July 2013 -

Archive for July, 2013

The Wisconsin Charter School Law Reform

Posted by Terri McCormick On July - 23 - 2013

THE STRATEGIES OF DAVID

We have heard the stories of David and Goliath. David’s strategy was to aim at Goliath’s one point of weakness, the spot on the giant that wasn’t armored.

Wisconsin Charter Schools - Terri McCormick The American school system was such a Goliath, heavily armored in layers of bureaucracy that resisted the calls for change. An education reformer and former New York City teacher said it best: “The American education system is broken, failing too many children,” according to John Taylor Gatto. Impersonal bureaucracies and cookie-cutter approaches left far too many children behind, particularly in America’s largest cities.

Gatto wrote that reform would take nothing less than “blowing up the system.” Fortunately, it didn’t come to that. It instead took the slingshots of passionate individuals driven with a singular purpose, “to provide educational opportunities for all children.” The proverbial stone in David’s sling was an idea so powerful that it built a nationwide network for educational change.

BIPARTISAN STRENGTH AND SINGULAR FOCUS

The Wisconsin Charter School Association represented every area of the state, every political faction and every network concerned with children and education. What gave this unfunded charter school movement strength at a time when there was no cash to buy political influence was simple: courage.

The sheer number of grandparents, parents, teachers, administrators, community groups and individuals together, all determined to put children’s lives first, made that difference. Our phone calling trees, faxes, and routine visits to state legislators’ offices made that difference. We didn’t need to be paid to do the right thing. It was simply the right thing to do!

Those of us in the charter school movement in the early 1990s raised our voices with such clarity of purpose and passion that lawmakers had no choice but to listen. We spoke with one voice and gave one message that was easy to understand: children in impossible educational systems deserved a way out.

Technology would create an opportunity to reach all legislators and leaders in a position to call for a vote on our legislation. The automatic fax dial-ups on our computers made hundreds, of supporters appear to be thousands of supporters, which then grew into tens of thousands of supporters overnight. The political muscle of the people (more specifically, parents and community leaders) was unwavering in the fight for the rights of children to have quality education.

The sincerity of parents who were fighting for the survival of their families could not be denied. No political need for power or control, no position of power or control, and no heavily funded union, association or political machine could stand up to the conviction of a family’s right to fight for its own survival. Education equates to survival for families whose children have fallen through the cracks of public schoolhouses.

State constitutions across this country guarantee every child’s “right to an education.” This political and legal argument became so powerful that it indeed swayed even the most reluctant politicians. Even those who dreaded the recourse from the union’s political action committee monies that would rain down against them, come election time.

And, as they say, “The rest is history.” Today, Wisconsin has well over thirty thousand students in public charter schools—many of them in my own backyard.

Senn Brown, a lobbyist of the school board association, confirmed the importance of the vote and the changes in education law, as he whispered in my ear the day of the vote, “Terri, look what you have done! The charter school law is one of the most significant public school reforms in Wisconsin’s history.”

I had the honor of leading and being a part of one of the most important movements in the history of the state of Wisconsin—a civil rights movement to many, and my core conviction as a citizen leader. We had done it! Zero dollars to lobby politicians, and the results were priceless; we would touch countless families and future generations, even though we would never meet.

To continue reading this chapter, get your copy of “What Sex is a Republican in paperback or Kindle edition on Amazon.

About the Author:

Terri McCormick is an author, policy expert, educator, and former state representative to the Wisconsin State Legislature. Today, she offers her expertise in public and government relations through McCormick Dawson CPG Ltd., a trusted consultancy of independent contractors.

Ms. McCormick serves as president and CEO of the company, drawing from more than two decades of professional experience, a strong educational foundation, a host of industry-related publications, and a multitude of accolades, awards and formal recognitions. Holding a Master of Arts in administrative leadership from Marian University, and a Bachelor of Science in political science and public administration from the University of Wisconsin, Ms. McCormick received both degrees with high honors.

“What Sex is a Republican?” is sold on Amazon in both the paperback edition as well as Kindle edition. Read reviews on Amazon here.

Book Excerpts

Despite Common Core’s Call for Increased State Standards, 26 States Lower Proficiency Bar

Posted by Terri McCormick On July - 9 - 2013

The McCormick Standard strongly recommends this article for the sake of an ‘honest’ dialogue about the future of public education in the United States.

(Reposted from Educationnext.org)

CAMBRIDGE, MA –Recently, states’ definitions of what makes a student proficient in math and reading have been changing—in some cases for the better, in others for the worse. In a new Education Next article, “Despite Common Core, States Still Lack Common Standards,” authors Paul Peterson and Peter Kaplan find that even though 37 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.) received a waiver from the U.S. Department of Education as incentive to join the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) consortia and raise their standards in 2009, standards still declined in rigor in 26 states and D.C. between 2009 and 2011. In the remaining 24 states, standards increased in rigor. In the period since 2007, there has been little change in state standards overall.

Comparing the percentage of students who were identified by state assessments as proficient in math and reading in 4th and 8th grade with the percentage of students from the same state who were proficient on the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), the authors were able to see the variations in state standards across the country. The authors then assigned grades A through F to the states based on the strength of their standards relative to all other states.

The authors explain in the study that a high grade “indicates that the state’s definition of proficient embodies higher expectations for students. It is best thought of as a high grade for ‘truth in advertising.’” A full list of the states’ grades and trends over time can be found in Table 1 of the article, on http://educationnext.org.

The CCSS were established by a national consortium sponsored by the National Governors Association. The U.S. Department of Education has waived the requirements established by the federal law, No Child Left Behind, for states that promise education reforms including the adoption of CCSS, which commits the state to set common standards with high expectations for student performance. So far, 45 states have officially adopted CCSS.

The data indicate that some states, like Tennessee, have raised the proficiency bar. Between 2009 and 2011, Tennessee’s grade rose from an F to an A. Other states that improved their standards in that time frame by a full letter grade include West Virginia (C to a B+), New York (D to a B), Nebraska (F to a C), and Delaware
(C- to a B-).

However, these gains are offset by significant drops in proficiency standards between 2009 and 2011 in New Mexico (A to a B), Washington (A to a B), Hawaii (A to a C), Montana (B to a C), and Georgia (C- to an F).

Additionally, the authors found that 8th-grade reading and math standards have converged among the states since 2003. The authors explain that this could be seen as positive news for those looking to decrease disparity in standards across states, “were it not for the fact that 8th-grade standards also declined between 2003 and 2011.”

CONTACT:
Paul E. Peterson, ppeterso@gov.harvard.edu, Harvard University
Ashley Inman, ashley_inman@hks.harvard.edu, 707 332-1184, Education Next Communications Office

About the Authors
Paul Peterson is professor of government and director of the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Peter Kaplan is pursuing a bachelor’s degree in government at Harvard University. The authors are available for interviews.

About Education Next
Education Next is a scholarly journal published by the Hoover Institution that is committed to careful examination of evidence relating to school reform. Other sponsoring institutions are the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, part of the Taubman Center for State and Local Government at the Harvard Kennedy School, and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. For more information about Education Next, please visit: http://educationnext.org.

Education standard

The Ten Who Dared and the Support for the Public Charter School Alternative

Posted by Terri McCormick On July - 1 - 2013

What Sex is a Republican? The source of resistance to change is human emotion. In the political environment, reaction and perception are reality.

COALITION BUILDING

Since the Charter School Association had no money, it was time to build a broad statewide coalition of integrity-driven citizen leaders. With uncertain support from politicians, we would need a multifront strategy.

My motivation was twofold: my passion to help children caught in ineffective educational systems, and the fact that time was running out on my commitment to Howard Fuller—six months was up at the end of the 1994 legislative session.

WASB

We managed to create a strong alliance from an unlikely source: the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB). Admittedly, the WASB was a reluctant ally in the process of defining and writing laws for self-governing public charter schools. Due to the power of the teachers union, however, the WASB found itself at a crossroads.

Parents and administrators alike voiced the need for more public school options to meet the needs of their diverse school communities. It was this convergence of voices from all constituencies within school districts that empowered the superintendent’s ranks, which began to see public charter schools as a part of their arsenal in educating children who were underserved and struggling.

The support of public charter schools, however, came with a hefty personal and professional price. Back in 1994, the radical idea of “public charter schools” was a political hot potato. The Wisconsin Association of School Boards magazine told the story in an article titled “The Ten Who Dared.”

This denoted the ten superintendents who dared to step forward to support the public charter school alternative for their schools. Those ten superintendents would soon become the seven … and then the five … and then, ultimately, the three who dared, due to the overwhelming pressure and hard-ball politics played by the state’s largest teachers union.

The teachers union was a powerful lobby, garnering the support of legislators in my state who were motivated by fear and were then moved to inaction. Any attempt to effect change within the public school system was quickly quashed because the union itself had other ideas. Members didn’t want to, as they put it, “lose power and control” by adopting a charter school program.

There was so much political angst from union stewards that those teachers who dared to teach in a public charter school were punished. The common penalty was to lose all seniority within the public school system, and with that, they forfeited their pensions and benefits. Soon, teachers unions forced charter school teachers out of their retirement and benefits packages altogether. This was the price they paid for stepping outside the ranks of union protection. It was an overt attempt to strangle the public charter school movement.

In one case, a school administrator who had moved to Wisconsin from Colorado confided in me as a member of the Wisconsin Charter School Association. With more emotion than I usually heard from a grown man, he told me, “I can’t lose my job. I need to be able to feed my family.”

My response consisted of two words: “I understand.” As difficult as it was to see him go, I did understand, on a personal level, what he was going through.

“I am sorry,” he continued. “I have to drop out of the charter school movement.” He sounded tired and beaten. This was my first taste of the politics of fear and intimidation. This was the price a public school teacher or administrator would pay for supporting something as “radical” as public charter schools.

A PERSONAL PRICE

My children were subject to pressure and added criticism in their public elementary schools. Worse, I received a warning on my home phone, telling me, “Stop supporting these charters—or else.” Unshaken, I asked, “Or else what?” The voice on the other end of the phone pushed further. “Check underneath your car before strapping your children in their car seats.”

That is the price one pays for being a “change agent,” a “reformer.” It was a personal price, one that tested my convictions and my ability to see past the smokescreens and the fear tactics, even those introduced to my own children.

I had a choice to make—curl up in a ball and be a victim, or stand tall and continue to do the right thing. This was a difficult decision for me. Any number of fears ran through my mind as a parent of young children—guilt, panic, anger, indignation, remorse.

Incidents of intimidation were reported at my daughter Kellie’s elementary school. One such report occurred in the form of a personal phone call to me from another parent, who was volunteering at the front desk at Kellie’s school.

This parent was so disturbed by the treatment my daughter received that she phoned me at home. My immediate response was to get the principal on the phone—he clearly loved children, and I trusted him to verify for me what was happening in my daughter’s fifth-grade classroom.

The principal’s response was as follows: “Yes, Terri, Kellie’s desk has been pulled out of the row and pushed to the far back corner of the room.”

“Would you tell me if there are boxes on it and a plant, so that she may not even have a seat in her classroom?” I asked, wanting clarification of the report I had received.

“Yes,” he admitted, “there were boxes on her desk, and I removed them so she has a place to sit.” If the principal thought to pacify me with that statement, didn’t work.

“I am leaving my meeting, and I am driving directly to school so that we may chat,” I declared. Later, the principal and I discussed the options that lay before me: pull my children out of public school, confront the teacher, see to it that Kellie was not singled out for no reason again. This was a stupid act by a teacher who was either told to intimidate the child of the president of the Wisconsin Charter School Association, or it was a thoughtless act of a teacher who needed help.

After that incident, I consulted a close friend and colleague, who gave me the words that I needed to hear: “Intimidation by those who do not want change will continue, Terri. Are you willing to back away from what you know is important to so many children and let this continue?”

My children needed to know that they would be protected. And at the same time, they needed to know that we, as a family, would not back down to fear. Undaunted, I continued to lead the charter school movement through the passage of the public charter school bill, signed in 1996. More determined than before, I set out to impress upon the politicians that public charter schools had widespread support.

I appealed directly to the people of the state through editorial boards, letters to the editor and, most important, through the statewide network of faith-filled, heart-filled parents and families who were fighting for the survival of their children, students and communities.

Building a strong grassroots base of support was critical if we were to take on what was feared to be an unmoving union. The Wisconsin Charter School Association and its members met monthly and spoke via the Internet and on the telephone frequently, as challenges and crises intervened. Listening to the concerns and feedback of the charter school organizers from around the state, we created communication strategies that kept our organization energized and filled with hope.