The Sonoran News has picked up the story
Burdick awarded three-year contract despite dismal performanceIn the article board member Clancy states that she...
Three schools loose ‘Excelling’ label, while one in three sixth graders are unable to pass math portion of AIMS
"only learned about the AIMS results when they were released to the public on July 14, which was the day after the board renewed Burdick’s contract. "
We can also confirm from a board member that these scores and labels were not provided to the board. Interestingly, Dr. Burdick says that...
"The board was fully aware of the AIMS results when they did my evaluation and extended my contract. One of my goals was directly related to AIMS results so we delayed the evaluation from May to July until we had the results and they could be shared. However, the AYP and AZ LEARNS profiles were still embargoed by the Arizona Department of Education when my evaluation was done"
So who is misspeaking here?
And in fact the labels were withheld from the board because she claims they were 'embargoed', yet she made the board 'fully aware' of embargoed AIMS scores. Sorry you she can't have it both ways and there is no doubt that when the Arizona Department of Education claims that something is embargoed, that does not mean to withhold it from a district's governing board.
Finally the Sonoran News reports...
In light of the district’s dismal AIMS results revealed one day after the board voted to renew Burdick’s contract for three years, Clancy said she has requested a vote to reconsider Burdick’s contract be placed on the agenda.
Another test for the governing board to prove that it is out for the students and not the administration. No doubt, they will get an F.
One more note. Seems suspicious that the video of that July 13th board meeting is missing from the http://ccusdbg.org/ website. Just saying. Read the full story here...
Sonoran News
[Again, we are not out for anyone to get fired, quit, or recalled, we just want the achievement and the education of our students to be the top priority, not buildings, protecting jobs, or playing politics]
This is all a huge disgrace. To add insult to injury, it will all be swept under the rug, just like everything else that goes wrong in this district. Or, the people who do step up and ask the tough questions will be told they are being too negative. The mantra for CCUSD should change from Students First...People Always to something more fitting, like No Problem Here...Nothing to See...All You Concerned Parents and Students Just Keep Moving Along Now. Take Black Mountain as an example. The parents there, many of whom are now probably paying tutors to work with their kids, will likely be told that the recent academic slippage doesn't matter, because it will all be okay now thanks to the new Core Knowledge curriculum (which the school or district couldn't actually afford and so anonymous donors and the PTO were asked to foot the bill for the tens of thousands of dollars it would cost). Yeah, if only the teachers, who have to implement this new curriculum at Black Mountain, felt the same way. Many of them felt pressured into the decision or voted in favor of Core Knowledge because they feared for their jobs. Why are Black Mountain teachers fearing for their jobs? Why did it require anonymous donors to get this new curriculum in motion at Black Mountain, and did the emergence of these anonymous donors place undue pressure on the teachers or on the PTO? Who were these anonymous donors and what really was their agenda? How will teachers who fear for their jobs and resent the new curriculum lift up Black Mountain's sagging AIMS scores? Are these teachers really ready for the new curriculum and new school year, or will they and their students suffer more? No Problem Here...Nothing to See...All You Concerned Parents and Students Just Keep Moving Along Now. The teachers are miserable at Black Mountain. Everyone at the school has known this for more than a year, but no one in a position of authority within the district seems to care enough to look into it in an appropriate way. Similarly, has anyone thought to look into why all of last year's PTO board members at Black Mountain just suddenly stepped down? This was historically a strong group that was unstoppable. Who or what stopped them? Where did they go? No Problem Here...Nothing to See...All You Concerned Parents and Students Just Keep Moving Along Now. In two short years, Black Mountain's AIMS scores have plummeted, and now, for whatever it's worth, the school loses its "excelling" label. One would assume the A+ ranking is next. Is anyone going to explain why. Crickets can be heard chirping, but nothing more. The district or the schools with these acute problems, like Black Mountain and Sonoran Trails, should be quickly reaching out to parents to tell them what's going on and what remedial steps will take place. But they don't and they won't. Instead, we get the news from this blog and the Sonoran News. Will parents who do ask the tough questions be at fault yet again for being too concerned or too negative? The kids are obviously the ones being hurt by this. Does anyone care enough about them to do anything about it? Sadly, the damage to our children's education is already done. One can try to blame the parents, but it's beyond their means to manage the principal, motivate the teachers, and ensure the curriculum is on target. These are jobs we rightfully pay experts, our school administrators, to perform. The CCUSD Board, in their elected positions, and the Admin and principals in their paid positions, should all be ashamed...they have all failed miserably at their jobs. But, they'll yet again sweep it all under the rug, with big, happy smiles on their faces, and tell us all No Problem Here...Nothing to See...All You Concerned Parents and Students Just Keep Moving Along Now.
ReplyDeleteThere is a contradiction in the SN story. It claims that:
ReplyDelete"When the board reconvened in public, Clancy recommended Burdick’s contract only be renewed for one year based on Burdick’s failure to meet goals."
Later in the story, Clancy claims that she did not know the AIMS scores that day, although Burdick claims that board members had been aware of them. Why would she have made a statement about Burdick failing to meet goals if she didn't know the scores.
I think perhaps Member Clancy's nose is growing long right now.
'Why would she have made a statement about Burdick failing to meet goals if she didn't know the scores.'
ReplyDeleteThe board members that replied to me confirmed that they were apprised of some missed benchmarks with respect to AIMS, but were not provided the scores. It appears that some of the board members feel that stability is more important than performace.
The bottom line is, the Board should be able to do something about Dr. Burdick's contract. Have the State disclose to the Board when they were released to the individual District higher up's...it is very shameful. I understand that Dr. Burdick might now "have to" but her not performing on her duties is crazy. I used to be proud that I lived in the CCUSD school district, not anymore. As far as parents, if you ask quetsions you are labeled "a trouble maker" even though your facts are the truth.
ReplyDeleteJust to correct a fact, there is one board member that was on the BMES PTO in school year 2009/'2010 that ran for school year 2010/2011. I am not sure why the other members didn't run and if they don't want to be labeled a trouble maker, they will probably keep quiet on it. BMES is in big trouble. I feel sorry for a bunch of good teachers that are miserable. Some where along the road, they feel they have lost their voice of truth...
ReplyDeleteBMES is experiencing exactly what DAMS parents experienced for the past few years. A CCUSD administration increasingly focused on schools and students to the south and an utter neglect for those to the North or the districts health as a whole. I cannot believe that Burdick was not given walking papers by the board. As for "failing to meet goals" that could have been some other contractual goals and not necessarily test scores. Which, if that is the case, adds even more reason to yank her contract.
ReplyDeleteWhy isn't anyone asking for the head of the Associate Superintendant of curriculum as well? Shouldn't she be held accountable along with Burdick? She is the one who has allowed so much time and effort into all of this new and improved smoke and mirrors "programming" at the expense of good solid curriculum for all children in our district. As the previous poster stated I am sure they will all point to "things being tough all over" "oh it's due to the economy" as their pat excuses and sweep this and us under the rug...again.
The demographics of our district should ensure good scores without the administration having to do much at all recession or not. Just give us a solid, well tested curriculum (one that has been around for a while) and leave our dedicated teachers and parents to teach it!!!!!!!! Stop falling for all of the carpet bagging "new curriculum" peddlers and start laying a firm foundation for our caring, giving staff and parents to build on.
One of the biggest problems with EM was its lack of examples and instruction in the take home materials. Well meaning parents who wanted to help with homework couldn't even figure out where to start. The administration has known about the problems with EM almost since its adoption. How convenient to use it as an excuse now. Why wasn't EM replaced before this? Oh I forgot...because we had to have Spanish Immersion, Horsemanship, and Core Knowledge. Who cares if the kids from CCUSD can do math if the administration can brag about all of its innovative programming available? It makes me ill to think of all the time, energy and money spent on such endeavors when the writing for this epic fail has been on the wall for quite some time.
STOP Dividing our district with cutsie curriculum only available to certain students at certain campuses!!!!! We do not have the resources to compete with PVUSD or SUSD on that platform and still have enough to go around! Some of these programs may be funded by grants but the time spent getting those grants could be better spent looking for grant money that benefits all students in CCUSD. I have also witnessed the best teachers from the northern schools going to the newer schools with flashy programs. What a disservice this "everyone for himself" attitude has done to the district as a whole. Burdick and Miller should both be ashamed!
I am going to defend the Spanish Immersion program - but not only because my kids are in it - but because 8/5 12:05 pm is simply wrong in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThe SI program has always been fully funded by grants. Cristina Ladas' position(the head of the program) has been fully funded by the grant(s) so this is no skin off the school district's back (budget). If the 50 or so kids per grade that are in the program weren't in the SI program --they'd still need a teacher --so again, no 'extras' being taken away from the general population. Thanks to Cristina --the entire school, not just the kids assigned to Spanish Immersion, has access to Spanish exposure to the Hola Amigos program (grant money). She has written successful grants for OTHER elementary schools in our district --who will now have access to foreign language exposure also. ALL children in CCUSD have access to the SI program via the lottery system. I don't see anyone complaining about all schools NOT having access to multi-age classrooms.
Foreign language exposure - especially in the lower grades - is an incredbile gift we can give our children. It not only opens up their minds to new worlds and cultures, but is also key to expanding their ability to absorb all other learning. Learning a second (or even a third) language in today's world economy is giving our kids a potential leg up in the future job market. How many job ads (in AZ and elsewhere) do you see that say "Bilingual a plus."? Learning another language can potentially translate into more and better job opportunities and income.
If anyone, like Mrs. Ladas, has the ability and experience to write grants, then I invite you to step up to the plate like she did and create yourself a job with CCUSD to make this a better place for all (or at least as many as possible).
I think the main point of comment 12:05, is they have lost focus. They are caught in the "flavor of the month" club trying to fix the challenges. We need focused leaders.
ReplyDeleteThere is no excuse for the labels and performance to drop as they did at BMES, DAMS, and STMS. For Debbi Burdick to blame this on the curriculum is foolish and shortsighted.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, aren't the math, reading, and writing curriculum used districtwide by all the elementary schools? If the curriculum is the problem, then why didn't the labels change at the other elementary schools? Blaming demographics such as socio-economic status doesn't work as an excuse (which is what larger districts in different neighborhoods or those in low income areas often use as their crutch) because Cave Creek is such a homogenous community that is upper middle class and high socio-economic status. The district should look at what's going on at BMES in terms of leadership and program instead of "blaming the test" or "blaming the curriculum" since all the other elementary schools are excelling.
As for the middle schools, the case against the curriculum may be stronger. However, if it is the same at both schools, why didn't they earn the same label or have the same results since the communities served by both schools are homogenous - high socio-economic status. Perhaps the middle school math and language arts curriculum could be at fault, but this is the same curriculum that was used during the "excelling" years. Now there's a problem because the kids didn't do as well this year on the test?
Burdick is real good at passing the buck, isn't she?
The issue will be on the agenda at the Board meeting on Tuesday. In looking over the material for that meeting, it looks like they've already got their excuses all lined up. Something to do with how "exceeding" and "meets" categories expanded and shrunk and how this affected labels across the state. Well, here in our own back yard, it affected BMES, DAMS and STMS, whereas all the other schools in the NE Valley, or those that CCUSD is pretending to be like at least, those in PVUSD and SUSD, all held onto their previous labels. This ought to be a doozey of a dance they try to do. When you refuse to identify and own a problem, it will only get worse. They won't own this. They'll point blame elsewhere and ignore it and make sure that their incompetence as administrators and principals is well masked and their jobs are secure for years to come. A sad day it is for BMES and STMS and most importantly for the students.
ReplyDeleteThe problems are so clear and obvious.
ReplyDeleteIt can't be the curriculum or the tests in the case of BMES because the other elementary schools in the district still kept their "excelling" label. It also can't be the demographics because CCUSD is so homogenous - high socio-economic status and upper middle class families. It isn't like the larger districts which have diverse socio-economic populations.
So it boils down to two things:
1) Leadership - School leadership at the middle school levels are clearly ineffective. Ann Orlando has let her teachers run wild for years without any accountability. Bill Dolezal leads the STMS staff like it's a fraternity or sorority, meaning he concentrates more on the social aspect and maintaining the "party" atmosphere than focusing on academics.
Burdick needs to take a strong stance when it comes to Dolezal. She's already got rid of Orlando, which everyone in the district knows she has plotted to do for years. As for the Board, they need to take a strong stance against Burdick and hold her accountable for not meeting her goals.
2) Teachers - It's no secret that the BMES teachers are rejecting Ellie Gaines's leadership. They're revolting. At the middle school level, most - not all - of the teachers have an inflated opinion of their effectiveness as educators and refuse any kind of professional development or instructional leadership, especially the DAMS 7th and 8th grade teachers. These teachers used to use the "excelling" label as evidence of their effectiveness. Well, teachers from both schools can't do that anymore.
The sad thing is that this post will get a lot of teachers "defending" themselves how "great and wonderful" they are. That's not necessary. There are a number of effective middle school teachers in CCUSD. Unfortunately, there are a larger number of middle school teachers who have an inflated opinion of how "good" (not effective) they are, and they mostly judge that by how popular they are.
Don't expect Dolezal to have them look at themselves. He stays out of anything that has to do with handling issues with teachers. That would end the "party".
The teachers at BMES need to do something before this affects the kids anymore. If the principal there is so bad, why isn't anything being done about it? How come the teachers aren't standing up and saying something is wrong? Will the school just continue to slip because of all of this?
ReplyDeleteBecause Burdick likes Ellie Gaines. If she doesn't like you, she'll get rid of you. Look at some of the administrators who have come and gone since she joined the district. Her excuse for those departures are some lame excuse like not fitting the vision of the district or it;s in the best interest of the district.
ReplyDeleteShe rewards those like Ellie Gaines, who had never been a principal before; Roger Hill, who has no elementary experience; and Bill Dolezal, who floated from an administrator on assignment to DAMS AP to CSHS AP to principal of STMS, because she likes them. She doesn't even interview administrators anymore. She just appoints whomever she likes.
If you're a friend of Burdick's, your job is safe, If not, you end up like Ann Orlando (not that kicking her out is such a bad thing).
As far as BMES, concerned teachers did go to District (the majority of them are gone or at other schools now), concerned parents went to District (most of those are gone now or don't bother coming into school anymore). Yes it is painfully obvious Dr. Burdick is protecting Elie Gaines, for reasons that are unknown. I am not going to try to guess. What is very sad is that BMES was what other schools wanted to be. Last year it was a shell of what it was, now it needs a obituary written about it. Time to let it go...BMES is gone. Maybe it should be renamed out of respect to what it used to be. it no longer deserves to be called Black Mountain Elementary School...
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know why the District is seeking tom move a section of area w/in LMES boundary to BMES? (per the agenda for next board meeting)
ReplyDeleteDoesn't that affect our Elementary kids??? Wasn't that what Dr. Burdick said it "affects less students" to close DAMS and now they do it to more students??? Don't know, just saying???
ReplyDeletehere is the link to the board packet it seems they are wanting to change the boundaries...http://www.ccusd93.org/education/page/download.php?fileinfo=Qm9hcmRfQm9va18wODEwMTAucGRmOjo6L3d3dy9zY2hvb2xzL3NjL3JlbW90ZS9pbWFnZXMvZG9jbWdyLzQyNGZpbGUyMjkyMC5wZGY= Just a side note, they present and will vote on this Tuesday night...
ReplyDelete