Monday, January 28, 2013

Supporting the MAP Boycott

From the Solidarity with Garfield Facebook page:

GET READY! THIS WEDNESDAY, January 30 is a national call/phone/fax day to tell Seattle Public Schools that you, your organization and your union stand with the Garfield test boycotters. Send your message to Seattle Schools Superintendant José Banda:

Phone: (206) 252-0180

Fax: (206) 252-0209

Email: superintendent@seattleschools.org

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

What? No Twitter Bomb? WSDWG

Mark Ahlness said...

@seapubschools Bombs away...

Anonymous said...

Six computers crashed today while my kids tested.

So glad we spend $10 per kid per year on this test!!

Over the years we have had it, every sps computer could have been replaced twice over.

Kate

Melissa Westbrook said...

I did Tweet this hours ago.

Mark Ahlness said...

Melissa, I think the "twitter bomb" comment was more along the lines of what? - no link to slam the Super on Twitter, too?!

The twitter account @seapubschools is the only official SPS Twitter account I'm aware of. It follows a handful and is followed by over 3K.

If people all over the country on Jan 30 let their feelings about MAP be known, adding @seapubschools to their tweets, it will be felt in HQ, trust me.

Eric M said...

DeBell let it be known during his Saturday meeting that he'd already received more than a thousand emails on the topic.

Anonymous said...

How much does all this testing cost WA state taxpayers? We need a study to total up the economic costs of tests, teacher time, computer costs, and lost student time. The taxpayers need to know the cost of testing and need to have a say on whether they pay for it, or not.

Tim Eyman is against for profit red light cameras being forced on the public without the public's say. I think he would feel the same way about the testing industry ripping off the taxpayers of Washington.

-Nonamenocredit

Melissa Westbrook said...

What's kind of fascinating is the Washington Policy Center actually thinks the teachers are right and the principals should be deciding this stuff.

To whit:

Top-down mandatory reforms don’t work. The Central Planners fail again. Teachers are rightly resisting MAP because they know test results will be used in part to determine their own pay and promotions, regardless of the very real challenges they face in the classroom.

"Professional teachers should be evaluated by their on-site managers - principals - who know their qualities directly. This is one of the secrets to the persistent success of private education."

(But I'll have to post a separate thread on Liv Finne's latest - and hilarious - post. While Lynne Varner is humorless at least Finne provides some comic relief.)

CT said...

They assume, of course, that principals are qualified to evaluate teachers. Unfortunately they base their opinions on false assumptions. Go figure. There's nothing funnier - or more insulting - than to have a principal who has never taught, dress you down for your teaching because you weren't standing up front transmitting all the information students needed to know and you didn't have the objectives (that the students can't even read) written up front on the board where the students are supposed to be gazing with "intent learning rapture".
Forgive me while I down my 2nd glass of wine to quell my choking.

Anonymous said...

Following up with CT, it's a balance of how much the principal rating factors in. Yes, I've had some like me so much I was, for all practical purposes, never really evaluated. Some peers have written their own evals at the request of principals/AP's (seriously). I also had the extreme math reform principal write so much fiction into one review I almost left teaching. Never mind my partial support of a functional data piece (like MAP, just not MAP) because after I was run out the HSPE scores came in showing my students scored about 10% higher than my reform-peers (who are good teachers, by the way).

Melissa - keep in mind that while principal input is always valid (I was in industry enough to not have an issue with it despite my experience with a useless twit), part of why we need something like MAP and student input as well is for balance. A principal should be able to overrule ho-hum scores when they acknowledge a teacher who takes on challenging students - especially as some teachers worried about test scores are already acting snotty to troublesome students so they will show up less than the 80% threshhold for their score to count.

**teacher not so keen on principal as master teacher**

mirmac1 said...

Okay, started tweeting : )

Melissa Westbrook said...

We need multiple measures to evaluate everyone. Teacher, I agree, with that. There are principals that ARE the educational leaders at their schools and ARE fully-qualified but there are others I wouldn't want evaluating anyone.

Mark Ahlness said...

About those pesky teacher evaluations...

I taught 29 years in SPS.

Years I worked for a fully qualified educational leader ... 10.5

I taught 4 years recently without receiving any evaluation.

Any teacher's evaluation is irrelevant if the input is not valid - i.e, based on student MAP scores and a principal evaluation based on the Danielson model.