minahkaypoh

A USA Today investigation calls into question "dramatic" improvements in student test scores in select District of Columbia schools due to an "abnormal pattern" of erasures. This occurred during Michelle Rhee's tenure as DC schools chancellor. Among the 96 DC schools that were flagged for wrong-to-right erasures by the city's testing contractor in 2008 "were eight of the 10 campuses where Rhee handed out so-called TEAM awards 'to recognize, reward and retain high-performing educators and support staff'.... Rhee bestowed more than $1.5 million in bonuses on principals, teachers and support staff on the basis of big jumps in 2007 and 2008 test scores. In 2008, to her credit, then-DC state superintendent (now Rhode Island education commissioner) Deborah Gist recommended that large test score gains in certain schools be investigated, but as USA Today reported, "top D.C. public school officials balked and the recommendation was dro

Tired of the rhetoric? Want to take a stab at cutting costs in Wisconsin public higher education yourself-- or even try increasing productivity? The Lumina Foundation has supported the development of an amazing interactive tool that helps you do just that. Here's one result I generated: Let's say we need to close the 2025 budget gap for Wisconsin public research universities to maintain current spending per FTE student. We can do that by increasing student/faculty ratio from 13:1 to 17:1. Period. Gap closed. No increases in tuition or state & local revenues necessary. And research suggests that such an increase will come at no significant cost to degree completion rates. If you want to suggest it will hurt instructional quality, you'll need to provide hard causal evidence to support that case-- I'd love to see it--email it to me! Better yet, let's first increase faculty salaries per FTE to the 75th percentile (which means an increase of about $1,000 from a

When I was in high school, I dreamed of going to UC-Berkeley. The stories of protests against social injustices conveyed by my AP History teacher got me excited. I was determined to attend a college where students fought against elitism and embraced diversity. The computerized college match programs I tried out told me that only CUNY would fit my bill (every other school was too white). And my mom told me that I was about 30 years too late for the Berkeley of my imagination. I ended up (sadly) at William and Mary, then George Washington University, and finally at University of Pennsylvania--entirely out of financial constraints (VA was in-state, GW was tuition-free thanks to Mom's job, and Penn offered me a full ride for grad school). In all cases I was surrounded by smart but highly privileged kids who had little sense that many had been born on 3rd base. My heart is therefore warmed by the sudden realization, brought on by recent events, that many of the undergraduates at UW-Ma

In a terrific piece in Inside Higher Ed , Jane Wellman and Charles Reed explain why a break from UW System is not an appropriate means with which to obtain greater flexibilities for UW-Madison. As I've said here many times, despite Chancellor Martin's claims to the contrary, doing so would be effectively shirking our responsibilities as a public institution. A board charged with keeping UW-Madison's best interests at heart--and only UW-Madison's interests-- would destroy the state's emotional attachment to Madison as a "common good." Think about it: where else in the nation can you find citizens across a state who treasure the flagship's mascot and sports teams as their own, despite having never been a Badger? Here's Wellman and Reed: "While system boards work imperfectly, their core purpose is more important now than ever before: to balance institutional aspirations with broader public needs, through planning, differentiation of missions,

A huge public thank you to Paul Krugman for his outstanding defense of academic freedom in Monday's New York Times . As an untenured professor and regular blogger, I am eternally grateful that he -- at least -- gets it. He is absolutely right about the risks of letting this kind of behavior go by-- "... less eminent and established researchers won’t just become reluctant to act as concerned citizens, weighing in on current debates; they’ll be deterred from even doing research on topics that might get them in trouble. What’s at stake here, in other words, is whether we’re going to have an open national discourse in which scholars feel free to go wherever the evidence takes them, and to contribute to public understanding. Republicans, in Wisconsin and elsewhere, are trying to shut that kind of discourse down. It’s up to the rest of us to see that they don’t succeed." Now if only UW-Madison Administration would take such a stance.

The news that the Wisconsin GOP has begun to investigate UW-Madison faculty should cause all members of the UW-Madison community to take a gigantic pause and ponder the reality that if the New Badger Partnership is approved, Governor Walker will get to immediately --July 1--appoint the majority of the board that will govern the public authority . This is not an "NBP myth." The Administration does not dispute this fact-- instead, they say : "Myth: Gov. Scott Walker will be able to control UW-Madison because he will be able to appoint a majority of the board. Fact: Having the executive branch appoint a majority of the Board of Trustees will preserve the university’s public status and its sovereign immunity status from certain types of lawsuits. The UW System Board of Regents is fully appointed by the governor to staggered terms, where the UW-Madison Board of Trustees would include appointments by the governor and the university of members with a closer interest in the uni

The witch hunt is on. Last night, my colleague William Cronon -- a highly respected, tenured professor of history -- revealed that the Wisconsin Republican Party made an open records request for his university email following the publication of his first-ever blog post . What was in that post? A thoughtful set of questions about the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). The investigation of Bill Cronon scares the crap out of me, quite frankly. And obviously, that's the intent. We are told as university faculty that we are state employees and our writing is subject to these requests, but many of us operate (have operated) under the impression we are living in a rational, civil society that understands the importance of academic freedom. No longer. I'm betting that a request is coming my way soon. I lack Cronon's long track record in academia, I lack his tenured status, I lack his measured way of saying things, I lack his status as a white male, I lack his apparen

Over the last several years, UW-Madison has increased its tuition at a higher rate than its System peers, thanks to the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates. That shift has not been accompanied by a decline in the percent of students receiving Pell Grants--in fact there's been a 5.5 percent increase in % Pell since 2000. Some are saying that this means that low-income students have been "held harmless" from the rising tuition, and that further increases would likely not lead to diminished economic diversity on campus. Furthermore, we are told, we can look to the outreach campaigns of institutions like UVA and UNC-Chapel Hill (home to Access UVA and the Carolina Covenant respectively) for models of anti-"sticker shock" programs that "work." These claims are terrific examples of why it's a bad idea to make causal claims based on correlational data. If you want to make those statements, you can look to those examples and find support for your ag

While some continue to wander in the desert , other folks are waking up to the realities of the ongoing assault on public higher education. Remarkably, this includes Stanley Fish . Fish's blog in today's New York Times includes some insights that more folks in Madison need to be cognizant of. Most importantly: "The erosion of support for public higher education is a part of a larger strategy designed to deprive public employees of a voice and ensure the triumph of conservative/neoliberal policies." While I adamantly oppose the corporatization of higher education, Fish is right-- universities are more corporate in spirit every day. At my own institution, the climate is increasingly one in which faculty do not feel free to express their views, for fear of reprisal from administrators (to wit: The Sifting and Winnowing blog contains anonymous entries from faculty mainly because those taking "unpopular" positions are loathe to do so publicly). While hiring

UW-Madison is touting a new endorsement of its New Badger Partnership from "Appleton resident Tim Higgins." That's nice, dear. Oh, except hang on a second....Who is Mr. Tim Higgins of Appleton? Not just an ol' man about town. This guy is a business owner with serious conservative Republican creds who is eager to "restore...conservative leadership" to Wisconsin! He was a Bush-Cheney '04 local Wisconsin co-chair . Yep-- Scott Walker and his conservative cronies are all excited about the NBP. Things that make ya go hmmmm.....????

For immediate release March 21, 2011 Contact: Kevin Gibbons, TAA Co-President: 608-520-3560 Alex Hanna, TAA Co-President, 765-404-6996 TAA Opposes New Badger Partnership and the Formation of UW-Madison as a Public Authority At a meeting Sunday, March 20, 2011, the general membership of the Teaching Assistants’ Association (TAA) approved a motion to oppose the New Badger Partnership. The TAA opposes the separation of UW-Madison from the UW System and the formation of the public authority model. The motion reads: The TAA opposes the New Badger Partnership, especially the separation of UW-Madison from the UW System, the formation of the public authority model, and the threat to affordability and accessibility it poses to public education and the lack of protection for labor unions on campus. The TAA also objects to the non-transparent and undemocratic process by which the New Badger Partnership was designed. “Our members have serious reservations about the sweeping changes being proposed

Whatever it actually means, "shared governance" seems awfully important to the faculty, staff, and students of UW-Madison. And so I want to bring to light an exchange that the Associated Students of Madison (ASM) had with Chancellor Martin about the New Badger Partnership at the end of January. I had heard about this conversation but neglected to read the text of it until now. I think it is something students should consider carefully, and discuss at great length. How do you feel about the process and how it's unfolded? How do you feel about the style of governance employed thus far, and what it means going forward? What follows is an excerpt from the ASM "live blog" of January 24 . Beth Huang: I’ve continually heard that the partnership is not a privatization, but a way to give the university more powers. But I don’t hear much about what powers will be given to students, staff and faculty at this university. Can you give me your vision for how other players

UW-Madison Chancellor Martin has received positive press for her willingness to use social media to communicate with her public. In 2009 she was described in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel as open to feedback, and eager to engage. "We've got a chancellor here who has been trying very hard to be open to feedback. She's done a huge number of public forums, trying to build support for the Madison Initiative," [Katy] Culver said. "Having her out there and appearing to be someone who is interested in using social media, is open to letting her personality out there, that may work very, very well for her." I thought this was super-cool of her. So, I started talking with her over Twitter about the New Badger Partnership . As a professional, I tried hard to balance candor, curiosity and a respectful tone. I mean, heck, I'm also untenured! Imagine my surprise when a few days ago I noticed her Tweets disappeared from my feed. I was no longer following her.

Interested in how the New Badger Partnership could affect the composition and quality of the student body? Of faculty? Please take a look at this memo I drafted for several campus committees, posted by Sifting and Winnowing .

As we think about ways to cope with proposed cuts to the UW System budget, here are a few more facts to ponder: 1. Costs-per-student are remarkably unequal throughout Wisconsin public higher education. According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau , "The cost per student calculation is based on standard accounting procedures that identify direct and indirect student-related costs funded by GPR and student fees. The calculation includes the direct costs of instruction, student services, and academic support. Other activity costs, such as physical plant, institutional support, and fringe benefits, are included in the cost per student calculation with the costs allocated based on the teaching mission's share of those costs. In those instances where a faculty or staff member performs research as part of his or her educational responsibilities, only those costs directly related to instruction are included in the cost pool for setting tuition." The disparities by universities are

When things look terrible in your neck of the woods, it's always useful to take a look around-- it helps to put things in perspective. I've been hearing a lot about how Wisconsin has disinvested in higher education over the past several decades, leaving Madison with no choice but to jump ship to become its own public authority. Today Tom Mortenson issued the latest issue of Postsecondary Education Opportunity, this one on " State Fiscal Support for Higher Education ." Here are a few key highlights: (1) In FY 2011 Wisconsin ranks 23rd in state fiscal support for operating expenses of higher education per $1,000 of personal income. The state spends $6.72, compared to a national average of $6.30. Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, Virginia, Ohio all spend LESS. (2) We rank 34th in the rate of change in state fiscal support over time (FY1980-FY2011). The national average is a decrease of 39.9% -- in Wisconsin we saw a decline of 45.2%. In contrast, Minnesota saw a 55.

Mulling over the events of the last several weeks during a trip to New York, where I met with several sociologists who specialize in social movements and politics, I have reached a rather grim conclusion: After passing the New Badger Partnership -- or the Wisconsin Idea Partnership--the Legislature will advance the bill to Governor Walker, who will then exercise one of the strongest powers any governor in this nation holds: the line-item veto . Writes The Nation : "It's not just a line-item veto; Walker has the power to veto individual phrases and words -- like "not" -- from sentences. If the state Senate returns to session and passes a bill with time limits on Walker's favored provisions, he can strip out the new language and sign his own decompromised version into law. If that sounds crazy, keep in mind that until 2008 governors of Wisconsin could -- and did! -- veto multi-page sections of bills, leaving in place only eight or nine words spelling out a law the

From yesterday's EPS conference ... my remarks. I hope they prove useful in some way. Saving Public Higher Education for the Twenty-First Century: The Case for Pragmatic Idealism By now we are all well aware—the United States is “losing the future” by falling in international rankings of the stock of college educated labor. Here at home, we are told that “for the good of the state we cannot afford to have the quality of UW-Madison … erode because we have our hands tied behind us in a range of ways that make us uncompetitive with other public and private universities around the world." The need to compete – with other colleges and universities across the world, across the country, and across our state – is the dominant and ever-present message stalking public higher education today. It drives our administrators to seek creative financing strategies and new governance structures, pushes our faculty to take on extensive grant-writing efforts and build in time-consuming travel,

This is a strange new horrible world we live in. I have no idea what happen to democracy, but it's clearly left the station. So, let me try to apply a little "pragmatic idealism" to the current moment regarding the New Badger Partnership. Today the UW System put the WIP on the table-- the Wisconsin Idea Partnership . It looks a lot like the NBP except it's for the whole System and it comes with real performance accountability measures. That means the most horrific part of the NBP--the splintering of System into a million selfish little pieces-- goes away. That's good-- that split wasn't Biddy's idea, it was Walker's-- and so it's something we ought to be awfully suspicious about. That doesn't mean the WIP is great, or even good. The question is whether it's better than the alternatives. I think the NBP is untenable. Even if it currently includes Chapter 37, it may not when the day is finally done. You simply can't trust this guy. It

When citizens take democracy for granted, Wisconsin happens. The current Republican leadership of this state -- who a majority of the people elected, sad to say -- is not worthy of a banana republic, let alone a state with a progressive reputation. If any one of them had any pride, he or she would stand up and say "This is wrong!" or even resign. But they are cowards and cheaters, the lot of them. They have trampled upon democracy, poisoned the idea of public service and brought shame upon the state of Wisconsin. Tonight, it isn't just about what they did, but how they went about doing it ... secretly, furtively, in violation of the state's public meeting laws. Governor Walker "praised" the move, which tells you all you need to know. So, apparently, killing collective bargaining wasn't so intrinsically related to balancing the state budget after all, now was it? This is NOT what democracy looks like! Media Coverage: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Wisco

It is nice to see that more people at UW-Madison are waking up to the new reality-- Walker isn't the only one trying to end public institutions in this state. We are in a tough financial situation and obviously that causes us to go into a protective crouch. We don't want to get hurt, and so we are willing to go on the offensive to protect our young. It's only natural. The way we do this can be guided solely by our personal interests, or in conjunction with a set of morals and principles used to help us sort through decisions. The use of such things can help us to make difficult choices, but also is likely to make some choices more difficult. The world is a lot greyer when you have to grapple with the greater good, while also trying to do for yourself. Take the rise of the Badger Advocates. Yesterday at Faculty Senate I asked Chancellor Martin who they were, and what interests they represented. Her reply, repeated in a tweet to me this morning, was this: "Badger Advo

The Badger Advocates formed this week to make sure the New Badger Partnership (NBP)--complete with split from the University of Wisconsin System--is passed in the Guv's budget this summer. Thank goodness someone is really digging into who these guys are -- this is a must read. My question is this: I have heard plenty of folks argue this is great for the research enterprise at UW-Madison. I have no doubt that's true. I've also heard some who think it's good for faculty. And plenty who think it's good for alumni. I also hear from current students who *think* it's good for them. But how, exactly? How does hiring 72 new faculty benefit students if teaching experience is not a requirement for hiring? If we continue to make tenure decisions based primarily on activities that don't involve students? Where is the evidence that any of the things we are dumping money into are causing improvements either in graduation rates, time-to-degree, gaps in degree com

Dear readers, I want to personally invite you all to attend two terrific events happening on the UW-Madison campus this week. I will be speaking at both and hope to see many of you there. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the Department of Educational Policy Studies will be holding its annual conference. The topic is The Obama Education Agenda: Principles, Policies, and Prospects . The speaker for the opening session, Tuesday night at 7 pm at the Union Theater, is none other than Diane Ravitch . (You can bet Liam is excited!) She will be talking about "The Future of Public Education." On Wednesday there will be several panels and a lunchtime session featuring former Wisconsin congressman David Obey . You might've seen the video of Dave attempting to get into the Wisconsin State Capitol building recently -- I sure hope he talks about that. Take a look at the full agenda , and note that the title for my talk has been revised -- I will now be speaking on Saving Public Higher Ed

Jon Stewart makes a compelling defense of teachers on the March 3rd Daily Show . He juxtaposes numerous comments made on Fox News during the 2010 debate in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts for couples earning more than $250,000 against the "avarice" of teachers earning around $50,000 a year plus benefits here in Wisconsin. As one Fox anchor put it: "250,000 dollars is not rich for a family of four sending kids to college! It's actually close to poverty!" Indeed. Further, Tracy Byrnes, a "Fox business contributor," railed against reducing pay or rescinding bonuses for Wall Street CEOs whose firms were being bailed out by the U.S. government because of contractual obligations. But, recently, she favored reducing teacher pay and benefits regardless of whether they were promised under existing employment contracts. What's fair is fair -- or not. Very interesting. The Republican argument is that we shouldn't -- and didn't -- let the Bush t

"I'm an optimist...tempers will cool." Scott Walker, delivering his big ol' budget speech, 3/1/2011 There are too many important words being co-opted around these parts lately (more on "flexibility" "tools" and "crisis" later). Optimism is one of them. Walker, when you rule the world, you cannot begin to know what optimism truly means. Optimism is the faith that good will prevail even when the world seems dead set against you. As the guy on top beating the heck out of us, you don't have a clue what optimism really means. It's us who have to be optimistic -- that, eventually, you will no longer be in charge.

Being part of history in the making is a powerful thing. It can make you feel like you are--finally--part of something real. And of course you are. The trick is recognizing what you are part of, and responding as a human being. Remember our dear friend Pinocchio? He was created by a nice guy (Geppeto) who was lonely, insecure, and sought love-- so he made himself a son. Except that in reality, his "son" was a puppet. He wouldn't become a real boy until he developed a conscience, recognized the power of (and reason for) his strings, and in doing so became part of the world. And Gepetto, despite hoping that his puppet would complete him, remained isolated until Pinocchio became a true boy. Pinocchio's road to developing a conscience was tough. At first, he just tried to act like he had a conscience. "I've got no strings, to hold me down, to make me fret, or make me frown...there are no strings on me...I want the world to know, nothing ever worries me..