San Francisco Chronicle
January 24, 2012
Written by Chip Johnson

The Oakland Unified School District wants to end the practice of allowing senior teachers to cherry-pick their work assignments.
Under the current rules, teachers with the most seniority get first choice of schools and classrooms – it’s a practice that’s customary throughout the U.S. public school system.
But Oakland school district officials say the decades-old practice does not always result in the best matches of students, teachers and communities.

KALW
Today on Your Call
Originally aired on February 1, 2012

On today’s Your Call we’ll talk about education success stories. With another round of severe budget cuts and a heated debate about education reform led by corporate funded think tanks, we’re taking a step back to talk about what’s actually working in our schools. Smaller class sizes? Textbooks that are more relevant to everyday life? More support for teachers?
Guests

Katy Murphy, education reporter for the Oakland Tribune
Eric Guthertz, principal of Mission High School
Kathy Schultz, dean and professor of education in the School of Education at Mills College

Listen to this story.

MindShift Blog
Tina Barseghian
February 1, 2012
Today is Digital Learning Day, a national promotional effort by the Alliance for Excellence in Education to call attention to using technology in schools.

More than 10,000 teachers and 1.5 million students have signed up in support to “celebrate innovative teachers and highlight instructional practices that strengthen teaching and personalize learning for all students,” according to the AEE.

To that end, a repost of Adam S. Bellow’s Golden Rules of Technology in Schools, as he stated them at the ISTE 2011 conference.
Learn more about the seven golden rules of using technology.

New American Media
January 26, 2012
Arun Ramanathan

OAKLAND, Calif. — Around this time every year, millions of parents in California are working through the school enrollment process. Unfortunately, while many don’t have a choice regarding what school their child will attend, those who do often find their options bewildering.

My wife and I are both educators (her currently, me formerly). We know the education system well, and what qualities to look for in a school. Still, even we were confused when we moved from San Diego to Oakland and began looking at local public schools.

After months of research and hours spent talking about the pros and cons of schools, we filled out our “options” form with our top three school choices. In some ways, this final step was a leap of faith. The school we picked had low scores but we liked the Spanish immersion program and believed that the principal and teachers could turn it around.

Our experience is not uncommon, as conversations with numerous other parents showed us. As parents, we know that the schools we select will have lifetime implications for our children’s success. But as we make these choices, we lack high-quality information on school performance.

The first problem is the school rating system. Read further about California school’s two separate ratings.

Influential education expert Diane Ravitch was on KQED’s Forum radio program with Michael Krasny on Wednesday, January 18, 2012.

Once a champion of reform policies such as vouchers and charter schools. Now, she has emerged as a leading defender of public education. We talk to her about the state of schools in California and across the country.
Listen to this valuable conversation on Forum with Michael Krasny.

Could being on the high school football team prepare you just as well for the workplace as taking an advanced placement class? By forcing all students onto a college-bound track, we ignore the fact that there are other trajectories towards success and gainful employment, according to Russell Rumberger, who currently serves as provost in the Office of the President at the University of California, and director of the California Dropout Research Project.

Rumberger recently published a book called, Dropping Out: Why Students Drop Out of High School and What Can be Done About It. According to Rumberger, roughly 25 percent of U.S. high school students do not graduate.  And he says that our country is only making the problem worse by trying to prepare everyone for college.

Turnstyle spoke with Rumberger about how to re-define success in high school by creating multiple pathways for students to achieve inside and outside of school.

Read this compelling interview about multiple pathways to success.

Turnstyle News KALW
January 18, 2012
Written by Robin Gee

Silicon Valley Education Foundation
January 13, 2012
Written by Kathryn Brown
California schools are the poster child for Gov. Brown’s new budget mantra that the state can’t spend what it doesn’t have. The latest Quality Counts report from Education Week ranks California 47th overall in how much it spends per student – $8,667 when adjusted for regional cost differences, about $3,000 below the national average of $11,665.
This is a drop over last year, when California spent $8,852 per pupil, with a ranking of 43rd in spending adjusted for regional cost-of-living variations.  Of course that was before the state faced a nearly $27 billion dollar deficit.
The state also falls short when it comes to education spending as a percentage of state and local taxable resources.  That comes to 3.3 percent according to the report, putting California in 40th place.  The national average is 3.9 percent.  For another perspective, Vermont puts 6 percent of its taxable resources into education; and even Texas does a little better than California at 3.7 percent.
The picture is better in the equity analysis.  California ranks 12th on a measure called the wealth-neutrality score.  This is defined by EdWeek as the “degree to which state and local revenue are related to the property wealth of districts.”  The state’s 0.038 average means that poorer districts receive more funding than wealthy ones on a weighted per pupil basis.
It’s interesting to note the differences in where states get the bulk of their education funds.  In California in 2008-09, local revenues contributed $21 billion or 29.6 percent; another $9.2 billion, 13 percent,  came from the federal government (above the national average of 9.6 percent); the state ponied up the remaining $40.6 billion.  Nationwide, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, state shares ranged from a low of 27.6 percent in Illinois, to a high of 85.7 percent in Vermont.
For more information please go to Spending Near Bottom.

San Francisco Chronicle
January 10, 2012
Written By Nanette Asimov

Over the objections of angry college students and worried faculty members, California community college leaders voted Monday to support a systemwide overhaul that could end many free classes for older adults and squeeze out students who fail to move quickly through the system.

The 22 recommendations approved by the college system’s Board of Governors are intended to address a devilish problem: Essential classes are in critically short supply and thousands of students are turned away from classes they need because of the state’s economic crisis.

Board member Peter MacDougall, chairman of the Student Success Task Force that drew up the recommendations over the last year, said colleges can no longer afford to put out the welcome mat they have offered for generations.

“As wonderful as having open admission is, if it’s a false promise, it fails,” he said.

Under the new plan, all students will be expected to set up an education plan to move quickly toward an associate’s degree or vocational certificate. If they linger too long or take too many classes unrelated to their goal, they lose registration priority. Others poor enough to quality for a fee waiver would lose that benefit after 110 credits, well beyond the 60 credits needed to transfer.

These changes, including a shift in key decision-making from the 112 campuses to the state chancellor’s office, won’t be automatic. Legislation is required for several of the proposals.

But Monday’s vote, unanimous with two abstentions, was a significant step toward implementing them.

“This is the most significant issue that’s come before the board,” said Board of Governors President Scott Himmelstein.

Supporters include the Community College League of California and other groups that say the recommendations will focus more attention on students who fall through the cracks.

Scott Lay, president of the league, said it was “unconscionable” that higher education has been cut $2 billion this fiscal year. “But it’s more unconscionable that we have a 20-point achievement gap between white and black students. We cannot ignore this any longer,” he said.

Dozens of opponents addressed the board, fearful that students who don’t fall within the scope of the recommendations will be shut out.

Many said that 110 credits isn’t enough time for some students, especially those who have had troubled childhoods, are single parents or former offenders.

“These recommendations are discriminatory,” said Paul Munoz, who works with needy students at Ventura Community College.

Ed Murray, an instructor at City College of San Francisco, where many opponents were from, urged the board to oppose the recommendations.

“Don’t cut out the poorest of our society. Where are they going to go if they can’t go to community college? To prison?” Murray asked.

Several of the speakers oversee programs for older adults, which offer free classes from memoir writing to music appreciation.

The recommendations direct colleges to spend their dollars first on students with academic or vocational goals. Only then should scarce resources be spent on free enrichment classes.

Chancellor Jack Scott told the audience that he has nothing against older adults. “I happen to be one of them,” said the white-haired former state senator.

Scott also addressed those who criticized the rationing of education, an expression he has used himself.

“We’re already rationing education,” he said. “We’re just doing it haphazardly.”

Abstaining from the vote were board member Natalie Berg, also a City College of San Francisco trustee, and Danny Hawkins.

As the board members voted, students stood, interrupting with “Mike check!” the Occupy movement’s signature statement. They paused only long enough to allow the board to finish voting, then shouted:

“We’ll be back! We shut down the Port of Oakland – twice – and we’re coming for you!”