By Tom

I was sitting at home the other day, perusing the Spokesman-Review, and I came across an interesting editorial, criticizing Randy Dorn's recent proposal to make the state math test more reasonable. You can read it yourself, but here's the money quote:

"The state will only institute math and science requirements after it’s been demonstrated that a higher percentage can pass. This is like watching high jump practice and then deciding where to place the bar so that most competitors will clear it. When the consistent message is that the state will call off accountability, then it’s impossible to gauge students’ best efforts."

When I read this, I thought to myself, "Isn't that exactly how a high jump competition is supposed to run?" I mean, like most Americans, I only catch snippets of high jumping every four years, so I'm no expert, but that seems like the way I remember it. So I looked it up, and found that:

"In a competition, the bar is initially set at a relatively low height, and is moved upward in set increments … The competitor who clears the highest jump is declared the winner."

That sounds right. You set the bar low and then raise it until only one jumper is left. But unlike a high jump event, our goal in education is not to designate a single winner. Despite the fact that you hear it all the time, high jump competitions are a really bad metaphor for educational standards and assessments. So I decided to find a better one.

Continue reading →

 By Tracey
 

Continue reading →

 By Mark

I'm sitting here waiting for the turkey to reach 165F so I can load it into the car and rush it across town to the three-dozen waiting family members at our multi-bird feast this evening.

In these few moments, as hokey and cliche as it may seem, it is worth taking a few moments to reflect on what I appreciate about this business I'm in.

First, I am thankful to live in a state where with each new policy decision, teachers' voices are louder and more respected by policymakers. This is due completely to the diligent efforts of the teacher-leaders at CSTP (The nonprofit Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession, sponsor of this site) and Washington's OSPI (Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction) who proactively seek ways for teacher voices to be heard at the decision-making table–with CSTP being the force which helps remind OSPI of the need for teacher voices.

Second and even more important, I am thankful for those fellow teachers who have made their voices heard at those policy tables and in front of the legislature. 

Last, I am thankful for the thanks I get as an educator. Just last week, as the culmination of a tough unit on poetry with my Sophomores, students memorized and recited poems aloud as part of my poetry curriculum, with the assessment being the non-verbal channels of communication–tone of voice, power of expression, and stage presence. I sat in awe as sixty fifteen- and sixteen-year olds tackled voices from Keats to Komunyakaa and Sexton to Sanchez. They worked so hard, and they truly embodied the words in a way which gave me chills and proved to me that they really got it. I am thankful that I am in a job that can warm my heart and give me chills.

Enjoy the season, SFS readers, and thanks for checking in now and again.

By Tom

It looks like Arne Duncan decided to soften his approach to turning around "failing schools." Up until just recently, states that wanted to compete for Race to the Top funds had to take an aggressive approach to fixing their lowest performing schools. They had to either replace the principal and half the teachers, reopen the school as a charter school or simply close the school down.

But with the release of the new guidelines states are permitted to use a "softer approach" and still remain eligible to compete for the RTTT grants.

What's the softer approach? Providing professional development to the faculty and changes to the curriculum. Wow. Imagine that.

And who can we thank for this enlightened approach? Ironically, the charter schools themselves. Much to Duncan's surprise, they showed little interest in taking over these failing schools. Apparently they would much prefer to start from scratch than to take over a school in peril.

This is good news for Washington. It will make it easier for our state, which outlaws charter schools and doesn't have a particularly aggressive model for taking over failing schools, to compete for the funds.

And we really need the money. 

by Brian
 

David Horsey of the Seattle PI has weighed in with the best opinion piece about Superintendent Randy Dorn's proposal to modify the math graduation requirement that I have read so far.

We are having parent conferences at my school this week, and yesterday I heard the parents of one of my better Algebra students tell me how frustrated they have been with the WASL. Their daughter is a bright, highly motivated freshman who seems to like my class and be comfortable with the curriculum. But her parents told me she did not meet standard in math on the WASL in 4th grade or 8th grade, and she has a lot of anxiety about taking the state test (whatever it will be) next year. It makes me angry to read the Seattle Times editorial board opposing Dorn's proposal: "It sends a disheartening message to students who want to excel and who understand that the route to higher education — whether college or trade school — is by meeting high standards." What do they think the message has been for the last ten years for the 50% of our students who have not met the math standard? Inspiring?? What makes them think that the WASL has been a reasonable measure of what a high school graduate should know? Not a college-bound student, just a high school graduate ready to go to work. It's time to answer that basic question.

I made an appointment with my Representative today to talk to him about where the bar should be set for graduation. I sent him Horsey's article too. I encourage you to read it, and talk to your Representative too. Our students deserve a realistic standard.

by Brian

Back in September I wrote a post called How Much Math Does a Man Need?  I questioned the wisdom of requiring every student to take and pass Algebra, Geometry, and Algebra 2 in order to graduate from high school, beginning with this year's freshmen.  Today state superintendent Randy Dorn wrote a guest editorial in the Seattle Times, and posted on OSPI's website his proposal for changing the math and science graduation requirements.  He proposes using a two tiered model, already in use in Massachusetts, to provide students in Washington the opportunity to graduate with either a ranking of "proficient" or "basic" math skills.  Proficient will be the goal for all students, but under this proposal the student with basic skills will continue to take additional math courses, and still be able to graduate.

I think the superintendent has taken a huge step toward setting the bar for high school graduation at a realistic level.  For far too long we have been telling too many students that they were below standard in math, when the problem was not their skill level, but how hard the WASL was. We were giving the same test to students in Algebra 2 and Pre-Algebra.  It didn't matter what course they were taking; they all got the same WASL.  Now they will take end-of-course exams over the math they have just learned, and they will be judged to be at a proficient or basic level.  That seems a lot more fair.

I'm still not convinced that everyone needs to take Geometry, but this would be a vast improvement. (And thank goodness Algebra 2 has disappeared from the required list).

I applaud the Superintendent's honest and realistic recommendations, and I hope the Legislature will consider them carefully.

By Tom

A recent story brought my attention to a brand new issue. Teachers are now selling their lesson plans to each other on-line. Some of them are making some pretty good money at it, including an English teacher from California, who brought in an extra $36,000 by selling his plans.

It's an interesting story, to which I have several reactions:

Continue reading →

By Guest Blogger Sarah 

What really sticks with me is Governor Gregoire saying that Legislators need teacher mentors to educate them about the important issues of education.  What a terrific idea. But honestly, I think a lot about the barriers and not always about the possibilities and I need to get over that.  I think about people’s lives already being full with teaching, parenting, trying to eat right and get enough sleep – being a “Legislative Mentor” is probably the furthest thing from our minds, realistically, but I wonder- would the efforts put in now make a difference down the road?  Would becoming legislatively active and aware and influential, create a school system in Washington state that would ensure our students were prepared for the world they are going to, and maybe even lighten our day to day load by having smart, teacher influenced, educational policy?

Continue reading →