Speed Gibson

A Society of Cannibals

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand is again the rage in 2009, from which I quote below.  Industrialist Henry Reardon is before a court of the Bureau of Economic Planning and National Resources.

"Are we to understand," asked the judge, "that you hold your own interests above the interests of the public?

"I hold that such a question can never arise except in a society of cannibals."

I thought of this when the U.S Preventive Services Task Force came up with their "don't worry, be happy until you're 50" approach to breast cancer screening.  The rationing has begun.  The outcry was immediate and these "experts" (none of them oncologists) soon all but retracted the entire pronouncement.

Think about this.  This Task Force's recommendation, fully implemented, would result in the premature deaths of thousands of women.  What is the only reason to implement it?  To save money.  Whose money?  Our money, or what used to be our money.

In a free society, a woman can decide if she wants a mammogram or not.  They're not expensive, about $100 as a walk-in, uninsured patient.  With insurance, it's usually just a co-pay, and some policies even waive that here because early detection and treatment is often much cheaper than the alternative.  Regardless, it's your money and it commands and delivers the services you want, simple tests that might keep you alive another 30 years to be with your grandchildren.  And - very important - your having a mammogram doesn't prevent anyone else from getting the health care they want.

But in the People's Health Republic being debated now, your money will not avail you, not if you're under 50 and don't travel in high political circles.  The Task Force has spoken.  Sure, there will be some collateral damage, but the money saved is for the greater good.  If you're among the unlucky who contract breast cancer early, c'est la vie.

This is the cannibalism of which Ayn Rand wrote, a society willing to write off the lives of a few to make life a little more convenient for the many.  

It's Only Make Believe

With apologies to Conway Twitty:

People see us lobby everywhere
They think Pogey really cares
But ourselves we can't deceive
We know it's only make believe

Our one and only prayer
Is that some day they'll care
Stop jacking welfare out of sight
Instead set K-12 funding right
No more Light Rail, the Vikes can wait
No more sending money late
Special Ed, we want it all
Raising taxes?  Well, that's their call
But it's only make believe

Soon, the 2010 spring offensive begins for the Robbinsdale Area Schools Legislative Action Coalition (LAC), and your district, too, most likely.  The LAC met with the School Board Monday to review proposed the 2010 platform.

• Adoption of "New Minnesota Miracle"
• Pay back unallotment funds
• More Early Childhood money
• Fully fund Special Education
• Larger share of Integration funds

As someone observed at that meeting, "it all ladders up to funding" and unless the Legislature is willing to rearrange its priorities, it really ladders up to tax increases.  But folks, the cupboard is bare.  Tax receipts continue to fall, and the State will likely have to do some short term borrowing for the first time in 25 years.  And if anything, the Obama Administration is effectively trying to make matters worse, far worse if Cap and Trade or Health Care "reform" passes.

I'll give Board Chair Tom Walsh some credit for twice observing that the LAC should try to pare its list of demands this year.  I'll go further and suggest that the above should be set aside as totally unrealistic given the financial situation and the Legislature's current priorities.  The only way to get more money is to at least slow down the other "cost drivers" as one Legislator put it.

Instead, why not push for non-monetary changes, like repealing levy limits and requiring referendums for bond issues only.  Simplify state reporting and consolidate testing requirements.  Demand more local control, e.g., no forced use of "shared" services.  Require interest paid to cover shifts and unallotments be automatically repaid the next year.  In return, the districts could offer to reconsider its increasingly broad definition of Special Education and other "cost drivers" in the K-12 budgets. 

These require little money, meaning they are at least achievable this year.  The rest is only make believe.

Be Educating You

In an odd sort of connection, I am watching the debut of AMC's latest production, a remake of "The Prisoner" while sifting through the day's Twitters and saw yet another depressing sign of our times.  It seems a teacher is in trouble for posting grades, specifically the top scorers.  The intent is obvious, to reward the achievers and motivate the others, and a common practice when I went to school.  The pure whiteness of motive matters not for it now violates black letter law that requires total privacy of student records. 

Just whom does this really protect?  I quote a commenter from the Minneapolis Star Tribune web site, edited for clarity.

If intelligent aliens were to land and see how our education system is run, they would find it hilarious. The ONLY people who support the current system are the people who created it. I am a public school teacher.

The entire system is based completely on deception. School systems constantly preach accountability. This "get tough" system is ridiculous. Drug addicted kids who show up with a pulse can get a diploma. The powers that be have a greater fear, that drop out rates will increase if they really get tough. No child left behind? Is anybody that stupid that they believe ALL kids can succeed?

Success is a choice, and we can't force a choice upon anybody. And we are all blessed with talents and deficiencies. Once again, is anyone so stupid as to think that talent levels don't vary among us? Maybe we should set Phy. Ed. standards and tell every kid they need to run a five minute mile to graduate. It's insanity, but it is extremely deceptive. It would seem that the powers that be know exactly what buttons to push.

We of course have no way of validating his or her credentials as a public school teacher, but the message stands on its own regardless.  Failure is not an option, but as the above commenter might ask, whose failure?  Quoting another commenter:

Since when did math become a team sport? When these poor children who have always been praised get to the real world and have to compete for a job or a promotion, they will be in for a real surprise. I am sure they will run right back to mommy and say the boss was mean to me, call a lawyer, the job is unfair. Sure I didn't do a good job, but he made me feel bad... Good Luck!

Protecting the young students' egos sounds so noble, so progressive you might say.  It doesn't do the school district any harm either, making it impossible to independently audit its results.

Welcome to the Village!  Be seeing you!

Affirmative Inaction - Part 3 (of 3)

We have large achievement gaps in Minnesota's public K-12 education system, some of the widest in the nation.  In Part 1, I bemoaned the "more of the same" approach presented in my District.  In Part 2, I expanded on the one new concept, that we might actually have to pay for performance to solve this problem.  Actually, it was phrased more in terms of paying for expertise, which included the usual additional teacher training.  But it also was clear a first ring suburb might have to pay more as a market reality to retain a teacher who would otherwise prefer the Elaysian fields of a third ring suburb.

Regardless, it's another rush to hear and hire experts.  I'm fine with that, but whose experts?  "Why, ours of course!" says the teaching profession.  "Look at all those Continuing Education Units we've earned.  We're applying the acclaimed research of major universities, can't do better than that.  We have people skills!" As I wrote in part 1, this has all  been tried before, failed before, and will fail again.  Again I ask: whose experts?

The top down approach isn't working, fortifying the teacher ranks so they can reach down to the misguided.  How about hiring advocates from among these under-performing groups, a bottom up approach of providing mentors to these students?  I'm not talking about degree'd social workers here.  I'm talking about the neighbor next door, who might well not have a high school diploma, who might well have an EBT card in his pocket.  And right now, he might not have a job.  But what he does know is life without a good education, and the right person aches inside when he sees another generation poised to do no better, not even knowing perhaps how far they could have gone.

Another neighbor, equally valuable here, yes, may have done much better than my first example.  All I care is that he or she can get through to these kids at risk.  I am an equal opportunity employer here.  Sell me on your beliefs and ability to express them.  Let me run the usual background checks.  Understand that you're not going to retire at 40 doing this.  And let's see what happens.

Yes, there are some exceptional teachers who can inspire some to achieve, but like any other profession, these are just that - exceptions, not the rule.  We don't even know if we have one when we hire them.  It can't be taught; they're largely born, not made.  It's seldom rewarded and is difficult to leverage.  Yes, there are many caring, over-worked social workers who try to convey the same message, but the nature of their job serves as contradiction.  The 'hood knows full well about The Dead Zone King Banaian recently illustrated, trust me.

I have to think there are plenty of mentors out there, many of whom don't even know they are exactly what I'm looking for.  I want people these "disadvantaged" students can open up to, and be willing to at least consider advice from, maybe even a little tough love upbraiding from time to time.  You may have met one of them already, coaching Little League or helping with a class play perhaps.  Consider:

1. They speak the languages.
2. They know the neighborhoods.
3. They know the cultures.
4. We get community involvement.
5. The parents get an advocate for their children's education.
6. The teachers get help they can really use.
7. The principals get feedback on programs and yes, teachers.
8. We get some good people some good jobs.
9. And if I'm right, we get results.

Further, this would remove some of the need for the professional staff to specialize.  Let's work together on teaching these kids English, for example.  Recent research finds the sooner they do, shedding ELL etc, the better they do.  It's too much to expect the teachers to diversify the material.  Let's do it one way, the right way, the American way, and let these mentors help the kids toward that common goal.  The place to diversify is at the back of the classroom, not in the front.

Now, the money.  As I understand it, we currently employ hundreds of Educational Assistants.  I suspect a great many are dedicated to Special Education, but certainly not all, and maybe fewer if you were listening to some of the candidates during the election.  Some of those positions can be converted, with additional money from some of the additional teacher training we no longer would need.  We don't need much to get started and besides, this is a program that should be tried and implemented incrementally.

So why not try, with one school, with a grade or two?  Why not now?  What we've been trying, repeatedly, hasn't worked.

Affirmative Inaction - Part 2

In Part One, I recounted the presentation I saw at District 281's work session this past Monday, the main presentations covering what's called Equity and Integration at the Robbinsdale Area Schools.   Despite the high quality of those presentations, it was painfully evident that nothing was really changing.  There was one intriguing slide in Board Clerk Helen Bassett's report, however, "Issues for Further Study."

• “Market pay” incentives for effective master teachers to volunteer to teach in our most struggling schools. Goal: quality teacher recognition, retention and rigor.

• Pro-active stance to stave off “opportunity gap ” described as disparity in access to high quality teachers who choose not to teach in a district viewed as low-performing.

• Districts consistently not meeting AYP [Adequate Yearly Progress] may increase this perception.

There are a lot of juicy words to unpack here, but it's the overall message that's important:  some teachers are more valuable than others, and it's worth paying for that difference.  We may have finally found the issue - disparate outcomes - that can unchain the rowers.  Market pay means there is a market, for teachers who get better results in low performing districts.  Said another way, an exceptional teacher can be more valuable to Minneapolis than, say, Wayzata.

Said a third way, we may not have the optimum collection of teachers here in 281 given our demographics.  Indeed, Program Director Cox's presentation spoke of needed additional teacher training to be more effective in these more challenging environments.  I could ask why these skills are not being taught as part of the certification process or why we should pay more for a master's degree without them, but at least we realize we need more expertise.

Expertise is the skill of an expert per Merriam-Webster.  We need more experts and /or better experts to close the achievement gaps that started this discussion.  But there is an assumption in the above, what I will challenge as an unwarranted assumption in part 3.

Jottings

Watched Susan Boyle sing on Dancing with the Stars tonight, pretty impressive.  Maybe knowing her history made her strong voice resonate all the more.  I could feel it.  Certainly outsang the normally superb Michael Buble, who was off his game tonight.  Might have to buy her CD.

***

I've been recording Fox News 2 am "Red Eye" the past two weeks.  This is a pretty clever show, not surprising that it's beating some CNN prime time fare.  On the Ft. Hood massacre where the media can't bring themselves to use words like "terrorist", Andy Levy says: "We report, you decide why no one else will."

***

I like pumpkin pie in the fall.  From time to time, celebrity chefs turn up their noses at pumpkin desserts and I get mad.  Garrison Keillor did the same recently on Prairie Home Companion, saying pumpkin pie is an exercise in mediocrity, that the best you've ever had isn't that far from the worst.  It's just a vehicle for the cloves and other spices, he said.

You know, GK is probably right, but I think it's because it's hard to mess one up.  Top it with some quality whipped cream and I'm a happy guy.

***

Best thing to come out of all those "Rocky" movies?  "Eye of the Tiger" song.

***

Watched 1967's "Taming of the Shrew" with Elizabeth Taylor (then 35) and Richard Burton (then 42).  Wonderful production.  I'm not much of a Liz fan, but she made a convincing shrew.  Burton's Petruchio good, but Bruce Willis's carefree rendition in a fantasy episode of "Moonlighting" tough to forget.

***

Richfield put in a traffic circle at 66th and Portland.  Seems to work, unless you're on foot.  Drivers are already preoccupied with constant merging, may not see you in the crosswalks.  Run, don't walk!

***

Should go to bed, but happened on another Titanic documentary.  Never can get enough.  I've always been fascinated by this story.  This show's focus: poor quality iron rivets used instead of steel originally spec'd.  Thought they were going to build a replica "Titanic Centennial" but I see it will just be the Balmoral retracing the route in April 2012.  Prices starting at $ 3,900.  Last survivor died this past June.

***

Bedtime, time for "When Radio Was" from WBBM 770 AM out of Chicago.  Even heard an episode of "Speed Gibson" one night.  I get better reception on this station at night than Patriot II 1570 or K-FAN 1130.

Pawlenty's Spending Accountability Amendment

My readers know how frustrated I am with Governor Pawlenty's inconsistency, having taken him to task many times in the past.  But I have to admit he's dead on straight with his Spending Accountability Amendment proposal, which of course is dead on arrival at our profligate Legislature.  

I've never been comfortable with balanced budget amendments per se, there being too many devils in the details.  This approach is much cleaner, though the escape clause(s) must be equally clean and difficult to invoke, for the DFL will have no trouble coming up with a few Republicans to come up with super-majority votes.

As is often true, the Minneapolis Star Tribune's Editorial Response is the best evidence that Pawlenty is right, saying that "the governor did not describe what would happen to people and institutions that rely on state spending if his amendment were adopted."  Better they should ask what's going to happen if it isn't, for that is what will truly bring the "fiscal horror show in California" here.

Well done, Gov!

Affirmative Inaction - Part 1

The Robbinsdale Area Schools, like so many surrounding districts, has seen enrollments fall and diversity rise.  Fewer students mean less revenue, putting pressure on class sizes and the relatively fixed costs of facilities.  Meanwhile, more diverse student populations require more specialization that also contends for those decreasing revenues.  Trouble is, that specialization, even when revenue was abundant, has not prevented disturbing, rising differences in results.  I speak of course of achievement gaps and graduation rates, Minnesota oddly scoring high in average results and wide in the disparity of those results.

At its November 9, 2009 Work Session, the District 281 heard reports from Board Clerk Helen Bassett and Tyrize Cox, newly appointed Program Director for Integration and Equity.  This included a report from Bassett on her trip to the Pacific Education Group (PEG) Summit for Courageous Conversation.  Before continuing, let me note that PEG has run into some controversy as The Activist Next Door has been chronicling.  Several Board members touched on this last night, apparently uncomfortable with following PEG’s programs too closely, as they should be.  PEG won’t blow up like ACORN did,  but their abrasive approach including some reverse racism could still prove embarrassing and counter-productive later.

Bassett’s report also touched on the District’s participation in WMEP and the District’s 2008 Strategic Plan.  It was a good presentation, which I would recommend be summarized for a formal public presentation at an upcoming Board Meeting.  Following that was Cox’s report on our 2009-10 Equity and Integration Goals, again well presented.  A number of goals, policies, programs, even a couple of new ideas were listed, all aimed at getting better results for the underperforming “cohorts” in 281.

Folks, this is serious business, with another generation of minority students at risk.  I cannot do less now than speak truth to power.  This is old wine in new bottles.  It’s been tried before.  It didn’t work before.  I see no reason to believe it will work now.

As I posted previously, turnaround efforts within the boundaries set by the various “Statutes of Limitations” have yet to produce the scalable, repeatable results we all seek.  Indeed, Superintendent Sicoli observed last night that there is no template whereby you do this, this, and this, and the problem is solved.

No, we’re just exchanging reworded bromides about welcoming environments, cultural understanding, racial balance, staff diversity, socio-economic disparities, equal access, and multi-culturalism.  We’re being presented with the same old approach of more awareness, more research, more programs, more experts, more resources, more training, and of course, more money, and none of this is new.  What would be new would be some honest evaluation and explanation as to why these prior efforts failed, and how these new recommendations would avoid those mistakes.

As I said, there actually were a couple of new concepts, one of which deserves further commentary which I’ll save for part two.

Public Option Needed

No, not that public option.

I think it's time for our government meeting halls to provide Wi-Fi - County, City, and School Board.  If Caribou and Super 8 can offer it, this shouldn't be too big a challenge, technically or financially.  Wi-Fi is now widely accepted practice.  The word "ubiquitous" will soon apply.  

We, as constituents, residents, parents etc are taking personal time to attend these meetings, and Wi-Fi will improve that experience.  I'll use the School Board and myself as an example.  (Hey, it's my blog!)

Believe it or not, some portions of these meetings are more interesting than others.  Wi-Fi (VPN capable) would allow me to get a little work done if I'm not terribly interested in a topic.  For those I am more interested in, I could visit the District web site or other District sites for background, past meeting materials, or more detail in response to points raised.

Yes, there could be some who might abuse the privilege, having their kids in the back soak up the bandwidth watching movies, for example.  Not a problem. We in the audience can be self-policing.

Turning around the turnaround process

Once again, my friends at District 279 United have linked an intriguing article.  In The Turnaround Fallacy, Education Next contributor Andy Smarik notes that efforts to turn around failing schools almost always fail.

For as long as there have been struggling schools in America’s cities, there have been efforts to turn them around. The lure of dramatic improvement runs through Morgan Freeman’s big-screen portrayal of bat-wielding principal Joe Clark, philanthropic initiatives like the Gates Foundation’s “small schools” project, and No Child Left Behind (NCLB)’s restructuring mandate. The Obama administration hopes to extend this thread even further, making school turnarounds a top priority.

But overall, school turnaround efforts have consistently fallen far short of hopes and expectations. Quite simply, turnarounds are not a scalable strategy for fixing America’s troubled urban school systems.

Indeed, can you name a public school or school district that, once it fell back, later bounced back?  I can't, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.  Here's his solution:

Fortunately, findings from two generations of school improvement efforts, lessons from similar work in other industries, and a budding practice among reform-minded superintendents are pointing to a promising alternative. When conscientiously applied strategies fail to drastically improve America’s lowest-performing schools, we need to close them.

Done right, not only will this strategy help the students assigned to these failing schools, it will also have a cascading effect on other policies and practices, ultimately helping to bring about healthy systems of urban public schools.

He's not saying don't try incremental improvement at a "failing" school.  But if it doesn't work, and work well, that school must be closed, i.e., replaced.  While he acknowledges the difficulty of getting this past the unions and the bureaucracy, I don't think he acknowledges it enough.

Tom Torkelson, CEO of the high-performing IDEA network agrees: “I don’t do turnarounds because a turnaround usually means operating within a school system that couldn’t stomach the radical steps we’d take to get the school back on track. We fix what’s wrong with schools by changing the practices of the adults, and I believe there are few examples where this is currently possible without meddling from teacher unions, the school board, or the central office.”

Chris Barbic, founder and CEO of the stellar YES Prep network, says that “starting new schools and having control over hiring, length of day, student recruitment, and more gives us a pure opportunity to prove that low-income kids can achieve at the same levels as their more affluent peers. If we fail, we have only ourselves to blame, and that motivates us to bring our A-game every single day.”

Control over hiring?  Not if Education Minnesota et al continues to control most of the process via licensing, tenure, steps, and lanes.  Student recruitment?  Not sure what that means either.  But it is an intriguing thought.  It's also a necessary thought for school administrations and staff, that your school might close if the results or whatever else is wrong isn't fixed.  Peer pressure alone might chase out the under-performers.