Anthony Cody Writes the Book We Need: an Expose of Gates Foundation

Anthony Cody and Nancy Flanagan, right

Anthony Cody is one of the first educators I saw using his ‘teacher’s voice’ to stand up to reformers…to push back against reformers. He helped organize and host the Save Our Schools March and Rally on July 30, 2011. I was there, in awe, watching education heroes come to the makeshift stage and remind us how important our fight was…How much the children of our country needed us to keep pushing.

I was able to meet him in person at an NBCT Conference in DC. He and my friend Nancy FlanaganA and online friend David Cohen were all on a panel of NBCTs encouraging others to begin blogging. I had eagerly followed all three of these leaders, and their encouragement helped me take that step and begin this blog.

More online friends. Jon Hanson, left and Gail Richie, right

Attending the SOS March and Rally was a highlight of my career…Linda Darling Hammond, Diane Ravitch, Deborah Meir, Taylor Mali. Jonathon Kozol…all right there in front of me. Oh, and Matt Damon, too! When we marched around the White House, Meier was right there in front of me, in stifling heat and humidity. 

That day gave me the courage to use MY teacher voice.

Deborah Meier

Linda Darling Hammond

Diane Ravitch

As we watched the Gates Foundation roll out their ideas on ‘multiple measures’ for teacher evaluation, I was hopeful. But as I read the document, I saw it was just the same old ‘value added measures’ Gates had been hawking. Anthony and I emailed back and forth, clarifying the issues, and he invited me to write a post for his wildly popular blog, Living in Dialogue. Still a thrill to think I’m published on his blog.

But this piece is really a book review!!

I watched Anthony take on Bill Gates and his Foundation. I read the series of letters back and forth on important issues.  His new book, The Educator and the Oligarch, was born, partly from those dialogues.

But it’s more. It’s a careful investigation into the how and why of Gates’ power play. The circular reasoning that allows him to live in his echo chamber, unconcerned by the voices of students and teachers who are being forced to live with his many hunches about education.

Gates has fixated on the ‘bad teacher’ myth and he believes, with no evidence, that teacher evaluations connected to student test scores is the way to find those crummy teachers and root them out.

Anthony takes apart this argument with the precision of a surgeon, and leaves the foul carcass bare…

Anthony connects the dots…money buys power. Money buys more power. Money buys politicians. Money buys influence. But Gates’ money cannot buy teachers. And I think that bothers him.

Anthony shows how Gates has bought into the education establishment: ASCD has been partially funded by the Gates Foundation. NBPTS has been funded by the Foundation to revise the National Board process. Gates was invited to speak at the conference last year, and Anthony reports his words…his intentions. He asked NBCTs to be vocal about supporting CCSS…now, he wants help from teachers.

Anthony’s dialogue with the Gates Foundation revolved around fundamental questions about public education: How do we build the teaching profession? How do we consider evidence of learning in evaluations? Can schools defeat poverty by ignoring it? What is the purpose of K-12 education? What happens when profits drive education? Good for the Foundation that they agreed to engage in this conversation…they just didn’t realize that Anthony held all the intellectual weapons. These questions SHOULD be the centerpiece of any discussion about reforming schools…

Anthony chronicles some of Gates’ more bizarre hunches: galvanic bracelets, his TED talk promoting video cameras in classrooms, his fixation on evaluations tied to scores, his faith in technology (a funny/sad look at BF Skinner’s teaching machine reminds us we’ve dealt with this nonsense before), MOOCs, Common Core, technology, technology and technology.

My favorite chapter was the “Billionaire Philanthropist Evaluation.” I laughed out loud and cheered.

Standard 1 – Awareness of the social conditions targeted by philanthropy

Standard 2 – Understanding of how learning is measured

Standard 3 – Understanding how teaching is evaluated

Standard 4 – Understanding of effective instruction.

Understandably, Mr. Gates was below the standard in each of these four areas.

I took 10 pages of notes, quotes from the book that sang to me.  I’ll just share a few:

“Last September BG said, “It would be great if our education stuff worked, but that we won’t know for probably a decade.”

• ·         VAM is a disaster
• ·         Charter schools, are, as a sector, not better than public schools
• ·         CCSS and the high-stakes accountability system is on its way to the graveyard of grand ideas

“Bill Gates has made it clear that this was an experiment from the start. What he did not seem to allow for in his scenario was the possibility that his experiment would not succeed. Hand there was an impatient imperative in his demands—“They have to give us the opportunity for this experimentation.””

“We, the citizens, students, parents, and educators, were not asked nor allowed to vote on this. BG and his allies decided this was needed, and they made it happen, suing the levers of power within their control.”

Indeed. When are we the citizens, students, parents, and educators going to rise up, use our voices, and tell Gates enough is enough.

Anthony has given us the evidence, and the call to action.

Buy this book if you care about public education. Then buy another copy and donate it to your legislators.

Make them accountable for following their lead. Maybe Antony will write a “Legislators Education Evaluation” instrument too! 

National Board Matters: Lisa's Story

Yesterday I posted a story by my friend Michale and what National Board Certification meant to her and her family. She spoke about her family's legacy, and about a friend she made along the way. Michale, Lisa Watson and I met over coffees at Norman's Grey Owl. We talked about our NB journey and our commitment to the process.

We talked about strategies for the NB renewal process and they brainstormed ideas for their professional growth experiences that were to be documented. There was tremendous energy in that corner of the coffee shop as we talked about our classrooms and our work. 

Lisa and Michale completed the renewal process in the good-faith belief that they would be rewarded for their investment of time and money with the $5000 stipend they have been receiving. Just this month we discovered that is apparently not the case.

Here is a post with background on the decision.

We share our stories to remind everyone we are teachers who have sacrificed for our families, who have held ourselves up to the highest standards of our profession, we have committed ourselves to improving our own teaching so we can improve student learning.

Every broken promise by our policy makers hurts our teachers, our classrooms, our students.

I offer Lisa's story

For 16 years, I have been teaching ninth, tenth, or eleventh grade. I feel called to be a teacher. I love my students, and they know it. I want the best for them, I push them when they need it, encourage them when they need it, and comfort them when they need it.

I spend more time with my students during the week than most parents get the opportunity to do, and  I don’t take this opportunity lightly. For many of my students, I may be the only adult they see that day that cares for them and believes in their future. In my class, they feel valued and important. Yes, we are learning about literature and writing, but we are also learning about the value of hard work and commitment, about honesty and integrity, about community and respect. We learn about the importance of learning and being lifelong learners. 

All of these things are what prompted me to pursue National Board Certification in 2003-04. I felt the need to be a good example to my students. How could I continue to stress lifelong learning to them unless I continued it myself? The process of becoming certified was grueling, ambiguous, and incredibly hard at times. I persevered during difficult times because I knew I could do it and because I also needed the $5000 stipend that was promised with certification. As stated before, I loved teaching and at times I loved it so much I couldn’t believe I was actually getting paid to do it.

It was too good to be true. But in reality, I could barely make ends meet some months. My family was growing and so were my bills.

 In 2005, I anxiously awaited the email that would inform me if I certified or not. I remember being afraid to open my eyes and read the email once I opened it for fear that I might not have passed. I was overjoyed when I saw the words, "Congratulations!" I felt validated in that moment. I felt valued. I felt like I was definitely doing something right and people recognized it. Just like my students needed validation and encouragement to flourish, so did I.

I was the first teacher at my school to successfully complete the process. The $5000 stipend came at the perfect time for it provided the cushion for my family to breathe a little. I encouraged more colleagues to pursue this difficult but rewarding process.

I’ve continued joyfully teaching for the most part though all the difficult teaching years in Oklahoma. Friends would sometimes ask me if I considered driving across state lines and teaching in Texas for the pay was so much better, but I always declined because I felt like I was making a difference in my hometown. I’ve proudly watched students become teachers, doctors, scientists--you name it.

I feel now more than ever my students need my teaching experience in the classroom. They need someone that pushes them and shows them they have a future.

So, during my eighth year of National Board, I began the renewal process. I painfully wrote the $1250 check to begin the renewal process, and began the journey because I knew the reflection would strengthen my teaching, and I was encouraged to continue receiving my stipend. I explained to my students that it was time for me to re evaluate my teaching and push myself again. They championed me and encouraged me, and I think they were proud of their teacher for continuing to improve herself. 

They’ve asked me frequently this year when I will find out if I passed or not. Now, my students are upset. They don’t understand how something like this happens. Even though they are 16, they know what has happened is wrong.

Now that HB 1660 has been reinterpreted, I’m no longer looking forward to my results. I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me. Time and time again, I feel that the State Department does not value quality teachers in public school.

It would be like me telling my students that they were going to complete a project over the course of the year that would be worth 5000 points only to tell them once the work was done that it was really only worth 1000 points, so now they would have to do even more work to make up for it. I would never do that to them. A promise is a promise. Once you give your word, you stick to it. Treat others like you want to be treated. Respect humans and their effort.  My students know these simple life lessons; however these lessons have been ignored by the state department of education. 

I began teaching with no other thoughts in my head than to make a difference in lives of students. I feel like I do that. I also teach my students to stand up for what’s right.

I would be amiss if I said what is happening to National Board Certified Teachers in Oklahoma is Okay. It is wrong. I feel that the state is on the verge of losing many of its most effective teachers in the midst of a massive teacher shortage already.

I deserve more; our teachers deserve more and our students deserve more. Please do something about this or I fear for what education may look like in the future.

The system is broken. I am not.

Integrity always wins.

National Board Matters: Michale's Story

I am honored to share the story of one of my colleagues, a friend and fellow NBCT. Michale Gentry and I invented a new kind of candidate support when she was going through the process. We had to travel to Dallas for a conference and she volunteered to drive so I could read her entries and respond. We got a lot of reading and talking done in that car. We still giggle about that.

Michale is a valued family friend, teacher to my two oldest granddaughters. She is a teacher leader. She is exactly the kind of accomplished career teacher who should be revered in our state.

She is brilliant (I can say that; she wouldn't), passionate, committed to her profession and her students. Always striving to learn more so she can work even more magic in her classroom. Making connections most of us cannot see until she explains.

I love this piece because Michale is practicing in the here-and-now, while being grounded in that one-room schoolhouse of her grandmothers, as she reaches into the future with her own grandchildren.

This is one story, of one NBCT who fulfilled her part of the covenant with the state of Oklahoma...a covenant broken by our policy makers.

Here is the story of a teacher who has been entangled by your recent decisions regarding educational policy in Oklahoma, specifically the reinterpretation of HB1660. I want to give you a “face”’ for how your decisions have impacted my professional and personal life; but, in no way do I think MY story is any more important or relevant than that of any other teacher who has been impacted by these decisions regarding National Board Certification. Rather, I hope you will take the time to read all our stories and see a trend that illuminates the importance for an enlightened and fair system to truly recruit and retain the “best and brightest” teachers for Oklahoma’s future.

Michale’s Story

I am a veteran teacher of 22 years. I earned a masters degree and additional certifications in educational administration as well as middle school language arts. I have worked primarily in the elementary school setting. I also spent some time in the university setting as an ELL teacher and a project coordinator, where I was allowed to truly “see” a big picture of education and begin to understand the implications of policy on practice.  

I considered other career options periodically due to my concerns for a secure financial future; but, I always returned my mind and body to the classroom because it was where I felt I could build a career I loved. Teaching provides me an opportunity to be compassionate, creative, academic and to feel I am making an important impact through relationships with people in my community. I have always loved working with kids and feel my gifts and passions are in creating lessons and units that not only meet state objectives but also inspire my learners to connect with the world in authentic ways as problem solvers and empowered citizens. I love learning and collaborating with other educators and have built my practice and sense of self on that premise. I will always be a learner. I had leaders who modeled this and supported my efficacy and autonomy as a teacher. I thought this was the way.

I have continued my own education formally and informally, involved myself in the community and networked with others across the nation and internationally through travel and technology.  My relationships with young people and families have been the driving force for my need to continue to learn and grow as a teacher, so I could always better my practice and myself.  Being a parent and coming from a family of farmers, small business entrepreneurs, social workers, teachers, artists and scientists provided me a comprehensive framework to embrace education as my life work.

When I began my journey as a teacher, it was largely because I was inspired by my grandmother, a career teacher in her hometown of Durant, Oklahoma.  Wanda Pyrum is well known in the southeast region. As a matter of fact, my grandmother taught in one of our state’s last one-room school houses in Lone Oak, where she was also the bus driver and principal.  My grandfather also taught there, drove a bus (their personal station wagons) and installed all the indoor plumbing.  He soon went on to a more lucrative career (one that matched his talents) as a master carpenter/builder.  His teaching evolved to mentoring as he trained many young apprentices, including family members in the Lake Texoma area.  

My grandmother devoted her life to young people, her church, her family and her friends. She was a master at quietly facilitating learning opportunities and encouraging her students to take challenges to better themselves. She did this as she mentored me into teaching. She was sought by administration to lead parent classes and spent evenings teaching ELL classes when her community saw a rise in need.  

Although my Nonnie is currently suffering from Alzheimer’s and her memory is quickly fading, she still can speak of those years of teaching at Lone Oak with vivid details and poignant anecdotes of people she cared for and who cared for her. Phone calls and letters pour in every year around the holidays retracing memories and offering thanks to her for her kindness and impact on their lives. The community my grandmother contributed to raised many successful business people, artists, engineers and families who are now raising their extended families, many right here in our state.  I would say that is quite an investment in Oklahoma values.

My grandmother knew that learning environment was, and continues to be, the most important ingredient to inspire and thus, educate others.  When we visit and take her out on the town, it never fails that someone stops us to ask her how she’s doing, to give her a hug, and to tell her how much they appreciate her.

These stories warm my heart but I am afraid my fate as a teacher is taking quite a different turn here in Oklahoma. The cognitive dissonance around legislation has been dizzying at best. When I think about the Oklahoma teacher shortage, I can’t help but wonder why those in power refuse to see the value of National Board Certified Teachers and of people who are invested in teaching as a career.

When I pursued National Boards, I had a young baby and I was worried about how I would afford a quality, home day-care environment for him while I was teaching.  My stipend from National Boards allowed me to do that. That money went to another Oklahoma family who was dedicated to providing quality care for young people. What I didn’t anticipate was the depth of reflection and learning that came from this very personalized learning experience of going through the National Board process. I found mentors.  My students knew what I was working on and helped me. We even came back together and celebrated when I discovered I certified the following year.  

My principal, librarian, teaching assistant, ELO coordinator, colleagues, family and parents of my students were invested in the process with me because they knew I was trying to be better.  The focus on my classroom, my learners, my curriculum, standards, new technology and goals all challenged me to see myself no longer as a teacher but as an educator. I grew as a professional in so many ways. I wrote grants for my school and sought opportunities to share my learning. I grew from the challenge and it served as a base for many years of growth. Everything became filtered through a new, authentically broader lens.

When the stipend was cut, it was both an emotional and financial blow.  It was no coincidence when the state department cut other programs once implemented for teachers like me, who wanted to continue our growth and learning through sharing with others. I continued to read, study and examine policy and research, not just in our state but nationally and internationally. I networked, I attended meetings looking for answers to why we were making the changes we were making in my profession. I worked on my own practice. I questioned myself, which is what National Board and my work at the University of Oklahoma trained me to do; to not only identify MY problem but the bigger issues, and what I could contribute towards a solution.  I was willing to take my share of the blame when the “Shame Game” of high stakes testing took full grip and I worked hard to make adjustments where I could in not only my practice but also my perspective.

When I was notified that I was eligible to re-certify with National Boards and be extended the stipend (as was the practice for renewed NBCTs and speech pathologists), I thought perhaps things were starting to turn and that teachers like me would be valued for our contributions in our state. This little bit of faith made me believe that SOMEONE was listening somewhere, and maybe we were making some strides as a state to move toward a vision to embrace teaching as a true profession. I wanted to believe that.

I don’t believe that in a state like ours, the money from the stipend attached to National Boards was ever “extra” income for most teachers. I am pretty sure it is not being filtered into Swiss bank accounts.  I know it wasn’t in my family. It allowed us to pay for child care and later for car repairs, clothing and other necessary essentials that supports the economy right here in our city and state. It gave my family a little bit of breathing room in our budget.

I took to heart the challenge to re-certify this past school year. With the help of our regional coordinator, I met another teacher who was going through the same process and we became fast friends, colleagues and fellow travelers on this journey to learn new technology and requirements, and to push each other through the disequilibrium that comes with such a rigorous process of reflection and growth about one’s teaching.

I wanted to put together a portfolio that met all the required elements but that also had personal meaning and shared my sense of both accomplishment and authentic striving.  I outlined my journey in four areas of my professional growth: Teaching and Learning with Technology; Literacy Instruction as “The Literal Link;”  Master Teacher and Math Academy; and Project Based Learning.  The process was, at times, grueling.  But it was challenging and it helped me reflect on where I was as a professional, why I made the decisions I did within my context, how I addressed student needs and what I learned from the entire process that would shape my next steps and goals.  It was reflective, it was honest and it was focused on growth--my own, and my students’. I paid the $1,250.00 to participate out of my dwindling family savings and even as I pushed “submit” on my portfolio last May, I was thinking about what I would do differently, what I was going to do next. THAT is what National Boards is all about.

I WAS anxiously awaiting my results (which should be any day now.)  Now, it doesn’t much matter. The OSDE has reinterpreted the law in a way that will not attempt to retain my talent or that of my new friend, a gifted, young teacher and mother in Sulphur, Oklahoma. I see now that my efforts and contributions as a teacher are not with the new plan. I can’t imagine how many other teachers are reeling at this news. I guess this will make it easier to grow other programs that reward uninformed teachers to serve as volunteers and thus, create a need for more tightly scripted lessons and synchronized corporate reform.  Too bad THAT is not in stride with my vision of being an educated citizen.  My son said, “This whole thing is like ordering a meal and then refusing to pay once you have been served.”  I love his insight.

My grandchildren will have a very different perspective on teaching and the impact of a teacher in their home state and now, so do I.  It’s in your hands.  I can only hope at this point that you will  do the right thing--not just for me and my family--but for the many, many dedicated teachers like me and my new friend in Sulphur. I also think about the ones we will need in the future. The flaws in this process regarding the legalities of the decisions for NBCT have been pointed out by others. This is a legal, moral and ethical disgrace to teachers in our state. I am not a lawyer or a legislator, but I am a teacher and I know this much.

I offer you my story. Please write a happy ending.  I have kids to teach and I just don’t need the distraction. My final conclusion to my own story is this- the SYSTEM is broken.  I am not. 

And my grandparents, the ones who farmed this land and raised many young--well, they taught me this….Integrity ALWAYS wins.

Confusion about National Board...So What Else is New? My First Response from OSDE!

The state of Oklahoma is in a teacher shortage crisis. We started the year 800 teachers short, and even today, there are classes being covered by substitutes, and some specialty classes have been dropped. Class sizes are rising, and the state wrings its hands about recruiting and retaining teachers.

While all the hand-wringing is happening, the Legislature apparently is quietly killing the best program in the state for retaining career teachers: the Education Leadership Oklahoma's National Board program. At one time we were in the top five in the nation in numbers of NBCTs. That was before the moratorium on scholarships and stipends...and before the passage of HB1660.

We believed, after reading and rereading, and parsing...that current NBCTs could renew their certification and continue to receive the $5000 bonus. The cost, out of pocket to NBCTs for renewal is $1250, and we pay that, go through the process, and we believed would continue to be rewarded. We understood that the Legislature would withdraw its support of new NBCTs to a measly $1000 salary increment, payable from state funding (with no increase from the state). The catch? If a district is paying above the state minimum, NBCTs may receive considerably less, and perhaps nothing at all.

With that background, I called the OSDE and asked for clarification. I left a message, and the next day I received a call from Joel Robison, the Superintendent's Chief of Staff...after some phone tag, we had a frank conversation about NBCT stipends and increments. Mr. Robison answered all my questions, even if I didn't like the answer...twice he said he was hearing feedback on the line, and even asked if I was recording the call. I assured him I was not, but I was taking notes. I found that interesting...that he would think I'd record it. For what purpose??

I asked him who made the ruling about renewing NBCTs. He said 'We believe, as a result of the Legislation,' and 'We discussed the intent of the bill with the authors.' His use of the first person pronoun left no doubt this was an OSDE decision. I pressed him on the authors of the bill, Representatives Denney and Coody. I said I would be contacting them next, and I have sent the email pasted below.

I was only rude once...when he said the stated rationale of HB1660 was to address the fact the NBCT program is too expensive. After the crippling moratorium, very few new candidates are stepping up. As for renewing NBCTs, no more than 40% even renew. Add to that, the attrition of NBCTs retiring, leaving teaching, leaving the state, and I would venture to say the costs of stipends is not growing. I did snort in a most unladylike manner when he said that. My bad.

He spoke of a ten-year commitment...of keeping their promise to NBCTs. That was not the intent of the original legisation that created the program...this is reniging on the commitment. Their attitude is, once the 10 years were up, they had no more commitment to NBCTs, and they would go onto the increment schedule. So, NBCTs who renewed last year, who are waiting for their scores will receive the bonus of $5000 until their original certification expires. It's confusing because we must renew in our 8th or 9th year of our current certification. But the state is willing to give us the bonus for the life of the certificate...ten years.

I asked him if he was aware of the fact that speech pathologists (who piggybacked on our bill, as they did all over the country) had received the full $5000 bonus, through the moratorium on our program, through the changes to our program from HB1660. New speech paths and renewing ones will continue to get the bonus that has now been ripped from NBCTs. He said, "We are aware, and believe that (the perceived special treatment of speech pathologists) to be unfair.' His office has maintained for three years that speech paths and NBCTs should be treated the same. He said the speech pathologists asked for an Attorney General ruling on this...and that the AG said the legislation does not apply to speech paths. I asked again, if there was any AG ruling on HB1660, and he said no. So, until further notice, NBCTs will continue to see their benefits reduced, and speech paths will have it all. I was not aware of the OSDE's attempts to amend the speech path's bonuses to align with ours...I appreciate that effort. Sorry the AG favored one group over the other...and that the Legislature did not include speech paths in HB1660.

We now have a three-tier, separate and unequal system of compensation: Current NBCTs will receive their bonus for only ten years now...the commitment from the state seems to have a shelf life. New NBCTs and renewing NBCTs will receive a salary increment of $83 a month, or close to $70 after deductions (to put this into perspective, renewal costs $1250. It will take a renewing NBCT 18 months to make up the cost of the renewal). New candidates will only receive partial scholarships as well. New and current speech paths will continue to receive the bonus for as long as they are certified...renewal, I believe, involves documenting 30 hours of professional development every three years. Separate systems. Unequal systems.

My last line of questions was about who will pay the salary increments...did the state allocate money to send to schools, as it does for the current NBCT bonus. Guess what? No allocation. No money to schools. NO FUNDING. NO MONEY. NONE. NADA. Their budget requests did not include any money for salary increments. I said, 'So this is another unfunded mandate for schools?' He bristled...and did not answer.

The actual increments will be paid IF a district can afford to pay, and IF the district pays at the state minimum. If the district pays above the state minimum, it gets murky and complicated. Can you say 'unfunded mandate?' I surely can.

Here's the reality. Now NBCTs are expensive to districts...they will take more funding than entry-year-teachers with no experience. In this time of teacher shortages, the state Legislature has made accomplished, career teachers costly to retain. Even the bragging rights of being able to list all the NBCTs in a district will wither under the added funding requirements.Districts will no longer hire NBCTs, knowing they'll be more costly...We will lose a generation of amazing teachers through neglect.

He gave me the names of three Senators: Halligan, Ford, and Jolley, who would be able to answer questions about the allocation of funding.

I thanked him for his return call, and told him this was the first time anyone from OSDE had ever responded to a call, a letter, an email...We agreed I didn't hear the answers I hoped for, but I heard answers...

Then, I wrote to the authors of HB1660, Ann Coody and Lee Denney. I have a sneaking suspicion that the OSDE might, just might, have exaggerated their intent. Always best to get information from the source, huh?

So, I wrote to them:

I just got off the phone with Joel Robison, chief of staff for Superintendent Barresi. I was deeply concerned about the OSDE ruling that renewing NBCTs, including those awaiting their scores, will not have their bonuses extended, and will, instead, be placed on the increment salary schedule.

He repeated over and over that 'we', meaning OSDE, had consulted with the legislators who wrote the bill, and this interpretation reflects legislators' intent. If that was so, why didn't anyone know anything until the beginning of the year when OSDE told superintendents? 

I am asking you if that was your intent? I'll be honest, HB1660 creates a separate and unequal climate for NBCTs, and we are already seeing the growth of the program come to a screeching halt. But to include renewing NBCTs in the mix now exacerbates the two (three?) tier of inequality and inequity. 

When I asked Mr. Robison about funding for these increments, he said the state would not be funding them...that the OSDE did not receive funds for NBCT increments.

He made it clear to me that the AG had not ruled...that OSDE, in partnership with authors of the bill, made this ruling.

I also asked him about speech pathologists, who have not seen the same consequences of their 'national certificate' program. He said OSDE attempted to change their benefits to match our diminished benefits, but the AG ruled that speech paths would continue to receive the bonuses. So, now there are multiple tiers of inequity. NBCTs have seen a moratorium, have seen scholarships cut, have seen bonuses withdrawn. Speech paths? Full speed ahead. 

I am writing to you today, for a reply to Mr. Robison's words, and to beg you to reconsider this program...it's the best way to retain career teachers -- to reward them for staying in the classroom. 

I would love to be involved in such legislation.

I will be sending you a comparison of NBC and the speech path certification, in an effort to convince you to restore our benefits to match speech paths. 

Please let me know if I can provide any other information...please help us restore our program to national leadership.

So, now I wait again...to hear from the legislators. They were in the interim study last week when I spoke about the NBCT program in Oklahoma...they never flinched when I said we had just recently learned of the new ruling...I will be interested in their reply

I ended my conversation with Mr. Robison the same way I ended my presentation: If the state is really committed to retaining accomplished career teachers, we have the program right here...it's on a respirator, and fading fast...but it's here. We could continue to help teachers become NBCTs, to hold their practice against rigorous standards, to find the best of their professional selves. 

Now the question is, do the Legislature and other state policy makers care? DO they want to retain career teachers? Do they care about the quality of the educators in the classroom, or do they just want a warm body to read a script?

I'm watching.

Where are my Hall of Fame Friends? Where is Mildred Laughlin?

I want to tell you a story of a woman who inspired me, pushed me, supported me, encouraged me to become the educator I am. I want to tell you of the shameful treatment her memory has suffered at the hands of the OSDE.

I first met Mildred Laughlin in Iowa City, when my husband was teaching at University of Iowa, in the same department as Mildred: Library Science. Bob was the information science guy, Mildred was the children’s literature and library services expert.

She had taught in Oklahoma, at Kennedy Elementary in Norman, for one, before she moved to Iowa. In Iowa City, she was homesick. I’m sure the brutal winters (and we had some horrible ones during that time! One night was minus 75 degrees, windchill) were part of the reason she decided to come home to Oklahoma, and to OU. She encouraged Bob to consider OU, and as it turned out, we all moved to Norman together, in 1979. For her, it was a homecoming. The return of a library legend. She was enfolded into the school library community with open arms. For me, it was a joy to see how beloved she was.

She helped me get my first job in Oklahoma: afternoon librarian at Eisenhower Elementary. After five years of teaching, in two states, this was the first time I would teach in the same university town I called home. A real luxury! My new principal was Judi Ford Barber, a legend in the making. My colleague, Bob Kidd was also destined for greatness. They would join Mildred in the Hall of Fame.

I watched Mildred build the children’s  library program at OU…I was there at the beginning of her amazing Festival of Books, where she invited world-renowned children’s authors to come and visit. She made sure I met these authors, sat beside them at dinner, hosted their visits. She made sure I left with autographed copies of their books. This was magic. The Festival grew and grew. I remember one year I saw Kyle Dahlem (another Hall of Fame eductor!) attending, after her service for OEA. I was reminded she, too, was a school librarian. I’ve decided all the best people are!

Mildred got a contract for a series of books about using children’s literature in classroom instruction. She told me she couldn’t possibly do this project without me. We both knew she could! She asked me to write the introduction to our book, and I did. It was beyond bad, but Mildred never said a word. She submitted our book, and the editor ripped my introduction. Mildred and I talked, we planned, and I rewrote. What a powerful teacher she was…letting me stumble and fall, supporting my efforts. I never forgot that.

Her beloved husband, Bill, died. She asked Bob to be a pallbearer. I remember at the service at the cemetery, she held Bob’s hand.

She told a story on herself about visiting the cemetery, going to Bill’s grave and talking to him, visiting. Telling him what she was doing, and how much she loved him. Once his headstone had been place at his gravesite, she discovered she’d been talking to the wrong grave, a stranger, not Bill. She laughed about her mistake, and hoped the stranger didn’t mind her talking to him.

On her retirement, we were all invited to a huge luncheon. Teacher after teacher, librarian after librarian, stood and told Mildred and the rest of us what she meant to us. How she inspired us. Why we loved her.  You’ve heard ‘not a dry eye…’ Well, there wasn’t. Mildred was a towering figure of professionalism, encouragement, dedication.

Forty six years she committed herself to education. From Kennedy, where her favorite story was about a child who ran up to her in the library, in the middle of his research project to exclaim, “Aren’t bibliographies FUN?” Through her detour to Iowa, to her coming home to Oklahoma. She changed the face of children’s librarianship. Her generosity gave so many of us opportunities to be published, to grow as professionals.

Her legacy includes educators who still echo her words: “Don’t worry about a lost book. It’s in the hands of a child.” Librarians all over the state, and the nation, think about the lessons she taught them as they work with young readers. We all ask ourselves, “Would Mildred be proud?”

Mildred fought a life-long battle with cancer. She saw her daughters grown; she met grandchildren. Finally, though, cancer was too much. When she returned to her home for that last time, we tried to find ways to help, to remind her of how much she meant to us. Friends created a visiting schedule…we’d bring dinner, sit and talk, have a good time together, and remind Mildred how much we loved her, how important she was to us.  Until the very end she was hopeful, and she buoyed our spirits. Until the very end.

I tell you the story of my friend to tell you she is enshrined in the Oklahoma Educators Hall of Fame. She deserves to be there…she got there before my friends, Judi Ford Barber, and Bob Kidd and Kyle Dahlem. Her portrait was hung in the long hallway to the State School Board Room. One of many legends in our field.

When I walked down that hall, her portrait always stopped me…her face hovering like a halo out of the black background and her dark blouse…she seems to glow with that internal light we all knew…I would stop myself every time from actually touching her face, her cheek. Instead I would pat the frame of her portrait and tell her I loved her. That I was still fighting for kids and books. That I hoped she was proud of me.

I would also greet other friends: Judi, Bob, Kyle, Nancy O’Brian, John Clinton (my son’s orchestra teacher), Freda Deskin (a new friend), Sandy Garrett (she gave me my first National Board check), Fred Wood (we worked on several projects together). I made eye-contact with them all, and rededicated myself to follow their lead. The walk down that hall, under the gaze of those giants in education was inspiring and humbling. Everyone who passed them was reminded to do good work for the children of our state, to reach higher and work harder.

Now those portraits are gone from that hallway. The overwhelming symbolism of these leaders, guardians of education, is gone. Now the hallway is bare.

Supposedly, a new exhibit will be installed: Student art work.  My friends’ and heroes’ portraits have been summarily moved to another part of the building. Now, as the School Board walks to their meetings, they will no longer have to look my friends and colleagues in the eye and promise to do what’s right for our children.

The symbolism of children’s art in the hallway is also ironic. As the OSDE has presided over the dismantling of choice and electives and art and music and social studies and recess, all in the pursuit of test scores, do they not see the cynicism of their choice to celebrate art? Celebrate art by putting it back into our schools.  

I can’t help but wonder if our current administration just felt intimidated by having to face the very best educators in our state every time they walked down that hallway. 

Why NOW, with months left in their failed administration? Why NOW?

I fully expect the new Superintendent of Schools to restore the Hall of Fame to its rightful place, as sentinels to the work done for our kids.

Shame on them.  

"A Crummy Commercial?" Day #2 at Interim Studies.

I have now spent two days in a row at the OK Capitol, listening and participating in Interim Reports. Listening to experts in the field share their concerns, and Legislators pushing their issues. It has been enlightening.

I wrote about my Tuesday here...not a shining success, but a great learning opportunity. Kind of that first time you try a new lesson...reflection reveals ways to improve.

And on to Wednesday. A study on high stakes testing of IEP students, and then the main event, the first meeting about life in Oklahoma after Common Core.

How do I explain my Wednesday afternoon? This scene, with a bad word at the end, from my favorite Christmas film tells it all. I was raised very near where Ralphie trudged through the snow (yes, the snowsuit scene is truly appropriate).

But it's THIS scene that flashed through my mind as I listened to the presentations yesterday, for "Common Core: What's Next." I had now seen and participated in two Interim Studies, so I understood the format: presentations and questions.

So we began. Professor Jim Ferrell, from NSU introduced the subject, restating some tired reform myths that made me squirm and want to rebutt, but then he spoke of the need for equality and equity in our schools...I liked his definition of equity: "treating students unequally until they are equal." After just hearing the study on IEP students' woes with all the high-stakes testing, was I the only one in the room who saw that at some point, we must admit some students, some citizens, would never be 'equal'?

He made a passing reference to P.A.S.S., and intimated that they will NOT be found 'college and career ready.' That was interesting, since the Regents have get to make that pronouncement. I wondered if he knew something we don't.

He spoke of the Pygmalion Effect as if it was new information...I looked up the date of the study: 1968. Teachers and teacher candidates have heard that story often...and I, for one, always squirm: I hope I had high expectations for all my students, along with realistic expectations, and positive regard.

He spoke of rigor, but never defined it...would love to hear what he means, especially since his definition of equity is one of the best I ever heard.

Then he introduced the major presenters for this session: Representative David Brumbaugh, Scott Dittner, and Oklahoma's own Linda Murphy. I've done a lot (read: A LOT) of emailing to the Education Committees of both Houses of the Legislature. I have their names in gmail groups for quick access. I'd never heard his name in any of the education discussions.

Puzzled, I checked my handy OAEC Legislative app, I learned that his committee assignments are Energy and Aerospace, Government Modernization and Accountability, the Appropriations Subcommittee for 'Non-Appropriated,' (man, do I have a lot to learn still!) and the Appropriations Subcommittee for Public Safety. I was confused and did not see the connection between his expertise and Common Core: What's Next?

He began by talking about the testing problems of the past, the number of companies, the costs (Pearson-$16.7 million; CTB-$13 million; and the new contract to Data Recognition-$39.94 million over six years.), and the problems. He loves tests, as they make teachers accountable to taxpayers...oh, and to parents, too. He seems very comfortable with the business model being used in schools.

He talked about the delivery problems (online woes), and said we could easly use paper and pencil tests. He talked about the lack of bandwidth in schools, and the fact there isn't enough money to increase bandwidth...so, why not paper-and-pencil?

He told us his children attend private schools, where they're tested once at the beginning of the year, and once at the end of the year. He likes that model, but did not suggest it for public schools.

I still was not seeing a connection to his presentation on testing concerns and Common Core...what's next? We must produce state-wide standards that DO NOT in any way resemble CCSS. We must have the Regents 'certify' the standards as 'college and career ready,' even though we really have no idea what that means. Don't we need professional development, once the standards are accepted and certified? Collaboration with educators to create lessons? Here he stood, talking about tests. And tests. And tests.

According to Rep. Brumbaugh, we need better tests, less test preparation, less time out of school testing...Our kids need tests that measure problem solving, and schools need to teach problem solving (Don't even get me started here!). We need control over cut scores (again, I bit my tongue...we have seen lots of political control over cut scores, and the resulting disasters in our schools). Schools and teachers need accountability. Better tests will see A-F grades skyrocket. Oh really? Do tell me more.

Then, he began talking about norm-referenced tests...Wha?? Our tests in Oklahoma are all criterion-referenced tests...measuring kids against the standards we've set for them. Oh, but wait! We're beginning that conversation about CCSS, what's next, by talking about tests. We have no standards...so we can have no testing of standards, no criterion referenced tests.

I have nothing against norm-referenced tests...they have a purpose. They measure our students against others. But what a strange turn to be taking. Or maybe not.

He also spoke of the test bank Oklahoma has...and how we could use it. But he offered no suggestions.

I continued to listen. He talked about no 'emotive' questions on his norm-referenced tests, no 'what do you think' questions...lots of right-wrong questions, like in reading comprehension. So, questions about problem solving with one right answer?  I was lost...what DID that mean? He wants a suggested reading list, from the classics, the books we read when we were in school...no politically-charged books, no technical manuals. Alice's rabbit hole was opening up at this point, ready to swallow me whole.

What does any of this have to do with CCSS? Representative Casey asked a great question, and got an interesting answer. He asked if, since Rep. Brumbaugh's own children were only tested twice a year, how did he know the school was doing their job? Gotta hold schools 'accountable', don't we? The answer? ACT scores. Another 'tell me more' moment, but the hearing progressed with out an answer.

He also talked about making sure tests didn't let kids deliberately give wrong answer so the questions would become progressively easier. He was referring to computerized adaptive testing...but not calling it that. I had to look it up, because I'd forgotten the term. The test can adjust the difficulty level of the next questions, based on whether the current question was answered right or wrong. He's assuming kids will deliberately bomb the test so they get easy questions. But he also is touting pencil-and-paper testing. Not compatable with computerized adaptive testing.

The more I listened, the more confused I got...he was discussing some pretty techical testing issues, but there was a disconnect between what he was saying, and our current situation...and I kept circling around to what any of this had to do with CCSS, and our need to have standards and lessons in place for our kids.

Brumbaugh's part of the presentation was finished, and he turned it over to Scott Dittner...a representative of Riverside Publishing, home of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Meaningless personal connection here...Years ago, I lived in Iowa City, just down the road from the big ITBS center. It was a lovely building.

Iowa Test of Basic Skills, a norm-referenced test...like the Representative was speaking about. A norm-reference test that can predict a student's score on the ACT or SAT. A test that shows a growth model. A test that...sounds a lot like the tests Rep. Brumbaugh's own children take. Like little Ralphie's secret decoder ring, things started clicking into place....Norm reference, connected to ACT...like ITBS! He made a big point of ITBS showing growth...of being able to predict growth...used the term 'growth model' And, about that bank of test questions we already have? Those criterion-referenced questions? ITBS can incorporate them into a test for us...at just a small charge.

ITBS seems to work from 'national standards,' not CCSS standards.

It was a crummy commercial. Representative Brumbaugh likes ITBS, and Mr. Dittmer wants to have our testing contract...we'll just have to shift to a nationally-normed test instead of our CRTs. No biggie. It's not like the third grade ELA/reading test, the 8th grade ELA/reading test, the seven EOIs that our policy makers cherish so close to their hearts, that mean nothing to any college anywhere, are important or anything. It's not like teachers have been teaching to standards that are then tested and measured. Sure...let's just go norm-referenced...and again, I say, I have no problem with a norm-referenced test...any more than CRTs.

I do have a tiny question about how norm-referenced tests can continue the 'test and punish' culture. They clearly show kids score above, at and below the norm...Will the high stakes NOW hit teachers and schools if predicted growth models are not met? Is that the new game in town? My head was spinning, but I clearly saw how one presentation set up the second.

Linda Murphy was the third presenter. She asked the questions that should have been asked at the very beginning: "Why are we testing? What are we testing? And Who decides?" There it is. Three short sentences that must be addressed first...not at the end. FIRST. Why are we testing, and what are we testing Who gets to decide??

There will be one more long session that I know of: October 15, at the Capitol. Hopefully we will get to hear some ideas about, I don't know, standards and collaboration and professional development, instead of a crummy commercial.

If I needed evidence that testing runs education, there it was.

School Libraries and National Board.The Speech I Didn't Give.

Retirement offers new opportunities, and I wallowed in them this week. I learned that Legislators hold 'Interim Studies' in the fall, before the Session. I learned that here is where some bills are crafted...sooo. I contacted several, and volunteered to help. I envisioned doing research, checking sources. Instead, two Legislators, Joe Dorman and Jadine Nollan contacted me to 'testify' at their studies. 

I've seen folks testify at Congressional hearings: They bring their statement, read it and answer questions. Rep. Dorman's study was about school funding and per-pupil expenditures. I saw the other speakers were high-powered leaders, waaay more informed than I am about the big picture. I offered to write a speech about what reform and funding looks like in a real school. I wanted to concentrate on two issues close to my heart: the deregulation of funding for school libraries...I have always been a school librarian at heart, and have spent several years in that actual job. The other issue I wanted to talk about was the way the National Board program has been chipped and bludgeoned out of existence in our state. I would have 5-10 minutes. I wrote, rewrote, cut, cut some more. I got it down to 9 minutes and 34 seconds. I asked for editing help, and I was ready.

I had my speech in a folder I could put on the podium. I was feeling pretty smug. 

Then...I got there. No podium. The microphone speakers were to use was far enough from the table that I wouldn't be able to stand, put my folder on the table and read. I doubted my ability to read my own words from that distance anyway.

I watched the other presenters...no one read a speech. Some had a few pages, stapled...some had powerpoints. They were presenting, not testifying. The audience was Legislators...I scanned my speech and realized I had said some pointed things about Legislators. Why didn't I think of this??

I got out a pen and cut all the snark and loaded language. I listened to others. I listened to Legislators' questions, which were really statements...I watched the time slip away. I cut some more. I rearranged sentences. I hyperventilated. I cut some more.

Finally I was called, five minutes AFTER the meeting was to have been adjourned. Yikes! I've been in front of a class who's being held after the bell. They are NOT happy.

I threw everything to the wind except for a few paragraphs. I tried to remember what I had written, and what was most important to be said. I rushed. I forgot the good stuff. I made a bad joke about dismissing the group.

AND there was another presenter after me!! 

Wow, did I learn a lot. Would I do it again? In a heartbeat. Would I do the same thing? Not a bloody chance. 

So, for your reading pleasure, the speech I did not give. 1300 words, cut from 1800. With all the snark restored.

I sincerely thank the House interim study committees for allowing me to speak today, and bring a message from teachers and students. Just as educators must be held accountable, so must policy maker. Your responsibility is support to schools.

In 1979, my family moved to Norman, and I was lucky enough to begin my OK career in a school library, the emotional center of Eisenhower Elementary. My salary was $1000 less, with one more year’s experience, than my job in IA. This was my introduction to the struggles our schools faced, and have faced for the 34 years of my OK career.

I will focus on two small examples of what politicians’ neglect looks like in our schools: the deregulation of standards for our beloved school libraries, and the gutting of the National Board program.

OK has cut school funding more than any other state, and schools suffer. So, loosening regulations on school libraries came at a time when districts were desperate. This cynical move shifted resources, instead of providing schools with funding. It ignored research that shows strong school libraries, and certified librarians, contribute to students’ literacy, and to higher achievement scores on reading tests.

I have sent Rep. Dorman links to this research, and National Board research. (After the fact, I found this link too...kids who succeed in college come from schools with strong school libraries.)

A certified librarian, a dedicated space, an up-to-date collection, and current technology are required to fulfill the mission of school libraries, to help students and teachers become effective users of ideas and information, to become lifelong learners. That was the standard…before deregulation forced school districts into impossible choices: libraries or lights? Librarians or third grade teachers? Sufficient funding would not require these decisions.

Since deregulation, schools use library funds for other purposes. Librarians and aides have been let go. Hours have been cut. Instead of being the heart of a school, too many are closed and locked, suffering from the neglect of our politicians. At Norman North, my classroom library was more up-to-date than the school library, since I paid for my books out of my pocket.

Librarians can’t replace lost and stolen books, or those worn-out, tattered copies. Damaged books are taped and glued as librarians hope to squeeze one more check-out from every copy. They cannot provide the latest technology to students and teachers. 

Librarians scramble to find new sources of funding – Book Fairs, grants, even bake sales. One middle school earned $600 at lunch for books…but this year, that is illegal. No more bake sales during school…$600 for books lost.

From a librarian in OK: “The legislation that was passed 4 years ago has wreaked havoc with my program. I no longer know how much funding [I will have] each year, if [it will come] or where it will come from. Instead of being focused on ordering books that we need and lessons to teach students I'm … worried about funding. This has been disruptive.”

Teachers see the loss first hand. They cannot do their jobs: “We lost our elementary librarian, and NONE of our libraries has a budget this year. We will purchase no new books at any site. I have a broken LCD projector and other AV equipment I can't replace.”

It’s more than books. It’s support: “Also, libraries NEED to be a place for student to use beyond the school day. To keep the library open requires funding for tutors, for librarians, for staffing in general.”

In Norman, we now use bond money as the only funding source for libraries. My district and our citizens sacrifice, making up the funding difference for our students. But why should they do the job of the legislature? Where is your accountability?

Our students are suffering.

Schools are suffering. State aid has fallen every year, to a paltry $3081.40, or $17 a day per student. A teenager will charge $10-15 an hour to baby sit, and a tutor will charge upwards of $15 an hour as well. Schools receive $17 a day. Fewer dollars, more kids, more kids in poverty. More libraries in jeopardy.

Just as politicians have turned their backs on students’ reading achievement, they have made damaging cuts to another program that also affects student achievement. The National Board program in OK used to be exemplary, a national leader. The Legislature offered funding for scholarships, support groups, and stipends for teachers who chose to hold themselves up to the very highest standards in the country, to achieve National Board Certification.

At one time we were in the top five in the nation with the number of NBCTs.  At conferences we took pride in the support and faith the Legislature gave our program. We were envied by other states when we described our teachers-as-mentors program.

From Dr. Barresi’s first School Board meeting, we have seen the systematic dismantling of the program. With the moratorium on scholarships, the number of new NBCTs plummeted:

In 2009, OK had 479 new NBCTs, and supported 292 candidates. This year, under HB1660, we have three candidates, state wide.

Now, we are in a new era of separate and unequal treatment of candidates and NBCTs…only partial support for scholarships, and drastically reduced ‘salary bumps’ instead of the stipends of the past. That $1000 salary bump averages to $83 a month before deductions, about $70 after. Districts who pay above the state minimum salary are not required to pay NBCTs a penny. You have deregulated even this.

Politicians told us when we achieved National Board Certification, we would be rewarded. If we stayed in the classroom as teacher leaders, the state would give us the opportunity to contribute more to our families.  It was, in fact, a mini-stimulus to the state, as we remodeled our homes, made down payments on cars, bought food, clothes and other necessities.

Cynical politicians have withdrawn their support of the incentive pay of National Board, to pursue the faulty policy of merit pay. Our state will continue to bleed accomplished teachers from the profession. They will retire, leave the classroom, or leave the state.

Teachers, including a friend, are wary about the state’s support. She was a high school student of an NBCT, when she knew she would be a teacher, and she would be an NBCT. She was 16 and determined. But, she saw the state support dwindle.  Now she will only bring home $70 a month when she achieves NBC. Why should she trust you to keep promises?

We discovered yesterday that the OSDE, the agency who should be our strongest advocates, has chosen to interpret HB1660 in a way that all renewing NBCTs, starting with last year's renewals, will lose their stipend. They, too, will be paid $70 after taxes.

Ironically, speech pathologists, who wiggled into our original bill, and have been receiving the stipend for a national certification that does not equal the rigor of ours, will continue to receive the stipend. Their renewal process seems to include only documentation of 30 hours of professional development every three years. NBC renewal demands a systematic examination of 8 years of professional growth, a classroom video, another video or analysis of student work, and a reflection. The work is evaluated by a trained assessor who may reject it all. NBCTs pay $1250 out of pocket. An NBCT will work for nearly 18 months before he or she has broken even, if she renews.

This is the ultimate, deep, betrayal by our politicians. They have together turned their backs on their most accomplished teachers, while speech pathologists have been unscathed. Let us remember, Dr. Barresi began her short career in the public schools as a speech path.

The legislature has demanded and mandated and required and expected accountability from schools and teachers and students. The legislature has yet to support their demands with adequate funding or with their own accountability. Their decisions to underfund, to deregulate will continue to erode the work of our educators and students. Where is the accountability for our policy makers?