By Travis

The school of the future will not be housed on a cloud, or a floating pod. The school of the future will not have whole sides of buildings made out of windows, nor will students sit, discussing great works of literature through their hand-held discussion devices.

No, the school of the future is more real.

It IS attainable.

It IS possible.

The school if the future will have No Tardies, No Failing Students, and No Homework. The school of the future is only a few years away. 

Each spring the uncertainties of student enrollment, teacher transfers or retirement, and funding make budgetary predictions difficult.

To remain financially sound some districts send out pink slips to the newest teachers. In no way is this ideal. These teachers face uncertainty about their employment future. Some of the district’s best teachers, who happen to be new hires, may not have their contracts renewed.

New legislation, yet to be introduced, may change how districts respond to RIFs. Instead of RIFs base on level of experience they may be based on a teacher’s evaluation relative to other teachers.

This bill, I assume, is in response to schools being unable to retain effective teachers when they are forced to lay off staff.

In 2009-2010, 3% of Washington’s teachers were given RIF notices. 87% of those teachers were recalled. Evidence does not suggest that the best and brightest young teachers are losing out to ineffective veterans.

Still, this idea is compelling. Shouldn’t the best teachers be the last ones to be laid off? Yes. If only it were that simple.

Distinguishing between the best and the worst teacher in a school may not be that difficult. But it is much more difficult to distinguish between the second and the third worst (one may keep their job while the other may not).

New evaluation systems are expected to have different criteria for novice and experienced teachers. Is a good novice teacher more effective than an average experienced teacher? Who wins in this RIF race a teacher with five years of solid student growth and one recent year of poor growth or the second year teacher with two years of average growth?

What are the recall rights for a RIFed teacher?

When the art program is cut can somebody determine the relative effectiveness between a high school and elementary art teacher?

The idea, keeping the best, is elegant. Implementing this idea? Not so much. Since relatively few new teachers actually lose positions this law is unlikely to result in an improved teaching force.

I'd like to see lawmakers put their efforts elsewhere. If lawmakers want to address the problems related to RIFs they should fulfill their paramount duty and fully fund education. And they should allow local school districts the time and space to implement the new evaluation criteria. Many stakeholders came together to put this evaluation model in place. Rolling out this system will be challenging. Rolling out this system while simultaneously addressing the complexities of a new model for RIFs seems unwise. But I'm no lawmaker...

By Rob

Some time ago I was struggling to set up procedures during my literacy instruction.  I was attempting to meet with a guided reading group while the reminder of my class was engaged independently in a meaningful activity.  For some students the “independent” activity was a too challenging and they needed support.  For other students it was too easy and they were finishing early.  Other students had difficulty remaining on task and caused disruptions.  These are the challenges of a novice teacher.

All things considered I was doing pretty well but I knew it could be done better.  But I wasn’t sure how.  I was building the boat as I was crossing the ocean.

I spoke with some other teachers and we shared the same struggles.  After I confided in my principal I found this “struggle” reflected in my evaluation.  Prior to that evaluators found little to criticize.  I regretted opening up my practice.

 By Travis

The message is clear. Very clear.

On the surface, the message comes across as positive, saying there is an organization out there to help children. I am all for helping children.

However, there is hidden message. An agenda, perhaps? This subtle meaning sends its message to the community even if the community does not consciously read it that way.

By Rob

Tom has written some thoughtful posts (here, here, and here) about charter schools.  When I read about charter schools with a cohesive staff, a common vision, and high standards for all I’m excited about the possibilities for their use in education reform.  I am also a firm believer that the same reforms are possible for public schools. 

If charter schools take hold then resources will shift towards making them viable.  Who provides the transportation?  Who maintains the facilities?  Who provides the special education services in the least restrictive environment?  Who provides the oversight?  Undoubtedly answers to these questions are possible.  But what if the resources used to address these questions were invested in local school improvement?

By Mark

I sat at a table with two other teachers, two building administrators, and the top two admin from the district office. We'd spent the better part of an hour sorting through the assessment rubrics and frameworks associated with the new teacher evaluation system mandated through legislative action in Senate Bill 6696. 

Silence settled on us all at once. The weight of what we were examining suddenly became overwhelming. 

Like so many things in education, the ideas and philosophies behind this new evaluation system (in brief: a shift from the binary satisfactory/unsatisfactory on a menu of teacher behaviors to a four-point continuum of evaluation using as many as sixty individual descriptors of teacher practice) we could all agree were sound, necessary, and powerful both in terms of evaluation and potential professional development.

But as we began to picture how it all could transition from philosophy to action, the beast began to be revealed.

By Rob

Me: Teacher- youngish, energetic, and looking for new perspectives. You: an inspiration- must be willing to share ideas and be a good listener. Let’s build a relationship based on good intentions, trust, and a common vision.

Earlier this month Diane Ravitch spoke on school reform at Town Hall Seattle. Her message to a friendly audience was a critique of the “corporate reform movement.” It was a mix of motivating rhetoric, valid points, and verbal grenades. Her positions concerning Race to the Top, NCLB, merit pay, the use of student assessment data to evaluate teachers match my own. I appreciate she is speaking on my behalf.

A week before Ravitch’s visit to Seattle Michelle Rhee spoke at Boston Symphony Hall. I can only assume her speech was equal to Ravitch’s in passion but opposite in perspective. I expect someone in the audience found her perspectives matched their own and they are thankful she is speaking on his or her behalf.

As our way to recognize and celebrate the National Board score release this weekend, our NBCT/Bloggers shared a bit about what being a National Board Certified Teacher has meant for them, and for our state. The process of becoming National Board Certified involves hundreds of planning hours and demonstrating best practices in teaching. Those who recently certified had an additional stress of a delay in score results due to a computer server glitch.

With the glitch solved, and over a thousand new NBCTs to join them in Washington state, we offer our congratulations and invite you to read on and be inspired by what our bloggers have said about how being National Board Certified is making a difference for teachers in our state.

By Mark

Senate Bill 6696 has put into motion changes in the way teachers are evaluated.

First... the relevant language of the bill (from the link above):

Evaluations. Each school district must establish performance criteria and an evaluation process for all staff and establish a four-level rating system for evaluating classroom teachers and principals with revised evaluation criteria. Minimum criteria is specified. The new rating system must describe performance on a continuum that indicates the extent the criteria have been met or exceeded. When student growth data (showing a change in student achievement between two points in time) is available for principals and available and relevant to the teacher and subject matter it must be based on multiple measures if referenced in the evaluation.

Classroom Teachers. The revised evaluation criteria must include: centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement; demonstrating effective teaching practices; recognizing individual student learning needs, and developing strategies to address those needs; providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum; fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment; using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning; communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community; and exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning. The locally bargained short-form may also be used for certificated support staff or for teachers who have received one of the top two ratings for four years. The short-form evaluations must be specifically linked to one or more of the evaluation criteria.

Here in southwest Washington, ESD 112 is leading a group of districts who are beginning the process of adapting and implementing the evaluation procedures described in this bill. Of course, the first step is a careful reading of relevant parts of SB 6696. 

There are two elements of the language above that I like in particular. To begin, there's this:

 By Travis 

Not too long ago, Governor Gregoire’s educational budget cuts came out, and I have had some time to think about it.

Washington, you can continue to be a pillar of education strength.
Washington, you worked so hard to not have California-sized classrooms.
Washington, your students have already given up a lot.
Washington ... you need to figure out your budget.

Please do not trash the future of our children's education. 

By Rob

In a comment on my recent blog post Tom asks: "How can we rewrite the federal education bill so that it actually helps student learn?" This is a huge question. The difficult issues of funding, evaluation, accountability, standards, and testing must be addressed in a politically feasible manner. I don’t know what is feasible but I'd advocate for these ideas-

Standards: I support national standards. As a population we are more mobile than ever and there should not be a drastic difference in the curricular content among states. This requires a level of monitoring and evaluation of states and educational systems. Currently this evaluation and monitoring is done by comparing the separate standardized tests in each state. Although these tests are given to every student multiple times throughout their schooling it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions since these tests vary in rigor and content. Our testing system needs reform.

Testing: Evaluation and monitoring of education systems is necessary for oversight and informed policy decisions. However this does not require the current two week assessment window, every child tested, a huge financial cost, lost instructional time, and enormous pressure on educators and students. Instead this should be done with a smaller randomized sample of students and less impact and intrusion on instruction.

Summative tests, currently the HSPE and MSP (sort of), are assessments of learning given at the end of a particular educational stage. Passing these tests is necessary for students to receive credits or in some cases progress to the next grade. Presently these are a part of a broken testing system. With rare exception, the students who come into the tenth grade performing far below grade level are the ones who are not going to pass the High School Proficiency Exam.

This idea isn’t new but I support summative tests at grade 3, 5, 8, 10, and 12. Students should not exit that grade until they are proficient. How can a fifth grade teacher instruct a student on comparing and contrasting an author’s inferred message when the student is struggling to sound out every third word? How can an eighth grade math teacher approach the Pythagorean Theorem with a student who struggles to multiply?

I’ve heard teachers say (myself included) I could teach 35 students if they came to me proficient in the previous year’s content. Let’s go with this idea-

It begins with half day Pre-K for all students and full day kindergarten. Before they leave kindergarten they need to know their letter sounds, numbers, reading behaviors, and should be able to read and discuss the events in a predictable text. Those who are proficient enter a first grade class capped at 24 students (35 is too many first graders for any teacher no matter how academically proficient the kids are). Those who are approaching proficiency enter a first grade class capped at 16. Those far below proficiency enroll in a class capped at 12.

Schools would use their ongoing formative assessment in grades 1,2,4,6,7,9, and 11 to reconfigure classes and to carry the model forward. The student who enters second approaching standard but exits meeting standard would enroll in the third grade class with the highest student-teacher ratio.

This model has imbedded funding implications. The schools with the highest performing students would have higher class sizes and would be cheaper to staff as long as they continued to maintain high student performance. The schools with lower performing students, ostensibly with underserved populations, would have a lower teacher-pupil ratio and would receive more funding.

This model is not without its challenges. Schools would need to take great care not to track students by providing some students with continual remediation while others engage in higher order thinking. I believe smaller numbers of students is important when serving struggling students in reading and math it is also important for students not to be ability grouped for other content areas.

Can somebody tell me why this wouldn't be an improvement? Maybe this idea isn’t ready to be written into law but couldn’t congress earmark some funding so some districts could try it?

 

By Rob

My school is in the third round of No Child Left Behind sanctions.  Among other procedures these sanctions call for ‘corrective action’ to be taken. 

Arriving at this point wasn’t a surprise.  It’s taken many years to get here.  Our school has been labeled ‘failing’ for a while but only after seeing last year’s test results do I feel like we’ve failed.  No teacher at our school wanted to enter the third round of NCLB sanctions.  Round 2, Schools of Choice, was embarrassing enough. 

There was pressure to improve our school’s test results.  I sensed a change in the tone of my evaluations.  Many new teachers were not hired for year two.  A veteran teacher was removed.  It seemed to me that the pressure was high and morale was low.

Perhaps other teachers felt this pressure more acutely than I.  Last year many of them have transferred elsewhere.  Of 23 classroom teachers 11 are novice (in their first or second year).  In my tenth year teaching I’m the second most experienced teacher at our school.

I’ve wondered how we’ve arrived at this unfortunate point.  Each fall we receive our state’s standardized test scores.  Teachers, energized and committed, face the challenge.  We’ve created systems for tracking student progress, providing extra support, engaging families, growing professionally, and improving instruction.  I believe some of these systems have been of great benefit to students.

While I thought these systems were beneficial our data never really showed it.  Here’s what it shows: (click the picture for a clearer view) 

In 2011 our scores dropped 30% to under 40% of students passing the 4^th grade reading MSP.  The year before 71.4% of students passed the 3^rd grade reading MSP.  The test didn’t get harder.  The state average pass rate remained flat.  This isn’t isolated to one grade.  Our 3^rd grade reading pass rate fell 13.1% from the previous year.  Our 5^th grade reading pass rate fell 32.8% from the previous year.

This drop in performance is startling.  So what happened?  Who knows?  I wish I had more answers and fewer questions.

Did the students consistently miss a particular type of reading comprehension question?  That could be addressed with an adjustment to the curriculum.

With a 37% mobility rate could the students who left be the ones who passed in 2010.  Might they have been replaced with students who didn't pass?  How about the families who left because of school choice (a NCLB sanction for schools in step 2 of improvement)?  Did the student population change significantly?  Are we comparing the same students from year to year?

Did students who narrowly passed the MSP in 2010 narrowly miss passing in 2011?  Did a slight drop in performance signify a drastic drop in the percent of students meeting standard?

Did significant numbers of non passing students come from specific classrooms?

Could school community, teacher morale, and the shame & blame policies of NCLB account, at least in part, for a dramatic drop in student performance?

Answers to these questions are important as a school undergoes “corrective action.”  I don’t know if anybody is asking these questions.  I don’t know if answers are available.  But I’d like to know exactly what problem I’m correcting and we all deserve a clearer answer than ‘you didn’t meet adequate yearly progress again.’ 

By Travis As a child, when I was sick, I would lay in bed watching old black and white shows on the family TV. This was before cable so I watched whatever was showing. Also of note, the family TV had four stations. I watched a number of police stories as that is what seemed to be on TV in the early afternoon. I enjoyed the suspense and the angles. The drama. Most of the shows had a scene where an inmate would trade secrets, privileges, or wealth for cigarettes. The money system in jail is cigarettes. In my school, the money system is paper.

By Rob

Great investments have been made to collect and use data.  The role of assessments and use of student data has shifted and it has changed the nature of education.

The standardized test, Washington’s Measurement of Student Progress, is analyzed extensively to meet the requirements of No Child Left Behind.  It is used to identify schools as “failing to meet adequate yearly progress.”  It is used to rank-order schools.  New metrics which control for the impact of poverty use this data to compare effectiveness among districts.  This assessment comes at a great cost- financial, time, lost instruction, grading, and tools for analyzing.  The information gained from it could be found with a smaller sample size and at a lower cost.

The Measurement of Academic Progress (MAP) tracks student growth across a school year.  This test is completed by students on a laptop in a separate classroom.  Our technology and curriculum coach devotes weeks to setting up the computers, scheduling, and proctoring each class.  The list of goals compiled for each student is exhausting and includes standards not covered for months or years or, depending on the curriculum, not taught at all.  I am pleased when the assessment result matchs my analysis of the student but often it doesn’t.

I get very little actionable intelligence from the results of my MSP or MAP scores.  But increasingly I have to answer for the results. 

The emphasis on testing extends far beyond MSP and MAP.  Over the course of the school year my students must complete 32 mandated “common assessments” with the score recorded into a database.  How the scores are used I have no idea.  Increasingly these assessments feel more like an audit of my teaching than a tool for improving student learning.

Students also complete regular math and spelling quizzes.  This is an additional 85 assessments.  While these tests tie closely to the content they contribute to the culture of ‘no child left untested.’  My students are expected to demonstrate their proficiency 117 times throughout a 180 day school year.  They are second graders.  In third grade the assessment load will increase.

This certainly wasn’t my experience in elementary school.  It wasn’t even the experience of my students ten years ago.  And this emphasis on testing isn’t preparing my students for adulthood:  The last assessment I took was four years ago.

One form of assessment has been overlooked by policy makers and more attention should be paid.  It is the teacher’s ongoing examination of student progress and understanding.  Teachers use this information to inform their practice and to adjust lesson pacing.  It gives teachers an indication of what to re-teach or where to extend.  It allows teachers to identify struggling students while there is time to arrange extra support.  It requires acute observation and meaningful interactions with students.  This process is at the heart of teaching; it’s where the magic happens.  It happens every day... except when we're testing.

 

By Kristin

A few weeks ago I spent an evening in Issaquah providing feedback on parts of a document called "The People's Plan for Education in Washington State," something Excellent Schools Now has put together to increase student success. I wasn't alone - there were about forty teachers there, including Washington's 2010 Teacher of the Year Jay Maebori. 

There were many things in the plan that I agreed with but one thing troubled me, and that was the recommendation to eliminate salary bumps based on earning a master's degree, something that would be put into place for new teachers. I disagreed with it in Issaquah because I feel strongly that if we're in the business of encouraging students to believe in education, then we need to encourage teachers to believe in it - that it means something, that it makes you better at what you want to do, and that it brings with it financial rewards.

By Mark

One of the wheels I reinvent each August is this chart wherein I build the scope and sequence for my courses, identify the timelines as well as major formative and summative assessments, then list which EALRs/GLEs those assessments address so that I can be sure I've fulfilled my obligation. Sounds fun, eh? Yeah, I'm a fun guy.

As I posted recently, the State of Washington is shifting from the old standards for Language Arts (farewell EALRs and GLEs) to the new Common Core standards. Ultimately, I like the wording of these "new" standards better (and for some reason, I can just understand many of them better). There are changes, to be sure, but even within those changes I can easily see ways that "what I already do" could be tweaked a bit to fit that instructional goal.

This post, however, is my attempt to help illuminate the complexity within teaching that these standards illustrate. (I cannot even begin to imagine what this same post from an elementary teacher might look like!)

By Rob

Teaching is a flat profession. A teacher with 20 years of experience performs the same job as a teacher with two years of experience. Aside from moving into administration there isn’t a career ladder for teachers to climb. School systems may be hesitant to remove the best teachers from classrooms. Consequently, cultivating leadership from the ground up is a difficult task.

Why not cultivate leadership from the top down? Two-thirds of superintendents are hired from outside the district. Nationwide the average tenure for superintendents is just over five years. In urban districts it is under four years. This constant turn-over negatively impacts the continuity of reforms.

When a new superintendent arrives the cabinet, departments, and programs are often restructured. This creates a lot of work for school personnel. It may be done in the name of improving student learning but it is not about student learning; it is about change and reorganization. Given the rate of superintendent turn-over it is a task that is likely to be repeated soon.

Changes in leadership impact teachers. With new superintendents come changes in curriculum, programs, models of instruction and evaluation. In my ten years of teaching I’ve had three superintendents. Where we once focused on expanding access to Advanced Placement classes and participation in Lesson Study we now focus on Guided Language Acquisition Design and Professional Learning Communities. We’ve shifted from broadening all curricula to narrowing some and expanding math and literacy. We’ve replaced teacher designed tests with norm-referenced tests.

Whether these shifts in focus have been positive or negative depends on your perspective. Professional Learning Communities can be a powerful transformative tool. So too can Lesson Study. Japan’s practice of Lesson Study has been well established since the 1960’s. My district tried it for only six years. The constant shifting of focus, energy, and funding that comes with new “outside” leadership means many programs never reach their full potential.

When a new leader takes the helm I question if they were good teachers. Do they have an appreciation for the complexities of managing classrooms? Will they take these complexities into consideration as they make decisions? If new superintendents are from outside the district these questions may never be answered. I’m less likely to have these concerns if I’ve had the chance to work beside them.

Suppose schools hire two-thirds of their superintendents from inside the district. There would be more opportunity to build a culture around a common vision. Wholesale changes to programs would be less likely. Shifts in focus may be more gradual and more targeted. Their Initiatives may realize greater potentials.

I’m not a fan of many top-down reforms but I’d be happy to see schools cultivate leadership from the top.

By Mark

NBC News ran a story last night about Siemens and their 3400 un-fillable jobs despite an abundance of job-seekers out there right now. The segment (embedded below) also featured small businesses who also have an abundance of openings--one owner noting something to the effect of "we can buy all the equipment we want, but it's no good if there is no one skilled to use it."

The piece discussed the "skills gap" between what the jobs require and what the prospective employees were trained for or capable of doing... and thankfully stopped just short of blaming American public school teachers for causing this, the failing economy, or current debt crisis in Europe.

The solution to the skills gap, according to the report, was more training (not testing) in math and science. Okay, that's fine. But how about training in skills?

Several of us here at SfS have beaten the drum about the need for more investment in vocational and career and technical education at the high school level. This got me thinking: what if we took every penny currently dedicated to statewide testing and test prep at all levels and instead invested it in vocational and CTE programming starting even well before high school? What about devoting funding toward funneling kids toward voc/tech speciality schools after high school instead of always talking about "college readiness" as if enrollment in a four-year is the only indicator of a school's success?

Alas, in a cursory search, I was unable to find clear numbers about the cost to taxpayers to adminster and assess all the state tests. Certainly, vocational and CTE programs can be quite expensive due to specialized equipment or facilities needs, but still, I feel like when we look at the problems facing the country, we're mismanaging our investment. 

One of the first and most important lessons I learned as a pre-service teacher was to examine the needs of my students and adjust my response, rather than just dish them a canned curriculum regardless of their needs. When I consider what our economy and country apparently need from public schools, it isn't kids who can pass tests. We need kids with skills... and report after report highlights that skills gap. Our schools apparently are not arming the emerging workforce with the tools they need to be successful.

Instead of using tests to punish schools for what we're supposedly not doing, why not fund programming to help schools do what we ought to be doing?

(Sorry about the ads in the video below. I usually open another window and check my email, but you can multitask however you choose.)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 

 

By Mark

At the end of July, Randy Dorn announced that the state of Washington has adopted and will begin transitioning to application of the Common Core standards for English Language Arts. I head back to my classroom next week to start unpacking and really getting down to work preparing for the school year, but I'm having a problem seeing how this shift in standards should affect my planning and implementation.

And, based on the emails that have filled my spam folder for my school email address, there are an awful lot of businesses looking to cash in on this standards changeover... so many emails in fact, that the persistent cynic in me wonders whether this change to CCSSO Common Core standards isn't more about supporting textbook and software manufacturers than it is about promoting learning. When I see on the changeover explanation that the "system will include...

• optional formative, or benchmark, exams; and
• a variety of tools, processes and practices that teachers may use in planning and implementing informal, ongoing assessment. This will assist teachers in understanding what students are and are not learning on a daily basis so they can adjust instruction accordingly.

...I hear the cha-ching of cash registers and start thinking about all those emails trying to sell me matierals "perfectly aligned with Common Core Standards to guarantee student success on major assessments."

It probably isn't all about lining the pockets of curriculum mills, but when I look at the standards and the timeline that OSPI posted (more on that below), I do wonder really what is going to change... and I don't mean that in a futile, cynical way. I mean it like this: don't these standards just communicate what we should have been doing anyway under the old standards?

 

By Tracey

In continuing with the Save Our Schools March events, since it's still so fresh in my mind, I'm posting the speech Diane Ravitch gave at the rally on July 30.  She's not Matt Damon, so you may have missed her.  (I was deeply touched by the words Matt Damon spoke and am grateful he came.  But, I will assume you won't need me to hear his speech.)  Ravitch also spoke at the two-day conference leading up to the rally.  Her speech at the rally was shortened dramatically, as it should.  What you missed was a historical account of how our education system has been "in crisis" since 1910.  It's apparently what we do; we claim our schools are in crisis, and then make irrational decisions about how to fix them.  Anyone ever read Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine?  A hundred years of crises should raise some flags.  But, the greatest offender at this point in time, is pretending that poverty isn't an issue.

InterACT, a group blog by educators in California, recently shared a post by guest-writer Lynne Formigli, an NBCT and active teacher leader. Formigli summarizes the situation which resulted after three billion dollars (over eight years) had to be funneled directly to nearly 500 struggling schools as a result of a lawsuit against then-governor Schwarzenegger. (Read Lynne's post for more articulate and thorough explanation.)

The use of that money (now a few years into the eight year plan), as implied by Formigli, was apparently teacher or at least locally directed, and the results were powerful. These results included evidence to support what teachers often promote: class size matters significantly to the learners who are statistically "left behind."

This information ought to resonate all throughout the country as states face the tough budget decisions about public education. Decision makers need to hear this:

• It isn't just about teacher pay, it is about paying for teachers.
• When there are more teachers, classes are smaller, and that is proven to result in greater student learning.
• When teachers are cut, schools are left with no other choice but to increase class sizes and do the exact opposite of what data proves is best for student learning.
• Sure, everyone has to tighten the belt a little--but few choices will have as long lasting repercussions as choices about a child's education.

I really encourage you to take a look at InterACT and read Lynne's post and other posts by the teacher-leaders there.

By Mark

I came across this Washington Post re-post via A 21st Century Union, a teacher blog rooted in Maryland. The piece in the Post, in a nutshell, illuminates a simple reality about the recent PISA education rankings wherein the US was situated far from the top. The maxim "if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging" forms the root of the argument.

The hole? The fact that the rest of the world is catapulting past American education on international measures.

What has dug this hole? Kevin Welner, author of the post, states it clearly: we are in the position we are in because the current generation of tested students came of age in an education system dominated by NCLB mandates centered on test-mania. We dug our hole with high stakes tests and an obsession with scores and sanctions.

The result of that test-mania is obvious: we have not gained ground in student achievement, we've lost ground. The proof is in the data. Since data analysis is all the rage in education, we should be abandoning what clearly doesn't work, right? Logic says we ought to stop digging.

Here's the link to the post, it is worth a read. I know I'm ready to put down this shovel.

By Mark

This video was emailed to me by a colleague...if you have a few minutes and are willing to maintain a sense of humor, it's worth a look:

 

Now, I wouldn't post this if I was just trying to be subversive or funny. In any satire or parody, there is always a kernel of truth (heck, sometimes a whole cob of truth). 

I truly enjoy authentic collaboration. In fact, I believe that my freedom to collaborate is actually what has kept me in education this long--if I were isolated in my own classroom all day with my only human contact being with 14-year-olds (who some contend are not quite yet human beings) I don't think I'd have lasted.

Because I get to collaborate and actually team-teach in my current assignment, I have grown as an educator and my satisfaction in my job has grown as well. There is something powerful about working closely with a like-minded educator or team of educators who share common philosophies, attitudes and dedication to increasing student learning. We challenge each other, support each other, and learn from each other. I am a better teacher because I have collaborated. My students perform better because I have collaborated.

Alas, like so many fads in education, Collaboration has become a four-letter-word to some, and I think it is in no small way due to the kinds of situations parodied in that YouTube video above.

By Mark

A colleague of mine posed an interesting proposition lately. Like many school districts, mine is apparently toying with the idea of a hybrid virtual/brick-and-mortar kind of school-within-a-school. The idea is that the curriculum would be administered face-to-face when necessary and via web interface when necessary, so this colleague of mine was casting out a few lines to see if any of us would bite.

I've voiced interest in participating, but have concerns and questions. 

A few years ago, I was part of starting a small learning community "school-within-a-school" of sorts in my high school, and it is still operating, but that endeavor was small by comparison with what my colleague has in mind. I am wondering what models of this kind of hybrid exist, what are the benefits or shortcomings, and what the best course would be.

I'm definitely in the learning stages here. Sure, I can Google it or read some journal articles, but that only gives part of the story.

So, SFS readers and contributors: what do you know, or what advice do you have about building this kind of educational opportunity? If you are a brick-and-mortar teacher, what concerns would you have for a hybrid or virtual school? What hopes would you have?

By Mark

I am just old enough to remember Paul Harvey, and the "rest of the story."

Eve Rifkin, at our Arizona partner Stories from School has helped flesh out the "rest of the story" on that annual USNews "Top Schools" list, and it is as if she was reading my mind.

Between Waiting for Superman, Oprah, Education Nation, Obama's charge to raise the bar, and the resulting present (and I pessimistically argue ephemeral) empassioned focus on education in this country, it is clear that the whole story has not been told in far too many instances. Here is my take on the untold halves of the many stories told in the last couple of weeks...the rest of the story, if you will:

1. Unions oppose merit pay not to protect lazy teachers but because no one can come up with a fair and reliable way to assess teaching "merit." Issue number one: test scores don't work because not all teachers are in tested disciplines.

2. Those other countries who post great education stats? Their systems are different than ours. Some screen out special education kids. Some have separate vocational tracks which are conveniently not part of their data. Many in those systems lament the fact that the kids they produce are test-takers, not thinkers.

3. Weighing myself will not make me lose weight...I've being weighing in for years and the number is only going the wrong way. Testing kids more will not make them learn. In fact, testing actually takes up instructional time, the loss of which not surprisingly has a negative effect on test performance.

4. American schools held up as models of success always have the following by comparison to the mainstream: extra funding or an enrollment screen or both. These models are neither replicable nor sustainable in other schools unless those schools also get extra funding or an enrollment screen or both. 

5. Every child can learn, but not every child will. To blame that solely on teachers or on students is yet another heinous oversimplification of the complex problems facing education, educators, students, and families today. 

The rest of the story? I'm sure there's even more. I'm tired of hearing half-stories in the sound bytes mainstream America turns to as it's source of facts.

By Mark

I have a three-year-old son at home who is that child whose behavior is my karmic payback for the times I mouthed off to my parents. He's a boundary-tester and an eye-lash-batting innocent cherub for whom consequences like time out and taking away of toys have no influence on behavior. Though I regret it, there have been times when the worst of me has come out, and this 32-year-old ends up shouting at that 3-year-old.

And then he cries and cries and I feel horribly guilty.

But usually it changes his behavior, at least for a while. The same results cannot be said for a stint in time-out.

I was venting my frustrations to my dad this last fourth of July when he mentioned that behavior changes only result from one of two things: fear or understanding. I don't know if he discovered this on his own or if he learned this from some workshop, but it rings very true. My dad is a well-respected educator who taught for over three decades, served in the military, and has even volunteered in prisons to teach math to inmates. He made me realize that if I want to influence my toddler's behavior, I should aim for understanding. My son needs to understand why it's not okay to punch his brother or jump off the dining room table. Sometimes a lesson is learned the hard way (he hasn't leapt off the back of the couch even once since that trip to the ER with bashed-in teeth) but there are many other lessons I'm having a hard time teaching him simply because there are a lot of things a three-year-old just isn't capable of understanding yet.

There are obvious analogies to teaching. 

By Kristin

Buy this car.  I'm serious.  Come on.  This car has been around a long time.  It has proven its worth.  It deserves to be on the road and anyway, the rules are that you can't buy another car until this one is purchased.

I wouldn't buy the car in the photo.  I don't have the time and money to make it queen of the road, and I don't need test results to know that.  Unfortunately, because we can't seem to design a better system of teacher evaluations than seniority, this "you have to take it" policy is what many buildings face when they have a position to fill. 

The system is faulty, and districts and their communities are trying to fix it by placing more weight on student test scores.  We don't need test scores to identify ineffective teachers, we just need to make it easy for administrators to evaluate their staff.  I think it can be easy, and measurable, because you can kick a teacher's tires, so to speak.

Mike Lee at Arizona's Stories From School blog has enlightened me about the evil beast known as the TTWWADI..."That's the way we've always done it." As he points out, the TTWWADIs are the real forces which undermine our efforts to reform education and improve our practice (and thus, student achievement)...and TTWWADIs need to be closely examined if we ever wand to move forward. Take a read and add your thoughts.

The TTWWADI which stands out most to me: advancing kids from one grade to the next based more on calendar year than actual readiness. In your perspective, what TTWWADIs need to become TWWUTDIs (The Way We Used to Do Its)?

By Mark

An article in this week's Tacoma News Tribune points out that in the state of Washington, high school math and science teachers get paid less, on average, than teachers of other disciplines. The assumption--not backed up by research or widespread observation--is that math and science teachers are lured away to more lucrative careers in the high tech industry and therefore do not stay in teaching as long.

Besides that, this study by Jim Simpkins, Marguerite Roza, and Cristina Sepe and produced by the University of Washington's Center for Reinventing Public Education raises several valid points about teacher compensation. However, it is what the study does not include that concerns me most.

I heard a sad story the other evening. It was during the annual NSDC conference here in Seattle, and a bunch of us were gathered for dinner downtown after the first day. A colleague began to describe the teaching career of her young niece, who had dreamed of being an educator since she was eight years old. Her first year had gone well; she had been paired with an excellent mentor who had been very supportive and helpful. A mentor who then moved on to work with the next first-year teacher. Now, after five years in the classroom, my friend's niece wanted out. She was lonely, wasn't getting any feedback and was concerned that she just wasn't any good at teaching. She was looking for a new career.

Me being me, I didn't think too much about it. In fact, I had a hard time relating to the young lady's problem. I had no mentor during my first year, and it seemed like I learned everything on my own, without a whole lot of support from anyone. My principals have generally left me alone, which is pretty much the way I like it.

But I'm an idiot.

And it took world-renowned cultural anthropologist Jennifer James to make me realize that this story was more important than the interrupted career of one frustrated teacher. James was the keynote speaker at breakfast the following morning, and part of her lecture was on the differences between my generation (I'm 48) and that of our younger teachers. 

My generation attended grade school in straight, quiet rows of desks. When our young teachers were in grade school, they sat around in cooperative groups at tables of four. We did our high school homework all alone in our rooms. They did their high school homework in study groups. We did our college homework all alone in our rooms. They went through college, including education classes, in cohorts; learning together and supporting each other.

My generation taught their generation how to work together. We encouraged them to collaborate, helped them form study groups and cohorts, taught them how to give constructive feedback and how to support each other.

Then we hired them to teach in our classrooms, gave them a mentor for a year, and left them all alone with a group of kids. For good. Well, not completely; every now and then we take them out and send them to two-hour workshops so that they'll learn something new.

Sometimes when I’m riding my bike I have imaginary conversations with real people. This morning I spoke with the Seattle Times editor who wrote this piece. Here’s a transcript of our discussion:

Me: So I’m still waiting to take my test.

Editor: Which test is that?

Me: Well, I’ve been reading your paper for over 35 years, assuming that at some point you’re going to give me an assessment on my comprehension of local, national and world affairs so that you’ll know how well you’re doing.

Editor: We don’t do that.

Me: Seriously? Isn’t it your job to inform your readers? How do you know how well you’re doing if you don’t assess them on the extent to which they’re informed?

Editor: First of all, writing a newspaper is a very complex undertaking. We do a lot more than report on current affairs.

Me: I guess that’s true.

Editor: And besides, not everyone reads the articles about local, national and world affairs. Sometimes they just read the sports page. Or the funnies.

Me: Imagine that. But can’t you do something to make us pay attention to the important stories of the day?

To steal from Tom's post a few days ago, I too wonder "How I did" this school year. Since my evaluation was likewise "satisfactory," I thought I'd consider the question how a state government might: through test scores.

Colorado has joined with a few other states (Florida and New York are among those with plans in motion) to tie a teacher's continued employment directly to test scores. It appears that student test scores must comprise "at least fifty percent" of the evaluative criteria for teacher tenure and retention. If improvement is not sustained, a teacher can lose tenure and risks being fired. That would certainly align with an "unsatisfactory" review...potentially sparked by poor test scores. 

As I read the article, it stated clearly the bill calls for teachers to demonstrate student growth. I'm not familiar with the Colorado assessment system, and a half hour of wading through the web didn't net me many answers. I'm a skeptic of that word growth, however. Something tells me we're not talking about a preassessment in September and a postassessment in June, which is the only kind of assessment of growth I'd feel comfortable tying to teacher pay and continued employment. The old argument of comparing apples to apples is key. If we're comparing apples to oranges, then ready the court for appeals.*

In a once-a-year test situation, how can growth be assessed? Let's trace it out and play the how I did game by considering my students' performance on the recent High School Proficiency Exams (HSPE) in reading and writing and previous years' Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) tests.

In an earlier post in response to the meme “Five Things I Would Change about Our School System,” one of the items on my list was the Running Start program. Running Start is an option that students have to take classes at the community college and earn college credits while still in high school. Some students are able to finish high school with both a diploma and an AA degree. Sounds good, right? So what is my problem?
 
While students have to pay for their own books and transportation, the tuition is paid fully by the state. Every dollar is a dollar that doesn’t go to the students’ respective high schools, so it is a financial drain on public education. I can just hear some people say, “If you want to keep those kids in high school, offer the classes and programs that will attract them.”
 
It’s not that simple. At my high school, we have the International Baccalaureate program. These are college level classes that challenge the intellect and offer potential college credit. For many of our Running Start students, IB or AP classes are too difficult. Instead, they take basic reading and writing, or biology, or chemistry, or whatever that is also offered at the high school. They don't leave because our high schools don't offer a good education; they leave for the free college credits.
 
It’s not just the money that runs away to Running Start, it is a core group of mid-to-high-level students who both set behavior and academic standards for the school. When there is an exodus of large numbers of these students, it actually changes the climate of the school. Who are left? The very high IB students in their IB classes. And the lower, more poorly achieving students mixed with a smaller than necessary core of "middle" kids.

I do understand that there are some students who simply need classes that aren’t available through the public school system. However, the number of students whose needs could not be met by an IB or AP program is very small.
 
I don’t take issue with high school students taking classes at the community college; I just have a problem, as a taxpayer, diverting the money from our public schools to pay for it. It is our responsibility as taxpayers to pay for education through high school, but it is NOT our responsibility to pay for college.

 
 

 By Mark

I keep hearing about how education as a system is broken. Everyone has an opinion and a finger to point, and many have "solutions." I spotted an article recently which attracted my attention: a Utah senator is being accused of "dumping the 12th grade." (The article is here.)

I think he's on to something. Part of the criticism lobbed at modern education is that it isn't a modern system at all: it is an antiquated 18th century system. One change which could help us rethink the purpose and structure of schools is to rethink the finish line.

We should abolish the high school diploma as we know it.

 By Mark

Let me begin by clarifying the title of this post: I am beyond appreciative that Washington is one of the states in the union which recognizes the achievement of National Board Certification by awarding an annual bonus to NBCTs. I am eternally grateful for that bonus...and I feel, no I know, that I earned it. I know I am an infinitely better teacher than I was because the process helped me reflect, analyze the effectiveness of my instructional decisions, and examine with a more critical eye whether my students are learning what they need to learn.

But let me trace the ripples caused by the Washington legislature's decision to reward my efforts (and the efforts of hundreds of other NBCTs). While some may see that as just a change in my paycheck, it is much, much more than that.

The first ripple? Earning the bonus meant I could quit my job. My night job, that is. Oh, and my weekend job, too.

By Tom

Back in the mid-eighties, when I was fresh out of college and looking for a teaching job, I stopped by the Everett School District to apply for a position teaching fifth grade. When I checked in with the receptionist I was handed a piece of notebook paper and a pen and told to write an essay. I forgot what the topic was supposed to be, but I remember specifically being told to write in cursive. Unfortunately, I did not see that coming.

Needless to say, I didn't get that job. But I shook it off and went on to become a third grade teacher. That's the grade in which every American student learns how to write a paragraph, how to multiply and divide, how to subtract with borrowing and (ironically) how to write in cursive.

But that might be changing.

 By Mark

A recent Education Week article suggests that we already know how to fix the public school system in America, but simply aren't doing it. According to his CV, the author, Allan Odden, has been a university professor and policy maker since 1972, after spending five years as a math teacher.

The article kinda frustrated me. More than a little. A lot really. I had to walk away from the computer several times. 

First, the solutions he suggests for struggling schools: new curriculum, stronger professional development, teacher-leadership, extended literacy instruction at the secondary level...none of these are rocket science. 

But Odden's claim is is that we all know how to fix broken schools, we're just choosing not to do it. 

To me, the article illuminates two great problems with the education system:

 By Mark

I'm presently working with my sophomores to examine news and web articles for the rhetorical triangle of ethos, pathos and logos. In doing so, they've become fantastic critical readers by asking these three questions: What is this article assuming about its audience? What questions is this article not answering? and What is being left unsaid?

That latter two questions came to mind when I was emailed a New York Times article detailing the potential closure of four "failing" schools in the NYC school system under Mayor Bloomberg. The gist was this: four schools had failed to meet growth expectations over the last few years, and therefore the future employment of teachers and administrators was in jeopardy and students were likely to soon be relocated.

The question that seemed to be unanswered to me: How exactly will closing schools solve the problem? 

Let's think about the logic of that...

By Tom

We learned recently that Governor Gregoire decided to postpone Washington's application for the Federal Government's Race to the Top grants. The first round of applications is due in January. The second round is due in June. So the question is, what's the next move?

As I see it, there are two choices.

By Mark

I look with envy at my peers in the math department.

Sure, I know they have the same issues I have as an English teacher: kids who don't turn work in; hours of planning, prep, and grading to do; a state standardized test looming over our heads.

But, there's one thing they have that I really want.

You probably won't find many Algebra II students who cannot do basic work with monomials and reverse order of operations. In Geometry, the kids are all likely equally confounded at first by the mysteries of Pythagorus. In Algebra I, more often than not I think the kids at least have basic number sense.

Or, perhaps it is better put this way...

In that Algebra I class, there's probably not a kid sitting there running advanced differential equations through his head while everyone else solves for x. If that kid were spotted, you better believe that his teacher would bump him up to somewhere that he could be both more challenged and better served.

But in an English 9 class, just because their birthdays fell within a given year, a kid who can immediately spot the nuances in Scout's narration in To Kill a Mockingbird and by the end articulate how the novel is a coming-of-age tale about the collapse of childhood illusions is sitting next to a kid who still thinks Scout is a boy and Atticus is African-American.

By Mark

In the last two weeks, a few things have me thinking about the age old debate over how schools "grade" students. First, in Nevada, there was this discussion about the merits of allowing students in public high schools take exams to earn state-required graduation credit (as opposed to putting in the seat time). 

Second, there were the 28 letters I sent home to students' parents this past Monday updating them that their students were earning a D or F in my English class.

When I look at those 28 letters, there are really only probably seven kids getting the low grades who I think genuinely have not yet exhibited the minimum language arts expectations which I have at this point in the semester and thus "deserve" the F. The other 21? Missing assignments. I'd bet dollars to donuts that those 21 would pass an on-demand-test of minimum language arts skills and content, and I have few concerns about next spring's state tests for those kids, even though they are presently earning Ds and Fs in my class. They've been able to show me that they have the skills through classroom work and other assessments, some of them far exceeding the standards from the very first assessment--yet their grade is an F.

I know that this discussion is almost as old as the model of education present in most public schools today, but how do you as a teacher reconcile the necessity of "grades" and the reality that grades do not necessarily reflect actual skill in a content area? 

Are these kids earning failing grades due to a lack of content knowledge and skill or due to a lack of ability to submit complete work on time...which incidentally is not one of my content area standards? Is the idea of a mastery test (in lieu of seat time) really out of line? We put so much stock in those one-time snapshot tests to assess school and teacher effectiveness, so why not a one-time snapshot test for a kid who has the skills but doesn't want to spend 90 hours this semester in a class which will penalize him for poor organization, not a lack of skill?

by Luann

The results are in from the Policy Summit held a few weeks ago. 

The top three priorities for most immediate funding, as reflected by the decisions made by teachers at the Symposium were:

(drum roll).........................

By Mark

It's a question I and my teammates get often: "Why don't they do this for all freshmen?"

About seven years ago, some administrators with a clear vision saw a need in our building: far too many tenth graders weren't actually tenth graders. By credits, they were still ninth graders.  Far too many kids were not on track for on-time graduation...or even graduation at all. These administrators had an idea of what they thought would help solve this problem. So, they attended conferences and did some initial research.

Then, those administrators with a clear vision did something that I fear is unfortunately rare, but has made all the difference. 

They identified the problem.

And then they trusted teachers to figure out how to best solve it.

By Senator Rosemary McAuliffe and Senator Eric Oemig

Redefining the funding formula for Basic Education is the critical catalyst for moving our K-12 educational system into the 21st century. It is our responsibility as Chair and Vice Chair of the Washington State Early Learning & K-12 Committee to identify and implement policies that allow all children the opportunity to learn and to support educators with the resources they need to deliver a quality education for every child.In the 2009 session we redefined Basic Education (House Bill 2261) which sets a pathway for essential improvements needed in our educational  system.

We started work this summer and fall by traveling around the state and conducting listening tours — the sole purpose being to listen to what teachers on the ground have to say and make sure our objectives align with real needs. We realize every classroom and school has unique needs and that one size does not fit all. By speaking with multiple teachers from across the state, we have gained insight into the types of reform that will be meaningful for teachers in different classrooms.

by Luann

     In November 2006, Washington National Board Certified Teachers took part in the "NBCT Policy Summit: Supporting and Staffing High Needs Schools".  Similar Summits were held in 4 other states, including my former home state, Ohio.  Our state superintendent and many state policy makers listened as 225 accomplished teachers shared suggestions for making education a better place for the students who need it the most. 

    On Saturday, October 17, a sizeable group of accomplished teachers will gather again in Seattle. We've been asked once more by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), the Washington Education Association (WEA), and the Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession (CSTP) to speak as professionals on behalf of our students. This time, our voices will address the utilization of state dollars in the implementation of House Bill 2261 S. E. (caution: it's a rather long read) passed by our state legislature last session.

By Tom

There are good laws and there are bad laws. And there are some laws that seem to cause exactly what they were designed to prevent. This year I got to see what that looks like.

Eight years ago, No Child Left Behind dramatically amplified the federal government’s role in public education. In an attempt to eliminate the Achievement Gap, schools in which students do not meet “adequate yearly progress” are now subject to increasingly severe sanctions. Meanwhile, the target for all schools climbs ever higher, until the year 2013, at which point every student in the country is supposed to be reading and doing math at grade level; something that’s never happened in our country’s history, and probably never will, since “grade level” is essentially determined by finding the mid-point in a range of data.

Instead of supporting our struggling schools, this law punishes them. First they’re publicly identified. Then the parents are “invited” to send their students to a better-performing school, at the district expense. If that isn’t possible, the district is responsible for hiring tutors for the students. If these schools keep failing, they’re eventually shut down.

The law was well-intentioned. No one wants their child to perform below grade level, and no one likes the fact that poor children and children of color consistently under-perform on achievement tests.

By Mark

The press was briefly abuzz recently when President Obama mentioned his ideas for extending the school year. While this seems to be far from a concrete policy decision, it reopens a discussion to which we seem to return every so often. 

Is Obama out of line? Aside from the cute arguments of fifth graders who want their summer break, why do people resist this concept so vehemently? If we can't change this, how can we change anything else about our faltering education system?

I love my "three months paid vacation and a month off at Christmas" (as if), but am for extending the school year. What are your thoughts?

By Mark

We have some new leadership in my building that is making me very optimistic. One of the movements being promoted by our leadership is the concept of PLCs, or Professional Learning Communities. We've had these in our building for a while, but the current push involves analyzing student data to assess past practice and inform future endeavors.  Makes good sense, prompts a good deal of collaboration, and seems to be ready to push teachers toward improving practice. If it sticks, I see good things on the horizon.

Not too long ago I talked to a retired teacher whose building in a different state had attempted PLCs in her last few years of teaching. "We dumped that pretty quick," she explained. When I asked why, she explained that it didn't seem to be doing any good. When I asked her how she knew that, she couldn't really answer the question, but she knew that she and her colleagues didn't really like it. They said their principal called it "reforming" their school culture...they knew it was just another passing education fad.

This small is example is all you need in order to see why major education reform will always fail.

By Nancy

I attended a school board meeting a couple years ago, along with dozens of parents, teachers, and students, when our school district was considering the elimination of all elementary school librarians. The seven board members appeared to listen thoughtfully. Everyone left the meeting that night with a sense that voices had been heard, and that school librarians were valued and would be saved. The board and the superintendent moved on to their closed door executive session.

You guessed it: librarians were eliminated. 

More recently, our school board hosted a series of community meetings to gather input about a long list of potential budget cuts. These community meetings were well organized, well-attended, and resulted in a complex tally of votes that represented each special interest group's favorite line item. The process was completely transparent, and stakeholders felt great about their ability to contribute to the final budget decisions.

You are right again: in the end, the original prioritized budget list did not change.

In both cases, the school community realized that they actually had little influence on school district decisions. And huge questions came up: should seven community members, from all walks of life and usually having no training in education, be the final authority in our public schools? Should a 7-member board have the ultimate power to affect thousands of lives? Shouldn't education reform start with reforming the school board system?

By Mark

Nearly every training and inservice repeats the same mantra: we must increase student learning. So we get shipped off to learn about a new strategy or a new tool or a new curriculum. We meet about goal setting and analyzing student data and impact on student learning. We are constantly doing extra in an effort to better the service we provide our students.

All that extra work, and it turns out there is something out there which has delivered a measurable impact on student learning, and it doesn't involve a special training or new curriculum.