Board vote good for future business

Some things are so outrageously ridiculous, the only way to handle them is through satire.

Like, for example, at a May 27 board meeting for Spokane Public Schools, board members voted to spend another $90,000 of taxpayer money on materials from the same failed reform curricula we have now. For a few tense moments, I was worried they wouldn’t, but at 11 p.m., they came through for me.

To quote a 5th-grade teacher who spoke on behalf of the proposed supplements: “Yay!”

Some people see reform math as a problem, but for me, it’s the solution. For one thing, it gives me something to do. I now spend 4-11 hours a day on math: Tutoring my daughter in actual math; taking college math classes so I can tutor her through high school; keeping up with developments at the state and national levels; and communicating every day with dozens of concerned parents and advocates. It’s a lot to do, which is good because otherwise, I would just sit around like the illiterate slob I am, eating Twinkies and playing video games.

But mostly, when I finish my math classes, I’ll have a HUGE pool of clients for my future tutoring business. The May 27 vote was VERY good for me personally.

I have to say it was touch and go that night. I thought when a cardiologist and a retired mathematician spoke eloquently for better math instruction, it might have swayed the vote. Luckily, most of the BM weren’t listening.

(BM is short for “board members.” What did you think it meant?)

When a local parent spoke about her daughters' struggles with basic math skills – like measurements – I worried again. Not because of the parent’s well-articulated concerns, but because Spokane’s elementary curriculum coordinator, Debbie Oakley, bobbled it and blamed the girls’ struggles on traditional math. How stupid was that? I doubt Spokane's current students have gotten more than a whiff of traditional math in the last 8 years.

Thankfully, the BM just let it go.

I spoke at the meeting, too, pretending I wanted better curricula and offering the board information from state and federal levels. It was all a ruse, part of my master plan. I knew the BM wouldn’t look at the information before the vote, wouldn’t ask me questions about it, wouldn’t even wonder out loud what was in the package. And they didn’t. President Rocco Treppiedi waved the information away to a side table where it sat like the lump of dog doo it was. (Some of the BM might even have held their noses.)

Ms. Oakley almost wrecked it again when she said, “There’s just nothing out there that aligns better to the new math standards.” How stupid was that? Not one of Spokane’s main curricula is ON the final lists of recommended curricula. Everything aligns better than they do. Two weren’t even on the preliminary lists – and those were lists drawn up by people who support reform. How bad must reform curricula be when supporters of reform don’t support them?

But the BM just let it go.

Oh yeah, and then one intelligent board member challenged Ms. Oakley on one of the proposed materials, saying it doesn’t do much of what she said it does and doesn’t seem to be necessary. Ms. Oakley had no defense for that, no support, no explanation, no clarification. I might have heard her mutter, “The dog ate my homework,” but that might have been the 5th-grade teacher behind me, who left her seat beside the curriculum coordinators to advocate for the proposed materials. The teacher's entire argument consisted of, “Come to my house and I’ll give you Brownies.” No, I think she said, “Come to my classroom and see what we’re doing.” And she took a swipe at me, which I did not appreciate. I thought, “Hey, don’t swipe at me! We’re allies! On the same side! We’re both doing this for the kids! You have them muddle in herds to teach themselves box and whisker plots, and then I’ll charge their families a lot of money to tutor them in arithmetic and algebra. We could be a great team!”

Yay!

Come to think of it, the person talking about dogs and homework might have been Rick Biggerstaff, Spokane’s secondary curriculum coordinator. He couldn’t remember who wrote the national standards on which he claimed Washington’s new standards are based. I offered him a suggestion, and – without looking at me – he muttered something that sounded like, "That could be it." Or, he might have said, “Shut up, you inconsequential idiot parent person, you dog-face daughter of a wallaby.”

If he'd said that, I would have said, “Look, don’t call me that. We’re allies. You LOVE Core-Plus Mathematics. 'LOVE it!' you said. And I’m going to LOVE the money I’m going to make in my future tutoring business. We’ll go great together, like peanut butter and food allergies.”

Mr. Biggerstaff nearly gave away the farm when he said other countries (almost all of which do better in math than America does) are perplexed at our "math wars," and they say, “What is America doing?” I was afraid the BM would laugh out loud at the unintended irony. Other countries do look at America, at how we teach mathematics, and they do say, “Woo-hoo! More jobs for us!”

But the BM didn’t note the irony, and my future tutoring business was saved again.

(I didn't even mind it when Mr. Biggerstaff was rude to me. When I left to thank the mathematician for coming, he rushed out behind us and interrupted me so he could shake the man’s hand. He never once looked in my direction or apologized for interrupting. My grandma always said, “You can tell a lot about folks by their manners,” but I know Mr. Biggerstaff is much more important than I am.)

I was glad I could crawl my way home at 11:30 p.m. and tell my husband the evening wasn’t a complete waste, as he had predicted.

For one thing, I met the cardiologist and the mathematician. I also got to see Ms. Oakley and Mr. Biggerstaff in action – an invaluable experience. And I totally figured out how to game the system. These people now think I’m opposed to Spokane’s ridiculously flawed reform math curricula. They see it as their turf, not mine. The harder I rally people to fight against it, the harder they’ll fight to defend it. It’s just human nature for bureaucrats and other uncivilized groups. This can only help me.

I’ll say: Please reject these failed curricula. And they’ll continue to say, “No."
I’ll say: Please just look at this material. They’ll say, “No.”
I’ll say: Please learn something about mathematics. “No.”
Please help me figure out a way to tutor these children in arithmetic. “No.”
I’ll do it for FREE. “No.”
Please wait on voting until you read this. “No, no, no.”
Please show me some infinitesimal sign of respect. “Well, sure, whatever-your-name is. Come back anytime.”

To the parents, I apologize. I’m sorry you’ll have to pay huge bucks to re-educate your children. I’m sorry that (unless they’re in the one-third of students who will drop out of high school before they graduate) they’ll have to spend several semesters in remedial math classes in college (which many will fail). I’m sorry that most of them will hate math for the rest of their lives and run as far away from it as they can. But that’s the way the box-and-whisker plot bounces. I have to eat, too. If you’re so mad, start your own tutoring business. It’s not like there won’t be enough work to go around. It would also give you a good reason to stay in your school district, unlike the 2,000+ quitters who bailed out of Spokane Public Schools over the last few years.

I have big dreams that require ill-educated students. Together, we can turn this very real and very serious math problem into a real business opportunity. With reform curricula in our corner, we’re totally in the catbird seat.

My new motto is: “Too bad for the little birdies, but darn good for the cats.”

Yay!




Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (May, 2009). "Board vote good for future business." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was published May 31, 2009, on EducationNews.org at http://ednews.org/articles/school-board-vote-good-for-business.html

FACT: Spokane refuses to replace reform curricula

On Wed., May 27, Spokane Public Schools employees are slated to address the school board about proposed teaching materials for mathematics. The materials reportedly are a continuation of one of the three main math curricula already in place. The three main curricula are:

• Investigations in Number, Data, and Space
  
• Connected Mathematics Project (CMP)
  
• Core-Plus Mathematics

These three curricula are “reform,” which means they focus on estimation, group discussions, lots of writing, frequent use of calculators, and multiple ways of solving problems. They downplay the need for practicing skills and also the use of “traditional” procedures and equations. They emphasize constructivist approaches (“discovery”) where students work in groups and on their own to try to teach math to themselves.

They do not focus on practicing the most efficient, most effective algorithms (which are necessary for advancing in math, and needed in college, business and the trades).

Reform curricula have been criticized in the mathematics community for the last 20 years. Two decades ago, people with products to sell ushered in the philosophy behind these curricula, and money continues to drive K-12 math instruction. Texas Instruments, various software developers, textbook publishers and other stakeholders have worked intensively and cooperatively to push reform curricula and attendant supplementary materials and “helpful” tools on an unsuspecting public. The reform approach to math plays a huge role in why America’s math skills have fallen so far behind the rest of the world. America’s businesses, universities and government agencies are forced to draw heavily from other countries for their talent pools.

But many people were not fooled.

• FACT: For years, parents, math teachers, professors, business owners, STEM professionals (science, technology, engineering and math), and math advocates have fought for a more traditional approach to teaching mathematics.
  
• FACT: In 2008, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel called for more traditional content and increased rigor across the nation.
  
• FACT: In 2007, a consultant hired by the Washington State Board of Education (at the behest of the state legislature) assessed Washington’s math standards. The consultant called for major revisions, including a great deal more traditional content, increased rigor, and caution on the use of calculators in the classroom.
  
• FACT: New, more rigorous math standards were developed in Washington State. The state department of education (OSPI), board of education (SBE) and advisory panels used the new standards to compile a list of recommended K-8 math curricula. These curricula use a more traditional approach. Spokane's main math curricula are not on the list.

Meanwhile, Spokane Public Schools has continued to replace one reform curriculum with another. This approach has been an expensive failure.

• FACT: Spokane’s current reform math curricula are heavily supplemented by a long list of expensive materials and by ongoing “professional development” for teachers, “instructional coaches” for teachers, substitute teachers and remedial programs.
  
• FACT: Spokane’s full-time enrollment has dropped by about 2,000 students since 2001 (mostly from the high schools). Administrators predict another drop of 350 this year.
  
• FACT: A 2008 survey of parents who left for a different public school indicated that at least 33% left in whole or in part over the curricula. (The survey didn’t include families who chose a private school.) Spokane’s superintendent said this survey doesn’t tell her anything that “informs” her “decision-making.”
  
• FACT: In 2008, the number of Spokane students passing the 2008 math WASL dropped grade by grade until just 45.9% of 10th graders passed.
  
• FACT: Achieve, Inc. says Washington’s 10th-grade math WASL is based on content that is taught internationally in 6th or 7th grade.
  
• FACT: Washington State has a reported 50% + math remediation rate in college. According to the dean of the math department at Spokane Falls Community College, new students have about an 80% remediation rate for math.
  
• FACT: I've spoken with recent Spokane high school graduates who struggle with basic math skills. They tend to feel dependent on their calculators, to lack number sense, to think they’re bad at math, and to avoid career choices that involve math. Some must take remedial classes in arithmetic. Many must take remedial classes more than once in order to pass.
  
• FACT: In February, Superintendent Nancy Stowell and Bridget Lewis, executive director of Instructional Programs, indicated to the Spokane school board that they don’t know how to fix the math problem.
  
• FACT: In mid-April, I wrote to Ms. Lewis and two of Spokane’s curriculum coordinators. I noted that Spokane’s main math curricula don’t align with the new state math standards and aren’t recommended by the state or by the math advisory panels. I asked why this district is not replacing its inadequate curricula with curricula that better align to the state’s math standards. After my four polite emails and my polite phone call, I haven’t received an answer to this reasonable and not-too-difficult question.

What the students need is the proper tool for the job - better curricula from kindergarten to Grade 12. They need to be taught, rather than being forced to muddle around in groups, trying to teach math to themselves. They need to learn the most efficient method first, rather than being forced to learn several inefficient ways first. They need to be able to practice their math skills so that these skills go into long-term memory and can be easily recalled.

Spokane will not be replacing its inadequate curricula this year. There are plans to shuffle these failed curricula around a bit … like moving a dirty mop around the floor, hoping it will clean better over there. Now, there reportedly are plans to add more materials from two of the failed programs!

• FACT: Better curricula are available. They include proven methods for teaching mathematics to children that have stood the test of time. They align better with the new math standards. They’ve been vetted by OSPI, the SBE and various professionals with strong backgrounds in mathematics.
  
• FACT: Spokane Public Schools is refusing to adopt any of them.

(It's somewhat like watching people willfully cause a traffic accident.)

I'm asking you to attend the May 27 board meeting and ask for the adoption of better math curricula. By law, the board’s meeting time, place and agenda is to be listed here at least 24 hours before the meeting: http://www.spokaneschools.org/Board/MeetingDates.stm

This isn’t a game we're playing. The children's futures are at stake. Parents should not have to supplement the regular program, pay for private school, or teach their children a separate math curriculum at home. They should not have to pay for several remedial college classes. High school graduates should not have to spend several semesters desperately trying to pick up the math they should have learned in K-12. We should expect district employees to do “due diligence” and pay attention to what's being said at the state and federal level relative to mathematics instruction. We should expect the curriculum coordinators to listen when parents ask for something better for their children. Parents should expect to be included in discussions about curricula choices. But in Spokane – despite all contrary evidence – curriculum coordinators persist in supporting and buying teaching materials based on inadequate programs.

If you can't attend the May 27 board meeting, please write to the board and express your views. Ask them to ensure that the district immediately implements curricula that are aligned with the new math standards, to reject the failed reform curricula we have now, and to offer all students the tutoring they need to bring them up in skill to where they should and could have been.

Thank you for standing up to be counted. Please pass on this message to others. Together, we can turn this thing around.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (May, 2009). "FACT: Spokane refuses to replace reform curricula." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

A version of this article was posted May 23 at ednews.org at http://ednews.org/articles/fact-spokane-refuses-to-replace-reform-curricula.html

What's the education budget for lawsuits?

In Spokane Public Schools, the main approved mathematics curricula are:

• Bridges in Mathematics
• Investigations in Number, Data, and Space
• Connected Mathematics
• Core-Plus Mathematics

These curricula are reform, which means they focus on conceptual learning, group discussions, lots of writing, frequent use of calculators and multiple ways of solving problems. They downplay the use of “traditional” procedures and equations, and they emphasize constructivist approaches (“discovery” learning) where students work in groups and on their own to teach themselves.

Reform curricula have been heavily criticized in the mathematics community for the last 20 years. The four used in Spokane should be replaced immediately with curricula that guide students to competence in pre-college mathematics. But – based on minutes from recent school board meetings and my conversations with central office staff – it seems there won’t be any major replacements for 2009/2010. There are plans to shuffle the four curricula around a bit … kind of like moving a dirty mop around the floor, hoping it will clean better over there. Bridges is being replaced by Investigations, Investigations is being replaced by Connected Mathematics, and Connected Mathematics is being replaced by Core-Plus. Additionally, these curricula are heavily supplemented by other materials. The list of district-approved supplementary materials is long, I was told. I couldn’t get any of the titles over the telephone.

Rick Biggerstaff, the high-school curriculum coordinator, wrote to confirm that Spokane's "middle school program uses and will continue to use" Connected Mathematics. He added: "We are making recommendations for materials to complete our middle-school program for next year." He said the recommendations would be clarified in May.

It's an interesting word choice. Instead of saying "complete," he could say "to supplement," as in "to support with extra materials because Connected Mathematics is insufficient, inadequate and confusing as all get out." Or something like that.

Biggerstaff confirmed that Spokane high schools use Core-Plus and College Preparatory Mathematics (which is another reform program that's been criticized for years). He said changes in the high school program would have to wait until the state finalizes its decisions. But the state has finalized decisions about the K-8 recommendations, and Spokane's K-8 curricula aren't on the list -- yet Spokane is still using them. So is the district really waiting for the state, or is this just a convenient excuse to do nothing? What's the real hold-up? Why isn’t Spokane replacing its reform math curricula?

You know it isn’t about money. A lot of the money floating around this district is spent on central-office administrators and other things that don’t have a direct and positive impact on the classroom. If a school district can’t find the money for a proper curriculum – the entire point of its existence – it really ought to just shut the doors and send everyone home.

You know it isn’t about waiting for guidance. Parents, teachers and professors have been asking for a more traditional approach to teaching mathematics. In 2008, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel called for a more traditional approach. In 2007, a consultant said Washington’s math standards were weak and called for a more traditional approach. Over the last two years, the state department of education (OSPI), the state board of education (SBE) and various math advisory panels used the new, more rigorous standards to compile a list of recommended K-8 math curricula. These curricula use a more traditional approach.

Spokane’s main high-school math curriculum – Core-Plus – is barely clinging to OSPI’s preliminary list of high-school recommendations. Core-Plus was chosen over better curricula just so that a reform program could be on the list. Advocates are fighting to remove it. Bob Dean (math department chairman of Evergreen High School; and member of the State Board of Education Math Advisory Panel, the OSPI Standards Revision Team, and the Where’s the Math? Executive Committee) had this to say about Core-Plus:
“The whole purpose for having precise standards and state recommended curricula was to make sure that all Washington students are being taught the same mathematics. That mathematics was supposed to be equivalent to what top international countries are using.

“The issue isn't about using Integrated curriculum… It's about using integrated curricula that are so misaligned to the state standards that a Core 1 student can't even pass an Algebra I test. In fact, Core Plus students don't learn all of Algebra I until they have taken three years of Core math. There is no international curriculum that doesn't teach students the equivalent of Algebra I by the 9th grade. Japanese students are learning Algebra II in the 9th grade (I have their text books). Core Plus not only doesn't align to our standards, it leaves students far behind international standards.

“Instead of asking if it is fair that Core Plus students should have to take the same test as Algebra I students.... we should be asking is it fair that students are taking Core Plus at all? Watering down the standards should not be the solution. Core Plus students from Bellevue averaged 42% on the achieve Algebra II test.... Do we call that preparing students to compete in a global economy?”

Meanwhile, my husband and I are trying to do what’s best for our daughter. We aren’t afraid to say what needs to be said or do what needs to be done. Last winter, we rejected the Connected Mathematics curriculum. We’re using our time and money to teach our daughter the math she needs. We’re declining to have her take this year’s math WASL because it won’t be an accurate measure of what she’s learning. Sadly, this decision will have a negative impact on the scores for her school.

We’re faced with the prospect of Core-Plus in 2009/2010. We know the teacher will move mountains to teach Core-Plus in the best way it can be taught, but we also know the curriculum is seriously flawed and inadequate. And yet, there it will be next year. Why? Administrators must know there’s a problem. One third of Spokane students will drop out before graduation. Of the remaining students, most will need several discrete semesters of remediation in math before they even begin taking college math. Over the last eight years, about 2,000 students have left Spokane Public Schools – most of them from the high schools. In 2008, a survey of parents who left the district made it plain that at least a third of them left over dissatisfaction with the curriculum.

And yet, with respect to improving the math curricula, this district appears to be an immoveable force. Maybe administrators are stubborn; maybe they’re under a dark spell; maybe they just don’t know what they’re doing. What’s left to do? Sue them?

Hmm.

Dan Dempsey, SBE Math Advisory Panelist, recently wrote a letter to the directors of Seattle Public Schools, taking them to task for considering the adoption of reform math programs. He predicted parents would eventually say:

“My kid did not graduate because (Seattle) chose a math series that was rated as mathematically unsound and unacceptable by the state. (Seattle) has steadfastly refused to offer the effective interventions mandated in school board policies …, instead socially promoting my unskilled child to grade 9. In high school, the primary instructional math materials consisted of an unacceptable math program that offered nothing below Algebra I.”Dempsey asked, “How much is the district budgeting for lawsuits?”

I wonder.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (April, 2009). "What's the education budget for lawsuits?" Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

District says no one knows how to fix math problem

By Laurie H. Rogers

Before I quote from the Feb. 11, 2009, meeting minutes of the board of Spokane Public Schools, I’ll review some events of the last two years:

• The National Mathematics Advisory Panel issued recommendations that called for more traditional approaches to math instruction (i.e. traditional algorithms, caution with calculator use, more practicing of skills, and increased rigor).
• Washington’s K-12 math standards were completely revamped, calling for more traditional content.
• For 20 years, mathematicians have criticized the reform math curricula widely used across Washington (and throughout Spokane Public Schools). These curricula also were hammered in Washington’s recent curricula assessments.
• Washington State’s Department of Education (OSPI) issued recommendations for K-8 math curricula that are based on the new standards. The curricula used in Spokane are not on the list. Expectations are that Spokane’s high school curriculum also will be rejected.
• Advocates have repeatedly asked school boards across the nation to replace reform math curricula with more traditional curricula.

You get the gist. Spokane needs to adopt more traditional math curricula. Waiting only prolongs the students’ agony. The district already has recommendations for K-8 math curricula that were vetted by people who support a traditional track. All the board has to do is adopt some of them.

Now I can quote from the Feb. 11 meeting minutes.
“NEW BUSINESS Teaching and Learning Services Middle School Math Update Ms. Bridget Lewis, executive director for Teaching and Learning Services, introduced Ms. Gina Rye, middle school math coordinator, and Mr. Rick Biggerstaff, secondary math coordinator. … Ms. Lewis commented that the staff needs to dig deeper in terms of the grade 6 to 7 transition.

"President Treppiedi asked the staff to help the board understand why middle school math scores are as low as they have been. It was his opinion that there is a lack of rigor in the elementary schools. Ms. Lewis responded that the data across the state and nation is not unique to Spokane. She said no one has the answer; however, the staff does know that they have to pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom. She pointed out that the data shows that Spokane has more students taking advanced placement math and all students are taking more mathematics. …

"Dr. Stowell noted that grades 3 through 7 math scores are higher than the state average. In spite of not having all of the answers, the scores are moving in the right direction. She stated that math and science summer camps and math coaches would help, but it is difficult to fill the open teaching spots. Ms. Lewis added that it is going to take multiple strategies such as standards-based grading, math labs, and professional learning in order to improve mathematics instruction.

"Director Douthitt indicated that the board would like to hear more ideas about adaptive changes. Director Bierman agreed that change takes time; he felt, however, that the math program is on the wrong track and needs to be distinctly different from what it is today, in both the language and the model that is used. Director Douthitt expressed appreciation for the way this presentation was constructed. He conceded that the frustration is that no one has figured out how to solve the problem. Because the district will still face the dilemma in 2014, he didn’t want the team to be constrained by saying 'we can’t do this.'

"Ms. Lewis said the team wants to look at this very straight forward and determine how to get at the hard questions.”I’ll offer some thoughts on certain portions of these meeting minutes.

“…the staff needs to dig deeper in terms of the grade 6 to 7 transition.” What does this mean? Does it mean to replace the math curriculum? If not, they can “dig” as deeply as they want; they’ll never reach the solution.

“Ms. Lewis responded that the data … is not unique to Spokane.” This statement is true, but it doesn’t mean an answer isn’t available. Indeed, it points to a national failure with reform math curricula.

"(Ms. Lewis) said no one has the answer; however, the staff does know that they have to pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom.” Actually, we have the answer, and it’s clear: Replace the curricula with more traditional approaches. For some inexplicable reason, district employees obstinately refuse to say so. It’s true that staff members should “pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom.” If they were, they would notice that students aren’t learning sufficient mathematics.

“(Ms. Lewis) pointed out that the data shows that Spokane has more students taking advanced placement math and all students are taking more mathematics.” More students are indeed taking AP classes – but substantially more students also are failing to pass the AP exams. I reject the statement that “all students are taking more mathematics.” Some might be taking more math classes, but if the classes were effective, students would know more math than they do.

“Dr. Stowell noted that grades 3 through 7 math scores are higher than the state average.” So what? Spokane’s 2008 math WASL scores look like this:Grade Level Math 3rd Grade - 75.2% 4th Grade - 60.7% 5th Grade - 69.2% 6th Grade - 55.9% 7th Grade - 52.4% 8th Grade - 49.5% 10th Grade - 45.9%
“(Dr. Stowell said) in spite of not having all of the answers, the scores are moving in the right direction.” District staff members do have the answers; they just refuse to acknowledge them. You tell me – do the 2008 math WASL scores look like they’re “moving in the right direction”?

A few of the statements can be dealt with together:
"(Dr. Stowell) stated that math and science summer camps and math coaches would help, but it is difficult to fill the open teaching spots.”
“Ms. Lewis added that it is going to take multiple strategies such as standards-based grading, math labs, and professional learning in order to improve mathematics instruction.”
“(Director Douthitt) conceded that the frustration is that no one has figured out how to solve the problem."
“Ms. Lewis said the team wants to look at this very straight forward and determine how to get at the hard questions.”Shall we laugh or cry? It’s the curriculum, the curriculum, the curriculum! Replacing the reform curricula with more traditional approaches is what will improve mathematics instruction. Why won’t they say it?
One begins to wonder if some of these people own stock in companies that publish reform curricula.

Folks, this is what is being done on your behalf. Please speak up and/or vote with your feet. Quite literally, the children’s futures are at stake.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is: Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "District says no one knows how to fix math problem." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Your child's education is up to you

Over the last 27 months, I’ve come to see public education as an immoveable force. Administrators are fond of talking about “accountability,” but it doesn’t mean much, not in any real sense. Today's administrators know that all they have to do is produce upward ticks in pretend numbers. The only real accountability comes when unhappy parents leave the school district. Although a few thousand Spokane families have done that over the last five years, local administrators have so far declined to say publicly that the enrollment drops have anything to do with how the schools operate.

Meanwhile, things stay fairly quiet, which is what bureaucrats generally prefer.

My comments here could be seen as “cynical” or “critical,” but I see them as “realistic.” With realism comes truth. With truth comes knowledge. With knowledge comes power. With power comes change – even if it’s change for just one child. When it’s your child, one child is a lot.

My husband and I have therefore taken control of our daughter’s education. We now know it isn’t enough to just be involved in the school or the classroom; we need to know what she’s learning. We also must have some idea of what she should be learning. When the school curriculum or learning environment fails her, we must fill in critical gaps. This isn’t a game we’re playing. Her future is at stake. Six short years from now, it won’t matter whether we helped out with field trips or cut paper for the class every Friday. What will matter is the knowledge she takes with her to college.

Although several people in this district care about our daughter – most notably her teachers and principal – no one at the district level has expressed even a sliver of interest in what kind of experience she must have had that would lead me to do an intense and focused two-year investigation of public education. To them, I’m sure she’s just a bit of data in a long string of data. I doubt they know who I am. Over two years, I've interviewed three curriculum coordinators, two board members and other sundry district staff. I’ve sat down with district Superintendent Nancy Stowell and asked her pointed questions. I’ve written about Dr. Stowell on my blog and run into her a half a dozen times at various meetings. She still introduces herself to me as if we've never met. Clearly, she doesn’t feel the need to retain any information about me or my concerns.

Over 27 months, I've come to believe I could be brilliant, have the best research, find the most perfect words and fill up school board meetings with the most knowledgeable people – and administrators would still operate as if I don’t exist. If I ever manage to effect positive change in this district, I have no doubt that the minute I turn my back, someone will begin working to erase it.

I have two main goals now:

1. Help parents cut through the fake statistics and “edu-speak” so they can see things more clearly.
   
2. Tutor students in math. I looked into earning an education degree, but colleges of education tend to train teachers by using discovery learning methods and reform philosophy. I'm 47 and a college graduate. I get hives at the thought of sitting in groups to hash out simplistic problems I could easily solve on my own. I’ve therefore chosen the math program over the education program.

In these two small ways, I hope to help the children succeed. I yearn for revolution, but perhaps some of the improvement will just have to come one person at a time.

Speaking of “one person at a time,” I received an email from a Spokane parent who is distressed by reform math. Last fall, an elementary-school teacher told her to not teach traditional math to her children. She wrote:

“Laurie … I have to tell you, I'm going through a kind of personal revolution right now. I've always felt that I was hindered by a lack of knowledge, betrayed, if you will, by my own public education, and would just sound ignorant if I spoke out on the things I felt strongly about (education, political issues, etc.), so I said and did nothing. Besides, I'm just one little suburban mother. What difference could I possibly make? I have long felt that the public education system has failed us as a nation, and that this is now more apparent than ever. I've been very concerned about the direction our nation is heading at such a rapid pace, so I've been educating myself on American history and government. For the first time in my life, I've been following the actions of the government, communicating to my representatives, and I'm 33 years old. My own public education didn't come close to preparing me to be an active, educated citizen in the community, let alone in the nation (yet I still cast my vote at every election). I've been compelled to educate myself and take a more active role. I just can't sit complacently by anymore, and I've realized that everyone who has a part in making a difference is just one person. It's only when voices speak out that they're heard. “I spent 13 years in public school, 2 years in community college, and 3 more at a state university, and I have always felt ignorant and uneducated! There is definitely something wrong there, and the last thing I want is for my kids to grow up that way, too. So, I offer no more excuses for being part of the problem. I want to be part of the solution, and I do feel that it all comes down to education. I thank you for doing your part to improve the state of education (and, therefore, the country) and I want to do mine as well, so count me in! “I did go to bat for my own child last week, and I wish I had done it a year ago. (My son) has been complaining about school in general and math in particular. I think he's bored with the math in 1st grade and especially the pace of the class. Last year, I had the same issue with (my daughter) and (the teacher) danced around it, asserting that she was challenged in class in a variety of ways. My naive mistake was giving her the benefit of the doubt and not pushing any farther than bringing the issue up again at conference time. Last week, I went straight to (the principal). I have to say, I was very pleased with his reaction and the result. By the end of the day it was arranged (that my son) would go to (the next grade) for math. …”

This mother acknowledged, however, that the curriculum in the next grade is also insufficient, so she is tutoring her children in two traditional programs – “Singapore Math” and “Saxon Math.” She expressed concerns about the calculators in the elementary grades and wondered how I felt about it. I told her I’m opposed to introducing calculators in elementary school, that there is no need for it, and that it’s my belief that they interfere with the learning of necessary arithmetic skills. I asked the mother if I could quote from her email, and she said I could:

“I hope it can help encourage other parents to get involved or even just interested. One of the greatest things I took away from homeschooling was the attitude that my children's education is my ultimate responsibility, whether I choose homeschool, public school, or somewhere in between. That realization has been very empowering.”

I couldn’t have said it better.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "Your child's education is up to you." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was also published at EducationNews.org at http://ednews.org/articles/35600/1/Your-Child039s-Education-is-Up-To-You/Page1.html

Free math assessments March 21

On March 21, 2009, from 1-5 p.m., Education NW Resources will conduct free assessments in mathematics for students in grades 2-12. The assessments are intended to reflect essential math skills and international math standards. Each assessment will be about 30-45 minutes long, and will take place at Education NW Resources, 9429 N. Newport Highway, Spokane, WA.

“Our entire purpose is to educate parents on the existence of the new state math standards, and on how their children are doing with basic math skills,” Deborah Knutson said. “Our experience tells us that many students in the area have serious gaps in critical skills, and also that many parents are unaware of how wide those gaps are.”

Knutson noted that, in 2008, Washington State’s math standards were revised substantially, increasing their rigor and emphasizing more “traditional” algorithms and concepts. However, the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) doesn’t yet reflect these changes, and the planned “end-of-course” tests haven’t yet been implemented.

“We hope parents will take advantage of these assessments,” Knutson said. “They’re relatively short, they’re free, and they’ll give parents a better idea of where their children are in mathematical skill.”

Parents can call 323-4950 to register, or they can register at the door. Seating is limited, however. Please call to reserve a seat and a time.

Contact: Deborah Knutson
Education NW Resources
9429 N Newport Highway
Spokane, WA 99218-1245
Phone: (509) 323-4950
Fax: (509) 323-4950
Toll Free: (866) 491-0495

info@educationnwresources.com

What Is the Purpose of Public Education?

Updated March 11, 2009:

Part of the barrier to getting proper math instruction into America’s K-12 public schools is in the definitions. What constitutes “success” or “failure”? Which math skills are “necessary”? What is the primary function of public schools? Why do children go to school?

I don’t think of “success” and “failure” in terms of what’s good for the administrators but in terms of what’s good for the students. In my view, a public school’s primary function is to help students get prepared for postsecondary life. Children go to school so they can learn what they need to learn in order to grasp the future they want. Based on test results, remediation rates and dropout rates, there’s no question in my mind that today’s public schools are failing the students.

Many administrators, on the other hand, appear to see the primary function of schools as being all about inclusion, tolerance, equity, values and (the omnipresent yet ill-defined) “excellence.” They probably see themselves as successful.

Don’t laugh. I’m not pulling this stuff out of my hat.

As part of our district’s January 2009 celebration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Spokane Superintendent Nancy Stowell sent a letter to her “colleagues” that included the text of her welcome address for the Unity March. In part, she said:
“We renew our commitment to acknowledging the effects of white privilege and doing all that we can to understand and mitigate its effects – so that each of us understands race in a personal and profound way.
“We renew (our) commitment to creating classrooms, schools, and a school district that is founded on the principles of social justice … a compassionate system that knows each child.
“We renew our commitment to the development of culturally proficient and courageous educators who can succeed with all students because they believe in the value of each student.”

Dr. Stowell didn’t mention creating classrooms that are founded on the principles of a coherent and rigorous education. She didn’t mention renewing the district’s commitment to hiring academically proficient educators who can succeed with all students because they know the subject matter they’re trying to teach.

(These would be great ways to mitigate the effects of ethnic disparities.)

Reading Dr. Stowell’s remarks, you’ll understand the continued existence of a poster still tacked to a bathroom wall in the elementary school just down the street from me, that says: “The aim of education is the knowledge not of facts but of values.”

When I talk about math, administrators talk about “equity.” I talk about college; they talk about “social justice.” I talk about challenging the children; they talk about “achievement gaps.” I ask for better mathematics curricula – part of the schools’ primary function – and they say there isn’t enough money.

Actually, there’s a ton of money; it just pays for things that are not part of the primary function. It also pays for myriad things that shouldn’t be in the schools at all.

Meanwhile, President Obama is planning to deliver to states about 44 billion in nonexistent taxpayer dollars over the next six weeks. This money is on top of an already bloated education budget. More billions are forthcoming. Unless that money fixes the lack of academic content in our public schools, it won’t improve public instruction – it will just make the ineffectiveness exponentially more expensive.

The primary function of public school is academics. It isn’t supposed to be cheap daycare. It shouldn’t be promoting socialist views or any other political agenda. Its primary job isn’t to teach values or ethics, to feed the children, provide teen mothers with daycare, teach English to “undocumented immigrants,” or turn out people who are personally and profoundly aware of “white privilege.” Its primary function is to effectively and efficiently teach all students to a high standard of academic knowledge that will ready them for college, a trade, business ownership, a political career or whichever postsecondary life they envision.

If public schools don’t do this – their primary job – they’re a waste of students’ time and of taxpayers’ money.

So far, the education bureaucracy appears to be largely unwilling to address the biggest problem facing our public schools: The lack of core academic content – in much of the teacher training, in much of the curriculum, and in the daily focus of the typical classroom.

Some parents are coping with the educational shipwreck by deciding that sloshing through the water is OK. “Maybe she doesn’t have to work that hard,” one parent said recently about her daughter. “Academics aren’t everything.”

Others seek academic excellence (or even just academic competence) for their children by choosing to homeschool or to supplement at home (as we do) or by heading to charter schools, magnet programs, faith-based schools, private schools or co-ops.

I support these decisions. There is no guarantee that alternative choices will provide children with the best education possible, but we must allow for the most basic right Americans have: The freedom to choose the process. We have the right to choose to fail, and we have the right to choose to excel. It’s that flexibility that has traditionally made America strong.

Until lately, the market has always guided success and failure. It’s always provided us with the motivation to dismantle failing structures. Now, government programs support massive, systemic failure – while excellence barely has a place to breathe. For parents and students, flexibility and the freedom to choose have been legislated and mandated almost right out of the public-education system.

Every child deserves the best possible education, but what does that really mean? A gentleman from Massachusetts recently asked me: "If you could start all over again and build a brand new public education system … what would it look like?” This is an excellent question, and I’ve been pondering it ever since. I’m interested in hearing your ideas. Please reply to this blog or email me at wlroge@comcast.net.

Let’s say the future of public education is open to you. What would you create?

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "What Is the Purpose of Public Education?" Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/