as we get them, newest on top.

From Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver:

Earlier this year, I called on the Governor to intervene to help settle the statewide teacher evaluation issue, and I am grateful that he has stepped in to help bring this to a conclusion.

Today's announcement reflects a successful compromise by all parties involved and allows us to move forward in making our schools the best they can be. The original intent of the 2010 law that led to New York's Race to the Top award can now be fulfilled.

I remain hopeful that we can avoid schools closures in New York City, which continues to be a bargaining issue between the Mayor and the United Federation of Teachers, since overcrowding is already a chronic problem in our public school system.

There is no greater responsibility than to ensure our children have the confidence, intelligence and compassion they need to become our future leaders. This is the responsibility of not only teachers, but parents, administrators, and lawmakers. I applaud Governor Cuomo for his efforts so we can ensure New York's students get the quality education they deserve.

From Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch and Ed Commissioner John King:

Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl H. Tisch and State Education Commissioner John B. King, Jr. said today the newly agreed upon teacher and principal evaluation system was made possible by a collaborative willingness to implement a process that will help improve student performance. The two education leaders praised Governor Cuomo's leadership in driving a resolution to the complicated negotiations. King said the new system will protect more than $2.5 billion in federal Race to the Top funds and other education funds over two years, and, more importantly, help improve student performance.

- Elizabeth Ling, DFER NY State Director

(From NY 1, February 15th, 2012)

A coalition of African American and Latino lawmakers is calling on Governor Andrew Cuomo to avoid expanding education grants based on the performance of school districts. NY1's Zack Fink filed the following report.

Governor Andrew Cuomo's budget last year authorized a $500 million grant program that awarded school districts additional money for academic gains.
This year, the program would be expanded by an additional $250 million, but some New York City lawmakers say that shortchanges poorer districts.

"We are lacking in resources. We are lacking in opportunity for our kids. Competitive grants put minority communities at a disadvantage, put our school districts at a disadvantage, and it's unfair," said Bronx Assemblyman Marcos Crespo.

Members of the city's delegation are calling on Cuomo to eliminate the competitive grants.

"The concern is that some of the more affluent and wealthier school districts have the ability to successfully compete. They have grant writers," said Bronx Assemblywoman Vanessa Gibson.

"Certainly the more affluent districts have more resources to call upon. They have more expertise in certain areas to get more funding. That is why they are more affluent," said Manhattan Assemblyman Keith Wright.

In 2006, the state's highest court ruled in favor of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, a nonprofit group which had brought suit on behalf of New York City public school children.

Contact:

Rosie Hilmer | 212.784.5698 | rhilmer@groupgordon.com
Jeremy Robinson-Leon | 212.784.5702 | jrl@groupgordon.com

Democrats for Education Reform Responds to Alliance for Quality Education's Opposition to Governor Cuomo's Competitive Grants Proposal

New York, NY, February 15, 2012 - Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) released the following statement from New York State Director Elizabeth Ling in response to the Alliance for Quality Education's (AQE) opposition to Governor Cuomo's competitive grants proposal. The grants would reward struggling school districts that demonstrate progress toward improving student achievement:

"Every year, groups funded by special interests like AQE demand more money for the education bureaucracy when they should be demanding better results for our students. Their approach of throwing money at the bureaucracy has clearly failed. That's why New York is number one in the nation on education spending and 38th on graduation rates.

"The Governor's proposal to allocate $250 million of increased education spending to competitive performance grants is exactly the type of strategic approach we need. These grants will reward the struggling schools that demonstrate that they can truly help students improve. Indeed, student outcomes should help determine funding, not the special interests.

Watch this video to see how this school is changing lives. (Yes, we realize it's 9 minutes long and most people have a 30 second attention span for videos, but trust us - it will make you smile.)

College or Die: The Charles A. Tindley Accelerated School from Well Done Marketing on Vimeo.

By Jacob Gershman

(From The Wall Street Journal, February 15th, 2012)

ALBANY--Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday dealt a blow to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, signaling that he wouldn't use his budgetary powers to help the city win a labor dispute that has held up a new system to evaluate public schoolteachers' performance.

The Bloomberg administration had wanted Mr. Cuomo's help in its fight with the United Federation of Teachers, with their stalemate over a job-performance system jeopardizing a central priority of the mayor's third term and hundreds of millions of dollars in federal and state funding.

But, in a Capitol news conference, Mr. Cuomo said Mr. Bloomberg and the UFT have to strike a deal themselves on the key issue separating them: the process for teachers to appeal poor ratings.

"I don't have a specific plan between the [union] and the city. By definition, this is a locally bargained factor of the plan," Mr. Cuomo said.

Administration officials said Mr. Cuomo's considerable power on budget matters--his budget bills must be approved at the risk of a government shutdown--is limited to fiscal issues. By inserting a provision for handling rating appeals into a budget bill with no clear connection to monetary issues, officials said they risked a court fight with the Legislature that they would probably lose.‪

It would also set a risky precedent for the governor to get involved in a local labor dispute, officials said.

"This isn't the governor's role," said an administration official. "It's really the mayor's job, and we are trying to help. The governor isn't going to negotiate all city contracts."

By Larry Grau, DFER Indiana State Director

The Mind Trust recently presented a plan to dramatically reform the Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS), Indiana's largest and lowest performing school system. That plan, "Creating Opportunity Schools: A Bold Plan to Transform Indianapolis Public Schools" provides a road map for taking a huge step forward in achieving the goal of insuring every Indianapolis child's right to a quality education. At a minimum, the plan should serve as a foundation for a much needed and overdue discussion on how to rescue a school system serving our largest city in Indiana. However, in less time than it would take for any human to possibly read, let alone comprehend the nearly 200 page plan, the criticisms were flying, and the attempts to defend the status quo were flowing in full force.

For the record, the most significant recommendations in the plan call for:

• Dramatically shrinking and restructuring the central administration;
• Using efficiency measures to send about $200 million more a year to schools without raising taxes;
• Providing universal prekindergarten to all 4‐year‐olds;
• Giving teachers and principals more autonomy in exchange for more accountability;
• Providing parents with more quality school choices;
• Changing the governance of the district, by placing the schools under mayoral control.

The responses to the plan have ranged from enthusiastic support from our organization and several others, to the typical chorus of why this or that aspect of the plan cannot or should not be done. It is difficult to have a discussion when thoughtful questions and sincere concerns are drowned out by the can't and won't crowd. The initial response to the plan, while not unexpected or surprising, has caused me to be concerned people are not grasping what's at stake here, not just in IPS but for the state and nation. It is perplexing everyone cannot see and agree there are some things occurring - or maybe I should say not occurring - in our current systems that anyone with a pulse should find inexcusable.

By Joe Williams, DFER Executive Director

Re: This post from the other day on Gubernatorial Mojo, Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy continues to flex in what has been a steady stream of education reform proposals for the state. He's the latest Democratic governor to push proposals to make the process of earning teacher tenure meaningful for the profession. 

Check this out, from the Gov:

"We've been too timid when the situation calls for boldness," Malloy told a joint session of the General Assembly today. "Now, I'm a Democrat. I've been told that I can't, or shouldn't, touch teacher tenure. ... I do what I say I'm going to do, and do what I think is right for Connecticut, irrespective of the political consequences. So when I say it's time we reform teacher tenure, I mean it."

Joe Williams has built a reputation as one of the most effective strategists and coalition-builders in the education reform community. He is a nationally recognized analyst and public speaker on education policy and politics, reaching thousands of listeners in audiences from coast to coast each year. Read more about Joe here.

Given the politics, President Obama and Secretary Duncan pushed the reform envelope as far as they could be expected with these waivers. In doing so, they have reached a consensus with a critical mass of states that there is, and should be, a role for the federal government to play in ensuring an equitable and high-quality education for every child. We remain skeptical, however, of the storyline that says we are a nation filled with states chomping at the bit to do the right thing for children but which are hamstrung from doing so by federal bureaucrats and paperwork. History simply proves otherwise. It still falls upon Congress to establish the right balance of carrots and sticks to make the aspirational rhetoric a reality nationwide.

- Joe Williams, DFER Executive Director