Former DC schools superintendent Michelle Rhee, center, with LAUSD superintendent John Deasy, right, in 2011

Read below for the full statement from Rhee, who is now head of the Sacramento-based StudentsFirst school reform advocacy organization.  As you may recall, efforts to strengthen state teacher evaluation laws were stymied last year.

Full statement from Rhee:

While the agreement between the Los Angeles Unified School District and the United Teachers of Los Angeles regarding use of student performance in teacher evaluations brought the two sides together, it still falls short in many ways. Unfortunately, it creates uncertainty over how students’ academic progress and test scores will be used to determine how well teachers are doing and contains no guarantee they will be used at all.

The agreement illustrates that California is in dire need of a strong statewide policy governing teachers’ performance evaluations.

StudentsFirst strongly believes that no district can accurately measure how well its teachers are doing without considering the performance of their students along with other important measures like classroom observations and parent/student feedback. That’s common sense. California parents are looking to Sacramento to put students first and take up this issue to develop a strong statewide policy governing teacher evaluations.

Previous posts: Questions About Teacher Evaluation Deal,  LAUSD Approves Teacher Grading Deal

Fact Check: On Education, Gains Difficult To Demonstrate
Education reporter Howard Blume fact checks last night’s debate between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. LA Times 

California Schools On The Brink
If the state’s voters don’t approve a package of emergency tax increases at the ballot box in November, the system – already pushed to the brink by decades of budgets cuts, swelling class sizes, skyrocketing inner-city dropout rates, shrinking libraries and disappearing arts and music programs – will start to shut down altogether. Salon

A Missed Opportunity To Reform Teacher Evaluations
AB 5 was not perfect, but for the community groups and advocates who supported it, its demise represents the loss of a much-needed reform of the state’s teacher evaluation system. In figuring out a way forward, it’s worth examining the loudest arguments opposing AB 5 and whether and how to address them. Ed Source

2011-12 Education Bills Come Due
A review of all the bills that came through the state legislature this year. Ed Source 

Inglewood High Grad Takes Over City’s Troubled School District
Kent Taylor, who graduated from Inglewood High in 1982 and was recently an education official in Kern County, steps in to lead the state-controlled district. LA Times 

Community Colleges’ Crisis Slows Students’ Progress To A Crawl
Thousands of degree seekers are able to enroll in only one class at a time. Hopes of graduating or transferring wither as years pass. LA Times

It’s a couple of weeks old but still might be worth the watch, given the ongoing debate over including student achievement in teacher evaluations and whether unions can or should be involved in reform.  Or read the transcript here.

Small central coast district leads the way on teacher evaluation, mentoring SI&A Report: Two major themes of change working through the nation’s education system – teacher evaluations based on test scores and the elevation of master teachers as classroom mentors – failed to advance in California during this summer’s legislative session. But both of these themes are getting a vigorous trial in the small central coast school district of Lucia Mar Unified.

LCUSD, parents lobbied to kill bill La Canada Valley Sun: La Cañada Unified School District board of education members are crediting the community for helping spike a state Assembly proposal that would have eliminated student test results as a measure of teacher performance.

Educators seek innovative ways to get missing students back into the classroom Inland Valley Daily Bulletin: The various approaches districts are using were shared Friday at the Boyle Height Technology Youth Center where the educators and advocates gathered for the kickoff of the first Los Angeles County School Attendance Month to be observed during September.

Manhattan Beach Unified offers teachers 3 percent raise, no health cuts KPCC: Manhattan Beach Unified and its teachers’ union reached a tentative agreement that includes a pay raise for teachers, officials said Friday.

Schools find new ways to welcome community college transfers LA Times: New efforts are meant to ease ‘transfer shock’ for a student population that helps public and private universities’ bottom lines.

Santa Monica College joins Pasadena City College in cutting winter session KPCC: Thousands of Santa Monica College students expecting to take classes in the winter session won’t have that option this year. College administrators voted Thursday night to eliminate the 6-week session in order to save $2.5 million.

‘Parent trigger’ obstructionism LA Times Editorial: As parents attempted to wrest control of Desert Trails Elementary School in Adelanto under California’s “parent trigger” law, school board officials repeatedly said they weren’t trying to put up obstacles — they were simply trying to follow the law to the letter. But the most recent actions of the Adelanto Elementary School District show that following the law is a very low priority indeed.

Governor signs bill allowing training benefits for laid-off teachers SI&A Cabinet Report: Laid-off teachers will soon be able to collect unemployment benefits even while participating in specialized training under a bill signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday.

School board member Steve Zimmer

The first thing I notice when stepping into the office of Steve Zimmer, the 42 year-old LAUSD school board member, is the Cesar Chavez poster on the wall — a copy of which Deasy has, too.

The second thing is the expansive view from the 24th floor of LAUSD’s massive hilltop headquarters looking out over much of Downtown LA. I’ve always had a kind of soft spot for the building. Zimmer doesn’t feel the same way.

“It represents everything that’s wrong with the district,” says the Teach For America alumnus who was initially aligned with other school reformers on the board but has at times clashed with them since then.

“Really?” I ask, surprised.

“The whole district, it should be accessible to people, it should be accessible to the community. You shouldn’t have to worry about parking, security. It’s antithetical to idea of community-based schooling.”

“That being said,” he adds, “I do like the view.”

If at times Zimmer appears to be conflicted, carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders, it’s because well, he is. A liberal who believes both in collective bargaining and systemic change, Zimmer says he never expected to be an elected board member with shared responsibility over the LAUSD school system. Elected with strong support (and money) from UTLA, but with a mandate to find consensus, Zimmer often functions as the swing vote on the LAUSD school board in 4-3 votes. When we met last Monday, he compared his role on the board to “having a loaded gun to my temple” and described the controversial policy of identifying low-performing district schools and converting some of them to semi-autonomous charter schools as a “declaration of war.”

LA School Report: How long have you lived in LA?

Steve Zimmer: This is my 20-year anniversary. I came out here with Teach for America 3 weeks after I graduated from college.

LASR: Where did you teach?

SZ: I started at Jefferson, and then I landed at Marshall High School. That’s where I spent my career.

LASR: Talk about Teach for America.

SZ: When it started, it was about going to places in the country where there literally weren’t enough teachers, and about getting people into high need-schools who wouldn’t have ordinarily thought about a teaching career. So I was one of those people.

LASR: How has Teach For America changed?

SZ: Teach for America has become very, very aligned with the charter movement. I guess not improbably. And I’m only concerned about that because if the charter movement has a constant stream of new teachers that they’re recycling all the time, that allows them to have a completely different level of playing field, in terms of its ability to keep class size low.

LASR: You’re seen as the swing vote on the board. Do you see yourself that way? Are you conscious of that?

SZ: Oh, I mean, that’s like asking if this loaded gun to my temple is something I’m conscious of.

LASR: That’s a striking metaphor.

SR: I very much thought I was gonna spend my whole career at Marshall High School. It wasn’t like I was looking for something different. But folks reached out to me – the Teach for America community, and the labor community – and folks asked me to be kind of a bridge candidate. I was very seduced by that. I use that word intentionally. I really believed that that’s what people wanted. And I was elected on that platform. It turned out that nobody wanted that. That coalition lasted exactly 43 seconds.

LASR: Haha.

SZ: No, literally, you can go back and watch the board meeting. You can watch the speech I gave, that was certainly a labor speech, but also a high expectations speech. And then [CEO of Green Dot] Marco Petruzzi and [onetime school board candidate and Parent Revolution Executive Director] Ben Austin got up to the microphone, the first public speakers that day, and introduced Public School Choice [a mechanism for low performing schools to gain greater autonomy from the district, sometimes through becoming charter schools]. The same day I was installed.

LASR: And so you took that as an affront to you?

SZ: Not an affront to me. It’s not about me. But it was certainly a declaration of war. No one denies that. I was in a position to build bridges and to open lines of communication and to find consensus and policy things that folks could coalesce around. But no one wanted that.

So ever since then, it’s really been a personal and political and ethical tug of war. I don’t adhere to the orthodoxy of either side. There are things about UTLA’s positions that I firmly disagree with. I agree with them about some things– I strongly feel that teachers and folks who work in public schools should be represented by public sector unions. But I also believe in fundamental change in our schools.

I think the original ideals of the charter movement have been completely co-opted by folks whose goal is really not change for children, but to eliminate public sector unions. I stand against that, as much as I stand against the status quo.

You have a union that says, “Wait, wait, stop, no, delay,” and you have children on the ground who are the collateral damage of that position. You have a reform movement that says, “Immediate change, high velocity, no matter what the cost is.”

LASR: How much of LAUSD’s enrollment decline is due to charter enrollment?

SZ: There are 110,000 students in charter schools within the LAUSD boundaries. Are there good things about that? Sure. Does competition in some places create the lightening rod for change? I can believe that. Does competition in and of itself create transformation in the system at a time of the worst budget crisis since the great depression? No.

And so what I say to folks in the charter community right now is, you have 23% to 24% of the market share in Los Angeles. I’m not sure if the goal is 30%, 35%, or 40%. I mean, what happens to the other 490,000 students? What’s the plan for them?

Anyway, I’ve tried to find a middle ground, or some type of ground, to stand on that honors why I ran for this in the first place. That’s been… you know, you don’t sleep a lot when you try to do that.

LASR: So do you support AB 5? [Withdrawn on Friday, AB 5 would have limited use of student achievement data in teacher evaluations required under the Stull ACT.]

SZ: I’m generally supportive of the idea that [teach evaluation] has to be collectively bargained, I’m generally supportive of the idea that [student achievement data used for teacher evaluation] has to be more than one standardized test.

LASR: What’s going on with your proposal to reject the use of AGT [Academic Growth Over Time, a measurement that computes student progress based on results of the California Standardized Test] as a way to evaluate teachers?

SZ: There are real problems with AGT. It only measures, at the most, 55% of our teachers. But beyond that, it’s based on only one test. I won’t be satisfied with an AGT score unless it includes multiple measures.

Edited and condensed for clarity.

]]> https://www.laschoolreport.com/stuck-in-the-middle-a-conversation-with-steve-zimmer/feed/ 4 https://www.laschoolreport.com/morning-read-post-labor-day-hangover/ Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:36:45 +0000 http://laschoolreport.com/?p=883 Failure of teacher evaluation bill clouds CA’s NCLB waiver SI&A Cabinet Report: Withdrawal of the teacher evaluation bill in the final days of the legislative session last week likely removes an easy path for California schools to relief from federal sanctions under the No Child Left Behind Act, state officials said last week. [Also: The California Teachers Association has its version of events up here: Teachers Disappointed at Legislature’s Failure to Approve Evaluation Revamp, and UT San Diego has coverage here: Bill dies, but teacher evaluation debate to continue.

Teachers unions’ alliance with Democratic Party frays LA Times: Teachers unions have been the Democratic Party’s foot soldiers for more than half a century, but this relationship is fraying, and the deterioration was evident Monday as Democrats gathered in Charlotte, North Carolina for their national convention. [Also:  HuffPo has a similar piece that focuses on the new film, “Won’t Back Down,” based on the new Parent Trigger law.]

LA schools moving away from zero tolerance policies Los Angeles Times: The move away from punitive law enforcement actions and toward support services reflects a growing awareness, grounded in research, that treating minor offenses with police actions did not necessarily make campuses safer or students more accountable.

Educator Wants to ‘Revolutionize’ LAUSD Schools LA Sentinel: Educator Daphne Bradford, who helped a group of Crenshaw High School students get certifications in digital media, publish a book and get invited to the Democratic National Convention, is offering a free training to all Los Angeles Unified teachers beginning September 1, on how to apply innovative classroom techniques and bring students here into the 21st century, she said.

At Least Fun in the Sun Isn’t Banned. For Now… NY Times: The recent LAUSD ban on styrofoam trays was only the latest in a myriad of Southern California bans, which include bonfires on the beach, napping in libraries, porn without condoms, and (not mentioned in the article) kosher Coca-Cola.

Some top charter school organizations eye Washington AP: Rocketship Education, which runs some of the top performing elementary schools in California’s low-income areas, would love to expand to Washington state, said Kristoffer Haines, vice president of national development for the seven-school organization started in San Jose, Calif., in 2006.

Summer program gives farmworkers’ children a taste of college LA Times: The program at the University of La Verne provides counseling and English and math courses to teenage children of migrant workers who have been in the U.S. less than three years.

And perhaps nowhere was the scramble madder than in the Senate education committee, where lawmakers desperately tried to amend AB 5, a bill that would change how public school teachers are evaluated.

Among many issues being debated are the appropriate use of student achievement in teacher evaluations, the role of local bargaining agreements, political relationships between unions and Democratic lawmakers, and the fate of the lawsuit known as Doe v. Deasy, which would make student achievement part of teacher evaluation in LAUSD.

John Fensterwald of Ed Source has been tracking the bill and explaining its evolution wonderfully: “Taken together, the amendments would restore districts’ authority to set local standards used to evaluate teachers and explicitly require that state standardized test scores be used as one measure,” he writes in this story (More amendments coming to AB 5).  However, “sensing that AB 5 is an uncertain experiment in collaboration between unions and districts, the committee is also requiring that the bill be reviewed in five years and sunset in six if found not to work.”

Superintendent John Deasy and others in Los Angeles are worried that AB 5 could disrupt ongoing negotiations mandated by a judge in Doe v. Deasy to create new teacher evaluations that include some measure of pupil progress.

In an email to me yesterday, Ben Golombek, Deputy Chief of Staff to Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes (AB 5’s sponsor) wrote that “there’s also a provision in the bill that would allow any current evaluation process can stay in place for the duration of the agreement, so whatever agreement they reach under Doe v. Deasy in LA will stand.”

In the meantime, SI&A reports that Governor Brown has vetoed AB 1765, which would have created a “master teacher” program, and that SB 885, which would promote agencies collecting and sharing student date has been revived (see: Brown rejects master teacher bill, measure to link student data advances).

The latest word from EdSource is that AB 5 is being revised slightly to try and mollify opponents and also to help make the state eligible for a No Child Left Behind waiver (see: Fuentes agrees to compromises on AB 5: Are they enough?). If approved, the amended bill could go back to the State Senate education committee early next week. But it’s not clear that’s going to happen without further changes. Romero, EdVoice and other education reformers are still strongly opposed to the law — as is LAUSD’s John Deasy.

What is AB 5? Why do ed reform groups, not to mention Deasy, hate it so much? And what is Fuentes offering to change?

The back story goes all the way back to the 1971 Stull Act, which mandates that teachers (and other accredited employees) in California be evaluated by objective criteria, including pupil progress. In almost every interpretation, that boils down to one thing: test scores.

Flash forward to 2011, when a group of anonymous parents and students teamed up with Ed Voice to sue LAUSD on the grounds that it was not enforcing the Stull Act, since it wasn’t using pupil progress to evaluate teachers or principals. The suit was called Doe v. Deasy, the irony being that the named defendant, Superintendent John Deasy, actually agreed with the plaintiffs. A judge recently ruled that the district was in fact not adhering to the Stull Act, and he ordered LAUSD and the unions to come up with a new evaluation system that would satisfy the law by December 4.

Which brings us to AB 5. Sponsored by Fuentes, the bill would essentially re-write the Stull Act. The “pupil progress” section would be obliterated, replaced with what the bill calls a “best practices teacher evaluation system.” The bill goes on to list the many attributes “best practices” would include, but the short of it is that teachers would be evaluated on what they do in the classrooms, as opposed to how their students perform.

“This is a bill that was ghostwritten by the CTA,” says Gloria Romero, former State Senate Majority Leader (and now head of California Democrats for Education Reform). “If enacted the way it is, it will set us back 40 years, in terms of teacher evaluations. It needs to be rewritten or abandoned.”

(CTA has not yet responded to my request for comment.)

On Wednesday, Ed Voice took out a full-page ad in the LA Times blasting Fuentes’ proposal: “AB 5 guts objective accountability of adult job performance in schools just as voters are being asked to invest more in education.” A number of other ed reform groups are lobbying against the bill, including Educators 4 Excellence, Students First and Alliance for a Better Community.

When I spoke with Superintendent Deasy last week, he said he found the timing of the Fuentes bill, coming so soon after the judge’s order in Doe v. Deasy, “unusual.” He also expressed dismay that the bill is funded by $89 million out of the Quality Education Investment Act, or QEIA, which provides money to low-income, low performing schools in order lower class size. That bill was the product of heavy lobbying from, yes, the CTA.

“CTA, which is like this very powerful organization, have spent every ounce of their capital making sure nothing happens to QEIA,” said Deasy. “This bill takes away QEIA funds – this is how AB 5 is being funded. I find that perplexing. I don’t understand it.”

“All sides of the issues agree that the QEIA funds are important and not something we should be cutting,” says Evan Stone, co-founder and co-CEO of Educators 4 Excellence.

According to a document sent to us by Ed Voice, the QEIA cuts would weigh heavily on LAUSD. District schools stand to lose a total of $30 million if AB 5 passes. Bell Senior High, for example, would lose $1.1 million, while John Adams Middle School would lose $300,00.

SI&A has helpful links to the Fuentes proposal and the recent changes he’s offered (see: Student scores at heart of new teacher ratings nationally).  The Senate has until August 31, the last day of the legislative session, to do something about AB 5.

“Everybody is on pins and needles,” says Romero. “This is the time of the year when, basically, the legislature is on call, so they can meet at any time.”  She’s not sure what’s gonna happen, but she knows one thing: “Sausage-making is taking place.”

Fuentes agrees to compromises on AB 5: Are they enough? Ed Source: At the 11th hour, the author of the bill to rewrite the teacher evaluation law has offered compromises intended to placate opponents and to qualify the state for a waiver from the No Child Left Behind law. The latter may work, but probably not the former.

In California Politics, Teachers union are to fear Channel 6 News Online: In lawsuits against the state and the Los Angeles Unified School District, they allege that a number of union-backed laws “prevent school administrators from prioritizing or even considering the interests of their students.”

Many UC, CSU students aren’t ready for college-level writing; USC program tries to help KPCC: The 94 students in this year’s program competed to get in from Los Angeles urban high schools with low college attendance rates. For half of their six-hour days, they concentrate on intensive writing courses that offer what few of them have experienced before: one-on-one instruction, peer assistance and revision, revision, revision.

La Puente High School Student Injured in Stabbing NBC: The incident — an altercation between two students — took place just before 3 p.m. at Bassett High School.

Survey show student scores at heart of new teacher ratings nationally SI&A:  Of 21 states that passed major restructuring of educator evaluation systems during the past three years – all have included analysis of student performance as part the review, according to a new study released Thursday.

Offensive High School Tradition Finally Cancelled AP:  A Southern California high school canceled an annual dress-up day for seniors, saying that students who dressed as gang members, a U.S. Border Patrol agent and a pregnant woman pushing a stroller demeaned Latinos.

A number of other ed reform groups are strongly opposed to the measure, including California Democrats for Education Reform, Alliance for a Better Community and Educators 4 Excellence.

Ed Voice was instrumental in bringing about the Doe v. Deasy lawsuit, arguing that LAUSD was failing to abide by the Stull Act, which mandates that teachers be evaluated based on a number of objective criteria, including pupil progress. A judge recently ordered the district and the unions to come up with new evaluations that satisfy the 1971 law.

I spoke with Superintendent Deasy last week about a number of topics, including AB 5, of which he had this to say:

Is it disappointing that the [Stull] Act, even though it’s kind of a crappy act, has a very strong amendment to it in 1999, that says that certain achievements should be part of it, and up until now we’ve never used it, now we’re planning on using it and now we’re just gonna get rid of that [by passing AB 5]? Yeah, it’s really disappointing.

 

Is it odd to me that this happens in the middle of once this lawsuit pops up? I think I find the timing unusual.