Poverty NOT the problem with K-12 math

By Laurie H. Rogers

[Updated March 14]
A local school district spokesperson was quoted in a Feb. 27 column in The Spokesman-Review. According to column author Chris Cargill, of the Washington Policy Center, the district spokesperson said: “Instead of criticism, we’d like some help” (“Schools don’t shine in index”). The quotation made me laugh. What kind of help would that be, exactly?

• For four years and six weeks, I’ve tried to persuade central-office administrators to adopt math materials that will get our children to college readiness in math. They don’t appear to want that help. On March 14, the executive director of instructional programs told parents the district wouldn't replace Connected Mathematics for at least two more years.
• I’ve tried to persuade a few principals to allow me to begin a free tutoring program in arithmetic. Other community members also have tried this. The district doesn’t appear to want that help.
• I’ve been asking questions since January 2007. I write this blog. I’ve written a book. Central-office administrators and a quorum of board directors appear uninterested in my research, my desires as a parent, my daughter’s needs, or what would cause me to spend four years in this way. Occasionally, I get a glimpse of what some of them think about me and my efforts to help the children. Often shockingly arrogant and immature, their comments also indicate they haven't budged an inch on reform math.
• I’m working now with two STEM professionals to give people the information they need to help their children and grandchildren. Administrators definitely don’t want that help. They continue to argue passionately for their approach. It’s obvious to everyone but them that this approach completely fails the children.

Read through my blog and see how central-office administrators have obstructed, undermined, and dismissed all help from the community … unless it supported their philosophy toward learning or came with a check. The district administration doesn’t want “help.” It wants scapegoats.

A favorite scapegoat, used shamelessly and with impunity, is poverty. I heard it from self-identified teachers at a March 12 legislative town hall meeting. I saw it in the March 9 weekly The Inlander. I hear it frequently from district administrators.

“We have so many poor people,” they say sadly, bellies up and paws waving. “Can’t you see we’re doing our best? It’s the poverty. We can’t overcome poverty. Poverty is the problem. We also have ineffective teachers, uninvolved parents, unmotivated students, social issues, lack of money, changing standards, testing, No Child Left Behind, huge classes, and … uh … a bunch of other things for which we’re definitely NOT responsible … But, the main problem is poverty.”

“Poverty is the key,” a district employee said at our Feb. 7 forum. “If you could fix poverty, you would fix the math problem.” He thinks he’s absolved from responsibility. Pass rates on standardized math tests do tend to be lower for disadvantaged students, but that isn’t because poverty is the problem with math. Jaime Escalante, Ben Chavis and Geoffrey Canada all have capably taught math to disadvantaged children.

I could give every poor family in Spokane millions of dollars, fancy suits, and a Lamborghini. If their children went through the district math program, and without outside intervention, they would eventually park the family Lamborghini in the community college parking lot and walk inside to take multiple remedial math classes – which about half would fail.

Four things are required for any classroom to be effective. I call those things the “Square of Effective Learning.” These are its four corners:

1. Effective teacher
2. Prepared student
3. Efficient and effective curriculum (learning materials)
4. Focused and effective learning environment

Poverty is not in this Square. (Careful now, lest you accidentally stereotype low-income families.)

I built the Square of Effective Learning because administrators and instructional coaches continually divert the conversation away from the math materials. Spokane’s K-8 math materials have been criticized across this country, from border-to-border and from coast-to-coast since their inception. They have wreaked devastation in every community, every income level, and every ethnicity. Spokane’s leadership has so far refused to replace its K-8 materials with math textbooks that are efficient, effective and sufficient.

Our students are prevented from learning the mathematical skills that would help them rise out of their circumstances. Administrators blame poverty, while they add to the poverty problem. Rather than allowing these kids to learn to fish, they’re grooming them to accept a fish a day for the rest of their lives.

Poverty isn’t the math problem, and money won’t fix it. The math problem is fixed by teaching students sufficient math skills. Children from poor families can be taught, and if they’re ever to escape poverty, they must be taught. Students get one shot at a good K-12 education. The material must therefore be delivered effectively and efficiently.

At one time, children from low-income families were taught effectively and efficiently. My husband’s family was poor. Many of today’s STEM professionals used to be poor. Several attendees at our community forums grew up poor, but their education gave them new lives. They resent hearing that poverty is the problem with math. Huge numbers of immigrants came to America to be taught in our public education system. They were taught rigorously and efficiently - even with language barriers - and most thrived. Today’s immigrants, however, are perplexed by the lack of arithmetic, grammar, civics, or cursive writing in our schools. When they ask questions about the math program, some are assured: “There are lots of fields that don’t require math.”

"That isn’t what I want to hear,” a parent said to me recently. “My children need to learn math. They need to learn grammar. They need to go to college. It’s why I came here. I’m angry to hear that my income level is being blamed for district failures.”

Here’s how income level does bear on the math problem. Parents with money are better able to fix the mess the district leaves behind. Those with a math background can see gaps earlier and more clearly and can help fill in those gaps. Parents with money are better able to pay for professional tutors or private schools where teachers are allowed to teach. They often have connections and options that other parents don’t. Poverty bears on learning insofar as it prevents parents from hiring people who will do what the public schools won’t.

Meanwhile, as our administrators complain continually about poverty, I’ve watched for four years as Spokane Public Schools sinks under

• high remediation rates in college in math and English
• low pass rates on state tests that required less than 60% to pass
• low levels of student skills, to a point where students know almost no grammar, can’t add fractions together, don’t understand the number line, and can’t accurately subtract simple numbers without the use of a calculator
• a net loss of thousands of full-time-enrolled students
• high dropout rates, even in middle school
• complaints from parents and community members
• ever-increasing expenditures per student

Nancy Stowell became superintendent in 2007 but has been a central-office administrator since 1991. What are her successes? She and her administrators get a perennial free pass on failed policy. There is no real oversight, no assessment, no objective analysis of their effectiveness, as it relates to student outcomes. They interfere constantly, yet they’re ready to "assess" teachers, happy to assess teachers, really looking forward to assessing teachers --- based on student outcomes. Gee, I wonder how that will go.

When central-office administrators refuse to do what needs to be done for the students, to carry out the will of the board, to listen to parents and professionals, or to be accountable for the poor results of their policies – they must be replaced. When they persist in blaming everyone else, hounding good teachers out of the classroom, and wasting taxpayer money on their own salaries and failed philosophy – they must be replaced.

The contract for Spokane’s superintendent rolls over in June, each year putting her in the first year of a three-year contract. Hers is basically a lifetime job, unless the board takes action. Apparently, this sort of contract isn’t unusual in public education. Other central-office decision-makers also have de facto lifetime jobs. Student outcomes obviously aren’t the metric for their evaluation; otherwise, nearly all would be gone.

District K-12 math programs must include standard algorithms, practicing to mastery, efficiency, effectiveness, and sufficient arithmetic and algebra. Current students who need remediation (to bring them to where they should have been) must get it. If the superintendent won’t replace ineffective administrators with effective ones, then the board must replace her. If the board won’t replace the superintendent … the people must replace the board.

Our children and our communities need strong math and grammar skills, and we, the people must find a way to work together and make it happen.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is
Rogers, L. (March 2011). "Poverty NOT the problem with K-12 math." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

CCSS: Please ask all legislators to vote to delay

Note from Laurie Rogers: Below is a sample letter you can send to legislators asking them to delay the implementation of the Common Core State Standards in Washington State. Below the letter is argumentation explaining why the CCSS must not be adopted. Links to legislator email addresses are here.

Please write to legislators today, and ask others to do it as well. Please write to more than just your representatives. This vote must cross the aisle, or it will be unsuccessful. Please do not delay. Time is of the essence. In Washington State, if legislators do nothing, the CCSS will be adopted under legislation passed last year. This was a sneaky move by supporters of the CCSS.

This year's HB1891 moved to delay the adoption of the CCSS, but Rep. Santos refused to allow a hearing on HB1891. After much pressure on Rep. Santos, a hearing now is scheduled for March 10 at 8 a.m., but that is after the House deadline. It's hard to say if HB1891 still has any legs, because legislative rules appear to be flexible for those in charge.

Language from HB1891 can still be written into a Senate bill. The CCSS must be stopped - in Washington State and elsewhere. Please write to your legislators now.

***************

Dear Sir/Madam:

Re: House Bill 1891 in the House Education Committee

A hearing on HB1891 is scheduled for March 10 at 8 a.m. This legislation must be passed, or its language must be incorporated into another House or Senate bill and then passed in this session.

I’m asking for your vigorous support for the language in HB1891. Please take action to stop the erosion of local control of our children’s education. Please represent the interests of your constituents by:

1. Ensuring that school standards for Washingtonians are “Washington grown and managed” – not foisted on us by federal and corporate interests, and not driven by a multi-state, ideologically driven consortium.
2. Ensuring that the better mathematics standards Washington taxpayers have already paid for will remain the law of the land.
3. Saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars simply by not signing us on to the Common Core State Standards and common tests initiatives.

I hope to see your public support of HB1891, and your public rejection of all other bills that also would serve to remove the people’s voice. Your legislative acumen and skills must be put into overdrive in an all-out effort to have HB1891 passed.

Last year’s elections clearly indicate that the people expect their legislators to represent their interests. I’m closely watching this issue and will assess my legislators’ commitment to my interests. The people desire local decision-making on local issues.

Thank you for your efforts on our behalf.

Very respectfully,

(your name and contact information) 

***************************************** 

Reasons Not to adopt the Common Core State Standards

By Laurie H. Rogers, education advocate, Spokane, WA

• The CCSS/tests/curriculum initiatives are untested and unproved. There are no tangible, measurable results anywhere in this country, no evidence to support allegations of their efficacy. Our children and teachers are the subjects of this national education experiment. It’s irresponsible to mandate that we all rush to adopt untested products.
• In math, the CCSS are a lesser product. Supporters of the CCSS admit that Washington’s current math standards are better, but they claim it doesn’t matter. Who spends hundreds of millions of dollars to adopt something that isn’t as good?
• The CCSS are a “minimum” AND a “maximum” standard. Our state is allowed to add up to 15% more content to the CCSS, but the costs of adding and assessing the extra are to be borne by taxpayers. It's almost certain we would get the CCSS as is. Regardless, any addition is limited to 15%.
• The people don’t own the CCSS. Non-governmental organizations NGA and CCSSO own the CCSS. There is therefore no public accountability for the quality of the CCSS, no public vote against them, no public control over how they will be modified, and no recourse if the people don’t like the results.
• Nationalization of public education. With national standards, a national test, a national curriculum, a national database – and no local control – public education is thereby nationalized. Taxpayers will not be in control of what their children are learning, in the classrooms they pay for.
• Initially, these initiatives will produce instability and taxpayer costs. Then, there will be continued change and costs, or national paralysis. Centralization of public education initially will cause upheaval as all districts change over – at a cost of billions of taxpayer dollars. Supporters have called the CCSS a “living document,” indicating that change is expected. If so, this will be change and costs over which our state, districts, legislators, teachers and parents have little or no control. Another distinct possibility is national paralysis, where no one wants to change anything because then everyone would have to change.
• These initiatives will provide less public accountability. With the national standards/tests/curriculum, public education will be turned over to people who don’t know us, and who will never talk with us. It will result in a complete loss of local decision-making, and less real public accountability.
• The process used in Washington State to “provisionally” adopt the CCSS cut the public out of the process until it was all but too late. The public was told one thing, even as a completely different thing was happening. Gov. Gregoire and Superintendent Dorn signed a Memorandum of Agreement on the CCSS with no public notification. A few months later, they were pushing districts to sign on to RTTT (and the attendant CCSS) before the standards were even written.
• When public input finally was solicited, it was after the CCSS had been provisionally adopted. OSPI’s public “surveys” were heavily biased toward their permanent adoption.
• I’ve been trying for almost two years to get answers from the national business and political interests pushing the CCSS, and from the U.S. Department of Education. I haven’t received responses from most of these people, much less answers. The Dept. of Ed appears to be ignoring a Freedom of Information Act request about the CCSS.
• The CCSS were provisionally adopted, pending a legislative review in early 2011. But in this 2011 session, legislators have not had the opportunity to vote against their permanent adoption.
• Adopting the CCSS/tests/curriculum is a waste of taxpayer money. The money Washington State would get for the Race to the Top initiative will not pay for the costs of adopting the national standards/tests/curriculum. Ultimately, the national standards/tests/curriculum initiatives will cost more than the standards and assessments we have now.
• Washington State taxpayers spent more than $100 million on the development and implementation of the 2008 math standards that are clearer and more rigorous than those in the CCSS.
• State education agencies’ cost estimations for the CCSS often don’t take into account district costs, nor costs for materials, professional development, or the technology mandated by the new “common” tests.
• The money to build current standards and assessments is already spent. There are no savings to be had – not until the state MIGHT make changes at some unknown point down the road. It’s “creative accounting” to call that nebulous assumption “saving money.”
• It isn’t better to spend “federal” money than it is to spend “district” money. “Federal,” “state” and “district” money are all taxpayer money. Taxpayers can’t afford this untested, unproved upheaval.
• Even if Washington adopted the CCSS and got all of the money it could get for Race to the Top, half stays at the state level. The amount going to districts is a few dozen dollars per student per year, and there is no guarantee that ANY of it would go to classrooms.

No taxpayer understands spending hundreds of millions of dollars to adopt standards that are untested, expensive, and demonstrably less rigorous in math than what we have now. Yes, our public education system is weak. The answer is not to give away more control – it is to regain control at local levels, and hold those local people accountable. Something needs to be done, but not this. Not the CCSS. Not RTTT. Not the centralization and federalization of public education. Not the removal of the people’s voice and our vote. We need MORE voice, more choice, and more options for parents and teachers. Competition is good for education.

The CCSS/common assessments will add to costs, lower standards, eliminate choice, and ultimately not help children learn better. Adopting the CCSS will take our public schools in exactly the wrong direction.

Legislators must vote to delay the CCSS. Please help put a STOP to the adoption of the CCSS, to the complete centralization of our public education system, and to the removal of the people's voice.

Thank you for your help.
Laurie Rogers

Public education slipping out of our hands; we must fight to get it back

[Updated March 3, 2011, to add a paragraph about CCSS also being a "maximum standard."]

By Laurie H. Rogers


The Common Core State Standards (national standards) are leading to national assessments, which are leading to a national curriculum. Sec. Arne Duncan has spoken publicly about making all federal taxpayer money for education contingent on adopting this federal vision. The national assessments will be online, perhaps leading to a national database of our students and teachers. And there you have it: Nationalization of public education. This is a national experiment -- untested, unfunded, long-term expensive, and with no student data to support it.

Many people don't realize that the CCSS aren't just a "minimum" standard. They're also a "maximum" standard. Washington would be allowed to add up to 15% more content to the CCSS, but no more. Additionally, the costs of adding, supporting and assessing that extra 15% would be borne by state taxpayers. Therefore, it's likely we would get the CCSS as is, whatever they are, whatever they become under the people who control them. The CCSS are a gateway to a national test and a national curriculum. At that point, parents have nothing more to say about what our children are learning in the public schools that we pay for. It will all be said for us.

A large portion of this country doesn't want this. But who cares about what the people want? So far, in Washington State, few education administrators or lawmakers have paid much attention to what We, the People want in public education. It makes me wonder: Who could actually stop this train?

• It won’t be the state legislators who wanted to adopt the CCSS sight unseen. They listened to well-reasoned arguments against their adoption, and they voted for the standards/tests anyway.
• It won’t be the state legislators who didn’t want to adopt the CCSS at all. After Washington Superintendent Randy Dorn provisionally adopted the CCSS last year, our legislators never had a chance to vote against their permanent adoption. Last year’s “provisional” adoption was a de facto permanent adoption – not that anyone told the people this. At this moment, Washington taxpayers have a slim chance, if legislators amend an existing bill to include language preventing the adoption. The time to do that is almost gone.
• It won’t be the governors or state education agencies who were always on board, right from the beginning, before the CCSS were written, before the people knew about it, before we had a chance to think about it, before anything was even down on paper.
• It won’t be the local school board directors who heard the people say "wait!" and who heard the governor and the state superintendent say "do it" -- and who promptly voted to do it.
• It won’t be the local superintendents who appear to view the people's wishes with general disdain and who always supported the CCSS/tests initiatives, arguing for them with incredibly weak, yet wildly successful argumentation.
• It won’t be those teachers unions that climbed on board the nationalization train, or the ones that are reluctant to stand tall in support of their beleaguered teachers.
• It won’t be the media that are filled with praise for these initiatives and for the people involved in them, or that are absolutely silent on the more worrisome aspects.
• It won’t be the teachers who - out of fear for their jobs - have remained largely silent, and who now have a big target on their backs via a national "Blame the Teacher" movement.

We must understand what's bearing down on us here. Our last recourse, as parents, is to leave the system. And when the U.S. Secretary of Education, Bill Gates, the NGA, the CCSSO, Achieve, and Pearson Education don't want us to leave? What will happen then? There are people in charge now who would have no problem with limiting, monitoring, or regulating private schooling or homeschooling ... or with eliminating homeschooling completely. All for the good of the children, of course.

For all intents and purposes, folks, we have already lost our voice. The Education Machine already has complete control. It's still playing nice, pretending that We, the People have input. But the process already is sewn up tight.

We can see the truth in those rare instances when someone stands up to fight it. Then the boot comes out. Or, when we expect to have input, and we see that our voice was purposefully slanted, rewritten, removed, and rephrased. Or, when we expect our legislators to vote against something, and they can't ...  never having the opportunity to do what we ask.

What We, the People must do now is fight to get back our voice. This national standards/tests/curriculum movement is likely to lead public-school classrooms right back into reform math hell (that many of us sadly were never able to leave). But wherever it takes us, that path will be mandated, away from the people, away from our input or our control. And without real accountability to the people, without our dissent, without our arguments, and without our vote -- but with a bottomless pit of our tax dollars -- these initiatives could well bury this country for generations.

Despite all of this, I have hope. I believe in the democratic Republic, and I believe in the people. The solution rests with all of us. We've been persistently lied to, and so most of us have been silent, not understanding what's happened. Or, we've been concerned, but unsure of where to take our concern. It doesn't have to stay that way.

In Spokane and in the surrounding area, the people are listening. I'll speak to any group, I'll do it for free, and I'll fight for as long as I can. This battle is about more than the children, more than the teachers, more than the future of public education. This really is about our future as a free and educated people.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:

Rogers, L. (March 2011). "Public education slipping out of our hands; we must fight to get it back." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Stop fighting lost causes; start talking with the people

By Laurie H. Rogers

I’ve had a Eureka moment.

We advocates for public education heroically argue against bad legislation, bad policy, and bad process. Ultimately, it’s a losing battle. We spend scarce time and energy fighting a single fire – watching numbly as 20 more erupt. And the fire we thought we’d extinguished flares up again.

We, the People are on one side – minimally funded, with minimal time. On the other side is the Education Machine: administrators, legislators, governors, national leaders, business and institutional interests, and folks with a reform agenda. The Machine has the process sewn up tight – people in their pocket, well-heeled connections, powerful promises, backroom deals, and seductive lies.

Just look at much of public education today. The most dedicated, caring teachers can’t overcome the program: We have guessing and estimation rather than accuracy; weak process; insufficient grammar, civics, or math skills; no cursive writing (so, no reading original historical documents); constant group work and "consensus-building" that lead to groupthink; "peer reviews"; low achievement; weak skills; social issues and self-esteem trumping academics; inadequate testing; deceitful scoring; manipulated data; wasted taxpayer dollars; and administrative denial and obstruction. It takes one's breath away.

It’s time to switch gears. It’s time to stop arguing with the power structure and start talking with the people.

What do students need in any academic subject? They need a strong set of learning materials, an effective teacher, and a focused learning environment. We, the People must work together to make this happen, to focus on what matters, and to push for what our children and our country need.

The Education Machine doesn’t want this kind of involvement. Legislation is oozing across the country that will remove the People from the process, through a) “common” K-12 standards/tests/curriculum; b) consolidation and centralization of public education “from cradle to career”; and c) elimination of elected positions. Why are they forcing this legislation? Because it’s easier to press an agenda when no one can argue.

Textbooks and program materials

School administrators like to say that the textbook is less important than the learning standards. Here's why that's wrong. With good materials that are clear, logical, concise and thorough … written in appropriate language for those who are to learn from them ... students don't need standards OR testing to learn sufficient content. Conversely, with excellent standards and testing, but with weak materials, students are unlikely to learn sufficient content. 

Our daughter is a prime example. We’ve tutored her in math since the 4th grade. We pulled her out of her 6th-grade and 8^th-grade math classes to avoid reform content and excessive constructivism. She takes a traditional textbook to school and works on her own. At home, I check for good process, correct answers, understanding and application. She’s comfortably halfway through Algebra II. She blows Washington’s weak tests out of the water. She took the PSAT as an 8th grader and scored in the 94th percentile in math. The difference in math knowledge between her and most Spokane 8^th graders is a mountain. Most of them could be where she is, but Spokane teachers must use the materials and process they’re given.

The keys to learning math are efficiency and effectiveness – in content and in teaching. Interestingly, parents, teachers, students, and community members want to talk about these things, while administrators, legislators, politicians, and policy makers do not. Meanwhile, the People are being neatly excised from discussions, as the tentacles of national standards and national tests envelop the nation. These initiatives are unlikely to bring clear, logical, concise, and thorough materials into our schools. Here’s why.

Common Core State Standards (CCSS), and common test initiatives

Shortly after Arne Duncan was appointed Secretary of the Department of Education, advocates heard about an initiative to develop national standards. Called the Common Core State Standards initiative, or CCSS, it wasn’t a new idea. The 1989 NCTM Standards, which brought today’s reform math into our schools, were an example of de facto national standards, albeit not mandatory.

Billed as a grass-roots effort, the CCSS were to align all state standards and produce stability and international competitiveness – supposedly for less money. States, districts, organizations and companies fell in line with this federal vision – lured, no doubt, by political alliances and promises of money.

I respect the effort and intent of some traditionalists who helped write the CCSS, but in the end, these initiatives will bury us in more bad materials. People who oppose anything of a more traditional bent are excited at the prospect of the CCSS. States began signing on to the CCSS sight unseen. Supporters didn’t seem bothered by early weak drafts or by public concerns over the clarity, rigor, and thoroughness of the final version. State adoption processes often cut out or ignored public opposition. Proponents dismissed public concerns about “local control,” “state rights,” and “federal overreach.”

What’s the result? Even supporters of the initiatives acknowledge that the CCSS for math aren’t as good as Washington’s 2008 math standards. Why would taxpayers want to spend scarce dollars adopting standards that aren’t as good? We don’t, but the Machine is determined to do it. If the CCSS are a pathway to more reform math – this time, reform will be mandated, and the people will be powerless to change it.

The process of adopting the CCSS in Washington State was fraught with secrecy, deceit and manipulation. We, the People were allowed just minimal involvement. Despite what the people were led to believe, the 2011 legislature never had a chance to vote against the their permanent adoption. It was a done deal from the beginning, on the sneak -- before the standards were written, before the people saw them, before we could give input.

These political machinations at local, state and federal levels indicate that the initiatives are about control, not academics. The CCSS are dangerous, and the Education Machine wants them badly. How will We, the People argue with Sec. Duncan, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the NGA, the CCSSO, Achieve, Pearson Education, Texas Instruments, state legislators, our governor, our superintendents, various institutions, and multiple corporations and organizations? Our interests are about our children and our country – not about profits, ego, reform ideology, and political alliances.

The solution, then, is to stop arguing. Stop fighting with an immoveable force. Start rousing the people. We advocates have been nobly but ineffectually focused on putting out spot fires, and we’ve neglected to light a fire under the people. When the people do hear the truth, they listen, they understand, and they want to save their children.

We need to remove from our classrooms 1) reform math programs, 2) excessive constructivism, and 3) constant distraction from academics. If district staff won’t do it, then the superintendent must replace them with people who will. If she/he won’t do it, then the school board must replace him/her with someone who will. If the school board won’t do it, then the people must vote out the school board. If that doesn’t happen, then parents have choices to make about how they’ll get good materials to their children.

District people keep trying to distract the conversation away from the math materials. But - minus that distraction - the people can hear us. Advocates must stay focused.

Here’s what needs to happen for things to improve for the children:

• Replace K-12 reform programs with programs that are clear, logical, concise, and thorough, and that are proved to be effective in scientifically conducted, peer-reviewed research.
• Teachers must be allowed to directly teach their students.
• The learning environment must be focused on academics.
• Remediation must be provided to all students who require it.

 In addition, to retain our voice and to promote real public accountability:

• The CCSS must be stopped. CCSS adoptions must be reversed.
• Centralization of public education, and the elimination of elected positions, must be rejected. In WA, there are half a dozen bills that seek to consolidate and centralize public education, pre-K to career: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/p/proposed-education-legislation.html
• Check registers for school districts and state education agencies must be posted online. It’s all our money. Let’s see where it’s going. I guarantee that a) there’s a lot more money for public education than you think, and b) most of it isn’t going where you think it is.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:

Rogers, L. (February 2011). "Stop fighting lost causes; start talking with the people." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Democracy denied (so far) on HB1891

By Bob Dean

It’s ironic that while we are watching Egyptians half way around the globe fight for democracy, we are being denied democracy right here in the state of Washington. Representative Sharon Tomiko Santos of the 37th district, chairman of the house education committee, is refusing to have a hearing on HB1891, a bill to delay the adoption of the Common Core State Standards on math and English. This is a monumental decision by our state and it deserves to have an up or down vote from the legislature.

The legislature is playing a sly game, because they have never voted on the Common Core. Instead they voted to give our State Superintendent Randy Dorn the power to provisionally adopt the Common Core last August so we could look better on our application for the Race to the Top funds. Unfortunately, we never got a dime of RttT money.

Even so, Dorn was given the right to make the decision on Common Core. The legislature added a clause in the legislation, SB6696, that stated the adoption could be made permanent by Dorn after the 2011 session if there were no objections by the education committees. Thus, the Common Core State Standards can be adopted without ever being voted on by the legislature. If this move turns out to be a big mistake they can blame it all on Randy Dorn for making this historic change in our state education system.

I have given long technical arguments about why the Common Core standards would be bad for our state in earlier blogs, but the bottom line is just this: The people for the CCSS want to nationalize our education system. They want to give away the rights of the citizens of Washington to affect the education of our children and give it to a very small group of unelected people in Washington DC. This small group of people (CCSSI) was formed and financed by Bill Gates and then put under the auspices of the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Counsel of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The governors and the state superintendents really have very little input to this group. Any state only has one vote to make any changes or to resist what they are doing. While a state could back out of the association, once we start down the CCSS road it would cost hundreds of millions to reverse course. This is even worse than federal control because these people are insulated from any public vote.

Washington State had the worst math standards in the nation for more than a decade. It was the citizens of Washington who finally forced OSPI and the legislature to dump our old standards and begin the process of rewriting our standards. Washington now has some of the best math standards in the nation. There is absolutely no justification to make this change based on the merit of the CCSS and there is no reason to take away the rights of Washingtonians. This is about nationalizing our education system pure and simple.

A decision of this magnitude begs for a vote from the full legislature. Win or lose we do not want the legislature to be able to slip the CCSS through under the radar. Many who voted for SB6696 did so for other reasons. They were unaware of what the CCSS were all about. We want an up or down vote on the CCSS. Washington citizens deserve to know who it is that is giving away their rights. That is what HB1891 is all about.

Please call the legislative hotline at 1.800.562.6000 and tell your legislators that HB1891 deserves a hearing. Even better, email Representative Santos right now at, santos.sharontomiko@leg.wa.gov and tell her that Washingtonians don’t want democracy to be denied and she has no right to keep HB1891 from being heard. After you email her, call her legislative number at 1.360.786.7944 (Olympia) and give her the same message, but be prepared for a grumpy voice at the other end of the line (not hers) because she is getting hundreds of calls from all over the state.


Bob Dean is math department chairman at Evergreen High School, Vancouver, WA. He was a State Board of Education Math Advisory Panel Member; on the OSPI Standards Revision Team; and is a member of the Where's the Math? Executive Committee.

 
Note from Laurie Rogers: If you would like to submit a guest column on public education, please write to me at wlroge@comcast.net. Please limit columns to not more than 1,000 words. Columns might be edited for length, content or grammar. You may remain anonymous to the public, however I must know who you are. All decisions on guest columns are the sole right and responsibility of Laurie Rogers.

District tries to silence dissenting voices

By Laurie H. Rogers

Note from Laurie Rogers: Our public forums are designed to inform, to collect input, and to provide like-minded people with a path for improving math education in Spokane. The forums are public, with no expectation of privacy. We will make every effort to maintain privacy and to quote statements rather than specific people. However, district administration and board directors should expect to be directly and freely quoted.


Wow. WOW.

John Barber, retired engineer, Clint Thatcher, retired math instructor, and I are holding free community forums on K-12 math education. I am shocked at how school district employees treated members of the public at our Feb. 7 forum at Shadle Public Library.

The stated goals of our forums are to:

1. inform the community about the math materials being used in our schools,
2. listen to what parents and concerned community members had to say about the math program, and
3. gather together like-minded individuals for future conversations.

Several Spokane administrators, instructional coaches and other supporters of the district’s approach to math instruction laughed at us, interrupted us, criticized us, mocked us, and shouted us down. Some refused to sit down when asked to do so; several refused to obey the rules we had set. Frequently, when we tried to return to a discussion of the math materials, or we tried to turn over the floor to parents and community members who had come to talk about the math materials, district employees accused us of being rude.

“You can’t do that,” we were told at our forum.

They sure tried hard to silence the public voice, but they didn't succeed. We’re asking members of the public to come to the next forum on Feb. 15 and exercise your right to speak about your concerns. Bring relatives; bring friends, and when we ask if you have something to say, please raise your hand and say it.

Many of the people obstructing our forums have the future of our children in their hands. If I were a caring district employee, I would be embarrassed to be associated with them. If they worked for me, they would be fired so fast, they would be a blur on the way out the door. Actually, some of them do work for me. I’m the taxpayer, and they are taxpayer-funded. But I have no way to fire them. In Spokane, administrator jobs are practically set in concrete.

Even I didn’t know our district is stocked with so many people who would go out of their way to sabotage our efforts to speak with the people about the math materials used in Spokane Public Schools.

It makes you wonder what they’re so worried about. Why stack our little community forum with avid supporters of reform math and constructivism? Why shout us down when we try to discuss the abysmal student outcomes? Why interrupt and speak over parents and grandparents who try to explain how things are for their families? If administrators honestly believe in their approach, if it actually works, why alienate so many people by defending a system that brought Spokane to a 38.9% pass rate on the 2010 math test (on which students needed just 56.9% to pass)? They must be feeling anxious.

Administrators Tammy Campbell, Karin Short, and Rick Biggerstaff again did not have an answer to offer for that 38.9% pass rate in Spokane. Campbell claimed that:

1. things have improved over time. (But this is true only for a few groups, and only slightly), and
2. Spokane is doing better than the state averages. (But this is not true for Spokane 8th or 10th graders. Additionally, the other, better results she mentioned are still awful.)

On Jan. 31, John, Clint and I held our first community forum at South Hill Public Library. That meeting also was packed with supporters of the district’s weak math materials and its “constructivist” (or “discovery”) approach to teaching math. We allowed people to talk at will, and administrators and instructional coaches defended their approach to math for much of the meeting.

We felt that parents and community members didn’t get enough time to speak on Jan. 31, so at our Feb. 7 forum, we asked the administration and instructional coaches to stay quiet so that we could hear first from the parents and community members who had come to express their concerns.

There was immediate rebellion from district staff in attendance, as if the meeting was theirs, as if they had set the agenda, as if we were the ones being rude. We were interrupted constantly, shouted down, told that we were interrupting and being rude. We kept trying to bring the conversation back to the math materials – the entire reason we had set the meeting. But district personnel and supporters of reform were having none of it.

Campbell interrupted a parent and a grandma. She interrupted me. Short interrupted me. Other district administrative types interrupted John, Clint and me and laughed at us. Whenever I tried to answer a question – and yes, I did occasionally try to clarify or stop someone from going on for too long – I was interrupted and accused of being rude. I tried repeatedly to get Campbell to answer how she would fix our low pass rates, and she sniffed that she hadn’t been allowed to talk, so she wasn’t going to answer.

What is she? Six years old?

They haven’t been good at running a math program that will get our children where they need to go in math, but they are very good at running things the way they want; at obstructing anyone who wants traditional instruction; at blaming things on teachers, parents and students; and at rudely interfering when the public wants to speak. I have always felt sympathy for our teachers, but sympathy has become empathy. Imagine living with that day after day after day. Who could stand to be bullied that way?

Clint, John and I did our best on Feb. 7 to seek civil discourse with district employees who refused to be civil, who openly mocked others, and who expected to control the discussion at our forum. I have no idea how it looked from the outside, but from the inside, it was shocking. And telling.

The message from last night’s forum was clear; administrators do not see the students’ low pass rates, high dropout rates, high remediation rates, or concerns from parents and community members as any reason to change course on math. They are so sure that they know and that we don’t, they don’t appear to think they have to listen or even be polite. They have a million excuses why the math problem isn’t their beloved reform math, and our children will continue to suffer for it.

If anything in math is to change for students in Spokane Public Schools, these people must be replaced with people who understand the math problem and who will show some respect for parents, teachers, and others in the community.

John, Clint and I are concerned volunteers. We care about the children and about the future of our community and our country. We’re trying to do a good thing – holding public forums so that the public can share concerns about the district’s math program. We tried our best to allow the public to talk at the Jan. 31 and Feb. 7 forums, but district administration, instructional coaches and other supporters of reform were unbelievably, shockingly rude – not just to us, but to all of the people who took time from their busy schedules to attend. What is a concerned community member to do?

Don’t let them get away with this bullying behavior. Please tell your friends, relatives and acquaintances to come to our forums. See how little your point of view matters to those in control of the math program. Our forums are free and community centered. They are intended to obtain feedback from parents and other members of the public who are concerned about the math program. They are not designed to listen to reform twaddle, to support district excuses, or to help defend the reformers' interests. All attendees will be expected to adhere to simple rules of conduct. If you live in a different district, you’re welcome to join us. The math problem is not exclusive to Spokane.

Our next forums:
Feb. 15, 6-8 p.m., Shadle Public Library
Feb. 26, noon-2 p.m., Hillyard Public Library
March 8, 6-8 p.m., Moran Prairie County Library

Let’s give this another try, shall we? John, Clint and I want to hear from people who have concerns about how math is being taught. Let’s have civility, respect, and an honest discussion about the math materials.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (February 2011). "District tries to silence dissenting voices." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/


 

School administrators no help at community math forum

By Laurie H. Rogers

Note from Laurie Rogers: Our public forums are designed to inform, to collect input, and to provide like-minded people with a path for improving math education in Spokane. The forums are public, with no expectation of privacy. We will make every effort to maintain privacy and to quote statements rather than specific people. However, district administration and board directors should expect to be directly and freely quoted.


If there was any doubt, I think we can put it safely to rest. Despite a decade or more of steadily deteriorating math results in Spokane Public Schools, administrators continue to support a failing approach.

The school district packed our first K-12 math forum, held Jan. 31 at South Hill Public Library. We knew when we saw them all herd into the room that it would be an interesting evening. When we asked how many people worked for the district, most of the people in the room held up a hand.

The district’s pass rate on the spring 2010 10th-grade state math test was 38.9%, on a test that required just 56.9% to pass. And yet, on Jan. 31, each time we asked the administrators, principals and instructional coaches how they planned to fix the math problem, not one would hazard a solution. We heard how wonderful reform and constructivism are, how terrible “traditional” math is, how traditional math has “never worked” – a truly ridiculous thing to say – how poverty is such a problem in Spokane, how Spokane is doing better than other districts in the state, and how we are over-emphasizing the role of curriculum in the math problem.

That’s all symptomatic of the inherent flaw in their argument. They begin with, “We’ll continue with reform math and constructivism.”

Imagine, if you will, that the K-12 math program has a form of cancer. The only drug that will cure this cancer is Tamifloxin. But the district doesn’t believe in Tamifloxin, and so the use of that drug is off the table. "Now," the hospital administrators say to each other brightly, "how will we cure this cancer?"

The doctors suggest using Tamifloxin. “No,” administrators state confidently, ignoring the vast amount of research on Tamifloxin, “we know Tamifloxin has never worked.”

The dying K-12 math program asks weakly for Tamifloxin. The administrators pat the program on the head and say condescendingly, “You’re just asking for that because you heard the doctors say it. Tamifloxin has never worked. We’ll professionally develop our doctors until they understand that they’ve been brainwashed. And by the way, have you considered the possibility that you just aren’t that good at being healthy?”

The administrators then kick into high gear. “We need more money to cure this cancer,” they state to the family. “If you care at all about your math program, you’ll open your wallet and give us more. We need our patients to be more involved. We know we need more effective doctors. We have a real problem in this hospital with quality doctors. We also must acknowledge the high rates of cancer in math programs all over the country. It’s entirely possible that the math programs aren’t motivated to get well. Therefore, we have a plan to send our doctors for more professional development so they can learn how to treat their patients using balloon therapy and mud baths.”

The administrators pull the family aside and whisper, “You know, your math program is no doubt dying because some doctors are sneaking in Tamifloxin on the side. We’ll be going into the hospital rooms to watch and see if anyone is doing that. But we KNOW Tamifloxin has never worked. People who say it does work are completely ignoring all of the special challenges we face. We want to help you, and we’re doing our best, so you must give our programs a chance to work. Once we’ve had the full slate of balloons and mud, you’ll see everything turn around.”

And so, the K-12 math program dies a slow, lingering death, sighing painfully as its 10th-grade scores sink to abysmal levels, buoyed only slightly by the few students who are able to receive Tamifloxin outside of the hospital.

At the Jan. 31 forum, we put this district’s low pass rates to the people, asking them, “How do we turn these numbers around?” The back row of administrators never answered that question, but a few mocked those who were speaking. From a few instructional coaches, we heard anecdotes about how much they enjoy our reform math programs, how some students do “really well” with it. “Show us proof,” we were challenged – with vivid proof all around – “that traditional math has ever worked.”

Despite being asked several times, administrators Karin Short ($129,299 in base salary per year), Rick Biggerstaff ($77,377), Tammy Campbell ($114,849), a few principals (each more than $100,000), and several instructional coaches could not – or would not – tell the people at the Jan. 31 forum how they planned to turn things around. The entire room of administration – so gleefully dismissive of traditional math – and some of them rude and mocking in the back row – was absolutely silent on the impact on students of a decade or more of reform math and excessive constructivism. They had nothing to say about that 38.9% pass rate and no answers to offer, yet some of them felt OK about mocking or dismissing those who think teachers should be allowed to teach.

They did NOT appear to want to talk about the reform math programs we have in Spokane Public Schools – Investigations in Number, Data, and Space and Connected Mathematics. Those who defended reform instead kept diverting the conversation to side issues such as poverty, testing, parents, student motivation, professional development, and money.

Spokane administrators did not discuss the fact that Spokane’s new high-school math program Holt Mathematics has been virtually destroyed by district administration. Holt isn’t a perfect math program, but it’s infinitely better than the Core-Plus Mathematics Project Spokane had for the four years prior. Despite widespread support in this district for Holt’s adoption in spring 2010, the district’s Department of Teaching and Learning immediately thumbed its nose at the wishes of teachers, parents, students, and board directors – and persisted in forcing more reform math on high school math classrooms.

A high school math teacher said that Spokane teachers haven’t been able to properly use the Holt textbook. In a year or so, district administrators will no doubt say – as one of the “coaches” did at the Jan. 31 forum – that the district “had” Holt Mathematics, and it didn’t work. The truth will be that Holt was never given a chance.

This is what we face, folks. This is what I’ve been staring at for four years. We talk about data; they talk about how much they enjoy reform and discovery. We ask for solutions; they blame everyone else. We want results, they offer excuses and “we’re doing so much better than other people.” They appear to be completely married to a reform Titanic. Our children and community are stuck on that sinking boat, and we must find a way to get off of it.

John Barber, Clint Thatcher and I need your help. If you want the math curriculum in Spokane Public Schools to change, and teachers and principals to be allowed the freedom to do what needs to be done for the children, you will have to fight for it. The board needs to make some long-needed changes in this district, and if the board won’t do it, then changes need to be made in the board.

Please join us in the conversation. The district administration doesn’t appear to care about what you want in math, or about what the children need in math, but we’re listening to you. We aren’t going to blame teachers, and we aren’t going to take any garbage from the district. We’re solely focused on getting the math program where it needs to go. We’re out in the community, gathering input, and we need you.

Join us on Feb. 7, at Shadle Public Library, or on Feb. 15, also at Shadle Public Library. If you can’t attend either forum, then please write to us at wlroge@comcast.net  to add your name to our list. Forward this article to your friends and family. Put it on Facebook. Put it on the wall at your place of employment. Rouse the people.

Together, we can turn this thing around.


Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (February 2011). "School administrators no help at community math forum." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/