Live Blogging - Math Adoption, Part Eleven
Carr - thanked Shauna Health and Michael Tolley and entire MAC.
I am in agreement with McLaren on solidness of both curriculum. Happy with either. Means a lot to people and reasonable people will disagree. Staff have followed "a legal and robust process." MAC's rationale is good with CCSS. Second what Martin-Morris about curriculum and quality of teaching.
Worth noting that prior to debate, 11 schools picked enVision and 4 picked MIF. (No one has asked those schools why they made the choices they did so I don't go for that argument.) She did note that while Highline uses MIF, Shoreline uses enVision.
Said that input wasn't high and needs context.
Talked about a study referenced during testimony and listened to guy who did study and that standards are more important than textual materials. (Tell that to parents.)
(I think she seems to be negating public input.)
Can't ignore costs as A&F chair. MIF is nearly double enVision. Significant amount of money. Schools that want to use MIF still can (sure, if they can afford it, c'mon Director Carr). There's your equity issue.
She believes they are equally good texts so she's going with the cheaper one.
Blanford - says he came into building thinking they were talking dual-adoption and now (seems) surprised that isn't the case. Had been waiting for materials about amendments. Information at last minute and prevents us from making good decisions. He said it's an easy decision. Came in with dual-adoption comments. Going to read them verbatim.
He said he had already voted against dual-adoption and now he will vote against MIF. Because of CC alignment (mobile students), principals (all in his region elementaries support MAC rec) and staff recs and community input.
(Okay, I'll bite, what happens to mobile students who move to a school with waivers?)
Blanford says that there is not the community support that the amendment authors says there is. He says that support for a different math adoption is a "small subset" of people. Math wars are still raging and many have preconceived notions and what is best for your child might not be best for all students in elementaries.
McLaren - community input, to this point, want to say that my experience over ten years now that parents that want explicit math instructions are a subset and want to see students well-served. I have found them to be experts. I humbled myself and started asking many questions. That's when my education started.
Appreciate that Carr agrees that both curriculums are good but for ELL students, my experience is input from people helping students with math is that MIF works best. Plenty of time with this and yet haven't seen much support for enVision from parents.
Highline has a much higher F/RL than Shoreline.
She apologized for the slowness and for surprise for directors who didn't know there was another amendment.
MAC members not aware that there was an online alignment guide for CCSS;wonders if that might have made a difference. CC is the minimum and MIF introduces subjects earlier.
Budget issue; we did not budget for the most expensive option and I deeply regret that and went for the middle. It is with reluctance that I consider what we do approve with MIF and what priorities will change and hard choices.
I am in agreement with McLaren on solidness of both curriculum. Happy with either. Means a lot to people and reasonable people will disagree. Staff have followed "a legal and robust process." MAC's rationale is good with CCSS. Second what Martin-Morris about curriculum and quality of teaching.
Worth noting that prior to debate, 11 schools picked enVision and 4 picked MIF. (No one has asked those schools why they made the choices they did so I don't go for that argument.) She did note that while Highline uses MIF, Shoreline uses enVision.
Said that input wasn't high and needs context.
Talked about a study referenced during testimony and listened to guy who did study and that standards are more important than textual materials. (Tell that to parents.)
(I think she seems to be negating public input.)
Can't ignore costs as A&F chair. MIF is nearly double enVision. Significant amount of money. Schools that want to use MIF still can (sure, if they can afford it, c'mon Director Carr). There's your equity issue.
She believes they are equally good texts so she's going with the cheaper one.
Blanford - says he came into building thinking they were talking dual-adoption and now (seems) surprised that isn't the case. Had been waiting for materials about amendments. Information at last minute and prevents us from making good decisions. He said it's an easy decision. Came in with dual-adoption comments. Going to read them verbatim.
He said he had already voted against dual-adoption and now he will vote against MIF. Because of CC alignment (mobile students), principals (all in his region elementaries support MAC rec) and staff recs and community input.
(Okay, I'll bite, what happens to mobile students who move to a school with waivers?)
Blanford says that there is not the community support that the amendment authors says there is. He says that support for a different math adoption is a "small subset" of people. Math wars are still raging and many have preconceived notions and what is best for your child might not be best for all students in elementaries.
McLaren - community input, to this point, want to say that my experience over ten years now that parents that want explicit math instructions are a subset and want to see students well-served. I have found them to be experts. I humbled myself and started asking many questions. That's when my education started.
Appreciate that Carr agrees that both curriculums are good but for ELL students, my experience is input from people helping students with math is that MIF works best. Plenty of time with this and yet haven't seen much support for enVision from parents.
Highline has a much higher F/RL than Shoreline.
She apologized for the slowness and for surprise for directors who didn't know there was another amendment.
MAC members not aware that there was an online alignment guide for CCSS;wonders if that might have made a difference. CC is the minimum and MIF introduces subjects earlier.
Budget issue; we did not budget for the most expensive option and I deeply regret that and went for the middle. It is with reluctance that I consider what we do approve with MIF and what priorities will change and hard choices.
Comments