Duncan Gives No Hint about WA Waiver in Interview
In more in the long line of stuff Arne says comes this interview with Education Week. But, NCLB waivers ARE brought up and, in specific, Washington State. But Duncan is both direct and coy.
And he pledged to get one long-awaited initiative done that could also have a far-reaching impact: an overhaul of regulations that govern teacher-preparation programs. "They will get done," he said. "[They are] very important."
So that was the direct message and the one that the Washington legislature chose to ignore.
It's the teacher-evaluation piece of those waivers—tying evaluations to student test scores—that is tripping up a lot of states, and may cost at least one (Washington state) its waiver.
"We've tried to provide some real flexibility," Mr. Duncan said. "I'm interested in finishing at the right point. The path to get there is going to be very different. Some states are two or three years ahead of others, and are in great shape. Some are in the middle and some are further behind.
"We've been pretty agnostic on these things," he said, "and tried to give people the flexibility to figure out what the right answer is in their local context. There's no right or wrong answer."
Agnostic? Okay but also when you carry a big stick and wave it around, that's not exactly clean hands.
On Washington State:
Mr. Duncan was asked whether Washington state, which is in hot water because its timelines do not match those set by the department, can save its waiver.
"Washington state made some commitments," Mr. Duncan said. "In any agreement, you agree to things on both sides in good faith. ... When we both make an agreement together we both have to live up to our commitments."
Despite having had a phone call with Washington state officials on its waiver just days before the interview, Mr. Duncan said he didn't know the specifics about their waiver predicament.
But he also said: "It takes a little bit more time to get it right; we're finding that. If you're headed in the right direction, that's something we absolutely want to have the conversation about. If the state decides they don't want to do something, that's different."
So there's these phone calls back and forth and still no answer? I'm being to think that Duncan is quite worried about backlash if suddenly Washington state (and possibly others) have 95% of their schools declared "failing." No one will buy that and NCLB will look more toothless than it already does.
And he pledged to get one long-awaited initiative done that could also have a far-reaching impact: an overhaul of regulations that govern teacher-preparation programs. "They will get done," he said. "[They are] very important."
So that was the direct message and the one that the Washington legislature chose to ignore.
It's the teacher-evaluation piece of those waivers—tying evaluations to student test scores—that is tripping up a lot of states, and may cost at least one (Washington state) its waiver.
"We've tried to provide some real flexibility," Mr. Duncan said. "I'm interested in finishing at the right point. The path to get there is going to be very different. Some states are two or three years ahead of others, and are in great shape. Some are in the middle and some are further behind.
"We've been pretty agnostic on these things," he said, "and tried to give people the flexibility to figure out what the right answer is in their local context. There's no right or wrong answer."
Agnostic? Okay but also when you carry a big stick and wave it around, that's not exactly clean hands.
On Washington State:
Mr. Duncan was asked whether Washington state, which is in hot water because its timelines do not match those set by the department, can save its waiver.
"Washington state made some commitments," Mr. Duncan said. "In any agreement, you agree to things on both sides in good faith. ... When we both make an agreement together we both have to live up to our commitments."
Despite having had a phone call with Washington state officials on its waiver just days before the interview, Mr. Duncan said he didn't know the specifics about their waiver predicament.
But he also said: "It takes a little bit more time to get it right; we're finding that. If you're headed in the right direction, that's something we absolutely want to have the conversation about. If the state decides they don't want to do something, that's different."
So there's these phone calls back and forth and still no answer? I'm being to think that Duncan is quite worried about backlash if suddenly Washington state (and possibly others) have 95% of their schools declared "failing." No one will buy that and NCLB will look more toothless than it already does.
Comments
We will see whether or not Duncan will support more effective stratigies over control of public ed. policy.
If school districts are forced to use outside tutors- which are less effective- Duncan is responsible.
This is an issue about control.
(Boy, I wish there were a way to have Google spider my opinion and post it far and wide for the Ed community. Bet there would be applause nationwide.) :-)
SavvyVoter
Parent
Read "Measuring Up - What Educational Testing Really Tells Us" by Daniel Koretz. Kind of wordy, but it helps you understand all the factors that make up test scores, and how tests and scores are misused.
CT
The pdf from OSPI has a many-page spreadsheet of exactly which waivers are being negated and what it means (in bureaucratic-speak). Let's read and discuss in the coming days!
CCA
with what you asked me to do, so I didn't do it". Doing so reduces my merit bonus and will eventually get me fired.
So to get PAID I do what I'm expected to do and leave the philosophy to others!
I also disagree with a comment that outside tutors are less effective.
That's a purely subjective comment and differs from my experience.
I hope the sistricts will now stop skimming money and money will be available to struggling students to get the outside support the schools should be providing.
--Michael
When my boss set goals I have better at least attempted to perform them by review time.
You see most of the teachers are relics of the 20th century unable to perform for our 21st century students. I've been told many students are accessing subject matter experts via the internet during classes because the instructors don't have a clue.
They are far from professionals.
Don't take me as a teacher basher I could never without meds deal with 30-40 middle school students, but the truth is it time to clean house.
--Michael
OK, could badly performing schools be closed and turned over to charters? That is your question. The answer, technically, is yes. Any school that receives Title I dollars that has not made Adequate Yearly Progress --- that is the term from No Child Left Behind that refers to the requisite growth in performance each school and district must make --- for six consecutive years would be required to "restructure." Under restructuring a school can be closed entirely, turned into a charter school, turned over to a private school management organization/company, or be taken over and run by OSPI. This information I know off the top of my head. However, I can't immediately remember what entity makes the decision about the restructuring option --- the district, OSPI, State Board? I'll have to get back to you unless one of the other readers knows and answers before I do my research.
--- swk
Astonishingly disrespectful. Where and what is your data? I'm sorry you feel this way but it has not been my experience in the least.
Hey "Michael"...get a clue: If you're going to blog, especially on education issues, you might want to write grammatically, or at a minimum, learn to utilize the spell check function on your software.
Even if your content remains as obtuse and loathsome as ever, you'll at least garner a modicum of respect from most readers for being able to communicate clearly.