1.
- Dumping Everyday Math for a math curriculum that values mastery
- Rigorous phonics instruction (way too much whole language teaching is happening)
- Differentiated instruction at least for core subjects at elementary (if you can’t afford aides, why not split up students among the existing teachers)
- Dedicated science curriculum at the elementary level
- Let’s see some solid physics, chemistry, and biology in the middle school
- Latin and Greek in the High School
- Even better, Latin in the middle school, beginning Latin in elementary
- If you insist on Spanish Immersion, at least continue it into middle school
- Self-contained gifted program (Gentry my ass!) and more gifted opportunities at the middle school
- Great Books and Great Books Junior for all students (AR doesn’t keep the kids focused on good literature nor does it stress reading comprehension)
- An all AP only track starting in 9th grade
- If you are going to have IB, why not IB Middle Years?
- A coherent and systematic teaching of history at the elementary and middle school
- Better use of testing to identify successful teachers, than make an effort to keep those teachers in CCUSD
- Less half days. These days are wasted instructional days. Even many teachers despise them.
- Technology actually integrated in to the curriculum (most smartboards are used as glorified projectors)
- Increased classroom discipline and behavior with support from the administration
- Maximum use of instruction time (less pull-outs, less non-instructional interruptions)
- Identify performing and under performing teachers and assign them accordingly
- SET HIGH EXPECTATIONS IN EVERYTHING THE DISTRICT DOES
>>Dumping Everyday Math for a math curriculum that values mastery>>
ReplyDeleteYES PLEASE! My daughter is gifted (missed by 8 points on the exam) and even she gets confused with this math. I teach her the way all of us grew up learning and she gets it right away!
>>Rigorous phonics instruction (way too much whole language teaching is happening)>>
My son is one who learns by phonics and I taught both my kids to read using phonix. Word recognition is great but if they don't know how to sound out words, they don't learn new words.
>>Differentiated instruction at least for core subjects at elementary (if you can’t afford aids, why not split up students among the existing teachers)>>
We had this when I was in elementary school in Tucson. I am not sure why they ventured away from it.
>>Dedicated science curriculum at the elementary level>>
That would be great!
>>Latin and Greek in the High School Even better, Latin in the middle school, beginning Latin in elementary>>
I completely disagree here. Why teach a dead language. Teach them something besides SPANISH! Absolutely. Latin and Greek...I'd protest that.
>>If you insist on Spanish Immersion, at least continue it into middle school>>
How about a language immersion class that will actually be used in corporate America? Farsi, Mandarin, Japanese. These language are in high demand where as Spanish is not anymore.
>>Self-contained gifted program (Gentry my ass!) and more gifted opportunities at the middle school>>
Yes
>>Great Books and Great Books Junior for all students (AR doesn’t keep the kids focused on good literature nor does it stress reading comprehension)>>
Absolutely! AR is great but when your kids are doing AR tests on books that are mainly short story fiction, they don't learn as much. Comprehension of great novels (age appropriate) would more of a benefit to them. This is especially true in HS and college.
>>An all AP only track starting in 9th grade>>
I was in AP classes all through HS however this was in CA. This is a great idea.
>>If you are going to have IB, why not IB Middle Years?>>
IB?
>>A coherent and systematic teaching of history at the elementary and middle school>>
How about history classes that go past WWI!
>>Better use of testing to identify successful teachers, than make an effort to keep those teachers in CCUSD>>
Keeping successful teachers is the key to a great school and a great learning atmosphere. If you have teachers who are consistently leaving, then this is a huge issue anyway. High turnover in any company is something to avoid. Districts are no different.
>>Less half days. These days are wasted instructional days. Even many teachers despise them.>>
At least they did not pass the law that the kids had a 1/2 day every Wed the entire school year! I can see 1/2 days on conference days and before school vacations but aside from that, have them once every other month instead of several times a month.
>>Technology actually integrated in to the curriculum (most smartboards are used as glorified projectors)>>
Agree.
>>Increased classroom discipline and behavior with support from the administration>>
Disca-what? LOL Yes, discipline in the classroom needs to improve. Telling students what they need to do 2 and 3 times is unacceptable.
>>Maximum use of instruction time (less pull-outs, less non-instructional interruptions)>>
Yes.
>>Identify performing and under performing teachers and assign them accordingly>>
Getting rid of underperforming teachers after a probationary period would be better. We don't tolerate underperformers in the workplace, why should we tolerate them in schools?
>>SET HIGH EXPECTATIONS IN EVERYTHING THE DISTRICT DOES>>
Yes absolutely.
Dear May 30, 2008 8:31 AM,
ReplyDeleteThanks so much for your feedback. Great stuff!
Latin and Greek are the roots and foundation of our language. This is the reason for the inclusion in our proposed solutions.
Solution for CCUSD:
ReplyDeleteGet rid of all the current administratiors at the district office and the schools.
Solution for CCUSD:
ReplyDeleteGet rid of all the current administrators at the district office and the schools.
Everyday Math -- LOVE IT! What great instruction. Teaches the students there is more than one way to solve a problem. Focuses on an understanding of patterns. Has the students learn to WRITE about what they do in math to build even greater comprehension. If I had had this math when I was in elementary school I would have had a MUCH easier time understanding advanced mathematics. Why is something wrong because it is different from the way we learned? Was everyone who studied with us so smart? Also, why have test scores in math improved DRAMATICALLY since the implementation of this program which everyone says is so wrong.
ReplyDeleteNot sure where the phonics statement comes from. My children learned with phonics. They did not learn whole language and they studied in CCUSD. They also had differentiated instruction beginning in 4th grade.
The comment about spreading among existing teachers and not using aids makes no sense to me. What are you talking about? Differentiated instruction would require even more teachers than they have now and if you have some simple logical way to implement this I'd love to hear it.
I am so sick and tired of folks just sitting back and throwing stones at this district. Especially people who write about it in the Sonoran birdcage liner.
I have been on committees with some of those folks. They don't listen in the committees to the issues. They come in with their agendas (like much of the school board which is their main problem) and when their own personal agendas are not followed or agreed to by the majority in the group they leave the meetings...stomp out ...like little kids taking their ball with them when the game doesn't go their way. One in particular DID NOT listen to any of the information presented. DID NOT take anyone up on invites to visit the schools and actually see how they worked and what the needs were (obviously a community member who NEVER spent any time in the schools) and continued to cause problems in the committee to the point of various committee members asking for him to be removed because they were giving up many hours of personal time to sit on a committee where they really wanted to see the best outcomes for the students, but this person had a personal agenda and just wanted to waste time. The chair refused to have him removed -- feeling it was important that his voice be heard and thinking (very misguidedly) that he might actually be willing to come to some compromise understanding or at least begin to understand the issues of the district. But he did not. He quit when he didn't get his way and now writes letters to the Sonoran News touting incorrect and insufficient data to prove his points.
But I digress...let's continue.
AR--Our school has gotten away from AR. Only some teachers use it. They use actual literature in the classrooms my children are in. AR does have some positive advantages for kids who really do not like to read. Some find the effort to reach points goals challenging. This is only used as a supplementary program to actual teaching going on in the classroom. Many books (including large full-length novels) have tests available for AR so I'm not sure about the short story comment except that may be what your child has chosen to do.
In our classrooms they use small group instructional learning to study various reading topics such as "voice" or "character" and delve into understanding those ideas. In addition they read "classics" aloud together in class AND have additional reading requirements for books that they do reports on. No one uses just AR as a teaching method. Do you actually spend any time in the classrooms or just sit outside and throw stones.
Latin and Greek? Okay...those are fine. I'm a musician. I'd rather learn Italian and French (more helpful to me). Though I understand the concept of Latin as a base language. That's great. Now...get the $$ and get the teachers. No suggestions here on how to do that.
Spanish Immersion is continuing into the Middle School -- where have you been? They worked extremely hard last year to get the program going and it will be implemented when the 1st Spanis Immersion class enters MIddle School.
Going back to Latin and Greek. Okay...let's address this on the elementary level a bit. You do realize, do you not, that the schools have continued evaluations they must go through -- yes, we can complain that this is standardized testing by which they are rated and evaluated and though I often hear parents say they do not like standardized testing...they are also the parents who want to see proof that their students are doing well and that they are sending their kids to the BEST schools. So they talk out of both sides of their mouths. We don't like teachers to "teach to the test" but we all want to know where our schools rank compared to each other. I'd love to see a better method for this, but right now it is testing. Principals, administrators, teachers are all evaluated on these tests. They feel extreme pressure to cover all the informaiton that is already being tested in their classroom with the time they have with their students. So, of course, let's add Latin and Spanish (I'm all for a language if the program is better than it was 4 years ago where they graduated elementary school only knowing colors and numbers in Spanish and could learn that from 30 minutes of Sesame Street a day) when they already feel they don't see their students enough. Oh, I imagine since the folks here are pushing the "fundamentals" they would cut P.E. and Art and Music; though I would argue that our kids would be much healthier and smarter with MORE P.E. (I'd love to see a study on the obesity rates in this country related to when they started cutting back on P.E. classes -- also the rate of ADD compared to the cutting back of physical education). Music is integral to math study and helps students understand patterns in a more in-depth way than just facts and figures alone. So...where do you fit Latin in? How do you do it with the budget?
AP and IB...student interest...teachers who are trained. IB JUST started at the high school and was a very time consuming, in-depth process to get it started (took 2 years if I recall). I believe they are working on the middle school program. Doesn't happen overnight. Maybe you should offer to help get it started...
Better use of testing to get good teachers. Hmmm...interesting...don't seem to like standardized testing for our kids, but want it for our teachers. Okay...
Well, again, don't know where your kids went to school, but our principal did an excellent job finding good teachers. Set a high standards goal when coming to the school. Had teachers leave that did not want to meet those standards. Drew quality teachers to the staff. Would visit schools and do site visits on teachers before hiring. Investigated extensively. Treats teachers as professionals. Uses half days (NO THESE ARE NOT A WASTE OF TIME AT OUR SCHOOL) to allow teachers to work on things that help them become better teachers. Implemented lesson study at the school where teachers work together on a lesson. Take turns observing each other teaching it and critique it after each session. The end result a high quality lesson all teachers in the group can use year after year. Implemented vertical horizontal curricular alignment (something they worked on during those wasted half days) to ensure curriculum expectations are clearly reached both within grade levels and in grades above and grades below. Encouraged professional development. This school has more tha 15 teachers with Master's Degrees, 3 Doctorates, 3 National Board Certified Teachers (and more in process). These students have high quality teachers. I support and stand by the half day as these times are important to these teachers working together to further develop their teaching skills and ensures that my students have better quality teachers in front of them in the classroom. When folks in a regular business need to collaborate, they just walk next door and talk to the other staff person. We all know that collaboration makes for stronger outcomes. But teachers cannot just leave their classroom and walk next door to talk to another teacher when they need advice or support.
Our teachers love these half days--though some do find their own childcare a challenge. These half days also may not be the best approach for all levels. Middle and high school teachers may not have the same collaborative working situation so maybe these times are not as effective for them. Maybe the program needs to be tweaked to better support their teaching needs.
Classroom discipline is fine. However, we do have some parents who refuse to believe their child is the issue. Blame the teachers seems to be the mantra in this district. Teachers are at fault if your child misbehaves. Oh...interesting. We've had some kids leave our school because our principal did not do enough for their little angels who were so perfect. But..interestingly enough, they have hte same issues at other schools. Hmmm...wonder why. Perhaps it is the child/parent, not the teacher that is the issue and the parents choose not to recognize it. Our school discipline program works well. We have one particularly challenging grade at our school. For some reason there are many students with behavioural issues in that grade level, but since 1st grade there have been many interventions offered to help those students...even a completely different discipline model introduced on that grade level to help stem teh issue before they get into higher grades where it becomes worse. I think the school has taken dramatic steps to support discipline. Unfortunately it is not a private school so the principal cannot just kick out the parents/children that are difficult. That is not legal.
Technology integrated into the curriculum. Hmmm...sure no one in the district ever thought of this one. Let's see...technology bond in 2000 FAILED. Last technology bond FAILED...oh yes, our parents really support this. Computers in the classroom of our school 15+ years old. Barely even turn on most of the time. Can't run the new software district has purchased for more integrated technology learning. When bonds come up, the arguing in the press second guessing what the district technology committee has developed as a technology plan (yes, there was a plan for this last bond, a good one -- did anyone here read it?). The committee consisted of community members (many with strong technology and education backgrounds), teachers, administrators, etc. But, like all district committees, as soon as the recommendations came out. Those who like to sit back and complain could find all sorts of problems wiht the recommendations. Of course, they couldn't take the time to actually sit on the committees themselves, they just wanted to rant and rave afterward. Really, one big reason why I don't know why ANYONE would want to work in this community for the schools/district. The board is the worst offender. "Let's form a committee to investigate something and then let's second guess and undermine all the committee's recommendations."
Smartboards do not even exist in the majority of middle school and high school classrooms where they should be. One elementary shcool has them in all classrooms because the principal there included them in the building budget. Another has them in EVERY classroom because the PTO raised the funds to get them implemented. One school has now resorted to begging for old computers from offices that are closing, etc. They have almost completely replaced all their 15+ year old computers. The computers are not new; but they are newer than what htey had and they work. I often read on sites like this the question of "why don't they apply for grants for this?" Well, I asked that question myself and instead of sitting back and whining about it, I decided to research grants. Know what I found out? We don't qualify for 90% of them. State technology grants have as a primary requirement a certain percentage of students on free or reduced lunch and that percentage is much higher than the 2-5% we have in this district. The state funds the schools with the assumption that those schools in wealthier districts (like ours) will be able to go out for bonds, etc. for higher funding. They don't take into considration districts like ours where the folks seem to not want to support the schools. Perhaps they assume the higher income area automatically means the schools get more $$. They don't. The school is funded the same as every other school in the state. They get X amount of dollars (approximately $4200) per student based on the number of students in class on the 100th day of school. That is how the M&O budget (the one that pays for teachers, etc.) is calculated. Then the district is allowed to go out for an override (limited to 10% of the overall M&O budget) to get any budget increase. So in poorer areas you see better technology and better maintained schools and programs we don't have because they qualify for a lot more funding than we do. We have to rely on our parents and our parents don't vote. Did you know that in the last M&O override there were more "YES" votes out of Carefree than voted in total in Tatum Ranch? That means those "retired" folks who supposedly don't support the schools...do! More than our own parents. Many parents choose to read these blogs and stories in the Sonoran News and sit on the sidelines and complain. It is much easier to do that than actually spend time in teh schools seeing what is going on or actively trying to fix the "problems" they may see.
Back to the list...take up the underperforming teachers issue with the CCEA. That is a teacher union issue. Believe me, the principals I know would like nothing better than to get rid of teachers they do not think are effective. The good principals find creative ways to do so.
Okay..gifted. Let's not even go there. They "saved" the gifted program with emergency funds so when the air conditioning totally goes at Desert Arroyo (and it is on its last leg), we can be happy that we have a gifted program while 900 kids swelter in the heat. In addition we can be happy the program was saved in its current self-contained structure at the expense of classroom aids. These aids not only support the teachers in the lower grades, but also have important school running functions such as lunch duty. Now on the surface, this may not seem important, but those aids allow the teachers to take a 30-minute lunch and get the students back into the classroom more quickly. Without aids, lunches will now need to be one hour so that teachers may eat and then break each other on lunch duty. So for the 2% or less of students in the district that actually qualify for "gifted" learning, we now have taken 30 minutes of classtime from the other 98%. That's fair, don't you think? Of course it is. Why did this happen? Because the board listened to a few vocal parents instead of listening to the principal's recommendations that there be gifted trained classroom teachers so all gifted students could be filtered through those classrooms and get gifted education all day long, not just a couple of hours in the morning. At our school, some of our best teachers were already to be trained and ready to go by the fall. As it is those teachers already teach 90% of the gifted kids in our school anyway.
It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and complain and throw stones. I would like to hear a lot more about people who actually do the following:
1.) Spend more than 1 hour per week in the school -- spend TIME in there. See what it is like. Take the time to LEARN what really goes on.
2.)Sit on the committees that are put together to bring about change. If you really think your ideas are spectacular, then take the steps to have them implemented.
3.) Show some respect to the parents that DO take the time to be in the schools and DO take the time to give up their family time to sit on these committees (long-range planning for over a YEAR). Perhaps they actually have read the piles and piles of information they received. Perhaps they actually care as much as you do about the children in this district and feel strongly their recommendations are the best. They actually weigh the needs of the many and try to find the best solutions.
As for the SUPER high school. That idea was, in my mind, the BEST recommendation for the district. Why? It accomplished many things.
First, the demographic numbers showed at the time the committee was meeting that there will need to be one more elementary school and one more middle school before the district is at build out. The demographers go to each developer in the area, get an estimate on their development sizes, get information on their building schedule, look at the income level needed for those houses, they take into consideration many, many issues to come up with their numbers. Are they always right? No. No one can see the future. Their numbers did save the district serious $$ in building STMS and HTES when they did. Building those schools now would cost a lot more.
Back to the high school. Given the demographers #s, the need in the next three years was going to be for a new middle school, a new elementary school and they had to address the high school.
The original plan called for two small high schools in the district. Well, the reality is...CSHS is overcrowded by about 300 students. Walk the campus. Look at what their needs are...don't just rely on figures thrown around by those who write for the Sonoran News. Spend time on the campus.
However, growth at that level is slow (100 or so a year). The district currently has enough SFB $ and remaining bond $ to build a high school that could house 650 students or so (1/2 a small high school). So they would need more bond $$ to finish a school. So let's say they do that. They build a second school that is supposed to be about the same size as CSHS was built to handle (about 1400 as at buildout the district is expected to have 2800 high school students). That school would start with about 100 students and would not reach capacity for over six years. That means the district would have a small high school in the south and a larger one in the norht. It would take many years before the smaller school could have the same programs and be equitable to the larger school as smaller student numbers dictate smaller staff and thus fewer options. Do you think the parents down south would be happy with that? They would have to send their kids to CSHS for almost all extracurricular activities...Of course, I say...build the 1/2 a high school. Let them complain and let them be unhappy. Then maybe they'd actually vote on the next election. Of course, administrators don't want to do that. They don't think it is fair for the students so they continue to search for more options. BTW, the long range planning committee that met for over a year investigated huge numbers of possibilities for the high school. They were continually looking at ways to use the limited funding, etc. They analyzed data, etc. researched other districts, read research, studied possibilities. Freshman academy, could we just figure out how to add on to CSHS with existing $$ (bond languaged disallowed this), could they build a freshman academy down south? (this is one area where research was pretty solid--the BEST thing for a student's education was fewer transitions so adding another school transition was not conducive to the students)...on and on and on it went. They shared their recommendations with the board. The board gave them more ideas to look at. They finally came up with the one high school recommendation. Here's why it was the best.
1.) Saved the district over 30 million as CSHS could be repurposed for one or more of the other schools the demographics said would be needed.
2.)Allowed all CCUSD high school students access to the same programs and as extensive an educational opportunity as possible.
3.) Allowed for a high school to be built RIGHT with the correct facilities instead of piecemealed like the current CSHS was.
4.) Allowed for sports to stay on current level or move up. Yes, I know strict educationalists think this is a stupid point...but CCUSD has lost many students to Pinnacle High School for sports. Each student that goes loses CCUSD $4200 (see the calcuation of M&O above).
5.) Still allowed for the building of a much-needed fine arts facility. Current facility was built when there was one elementary school (through 8th grade) and the high school had 500 students. It was "sold" to the community as a community use center. As the district has grown dramatically, more and more "community" groups are shut out of dates in the center. This has caused consternation in the community. However, with now 5 elementary schools 2 middle schools and hte high school all vying for quality performance space for some of their arts programs this makes sense.
5.) A single high school on a social level helps keep some community cohesion. Right now there is already a split between north and south in the district. The north believed to be the "haves" who have all the $$ and parents who don't work (though that is not true...they also have some of the poorer students in the district in their schools). The south is the "working parents" who are worried about childcare and other issues so they can work. The north sees the south as the parents with all the new schools who are never happy. The north schools are all older and in seroius need of repair. There is a clear split in how these groups look at things. Two high schools in the district would only cause greater consternation between these two groups and continual battles over services and programs. If I were an administrator I would have no desire to deal with that. It is already so difficult to please "everyone" in the district when so many look at programs and issues through personal vision. Only taking into consideration how it affects them personally. Not trying to see the whole picture.
The list goes on and on about the benefits of the one high school and the bottom line saved the community $$ which was continually stressed as a goal through the long range planning meetings. They looked at alternative funding sources, selling the existing Cave Creek school downtown Cave Creek, etc.
I understand. It is so much easier to complain and ask questions than it is to actually work to bring about change or to actually LISTEN to recommendations and try to understand why they are made instead of assuming that those who made them are
1.) stupid (because of course everyone is dumber than you)
2.) making decisions based on personal interest (because you would).
3.) Making uneducated decisions (because you obviously know more than they do)
4.) Making decisions that are purposefully designed to hurt students in the district...now come on do you really think the teachers/parents/community members/administrators who spend time working on these issues try to come up with solutions to harm students?
Why not, for once, either get in there and actually work in the schools to help understand them better or spend months on these committees or come up with positive steps that can be taken to initiate change. Don't assume that your ideas are the only ones out there -- understand there are other opionions and that those who actually have to make the recommendations need to take all those opinions into consideration(there are many that support and like Everyday Math).
This district has many strenghts. That's why we have our students enrolled here. The administrators also have to try to continue to make the district better swimming against a long history of issues (many of which happened BEFORE any of the current administration was even here, but they find themselves having to answer for them). They have to work with a board who thinks their job is to pursue their personal agendas or second guess every administration recommendation. A board where new members are being recruited by the Sonoran News so they can be even more disfunctional than they are now. The Sonoran News' last sponsored board member even refused to sit in the seat provided her because she didn't like where they put her so she sat in the audience. Hello! Are we in third grade or are we actually supposed to be making informed decisions for our students.
The boards role is the following:
1.)Fiscal oversight -- making sure the district is not using funds illegally or using them not in accordance with the bonds, etc. for which they were raised.
2.) Direction/visioning. Under this would be hiring/firing superintendent.
Their role is not micromanagement, second guessing, undermining. If they don't like the direction the district is taking then they have the primary function of taking action on hiring/firing the superintendent.
They are not there to listen to the loudest parents and then completey undermine the principals and others in the district who made recommendations based on the needs of thier school. Who knows those needs better, the principals that are there all day every day and almost every evening or the parent who drives by, drops their kid off and then disappears until 6 p.m. to pick them up. Want to know why the district is losing many principals? This is why. The undermining of their budget cut suggestions was the last straw for many. If I were them, I'd want to move on to districts where parents actually support the schools.
Sorry...I am just so tired of the griping. I want to see some positive movement for change, but this town is just full of people who think it is their role to shout down and shut down any ideas that are not their own. The "Cave" in Cave Creek stands for "Citizens Against Virtually Everything." No one is "for" anything.
Now the Sonoran News has spread its filth into more of Scottsdale. Great. Now we can be even more embarrassed as a larger group of people read that garbage adn wonder what kind of pathetic, ignorant, complaining people actually live in Cave Creek. Who the heck would want to live there?
I'm just glad I can remember when this town actually supported the schools (heck, they built one RIGHT DOWN TOWN). When the Women's Club was loved and supported as they did things to support the schools/students. I'm glad to know many old timers who love this town and still lvoe the town and realize that change happens, it just has to be managed, not fought every step of the way.
Dear May 31, 2008 8:30 PM,
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff. Thanks so much for the awesome feedback.
I'll be responding over the next couple of days.
I've worked in the CCUSD for almost 20 years and I agree with virtually everything in the very long post from anonymous. It is so hard to counteract the misinformation sent out to almost everyone in the district by the Sonoran News. Don't you ever wonder why the only positive coverage is by Pete Mohr, the sports reporter? Our property taxes are some of the lowest in this area, as our the salaries of the CCUSD employees. I see many dedicated employees, including administrators, who could earn more in other districts or other professions, but continue to work at CCUSD because of the relationships they have there with other employees, students and parents. If you have criticisms of the district please, please, please spend some time in the schools and district offices. We are not working in palaces and we are not paid high salaries. I'm lucky to have much take home pay at all after I pay for my husband's insurance. This district has many, many employees who work very hard and put students first. Please take the time to see for yourself.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDear June 1, 2008 9:55 PM,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post.
The issue for us is not that the district doesn't have dedicated and hardworking teachers. It does. Some teachers have to work even harder to overcome poor curriculum choices.
The issue is that the administration and board seem to spend all their efforts on infighting, buying technology, and trying to build more buildings. The primary focus of CCUSD needs to be on the academic achievement of the children. Test scores prove that CCUSD's scores are stagnant and they under perform neighboring schools.
Go look at recent board meeting minutes. Nowhere will you find them discussing how can the district improve the academics.
Many are quick to say Everyday Math (EM) isn't working. How can they be so sure? Test scores? Whose test scores are they using?
ReplyDeleteUsing middle school and high school standardized math test scores won't tell you about the success or failures of this curriculum. It's a spiral based curriculum that is intended to start in kindergarten. The kids in our middle and high schools have not had EM from the beginning of their time in school - our incoming 9th graders started using EM in 3rd grade. That gave them three years of elementary math instruction in EM but three years from the prior curriculum as well. Whose to say which of the two curriculums has propelled or failed these kids?
The first CCUSD students who've had EM from kindergarten forward are the kids going into 6th grade this coming August.
I'd think you'd need to compare the scores of these incoming 6th graders to previous 6th graders who used other math curriculum materials to see if it's impacted learning in CCUSD in a positive or negative way.
Sorry, one more comment regarding your use of 9th grade math scores from 2007 back to discredit Everyday Math.
ReplyDeleteI believe the 9th graders of 2007 would have been in 5th grade when Everyday Math was rolled out in CCUSD. That means they would have used EM for only 1 year. It was a rough year for those kids, families, and teachers. But to say EM is not successful based on math scores of kids who used the program for one year makes no sense.
To follow that line of thought, trending data reported on math scores of 9th graders prior to 2007 would show NO impact from EM as those kids never used it. A look at the previous curriculum might explain the data of those years. It might also explain why the district sought a curriculum change at all.
One quick question...I'm really curious now. How can Linda Bently write about CCUSD board meetings when she WASN'T EVEN THERE? She writes about things as well that were not even presented at those board meetings. I am wondering where she is getting her (mis)information. It is sickening to think that newspaper actually gets awards. I have been tempted more than once to write the organization which provides those awards and share with them the exhaustive examples of poor journalism and writing that verges on (but just barely skirts) slander--not to mention the extensive conflicts of interest presented almost daily in that publication. I was required more credible sources on a story about caring for lawns that I wrote for my first journalism job than is required of most of the stories in that publication.
ReplyDeleteJust curious...I'm sure if I tried to submit a story about a meeting I never attended, I'd be fired from my newspaper...
Someone wrote...
ReplyDelete"I believe the 9th graders of 2007 would have been in 5th grade when Everyday Math was rolled out in CCUSD. That means they would have used EM for only 1 year. It was a rough year for those kids, families, and teachers. But to say EM is not successful based on math scores of kids who used the program for one year makes no sense."
Great point. We have the past 4 years of scores for 2 through 9. We can tell you they are stagnant at best. We'll get them posted soon.
Someone else wrote:
ReplyDelete"I am wondering where she is getting her (mis)information."
What did they publish that is not true?
We are fascinated to know if it is true that 4 principals have left and one told off the board on his way out.
Many of your solutions seem to focus on "new" curriculum for the elementaries. Which leads me to wonder if you've seen the elementary curriculum materials as of late?
ReplyDelete-The only materials that are at all aged are the Everyday Math materials.
-Our elementaries have recently adopted new science, social studies and reading (with systematic phonics instruction included) curriculum materials.
-New state standards for science and social studies now look very much aligned to Core Knowledge.
-Some of our elementaries are already using Jr. Great Books.
What other changes were you hoping to see? Your group keeps saying it's all about the curriculum, but almost all of the curriculum materials are brand new. I know we live in a world where people expect immediate results in every area, but perhaps what is needed is some time to prove out if the use of any of these new materials will bring about the increased achievement we all desire for our kids.
Were folks from CCUSD Watch involved in review/public commenting of any of those new materials? If these weren't the new curriculum materials your group hoped to see, what were?
One point of Mis information...Dr. Sitton did not resign at that board meeting and has not done so to this point.
ReplyDeleteAlso, information about what appeared in Mr. Bailey's letter of resignation was not presented at that meeting. In fact, Mr. Bailey's resignation statement at the meeting was most congenial and complementary to both the board and the administration.
Where would Ms. Bently get access to information such as a resignation letter that would be held confidential (or should be)?
Not to be a consipracy theorist here...but is there a board member feeding her this information? Of course, since the article is written as if she were at the meeting, and no other sources were credited, it looks as if she, herself had access to that letter.
She must be an incrediblly skilled writer to write about events and meetings she did not even attend and without any attributed quotes from people who actually were there...Very interesting...
Is it any wonder, with "news" like this, that CCUSD struggles to have its voice really heard in a positive way on the issues?
"One point of Mis information...Dr. Sitton did not resign at that board meeting and has not done so to this point."
ReplyDeleteThanks for setting the record straight!
When I read the article I did not get the impression that all those events took place at the board meeting.
Ms. Bentley must have insider information. Hard to think that Mr. Bailey leaving after 2 short years could be a good thing. He was a strong advocate for the high school and seemed to have had things moving in the right direction.
Ms. Bentley is anything but a skilled writer. I can hardly make it through any of her articles because they are so disjointed and do not make any sense.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know her source though, too!
honeymom