What NBCTs Mean for Washington

3388757530_1a5b420fa0_o[1]
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.

Continue reading

Disappointment

By Tamara

 

In our district every week we have a late start day so that teachers and administration can participate in collaboration. Some weeks it’s by grade level, some by content area, and some, as whole staff. Quick disclaimer: as a whole I think my district has one of the more progressive and supportive approaches to collaboration in the state.  Recently as a whole staff we spent an hour essentially being told we didn’t really know how to teach. And here are some strategies to fix that. Keep in mind we have nine National Board Certified teachers on our staff. Nonetheless, our instructional coaches, principal, and area director, loaded us up with strategies and formative assessments (because, it was implied, we aren’t developing or making use of those) they used when they were in the classroom that would improve our student’s learning.

Now every one of the strategies presented were good and worthwhile in their own right. The issue was the tone in which they were presented: if you just did these things (because the strategies you are currently using are not increasing MAP/MSP scores sufficiently) students would be learning. No acknowledgement of what teachers are currently doing that is working, no celebration of success.

While the message to a seasoned staff that we have a lot to learn about how to teach is troubling enough, what really bothers me is the attitude that district leadership has about its teachers in light of the new teacher/principal evaluation system coming down the pike 

Both Mark and I have touched on the need for professional development of evaluators in our recent posts about the new teacher/principal evaluation system. I have been optimistic that administrators and teachers would approach this coming change by assuming positive intent from all parties. What I heard recently left me disheartened and worried. If my district is currently working on an assumption of deficit model, the transition to a growth continuum model (even with heavy PD) will be rocky at best, if possible at all.  

Charter Schools, Part 1

Images (1)By Tom

Eighty-eight percent. That's the proportion of freshmen at a large, urban university who had to take remedial courses in math or English before they could start on their regular college-level classes.

In other words, 88% of these college students were not “college ready.”

I learned about this state of affairs at a recent NCATE accreditation visit. I can’t name the specific school (or else NCATE would fire me from a job for which I’m not even paid) but it doesn’t really matter. This is typical in colleges that serve urban, high-needs populations. Their students routinely come from high school with something less than a high school education.

We can take some comfort in the fact that these students probably aren’t the best of the bunch. This was, after all, a second-tier state school. The best high school students in the area presumably went to private colleges or more prestigious public universities. And you’ll also be pleased to know that two years ago, ninety-four percent of the freshmen needed remedial classes. Progress! On the other hand, these are the students who are going to college. Reread that last sentence and think about it for a minute.

No matter where you stand on education reform, you can’t pretend this isn’t a problem. And you have to ask yourself two questions.

Continue reading

I Got Your Visitor’s Badge Right Here…

Hello-visitor-label-badge1By Kristin

This is what I'm talking about.  These excellent people, quaintly called "millionaires" in the Seattle Times article, as if a million will even buy you a house with a garage in some Seattle neighborhoods, these people who went to Olympia and heroically encouraged legislators to ask the rich to pay more in taxes.

The response from one conservative lobbyist?  "If you want to pay more, just write a check to the federal government."  I wonder what the millionaires thought about that.  Maybe something along the lines of, "Really?  How can you even find the brain cells to spare when tying your shoes in the morning?"  

Continue reading

The Bus Stops Here

School-Bus-Stop-Sign-K-2973By Rob

It is easy to criticize Washington’s commitment to education as illustrated by the budget cuts over the past few years. One idea that was recently floated was eliminating state funding for busing. Eliminating this funding will save approximately $220 million.

Washington State’s funding covers two-thirds of the cost to bus students to school. If eliminated local districts would have to bear the extra costs. Presumably some districts can afford this extra burden and others would require levies. However, an additional levy would be difficult to pass in many communities.

Eliminating bus routes may be necessary. This fact is alarming. First, a school bus loaded with 45 kids is an efficient way of bringing students to school. It is far more economically efficient (time and fuel) than individual cars or carpooling.

Second, how many schools are equipped to handle an increased number of students being dropped off by car? Presently the morning drop off at my school looks like an Ikea parking lot on a Saturday. We are not designed to handle the traffic we currently have.

Third, and most importantly, is safety.

“Each year approximately 800 school-aged children are killed in motor vehicle crashed during normal school travel hours. Of these 800 deaths, about 20 (2 percent) – 5 school bus passengers and 15 pedestrians – are school bus-related. The other 98 percent of the school aged deaths occur in other motor vehicles… or to pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists.” (The Relative Risks of School Travel: A National Perspective and Guidance for Local Community Risk Assessment– a study released by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences in June 2002).

On average there is one school bus fatality per 500 million vehicle miles traveled. School bus drivers are among the most professional and safety conscious individuals to serve our children. They make school buses one of the safest forms of transportation in the United States.

Every educator understands that schools must be a safe place for students. This begins at the bus stop. Cuts to education could put the futures of students at risk but cuts to transportation have the potential to put lives at risk. Let’s take this proposed cut off the table. It never should have been there in the first place.

The Four Point Scale

CRW_3531By 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:

Continue reading

Trash Talking the Washington Ed Budget

Picture 2

 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. 

Continue reading

Parent Conference Reflections

Images (1)By Tom

I just finished a week of parent-teacher conferences. And although it can be physically exhausting, it’s always one of my favorite times of the year. They always come at a time when I’m just starting to think about my class as a group of different individuals, and when I’m curious about how they got to be the way they are. As always, this year’s conferences were enlightening. It may surprise you to learn that I’m actually a pretty good listener, which is what I spend most of the conference doing. I’ll ask a few questions and go through a few pieces of student work, but mostly I listen to what parents tell me about their children. To paraphrase Yogi Berra, “You can hear a lot by just listening.”

Specifically:

-A lot of families are really struggling right now. You already knew that, and so did I, but after talking with some of them, it’s become far more real. People are unemployed, underemployed and badly-employed. I talked with a guy from Microsoft who’s been out of work for months; a former dentist from the Ukraine, who’s working at an entry-level, low-skill job; and several parents who work nights at the only jobs they can find. Most of us in education look at the current budget crises in Olympia and quickly decide that the answer is more taxes. But most of us in education don’t live nearly as close to the edge as some of the families we work with. Higher taxes might improve their children’s education, but they might also push them over that edge.

-I work with a lot of recent immigrants. Over half of my students were either born overseas or have parents that were. Many of these families come from places where child-rearing is a multi-generational endeavor. Adjusting to the American way of raising kids doesn’t always work out very well.

-Somewhat related to that, it was clear that at least one-third of my students are essentially ruling their households. Their parents seem to have lost control. For some of these families, it's partly because their children speak better English than anyone else in the house. For others, it's simply weak parenting. Either way, these are eight-year-olds, for crying out loud, and I can only imagine what the future holds. I actually had one man, with no sense of irony, ask me to tell his daughter to read on the weekends. I was about to ask him the same thing. I’m clinging to the belief that this is just a small-sample aberration; that there isn’t really a parenting crisis in this country. Please let me cling to that belief.

-My personal relationship with parent conferences has evolved. When I first started teaching, I was about ten years younger than any of the parents. I didn’t know what I was doing and I didn’t know what I was talking about. And they knew it. Then for awhile I was about the same age as the parents. I also began to know what I was talking about. Conferences became a lot more enjoyable. Now I’m about 20 years older than most of the parents. I’m roughly their parents’ age. Consequently, they treat me like a person from the previous generation. I’m still getting used to that.

-More than anything else, math confuses parents. Especially the fact that we seem to lack a consistent approach to teaching it. When third-grade math problems confuse grown-ups, something’s amiss. I’m at the point where I would agree to any math curriculum, even the worst math curriculum, as long as we stick with that curriculum for eat least thirty years. Honestly.

-One of my students, the oldest of five kids, hasn’t seen her dad since he went to Iraq nine months ago. He’s coming home in three weeks; the day before Veteran’s Day.

 Just thinking about that makes me smile and cry at the same time.

 

NCLB 2.012

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?

 

Teacher Evaluations: The Devil We Know v. the Devil We Don’t

By Tamara

 

First, thank you Rob for inspiring the title of this post in one of your recent comments.

Last weekend I attended OSPI/CSTP’s symposium on Teacher Principal Evaluations and Common Core Standards implementation. I walked away with the overall sense that most teachers want an evaluation system that validates their efforts and provides opportunities for professional growth. There was also an overall sense of anxiety about how these new evaluations will be implemented. Who is doing the evaluating? How and when are they being trained to evaluate? Will my evaluator be knowledgeable about my content area or grade level? Or about goals and standards for special populations (hello, I teach English Language Development-I can assure you my students are not going to be meeting standard as defined by Common Core any more than they are with EALRs and Power Standards now)?

The overwhelming theme in my small group session was the need for implementation to be approached with positive intent by all involved. No wants to feel trapped in a game of “Gotcha”. At the same time the only positive thing I heard about our current evaluation model was that it doesn’t involve student data.

That is the ultimate sticking point. Everyone seems to see new teacher and principal evaluation as a positive until we get to the part about using student performance data. I agree this issue needs to be approached with caution and careful consideration. But I also think, what is the ultimate outcome of our work supposed to produce? Is it not improved student performance/learning over time? How often do we bemoan that the public does not see teaching as a bona-fide profession? All other “professionals” are evaluated to some degree or other as to how their work directly impacts achieving specific outcomes. Granted children are complex packages of multiple variables that make their growth as learners difficult to quantify. But going through the National Board Certification process opened my eyes to the fact that learning (as defined by growth demonstrated over time) is absolutely quantifiable. And because student learning is the core of what we do, we should not shy away from having that data as a part of our evaluations.

But student data can not be used as a “one shot” snap shot of teachers’ performance. And it cannot be based on a single measure (like MSP, HSPE, pick your alphabet soup high stakes test) especially if we can all agree that student learning is defined and growth demonstrated over time. We talk about portfolio assessment being a more accurate measure of student progress than individual on demand performance assessments or tests. Why not a portfolio assessment model for teachers when it comes to the student data portion of our evaluation? That would bring us far closer to the balance of accountability and flexibility I hear so many of us pining for.