Wendy Lecker: No need to break the law -- just have it changed for you

The education "reform" movement has been rocked recently by revelations that its biggest stars are more concerned with the appearance of success than whether children actually learn.

Two major scandals involving cheating on standardized tests broke in the past few weeks. First, there was the indictment of former Atlanta superintendent Beverly Hall, along with 34 teachers, principals and aides, in a huge standardized test-erasure scheme. This revelation was quickly followed by the leaking of a memo from the DC public schools. Former DC schools chancellor Michelle Rhee has long been suspected of knowing of a large test-erasure practice occurring during her tenure. Investigative reporters found unusually high rates of wrong-to-right erasures on tests, and unusually high gains in test scores. However, unlike in Atlanta, where a full-scale investigation was launched, in DC there were only superficial investigations, none ever examining actual tests and consisting of very few interviews of staff, all concluding that there was no widespread cheating and exonerating Rhee, a major player in the national corporate education reform movement.

However, last week, reporter John Merrow unearthed a buried confidential memo warning then-chancellor Rhee of widespread cheating in DC: a warning Rhee apparently ignored. This memo flatly contradicts the conclusions of the anemic investigations clearing her of wrongdoing.

Rhee and Hall could have learned from states like Louisiana and Connecticut. There is no need to break the law, when these states cheat legally. For example, Louisiana raised the cut score for "success" on its standardized tests, so that New Orleans public schools would be deemed failures, be taken over by the Recovery School District and be converted to charter schools. Several years later, when those schools were set to be returned to the control of the locally elected school board, Louisiana simply lowered the cut score to give the impression that the Recovery School District was succeeding, thereby justifying its continued control over the schools. Why erase test answers when you can simply manipulate the standard for "success"?

Not to be outdone, we Nutmeggers have employed our Yankee ingenuity to game the system, as well. While superintendent of Hartford, Steven Adamowski boasted major increases in test scores -- a result, he claimed, of his reform methods, including school closures, school choice and merit pay. However, as revealed by Hartford Board of Education member Robert Cotto, the gains in test scores in Hartford during that period can largely be explained by the district's exclusion of a significant percentage of students with disabilities from the regular test and having them take a modified assessment that did not count in Hartford's test scores. As Cotto described, it Hartford engaged in "addition by subtraction." Neat!

Connecticut's Legislature and state Board of Education can be crafty, too, and it's all legal. Connecticut law provides that school administrators be certified, to ensure that our schools and school districts are led by individuals with the knowledge and experience to properly oversee the education of our children. All of Connecticut's permanent superintendents are certified to be superintendents -- except one: Paul Vallas, superintendent of Bridgeport schools, serving approximately 20,000 students. To remedy this problem, Governor Malloy wrote a law enabling Vallas to be certified if he completed an educational leadership course approved by the state board of education. But then, another problem arose: the state Board of Education did not approve any course and Bridgeport already hired Vallas permanently.

Not to worry! UConn quickly devised a course it claimed was just like what all other superintendents must pass. As Jonathan Pelto has pointed out, though, a regular superintendent candidate must have 15 credits beyond a master's degree; go through a rigorous application process that requires a full faculty review of one's application; complete an additional 15 credits of course work in the program; and pay approximately $30,000 in tuition and fees. UConn's program, hastily approved by the state Board of Education, only requires Vallas to enroll in a three-credit, one semester independent study course at a cost of about $4,000. More legal cheating!

So, kids, if you want to grow up to change the world like these star reformers, you don't need to learn anything of substance (don't worry, with standardized tests in every grade and subject, soon you won't be learning anything of substance, anyway). But don't break the law! Simply ally yourselves with those who make the laws and they will bend and twist them to make your dreams of greatness come true!

Wendy Lecker is a columnist for Hearst Connecticut Media Group and is senior attorney for the Campaign for Fiscal Equity project at the Education Law Center.