By Tom
There's a bill moving quickly through the Washington State Senate that could produce some interesting changes in the way teachers are evaluated. As part of a new project called Sounding Board, The Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession, the host of this blog, asked a group of National Board Certified Teachers a series of questions regarding Senate Bill 6696. The results are out and some of them are pretty interesting.
By Tom
By the time my third graders graduate from high school, this state will finally have to pay the full price for their education.
At least that's one way to look at the recent ruling by King County Judge John Erlick on a landmark lawsuit brought by a consortium of parents, local associations, district superintendents and teachers against the state of Washington to make them fully fund education. Glossary in hand, Judge Erilick looked at what the state is currently doing and reread the State Constitution where it says that "it is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders." He sided with the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit provided the backdrop for legislation passed last year in which lawmakers redefined basic education and pledged to fully fund it by 2018. Erlick recognized this effort, along with the current fiscal crises in which the state finds itself. Nevertheless, he ordered the state to figure out what it costs to educate Washington State's children and then pay it.
But he didn't say when.
So it's unclear what'll happen next. The state could appeal and hope for a different ruling; one that will get them off the hook. Judge Erlick could acknowledge reality and let the state take its time figuring out how to pay for basic education as it's been redefined. Or he could impose a swifter timeline, ignoring the fact that the state currently can't even pay for basic education under the old definition.
Or somebody really smart could come along, take over Olympia, and figure out how this state should pay for the education it wants with the money it doesn't have.
Call me a cynic, but my money's on 2018. Most of the lawmakers in Olympia today will be long gone by then.
Along with my third graders.
By Tom
Last week the Seattle Times ran an editorial supporting differential pay for math and science teachers. The reasoning goes like this: college graduates who major in math or science can make more money in the private sector than in education. If we offer them a bonus to teach, we'll get more math and science teachers. More math and science teachers will lead to better math and science education.
The editorial went on to chastise WEA President Mary Lindquist for opposing this idea, pointing out that the teachers' union doesn't understand the free market system, and prefers to cling to the ideology "that everyone in the group is paid under the same rules. No favoritism." the private sector apparently embraces the free market system in which hard-to-find human resources command a premium, while dime-a-dozen people command…dimes.
By Tom
Several years ago my principal and I spent a lunch hour on a home visit to see one of my students. He had been absent for a week, after telling us that he was going to be homeschooled.
This boy had come to me after a previous bout of homeschooling, essentially two years behind his peers, but was just beginning to make steady progress.
We were not happy to hear that he would be homeschooled, and feared for the worse. He lived with a single mom who lacked basic parenting skills and we were legitimately concerned that with her as his teacher he could essentially become a third grade drop-out. So we set out to change her mind.
By Tom
There came a point in my life when it became clear that I wasn't going to play centerfield for the Baltimore Orioles. It was time to choose a different, perhaps more realistic, career. I considered many: ophthalmologist, milkman, veterinarian, funeral director, even psychologist. But as a college student I took a part-time job as a lifeguard. As such, I was also required to teach swimming lessons. Although I quickly lost interest in guarding lives (too boring) I fell in love with teaching. I enjoyed the kids, the mental challenge of planning and executing lessons and I loved watching my hard work produce tangible and immediate results.
The fact that most of the hot girls on campus seemed to be majoring in elementary education sealed the deal. I was going to be a grade school teacher.
I've been teaching third grade for nearly 26 years now, and I still love doing what I do. But the fact of the matter is, I'm rare. Less than twenty percent of Washington's elementary teachers are male. It's actually not something I dwell on very often; as teachers we spend the vast majority of our time as the sole adult in a room of children. You stand out whether you're male or female. But at a recent workshop on reading instruction I looked around and counted two other guys in a room filled with over a hundred women.
So instead of learning how to better teach reading, I sat there wondering: Why are there so few men teaching little kids? Should there be more? How can we get more? When's lunch?
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 Tom
Besides having the most functional name in the publishing industry, US News and World Report also ranks high schools. This year Bellevue's International School, one of our area high schools, made their top ten. Three other schools in the Eastside suburbs made the top 100: International Community School in Kirkland, Bellevue High School, and Newport High School, also in Bellevue. Let me first of all offer my most sincere congratulations to the students and staff of these schools. I have heard wonderful things about each of these institutions even before the list came out.
So what makes these schools so great? Is it their staff? Their students? Their mascots? And more importantly, what can other schools learn from their success?
By Tom
(Editor's Note: The Quality Education Council has backed off a proposal to examine transferring local collective bargaining to the state level. On Tuesday, QEC members voted to remove the bargaining amendment from the discussion portion of their House Bill 2261 required draft report. Sen. Eric Oemig, who voted to approve the amendment at a previous meeting, introduced the motion to remove the amendment. Sen. McAuliffe (absent from the last meeting) was a strong second to the motion and worked with Oemig to remove the item.)
Just when we thought things couldn't get bleaker, Washington State's Quality Education Council, charged with the unenviable task of fleshing out HB 2261, recently passed an amendment to their preliminary draft document to "Examine transferring local collective bargaining to the state, including all matters pertaining to compensation, benefits and employment terms and conditions."
For crying out loud.
I understand the need to look everywhere and anywhere to save money, but do we really think the school system will run more efficiently without local collective bargaining?
Let's imagine what that might look like.
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.
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.
