Looks like somebody beat us to it. :)
Welcome to Candeo Schools!
Candeo Peoria is a tuition-free K-6 charter school opening in 2008. We are currently working with a builder to develop 3.3 acres at Lake Pleasant Road and Happy Valley Road and expect construction to begin on site in June.
- Core Knowledge sequence (www.coreknowledge.org)
- Singapore math (www.singaporemath.com)
- Junior Great Books literature series (www.greatbooks.com)
- Foss Science (www.lhsfoss.org)
- Fountas & Pinnell literacy program (K-2 phonics-based reading, K-6 guided reading, K-6 writing)
- Latin language and classical roots (www.promotelatin.org/whystudylatin2003.pdf)
- Fine arts, including music and visual arts
- Physical Education, as part of a comprehensive wellness program
While it sounds nice, do you realize that Candeo is so new that we don't know how it is doing yet (no report card) and that public schools tend to outperform the charters?
ReplyDeleteAlso, on their site, they stress high parent participation. Charters have a little more power to require parent participation than public schools. If more parents actively participated in this district, I bet we'd see some better results, too.
I'm also all for school uniforms.
honeymom
Just got my son's AIM scores for fourth grade. He started EM in our old district and has been doing it since he entered school.
ReplyDeleteI think I am reading this right - his Terra Nova Norm-Referenced National Percentile score is....
97!!!!!! Beats the pants off of the neighboring school scores, doesn't it?
I will make sure to bring his scores to the next curriculum overview. You can complain all you want about this program, but it does work for kids who have done it all along.
honeymom
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHoneymom,
ReplyDeleteYou are very annoying and antagonistic. What do you do to help CCUSD? Are you a PTO volunteer? Did you vote yes in the election last November? Or do you just sit at home monitoring this website because it allows you to print your inane comments?
Get a life! You sound like the typical CCUSD trophy wife who never puts up or shuts up!
Hi Honeymom,
ReplyDeleteSorry out post came out the wrong way.
There is no arguing against your anecdotal evidence and we are truly happy your child is doing well.
We only wanted to respond so you did not think we were ignoring you. We have posted the past 6 years of nationally referenced math test scores for the district and made our point that we feel they are stagnant, under perform neighboring schools, and that EM is to blame. There wasn't any need to rehash this.
Sorry again. we will remove the offending post.
Dear June 14, 2008 9:36 PM,
ReplyDeleteYes, as a matter of fact I am proud that I help out in the schools as well as work several jobs although I have a great deal of flexability with my schedule. I also don't sleep much and nurse my early morning and late night insomnia with the internet. I try to volunteer in the community in addition to volunteering at school. I am not a trophy wife, but I have chosen to be very involved with my kids lives and to give back to others where I can. It is said that those who do, do everything. I try to do a bit and know many more people who do a lot more than me. But, it seems that I am a person who does "put up" and will never feel threatened by someone nasty enough to tell me to shut up. You may feel that I need to get a life. I feel that you need to get some manners.
If you read my posts, you will see that I really do want everybody in this district to get more involved and to that extent, CCUSD Watch is a good platform for getting peoples attention. One of the problems that seems to exist here, is that rather than insert themselves in the process, people who don't agree with the district tend to hide on boards like these. The only way that you will be listened to by the district is to put yourself in a position where they have to hear you.
I voted for the bond, however, I did tell members of the district at the time that I was voting for it with reservations. My reservations were 1) the bond was too vague - I could not even get a clear idea from the principal of one of my kids schools of how the money earmarked for it was going to be used 2) the bond was too big - I think the district tried to get too many things through at once. Granted many were very necessary - i.e. there are some true facility issues at DAMS, but tying that to a bond that is also raising money for smartboards which could have waited and are certainly not an educational necessity by any stretch of the imagination pretty much dooms it to failure and 3) I'm not a proponent of mega high schools, prefer smaller neighborhood schools and as a former East Coaster am used to schools that add on, reconfigure, etc. rather than build brand new, megafortresses.
So why did I vote for the bond. I really wrestled with the decision, but ultimately decided that why not try to get my kids the best stuff possible, especially since the tax impact was minimal. I also realized that there were some things in that bond that were urgent - i.e. some of the maintenance money for DAMS.
I have given my feedback directly to the superintendent as to what I think doomed the bill and that the district would be better off prioritizing and putting up smaller bonds with the most important things in them. I am supportive of the efforts the district is making now to utilize its facilities better to help ease the overcrowding at Cactus Shadows. I am also supportive of the K-3 bond override. You can argue all you want about administrative overhead, but at the end of the day, if this bond does not pass more teachers will be cut and class sizes will bump up even more. And, I do not see how that will benefit any of our children.
As to my antagonism towards CCUSD Watch, I've been pretty honest about it. I do not think they represent the majority of the parents or teachers in this district. In fact, I now have a pretty good idea of who they are although it is a bit more complicated than I thought. I no longer think that there is any Sonoran News connection although I do believe that there may be a business connnection from another newspaper that may benefit from the discourse on here. I also feel that there is a conservative and theological agenda behind this blog hence the desire for latin and greek. It is possible that they have relationships with CCUSD staff, although I believe those to be young staff members. Hence, the resentment towards beginning teacher pay in the district (BTW my first job out of college was for the top ad agency in the world at the time and my starting pay was a measly $12,000 which was a pitance especially when I was trying to live in NY on it). I wish that CCUSD Watch would be honest about their motives and composition even if they want to maintain anonymity.
To CCUSD Watch, Thank you for removing the offending post. I had not read it and can only imagine. I had posted my son's score to show that EM can be a very successful program because CCUSD Watch keeps crowing about how horrible it is. However, while I say that, I do eagerly await the curriculum review to hear the teachers and other parents viewpoints on the subject and hope that the program that works for the most good of the children, whether em or another program is put in place. My kids are almost done with the EM component of math anyway so I am not personally affected by a curriculum switch.
I think CCUSD Watch is placing far too much emphasis on the stagnation in this district on EM. I also disagree about that stagnation as I see a lot of forward movement and truly wonderfully trained teaching staff. I still believe that there are socioeconomic factors that are driving the literally handful of schools in the area that outperform our schools to do so. For example, on Terranova scores, Horseshoe Trails seems to be a bit behind our other schools. Why would this be? Well, for those who are less familiar with our schools, a good deal of the district's special ed students attend special programs at HT which may explain the slightly lower performance.
Why don't you do a list of schools that underperform ours that are in the area? I think that you will find that list to be much longer than the ones that outperform it. Certainly driving up our class sizes with budget cuts is not going to help improve things. I wish that you would explore the effect of class size on student performance. It does not seem to be of importance to you, and I come from a very successful district where small class size, small class size was the mantra and principle for success.
I do thank CCUSD Watch for some of the governing board coverage that they are providing. I look forward to seeing minutes posted from the more recent boe meetings. I hope that the dysfunction is improving and that they are reviewing their governing policies and principles and sticking to them. I'm sure that CCUSD Watch will let us know if they aren't.
CCUSD Watch has the potential to make a very positive impact on our district. However, they will need to move away from pushing their own agenda on here towards listening to and working in conjunction with the CCUSD community at large. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't continue to put out their ideas for a CCUSD Utopian society. But, they shouldn't discount the successes that the district is having and attribute it to useless labelling.
honeymom
Nope, have ruled out CCUSD Watch connection to the other newspaper that I thought possible.
ReplyDeletehoneymom
Here are the scores for other surroundings schools in PVUSD, DVUSD, and SUSD. If there is a school you'd like to see let me know.
ReplyDelete2007 Math TerraNova Grades 2 through 6 Average Percentile Rank
---------------------------
Scottsdale Unified District Cheyenne Traditional Elementary School 87.4
Scottsdale Unified District Cochise Elementary School 85.5
Scottsdale Unified District Cherokee Elementary School 83.25
Paradise Valley Unified District Grayhawk Elementary School 82
Scottsdale Unified District Desert Canyon Elementary 81.75
Scottsdale Unified District Sequoya Elementary School 81.75
Scottsdale Unified District Copper Ridge Elementary School 80.75
Paradise Valley Unified District Sonoran Sky Elementary School 80.2
Scottsdale Unified District Anasazi Elementary 79.75
Scottsdale Unified District Hopi Elementary School 79.25
Scottsdale Unified District Kiva Elementary School 79
Paradise Valley Unified District Pinnacle Peak Elementary 78.2
Paradise Valley Unified District Copper Canyon Elementary School 77.8
Deer Valley Unified District Legend Springs Elementary 77.4
Deer Valley Unified District Greenbrier Elementary School 77
Paradise Valley Unified District Desert Springs Elementary School 77
Cave Creek Unified District Lone Mountain Elementary School 76.75
Scottsdale Unified District Laguna Elementary School 76.75
Paradise Valley Unified District Sandpiper Elementary School 75.6
Paradise Valley Unified District Wildfire Elementary School 75.4
Cave Creek Unified District Desert Willow Elementary School 74.75
Scottsdale Unified District Pima Elementary School 74.6
Paradise Valley Unified District Desert Trails Elementary School 73.8
Paradise Valley Unified District Liberty Elementary School 73.8
Paradise Valley Unified District Desert Shadows Elementary School 73.6
Deer Valley Unified District Sierra Verde Elementary 73.6
Cave Creek Unified District Desert Sun Elementary School 73.25
Scottsdale Unified District Zuni Elementary School 73.25
Deer Valley Unified District Arrowhead Elementary School 73
Deer Valley Unified District West Wing Elementary 73
Deer Valley Unified District Gavilan Peak Elementary 72.8
Deer Valley Unified District Diamond Canyon Elementary 72.6
Paradise Valley Unified District Quail Run Elementary School 72.4
Cave Creek Unified District Black Mountain Elementary School 72.25
Paradise Valley Unified District North Ranch Elementary School 72
Deer Valley Unified District Copper Creek Elementary 71.6
Paradise Valley Unified District Mercury Mine Elementary School 71.4
Deer Valley Unified District Stetson Hills Elementary 71.2
Cave Creek Unified District Horseshoe Trails Elementary School 70.75
CCUSD Watch,
ReplyDeleteWould you post the scores for those schools for all content areas not just math? Thanks.
"June 15, 2008 7:20 PM",
ReplyDeleteWould you post the scores for those schools for all content areas not just math? Thanks.
I'd love to but I don't have other content areas aggregated the way I do for Math.
If you visit here...
AZDE 2008 School Report Card System
They do have a nice way to view AIMS and TerraNova test scores and trends.
Hi Honeymom,
ReplyDeleteHere is the best post you will ever read on class size by one of our favorite ed-blogger.
Last word hopefully on class size
Executive Summary:
Class size reduction in and of itself is not a proven technique for raising student performance. Class size reduction in combination with other factors does form a necessary factor in successful programs that do raise student performance. In any event, the research on class size generally stinks; it is riddled with methodological shortcomings and typically shows small effect sizes. Given this and the high expense reducing class sizes entail along with the present teacher shortage, reducing class size does not represent a good investment for raising student performance.
Dear CCUSD Watch,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the research and for answering quickly. I was wrong, the scores seem to place us pretty much in the middle.
As to the class size debate, I disagree and agree with the research that you provided. I disagree about the impact - it had tangible benefits in the school district we came from. I agree that it may not be economically feasible everywhere. I suppose that the same can be said as to whether putting in latin and greek is economically feasible everywhere either.
honeymom
A couple of other sites that readers should look at regarding class size since there is also research supporting its benefits:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aft.org/topics/classsize/
http://www.reduceclasssizenow.org/research.htm
honeymom
The benefits of Singapore Math seem clear when looking TIMSS data. But are you willing to accept the challenges that accompany Singapore Math?
ReplyDeleteYes, many math professors applaud this program. But in places where pilot programs have taken place they are stating that teacher training is critical to the success of this program. (Article link at bottom of this post.)
The program was designed for teachers in Singapore who apparently have a much deeper knowledge of math than most US elementary educators.
It was also meant to be used along with Saturday school/additional after school tutoring.
Are you going to financially support the intense professional development that will need to happen to make this program successful?
Are parents going to be willing to provide the extra time in math that make the international scores happen?
The culture of Singapore values education very differently than it's valued by the majority in the US. What happens if it's more than just the use of materials but the mindset of the people that influences success of curriculum?
Here's a link to a recent LA Times article about this curriculum:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/09/local/me-math9
CCUSD Watch wrote in another thread: "We are looking for direct instruction not discovery."
ReplyDeleteIs that true just for math?
You've posted Candeo as your perfect school:
-They've selected FOSS for science. These are inquiry-based kits, not direct instruction materials. CCUSD has been using these kits for 3 years at the elementary level.
-They've selected Great Books. This is a shared inquiry based program, not direct instruction. Some CCUSD schools have been using these as well for years.
If direct instruction is your goal, your ideal school may fail you.
"Yes, many math professors applaud this program. But in places where pilot programs have taken place they are stating that teacher training is critical to the success of this program."
ReplyDeleteIf you speak of the Montgomery County 2 year pilot you are barking up the wrong tree. Be sure to check out the the Education Next article this travesty. I'll see if I can find a link. Bottom line here was that the program showed gains, but it was too much work for the administrators and teachers. I have faith that our teachers can pull it off, but our administrators and governing board may not have the political will power. We will be glad to provide motivation.
SM may not be not the only answer. Look at Kyrene that apparently dumped EM for a dual program approach.
CCUSD has been using these kits for 3 years at the elementary level.
ReplyDeleteGreat! Are they using the full program or just the kits? What textbooks are they using to teach science? Can you post a link to the CCUSD science curriculum for elementary schools? Does the district dictate what percentage of time the elementary children spend on science versus social studies?
"-They've selected Great Books. This is a shared inquiry based program, not direct instruction. Some CCUSD schools have been using these as well for years."
Are they using GBJR outside of GLO? Why just some schools? Is this a pilot program we have not heard of? Are individual schools free to implement their own curriculum changes? Is Core Knowledge at DSES another pilot program?
Also we were hoping you could tell us about the recent changes in adopted elementary reading, science, and social studies materials that you spoke. This is not a smug question, we would seriously like to hear about how the process the district went through to evaluate student performance and then select a program that will increase student achievement. The Teaching and Learning section of the district website does not seem to have any information about this.
Hi Honeymom,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned...
http://www.aft.org/topics/classsize/
and
http://www.reduceclasssizenow.org/research.htm
The fisrt site is of course courtesy of the teachers unions who have their own agenda on which academic acheivement is way down the list.
The second site quotes the studies that Ken Derosa specifically refuted.
BTW, can you post your child's school TerraNova test scores since they won't be out until July.
How is it that your group, which is so committed to curriculum, is unaware of recent curriculum adoptions?
ReplyDeleteI don't believe this to be a secretive process. In fact, I received invitations (via email) from the schools my children attend to come and view/comment on the new social studies materials.
We agree, elementary ed. is big part of the foundation of learning that should have started at home. But for a group so interested in that curricular foundation it's odd that the only program of which you seem to have knowledge is Everyday Math.
Thank you for saying that SM may not be the only answer. It might; it might not. I just don't see where any US school district right now knows for sure either.
ReplyDeleteI can't locate the Education Next article you referenced. But here is an excerpt from the American Institutes for Research:
"The study also includes initial results from four pilot programs that used the Singapore mathematics textbook in place of their regular textbooks. The pilot programs involved students in Baltimore, Md., Montgomery County, Md., North Middlesex, Mass., and Paterson, N.J. The study found two pilot sites produced sizeable improvements in student outcomes, but overall the study observed mixed results because “the pilot sites, to varying degrees, encountered problems with teachers who lacked the educational preparation needed.” Student mobility also limited prior exposure to the Singapore mathematics curriculum, a serious problem in a curriculum that teaches to mastery and does not repeat content.
http://www.air.org/news/documents/Release200502Singapore.doc
I can't find more recent research. Do you have links for anything more recent?
Again, if there is something that will work better for our kids, bring it on. But let's be sure it will be better and not just different.
Is this the Ed Next article you are referencing about the SM pilot?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/3853357.html
That's it. Our favorite excerpt is...
ReplyDelete"Because the effectiveness of a program as sophisticated and multidimensional as Singapore Math cannot be thoroughly evaluated in just two years of testing, the story of its failure in Montgomery County says more about school politics and finances than about math programs."
Someone wrote...
ReplyDelete"I received invitations (via email) from the schools my children attend to come and view/comment on the new social studies materials."
Did you get invited to help evaluate and select these materials? Were the comments on the already selected social studies materials aggregated, evaluated, and communicated to the CCUSD community? Did you get invited to look at the reading and science materials that a poster claimed took place? This is what we were referring to.
Read more of our comments in this thread...
"Cave Creek Unified Schools have reportedly lost about 300 students to PVUSD"
Terranova Reading: 74
ReplyDeleteLanguage: 96
Math: 97
I'll have to get my son to stop reading Garfield books and try a little harder. His AR level is actually 4 grades higher than the grade he was in, but you would never know it from the books he likes to read.
Are you finding informational weaknesses with the district website? I have seen some other districts with stronger websites and I am wondering if this is part of your frustration with the district. Why not blog on how you think the district could improve its website? I'd be glad to make some comments as I have also noticed some weaknesses and perhaps I could pass on to the district if they aren't already watching this blog.
honeymom
Hi Honeymom,
ReplyDeleteWe could wrote post after post about the CCUSD website. It is not so much the structure (which isn't great) but the lack of content. For example check out the test scores section on the web site...
AIMS Scores for Cave Creek Unified School District
First, you will notice they are from 2006. They have had 11 months to post the 2007 scores. Next, TerraNova scores are nowhere to be found. And finally, the trend they show is inconsistent. Some schools have 4 years of data, some have 2. Opps, one more thing, 9th grade, HTES, DAMS, and STMS scores are missing.
There is no excuse for this when all they have to do is link to the State district and school report cards.
I don't know who is in charge of their website, if it is a dedicated employee, a student, or volunteer.
ReplyDeleteIf not a dedicated employee, they probably just don't have the time to do it right.
So here, let's start a list for the site (some from you, some from me, others please add on):
1) Needs test scores updated for all schools
2) Needs links to state district and school report cards
3) Would like a budget link
4) Better section on curriculum - what programs, description of content, links to program websites, information on curriculum review process. Links to state mastery standards.
Please feel free to add on. I'll try to look at some other district sites over next few days and see if there would be other helpful info to include.
honeymom
Is this a place for ideas or just a way to get people to leave a great school district like CCUSD to go to some unproven charter? Does the owner of this blog have a reason to promote Candeo?
ReplyDeleteWelcome Big Daddy Rides!
ReplyDeleteWe referenced Candeo as part of our discussion of curriculum choices.
I doubt that parents who live in Cave Creek are going to drive 27 miles each way to send their children to school.
Thanks for the post and we look forward to your participation.
Since my first comment wasn't posted, I'll try again.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the person running this blog has some personal issue with CCUSD. Are you a teacher who was fired or do you have an interest in this new charter school?
Hi Big Daddy Rides,
ReplyDeleteYou posted your other comment here..
Cave Creek Unified Schools Governing Board Response to Our Solutions
The answer is no.