[Updated to show classroms as currently configured]
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Cave Creek Unified School Utilization
We do the work that others won't...Click to enlarge
[Updated to show classroms as currently configured]
[Updated to show classroms as currently configured]
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Signs of Life in Cave Creek Unified
Kudos to Sandra Krestan for speaking to the governing board about the lack of input community and parent input into the recent changes.
See her speech here.
Public Comment – Sandy Krestan
Kudos to Governing Board Member Busbee for calling the administration on the carpet for its marketing over students.
Finally, kudos to Governing Board Member Clancy for asking where is the value proposition and rigorous curriculum in the new Cactus Shadows Prep.
See her speech here.
Public Comment – Sandy Krestan
Kudos to Governing Board Member Busbee for calling the administration on the carpet for its marketing over students.
Finally, kudos to Governing Board Member Clancy for asking where is the value proposition and rigorous curriculum in the new Cactus Shadows Prep.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Poor Curriculum Choices in Cave Creek Unified
The US Department of Education finds that the Cave Creek Unified middle school math program Connected Math has no effectiveness on math achievement.
CMP was found to have no discernible effects on math achievement.
Math achievement
Rating of effectiveness: No discernible effects
Improvement index Average: 0 percentile points
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/middle_math/cmp/
Compare this to Saxon Math a program that Cheyenne Traditional in SUSD and many charters use.
Saxon Middle School Math was found to have positive effects on math achievement.
Math achievement
Rating of effectiveness: Positive effects
Improvement index Average: +8 percentile points Range: -5 to +24 percentile points
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/middle_math/smsm/
The Core Knowledge Foundation suggests (but not endorses) Saxon and Singapore Math.
Core Knowledge Vendors
CMP was found to have no discernible effects on math achievement.
Math achievement
Rating of effectiveness: No discernible effects
Improvement index Average: 0 percentile points
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/middle_math/cmp/
Compare this to Saxon Math a program that Cheyenne Traditional in SUSD and many charters use.
Saxon Middle School Math was found to have positive effects on math achievement.
Math achievement
Rating of effectiveness: Positive effects
Improvement index Average: +8 percentile points Range: -5 to +24 percentile points
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/middle_math/smsm/
The Core Knowledge Foundation suggests (but not endorses) Saxon and Singapore Math.
Core Knowledge Vendors
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Cave Creek Unified: Welcome to the Minor Leagues
Continuing "the marketing is the new excelling" meme, we find out from the Sonoran News that Cactus Shadows' new athletic director is also responsible for marketing.
CSHS selects new athletic director
Apparently marketing skills are more important than job experience in Cave Creek Unified, which the new AD does not appear to have (seems he was a language arts teacher last month). Of course this follows in the great CCUSD tradition of hiring principals, curriculum directors, and even superintendents who have no direct job experience.
Until the administration with prompting from the governing board gets serious about demanding excellence and accountability our district will continue to suffer, whether it is defections to Pinnacle and ND for athletics, defections to charter schools and open enrollment for academics, or failing to convince our electorate that our district demands excellence and achievement.
Unfortunately the governing board cowers behind its 'micromanaging fear' and the administration works it tail off keeping the status quo.
Cave Creek Unified: Welcome to the minor leagues.
CSHS selects new athletic director
Principal Bebee:"...From his earlier corporate career as a ‘new business’ manager for Aetna health insurance, [our new ad] has strong communications and marketing skills. It’s time we begin marketing Cactus Shadows athletics.”
Steve Bebee is dead serious. Translate: halt the “defections” of DAMS and STMS graduating athletes to Pinnacle and Notre Dame.
Apparently marketing skills are more important than job experience in Cave Creek Unified, which the new AD does not appear to have (seems he was a language arts teacher last month). Of course this follows in the great CCUSD tradition of hiring principals, curriculum directors, and even superintendents who have no direct job experience.
Until the administration with prompting from the governing board gets serious about demanding excellence and accountability our district will continue to suffer, whether it is defections to Pinnacle and ND for athletics, defections to charter schools and open enrollment for academics, or failing to convince our electorate that our district demands excellence and achievement.
Unfortunately the governing board cowers behind its 'micromanaging fear' and the administration works it tail off keeping the status quo.
Cave Creek Unified: Welcome to the minor leagues.
Cave Creek Unified: Innovative Ideas for Consideration 3
Charter Academy (6-8)
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Let's not forget that in March we suggested opening a district sponsored charter would be helpful to the budget. Let's revisit.
CCUSD Budget Solutions: Open a district sponsored charter school...
We are still crunching the numbers but we propose that in addition to closing DSES, that CCUSD use part of Old BMES and open up a district sponsored charter school (of course with a rigorous academic program!). Our proposal would make it a K-8, 300 student school with a high student teacher ratio, again working under the theory that motivated students are easier to manage. Also with academics as the focus, the school would offer less services and extras, but parents would have a choice.
The primary theory we are working on has three main ideas...
1) A charter school student (in some cases) receives more state funding than a regular student in the form of additional assistance (but no transportation). Some have calculated this to be as high as $750 higher per student.
2) Opening this charter school could help relieve some class size issues
3) CCUSD would have a great tool to recruit students (assuming it is done with achievement in mind) by embracing the charter school movement instead of trying to fight it.
Great. The distirct finally is looking into it. About time. Increase academics and save money. A win, win. 400 students could generate the district $300 to $500,000. We recently proposed opening a charter based on the BASIS Schools here in CCUSD with a letter to the board
THE solution for Cave Creek Unified: Letter to Governing Board...
So how can Cave Creek Unified School District do? Simple. Open a grades 5 to 12 district sponsored charter school at the site of the old Black Mountain using the BASIS curriculum.
Sucking the students in at 5th grade and keeping them focused until 12 is a much better option than a 6-8 solution. AP classes from CSHS could be rolled over to the charter. As far as extracurriculars, CSHS would let the charter school students partcipate and we don't know why we cannot provide them transportation like we do for Career Success. Of course being a charter school, the district cannot implement an application process for admitance despite what it says in the governing board item.
Again like the traditional school, more details about the academics are required, but we see this as a step in the right direction.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about district sponsored Charter School:
1. Will the curriculum of the charter school be, what will it costs, and how will it differer from that currently in place?
2. Why can't charter school students be allowed to particpate in extra curricular activitives like Career Success (also a charter) students do?
3. Why can't the district provide transportation to charter school students like we do with Career Success (also a charter) ?
4. Would a 6th through 12th charter school be a better option?
5. Do the CCEA and teachers support a district sponsored charter? Will the district hire non-certified but qualified educators for the charter school?
6. Would a charter structure be a good choice for any type of school model (CK k-8 or 7-12 Prep) that is chosen?
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Let's not forget that in March we suggested opening a district sponsored charter would be helpful to the budget. Let's revisit.
CCUSD Budget Solutions: Open a district sponsored charter school...
We are still crunching the numbers but we propose that in addition to closing DSES, that CCUSD use part of Old BMES and open up a district sponsored charter school (of course with a rigorous academic program!). Our proposal would make it a K-8, 300 student school with a high student teacher ratio, again working under the theory that motivated students are easier to manage. Also with academics as the focus, the school would offer less services and extras, but parents would have a choice.
The primary theory we are working on has three main ideas...
1) A charter school student (in some cases) receives more state funding than a regular student in the form of additional assistance (but no transportation). Some have calculated this to be as high as $750 higher per student.
2) Opening this charter school could help relieve some class size issues
3) CCUSD would have a great tool to recruit students (assuming it is done with achievement in mind) by embracing the charter school movement instead of trying to fight it.
Great. The distirct finally is looking into it. About time. Increase academics and save money. A win, win. 400 students could generate the district $300 to $500,000. We recently proposed opening a charter based on the BASIS Schools here in CCUSD with a letter to the board
THE solution for Cave Creek Unified: Letter to Governing Board...
So how can Cave Creek Unified School District do? Simple. Open a grades 5 to 12 district sponsored charter school at the site of the old Black Mountain using the BASIS curriculum.
Sucking the students in at 5th grade and keeping them focused until 12 is a much better option than a 6-8 solution. AP classes from CSHS could be rolled over to the charter. As far as extracurriculars, CSHS would let the charter school students partcipate and we don't know why we cannot provide them transportation like we do for Career Success. Of course being a charter school, the district cannot implement an application process for admitance despite what it says in the governing board item.
Again like the traditional school, more details about the academics are required, but we see this as a step in the right direction.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about district sponsored Charter School:
1. Will the curriculum of the charter school be, what will it costs, and how will it differer from that currently in place?
2. Why can't charter school students be allowed to particpate in extra curricular activitives like Career Success (also a charter) students do?
3. Why can't the district provide transportation to charter school students like we do with Career Success (also a charter) ?
4. Would a 6th through 12th charter school be a better option?
5. Do the CCEA and teachers support a district sponsored charter? Will the district hire non-certified but qualified educators for the charter school?
6. Would a charter structure be a good choice for any type of school model (CK k-8 or 7-12 Prep) that is chosen?
Cave Creek Unified: Innovative Ideas for Consideration 2
High School Prep Academy
"Well there you go again". So right off the bat we see that laptops (and the associated costs) are back on the table, replaced by "netbooks". A side note on netbooks. They suck. Even Apple's COO who does not make netbooks, said recently that they suck.
“When I look at netbooks, I see cramped keyboards, terrible software, junky hardware, very small screens. It’s just not a good consumer experience and not something we would put the Mac brand on. It’s a segment we would not choose to play in.” Tim Cook, Apple COO
For learning these would be a disaster.
But back to the analysis at hand. There really isn't much to see here. We already offer this kind of course offering now and we don't see the attraction or the academic achievement. Maybe an AP\IB 6-12 school would have some merit, but no one will be buying a 7 to 12 prep academy. Parents that look at Foothills Academy, Basis, Scoostdale Prep etc will already be gone at 5th/6th grade. Students who do stay will not want to give up the extras that CSHS offers.
Maybe more details on this 'rigorous college prep' program would be helpful Without those details this looks like a way to backdoor laptops and to not really improve acheivement.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about a High School Prep Academy:
1. Are netbooks a necessary component of a 'rigorous college prep' program?
2. How will this school\program differ from the current honors\IB\Ap program or is this just a segmenting of the population?
3. Wouldn't 6th grade be a better starting year to compete with surrounding schools whose offerings start at 5th\6th?
4. What will make this this school more rigorus and what will it cost to implement?
"Well there you go again". So right off the bat we see that laptops (and the associated costs) are back on the table, replaced by "netbooks". A side note on netbooks. They suck. Even Apple's COO who does not make netbooks, said recently that they suck.
“When I look at netbooks, I see cramped keyboards, terrible software, junky hardware, very small screens. It’s just not a good consumer experience and not something we would put the Mac brand on. It’s a segment we would not choose to play in.” Tim Cook, Apple COO
For learning these would be a disaster.
But back to the analysis at hand. There really isn't much to see here. We already offer this kind of course offering now and we don't see the attraction or the academic achievement. Maybe an AP\IB 6-12 school would have some merit, but no one will be buying a 7 to 12 prep academy. Parents that look at Foothills Academy, Basis, Scoostdale Prep etc will already be gone at 5th/6th grade. Students who do stay will not want to give up the extras that CSHS offers.
Maybe more details on this 'rigorous college prep' program would be helpful Without those details this looks like a way to backdoor laptops and to not really improve acheivement.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about a High School Prep Academy:
1. Are netbooks a necessary component of a 'rigorous college prep' program?
2. How will this school\program differ from the current honors\IB\Ap program or is this just a segmenting of the population?
3. Wouldn't 6th grade be a better starting year to compete with surrounding schools whose offerings start at 5th\6th?
4. What will make this this school more rigorus and what will it cost to implement?
Cave Creek Unified: Innovative Ideas for Consideration
The Core Knowledge Sequence is a fine framework for learning but unless the district overhauls it curriculum, than the school will be a 'knowledge' school in name only. Parents are not going to be bamboozled (OK, some will) with a CK label above the door. Heck even Ventana offers CK and you don't see parents beating down that door.
PVUSD has stepped up the learning by making three of its schools (Wildfire, Grayhawk, and Pinnacle Peak) Official CK schools. Is the goal here to make the CCUSD CK school an Official CK School? If so some serious changes will be needed. CK is not a full curriculum but a sequence and framework that defines content to be learned at each grade level.
We have already shown that the Core Knowledge folks frown on Everyday Math...Day 3: Core Knowledge frowns on Everyday Math. Without a change to the math textbooks, any CK school in the district would not likely be able to receive an Official designation and would defeat the point of calling the school 'CK'. The district's reading and literature program would need to be replaced with one that emphasizes content, not quantity like it currently does now. The FOSS science would work well with CK. CK does an excellent job with social studies and it would be fantastic to replace the currently incoherent and inconsistent history and geography at the elementary level in CCUSD. So there is much work (and cost) to do if the district really wants to open a true CK school.
On the surface, it appears to us that since this is the path of least resistance, this is the way the district will end up going if it does anything "Innovative". It will have a CK school it can market to unsuspecting parents, but it likely will not put any real effort into making the CK school superior academically because that wouldn't be fair. The problem is that most parents not really leaving for CK itself, they are leaving for achievement. Look at Desert Sun, it has CK and it has the lowest enrollment in the district. Heck, even district parents aren't moving to DSES because they understand that the achievement is not any different. Schools like Foothills Academy, Freedom Academy North, and Scottsdale Prep are taking our students without offering CK. Parents want achievement and excellence, not the status quo.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about a K-8 Core Knowledge School:
1. Will the curriculum of the CK school be completely overhauled to meet the requirements of the CK sequence and at what cost?
2. Will the district make this school an Official CK school?
3. If CK is such an outstanding program worthy of implementing, why not implement it at all of our schools? Shouldn’t a CK type program be the baseline in our district, and not the bar.
CCUSD Watch
http://ccusdwatch.com
ccusdwatch@hotmail.com
Follow us on Twitter
PVUSD has stepped up the learning by making three of its schools (Wildfire, Grayhawk, and Pinnacle Peak) Official CK schools. Is the goal here to make the CCUSD CK school an Official CK School? If so some serious changes will be needed. CK is not a full curriculum but a sequence and framework that defines content to be learned at each grade level.
We have already shown that the Core Knowledge folks frown on Everyday Math...Day 3: Core Knowledge frowns on Everyday Math. Without a change to the math textbooks, any CK school in the district would not likely be able to receive an Official designation and would defeat the point of calling the school 'CK'. The district's reading and literature program would need to be replaced with one that emphasizes content, not quantity like it currently does now. The FOSS science would work well with CK. CK does an excellent job with social studies and it would be fantastic to replace the currently incoherent and inconsistent history and geography at the elementary level in CCUSD. So there is much work (and cost) to do if the district really wants to open a true CK school.
On the surface, it appears to us that since this is the path of least resistance, this is the way the district will end up going if it does anything "Innovative". It will have a CK school it can market to unsuspecting parents, but it likely will not put any real effort into making the CK school superior academically because that wouldn't be fair. The problem is that most parents not really leaving for CK itself, they are leaving for achievement. Look at Desert Sun, it has CK and it has the lowest enrollment in the district. Heck, even district parents aren't moving to DSES because they understand that the achievement is not any different. Schools like Foothills Academy, Freedom Academy North, and Scottsdale Prep are taking our students without offering CK. Parents want achievement and excellence, not the status quo.
Questions for the board members to ask the administration about a K-8 Core Knowledge School:
1. Will the curriculum of the CK school be completely overhauled to meet the requirements of the CK sequence and at what cost?
2. Will the district make this school an Official CK school?
3. If CK is such an outstanding program worthy of implementing, why not implement it at all of our schools? Shouldn’t a CK type program be the baseline in our district, and not the bar.
CCUSD Watch
http://ccusdwatch.com
ccusdwatch@hotmail.com
Follow us on Twitter
Letter to Mark Warren, Cave Creek Unified Governing Board President
From: ccusdwatch@hotmail.com
To: xxxxxx@cox.net; mwarren@ccusd93.org; cperkins@ccusd93.org; xxxxxxx@cox.net; dschaefer@ccusd93.org; xxxxxxx@aol.com; jbusbee@ccusd93.org; susancavecreek@aol.com
Subject: Letter to Mark Warren, Cave Creek Governing Board President
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:31:30 -0700
Mr. Warren,
Let us be clear. Cave Creek Unified School District 93 is the best district in the state of Arizona. This is not good enough. Individually, our schools are not the best schools in the state. They are not even the best schools north of Bell Rd.
Let's also be clear that when we compare CCUSD to other schools, we only compare them to surrounding public schools in Arizona, and almost always neighboring public schools. We fully understand the difference between AIMS and the DPA/Terranova NRT tests and how to interpret the scores. We've never expected CCUSD's NRT scores to be 100% and we have never compared them to other states.
What we have said is that:
1) AIMS is a test with low standards
2) AIMS is a poor judge of year over year performance due to the state meddling which every educator in this state knows
3) AIMS labels are meaningless ranges that show little real data about performance
4) DPA/TN isn't much better, but it is a better gauge than AIMS, especially over time
A director of Phoenix public school said this of AIMS last year:
"It is so basic we can't even use it as a benchmark of quality on a national landscape. People just laugh,...If that's where we're setting the bar, we're not a college prep."
At the 12/08 board meeting Dr. Burdick has made it clear that AIMS is the only standard that CCUSD students will be taught to. Disappointing but this was the bed that you made when you hired her and now CCUSD students have to lie it in. At least parents are lucky enough that they have open enrollment, charter, and home schooling if they are not satisfied with meeting state standards.
Bottom line, any way you score it, whether it be AIMS, DPA, AP, or SAT test scores, this district underperforms surrounding schools. We blame poor curriculum choices. If you have the data that says otherwise please pass it along and we will be happy to post it in its entirety. If you are satisfied, well than by all means continue with the status quo and put your efforts into your marketing problem. Godspeed to those under your charge.
One more thing. While you were all bedazzled by the offerings that CCUSD and Cactus Shadows have, did you stop and think that maybe every other neighboring school also has the same\similar\better offerings? Well they do.
--
CCUSD Watch
http://ccusdwatch.com
ccusdwatch@hotmail.com
To: xxxxxx@cox.net; mwarren@ccusd93.org; cperkins@ccusd93.org; xxxxxxx@cox.net; dschaefer@ccusd93.org; xxxxxxx@aol.com; jbusbee@ccusd93.org; susancavecreek@aol.com
Subject: Letter to Mark Warren, Cave Creek Governing Board President
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:31:30 -0700
Mr. Warren,
Let us be clear. Cave Creek Unified School District 93 is the best district in the state of Arizona. This is not good enough. Individually, our schools are not the best schools in the state. They are not even the best schools north of Bell Rd.
Let's also be clear that when we compare CCUSD to other schools, we only compare them to surrounding public schools in Arizona, and almost always neighboring public schools. We fully understand the difference between AIMS and the DPA/Terranova NRT tests and how to interpret the scores. We've never expected CCUSD's NRT scores to be 100% and we have never compared them to other states.
What we have said is that:
1) AIMS is a test with low standards
2) AIMS is a poor judge of year over year performance due to the state meddling which every educator in this state knows
3) AIMS labels are meaningless ranges that show little real data about performance
4) DPA/TN isn't much better, but it is a better gauge than AIMS, especially over time
A director of Phoenix public school said this of AIMS last year:
"It is so basic we can't even use it as a benchmark of quality on a national landscape. People just laugh,...If that's where we're setting the bar, we're not a college prep."
At the 12/08 board meeting Dr. Burdick has made it clear that AIMS is the only standard that CCUSD students will be taught to. Disappointing but this was the bed that you made when you hired her and now CCUSD students have to lie it in. At least parents are lucky enough that they have open enrollment, charter, and home schooling if they are not satisfied with meeting state standards.
Bottom line, any way you score it, whether it be AIMS, DPA, AP, or SAT test scores, this district underperforms surrounding schools. We blame poor curriculum choices. If you have the data that says otherwise please pass it along and we will be happy to post it in its entirety. If you are satisfied, well than by all means continue with the status quo and put your efforts into your marketing problem. Godspeed to those under your charge.
One more thing. While you were all bedazzled by the offerings that CCUSD and Cactus Shadows have, did you stop and think that maybe every other neighboring school also has the same\similar\better offerings? Well they do.
--
CCUSD Watch
http://ccusdwatch.com
ccusdwatch@hotmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)