Should teachers let their politics come to school?

Posted by Lindsey at 4:21 PM

With the Obama/McCain showdown claiming more above-the-fold newspaper space and primetime television minutes each week, I have been considering the delicate relationship between teachers’ personal politics, and their educational obligations to their students. Children have no qualms about asking blunt questions, including “who did you vote for in the last election?” which I was often asked when I taught sixth and seventh grade social studies at IS 143 in Washington Heights.

My students really wanted to know what I believed. Most of them were immigrants or first-generation Americans, and they were learning about democracy and politics for the first time in my class. They struggled in particular to understand modern political parties, and they wanted to know what the adults they looked up to believed, so that they could begin to build their own political opinions.

But is it fair for teachers to share their personal political views with students or is it a teacher’s job to present the all of the ideas and arguments and teach the students the skills they need to form their own opinions? According the chancellor’s regulations, it is forbidden: all DOE employees “shall maintain a posture of neutrality with respect to all candidates,” while on the job, but in reality, this is not always followed. And remember what happened when a Bronx high school teacher and his students made a video for the Obama campaign this fall?

Stanley Fish, a distinguished professor who has worked at several prominent universities, would also argue against bringing politics into the classroom. Fish writes in his New York Times blog that it is not only possible but critical that teachers don’t share their personal political opinions with their students. Gray Lady readers, particularly those who are also professors, have responded in force, igniting a vigorous debate that Fish has now responded to twice (I have even noticed some of my own professors from college chiming in).

But the relationship between politics and teaching is not just confined to higher-education. The commentators who complain that kids don’t know enough, or care enough, about the democratic process are usually quick to blame elementary, middle and high school teachers. If teachers are passionate about politics, should they share that with their students? I am inclined to side with Professor Fish and argue that politics need to be taught but not partisan ideas.

In this presidential election year, do you think that teachers’ political opinions should be shared or silenced while they are at school?

Klein, others unveil new coalition to ‘focus’ presidential candidates

Posted by Insideschools Blog at 1:24 PM

Chancellor Joel Klein and others announced today the Education Equality Project, which will aim to hone the nation’s attention on students with the highest needs and “to focus the presidential candidates on educational equality.” The project said it plans to host forums at both the Democratic and Republican national conventions.

“We need to get serious about giving all children the education they need to succeed,” Klein said at the press conference held in Washington, D.C. “It won't be easy — the status quo has lots of defenders — but it can be done and it is absolutely essential that we do it.”

Klein will serve as co-chairman of the project with the Rev. Al Sharpton. Among the leaders initially joining Klein and Sharpton are Geoffrey Canada of the Harlem Children's Zone and former New York Daily News education reporter Joe Williams of Democrats for Education Reform.


--posted by Tanner Kroeger

Bronx school faces consequences after stumping for Obama

Posted by Philissa at 7:36 AM

Oops. Administrators at the Bronx High School for Performance and Stagecraft are in hot water with the DOE after they allowed the Barack Obama campaign to film students discussing a class assignment based on Obama's "Yes We Can" speech. It's against DOE policy for schools to be used in political or promotional films; the 13-minute film has been circulated as a fundraising pitch by the Obama campaign. In addition, students are identified by their full names, and several say they are 9th graders — it's unclear whether the campaign sought releases from those students and their families before filming.

Principal Mark Sweeting said he knew the film was against the rules but that getting students to become politically engaged and informed was worth the potential consequences. I agree with Sweeting that inspiring kids to think critically about race and to see themselves as integral to the political process is a great thing. And I think the DOE's rules can be constricting for schools that want to publicize their work. But in this case, I am worried that structuring a class assignment around the speech of a particular candidate and then offering students the chance to speak about that assignment on behalf of that candidate creates a coercive environment that's inappropriate for the classroom.

Student Thought: Real student representation

Posted by Seth Pearce at 8:04 AM

Just a (sort of) quick note from Wednesday's MSNBC Democratic presidential debate. About an hour and a half into the debate Rep. Dennis Kucinich said that he believed 16 year olds should be allowed to vote.

While this idea sounds radical, it should really be considered, especially on a municipal level. In the spring of 2006, the New York City Youth Congress proposed that New York City's voting age should be lowered to 16. Following this, the Future Voters of America Party lobbied the City Council on lowering the voting age and Councilwoman Gale Brewer introduced a bill that would do just that. I failed to find any news on how that's doing.

When one of my friends who was active in Future Voters told me about the issue, I was a little unsure about it. Now I believe that lowering the voting age to 16 could be a very important step for NYC and it would have the greatest impact in education, since around one third of high school students would be able to vote for the politicians who they felt best represented their concerns in improving their education system.

Students are clamoring for a voice in the decisions made on their education. That desire is one of the reasons for the founding the NYC Student Union and why last year he New York City Youth Congress voted for a resolution calling for the creation of a Student Senate whose opinions would have a weighted effect on DOE decisions.

Generally, simpler is better. It seems to me that the simplest way to give students a voice in their education is to give 16 year olds the right to vote. This will let the people in charge know how students feel, giving them a more clear and informed view of how our schools are run and more insight into the city's educational successes and failures. It also might serve to get more students interested in how city decisions affect them and give them some reason to believe that their schools are really serving the students.

Ask presidential candidates about education in the next debate

Posted by Unknown at 12:07 PM

Ask about education in the upcoming presidential debate, July 23 in South Carolina. The debate is organized by CNN and YouTube, and debate questions will come from user-submitted videos uploaded to YouTube's site. Roy Romer over at Ed in '08 is encouraging all those interested in education to submit questions on the topic, and apparently people are listening: on Monday, CNN said 190 of the 1,044 questions submitted were about education-- more than any other topic-- Romer reported.

YouTube will continue to accept questions until July 22 (this Sunday). To submit your own, see YouTube's debate question submission page.

Bill to ease college bills advances in State Senate

Posted by Unknown at 4:00 PM

The New York Senate Majority Conference has just advanced a bill that would help ease the burden of higher education expenses. The bill includes such things as an increase in the maximum tuition deduction and debt relief for graduates facing daunting student loans.

Klein: ELL students will wait longer before taking tests

Posted by Unknown at 10:02 AM

Yesterday NY1 reported on Chancellor Klein's new plan to allow English Language Learner (ELL) students more time before requiring them to take standardized tests. Whereas ELL students currently have to take the tests during their first year in school (even students who haven't yet been in the States for a full year), Klein plans to change that requirement, exempting those students from required tests for their first two years.

While I think Klein is probably correct to exempt ELL students from state tests, since those students hardly need to spend time taking exams that won't yield meaningful results, I can't help but be skeptical about Klein's motivation for the change. ELL test scores are, of course, far below the citywide average, especially the scores of ELL students during their first two years of NYC public education. Therefore removing them from the test pool will probably result in a significant jump in test scores, giving the mistaken impression that test scores have greatly improved. With the end of Bloomberg's administration in site, and mayoral control of the city's public schools sunsetting in 2009, I can't help but think this measure could be a last push to show test gains under the Bloomberg-Klein reforms.

Of course, I could be wrong-- one could avoid the misleading test results by removing from past averages the scores of first- and second-year ELL students when calculating improvement statistics. Then the statistics would truly track how the same types of students were performing from year to year-- comparing apples and apples-- which is the only way to accurately measure the effects of school reform over time. We'll see if the DOE takes this step, or if instead they forgo statistical accuracy for the sake of political gain and claim credit for a test gain that never occurred.

Coming soon: cash for successful students

Posted by Philissa at 11:18 PM

In Ben's last post, he took a look at merit pay for teachers. Now, New York City is going to pioneer offering merit pay for students — offering kids cash prizes for academic achievement.

Last week, when the first rumors of the mayor's plan to introduce monetary "incentives" for strong school performance hit the newspapers, I hoped they would prove to be just rumors. But today the city announced a pilot version of the incentive program, in which families will receive cold, hard cash for getting kids to school, showing up at parent-teacher conferences, and applying for a library card. At the high school level, it looks like the money will go straight to teenagers who take the PSAT and Regents exams and who make progress toward graduating. The incentive schedule includes a $400 graduation bonus.

This program is just one of three privately funded initiatives that make up what the city is calling "Opportunity NYC" and billing as "the nation's first conditional cash transfer program." In addition to paying for school performance, Opportunity NYC includes financial incentives for adults who maintain health insurance and who hold down a job or enroll in a job training program. All of the programs will be launched this fall on a pilot basis — the education program will be open only to families living in one of six neighborhoods whose income is below 130 percent of the poverty level and who have at least one child in grade 4, 7, or 9. Schools can also volunteer to participate in a trial of a program that will pay students for high scores on the interim assessments that all schools are supposed to give next year.

These programs represent a major achievement for Roland Fryer, the Harvard economics professor who has spent his career (short so far; he is just 30 years old) investigating whether incentives can convince people to change their environment. A fascinating 2005 New York Times Magazine cover story about Fryer suggested that DOE officials were already interested in his plan, but that he was having a hard time selling it to principals, who worried that paying kids for test scores would send the message that learning itself is an insufficient incentive. Last month, Fryer pitched his plan in a letter to principals of empowerment schools. I'm curious what has changed to get principals on board now.

While I'm always eager to hear about innovative strategies to motivate students and their families, the notion of exchanging cash for school performance just doesn't sit right with me. I wonder whether the incentives are large enough to persuade people to improve their behavior, or whether some families will just be rewarded for what they are already doing well. I also wonder, as others have, whether cash incentives will make tests even more stressful for kids than they already are. These are probably questions that Roland Fryer is eager to answer — I just wish it weren't the city's kids and their families who have to be his test subjects.

Hemphill on ed reform: DOE "risks losing support"

Posted by Unknown at 6:20 PM

Bloomberg and Klein's reforms have been on the right track, but the DOE's upcoming reorganization could undermine recent gains, Insideschools founder Clara Hemphill told University of Chicago alums at an event Wednesday evening.

Hemphill said Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have implemented some positive changes, noting the increase in teachers salaries and regional consolidation of some of New York's worst districts with some of its best. She said Bloomberg has been "substantially better than previous administrations" when it comes to education, citing his and Klein's attitude that "public education was salvageable and worth saving" as an improvement.

Read more...

More reform on the way...

Posted by Unknown at 5:26 PM

A new organization is throwing its weight behind the ever-growing movement of school reform. Democrats for Education Reform kicked off its first major event last Wednesday in Manhattan. The group, led by several successful Ivy League-educated businessmen, aims to "return the Democratic Party to its rightful place as a champion of children in America's public education systems."

Although DFER was immediately criticized by some, including representatives of various unions, as a group of condescending paternalists who lack real experience in education, the pro-reform crowd is no doubt glad to have them on board. DFER's priorities are in line with much of Bloomberg and Klein's familiar education goals: accountability, school choice, local control, and weighted student funding.

The very evening of DFER's opening celebration, the school-reform crowd got some welcome news about elections in New Jersey: at least four of the six pro-reform candidates supported by DFER and Newark Mayor Cory Booker won in their primary elections against incumbent opponents. Check out the New York Sun's article for a bit more information.