Category Archives: Education Policy

Connecting to the Conversation

Posted by Spencer Olmsted on February 4, 2015
Education Policy, Professional Development, Teacher Leadership

Recently I got better connected to conversations on public education in the United States. I got my Twitter account up and started following people talking about our K-12 schools. You might know how that story goes. I knew a few people I wanted to follow, and then this person connected to that person and before I knew it I found it was hard to keep up.

My entire Twitter experience is all about professional engagement. My head is spinning with all of the information, but I have very little chance to be grounded in those conversations here in my school where we can craft solutions, visions, and help shape the course of a student’s day, month, year, life. Follow Diane Ravitch’s blog alone and your head will probably spin too.

One of the people I follow who makes a great deal of sense to me is Pasi Sahlberg. I had the opportunity to be a part of a one-day “Finnish Lessons” seminar with him at UW a couple of years ago, and I saw him again last year at the Teaching and Learning Conference in Washington, DC. He makes a number of compelling arguments about how schools in the United States could revolutionize their approach to teaching and learning. There are many societal issues that are out of reach for schools to take on, so I’d like to focus on one that seems accessible and almost desperately necessary for teacher survival:

Meaningful
Time
for Collaboration.

Continue reading →

Washington State Democrats Oppose the Common Core

Posted by Tom White on January 25, 2015
Current Affairs, Education Policy

By Tom

Over the weekend, the Washington State Democratic Party passed a resolution opposing the Common Core State Standards. This is a pretty big deal, given that the primary opposition to the Common Core has been from Republicans. But while Republican opposition focuses mostly on federal intrusion into state matters, Democratic opposition is mostly a reaction to over-testing and big businesses who profit on that over-testing. Were Washington to drop the Common Core, it would be significant; it’s not only a solid blue state, it’s also the home state of the Gates Foundation, which has backed the new standards since the beginning.

This is a surprising development.

First of all, no matter what you think of the Common Core, you have to hand it to the people behind this resolution. They are an intrepid group. According to their Website, they’ve been working on this project for a year, lining up their ducks and putting the pieces into place. It’s a group of concerned parents, activist teachers and progressive Democrats and it doesn’t look like they’re going anywhere soon. We can probably expect anti-Common Core bills in both the House and the Senate in the very near future.

There’s still a long way to go, of course, before any change in policy. Anything can happen in the legislature. But there’s absolutely no way for anyone who supports the Common Core to see this as anything but bad news. It doesn’t bode well, especially since the Republicans have already come out in opposition to the Common Core and especially since Patty Murray, one of our US Senators, is trying to get the ball rolling on rewriting NCLB. She’s made it clear that she still supports yearly testing, and the only tests we have these days are the ones that are pegged to the Common Core.

As a teacher, I find this whole mess extremely frustrating. Like most districts, mine rolled out new curriculum in both math and ELA just before the Common Core was written. So, like everyone else, I’ve spent the last five years trying to figure out how to teach to the Common Core with materials that don’t quite fit. It’s been a struggle, but I’m getting there. I’ve also worked hard to get my students prepared for the SBAC, the Common Core-aligned test used in Washington State.

And quite frankly, I like these standards. They make sense. They might not be perfect, but they’re better than the ones we used to have and they’re sure better than what hasn’t been proposed by the people who want to get rid of the Common Core.

We can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Teachers – and students – have enough to work on without having to abandon everything we’ve done over the last five years and refocus on another set of standards. And while I admire the idealism and determination of the folks who got this resolution passed, I resent their ultimate goal.

We’ve adopted the Common Core. Let’s focus on implementing it.

TeachToLead Summit, Part Two: Us versus Them.

Posted by Mark Gardner on January 19, 2015
Education Policy, Teacher Leadership | TTLSummit

One theme that kept coming up again and again during my weekend at the Denver TeachToLead Summit earlier this month: Us versus Them.

The “us” was universally the same: teachers and teacher leaders.

The “them” varied depending on the project. In some cases they were unwilling principals, myopic departments of ed, or whoever “they” are that design and mandate clunky policy.

In our movie-plotline fantasies about leadership, we might envision the lone, passionate advocate standing up to “them,” converting “them,” and having waved the wand of leadership to magically change their minds, rather easily change the world.

The reality of Us versus Them is more complicated. And I believe that the first step in successful teacher leadership is the honest admission that this dichotomy does not actually exist.

Continue reading →

TeachToLead Summit – Denver: Part One… Washington is Different

Posted by Mark Gardner on January 13, 2015
Education Policy, Teacher Leadership | Denver, ED, leadership, TTLSummit

This past weekend I was surrounded by people ready to change their worlds. Teacher leaders from all over the nation converged in Denver for the regional Teach to Lead Summit hosted by the U.S. Dept. of Ed. and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

It was inspiring, enlightening, and exhausting (in a good way).

Much of it was also about forging connections, perhaps future partnerships. I had the opportunity to deliver a breakout session with CSTP’s Katie Taylor, and serve as a critical friend and consultant to teams of teachers from Colorado, Minnesota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, and other states who were seeking feedback on the teacher-leadership projects they were building back at home.

One thing I figured out quickly, though, was that Washington is unique.

Continue reading →

The Inslee Budget, Part 2: Compensation

Posted by Tom White on January 11, 2015
Education Policy, Elementary | CCSS, Inslee budget

By Tom

The other night I was sitting in my living room, on my recliner, preparing lesson plans for the next day. (That’s how I roll, by the way; one day at a time.) As I was working on my math lesson, I looked in my Math Expressions Teachers’ Guide and noticed that the next day was all about finding the area of a triangle. A bell went off in my mind; I remembered something from some Common Core workshop sometime in the last couple of years. So I check the CCSS website and sure enough, area of a triangle is no longer a fourth grade thing. Sixth graders get to do it.

Now, a smarter man would have simply shrugged it off, turned the page to the next lesson and planned accordingly. But I’m not smart. I thought to myself, “I wonder if there’s something in the fourth grade standards that isn’t covered by our textbook. And if there is, maybe I should teach a lesson on that.”

There was. Fourth graders are supposed to “Recognize angle measure as additive; when an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. They’re supposed to know how to solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram in real world and mathematical problems.”

In other words, my students are supposed to know that you can take a ninety degree angle and divide it into a sixty and a thirty degree angle. Or you can take a ninety degree angle and combine it with two 45-degree angles to make a 180-degree angle. Stuff like that.

So I went online to see if there were any resources available. There are. Actually there’s some great stuff from New York State’s “Engage NY” site. So I found myself some resources, came up with a plan for my students, and wrote it up.

Then I checked the time. Continue reading →

Teaching Canned Curriculum

Posted by Hope Teague-Bowling on January 7, 2015
Current Affairs, Education Policy, Teacher Leadership

WANTED: Highly-qualified teacher to implement district purchased curriculum. Must attend trainings. Must follow pacing guide. Must give students consumables. Must move quickly. Must ignore reteaching. Must trust the model. Must regularly update online assessment collection tool. Must share results with building data team. Must not question the process.

I had completely forgotten the existence of this wanted ad when I clicked on the email attachment with excitement, nervous about the courses I would teach in the fall. I’d requested Sophomores and AP Language. Four sections of Sophomores glowed on the screen. That meant I’d have roughly 120 fifteen year olds to guide through the themes of Sophomore year. I love 10th graders because they sort of know how to play high school. They think they are better than the freshmen. They consistently under or over-estimate how much time it actually takes to accomplish an academic task.

They think they know everything.

This is the year that many high school students transition from thinking about themselves to thinking about others. Throughout the nation, tenth graders are learning to “think globally”. Sophomore year a student could read texts like Siddhartha, Things Fall Apart, and Macbeth. They learn about the cellular makeup of the world in Biology, discover that Geometry is simply argumentative writing with numbers, and explore how civilizations rose and fell through World History.

Following the lead of others, my own district adopted Springboard, a College Board developed, Common Core aligned, “culturally responsive” curriculum that prepares students for rigorous, Advanced Placement courses. I was certainly excited about these qualities when I attended the district workshop last year. Nonetheless, after five months of implementation what I’ve found is that this curriculum—much like most outsourced programming—is problematic. Instead of concentrating this post on an analysis of the issues, I want to emphasize what teaching Springboard curriculum has illuminated for me.

My classroom isn’t more rigorous, engaged, or common core aligned because of Springboard—those qualities already existed. What Springboard has done is remind me that teachers still need the flexibility and autonomy to modify any curriculum to meet the needs of the diverse students in their classrooms.

Furthermore, the following is more true now than ever:

Students need their classroom teachers to pre-assess their knowledge.
Students need their classroom teachers to develop engaging hooks.
Students need their classroom teachers to differentiate learning tasks.
Students need their classroom teachers to scaffold complex readings.
Students need their classroom teachers to create a safe place for all learners.
Students need their classroom teachers to not be “good soldiers” rotely teaching curriculum developed by someone many states away from their school.

Above all,

Students need their classroom teachers to advocate for them when policies don’t.

TPEP Is Killing My Principal

Posted by Jan Kragen on January 5, 2015
Education Policy

I have a really great principal.

I’m not just saying that because I have a sense of loyalty to the school and the staff or because I like him and his Star Trek suit. (Which I do.)

I’ve lived in multiple states and taught at multiple schools. I’ve encountered many principals from mediocre to strange to bad to great. He really is one of the good guys.

Our elementary school is on tribal land. About half of our students are on free or reduced lunch. Our principal maintains a strong, positive relationship with the tribe and the community. He builds coalitions with a terrific PTSA, with volunteers and coordinators, with classified and certified staff. If we are all rowing our canoe in the same direction, he is the one calling out the rhythm.

In the past my principal has come by my classroom nearly every day, often twice a day. He comes in, sits down and soaks in a portion of a lesson, interacting with the students, asking questions, interjecting his own comments. When it comes time to write an evaluation of my teaching, he has a wealth of direct observation to draw on—he knows what my classroom looks like and how I interact with my students.

Well, in the past he had that.

This year nearly half the teachers in the school are on comprehensive evaluations—or, as I’ve dubbed them, the “Bataan Death March Version of TPEP.”

My principal has all the same job expectations he’s had in previous years, but this year the time he is spending on evaluations has quadrupled. (At least quadrupled.)

I have watched the energy drain out of him this year.

He still comes to my room, occasionally, once in a while, for a quick pop in and pop out. I know he wants to stay longer, but he doesn’t have the time. He’s off and running to the next room.

I know how driven he is to do a stellar job, but something has to give. If he must do evaluations and they take so much more of his time than they did in the past, how does that affect the rest of his job? What gets short shrift or what gets eliminated because there just aren’t enough hours in the day?

Principal burn-out is a national issue. Take a look at the article Churn: The High Cost of Principal Turnover. Two of the primary causes driving principals to leave their jobs are

excessive workload and managerial tasks that prevent more meaningful instructional leadership efforts and
personal costs—long hours and the physical and psychological toll.

I know my principal would enjoy more meaningful instructional leadership efforts than ensuring all the TPEP evidence is collected and all the TPEP paperwork is complete for all the teachers on the comprehensive evaluation form this year. Obviously, that’s another thing he would love to do. If he had time.

How could we make evaluations take less time? We have a handful of National Board Certified Teachers on staff at our school. Wouldn’t it make sense to exempt all the NBCTs at our school—all the NBCTs in the state—from the comprehensive level of evaluations for the term of their National Board Certification? After all, NBCTs have to undergo a rigorous certification process. It’s an objective review at a national level, far more extensive and impersonal than any local administrator could hope to manage. TPEP is, in many ways, redundant for the NBCTs.

If NBCTs were exempt from the comprehensive evaluations, my principal could do the focused form with all the NBCTs in the school for the ten years of their certification period. It would take those comprehensive evaluations off his schedule for a decade.

Principals in general might get more supportive of teachers who wanted to pursue National Board Certification since their certification would mean shorter evaluation forms in the future and reduced work load for the principal!

Having NBCTs on the focused form for the length of their certification would be an added incentive for teachers too, giving teachers another reason to do the difficult work of pursuing National Board Certification.

Meanwhile, there is no solution in sight.

The legislature created the more rigorous teacher evaluation system to make sure all the teachers in the state met high standards. Wouldn’t it be ironic if, in their effort to create more perfect teachers, they destroyed their principals?

New Year’s Resolutions for Teachers

Posted by Mark Gardner on December 29, 2014
Current Affairs, Education, Education Policy | hacking, happiness, resolutions

By Christine Zenino from Chicago, US [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Last December, David B. Cohen, an accomplished teacher-leader and blogger posted his five resolutions for teachers (and he re-tweeted that post recently, which got me started here this morning). This past year, I’ve had the chance to hear from some great thinkers and leaders, so that has me thinking about what we teachers ought to consider for our 2015 Resolutions. These are very “teacher-centric” as opposed to directly considering our students… but if we are our best as professionals and as a system, who benefits is clear.

Things for educators to consider in 2015:

1. Let’s change the way we talk about teaching. At the Spring NBCT Teacher Leadership Conference in Sun Mountain, Washington, our kickoff speaker, 2013 National Teacher of the Year and Zillah High School science teacher Jeff Charbonneau, got me thinking about this one. Too often, he pointed out, we teachers minimize the work that we do when we talk to other professionals. Too often, the conversation focuses on the “getting to play with kids all day” and “those three months [weeks] off for summer break,” or devolves into a gripe session about testing (see the next resolutions).

Continue reading →

The Inslee Budget Part 1: Class Size

Posted by Tom White on December 26, 2014
Education Policy, Elementary

By Tom

Despite being three months pregnant, my wife agreed to hike with me to the bottom of the Grand Canyon and back. The last three miles were brutal, what with the pregnancy and all, and the only way I could keep her going was the promise of ice cream from the little stand near the trail head. When we finally finished the hike, she headed to our cabin; telling me not to bother following her without a scoop of strawberry.

So I waited in line. When it was finally my turn, the ice cream guy rolled down the security screen and told me they were closed. “It’s five o’clock,” he explained. Nothing I could say would change his mind, so I headed back for what became a tense evening.

That was almost 20 years ago, but the ice cream guy is starting to look a lot like our governor. I’m talking about the part in his budget where he proposes class size reductions (down to 17 students!) for kindergarten through third grade.

I teach fourth grade.

Apparently he thinks it’s fine to cram 29 students in a fourth grade classroom, as long as there’s only about half that number in the younger grades. And he’s not the only one. Most class size reduction programs around the country focus on K-3.

Why? Research, of course. Specifically, a twenty-five year old study out of Tennessee that found positive gains in student achievement when class size went down. What most people forget to notice, though, is that the study only looked at K-3 students. They didn’t involve anyone older. At least not in that study. Another study (which you don’t often hear about) was conducted in 2000 by the National Center for Education Statistics and looked at K-12 data from 20 different states. These guys found that lower class size had a positive effect of students across grade levels. To wit:

“The clearest result with respect to correlates of achievement is that average achievement scores are higher in schools with smaller class sizes. This result, obtained from structural equation modeling using both state assessment data and NAEP adjustments for between-state variance in achievement, is consistent across grade levels.”

Then there’s me. I’ve taught second, third and fourth grade for over thirty years, and I’m here to tell you that nothing structural happens to a kid on her ninth birthday which helps her better navigate a crowded classroom. What I can tell you is that when my class size creeps upwards of thirty, several things happen.

First of all, classroom management becomes an overwhelming priority. I have to come down hard on the smallest of infractions to keep things under control. I can do it – trust me – but sometimes it’s not pretty.

Secondly, with more kids I relate mostly to the class as a whole, not to the students as individuals. When I plan lessons, I think of the whole class or small subgroups and differentiate (or not) accordingly. With a class size closer to twenty, it’s much easier – and more natural – to think of individual students.

And finally, I simply don’t have the time to spend giving personal feedback to each student. My students just completed a major writing project before winter break. There was literally no way I could sit down with 29 students and spend even three minutes explaining to each child how I scored their writing. The best I could do was fill out a thorough rubric, attach it to the writing, and pass it back.

I’m glad to see that Kindergarteners through third graders might get lower class sizes. But I’m not convinced that it should stop there.

We should all get ice cream.

Stories From School

Practice Meets Policy

Category Archives: Education Policy

Connecting to the Conversation

Washington State Democrats Oppose the Common Core

TeachToLead Summit, Part Two: Us versus Them.

TeachToLead Summit – Denver: Part One… Washington is Different

The Inslee Budget, Part 2: Compensation

Teaching Canned Curriculum

TPEP Is Killing My Principal

New Year’s Resolutions for Teachers

The Inslee Budget Part 1: Class Size