tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post5184865623169495514..comments2024-03-28T02:21:17.452-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Waivers ListMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-65292869825853028092018-12-31T14:34:32.016-08:002018-12-31T14:34:32.016-08:00There are a number of problematic issues with this...There are a number of problematic issues with this waivers list, and specifically the use of Amplify Science.<br /><br />First off, the waivers list reveals that science curriculum waivers have been granted to 19 schools (including what looks like all the District's middle schools) and to all use the same curricular materials -- Amplify Science. <br /><br />That amounts to a de facto curriculum adoption. <br /><br />Yet, Amplify Science never came before the School Board for approval or even review. <br /><br />Secondly, if Amplify Science is under consideration for the current Science curriculum adoption that is in progress, this gives the Amplify product and vendor an unfair advantage over other materials and vendors that may not have had the benefit of this waiver and de facto pilot process. <br /><br />Rightly or wrongly, this looks like another end-run around the Board; an attempt to quietly bring in and embed a new product before the official adoption process (as prescribed by Board policy) has even been conducted, and to give one product an unfair advantage. <br /><br />Another problematic element of this issue is that there have been many complaints about Amplify’s Science curriculum, last year when I was still on the Board, and since: Not enough hands-on experiential components, lack of engaging material, too reliant on impersonal online direction (rather than interaction with an actual teacher)-- adding up to a lost year in science for some students.<br /><br />And then there’s the provenance of the product and its vendor. Originally owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp Company, Amplify was sold in 2015 to a group of investors, and Joel Klein and Larry Berger. (https://newscorp.com/2015/09/30/news-corp-completes-sale-of-amplify-digital-education-businesses/ & https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/10/07/news-corp-sells-amplify-to-joel-klein.html) <br /><br />When the product was first brought to the Seattle School District, it was an assessment -- Amplify mCLASS Beacon -- which was controversial and flawed. Various teachers and principals complained about it. Parents said that the test results were being kept from them. The district’s own survey revealed the mixed responses from school staff about the product. (https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/14-15agendas/061715agenda/20150617_Amplify_Survey.pdf)<br /><br />Another issue -- Amplify’s assessment product was first purchased by the District without Board approval. The price of the Amplify test just happened to be just under the $250,000 threshold required for Board approval. I believe it was something like $249,000 (I have a copy of the contract somewhere). Despite all the issues, staff sought to expand the use of the Amplify tests throughout the district. So about a year later, they were obligated to bring the contract renewal to the Board because the cost to expand it had surpassed the $250,000 mark. Based on the negative responses from schools, the Board voted it down. <br /><br />That was the last time those of us on the Board had heard of Amplify until it was revealed to the Curriculum & Instruction Policy Committee in mid-2017 or so that it had re-emerged as a Science curriculum that was being used by nearly 20 schools via the waiver process. (Directors were duly alarmed by this belated news.) <br /><br />This looks like an abuse of the waiver process, and intentionally or not, these actions come across an effort to bypass Board oversight (and policy) and public scrutiny.<br /><br />Directors were right to be alarmed and demand oversight. The Superintendent should also step in and require her staff to follow policy. And this may impact the current science curriculum adoption.<br /><br />-- Sue Peters<br />suep.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17281578510716234624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-87985618750852153642018-12-19T08:29:53.586-08:002018-12-19T08:29:53.586-08:00There is a foundation of knowledge that is still p...There is a foundation of knowledge that is still perfectly up to date even from 1995. Really, it isn't until graduate school - think about that - graduate school(!), that you need to update your scientific knowledge base on a yearly basis. I think you are drinking the kool-aid of publishers to think that 1995 science is too out of date for middle schoolers. The Amplify curriculum provides little kits - composed mostly of pipecleaners - that they are using to teach biology and chemistry. This is an outrageous way to expose students to the realities of scientific inquiry and the natural sciences.<br /><br />UWScienceProfessorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-85993433432771988432018-12-18T19:58:33.958-08:002018-12-18T19:58:33.958-08:00What's the problem with Amplify? Prior to Ampl...What's the problem with Amplify? Prior to Amplify, the last STEM curricula for middle school students was from 1995. Think about that - 1995! If there's problems implementing it in the schools, it's because there's not enough money for the PD sessions required to do this new type of teaching - one in which teachers utilize online curricula to lead and supplement their own instruction alongside students.<br /><br />I'd take an online STEM curriculum that's updated over one that's over 20 years old any day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-70952842540823248772018-12-18T08:03:59.557-08:002018-12-18T08:03:59.557-08:00I too, was dismayed to see the number of schools w...I too, was dismayed to see the number of schools with Amplify waivers. I looked over the Amplify middle school curriculum and in my judgement it appears very superficial. It is not going to provide a good science foundation for students. Additionally, web-based instruction will completely distort students' understanding of how real science is done. I see this as a cost cutting move to de-professionalize teaching science. I think, by moving to Amplify-style science instruction we are going to lose a large segment of the student population to scientific inquiry. In this day, with the increase in false information wars and the corporate and political distortion of the scientific record we can ill afford to drive students out of science. I have welcomed local high school students into my lab for internships and, to be frank, they seem way less comfortable in the lab and less scientifically savvy than my high school cohort was back in the 70's. In both middle school and high school we "hung out" in the science teacher's classroom and worked with the equipment hands on - sometimes working as TAs for the teacher and helping to set up lab practicals and dissections. I would hate to see students that are interested in science lose out on this opportunity in favor of a computer screen. <br /><br />UWScienceProfessor Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-90581340559036979202018-12-14T15:22:16.942-08:002018-12-14T15:22:16.942-08:00I have heard that teachers have been uninvited to ...I have heard that teachers have been uninvited to training sessions by Welch based on negative input they made in the past. The official line was that the science committee only needs one representative from every school. And when the teachers showed up regardless, they were subject to receiving an official letter of warning in their file. <br /><br />Negative input is definitely not encouraged <br /><br />NWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-10113699806616663162018-12-14T14:18:01.968-08:002018-12-14T14:18:01.968-08:00I want to add that I heard from a science teacher ...I want to add that I heard from a science teacher recently that Welch said that if you, as a teacher, weren't on her committee, she wasn't really interested in teacher input. Dumbfounding.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-84218555005643661772018-12-14T14:17:16.713-08:002018-12-14T14:17:16.713-08:00NW, I agree with Long Road. Go to Director Burke a...NW, I agree with Long Road. Go to Director Burke and the committee. I think you do need a crowd because staff will not listen so the Board needs that backup.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-44600941612373132872018-12-14T10:31:00.785-08:002018-12-14T10:31:00.785-08:00@Long Road
Thanks. I have emailed Rick Burke, Mar...@Long Road <br />Thanks. I have emailed Rick Burke, Mary Margaret and the rest of the board. In fact Mary Margaret (head of the science department) and I have had a long conversation about the curriculum - with the entire board copied in every email. I am happy to share the conversation with anyone interested. Rick, as an engineer, is concerned about this as well. <br /><br />In the past, though, I have seen a big difference between the school board being aware and concerned about an issue and a school board acting on an issue. It usually takes a large group of people showing up at school board meetings before there is enough impetus for action.<br /><br />-NWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-13016049437581809992018-12-14T10:19:27.727-08:002018-12-14T10:19:27.727-08:00@NW Start with Rick Burke who leads the Curriculum...@NW Start with Rick Burke who leads the Curriculum and Instruction Committee. And the board should be aware of this long running discussion and if they are not, they are not listening. I don't think you need a crowd, but I will support any efforts here.<br />-long roadAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-55210356637774262322018-12-14T08:04:40.678-08:002018-12-14T08:04:40.678-08:00I'd be willing to take this to the board if we...I'd be willing to take this to the board if we could get a crowd. Anyone else?<br /><br />NWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30132334679806325092018-12-13T21:45:59.252-08:002018-12-13T21:45:59.252-08:00This suggests that Amplify web-based science is al...This suggests that Amplify web-based science is allowed due to a waiver that lasts through 2020 - am I reading that correctly? Many students and parents have raised serious concerns about this curriculum and it would seem to me that the board should weigh in during the current school year in order to determine whether it should be continued. SPS should not be using web-based curriculum that takes the place of in-person teaching, yet the reports from the classrooms are that this Amplify middle school science is doing exactly that.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.com