The real story this year in the huge slid in scores at the middle school. Even the leader of the district in a board meeting stated that the middle school scores from last year were not acceptable. Well it got worse. The scores at Sonoran Trails Middle School are atrocious, and all middle schoolers are clearly and significantly falling behind their neighboring peers. An astounding 35% of 6th graders in Cave Creek did not pass the AIMS Math test. That is over one in three students not passing the math portion of the AIMS test for this year.
So after 6 years of k-5 instruction in Everyday Math, this is how our students perform. Is there anything else that needs to be said about how EM and CMP are bringing down our students?
Other notes:
- DSES pulls out of last place, and BMES falls to worst performing school in the math
- CSHS ranks last in surrounding high schools.
- Foothills Academy 4th grade in its first year had 100% of its students pass the AIMS Math.
More analysis later, but for now read it and weep (click to enlarge).
At least the leader of the district recognizes that there is a problem and is not trying to sweep it under the rug. I think that parents have every right to ask what happened, what is being done to fix it. Perhaps it is time for you to drop your persona, and make your suggestions for a curriculum change publicly if it winds up being a function of curriculum.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that the em curriculum fails in classes that are too large to individualize attention properly (which has happened at CCUSD especially at the MS level). I think that EM works best when the teachers have time to teach to the kids that don't get it as well. As class sizes grow, there is probably a need to tweak to a curriculum to one that is more one size fits all.
Your wish to get rid of EM may come true. But, you need to put it in light of general student population - i.e. class sizes being too big for EM to work properly.
You're kidding right? EM is a pathetic excuse for a math curriculum and as far as I can tell was instituted as a "new" math for the sole purpose of selling textbooks. Too bad our district's superintendant of curriculum at the time (Burdick) fell for it and now we're paying the price. There were indications that this program wasn't working for parents and students long ago but the administration is only now aknowledging the problem. Math is math is math and a no nonsense textbook from 1950 could probably teach math better than the so called new and improved EM materials.
ReplyDeleteWhile EM is a poor program, you can't blame Debbi Burdick for it. It was approved by the school board in 2002, and she wasnt hired until 2004.
ReplyDeleteWhat a surprise, DAMS has better test scores than STMS and DAMS is the one that is closed and Ann Orlando is out of a job.
ReplyDeleteAnd what a happy coincidence that the superintendent's contract is renewed for three years, the day before these test scores are released.
Ann Orlando had NOTHING to do with DAMS test scores.
ReplyDeleteI would hope that the Ms. Orlando had a hand in the test scores at DAMS. Every Principal should be held accountable. I think it is the right thing to do, shoulder the responsiblity for the mistakes you have made. If our schools are under performing please work to resolve the issue, pointing fingers does nothing. I say recall the School Board and fire Burdick and her assistant. We closed a well performing school crowded all the others and from what I understand the person that handles the finances in our district says we only lost 6 kids (Kent Frison)!!! Clearly his Math is Skewed. I personally know of at least 20 kids. I would bet the number is closer to 100. What a shame! This administration has taken wonderful schools and turned them into unfriendly (not small town like) schools.
ReplyDeletePlease Fix the problems or resign Burdick!
It is quite possible that the district only lost an overall of 6 children if gains were factored in as well. If that is the case, based on the numbers removed, there will probably be growth the following year.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget that even in a normal year (one where a school hasn't been shut down), there is a good deal of attrition when kids are switching schools (i.e. going into middle school or high school).
If that is true, it is very good news for CCUSD. Now they just have to improve their performance numbers once again.
BMES enrollment, like its AIMS scores, is down significantly. If you go back over district enrollment reports from last year, take into account that they added three 6th grade classes this year, and then do a little math, you can figure out that BMES enrollment is down by roughly 60 students compared to last year. A March 31, 2010 district report on enrollment shows that BMES had 549 students enrolled last year, including 105 fifth graders. This year the BMES principal reported that BMES enrollment is at around 570 for this school year. When you take into account that BMES had 105 fifth graders last year, and look at losses at each grade level this year, the BMES loss in enrollment is at about 60 students right now. Enrollment is down across the board, and that includes every grade level kindergarten through 6th. Shhh. That's a secret that they don't want the BMES parents to know. By comparison, HTES, as reported by their principal in her recent newsletter at the HTES website, has 660 students this year, or 115 more HTES students. That's almost 100 more kids than BMES has now, and both BMES and HTES had the exact same enrollment figure of 549 as of March 31 last year. What in the world, beyond the impact the closing of DAMS had on BMES, is going on at that school? Sure, it's all very good news for the district, as long as you like the sickeningly sweet taste of the CCUSD Kool Aid, because you're not going to get the bitter truth from either the district or the principal at BMES. My beef is simply how are we going to fix the problems if our principals and district administrators won't even acknowledge them. BMES loses about 60 students and suffers a dip in AIMS scores significant enough to lose its excelling label. Those are two huge problems that are being hidden or downplayed by the BMES principal. The parents have a right to know and all the Polly Anna posturing going on right now is just wrong.
ReplyDeleteI've been told that there are upwards of 100 kids who left to go to Explorer alone. That doesn't count Foothills Academy or any other school. I know some people that took their kids out of our elementary and high schools too (but still live in our district). Don't believe "6". We did NOT take in that many new students to offset the major reduction in student population. The question is how do we get these kids back (if ever. It is going to be a long road.. unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteDear Aug.25th at 7:16pm, While I agree and believe your comments about BMES, I have to say I am sorry you did so much gathering of information. The District does not care about what the Principal does at BMES. She has a "get out of jail" card, not sure why, but she does. When the budget is short again this year, they will vote to close BMES because of all of this "stuff". it is a shame, it was a great school with a great environment.
ReplyDeleteBingo! BMES slumping AIMS scores + BMES slumping enrollment = BMES closure. August 25 at 7:16pm has it right, but it only took 2 mouse clicks, a quick tally of BMES class sizes, and about another 3 minutes of everyday math (pardon the awful pun) to connect the dots on BMES enrollment. There's no doubt, no doubt at all, that the district has lost far more than 6 students. Is the district really putting that number out there?
ReplyDeleteRemember, you have to factor in the "increased" enrollment at HTES as the retained 6th graders, since this is the first year our elem schools have had the add'l grade attending. So the +115 could and probably is mostly - if not all - 6th graders. That's not new kids.. that just kids that aren't going to the middle school(s) this year.
ReplyDeleteWhy, oh why, is BMES high up on the list for repairs, if that were the evil plan?
ReplyDeleteI never had kids at BMES. From the outside, I always liked Ellie Gaines and knew people in the school who liked her, too. However, some of you have mentioned that she no longer permitted parental involvement. Do not know if that is true or not, but if I were a parent at that school it would have bothered me and I do commiserate with you.
However, if that were truly the case, I would have gotten off this board. I would have spoken directly to the source first about my gripe - Ms. Gaines. If her explanation was not satisfactory, I would have gone above her to the Superintendent to complain, and I would have filled out the district complaint forms. If it were not resolved, I'd also be showing up at Governing Board meetings to discuss, and I would try to get the subject on the agenda. Not allowing parental involvement at the Elementary School level is simply unacceptable, unless there were some very legitimate reason (i.e. the parents were socializing too much on campus and being disruptive).
As to the number 6, here is the question that you need to ask Dr. Frison if you really care so much about the number. Is that number the 1st day of school 2010 number, or is he pulling his end of school year number for 2009? Keep in mind that at this point in time, there is no real time for a careful analysis or breakdown of the number. He is just looking at an overall number (i.e. how many kids were there, not who left and who came in).
The end.
Yes, the additional 115 students at HTES is surely all about the sixth grade, and that's the point being made about low enrollment at BMES. Enrollment at both schools at the end of last year was identical. Both BMES and HTES had 549 students. HTES had 88 fifth graders and BMES had 105 fifth graders at that time. Now with the addition of sixth grade at both schools, HTES has 660 students and BMES has 567 students, which is 93 fewer students at BMES compared to HTES.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to Ms. Gaines at BMES. Believe me! People did take issues to her at first, but she would either begin to alienate those who raised concerns or ignore them all together. When she had concerns about certain things at the school she refused to ask input or suggestions from people who had been at the school much longer and who could have saved her a lot of grief and instead would implement protocols that alienated or annoyed folk. Believe me, folk have tried to raise issues with her, but she has either smiled and agreed with the concern, but done nothing to change it or become defensive with the person raising the concern. Those concerns also been taken to Dr. Burdick and Jana Miller who also refuse to do anything about it and, there are board members who have also been apprised of the situation. Those making the complaints have been marginalized by the administration.
ReplyDeleteSo does it surprise folk that BMES has gone downhill. No. I believe Dr. Burdick and Dr. Miller are also directly responsible for ignoring the problem.
When it all comes down the pipe, it is just sad. Yes I brought concerns to Elie about the very first New Years Eve party and the First day of school. Brought out of geniune concern. She did not care. It is about her way and about "her agenda". After going to the District in the very first couple months to Dr. Burdick, nothing happened. Well nothing, it actually got worse. After that had wasteful meetings with Jana Miller. I really wish people would not offer opinion on things they haven't experienced first hand. I also brought it to the Board in a perfect example of the situation and my comments were removed. You see it doesn't matter how much what you are saying is the truth, it isn't what they want to believe so they push you to the side. You will NEVER get the truth out of any part of the Adminstration in CCUSD. It is very sad to see a school and District I was once proud to say I supported be so backhanded.
ReplyDeletePerhaps they have repurposing in mind at BMES as they did/do at the Desert Arroyo campus and as we already see happening at the old BMES campus. After what I've seen at CCUSD in recent years I would not put it past this money grubbing administration to rent out another tired old building that the taxpayers payed to erect.
ReplyDeleteSandy - that is disingenuous.
ReplyDeleteWhen you brought it to the board, you brought it out of context on another matter. Also, you brought it in a forum where Ms. Gaines had no opportunity to defend herself. I believe this matter was already addressed on here by the videographer.
They spent thousands on a new gym floor at DAMS, and made other costly repairs to it, the year before it was closed. Why would BMES be any different. They can make as many repairs to BMES as they want, but it will all be too little, way too late, and it won't fix the true problems that are affecting the students, parents and teachers there. The District apologists can protest all they want, or post the District talking points they are provided with over and over and over again, but the fact is they have absolutely no clue about what is going on at BMES.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that you have any clue about what is going on at BMES either. You sound a lot like Watch - district apologists?
ReplyDeleteI think that even within BMES, there are different factions of parents - some who disagree with the direction of the school, others who are okay with it and think that some of the parents are being obstructionist and leading to the problems over there. Some who are perceived as obstructionist may have personal reasons that have nothing to do with the kids' education.
I won't say more than that, because I don't believe in spreading rumors especially about individuals. Just know that if you are Watch, you need to talk with a much larger circle of BMES parents than you do.
'Nough said.
Typical, cast doubt to discredit the dissenter. This is almost like reading the Sonoran News. First, not the Watch. Second, do know what's going on at BMES. Third, do talk to a wide circle of BMES parents and teachers. The so-called obstructionists have left the school and in their absence now anyone who has a concern, no matter how well intentioned it may be, is labeled an obstructionist and quickly alienated, and anyone who blithely follows along, not questioning anything, is rewarded. You and others can castigate me and those like me all you want, but it doesn't make the situation any less real or any less troublesome for the concerned parents at the school. By the way, I didn't know that the Watch previously used or held the rights to the words district apologists. I won't retract it, but I will give the Watch credit for coining the perfect phrase.
ReplyDelete- Sandy - that is disingenuous
ReplyDeleteMrs. Krestan exhausted all avenues yet she is disingenuous by raising it at a board meeting because the offending party is not present.
Complaints about the district are only honest if the other party is present?
Laughable.
Imagine you are in for a job review. Only, you are not there, just someone who has a grievance with you. Sandy knew why her video was not included, has already hashed it out here with the videographer, but then later raises it again to prove a point about the district. Yes, that is not a honorable thing to do.
ReplyDeleteLaugh all you want. I'll make it easy for you. This is my last post ever again to this board. Have fun. Time for the trees to blow in the wind again.
What is hilarious is you are all hiding behind anonymous. Again, there were plenty of times it was brought directly to Elie and the District. When I brought it up at the Board meeting it was a specific example about the school my son went to. I would not bring up another school because I had no experience with that school. But this is the perfect example of you put yourself out there and other's hide behind anonymous. Elie knows what I said was true. The parents were not surveyed, asked whatever you want to call it about Core Knowledge. Again it was the truth. She could have said yes we were, but that would have been a lie. If you are going to call me disengenious, you should at the very least sign your name to it.
ReplyDeleteI called you disingenuous because of the way that you used that as an example to stoke the fires of hatred towards the district on here. People who are reading this blog for the first time may not have been familiar with the earlier thread between you and the videographer.
ReplyDeleteI am sorry, because the choice of word was too harsh. But, I do feel that your use of that situation in your post, without any mention of your discussion of the reasons given to you by the videographer for not posting, was equally harsh. There were initial concerns by the district about airing board sessions. There are some pretty strict policies about how employee grievances are handled (check the CCUSD board policy). They cannot be publicly aired according to their policy.
Personally, I prefer complete transparency in the airing of the board meetings. I think that districts should accept that what is said publicly at a public meeting, is best left unedited. Otherwise there is too much room for debate for the motivation behind the edits that tends to devalue the effort to videotape. Let everybody can watch and make decisions on their own. Without seeing your impassioned speech, but having watched several other of your impassioned speeches Sandy, I'm afraid I found some of what you had to see without much seriousness because of the accusatory tone that you adopted. There was also a contingency of other BMES parents who full on disagreed with you, even if they didn't have the nerve to say it to your face. Many felt that you were unnecessarily difficult with Ellie Gaines for personal reasons that related to how you felt your sister was treated by the district and that you felt that Ellie could not fill your sisters shoes. Also, there seemed to be a feeling that you expected to play a bigger role in Ellie's selection and that since you didn't get to play that role that you were upset. I really have no idea if that is true or not, but those were the private whispers (and those whispers did not come from district personnel).
It does seem that you have a problem with CK. I am not sure why surveying parents is meaningful in this situation. Are current parents the sole arbitrators of curriculum choices that will affect future parents? Wouldn't concerns about how to best educate the kids be the sole driving factor? Are you really sure that there wasn't an informal surveying of parents and that you weren't left out, perhaps on purpose?
I am sorry about the anonymity. It has little to do with you and more to do with some of the others involved in this board. But, I am also sorry for the harshness of my tone. It was not acceptable to call you a name. You have been very giving of your time and very caring towards the kids. Regardless of any disagreement I may have with your participation in this board, your willingness to help out and have such concern for the district is respectable.
Two things and then I am done. 1. My sister had NO problem with the District, she left for a better job and a better career move. (so that is all bologne) 2. CK, never had enough info on it to agree or disagree, just was concerned that it was like a "teacher in a box" feeling. If I was left off a vote about CK then that pretty much tells you of the problem at BMES. I had from the beginning tried to do nothing but help Elie out. She is the one that said she didn't want to be surrounded by Pam's family. I am gone from BMES, but I am still concerned with the District. I own a home here and my best friends still have kids here. I would love to see the District come full circle and embrace the "smallness" of CCUSD 93 and be raised to a higher level again. Thanks for your feedback. By the way, I am done with the conversation about Elie Gaines.
ReplyDelete