The Lie of Charter Schools

I have been a math, science and technology teacher for 14 years, mostly in private schools, and have seen a lot of "stuff" go on, but one thing has been true throughout all of the schools I have taught at.  The teachers have all gone into teaching because of a love for education and a desire to help students learn.  Administrators at the schools I have taught at were always former teachers, so were always cut from that same cloth.  However, there WAS one exception...there was one year that I taught at a charter school.

That year, I interviewed at this school over the summer and the head of curriculum told me that he was impressed with my ability to teach a wide variety of subjects.  When I asked about the benefits, he was full of praise for the health benefits, but when I asked about the salary, he paused for a moment.

"Well," he started, grinning sheepishly, "I'm not the head of HR, but normally we start teachers based on their years of public school experience, and you have all private school experience." (I had ten years under my belt at the time.)  "However, I'm sure we can get you credit for half of that experience and start you on step 5." 

And so, I went home, certain that I would start at least at a salary I could support my family on.  Instead, when I signed my contract, I was told by the head of HR, "We have to start you on Step 1 because the union makes us base your salary on public school experience."  Then, I picked up extra classes, so was teaching 8 sections of classes (out of a 10 period school day), but wasn't even full time (I was 3/4 time), making so little money that I was eligible for food stamps and unemployment.  My kids were on reduced price school lunch, and my house went into foreclosure.

When I got involved with the union, I found out that there was NO union policy about starting me based on public school experience, and that I should have started based on my full 10 years experience.  So, when I had the union bring it up to the head of HR, they agreed, saying that my next contract would show the change.

Two weeks later, as I was searching the job postings for the following year, I found a post for my position; it was April.  Then, on the last day of school in June, I was grading the last of my finals and putting my grades in the computer.  I had already cleaned out my desk and found another job, telling my students that I was unsure if the school was planning on bringing me back and saying goodbye to them.  As I finished my grading, the principal came into my classroom.

"Oh, I'm glad I caught you.  The administration has decided not to renew your contract, but I'm sure you expected that.  You can turn in your laptop on your way out."  And with that, she turned and left my classroom.

Our charter schools and the people in charge of them don't seem to care about the teachers in their employ.  All they DO seem to care about is the number of students they can attract to their schools and the amount of money they can funnel to the corporations that convince the politicians to allow them to create them.  These politicians then get nice fat donations from these corporations and the profiteers running them so they can stay in their elected positions.

We need to bring education and educational policy back under the control of the teachers, the parents and those who really care about the kids in the system.  We need to take the money out of education and make it, once again, a public right and good, as it was originally intended to be

The Cost of Education Reform

CCCS: a set of “standards” that define what students should be able to accomplish at the completion of each grade level in Language Arts and Mathematics.  Approved by politicians (but not educators, who had no say in the matter) in 43 states and the District of Columbia, these standards have become the law of the land, and on July 1, 2012, these states began requiring their teachers to assess students proficiency on each grade-level standard.  Then, on July 1, 2013, two federally-funded testing coalitions rolled out standardized tests to assess students as to where they fell according to those standards.  (Now, being a math teacher with a math degree, this is statistically backwards, telling teachers to assess students on standards with no assessments to be able to assess their proficiency with, then rolling out standardized tests without knowing where the average student would fall on each question, thus having no ability to identify grade-appropriate questions to asses the students with…but I digress.  The point was to make people in these testing coalitions, and companies that force test prep programs on public schools, money, which it did…)

Other than the problems of rolling out untested standards that were not research-based, teachers that were given no materials or even curricula with which to teach the new standards, and tests that had no norms associated with them that were based on research and trial runs, there was a MAJOR flaw with the tests.  The CCSS included standards that required that student be taught to think at higher levels and be able to argue their points, using evidence and logical arguments to come up with reasonable solutions.  These tests, being primarily multiple choice questions, are not able to assess these higher level thinking skills or reasoning abilities.  Additionally, each test required extensive new technology for each district to purchase, often costing up to 10X more per student to administer and score each test than the previous (and just as ineffective), subjectively scored state-designed tests required under NCLB.  Now, schools are spending more money to assess their students, with no more effective tests, on testing websites that are (as I found out this fall) often down or not functioning, requiring more time to be devoted to testing, and taking up more precious teaching time.

Add to all this the push from politicians to “improve” our urban schools.  The politicians’ (flawed) theory goes this way:

1. Give charters to corporations that put forth a proposal on how they plan to educate students “better;”
2. Promote these charter schools with public tax money, convincing parents that their kids can get a better education at these schools;
3. Let these schools choose the students they accept, typically the high-fliers, pulling the good students out of the neighborhood schools;
4. Require the districts give more tax money to these schools, through voucher or “Money Follows the Child” programs, taking more money away from the district public schools,
5. Require the neighborhood public schools to STILL pay for the higher proportion of special education and behavioral problem students they now have, lowering the scores on the tests, without the benefit of those students who would score higher;
6. The charter schools then end up: renting space, paying for business services, and putting money into the for-profit corporations that set them up in the first place, all the while paying lower salaries without the added benefits of unions, professional development or other benefits that would go with the collective bargaining.

The charter school movement often benefits the corporations and “reformers” at the expense of the public schools and the students at the school, but perform no better than the public schools they wish to replace.

So, we have standards that cannot be accurately assessed by multiple choice, standardized tests.  Our public school districts are paying tax money to test students, even students who attend charter schools, for ineffective tests.  Our public school districts, especially our urban districts, are ending up with a higher proportion of special education students and low performers, which results in more money spent supporting students AND consequences ranging in funding penalties and more testing when their students “fail to have adequate yearly progress.”  Yet our politicians, bureaucrats and businesses get rich pushing new standards, new tests, new textbooks, new educational programs and new charter schools.

We as a people need to stand up for the rights of our kids.  Education has become a multimillion dollar industry when it used to be a right for every child.  The “education reformers” have preyed on our desire to do the best for our children, but we need to ask ourselves, “Do these politicians and bureaucrats REALLY have our children’s interests at heart?”  As a teacher and a parent, I have seen firsthand that they do not.  They have their OWN interests at heart, and would trample their own kids if it would make them an extra dollar.  I once listened to the headmaster at my school refer to a student as “…having a dollar sign over his head.”  (He has an MBA and is active in politics in our town.)  THIS is how these people our kids, as big dollar signs.  It is the teachers and parents who can be the real education reformers, not the profiteers and bureaucrats.  We who really care about our kids and their futures.  When we take politics and profit out of education, and return it to the hands of those who REALLY care, we can change education for the better.  Until then, the politicians will continue to create laws guided by the profiteers who wish to line their pockets through public education tax dollars, and we will see worse results with our increased taxes and expenditures.  This is our future, unless we step up and force the change that needs to be!

A Different Type of Diagnosis

I recently attended a meeting where a Special Education director asked me, as someone with a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome, whether I was upset that the diagnosis was "disappearing" with the release of the DSM-5.  I had to think about it before answering - I hadn't really given it much thought.  Since my diagnosis three years ago (at 37), I have always viewed myself as an Aspie, or having a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome.  However, that, to me, is only a label that has been placed on me by the observation of my behaviors or, more importantly, how my behaviors have exhibited themselves at different stages of my life.  No matter what label is placed on me because of those behaviors, I am different from those around me.  Any changes that the APA makes to the DSM cannot make me change that view of myself, whether I am Asperger's or Autistic or Socially Inept.  It will not change who I am or how I deal with my differences.

So, to get back to my story, I told her that, despite not being a major category of diagnosis, it will still be a subtype diagnosis, it's just that it will be under a different major title, that of Autism Spectrum Disabilities.  This, however, is not completely how I feel about it.  Let me elaborate...

The DSM has been the standard tool for diagnosing psychological differences for decades.  Compiled and published by the American Psychological Association (APA), this manual provides the codes which all types of organizations, from educational institutions to insurance companies, use for billing and organizing people into categories in which they fit best.  Providers of services have also used the DSM diagnoses to determine the most appropriate treatment for different disorders, be it psychological or pharmaceutical, or some combination of the two.  For example, under the DSM-IV-R, I was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome.  However, the diagnosis criteria is all behavioral in nature.  For example, when I received my diagnosis, I met the following criteria:

• DSM-IV DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR ASPERGER'S DISORDER
  (criteria I met are in italics)
  A.Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:
  
  (1) marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction
  (2) failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level
  (3) a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)
  (4) lack of social or emotional reciprocity
  
  B.Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:
  
  (1) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus
  (2) apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals
  (3) stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)
  (4) persistent preoccupation with parts of objects
  
  C.The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
  
  D.There is no clinically significant general delay in language (e.g., single words used by age 2 years, communicative phrases used by age 3 years).
  
  E.There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood.
  
  F.Criteria are not met for another specific Pervasive Developmental Disorder or Schizophrenia.

However, these criteria are all based on how I was behaving at the time.  When I was undergoing my diagnosis, I was having difficulty at work, and the stress was exacerbating the presentation of these symptoms.  Two years later, I was in a job where I was appreciated and my stress levels were extremely low.  That means that, had I not sought therapy when I did, my behaviors would never have warranted a diagnosis of Asperger's.  Does that mean that in the past two year my Asperger's has gone away?  No, it's just under the surface.  It's still a part of who I am, but I just blend in with others much better now since I am under much less stress than I was three years ago.

And that, my friends, is why I am upset with the APA's decision to reclassify Asperger's  Syndrome, along with a ton of other psychological disorders in the DSM-5.  Asperger's Syndrome might share similarities with Autistic Disorder and other Pervasive Developmental Disorders, especially in the behaviors that those with AS/Autistic Disorder/PDD-NOS exhibit.  However, the treatment for these three disorders, along with most of the DSM-5 diagnoses cannot be entirely based on the behaviors that one exhibits.  That would be like treating someone who was limping with surgery to remove a bone chip form their knee (which may or may not exist).  Not all behaviors (limping, lack of social or emotional reciprocity) have the same cause.

So, then, how do we learn to treat people with psychological disorders?  Well, when the DSM-5 (which will be released and become effective on May 18), was announced and it's diagnosis criteria were released, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) announced that the APA's insistence on basing diagnoses on behaviors rather than focusing on finding biological markers for these disorder was creating validity problems with the DSM.  They announced that they would be focusing their research efforts on their new RDoC:

The NIMH has launched the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project to transform diagnosis by incorporating genetics, imaging, cognitive science, and other levels of information to lay the foundation for a new classification system. 

The RDoC will hopefully replace the DSM in the future.  It will be a blessing for those who wish to have better mental health services for the population, but it may be a death knell for the pharmaceutical industry.  To have a diagnosis like ADHD have a biological marker that might have a simple medicinal treatment, all these meds that are now prescribed might be found to be useless.  However, for those of us who have been diagnosed with Asperger's, we will probably find that all the medications people have been prescribed for conditions similar to ADD, ADHD, and other co-morbid conditions have a negative effect on us.

I might be wrong.  The DSM-5 might be a good thing, but the way it diagnoses through behaviors is not the way medicine should work.  We need to create a biological way to diagnose psycholgical disorders, like the NIMH's RDoC.