Category Archives: Education Policy

The Girl Who Wasn’t Here

Posted by on
Education Policy, Life in the Classroom, Parent Involvment, Social Issues

Note: I wrote this post six or seven years ago (can’t remember now) and it was the first post for which I was called to the principal’s office. It was one of those ominous Friday evening Outlook “meeting requests” to meet with admin on Monday morning before school. The only note in the request: “blog post.” I called the principal at home to see if I needed to bring a union rep.

When you read it, you’ll likely see that it isn’t particularly controversial, which was what at first confused me about my reprimand. Still relatively early in my career, and very new to blogging, I made the rounds apologizing to administrators and ultimately pulled the post down from Stories from School even though it had already garnered several comments and reposts…and even though I had modified enough details of the kids’ stories to protect the innocent while still emphasizing the impact of the policy. Their concern was that a parent could read the post, read through the modifications, and still see themselves and their student, then be upset.

A recent conversation with a teacher at Denver’s TTLSummit reminded me of this post, as this teacher was struggling with building-level policies that she wanted to see changed for the benefit of students.

A few weeks ago, she and her family moved into my district. It was perfect timing to join my class, as we were just starting to read the next novel and she could step right in with us.

Two days after she arrived, she was absent.

No big deal, I thought.  Then, she proceeded to miss two more days.

Continue reading →

TeachToLead Summit – Denver: Part One… Washington is Different

Posted by on
Education Policy, Teacher Leadership | , , ,

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 on
Education Policy, Elementary | ,

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 on
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 on
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 on
Current Affairs, Education, Education Policy | , ,
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 on
Education Policy, Elementary

imagesBy 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.

 

 

My Test Anxiety

Posted by on
Assessment, Education Policy

A variety of assessments given to students throughout the year serve to inform teachers on how their students are progressing. The typical pre-test post-test cycle is an important measure of learning. Formative assessments, informally gathered during the course of a lesson or unit help direct instruction. Teachers and students would be a little lost without this feedback loop.

Administrators also gain insight into the success of their program(s) through the careful examination of student data. Results may be used to allocate resources or identify areas that fall outside the norms – pointing towards highly effective instruction or areas that need improvement.

I don’t think that anyone can argue against the value of assessment generally. That being said, there are many people who wonder about the effective utilization of standardized, system-level assessment in schools today. Are we getting an appropriate return on the investment of time and energy (on the part of students, teachers, and administrators)? How much should districts and states spend to gather data on student achievement? How can we minimize any negative impacts that come with high-stress, high-stakes tests?

The NEA recently published a list of awards called apples and onions. Apples are for great players in public education and onions are for not so great players. They gave an onion to “High-Stakes Testing Zealots.” While Arne Duncan says that these tests are “sucking the oxygen out of the room” and NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia says “all the evidence that can be gathered shows that it is corrupting what it means to teach and what it means to learn,” still the battle rages on (NEA Today).

I’ve been wondering about the impact the Smarter Balanced tests will have on my students since I took a pilot test last spring. My sense was that it would be extremely rigorous and time consuming for my students. The Oregonian recently published an article projecting that about 60% of Oregon students will not pass these tests this spring. What will this data tell us? How will we use it to improve instruction?

It is a worthy goal to give students rigorous tests that evaluate their ability to demonstrate conceptual understanding and strategic thinking, analyze information, and make compelling arguments. But do we want to give this type of test to every student every year?

The costs are high in all regards to this type of census-based testing. When I read that Finland uses a sample-based no-stakes national test as a means of informing policy makers I was struck by its simplicity (This article summarizes the point, but the book Finnish Lessons is a fantastic read.). Why test everyone everywhere when a sample population will provide rich feedback to policy makers and administrators? Why make the tests high stakes – for students, teachers, administrators, schools, districts, and states? Yes – we’re actually doing this. Do we really need to gather such a massive amount of data to make informed decisions? How do I justify that need to my students?

The fear that drives this kind of accountability contrasts the notion that schools, districts, and states already take responsibility for the quality of education in our schools. In any event, the use of these kinds of tests to prove otherwise is an abuse of their purpose. These tests are designed to assess student performance – not the performance of the system at large.

Gratitude

Posted by on
Education Policy, Life in the Classroom

By Tom

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, I want to take a few minutes to express my gratitude to the people who make it possible for me to do the best job in the world:

Parents: I can’t thank parents enough for supporting what I do in the classroom by doing what they do at home. All I have to do is run off homework and send it home. The parents have to structure a time and place for my students to do it. And then check it so my students can redo it. Neatly. And then make sure it gets back into a backpack. All this while trying to cook dinner after an exhausting day at work.

Custodians: I just finished a science unit with my fourth graders called “Land and Water.” Do the math. There was sand, soil, clay and mud on my classroom floor for six weeks. Yet every morning it was clean again.

Para-educators: The lady who works in my class, Miss Natalya, was once a math professor in Russia. Now she works on our para team, doing all the other stuff that makes it possible for us to focus on teaching; working one-on-one with the neediest students, supervising recess and lunch, and doing crossing duty.

Office Staff: I was on the hiring team for our current office manager. When she came in for her interview, she asked what the job entailed. “You get interrupted for a living,” I replied, and it’s true. These people take care of all the logistics and paperwork for an entire school, when they’re not dispensing Adderall, Band-Aids and ice packs or supervising the kids who stop by to “visit with the principal.”

School Administrators: My principal spends his long days conducting focused and comprehensive evaluations, talking to upset parents, conducting focused and comprehensive evaluations, setting up the lunch tables, conducting focused and comprehensive evaluations, supervising the lunchroom, conducting focused and comprehensive evaluations, facilitating meetings, conducting focused and comprehensive evaluations, and supervising the bus lines. Yet he’s always smiling.

District Administrators: There’s a lot going on over at the administration building. There’s curriculum to order, trainings to run, human resources to manage and budgets to balance. My district is blessed with some incredible talent at the district level; they push us to rethink how we go about our jobs and support us while we learn.

Our Association: There’s a reason why we have planning time, dental care, health insurance, collaboration time, teacher-led professional development, National Board bonuses and representation when have a conflict with our administrators. It’s because we have a union.

Educational Service Districts: I never really understood the weird little “ESDs” wedged into the bureaucratic niche between the state and district. But I’ve recently done some work with the Puget Sound ESD and I’ve come to appreciate their work in supporting professional development and advocating for the most marginalized families in our school communities.

The Elected People: School Boards, state legislators and US lawmakers all have a say in what and how I teach. We all have the right – and responsibility – to question what they do, but not one of us can doubt their intentions. Ultimately, the only thing they really want is the only thing we really want: student learning.

Higher Ed: Teachers don’t train themselves; colleges and universities do, and I’ve had the privilege over the years to work with a lot of the people who work in those colleges. I’ve always been impressed with their dedication and focus on training the next generation of teachers.

And finally, CSTP: There’s a whole lot of non-profit organizations focused on education, but my favorite by far is The Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession. Their name says it all; they focus on promoting teacher leadership and amplifying the teacher voice on educational policy. And they sponsor this blog!

Your turn! Who did I miss? Who else needs to be thanked?

Initiative 1351 Passes. Now what?

Posted by on
Education Policy, Elementary

By Tom

It took a while for the results to trickle in, but after nearly a week it’s become clear that the voters have decided to lower class sizes in Washington. I voted yes, with all the passion as a 1988 vote for Michael Dukakis.

Why the lack of enthusiasm? Three things: implementation, allocation and expectations.

Implementation: Now that the initiative passed, none of us can expect our classes to suddenly shrink. I certainly don’t. Class sizes aren’t going to get any smaller unless and until there’s someplace to put those extra kids. And in my school, there simply isn’t. Every one of our classrooms is being used, along with the two portables that were brought in over the summer. And it’s the same all over our district. If I understand the Initiative correctly, there are workarounds for schools that don’t have room to create new classrooms; it involves hiring extra teachers until the average class size goes down. It sounds to me like my district will be hiring a fleet of learning support teachers, which is a good thing; as long as we’re careful about how it plays out. This is definitely something all of us need to pay attention to and get involved in. It could be a great thing for our schools or it could be a mess.

Allocation: 1351 is going to be really expensive, which is a problem, since lawmakers don’t run the state like a restaurant. “I hope you enjoyed your lower class sizes, citizens; here’s the bill. I’ll be your cashier when you’re ready.” What they do instead is move money around so that as few voters as possible notice. My guess is that the people who will end up noticing the most will be teachers. I worry about my salary, my benefits and my National Board bonus. I also worry about the state’s ability to pay for other important education programs, specifically those that involve college readiness.

Expectations: Once we get these smaller classes – or whatever workaround we end up with – all eyes are going to focus on outcomes. And I don’t think they’ll be waiting for the class of 2028. In fact, as a fourth grade teacher I’m looking forward to 2016, when I get a class of kids who all came out of 17-student third grade classrooms, all of whom had the benefit of more teacher attention. And my expectations will increase each year. But that’s nothing compared to what “outsiders” will be looking for. And by “outsiders” I probably mean the Seattle Times, who were relentless in their opposition to 1351, both in and out of their editorial page. I don’t seriously doubt that we’ll have the data to show that the Initiative led to student improvement, but I have no doubt that the doubters will be looking really hard to prove that it didn’t. And that worries me.

So I guess it’s time to celebrate. But briefly, because there’s a lot of work to be done to make sure this turns out well.