An Explanation of No Child Left Behind for the Lay Reader
By Dr. Monica Bomengen
Superintendent, Schools21
Unfunded mandate. High-stakes testing. Federal takeover of the public schools. Adequate Yearly Progress. No Child Left Behind.
All of these phrases have been tossed about for several years in the media. Those readers who are not professional educators (and many who are) tend not to have a clear understanding of the Elementary and Secondary Education Authorization (ESEA) Act, nicknamed No Child Left Behind during the George W. Bush presidential administration. This article is intended to provide simple facts and a clear explanation. For clarity, I have interspersed in bold items that are commonly asked questions.
Congress authorized the first version of ESEA in 1965, establishing a statute of federal title programs to help fund public education K-12. The original act was set to expire after five years. Congress has reauthorized ESEA every five years since 1970. ESEA expressly forbids the establishment of a “national curriculum,” as public education is the clear territory of the individual states.
Q: If education is the purview of the states, then why does the federal government get involved?
A: The federal government has a “clear and compelling interest” in the success of public education. That is why the U.S. Department of Education was created.
Q: Wait a minute. I thought that the new Common Core Standards was a national curriculum?
A: The CCS was commissioned by the governors of the states and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Each state will decide on its own whether to adopt the standards (North Carolina recently did adopt them). This is not a national curriculum imposed by the federal government.
Under ESEA, there is a series of “title” programs that establish funding pools. These monies are distributed in block grants to the states to assist with the expenses of educating challenging students, purchasing instructional materials, professional development of employees, promoting school safety, and educational research. Title I is the most famous of the programs and provides funding for the education of low-income students. Students who are economically disadvantaged are counted by enrollment in the federal free and reduced lunch program.
Q: So the federal government is spending billions of dollars on education? And this is why the feds are forcing high-stakes tests and other mandates onto the public schools?
A: Yes and no. The federal government spends about $20 billion annually on K-12 public education. This amounts to about 8.5% of all public education spending in the U.S., less than a dime on the dollar. The rest of the funding comes from states and local governments, with a small percentage coming from private funders. However, other than education of special needs children, public schools are not required to take any federal money at all, nor are they required to comply with any federal guidelines, such as high-stakes testing, unless they do “opt in” to the funding pools. More than two-thirds of all federal monies expended on public education are spent on Title I programs for economically disadvantaged children and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) programs for special education students.
To put it as simply as possible, states cannot “opt out” of educating special needs students. The federal government provides extensive supplemental funding to defray the expenses associated with special education, including transportation, physical and occupational therapy, instructional materials, psychological testing, and other extraordinary expenses not associated with “regular” education.
Everything else is up to the states. State departments of education that decide to participate in the Title I program are required to conduct annual testing of students to determine levels of proficiency in reading and mathematics in grades 3 to 10. These are the so-called “high stakes” tests. It is up to the states to develop their own testing programs for approval by the U.S. Department of Education. It is then up to local schools to administer the tests and the states then report the results. Test results must now be disaggregated by “subgroups,” to show not only how the school as a whole performs, but also the proficiency of economically disadvantaged students, special education students, English language learners, and other subgroups. This prevents the “law of large numbers” from allowing schools and districts to hide the lower performance of certain subgroups by claiming that the school as a whole is performing well.
Q: So why do school officials at the state and local levels across the country claim that NCLB is an unfunded mandate?
A: This claim is an attempt by the national offices of the two largest education employees unions to mischaracterize the purpose of the law and sway the public to think that the federal government is trying to the take over the public school system. The National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) have launched a systematic assault against NCLB since its initial passage. This assault is in keeping with their political campaign to prevent any effort to increase accountability for the quality of education in this country. With the advent of NCLB and the separation of test score reports into subgroups, it has become increasingly clear that some teachers and schools are much more effective than others at producing students who are proficient academically. This clarity is particularly pronounced in high-need schools with large percentages of disadvantaged students. Recent research is causing the call of performance-based teacher salaries to be sounded much more loudly than ever before. The NEA and the AFT are completely invested in maintaining the status quo, whereby teachers are paid based on how long they have been employed and how advanced their degrees are, not by on how well their students perform (and improve) on objective standardized tests. These two groups provide school officials and teachers with “talking points” that mischaracterize the intent and effect of NCLB.
The goal of the ESEA reauthorization known as No Child Left Behind was to ensure that all students demonstrate grade-level proficiency in reading and mathematics by 2014. Schools must also meet attendance goals and make progress toward increasing high school graduation rates. All of this is, remember, in exchange for accepting federal money that the states are not required to take. Schools and districts that do not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward this goal, as defined by the U.S. DOE, are subject to an increasingly severe set of sanctions, culminating in eventual takeover of the school by the state, reconstitution of the school as a charter school, firing of the entire staff, and other radical measures. In the interim, parents are permitted to take their children out of a “failing” school and the district must provide transportation to a local district school of the family’s choice. Districts are also required to offer supplemental educational services outside the school day, at no charge and with transportation provided, for students who do not demonstrate proficiency on the state tests.
I hope that this explanation of NCLB has provided clarity and understanding for the reader. If you have questions, you may email them to me at monica@schools21.com.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Homework, Extra Credit, and What Do Grades Really Mean Anyway?
When I was in the classroom, I turned the ideas of "homework" and "extra credit" on their heads, at the suggestion of my students. (I asked them about this when I was working on my National Board Certification.)
Instead of requiring every student to do every homework assignment, I started administering mastery pretests on items that lent themselves to it. Any student who could score 80% or higher on the pretest did not have to do the “homework” assigned on those concepts. They could do it, if they chose to, for “extra credit.” Homework completion in my classes shot up dramatically.
Any student who opted not to do “homework” assignments in areas where there was no master pretest available (answering reading questions, for instance, when we read a full-length text of some kind) was not penalized with zeroes on the homework. I hate the case of the kid who can score 100 on the tests but gets a C in the course because he doesn’t do the homework (which, in his case, would be busywork, would it not, if he can ace the tests already?). However, if the student scored lower than a C on the test or major project, who had chosen not to do the “homework,” I would then contact the parent(s) to notify them that the student could have done the homework in order to boost his grade, but chose not to. (Again, this was suggested by the students.) I never had to call a parent about this. And I didn't teach only "advanced" students; most of my classes were, by my own choice, at-promise (at-risk) kids, when I taught on the high school level.
Students who chose to do those “homework” assignments were awarded “extra credit” if they scored well, and we ignored the score and did “retakes” if they did not do well. Students had to conference with me in order to win a chance for a “retake.” Homework completion among my “iffy” students shot to the ceiling.
Finally, at the request of the kids, who were middle schoolers at this time (I later returned to high school teaching and employed the same methods, with the same excellent results), I provided all the “homework” up front in advance, so they could work at their own pace, much like a college syllabus. The students took responsibility for organizing their time and worked ahead when they had a busy stretch. This from 12 and 13 year olds, heterogeneously grouped, 16% special education, urban junior high school.
I loved being in parent conferences when other teachers complained about students not doing homework, but the parents would say, “Well, he says he never has homework from Mrs. B, but he does stuff for her class almost every night.”
I did not have a lot of luck influencing other teachers who asked about my methodology, because there is a curious persistence by classroom teachers of punishing “lazy” students with zeroes, administered with extra zeal when those students ace the tests. There is also an odd commitment to trying to make everyone do the same thing at the same time.
In my professional opinion, school grades should be based purely on what students know and are able to do, as described in the curriculum frameworks for the course, whether that is a public school state curriculum document or the Advanced Placement handbook. Does a "zero" really mean that the student knows and can do nothing relative to a standard? And how does one justify a "zero" on a homework assignment when the student scored 90, 95, or 100 on the test for that unit? Maybe it means that the homework is boring and doesn't help the student advance his understanding.
It was a tremendous step forward for me as a teacher when I started holding up a mirror to my teaching practice when students did not do an assignment and asking myself what could I have done differently. Asking them how to make it more interesting was even more helpful. Sometimes it has nothing to do with their interest or engagement and everything to do with the timing of when it was given to them, or the shortness of the deadline. Newark Mayor Cory Booker asks a bold question in the documentary film The Lottery: What if, instead of making time the constant and achievement the variable, we reversed it and made achievement the constant and time the variable? Without realizing it, this is exactly what my students advised me to do. And we did it, with excellent results. My kids scored the highest in the state on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) 8th grade English exams for three years running.
I understand the desire among teachers to build "work ethic" in their students; I simply question their method of doing so. The old saying is that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different result.
Instead of requiring every student to do every homework assignment, I started administering mastery pretests on items that lent themselves to it. Any student who could score 80% or higher on the pretest did not have to do the “homework” assigned on those concepts. They could do it, if they chose to, for “extra credit.” Homework completion in my classes shot up dramatically.
Any student who opted not to do “homework” assignments in areas where there was no master pretest available (answering reading questions, for instance, when we read a full-length text of some kind) was not penalized with zeroes on the homework. I hate the case of the kid who can score 100 on the tests but gets a C in the course because he doesn’t do the homework (which, in his case, would be busywork, would it not, if he can ace the tests already?). However, if the student scored lower than a C on the test or major project, who had chosen not to do the “homework,” I would then contact the parent(s) to notify them that the student could have done the homework in order to boost his grade, but chose not to. (Again, this was suggested by the students.) I never had to call a parent about this. And I didn't teach only "advanced" students; most of my classes were, by my own choice, at-promise (at-risk) kids, when I taught on the high school level.
Students who chose to do those “homework” assignments were awarded “extra credit” if they scored well, and we ignored the score and did “retakes” if they did not do well. Students had to conference with me in order to win a chance for a “retake.” Homework completion among my “iffy” students shot to the ceiling.
Finally, at the request of the kids, who were middle schoolers at this time (I later returned to high school teaching and employed the same methods, with the same excellent results), I provided all the “homework” up front in advance, so they could work at their own pace, much like a college syllabus. The students took responsibility for organizing their time and worked ahead when they had a busy stretch. This from 12 and 13 year olds, heterogeneously grouped, 16% special education, urban junior high school.
I loved being in parent conferences when other teachers complained about students not doing homework, but the parents would say, “Well, he says he never has homework from Mrs. B, but he does stuff for her class almost every night.”
I did not have a lot of luck influencing other teachers who asked about my methodology, because there is a curious persistence by classroom teachers of punishing “lazy” students with zeroes, administered with extra zeal when those students ace the tests. There is also an odd commitment to trying to make everyone do the same thing at the same time.
In my professional opinion, school grades should be based purely on what students know and are able to do, as described in the curriculum frameworks for the course, whether that is a public school state curriculum document or the Advanced Placement handbook. Does a "zero" really mean that the student knows and can do nothing relative to a standard? And how does one justify a "zero" on a homework assignment when the student scored 90, 95, or 100 on the test for that unit? Maybe it means that the homework is boring and doesn't help the student advance his understanding.
It was a tremendous step forward for me as a teacher when I started holding up a mirror to my teaching practice when students did not do an assignment and asking myself what could I have done differently. Asking them how to make it more interesting was even more helpful. Sometimes it has nothing to do with their interest or engagement and everything to do with the timing of when it was given to them, or the shortness of the deadline. Newark Mayor Cory Booker asks a bold question in the documentary film The Lottery: What if, instead of making time the constant and achievement the variable, we reversed it and made achievement the constant and time the variable? Without realizing it, this is exactly what my students advised me to do. And we did it, with excellent results. My kids scored the highest in the state on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) 8th grade English exams for three years running.
I understand the desire among teachers to build "work ethic" in their students; I simply question their method of doing so. The old saying is that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different result.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
One Small Way that Hungry Children Are Being Fed this Summer in WNC
A recent article in The Smoky Mountain News highlights the issue of child hunger in western North Carolina. Of the 700,000 children in North Carolina who qualify for free or reduced meals during the school year, only 53,000 (about 8 percent) get free meals during the summer, said Cynthia Ervin, North Carolina summer food service programs coordinator.
The United States Department of Agriculture reimburses approved programs $1.85 per breakfast, $3.25 per lunch and 76 cents per snack for children to have free and reduced meals during summer programs. But nonprofits, schools or other programs have to be in charge of preparing the food and keeping up with the paperwork required for reimbursement.
Should parents and guardians be the ones responsible for making sure that children are fed? Of course. But it doesn't happen in all families, for a variety of reasons. In the meantime, the schools have access to funding, as well as the facilities and equipment to do it, along with detailed knowledge of which children need the help. If the schools and counties work together with local service agencies and churches during the summer, perhaps they could come up with solutions on how to help parents take on this responsibility once the school year resumes, so that by next summer children's meals are taken care of by their parents. In the meantime, children are going hungry this summer.
Programs are underway in Haywood, Jackson, and Swain counties to increase the number of children who are being provided nutritious meals this summer in the event that their parents don't (or, more likely, can't) give them three squares a day.
In our neck of the woods, Jackson and Swain County Schools have picked up this ball and are running with it. Both counties have meal programs and are looking to double the number of children fed from last summer. Any child up to age 18 can simply go during the right time to an open meal site and get a free meal, no paperwork necessary. (Proof of lower-income status isn’t required in counties where more than 50 percent of the student population is eligible for free or reduced lunches during the school year.)
In Jackson County, the school system and the churches are joining forces to make sure that hungry children eat. Led by pastor Jeffery Vickery at Cullowhee Baptist Church, volunteers deliver lunches to children at four free meal sites in the Tuckasegee, Cullowhee and Canada communities every weekday this summer to expand the reach of the program to more remote areas. Pastor Vickery met with school officials to determine which areas had the poorest children and estimated the number of meals to prepare based on how many kids get off at nearby school bus stops. Staff at Smoky Mountain High School prepare the lunches, meeting strict government guidelines.
Swain County Schools will offer breakfast and lunch at the Swain Middle School cafeteria seven weeks during the summer in a program operated by the schools food services department. Haywood County is getting the food to its kids via the summer day camp programs operated by the county parks and recreation department.
The lone holdout is Macon County Schools. In Macon County, 66.6 percent of the 4,239 students enrolled in public schools are eligible for free or reduced lunch. There are no programs in place to ensure those 2,825 children get good nutrition during the summer. Cynthia Ervin, North Carolina summer food service programs coordinator, told The Smoky Mountain News, “They just haven’t stepped up to the plate.” On the bright side, they do have a new high school basketball coach, and there is a brisk program of building new school facilities, so the superintendent has been doing something this summer. It's unfortunate that new building programs don't feed hungry children during inconvenient times.
However, even in the counties where the school superintendents have assumed the responsibility to feed hungry children in the summertime, there are those kids who fall through the cracks.
If you think there aren't hungry kids in the summer in western NC: the lifeguards in Jackson County see it every day. My son, Brook, is one of the lifeguards. Staying in Cullowhee to attend summer school at WCU, this future teacher is receiving an education far beyond anything he has learned so far in the air-conditioned classrooms on campus.
Brook can tell you about children who are dropped off as soon as the swimming pool opens, with $1 or some coins in their hand, and are picked up at the end of the day when mama gets off from working a low-paying job. Mama thanks God for the county pool because the summer camp is too expensive, she can't afford a babysitter at her house, and she doesn't want to leave her child at home alone all day. But if she doesn't go to work that day, she can't pay the rent. If not for the county pool, her child would stay home alone all day.
The kindly pool staff asks a hungry child with little or no money do a small chore of some sort, then gives him lunch at the pool store "in appreciation" for helping the lifeguards. His dollar and his work buys him a decent amount of food for his lunch, regardless of the fact that the dollar would have bought only a pack of crackers OR a Coke. A little boy keeps his dignity without going hungry, and a young lifeguard and schoolteacher-to-be learns the importance of the social services that his taxes support. He now sees that while adults might argue the politics of "handouts" and "welfare," for a hungry child, it means simply that he gets to eat when all the other children do.
Brook says to me, "Mom, I've never seen such an economically depressed place." He's led a sheltered life, going to high school in Connecticut. It's surprising to him to see life in the mountains beyond the boundaries of WCU and away from the privilege of Highlands. But it's good for him to see this before he becomes a schoolteacher. He needs to know how much families in poor areas depend on young people like him to do everything they can to ensure a brighter future for their children.
I'm proud of him for not condemning the mamas who drop off the children and go to work cleaning other people's houses. He realizes that no lunch was packed probably because the food that would have been sent for lunch, if there is any, is being saved for supper. It's nearing the end of the month and the food stamps have been spent. He knows that only a dollar or a few coins were sent because that's all the mamas have after paying for gas to get to work, but it's important to them that they send their child with something, anything. They press those coins into their children's hands and thank God for the county pool. Then they go off to work.
Brook understands now why his mother says that public education is, for poor children, a matter of economic life or death. It has changed his perspective and made him more determined to be the best teacher he can be.
Dr. Monica Henson Bomengen is a native of Hayesville who now lives in Highlands and runs an educational consulting company, Schools21 Dr. Bomengen is an alumna of Western Carolina University and former principal of Highlands School in Macon County. Her son Brook is the fourth generation of the family to attend WCU, and the third generation to go on to work in the public schools.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
MCS Priorities: Hungry Children Need Not Apply June-August
A recent article in The Smoky Mountain News highlights the issue of child hunger in western North Carolina. Of the 700,000 children in North Carolina who qualify for free or reduced meals during the school year, only 53,000 (about 8 percent) get free meals during the summer, said Cynthia Ervin, North Carolina summer food service programs coordinator.
The United States Department of Agriculture reimburses approved programs $1.85 per breakfast, $3.25 per lunch and 76 cents per snack for children to have free and reduced meals during summer programs. But nonprofits, schools or other programs have to be in charge of preparing the food and keeping up with the paperwork required for reimbursement.
Should parents and guardians be the ones responsible for making sure that children are fed? Of course. But it doesn't happen in all families, for a variety of reasons. In the meantime, the schools have access to funding, as well as the facilities and equipment to do it, along with detailed knowledge of which children need the help. If the schools and counties work together with local service agencies and churches during the summer, perhaps they could come up with solutions on how to help parents take on this responsibility once the school year resumes, so that by next summer children's meals are taken care of by their parents. In the meantime, children are going hungry this summer.
In our neck of the woods, Jackson and Swain County Schools have picked up this ball and are running with it. Both counties have meal programs and are looking to double the number of children fed from last summer. Any child up to age 18 can simply go during the right time to an open meal site and get a free meal, no paperwork necessary. (Proof of lower-income status isn’t required in counties where more than 50 percent of the student population is eligible for free or reduced lunches during the school year.)
In Jackson County, the school system and the churches are joining forces to make sure that hungry children eat. Led by pastor Jeffery Vickery at Cullowhee Baptist Church, volunteers deliver lunches to children at four free meal sites in the Tuckasegee, Cullowhee and Canada communities every weekday this summer to expand the reach of the program to more remote areas. Pastor Vickery met with school officials to determine which areas had the poorest children and estimated the number of meals to prepare based on how many kids get off at nearby school bus stops. Staff at Smoky Mountain High School prepare the lunches, meeting strict government guidelines.
Swain County Schools will offer breakfast and lunch at the Swain Middle School cafeteria seven weeks during the summer in a program operated by the schools food services department.
The lone holdout is Macon County Schools. In Macon County, 66.6 percent of the 4,239 students enrolled in public schools are eligible for free or reduced lunch. There are no programs in place to ensure those 2,825 children get good nutrition during the summer. Cynthia Ervin, North Carolina summer food service programs coordinator, told The Smoky Mountain News, “They just haven’t stepped up to the plate.”
This lack of support of our county's neediest students is egregious, but not surprising. The leadership of Macon County Schools is much more focused on building new schools (with fancy brass plaques listing the names of those who pushed the building projects) than it is in serving the needs of children, particularly the children who need their help the most. I saw this firsthand when I recently spoke at the first annual WNC Graduation Summit in Cherokee, a day designed for local school districts to come together to discuss the problems that lead to dropping out of school and work on crafting action plans for the upcoming school year.
Swain County Schools brought their entire administrative team, including the principals of all of their schools, even the elementary school. So did Clay and Graham Counties. Southwestern Community College sent a team to work with the K-12 districts as they developed action plans. Western Carolina University sent a team to help as well. Swain and Clay counties even sent their county and town managers. Todd Leek, town manager in Hayesville, explained to me, "This is not just a school issue. This affects our entire business community. That's why I'm here."
Regina Mathis Treadway, principal of Swain County High School, spoke during the panel discussion. She commented that SCHS loses the equivalent of an entire graduating class every four years to dropping out. Scott Penland, superintendent of Clay County Schools, pointed to the Clay County Communities in Schools executive director, Theresa Waldroup, as one of the prime reasons why Clay County starts its dropout prevention work in kindergarten. Students who are hungry, who need clothes and school supplies, get fed and get what they need, because otherwise they are not ready to learn.
Of all the WNC counties and the reservation school system, only one district did not bring a team to work on an action plan after lunch: Macon County Schools. To be fair, Superintendent Brigman did attend the morning session, which consisted of a speaker who talked about mentoring. But he disappeared after lunch, when the real work started.
I suppose that Mr. Brigman had more pressing priorities to look after, such as hiring a basketball coach and making sure that he gets enough funding to keep building new buildings. Perhaps he will send the newspapers a detailed explanation of the county's comprehensive, research-based action plan for addressing the dropout problem, assuming that such a plan even exists. I've seen plenty of boasting that the dropout rate has been "cut in half." Horse manure. Let's see the ten-year trend report on how many students in grades 9-12 have reportedly left the district as "homeschoolers." I'll wager that there is an increasing trend in "homeschool" that corresponds to the "decreasing" dropout rate. Homeschoolers do not count against school districts as dropouts, but instead can be coded as transfers. All that a district needs to code a child as "homeschool" is a parent's signature on a piece of paper provided, of course, by the school district.
Maybe Mr. Brigman will also explain why our district eliminated a half-time teaching position in order to hire a half-time graduation coach who is also the basketball coach, when Communities in Schools of North Carolina helps districts write grants to fund full-time Executive Directors for each county who do precisely the type of work that a graduation coach does, at no cost to the school district. The grant provides a full year of service to establish the program, then the community comes together to decide how to continue the funding, whether by the local school district, the county or town government, or by writing additional grants. This was all discussed during the after-lunch action planning, but Mr. Brigman had already left by then. This information was also provided to MCS via email, without response.
The main thing I would like to see explained first, though, is why our neighboring district superintendents can make sure that hungry students are provided food in the summertime, while our district leader dithers over basketball coaches and new buildings.
The United States Department of Agriculture reimburses approved programs $1.85 per breakfast, $3.25 per lunch and 76 cents per snack for children to have free and reduced meals during summer programs. But nonprofits, schools or other programs have to be in charge of preparing the food and keeping up with the paperwork required for reimbursement.
Should parents and guardians be the ones responsible for making sure that children are fed? Of course. But it doesn't happen in all families, for a variety of reasons. In the meantime, the schools have access to funding, as well as the facilities and equipment to do it, along with detailed knowledge of which children need the help. If the schools and counties work together with local service agencies and churches during the summer, perhaps they could come up with solutions on how to help parents take on this responsibility once the school year resumes, so that by next summer children's meals are taken care of by their parents. In the meantime, children are going hungry this summer.
In our neck of the woods, Jackson and Swain County Schools have picked up this ball and are running with it. Both counties have meal programs and are looking to double the number of children fed from last summer. Any child up to age 18 can simply go during the right time to an open meal site and get a free meal, no paperwork necessary. (Proof of lower-income status isn’t required in counties where more than 50 percent of the student population is eligible for free or reduced lunches during the school year.)
In Jackson County, the school system and the churches are joining forces to make sure that hungry children eat. Led by pastor Jeffery Vickery at Cullowhee Baptist Church, volunteers deliver lunches to children at four free meal sites in the Tuckasegee, Cullowhee and Canada communities every weekday this summer to expand the reach of the program to more remote areas. Pastor Vickery met with school officials to determine which areas had the poorest children and estimated the number of meals to prepare based on how many kids get off at nearby school bus stops. Staff at Smoky Mountain High School prepare the lunches, meeting strict government guidelines.
Swain County Schools will offer breakfast and lunch at the Swain Middle School cafeteria seven weeks during the summer in a program operated by the schools food services department.
The lone holdout is Macon County Schools. In Macon County, 66.6 percent of the 4,239 students enrolled in public schools are eligible for free or reduced lunch. There are no programs in place to ensure those 2,825 children get good nutrition during the summer. Cynthia Ervin, North Carolina summer food service programs coordinator, told The Smoky Mountain News, “They just haven’t stepped up to the plate.”
This lack of support of our county's neediest students is egregious, but not surprising. The leadership of Macon County Schools is much more focused on building new schools (with fancy brass plaques listing the names of those who pushed the building projects) than it is in serving the needs of children, particularly the children who need their help the most. I saw this firsthand when I recently spoke at the first annual WNC Graduation Summit in Cherokee, a day designed for local school districts to come together to discuss the problems that lead to dropping out of school and work on crafting action plans for the upcoming school year.
Swain County Schools brought their entire administrative team, including the principals of all of their schools, even the elementary school. So did Clay and Graham Counties. Southwestern Community College sent a team to work with the K-12 districts as they developed action plans. Western Carolina University sent a team to help as well. Swain and Clay counties even sent their county and town managers. Todd Leek, town manager in Hayesville, explained to me, "This is not just a school issue. This affects our entire business community. That's why I'm here."
Regina Mathis Treadway, principal of Swain County High School, spoke during the panel discussion. She commented that SCHS loses the equivalent of an entire graduating class every four years to dropping out. Scott Penland, superintendent of Clay County Schools, pointed to the Clay County Communities in Schools executive director, Theresa Waldroup, as one of the prime reasons why Clay County starts its dropout prevention work in kindergarten. Students who are hungry, who need clothes and school supplies, get fed and get what they need, because otherwise they are not ready to learn.
Of all the WNC counties and the reservation school system, only one district did not bring a team to work on an action plan after lunch: Macon County Schools. To be fair, Superintendent Brigman did attend the morning session, which consisted of a speaker who talked about mentoring. But he disappeared after lunch, when the real work started.
I suppose that Mr. Brigman had more pressing priorities to look after, such as hiring a basketball coach and making sure that he gets enough funding to keep building new buildings. Perhaps he will send the newspapers a detailed explanation of the county's comprehensive, research-based action plan for addressing the dropout problem, assuming that such a plan even exists. I've seen plenty of boasting that the dropout rate has been "cut in half." Horse manure. Let's see the ten-year trend report on how many students in grades 9-12 have reportedly left the district as "homeschoolers." I'll wager that there is an increasing trend in "homeschool" that corresponds to the "decreasing" dropout rate. Homeschoolers do not count against school districts as dropouts, but instead can be coded as transfers. All that a district needs to code a child as "homeschool" is a parent's signature on a piece of paper provided, of course, by the school district.
Maybe Mr. Brigman will also explain why our district eliminated a half-time teaching position in order to hire a half-time graduation coach who is also the basketball coach, when Communities in Schools of North Carolina helps districts write grants to fund full-time Executive Directors for each county who do precisely the type of work that a graduation coach does, at no cost to the school district. The grant provides a full year of service to establish the program, then the community comes together to decide how to continue the funding, whether by the local school district, the county or town government, or by writing additional grants. This was all discussed during the after-lunch action planning, but Mr. Brigman had already left by then. This information was also provided to MCS via email, without response.
The main thing I would like to see explained first, though, is why our neighboring district superintendents can make sure that hungry students are provided food in the summertime, while our district leader dithers over basketball coaches and new buildings.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Guest Commentary on the NC Premiere of The Lottery, Cap on Charter Schools
The following is the unedited version of my editorial, invited by the newspaper, that appeared in the print version of today's Asheville Citizen-Times.
When I was growing up in Hayesville, I took it for granted that my teachers (many of whom were my own relatives) were teaching me what I needed to know and be able to do to go on to college and a career. It never occurred to me that some other children in my state and country may not have enjoyed the high quality of education that I was receiving. I just thought that was what schools did. It was only after I grew up, graduated from Western Carolina University, and entered the teaching and administration force in public schools in Atlanta, and later, Massachusetts and Connecticut, before returning to my home state, that I realized just how mistaken I was.
In the United States today, 58% of African-American 4th grade children test as functionally illiterate. About one-third of all high school students who start ninth grade in this country drop out before graduation. No one can argue that the American public education system serves all students equally. Families who can afford to move to “better” ZIP codes are able to secure excellence for their children in the public schools. Those who cannot afford are held hostage by their local school district, regardless of the level of achievement there. This is a situation that has to change if this country is going to reclaim its position as the foremost nation in the world in educating its citizens.
On June 8, across the country, theaters showed the documentary film The Lottery by Madeleine Sackler. This film demonstrates how hundreds of thousands of American parents, many of them poor and minority, attempt to flee failing traditional public school systems every year. The Lottery follows four families from Harlem and the Bronx who have entered their children in a charter school lottery. The North Carolina Alliance for Public Charter Schools hosted the NC premiere of the documentary in Raleigh, Chapel Hill, Durham, Greensboro, Charlotte, and Asheville.
North Carolina is becoming a battleground for the right of families to choose the best educational option for their children without having to resort to homeschooling or paying for private education. The recent “education reform” legislation passed hastily by the state senate is a thinly veiled attempt by Governor Beverly Perdue for North Carolina to qualify for the second round of Race to the Top grants by the U.S. Department of Education. North Carolina’s application in the first round was passed over, largely because of the cap of 100 charter schools in this state and the open hostility to charter schools by school boards and superintendents.
President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have made it clear that only those states where public school choice, including charter schools, is supported and welcomed will be awarded those funds. Lifting the cap on charter schools is one of the steps that must be taken to qualify. Tennessee, our next-door neighbor, won $400 million for its K-12 schools in the first round. That’s right. Tennessee.
At a time when state and local education budgets are stripped to the bone, it is astounding that North Carolina’s elected officials in the Democratic Party are refusing to abandon their traditional support of the public education machine, which includes the school boards association, the school superintendents, and the NC Association of Educators, which is an affiliate of the National Education Association union. Another Race to the Top requirement is that to be eligible to receive funds, those groups must be on board with the state’s application. None of these groups are willing to agree to the requirement that the charter cap be lifted. As a result, Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson and Gov. Perdue crafted the compromise legislation to “allow” districts to create “charter-like” schools that would still be under the control of the local boards of education. The bill passed without a single Republican vote in favor of it, but the school boards, superintendents, and NCEA all enthusiastically backed it.
There is nothing in the new law that school districts were not already empowered to do before its passage. It is simple smoke and mirrors, designed to try to fool the Race to the Top selection team into thinking that North Carolina is a progressive, reform-minded state when it comes to education choice, when in fact the complete opposite is true. The “charter-like” schools (and the per-pupil funding they generate) will still be under the control of the same boards of education, superintendents, principals, and teachers that allowed them to fail in the first place. The recent dismal performance of the Halifax, NC school district on state testing after a year of being taken over by the Department of Public Instruction shows how unrealistic the expectation is that the current system can repair itself.
It is a shame and a disgrace that our governor and other elected representatives are willing to forego millions of dollars in education funding in order to maintain the status quo. North Carolina has more National Board Certified Teachers than any other state in this country. We invented the term “education governor” when we first elected James B. Hunt, Jr., who is also a founding member of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. We still have some great public school districts that don’t need to fear that a charter school will open in their backyard--because they are already doing a top-notch job. Hayesville High School has the third-highest graduation rate in the entire state, for example.
I never in my life thought I would see the day when Tennessee is rightfully deemed an educationally progressive state, while North Carolina is not. It’s a $400 million gamble that our school children will lose, again, while our governor “wins” by hanging onto the votes of those who populate the education machine. The Lottery exposes the truth that in many districts in this country, the public education system places the interests and preferences of adults far above the best interests of children. North Carolina is, shamefully, one of those places.
Dr. Monica Henson Bomengen is a native of Hayesville who now lives in Highlands. She established Schools21, an educational consulting company, in 2008, and works with school districts, charter schools, and state departments of education on school turnaround issues. A member of Democrats for Education Reform, the NC Alliance for Public Charter Schools, and the Georgia Charter School Association, Dr. Bomengen is a regional and national speaker and writer on education reform issues. She introduced The Lottery at its Asheville premiere and will speak at the NC Alliance’s first annual conference in July. She will speak at the National Dropout Prevention Network’s annual conference in Philadelphia in November.
When I was growing up in Hayesville, I took it for granted that my teachers (many of whom were my own relatives) were teaching me what I needed to know and be able to do to go on to college and a career. It never occurred to me that some other children in my state and country may not have enjoyed the high quality of education that I was receiving. I just thought that was what schools did. It was only after I grew up, graduated from Western Carolina University, and entered the teaching and administration force in public schools in Atlanta, and later, Massachusetts and Connecticut, before returning to my home state, that I realized just how mistaken I was.
In the United States today, 58% of African-American 4th grade children test as functionally illiterate. About one-third of all high school students who start ninth grade in this country drop out before graduation. No one can argue that the American public education system serves all students equally. Families who can afford to move to “better” ZIP codes are able to secure excellence for their children in the public schools. Those who cannot afford are held hostage by their local school district, regardless of the level of achievement there. This is a situation that has to change if this country is going to reclaim its position as the foremost nation in the world in educating its citizens.
On June 8, across the country, theaters showed the documentary film The Lottery by Madeleine Sackler. This film demonstrates how hundreds of thousands of American parents, many of them poor and minority, attempt to flee failing traditional public school systems every year. The Lottery follows four families from Harlem and the Bronx who have entered their children in a charter school lottery. The North Carolina Alliance for Public Charter Schools hosted the NC premiere of the documentary in Raleigh, Chapel Hill, Durham, Greensboro, Charlotte, and Asheville.
North Carolina is becoming a battleground for the right of families to choose the best educational option for their children without having to resort to homeschooling or paying for private education. The recent “education reform” legislation passed hastily by the state senate is a thinly veiled attempt by Governor Beverly Perdue for North Carolina to qualify for the second round of Race to the Top grants by the U.S. Department of Education. North Carolina’s application in the first round was passed over, largely because of the cap of 100 charter schools in this state and the open hostility to charter schools by school boards and superintendents.
President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have made it clear that only those states where public school choice, including charter schools, is supported and welcomed will be awarded those funds. Lifting the cap on charter schools is one of the steps that must be taken to qualify. Tennessee, our next-door neighbor, won $400 million for its K-12 schools in the first round. That’s right. Tennessee.
At a time when state and local education budgets are stripped to the bone, it is astounding that North Carolina’s elected officials in the Democratic Party are refusing to abandon their traditional support of the public education machine, which includes the school boards association, the school superintendents, and the NC Association of Educators, which is an affiliate of the National Education Association union. Another Race to the Top requirement is that to be eligible to receive funds, those groups must be on board with the state’s application. None of these groups are willing to agree to the requirement that the charter cap be lifted. As a result, Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson and Gov. Perdue crafted the compromise legislation to “allow” districts to create “charter-like” schools that would still be under the control of the local boards of education. The bill passed without a single Republican vote in favor of it, but the school boards, superintendents, and NCEA all enthusiastically backed it.
There is nothing in the new law that school districts were not already empowered to do before its passage. It is simple smoke and mirrors, designed to try to fool the Race to the Top selection team into thinking that North Carolina is a progressive, reform-minded state when it comes to education choice, when in fact the complete opposite is true. The “charter-like” schools (and the per-pupil funding they generate) will still be under the control of the same boards of education, superintendents, principals, and teachers that allowed them to fail in the first place. The recent dismal performance of the Halifax, NC school district on state testing after a year of being taken over by the Department of Public Instruction shows how unrealistic the expectation is that the current system can repair itself.
It is a shame and a disgrace that our governor and other elected representatives are willing to forego millions of dollars in education funding in order to maintain the status quo. North Carolina has more National Board Certified Teachers than any other state in this country. We invented the term “education governor” when we first elected James B. Hunt, Jr., who is also a founding member of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. We still have some great public school districts that don’t need to fear that a charter school will open in their backyard--because they are already doing a top-notch job. Hayesville High School has the third-highest graduation rate in the entire state, for example.
I never in my life thought I would see the day when Tennessee is rightfully deemed an educationally progressive state, while North Carolina is not. It’s a $400 million gamble that our school children will lose, again, while our governor “wins” by hanging onto the votes of those who populate the education machine. The Lottery exposes the truth that in many districts in this country, the public education system places the interests and preferences of adults far above the best interests of children. North Carolina is, shamefully, one of those places.
Dr. Monica Henson Bomengen is a native of Hayesville who now lives in Highlands. She established Schools21, an educational consulting company, in 2008, and works with school districts, charter schools, and state departments of education on school turnaround issues. A member of Democrats for Education Reform, the NC Alliance for Public Charter Schools, and the Georgia Charter School Association, Dr. Bomengen is a regional and national speaker and writer on education reform issues. She introduced The Lottery at its Asheville premiere and will speak at the NC Alliance’s first annual conference in July. She will speak at the National Dropout Prevention Network’s annual conference in Philadelphia in November.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Finally...National Standards Are Ready for Adoption
The new American national academic standards for English and math, developed by the nation's governors and state school superintendents (except for Texas and Alaska, big surprise), has been released for public review. The New York Times summarizes the standards:
"...written by English and math experts convened last year by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. They are laid out in two documents: Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, and Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects. With three appendices, the English standards run to nearly 600 pages."
I have not yet read the full text of the standards, only the executive summary. In English, the focus is on the skills to be developed at particular grades levels, not on dictating rigid reading lists, with the following high school exceptions: Six English texts are required reading. High school juniors and seniors must study the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, and one Shakespearean play.
Let's hope that the state departments of education move quickly to adopt a common-sense solution to the current hodgepodge of academic curriculum standards.
"...written by English and math experts convened last year by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. They are laid out in two documents: Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, and Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects. With three appendices, the English standards run to nearly 600 pages."
I have not yet read the full text of the standards, only the executive summary. In English, the focus is on the skills to be developed at particular grades levels, not on dictating rigid reading lists, with the following high school exceptions: Six English texts are required reading. High school juniors and seniors must study the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, and one Shakespearean play.
Let's hope that the state departments of education move quickly to adopt a common-sense solution to the current hodgepodge of academic curriculum standards.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Winner of amazon.com gift certificate!
Congratulations to Renee DeWeese, winner of the drawing for the amazon.com gift certificate!
Tell all your friends to follow Edutocracy today!
Tell all your friends to follow Edutocracy today!
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Gov. Bev Perdue Fiddles with "Charter-like Schools" as NC's Educational Rome Burns
The equation is so simple: Lift the cap on charter schools = Qualify for Race to the Top funding. Yet the NC education establishment (school boards, school superintendents, and teacher "union") will NOT agree to support that. And our governor and most of the Democrats in the state legislature continue to kowtow to those directly responsible for the horrendous graduation rates in our state, making sure that they maintain their incompetent monopoly on children's lives. Meanwhile, our next-door neighbor, Tennessee, received $400 million in the U.S. Department of Education's Race to the Top first round of competition. (You read that correctly: TENNESSEE.)
Instead, according to the Raleigh News & Observer, the North Carolina Senate approved a bill to allow local school boards to convert 135 low-performing schools into "charter-like" schools. The bill does not raise the statewide cap of 100 charter schools. Every Republican present in the Senate voted against the bill because the new schools would be under the control of the same local school boards that allowed them to fail in the first place.
This maneuver by Perdue, State Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson, and the Democrats in the state House and Senate is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. There was NOTHING preventing school districts from already doing everything in the "charter-like" schools legislation. This "compromise" is designed to pacify the school boards, superintendents, and the NC Association of Educators, all of whom oppose charter schools. When a charter school opens, the children who enroll in it are removed from the local school district monopoly. The BOE and superintendent have zero control over the school's mission, vision, hiring practices, and, most importantly, funding. A secondary reason for the legislation is to try to position NC to qualify for Race to the Top. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and the U.S. Department of Education have already passed over NC because of its historical hostility to charter schools and, one might reasonably speculate, the state government's close relationship with NCAE, the School Boards Association, and the NC Association of School Administrators.
Gov. Perdue, a former teacher and a Democrat, supported the Senate bill, which the House had already passed. “This is about doing what's right for our kids," Perdue said in a statement. "It will strengthen North Carolina's goal for making all schools successful and making sure all students receive a quality education." This is a lie, pure and simple. What this bill is actually designed to do is lock up the education establishment's support for Perdue's re-election bid.
Perdue is in the pocket of the school boards and school superintendents associations. "Charter-like" = local BOE and superintendents retain the money and the control. This is not true reform, but an effort to perpetuate the failing public school district monopoly. The BOEs and the superintendents are the very people who are responsible for the horrendous graduation rates in school districts with low student achievement outcomes. How on earth can a logical person say with a straight face that giving those snarling foxes the only key to the public school henhouse is "reform"?
John Hood of the John Locke Foundation says it best: Perdue's statement would be true "if [the education lobbies'] true goals were to satisfy parental preferences, increase student achievement, and boost the state’s woeful graduation rate. Because their goal was really to protect the powers and jobs of the education establishment, however, then adopting the pretense rather than the reality of reform was required."
North Carolina has more National Board Certified Teachers than all the rest of the U.S. states combined. We invented the term "education governor" when we elected James B. Hunt, Jr. Yet we did not qualify for the first round of Race to the Top funding. We sat on our thumbs and lied to the interview committee from the U.S. Department of Education. Both Gov. Perdue and State Supt. Atkinson answered "Yes" when asked if NC treats charter schools equally to district schools, even as the state Attorney General's office drags its feet on issuing funding that charter schools had to sue for.
This Democrat for Education Reform will NEVER cast a vote for Bev Perdue! Lift the cap on charter schools, and lift it now. Get our public schools' neck out from under the boot of the school boards, superintendents, and NCAE.
Instead, according to the Raleigh News & Observer, the North Carolina Senate approved a bill to allow local school boards to convert 135 low-performing schools into "charter-like" schools. The bill does not raise the statewide cap of 100 charter schools. Every Republican present in the Senate voted against the bill because the new schools would be under the control of the same local school boards that allowed them to fail in the first place.
This maneuver by Perdue, State Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson, and the Democrats in the state House and Senate is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. There was NOTHING preventing school districts from already doing everything in the "charter-like" schools legislation. This "compromise" is designed to pacify the school boards, superintendents, and the NC Association of Educators, all of whom oppose charter schools. When a charter school opens, the children who enroll in it are removed from the local school district monopoly. The BOE and superintendent have zero control over the school's mission, vision, hiring practices, and, most importantly, funding. A secondary reason for the legislation is to try to position NC to qualify for Race to the Top. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and the U.S. Department of Education have already passed over NC because of its historical hostility to charter schools and, one might reasonably speculate, the state government's close relationship with NCAE, the School Boards Association, and the NC Association of School Administrators.
Gov. Perdue, a former teacher and a Democrat, supported the Senate bill, which the House had already passed. “This is about doing what's right for our kids," Perdue said in a statement. "It will strengthen North Carolina's goal for making all schools successful and making sure all students receive a quality education." This is a lie, pure and simple. What this bill is actually designed to do is lock up the education establishment's support for Perdue's re-election bid.
Perdue is in the pocket of the school boards and school superintendents associations. "Charter-like" = local BOE and superintendents retain the money and the control. This is not true reform, but an effort to perpetuate the failing public school district monopoly. The BOEs and the superintendents are the very people who are responsible for the horrendous graduation rates in school districts with low student achievement outcomes. How on earth can a logical person say with a straight face that giving those snarling foxes the only key to the public school henhouse is "reform"?
John Hood of the John Locke Foundation says it best: Perdue's statement would be true "if [the education lobbies'] true goals were to satisfy parental preferences, increase student achievement, and boost the state’s woeful graduation rate. Because their goal was really to protect the powers and jobs of the education establishment, however, then adopting the pretense rather than the reality of reform was required."
North Carolina has more National Board Certified Teachers than all the rest of the U.S. states combined. We invented the term "education governor" when we elected James B. Hunt, Jr. Yet we did not qualify for the first round of Race to the Top funding. We sat on our thumbs and lied to the interview committee from the U.S. Department of Education. Both Gov. Perdue and State Supt. Atkinson answered "Yes" when asked if NC treats charter schools equally to district schools, even as the state Attorney General's office drags its feet on issuing funding that charter schools had to sue for.
This Democrat for Education Reform will NEVER cast a vote for Bev Perdue! Lift the cap on charter schools, and lift it now. Get our public schools' neck out from under the boot of the school boards, superintendents, and NCAE.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
School Districts Record Dropouts as "Homeschoolers"
The Houston Chronicle reports today on a widespread practice in Texas school districts aimed at avoiding accountability for high school dropouts. Rather than recording them as "dropouts" in attendance records, school officials instead label them as "homeschoolers."
This practice is not limited to Texas, although it is apparently rampant in the Lone Star State. It is an obstruction of social justice designed to avoid accountability by school districts that are not making Adequate Yearly Progress as defined in the No Child Left Behind law.
Every state has a set of attendance codes that are used to record student departures from school districts. As long as a student can be labeled a transfer to another school district, a withdrawal for homeschool, or a transfer to a private school, then the district is not penalized for a dropout. What officials are doing when a dropout looms is to convince the family to sign a document claiming that the student will be homeschooled.
This practice is an abuse of the public trust in public school officials, as well as an obstruction of justice, in my opinion. NCLB was designed to force schools not to "hide" dropouts or groups of low-performing students. Falsely labeling dropouts as homeschoolers in an effort to circumvent the law should be punishable by jail time and loss of state licensure.
This practice is not limited to Texas, although it is apparently rampant in the Lone Star State. It is an obstruction of social justice designed to avoid accountability by school districts that are not making Adequate Yearly Progress as defined in the No Child Left Behind law.
Every state has a set of attendance codes that are used to record student departures from school districts. As long as a student can be labeled a transfer to another school district, a withdrawal for homeschool, or a transfer to a private school, then the district is not penalized for a dropout. What officials are doing when a dropout looms is to convince the family to sign a document claiming that the student will be homeschooled.
This practice is an abuse of the public trust in public school officials, as well as an obstruction of justice, in my opinion. NCLB was designed to force schools not to "hide" dropouts or groups of low-performing students. Falsely labeling dropouts as homeschoolers in an effort to circumvent the law should be punishable by jail time and loss of state licensure.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Follow Edutocracy...register to win an Amazon.com gift e-certificate!
All followers of Edutocracy will automatically be registered for a drawing to win a $25 Amazon.com gift e-certificate. The drawing will be held June 1, in honor of the symbolic last day of school.
Become a follower today!
Become a follower today!
Monday, April 19, 2010
Crist Vetoes Pay-for-Performance Bill under Pressure from Teachers
On Thursday, Gov. Charles Crist, a Republican,vetoed a bill passed by the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature that would have introduced "the most sweeping teacher pay changes in the nation." The bill would have eliminated tenure for Florida public school teachers and tied their pay and job security to how well their students were learning, as measured (among other factors) by objective, standardized tests.
U.S. Secretary of State Arne Duncan is fond of saying, are we going to fix what's wrong with education in this country now, or are we going to keep talking about it for twenty more years? It is in the interest of the NEA, the AFT, and other cogs in the American public education machine to keep government talking instead of acting. Unfortunately for Florida's public school children, the machine won this round. Let's hope that Charlie Crist's abject supplication for votes as an Independent candidate will bring him the political loss he so richly deserves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/us/16teachers.html?ref=education
U.S. Secretary of State Arne Duncan is fond of saying, are we going to fix what's wrong with education in this country now, or are we going to keep talking about it for twenty more years? It is in the interest of the NEA, the AFT, and other cogs in the American public education machine to keep government talking instead of acting. Unfortunately for Florida's public school children, the machine won this round. Let's hope that Charlie Crist's abject supplication for votes as an Independent candidate will bring him the political loss he so richly deserves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/us/16teachers.html?ref=education
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
NY Principals May Get Power to Lay Off Teachers According to Performance Instead of Seniority
We are watching with excitement to see if the New York legislature passes a bill that would enable principals in NYC to choose which teachers will be let go due to budget cuts. Currently, principals are held hostage to the "first in, last out" rule beloved by education employee unions.
Seniority-based layoff decisions force principals to keep the most senior teachers, regardless of how good or bad their performance has been. Getting rid of this rule would be a big breath of fresh air and untie the hands of reformer administrators. We hope that it will become law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/education/13layoffs.html?ref=education
Seniority-based layoff decisions force principals to keep the most senior teachers, regardless of how good or bad their performance has been. Getting rid of this rule would be a big breath of fresh air and untie the hands of reformer administrators. We hope that it will become law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/education/13layoffs.html?ref=education
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Some States Might Not Reapply for Race to the Top Funding
Interesting how the award of only two Race to the Top grants has disgruntled some folks. Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. of Colorado complained, “It was like the Olympic Games, and we were an American skater with a Soviet judge from the 1980s.”
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has set the bar extremely high for Race to the Top, as it should be. If we want to develop truly world-class schools, then we can't accept the status quo and throw money at it. Here's hoping that Duncan holds to the high standards.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/education/05top.html?ref=education
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has set the bar extremely high for Race to the Top, as it should be. If we want to develop truly world-class schools, then we can't accept the status quo and throw money at it. Here's hoping that Duncan holds to the high standards.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/education/05top.html?ref=education
Monday, April 5, 2010
Will Schofield's Thoughts on Standardized Testing in GA
Great op-ed piece by Will Schofield, superintendent of Hall County (GA) schools, in today's AJC "Get Schooled" blog. I have reprinted his essay in its entirety, followed by my comment:
Do some individuals cheat on high-stakes tests?
Of course, some do and always have. Educators, while some of the most mission-minded individuals I have ever met, are also representative of society.
Additionally, the number of individuals who will utilize unethical means to pacify authority increases as enormous pressures are placed on them — Organizational Dynamics 101. This behavior, while understandable, is intolerable and should be dealt with fairly, expeditiously, and severely.
The more pertinent question I wish someone would ask is, “Are we testing the appropriate skills in our schools?”
The answer to that query is an overwhelming “No!” We must continue to develop and deliver metrics to our schools that measure the abilities futurists are telling us 21st-century citizens must have to be life-, college- and/or career-ready.
We must balance the testing of discrete factual information with the assessment of students’ capacities to think conceptually and solve complex problems.
Literacy and mathematics are important. Of equal importance are advanced communication proficiency (speaking, listening, and writing), critical thinking skills and a deep understanding of the physical world and its properties.
Our students must develop the abilities to discern between accurate and misleading data, to work more efficiently by utilizing the latest technology, and to participate in the democratic process by knowledgeably debating issues without being disagreeable.
Citizens of the 21st century must be able to work as effective team members within increasingly diverse groups, and they must embrace with enthusiasm the necessary skills of divergent thinking and creative problem solving. Our current national assessment system fails miserably when held up to the relevant and authentic tasks that teachers yearn to provide for our boys and girls.
We spend billions of dollars nationally working feverishly to determine what students don’t know and to remediate our most fragile learners to minimal proficiency in low- level skills.
We spend valuable hours, days, and weeks prepping for tests that ask questions such as “What are the largest cities in Kenya?” Why do we still memorize which three countries made up the Triple Axis?
I would prefer my own children to spend time comparing world conditions in the 1930s to those of today and postulating on what today’s Iran or North Korea might have in common with that decade’s Japan or Italy.
Perhaps they could create a multimedia presentation suggesting how America could have better exerted influence and possibly averted the war of the 40s and post it on YouTube.
The fact that this type of learning is more difficult to measure and cannot be determined by a multiple-choice test should not allow us to abandon it as a goal.
I have no desire to be among the first generation of Americans leaving less for my children than was left for me.
I pray regularly for thoughtful leaders who will come forward and challenge the status quo.
Mark Twain once suggested, “When your horse dies, dismount.”
We have ridden this pony laughingly called “high standards” and “accountability” into its grave.
Will we have the courage to demand better?
Will Schofield has been the superintendent of three school systems in Montana and Georgia. He is now the superintendent of schools in Hall County.
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/04/05/is-it-important-to-know-kenyas-largest-cities-what-should-we-teach/
My comment: Mr. Schofield makes an excellent point. It is absolutely essential in today’s global, networked economy to educate students to be able to think critically. However, I don’t want to see the “accountability” baby thrown out with the low-level, trivial facts testing bathwater. If states are willing to spend the money it costs to score them with live assessors (rather than Scantron machines), it is certainly possible to ask students thoughtful questions to elicit multi-faceted answers. It’s just really expensive to do so.
Do some individuals cheat on high-stakes tests?
Of course, some do and always have. Educators, while some of the most mission-minded individuals I have ever met, are also representative of society.
Additionally, the number of individuals who will utilize unethical means to pacify authority increases as enormous pressures are placed on them — Organizational Dynamics 101. This behavior, while understandable, is intolerable and should be dealt with fairly, expeditiously, and severely.
The more pertinent question I wish someone would ask is, “Are we testing the appropriate skills in our schools?”
The answer to that query is an overwhelming “No!” We must continue to develop and deliver metrics to our schools that measure the abilities futurists are telling us 21st-century citizens must have to be life-, college- and/or career-ready.
We must balance the testing of discrete factual information with the assessment of students’ capacities to think conceptually and solve complex problems.
Literacy and mathematics are important. Of equal importance are advanced communication proficiency (speaking, listening, and writing), critical thinking skills and a deep understanding of the physical world and its properties.
Our students must develop the abilities to discern between accurate and misleading data, to work more efficiently by utilizing the latest technology, and to participate in the democratic process by knowledgeably debating issues without being disagreeable.
Citizens of the 21st century must be able to work as effective team members within increasingly diverse groups, and they must embrace with enthusiasm the necessary skills of divergent thinking and creative problem solving. Our current national assessment system fails miserably when held up to the relevant and authentic tasks that teachers yearn to provide for our boys and girls.
We spend billions of dollars nationally working feverishly to determine what students don’t know and to remediate our most fragile learners to minimal proficiency in low- level skills.
We spend valuable hours, days, and weeks prepping for tests that ask questions such as “What are the largest cities in Kenya?” Why do we still memorize which three countries made up the Triple Axis?
I would prefer my own children to spend time comparing world conditions in the 1930s to those of today and postulating on what today’s Iran or North Korea might have in common with that decade’s Japan or Italy.
Perhaps they could create a multimedia presentation suggesting how America could have better exerted influence and possibly averted the war of the 40s and post it on YouTube.
The fact that this type of learning is more difficult to measure and cannot be determined by a multiple-choice test should not allow us to abandon it as a goal.
I have no desire to be among the first generation of Americans leaving less for my children than was left for me.
I pray regularly for thoughtful leaders who will come forward and challenge the status quo.
Mark Twain once suggested, “When your horse dies, dismount.”
We have ridden this pony laughingly called “high standards” and “accountability” into its grave.
Will we have the courage to demand better?
Will Schofield has been the superintendent of three school systems in Montana and Georgia. He is now the superintendent of schools in Hall County.
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/04/05/is-it-important-to-know-kenyas-largest-cities-what-should-we-teach/
My comment: Mr. Schofield makes an excellent point. It is absolutely essential in today’s global, networked economy to educate students to be able to think critically. However, I don’t want to see the “accountability” baby thrown out with the low-level, trivial facts testing bathwater. If states are willing to spend the money it costs to score them with live assessors (rather than Scantron machines), it is certainly possible to ask students thoughtful questions to elicit multi-faceted answers. It’s just really expensive to do so.
Friday, April 2, 2010
DeKalb County Schools Citizen Task Force Abdicates Responsibility, Demonstrates Lack of Common Sense
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/04/01/say-what-dekalb-fask-force-tells-board-dont-close-any-schools/
The DeKalb County Schools citizen task force, which was appointed after outraged parents protested the planned closing of ten schools, reached a "decision" to recommend not closing ANY schools, after two months.
The appointment of this task force was a no-win situation for the school board. Had the BOE forged ahead with its own decision, which was ostensibly based on enrollment drops, it would have faced a continued firestorm from parents in the attendance zones where schools would be closed. Appointing the task force brought criticism that the BOE was abdicating its and the superintendent's responsibility and dodging the hard decisions. Truly, there was no good way out of this dilemma.
The decision by the citizen task force, however, is merely postponing the inevitable--facing a massive budget shortfall, the BOE has no choice but to cut something. If they keep all the schools open, they will have to cut staffing, which will increase class sizes. Incidentally, research has clearly demonstrated that decreasing class sizes has no positive impact on student achievement above the primary grades, but "small class size" is one of those feel-good goals that won't go away. It is another case of making adults happy without regard to whether the expense helps children. The education unions have a vested interest in keeping class sizes small--smaller classes = more teachers = more membership dues for the union.
If they keep the schools open and don't cut staffing, then the BOE will have to reduce something else. They could decrease the number of days that school is in session each week from five to four--a measure that has been shown not to have a positive impact on student achievement and could negatively impact it. So they save teacher jobs at the expense of student achievement? Is this why we have schools--to run employment agencies for adults, or to educate children?
Another cost-cutting measure could be that salaries are reduced while hours worked are kept at current levels. This would no doubt produce howls of protest from the employees. Would they rather have lower salaries or for some of them to have no jobs at all?
Regardless of what the BOE ultimately decides, someone is going to lose. Let's hope it's not the children.
The DeKalb County Schools citizen task force, which was appointed after outraged parents protested the planned closing of ten schools, reached a "decision" to recommend not closing ANY schools, after two months.
The appointment of this task force was a no-win situation for the school board. Had the BOE forged ahead with its own decision, which was ostensibly based on enrollment drops, it would have faced a continued firestorm from parents in the attendance zones where schools would be closed. Appointing the task force brought criticism that the BOE was abdicating its and the superintendent's responsibility and dodging the hard decisions. Truly, there was no good way out of this dilemma.
The decision by the citizen task force, however, is merely postponing the inevitable--facing a massive budget shortfall, the BOE has no choice but to cut something. If they keep all the schools open, they will have to cut staffing, which will increase class sizes. Incidentally, research has clearly demonstrated that decreasing class sizes has no positive impact on student achievement above the primary grades, but "small class size" is one of those feel-good goals that won't go away. It is another case of making adults happy without regard to whether the expense helps children. The education unions have a vested interest in keeping class sizes small--smaller classes = more teachers = more membership dues for the union.
If they keep the schools open and don't cut staffing, then the BOE will have to reduce something else. They could decrease the number of days that school is in session each week from five to four--a measure that has been shown not to have a positive impact on student achievement and could negatively impact it. So they save teacher jobs at the expense of student achievement? Is this why we have schools--to run employment agencies for adults, or to educate children?
Another cost-cutting measure could be that salaries are reduced while hours worked are kept at current levels. This would no doubt produce howls of protest from the employees. Would they rather have lower salaries or for some of them to have no jobs at all?
Regardless of what the BOE ultimately decides, someone is going to lose. Let's hope it's not the children.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The Phoebe Prince Case--Bullied to Death in Massachusetts
In today's "Get Schooled" blog in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Maureen Downey asks, "Why didn’t someone save Phoebe Prince from unrelenting bullying?...For those of you who work in schools, why would administrators and teachers let this persecution go unchecked?" http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/03/29/was-irish-teen-driven-to-suicide-by-unchecked-bullying-in-her-new-american-school/
This is my response I posted for her:
Most administrators have the same attitude that most teachers have, that bullying is a rite of passage, that the victim is somehow bringing it on himself or herself, that it’s no big deal. When I was a building administrator, I had a very specific protocol for dealing with hardcore high school bullying of the variety that this poor girl endured.
When a situation was brought to my attention, usually by the victim or the victim’s parents, I took interviewed them and took extensive notes. I then spoke to teachers and other adults in the school to see if they had noticed anything—I learned not to use the term “bullying,” because of the eye-rolling and attitude of the other administrators and the teachers—it was easier to work around them and build a case myself than to try to get their cooperation in advance in working to change the culture of the school, especially if the bully was a popular student with influential parents.
I also interviewed student witnesses, always alone, and always guaranteeing their anonymity. I took care to interview them at times when other students wouldn’t know that they were in my office, perhaps having the guidance counselor or a coach lend me their office instead and have the school secretary send a note to call the student there.
Once I determined whether there was a persistent and serious bullying issue, I met alone with the bully in my office. I went to the bully’s classroom to get him or her myself, because I wanted the rest of the students to see that something was up and I was aware of it. During the course of my discussion with the bully, I allowed the student to offer his or her side of the story, which usually was in diametric opposition to everything I had heard from the victim and the witnesses and the adults. Frequently the bully would characterize him or herself as being victimized by the victim and simply defending him or herself. Even when confronted with hard evidence such as notes and eyewitness accounts from several others, including adults, I never had a bully who would break down and admit to such cruelty. I did not reveal any of my sources to the bully. I told the bully that I would notify his or her parents of the situation and that zero tolerance would be implemented effective immediately.
Before the student left my office, I would notify him or her that if there were any retaliation whatsoever against the victim, or anyone s/he thought had been a witness, either in school or online, that there would be an immediate ten-day out-of-school suspension for disruption of the academic environment, and this would apply to any of the bully’s friends who took any retaliatory action. (I never had to enforce this—it was a very effective way to shut down the grapevine.) I also notified the bully that any future incidents would be considered a persistent pattern of behavior by me and would result in the bully’s being transferred to the district’s alternative school at best, possible expulsion from our campus, and a police report filed by me for stalking, criminal harassment, and potentially assault. At this point, I would have the school resource officer come in to back me up on the criminal issue. I would explain to the student that my job as administrator was to hear all the sides and weigh the issue, that I believed the victim and the witnesses, and that I would tolerate no more bullying, period, and I had the legal authority to back up what I was telling him or her.
As soon as the bully left my office, I would call the parents and ask them to come in for a conference. I would give them the same information I had given their child, including all of the background information I had gathered so they would know that the situation was serious. Since 1985, I have had a grand total of ONE set of parents who were aghast at their child’s behavior and demanded to see her right then and admonish her to cut it out. Every other set of parents went berserk. I have had parents show up at school board meetings and demand that I be fired for victimizing their football player son by disciplining him for physically assaulting a gay classmate in the cafeteria in front of dozens of witnesses. I have had parents yank their sons out of my high school to homeschool them rather than accept my warning (not punishment) of their sons for physically and verbally harassing a female student in plain view of teachers and other students. I have had fellow administrators tell me that I was making a big deal out of nothing, that I was bringing unwelcome attention to the superintendent’s office and the school board, and that kids will be kids.
Persistent and severe bullying is a violation of a student’s civil right to a free and appropriate public education. Administrators have to deal with it effectively, and that usually falls on the assistant principal or dean of discipline. It takes time, backbone, and the support of senior administrators, the superintendent, and the school board.
This is my response I posted for her:
Most administrators have the same attitude that most teachers have, that bullying is a rite of passage, that the victim is somehow bringing it on himself or herself, that it’s no big deal. When I was a building administrator, I had a very specific protocol for dealing with hardcore high school bullying of the variety that this poor girl endured.
When a situation was brought to my attention, usually by the victim or the victim’s parents, I took interviewed them and took extensive notes. I then spoke to teachers and other adults in the school to see if they had noticed anything—I learned not to use the term “bullying,” because of the eye-rolling and attitude of the other administrators and the teachers—it was easier to work around them and build a case myself than to try to get their cooperation in advance in working to change the culture of the school, especially if the bully was a popular student with influential parents.
I also interviewed student witnesses, always alone, and always guaranteeing their anonymity. I took care to interview them at times when other students wouldn’t know that they were in my office, perhaps having the guidance counselor or a coach lend me their office instead and have the school secretary send a note to call the student there.
Once I determined whether there was a persistent and serious bullying issue, I met alone with the bully in my office. I went to the bully’s classroom to get him or her myself, because I wanted the rest of the students to see that something was up and I was aware of it. During the course of my discussion with the bully, I allowed the student to offer his or her side of the story, which usually was in diametric opposition to everything I had heard from the victim and the witnesses and the adults. Frequently the bully would characterize him or herself as being victimized by the victim and simply defending him or herself. Even when confronted with hard evidence such as notes and eyewitness accounts from several others, including adults, I never had a bully who would break down and admit to such cruelty. I did not reveal any of my sources to the bully. I told the bully that I would notify his or her parents of the situation and that zero tolerance would be implemented effective immediately.
Before the student left my office, I would notify him or her that if there were any retaliation whatsoever against the victim, or anyone s/he thought had been a witness, either in school or online, that there would be an immediate ten-day out-of-school suspension for disruption of the academic environment, and this would apply to any of the bully’s friends who took any retaliatory action. (I never had to enforce this—it was a very effective way to shut down the grapevine.) I also notified the bully that any future incidents would be considered a persistent pattern of behavior by me and would result in the bully’s being transferred to the district’s alternative school at best, possible expulsion from our campus, and a police report filed by me for stalking, criminal harassment, and potentially assault. At this point, I would have the school resource officer come in to back me up on the criminal issue. I would explain to the student that my job as administrator was to hear all the sides and weigh the issue, that I believed the victim and the witnesses, and that I would tolerate no more bullying, period, and I had the legal authority to back up what I was telling him or her.
As soon as the bully left my office, I would call the parents and ask them to come in for a conference. I would give them the same information I had given their child, including all of the background information I had gathered so they would know that the situation was serious. Since 1985, I have had a grand total of ONE set of parents who were aghast at their child’s behavior and demanded to see her right then and admonish her to cut it out. Every other set of parents went berserk. I have had parents show up at school board meetings and demand that I be fired for victimizing their football player son by disciplining him for physically assaulting a gay classmate in the cafeteria in front of dozens of witnesses. I have had parents yank their sons out of my high school to homeschool them rather than accept my warning (not punishment) of their sons for physically and verbally harassing a female student in plain view of teachers and other students. I have had fellow administrators tell me that I was making a big deal out of nothing, that I was bringing unwelcome attention to the superintendent’s office and the school board, and that kids will be kids.
Persistent and severe bullying is a violation of a student’s civil right to a free and appropriate public education. Administrators have to deal with it effectively, and that usually falls on the assistant principal or dean of discipline. It takes time, backbone, and the support of senior administrators, the superintendent, and the school board.
Tennessee and Delaware It Is!
Wow, the DOE and the president have set the bar very high in the Race to the Top. Not only did Georgia not win a grant yet, but only two states were awarded funds, not the anticipated four.
We will be keeping a close eye on our neighbors in Tennessee and Delaware. It's an exciting time to be an education reformer!
We will be keeping a close eye on our neighbors in Tennessee and Delaware. It's an exciting time to be an education reformer!
Monday, March 29, 2010
Race to the Top Winners to Be Announced 1 PM ET
The conservative school choice advocacy group the Center for Education Reform has set Georgia's odds for winning a $460 million Race to the Top grant from the U.S. Department of Education at 10 to 1. The winners will be announced today at 1:00 PM Eastern Time. We will be watching eagerly to see which of the four states that applied are considered to be the most progressive reform environments for public education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
