tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post339575000188172771..comments2024-03-28T23:38:22.511-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: How to Talk About Education ReformMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-84898289731113196262010-08-09T09:23:17.321-07:002010-08-09T09:23:17.321-07:00Sahila,
I'm not affiliated with anyone - just...Sahila,<br /><br />I'm not affiliated with anyone - just a concerned SE Seattle parent, wondering if I'll need to shell out for private school for a decent education for my toddlers.<br /><br />As a veteran, however, I find your characterization of military members as "cannon fodder" deeply offensive, the implication that a concern for physical fitness of recruits is brainwashing laughable, and in any case entirely orthogonal to this discussion.<br /><br />As for the Ravitch link, the most damaging thing to the cause of better funding for public education is the idea that additional money will simply be squandered with no gain in student performance. The criticism of NCLB and Race to the Top as not achieving anything is a pretty good argument that the educational establishment <i>doesn't know</i> how to deploy additional resources to improve outcomes.Martin H. Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16359973670269148738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-84755696784425610392010-08-08T16:35:12.218-07:002010-08-08T16:35:12.218-07:00Raj Chetty also calculated that 'good' kin...Raj Chetty also calculated that 'good' kindergarten teachers should make $320,000 per year. Almost as much as Seattle's Superintendent. If that's statistically valid than I think we're in trouble.<br /><br />http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/29/kindergarten-teaching-aff_n_663830.htmlkprugmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02126184111625382040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-76579155718107102642010-08-07T09:59:16.898-07:002010-08-07T09:59:16.898-07:00The idea of "frontier of your knowledge"...The idea of "frontier of your knowledge" is an equally ridiculous concept. The teacher should offer lessons that have a range of accessibility using universal design. Your proposal is grossly segregationist on many fronts, as have most of your previous posts and educational therorizing. The student should take that "lesson" to the "frontier" if that's something he believes in. The problem with the "grade level" notion is that it reduces the education to the points on which grade level has been defined. Then, education is reduced to those points. The marginalization you speak of is unavoidable in your world. (and notably, you benefit from it)<br /><br />If you believe that a grade level can be defined, then it can be measured. If it can be measured and is important, then it should be the basis of evalution. How not? The two ideas are inextricably linked.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30332535510331342682010-08-05T11:35:58.114-07:002010-08-05T11:35:58.114-07:00In response to Anonymous at 9:31 PM on 8/4/10 (by ...In response to Anonymous at 9:31 PM on 8/4/10 (by the way, please select a nom de plume - anonymous posts may be deleted).<br /><br />"<i>(T)he whole notion of 'grade level' is a problem. Those who believe in that simlistic notion should be quite happy to have MAP, or MSP, or any other test, be the measure of worth for a teacher.</i>"<br /><br />These two suppositions are completely unrelated. Those who would believe the concept of grade level constitutes a belief that the MAP can be used to measure a teacher's worth should be quite happy to stick their head in a bucket of manure.<br /><br />No, but seriously, the concept of grade level does not equate to confidence in the MAP to measure anything about teachers' work and I really resent the jump.<br /><br />The idea of grade level has a proper use as do the assessments. When these tools are used properly and properly interpreted, they are beneficial. When they are misused or misinterpreted they are harmful. The tool is neither good nor bad; that depends on the person who wields it.<br /><br />As for the concept of "grade level" in the first place, I have no problem with it. Part of the reason I don't is because I don't think there is any shame associated with working below grade level nor any honor in working beyond grade level. Grade level represents a normal range for development and expectations but there are a lot of people outside the normal range. So what? The function of grade level, like so many other measures applied to people, is not to find answers but to spark questions.<br /><br />So if a student is working below grade level it is a signal that the teacher - and others responsible for the student's development - should determine if there is something that isn't working right for that student. If everything is working right, but the student is just progressing at a slower than normal pace, that's okay.<br /><br />Children are expected to start walking around a range of ages. Some children start walking some time sooner, some start walking some time in the normal range, and some start walking some time after the normal range. So what? It's not a point of honor or shame and, so long as they all start walking, who cares when they started?<br /><br />If, however, a child is late walking it should trigger an examination to determine if there is a physiological problem.<br /><br />Students who are working beyond grade level should be identified so they are given work that will engage them so they will remain motivated learners.<br /><br />I think that if the anonymous commenter had read the rest of what I wrote, they would have seen that we share the same perspective about misusing the test to assess teacher quality.<br /><br />Anonymous and I both oppose the narrowing of education to meet a test. I will go further. I oppose the narrowing of education to meet a written curriculum. We both want students to have the opportunity to maximize their potential. I think that happens when students get lessons at the frontier of their knowledge and skills - wherever that frontier may happen to be. I think Anonymous would agree.<br /><br />I do think that teacher performance reviews, as currently conducted, are inadequate. I don't think they measure the things that really matter - the sort of things that anonymous wrote of. They could be much more meaningful and they could be a tool to put the focus of teachers' work where it belongs.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-7378035390955764332010-08-05T11:09:25.418-07:002010-08-05T11:09:25.418-07:00Maureen, you are right. STAR is one of the only ra...Maureen, you are right. STAR is one of the only randomized studies out there, and it was primarily designed to evaluate class size. This new analysis was presented at a professional meeting and summarized in the NY Times but it has not yet been fully published nor subjected to peer review. I read the NY Times article and am intrigued, but I'd want to read the full study before I comment on it. <br /><br />FWIW, I teach a class called Medical Literature Evaluation to graduate students at UW, so although I'm not in education, I have some skills that translate into evaluating the education literature, such that it is. This is something of a tangent, but when I see education folks say that class size doesn't matter, it shows that they don't know their own literature or how to interpret it. I searched for well-done studies about class size last year after my daughter's first grade class had 28 kids in it and the leadership at our school flat out said class size doesn't matter, numerous studies show that, etc. However, class size did matter in STAR, but just as importantly, that comparison was class sizes of 13-17 versus 22-26. No randomized class size study has looked at 28+ per class versus some smaller number. Even if STAR had shown no effect, it would be inappropriate to extrapolate to larger class sizes that were not studied. What they should have told me instead of "class size doesn't matter" is that "we don't know if classes this large have a negative impact because it hasn't been systematically evaluated." <br /><br />I guess coming from a profession that embraces data and strives to use it intelligently, it is very hard to sit by and watch what is going on in education, particularly the high-stakes testing tied to teacher pay. As in my class size example, what we have going on now is an attempt to tie pay to MAP scores when the validity of that approach has not been systematically evaluated and proven effective.Lorihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07777580098975083499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-78659004427361032762010-08-05T10:52:02.029-07:002010-08-05T10:52:02.029-07:00But, and this is critical, the definition of good ...<i>But, and this is critical, the definition of good class couldn't be attributed specifically to a teacher. The classes themselves could be different in some unidentifiable way</i><br /><br />I think <b>zb</b> makes a good point that is often disregarded in studies of academic results. Children are generally not randomly assigned to classes/teachers. In many schools, parents who have a clue have ways of making sure their kid is assigned to a 'good teacher' (however they define that.) As a result, more of the kids with involved families can end up assigned to the same class. It is generally not possible to separtae the impact of a perceived 'good teacher' from the impact of a 'good cohort.'<br /><br />The Tennessee experiment, <a href="http://www.heros-inc.org/star.htm" rel="nofollow"> Project Star,</a> referenced in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/business/economy/28leonhardt.html" rel="nofollow"> NYTimes article </a> linked to here recently is one of the few I have heard of that randomly assigned the kids to classes. IIRC that study was designed to measure the impact of class size not teacher quality. The teacher quality result seems to have been pulled out recently-out of the remaining variation in kids performance. Has anyone read this lit closely? Do you think the new teacher quality result is valid?Maureenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18444916440000921599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-79909628849008825112010-08-05T10:48:03.264-07:002010-08-05T10:48:03.264-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Maureenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18444916440000921599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30846494306643955262010-08-05T08:04:44.665-07:002010-08-05T08:04:44.665-07:00Of course all parents know that they will never, e...Of course all parents know that they will never, ever get anything close to maximizing their potential. But, some teachers get a lot closer than others. And the thing is, getting to the potential is a highly individualized affair... something the MAP never is. EG. Developing the skills to be a great plumber may the maximum potential achievement for one student, and that will never be reflected on any test.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-27697527007387147932010-08-05T07:18:32.255-07:002010-08-05T07:18:32.255-07:00Although the Chetty work is not yet published, it&...Although the Chetty work is not yet published, it's a pretty innovative study. If it turns out to be statistically valid, it's a step away from using testing as an endpoint in education research, and instead relying on long term outcomes. It's an economics paper so it still uses money (earnings) a it's endpoint. But it doesn't use performance on the test as the endpoint of success.<br /><br />I do agree that there is a fundamental conflict in parents seeking the maximum learning for their individual child, a responsibility that teachers don't want to be measured against. A more reasonable stand is an environment in which everyone can learn.zbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13205346985598789513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-47139085714784391972010-08-05T00:48:25.223-07:002010-08-05T00:48:25.223-07:00I suppose the same statistics that were used in al...I suppose the same statistics that were used in all the other positive studies were also used in this, as yet, unpublished report, no doubt published on the internet by a textbook salesman or his astronaut cousin. <br /><br />With the current state of low test scores and student achievement perhaps it is time we changed our methods of doing research. <br /><br />There is too much being written about in education that either could never be proven or will ever work in all classrooms. The public has stopped believing the ed departments at Ann Arbor, UW, and especially the U. of Chicago (not to mention the Dana Center, CMC, and the NCTM). <br /><br />What was leadership doing filming a documentary about the Sasquatch. The NCTM leadership are no better than Wiccans.<br /><br />My draft pick is Singapore. Everyday Math will always be Little League. The creation, evaluation, adoption, sale, and marketing of Singapore is an entirely different model than what has been used to sell American Standardized textbooks. And the difference is painfully obvious. Put some glasses on!<br /><br /><br />Change your tune, the public doesn't believe you. I've done enough analysis of bad research to know most of US education is in serious trouble.kprugmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02126184111625382040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-43955213228225864352010-08-04T21:31:45.999-07:002010-08-04T21:31:45.999-07:00Charlie's premise... identify and address 3 gr...Charlie's premise... identify and address 3 groups of students: those below, at, or above grade level is way off the mark. Most decidedly not brilliant as Melissa posits. Why are those the 3 key groups of students? They aren't. First of all, the whole notion of "grade level" is a problem. Those who believe in that simlistic notion should be quite happy to have MAP, or MSP, or any other test, be the measure of worth for a teacher. And, happy to have that as the reward criteria for teachers too. It follows from their premise. After all, don't those tests identify grade level standards and expectations... as well as the students achieving them? And with tests given 4 times a year (3 MAPs, and 1 MSP)... that should be more than enough evidence to demonstrate the movement of students through the expectations. We could consider average trajectories of those in common circumstances: race, poverty, number of days in same school, special need status etc. And then look at any given individual or teacher and determine how they have performed against the expected (or mean) trajectory of the student given the factors. All quite do-able.<br /><br /><br />The problem with all that is fundamentally the notion of grade level expecations, and the narrowing of the education to meet the test. The real question is did the student learn anything from the teacher? Is he/she maximizing his/her potential as a citizen? Unfortunately, there is no legal or contractual obligation for the teacher to maximize anybody's learning. And schools (teachers and administrators) shrink at the idea that potential maximizing is part of their job. As parents and taxpayers though, that is really what we seek. Nor do those tests give us that information. The other thing we want to know. Did the teacher create a classroom where everyone could learn?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-89068530094796437252010-08-04T21:04:48.536-07:002010-08-04T21:04:48.536-07:00PS: Here's the slides to the Kindergarten clas...PS: Here's the slides to the Kindergarten class effect study:<br /><br />http://obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/chetty/STAR_slides.pdf<br /><br />(It's not published yet, but was presented at a conference, and the author has made the slides of his presentation available).zbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13205346985598789513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-47742184236890826622010-08-04T21:02:25.246-07:002010-08-04T21:02:25.246-07:00"This NYT Article claims that a move from the..."This NYT Article claims that a move from the 50th percentile to the 60th is typical for a kindergartner with a good teacher."<br /><br />The article (and the paper it cites to) saying that the achievement effects of having a good Kindergarten class persists into adult earnings. A good Kindergarten class was defined as one that showed a higher percentile increase in test scores than the average in the school, over the course of the year. That increase could have been as high as 10%, but there was a distribution of these percents, with both below and above average increases in percentile. The authors used these variances to divide classes into "good" or "bad" because the variances in class performance over the year were greater than expected by chance (given statistical assumptions). They were then able to show that the effect of being in a "good" K class persisted into adult hood (pretty amazing). <br /><br />But, and this is critical, the definition of good class couldn't be attributed specifically to a teacher. The classes themselves could be different in some unidentifiable way (though the authors were able to show that SES, for example, didn't vary significantly among the classes). So it is not appropriate to say that a kindergartner with a good teacher moved up 10% points (since the definition of good teacher was that the kindergartner was in a class that moved up 10% -- it's a circular definition).zbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13205346985598789513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-57607264846804115442010-08-04T06:51:46.689-07:002010-08-04T06:51:46.689-07:00I told you Dan - Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids are no...I told you Dan - Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids are not that large a leap over to Seattle. This blog got somebody's attention. Nice hunt - I'm out of shells....kprugmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02126184111625382040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-41651174050078324252010-08-04T00:13:33.149-07:002010-08-04T00:13:33.149-07:00Re the myth that our kids are victims, plagued by ...Re the myth that our kids are victims, plagued by hordes of bad teachers:<br /><br /><a href="http://sahilachangebringer.blogspot.com/2010/08/if-you-repeat-lie-often-enough.html" rel="nofollow">http://sahilachangebringer.blogspot.com/2010/08/if-you-repeat-lie-often-enough.html</a>Sahilahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11610179287237833742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-41381020372026316602010-08-03T23:56:52.499-07:002010-08-03T23:56:52.499-07:00Mr Duke... with whom are you affiliated?
Charlie ...Mr Duke... with whom are you affiliated?<br /><br />Charlie might never say or write a word presuming ill intent on the part of the Alliance, Gates/Broad et al, but I will....<br /><br />Those who believe/state the 'reform' agenda pushed by these people (and the Alliance's clone Our Schools Coalition, and the other Broad/Gates-funded astro- turf groups League of Education and Stand for Children) are a sincere attempt to improve the education system, either have not done their own research or are lying to us...<br /><br />There is plenty of evidence available now proving that these 'reform' efforts are not benign at all...<br /><br /><a href="http://sahilachangebringer.blogspot.com/2010/08/occupation-of-us-public-schools-kids-as.html" rel="nofollow">http://sahilachangebringer.blogspot.com/2010/08/occupation-of-us-public-schools-kids-as.html</a><br /><br /><a href="http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/5/protests" rel="nofollow">http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/5/protests</a><br /><br />and here's an interesting read that relates to the propandising efforts of the Alliance et al at this time of teacher and union bashing:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_deception_of_real-world_inception_20100729/" rel="nofollow">http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_deception_of_real-world_inception_20100729/</a><br />"The Deception of Real-World Inception<br /><br />By David Sirota<br /><br />For all of its “Matrix”-like convolutions and “Alice in Wonderland” allusions, the new film “Inception” adds something significant to the ancient ruminations about reality’s authenticity—something profoundly relevant to this epoch of confusion. In the movie’s tale of corporate espionage, we are asked to ponder this moment’s most disturbing epistemological questions: Namely, how are ideas deposited in people’s minds, and how incurable are those ideas when they are wrong?<br /><br />Many old sci-fi stories, like politics and advertising of the past, subscribed to the “Clockwork Orange” theory that says blatantly propagandistic repetition is the best way to pound concepts into the human brain. But as “Inception’s” main character, Cobb, posits, the “most resilient parasite” of all is an idea that individuals are subtly led to think they discovered on their own.<br /><br />This argument’s real-world application was previously outlined by Cal State Fullerton’s Nancy Snow, who wrote in 2004 that today’s most pervasive and effective propaganda is the kind that is “least noticeable” and consequently “convinces people they are not being manipulated.” The flip side is also true: When an idea is obviously propaganda, it loses credibility. Indeed, in the same way the subconscious of “Inception’s” characters eviscerate known invaders, we are reflexively hostile to ideas when we know they come from agenda-wielding intruders...."Sahilahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11610179287237833742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-65930454622747619242010-08-03T22:17:15.928-07:002010-08-03T22:17:15.928-07:00I absolutely see value in standardized tests when ...I absolutely see value in standardized tests when they are used properly and their results are appropriately understood.<br /><br />Likewise, I have never said or written a word in which I presumed ill-intent on the part of the Alliance, the Gates Foundation, the Obama administration or anyone else who wants to improve public education. I just think that they make too many statement before asking enough questions.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-70653832870502294152010-08-03T17:28:01.915-07:002010-08-03T17:28:01.915-07:00NMAP final report
Foundations for Success
I refer...NMAP final report<br /><a href="http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/index.html" rel="nofollow">Foundations for Success</a><br /><br />I refer to paragraph 27 on page xxiii and the recommendation on page 22.<br /><br />There was a huge volume of evidence to reject the Everyday Math adoption on May 30, 2007 but the Board does not use evidence in making decisions. Vote to adopt was 6-0 as Irene Stewart was not present. Current Board member DeBell voted yes.<br /><br />High School adoption of "Discovering" on May 6, 2009 was an equally if not worse choice. That was a 4-3 approval with Sundquist, Maier, Carr, and Chow preferring to support TEAM MGJ's recommendation rather than using evidence.<br /><br />Harium has now replaced Cheryl Chow as the 4th supporter of TEAM MGJ nonsense. He ignored all the evidence in approving the NTN contract for Cleveland twice (once on Feb 3 and once on April 7). <br /><br />Note all 7 current Director's voted for NWEA/MAP testing.dan dempseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15536720661510933983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-20609954541763877872010-08-03T16:43:22.109-07:002010-08-03T16:43:22.109-07:00Mr. Mas,
I'm reassured by many of your commen...Mr. Mas,<br /><br />I'm reassured by many of your comments. I'm glad we agree that measuring teacher effectiveness and rewarding them accordingly is a worthwhile enterprise.<br /><br />I'm also glad to see that you (if I understand you correctly) think that standardized testing, properly applied, has a significant role to play in this.<br /><br />You would know better than I how SPS is (mis)using test results. I reacted to your blanket criticism of Ed Reform -- a movement * associate with the Obama administration and the Gates Foundation as sincere efforts to make schools work better.Martin H. Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16359973670269148738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-42637594156497683552010-08-03T14:43:03.692-07:002010-08-03T14:43:03.692-07:00NMAP is the National Mathematics Advisory Panel an...NMAP is the National Mathematics Advisory Panel and is not related to NWEA or the MAP. I believe Dan is referring to the federal NMAP report. Based on the report's recommendations, Everyday Math is simply a poor choice.<br /><br />The NWEA MAP test is used by students all over the US, a good number of which probably use Everyday Math.SPS momhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07868844486562389924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-81472814068199544682010-08-03T14:33:58.820-07:002010-08-03T14:33:58.820-07:00Mr. Duke, I like the idea of the MAP. It is a wond...Mr. Duke, I like the idea of the MAP. It is a wonderful tool if used properly for its intended purpose. Trouble comes when education managers use the MAP - or other assessments - improperly.<br /><br />The WASL is probably the most misused assessment of all. Intended as a measure of effectiveness of schools and districts, individual student results were not intended to be reliable - and they aren't. The test was intended as a tool to hold schools and districts accountable - not students. The technical notes for the test specifically caution against using it to determine individual student placement - yet that's how Seattle Public Schools is using it. It is a criterion-referenced test and cannot be used to rank students, but that's how the District is using it. It's inexcusable.<br /><br />The MAP was purchased for use as a formative assessment. As such, its proper use is to help tailor instruction for individual students.MAP scores are intended to be indicative, not definitive. The MAP is much better suited to sparking questions than providing answers.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-89773440873235007262010-08-03T13:17:36.454-07:002010-08-03T13:17:36.454-07:00Dan, can you clarify from your post at 730AM today...Dan, can you clarify from your post at 730AM today who NMAP is? Did you mean NWEA, the organization that created and sells MAP?<br /><br />If so, this is one of the most outrageous things that I've read in a while. If NWEA, the maker of MAP and on whose Board MGH sits, says that MAP should not be used to evaluate students who are taught with Everyday Math (and other spiraling curricula), then we need to either 1) change the math program or 2) not use MAP to evaluate math proficiency. <br /><br />Am I the only one (in addition to Dan) to get really angered by this?Lorihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07777580098975083499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-57205284821979515762010-08-03T11:59:30.358-07:002010-08-03T11:59:30.358-07:00Mr. Mas,
Thanks for the response.
I'm not an...Mr. Mas,<br /><br />Thanks for the response.<br /><br />I'm not an ed professional, nor even a particularly close follower, but I offered up some examples of how you could use test scores by correcting for SES.<br /><br />Most of the ed reform stuff I see seeks to compare the rate of improvement rather than the absolute score, which of course strips out a fair amount of the student-dependent stuff.Martin H. Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16359973670269148738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-29173779525377403922010-08-03T07:50:02.160-07:002010-08-03T07:50:02.160-07:00Troubling Questions about EDM and MAP
Dear Direc...Troubling Questions about EDM and MAP<br /><br /><br />Dear Director DeBell, 8-3-2010<br /><br />I posted the Troubling Questions about EDM and MAP at comments 20, 21, 22 here:<br /><br />http://saveseattleschools.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-to-talk-about-education-reform.html<br /><br />This approval of MAP testing involved no investigation into the likelihood of whether this expenditure was advisable.<br /><br />This is an incredible waste of $450,000 as this product can not possibly perform as advertised.<br /><br />Please recognize that your math program needs to be fixed.<br /><b><i><br />It is pointless to buy a poor measuring tool and think that purchase will lead to improvement.<br /><br />$450,000 for what?<br /></i></b><br />--- Dandan dempseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15536720661510933983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-70358478139447726342010-08-03T07:37:55.574-07:002010-08-03T07:37:55.574-07:00Board members asked only one question.
That quest...Board members asked only one question.<br /><br />That question was is the "Sole Source Justification" form filled out. <b><i> No one noticed that the justifications provided on that form make little sense.</i></b><br /><br />Surely there are other providers that can measure student performance as inaccurately as the MAP in the SPS situation ... but ... just maybe .. the others cannot be used to BEAT UP on teachers as well.<br /><br />Really read the Promotion / Non Promotion Policies ... so how is MAP going to measure mastery of particular standards successfully?<br /><br />So how are the interventions needed to help students gain mastery of standards going to be specified by MAP? The are NOT.<br /><br />So much for Everyday Math, the foundation of our vertically aligned k-12 math program, or MAP testing helping students obtain mastery of WA Math Standards.<br /><br /><b><i>How can 7 directors be unable to ask even one question on a plan this bad?</i></b><br /><br />Are our Directors afraid or ignorant about what is happening?<br /><br /> Surely they noticed that the only reason for the Superintendent’s bonuses was to lay the groundwork for Performance Management of teachers. See teachers the Superintendent got $5,280 for fulfilling 25% of her own goals, you do not want to miss out on this gravy train … sign here.<br /><br />The Directors appear to be silent accomplices in Reform atrocities.dan dempseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15536720661510933983noreply@blogger.com