I share this little anecdote to put an exclamation mark on a point.
I took my son Brooks to a walkin clinic yesterday to get a strep test. While we were waiting on the results, the nurse practioner commented, "So you say you're a teacher?"
I responded, "No, I didn't say, but yes I am."
She continues, "So what did you think of the election?"
Says I, "Well, if you're referring to the Glenda Ritz race, and her beating Tony Bennett, I'm still simply ecstatic. How do you feel about it?"
Then she drops the bomb on me. She says, "I'm a Republican, but I voted for Ritz." She then ask me, "Didn't you write a couple letters to the newspaper?"
I tell her, "Yes in fact I did, but how did you remember my name and connect it to a random guy coming through this clinic? "
Her reply was simply, "I read a lot."
She then went on to tell me if it weren't for the letters in the paper and all the talk on Facebook, she would have voted for Bennett as she had no other way to get informed. She says, "He sure had some good ads, but when I read what teachers had to say about him and his brand of reform, I realized he must be a pretty slick operator." She went on to say, "He sure did an effective job of making it look like it was all for kids, but the more I read, the more I suspected it was cover for his effort to privatize public schools."
At that point, once I got my jaw picked up from the floor, I told her she should consider being a detective because she possessed some formidable powers of intuition to get all that from reading a few letters in the paper and some post on Facebook:-)
...and here's the reality. There must have been nearly a million other nonteacher voters that made their decision the same way. They heard the voices and concerns of thousands of teachers, and they placed their confidence in teacher assessment rather than a ficticious slick glitzy campaign ad based on fantasy. This fact is incredibly uplifting, encouraging, and empowering.
So, now we have another duty and responsibility, as if you need more! Now, we must keep talking, and keep telling the story, and informing those that entrusted their votes to our judgement. We can not and must not retreat to the seeming security of our classrooms, close the door, and bear the brunt of the Republican bellicose bullies. Silence is no longer an option.
Here's the point. Never underestimate your ability to get the message out. It will resonate with someone. It doesn't cost anything to write a letter or speak a few words, except the investment of a tiny bit of time. When they are published or spoken, people take note. And when exposed to truth, many will be influenced to come to the aid of our common cause with their votes and to advocate for children and our public schools with their voices.
--
Julian Smith
President JCCTA
ISTA/IPACE
Units 3/F,G and H
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Never Underestimate Your Ability to Get the Message Out
The following came to us from Julian Smith, an Indiana Teacher...
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
NEIFPE Supports Glenda Ritz
NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
October 23, 2012
Contact: neifpe@gmail.com
Northern Indiana Education Advocacy Group Backs Glenda Ritz for Superintendent of Public Instruction
Public Education supporters concerned over negative impact of high-stakes testing, vouchers, charter schools, and teacher evaluations.
FORT WAYNE, IN – Citing strong and growing concern over the negative impact the corporatization of Indiana’s educational system is having on public education in Indiana, members of Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education (NEIFPE) today announced their support of Glenda Ritz for Superintendent of Public Instruction. Formed earlier this year, NEIFPE is a group of citizens, teachers, administrators and parents who are united by their support for public education and by concerns for its future.
The group believes that Glenda Ritz is the best candidate to refocus Indiana’s educational efforts toward students and learning rather than corporate interests. NEIFPE finds that recent federal and state reform measures that have turned education over to private interests threaten the well-being of children and jeopardize their futures.
The group supports Ritz, who has taken a stand against high-stakes testing and is committed to providing more time for education and less time for testing in Indiana.
For additional information visit www.neifpe.blogspot.com, www.ritz4ed.com or https://www.facebook.com/NEIFPE.
# # #
Vic’s Election Notes on Education #7– October 23, 2012
Dear Friends,
Tony Bennett’s policies have narrowed the curriculum to Math and English/Language Arts.
His focus on high stakes testing has put a huge priority on the two subjects schools must score well in for a high grade. Even survival as a school is at stake under the threat of state closure or takeover. Going further in this campaign, Tony Bennett has proposed state takeovers of whole school districts based on math and English/Language Arts scores.
The tremendous impact of this pressure on schools is not well understood by the public. Nor is it well understood by Tony Bennett, whose IDOE recently defended testing in the schools (“The Truth about Testing” posted 10/9/12 on the IDOE website) by saying that students only spend 6.5 hours per year taking ISTEP+ and that requirement only applies to seven grade levels. Tony Bennett apparently has not been in enough schools lately to know that the obsession to drive test scores higher, even if they are high already, is palpable in the life of our schools. It has undermined support for every other subject and elective.
We no longer have a balanced curriculum as we did up through the 1980’s. We used to a have state curriculum rule requiring a balanced curriculum, but this rule was repealed as the accountability movement picked up steam in the 1990’s. Now, school success is defined as success on math and language arts tests.
This is dangerous for the long term development of our democracy and our culture. Consider the areas of our curriculum and community life that are being left to atrophy as we push for higher math and English scores:
Music and Art
Specialists in music and art have suffered under the current priorities. They are grieving the decline of what they know is a vital portion of our curriculum. When Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett cut the already appropriated school budget by $300 million in December 2009 and never restored it as revenues improved, the consequences didn’t fall on reading and math teachers. They fell first on music and art teachers and on other “optional” specialists listed in areas below. Of course, state officials mandated the cuts, but local officials got blamed for the choices made for the cuts. It’s been tough to be a local school official in recent years, while Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett got praised for cutting the budget.
The irony is that research has well established that the arts can promote the brain development that unleashes reading and math development. That research is validated in my own experience as I look back to the 5th grade when I started playing cello in Elkhart’s outstanding music program. Looking back, it is clear now that my academic and intellectual development paralleled my intense interest and participation in music starting in the 5th grade. We need the arts in our schools.
Health and Physical Education
The Indianapolis Star proclaimed in a front page story in September (9/19/12) that Indiana is now tied for 8th among all states in the highest rate of obesity. Clearly health and physical education in our schools deserves a high priority.
Tony Bennett thinks otherwise. In the 2012 session of the General Assembly, he tried to repeal a long standing law that required a state health education curriculum and a state health education consultant. Years ago, health educators worked hard to pass a law that they thought would institutionalize a state role in health education. Tony Bennett didn’t want a health education consultant and three years into his term tried to repeal the law. Health and obesity issues apparently didn’t concern him. The heart association fought the repeal and in the end, Tony Bennett’s repeal bill failed. The law is still on the books, but there is obviously no priority on this program within IDOE.
Social Studies
Public schools have from their beginnings nearly 200 years ago been charged with building skilled citizens to protect and defend our democracy. This arena is often called the civic mission of schools, a mission which includes helping young people become informed voters, active participants in community concerns, and protectors of our Constitution.
Tony Bennett has ignored the civic mission of our schools.
Here is the record:
The laser focus on raising English and math scores is increasingly taking time and resources from the civic mission and, indeed, from any mission other than literacy and numeracy.
Science
Science is part of the STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Math) emphasis that gets much attention at the national level. Despite that status, science is suffering the same neglect as social studies in the elementary schools, and the lack of a strong foundation at the elementary level leaves science educators very concerned. Indiana gives science tests at 4th and 6th, just as they give social studies tests at the 5th and 7th grade. Everyone knows, however, that these subject matter tests do not count toward the letter grade system of the school which carries life or death consequences for the school, and potentially if Tony Bennett is re-elected, for the school district. Given the stakes, it is not surprising that all the attention is flowing to math and English. Science, for all of its importance for our future, is suffering.
Vocational programs
Seemingly every candidate is talking about a revival of vocational education in this year’s campaign. As I see it, candidates are responding to frustrated advocates for vocational education who have seen vocational electives erode in the face of other mandated courses. Why are there fewer electives available in a student’s schedule for vocational courses? When a high school student fails the math or English end-of-course assessment, they are generally placed in another math or English course to make up the deficiencies in order to qualify for graduation. Taking additional math or English means taking fewer electives, and vocational courses are among those that take the hit.
World Language programs
In today’s global economy, we need more people who are fluent in the languages of other nations. In Tony Bennett’s reforms, this need is ignored. At the high school, electives in foreign language are being squeezed out for the same reasons described above for vocational programs. Additional math and English courses have to replace something, and foreign languages classes have been hit hard. Research shows that the younger the student is, the easier they will learn another language, which would suggest more such programs at the elementary level. Budget cuts have prevented additional elementary programs to blossom, along with the relentless pressure elementary and middle schools face to raise math and English scores. The entire school letter grade in elementary and middle schools is entirely based on math and English scores, and this puts everything else such as foreign languages in a second class status.
Priorities: Taking a Broader View
Tony Bennett has pushed Indiana to focus nearly exclusively on reading and math. In defending the 2010 3rd grade reading retention bill and contradicting Gov. Daniels claim that the bill “needn’t, shouldn’t, won’t cost one extra cent,” Dr. Bennett “acknowledged the reality of potential expenses but said none of the funding would have to come from new state dollars. All of it, he said, is funding that is already available to local schools; it would simply need to be redirected. ‘I was thinking that this is about us focusing local resources on this initiative.’ Bennett said it’s a question of priorities.” (Indpls Star, 1/22/10, p. A23)
Going on, the article reported that Dr. Bennett “suggested the cost of an extra 90 minutes a day of reading intervention could be mitigated by embedding it within the normal school day, perhaps at the expense of recess or an arts class, which students would have to give up to focus on reading.”
English and math scores have dominated schools since PL221 (1999) and No Child Left Behind (2002) made scores in both subjects the determinants of whether a school lived or died under accountability rules. Now in 2011 legislation, Tony Bennett brought a quantum leap in the same direction. Now teacher evaluations and merit pay will be based on reading and math scores. When jobs are on the line, everything else will be put on the back burner.
Reading and math are indeed crucial priorities, but should they be the only priorities? Our democracy cannot survive without instruction in basic civics, geography, economics and history. At the elementary level, these subjects are disappearing and at the secondary level, IDOE leadership to promote vibrant programs like We the People, Project Citizen, History Day, Geography Bee and the Indiana Kids Election is missing. Our economy cannot survive without instruction in science, foreign language and economics to give us more inventors, exporters and entrepreneurs. Our culture cannot survive without instruction in music and art. Does anyone doubt that the loss of public and private support for the world renown Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra is rooted in part in the loss of music and arts programs in the last decade, since the accountability movement began crowding them out of the curriculum in the late 1990’s. These vitally important programs struggle for attention in a test-driven curriculum.
Only about half of all Americans of voting age cast votes in Presidential elections. Even with all the interest shown in the 2008 elections, participation only rose to 57%, the highest in 40 years. In crucial Congressional elections in non-Presidential years, less than 40% vote. Citizen participation needs an upgrade. Participation in our representative government is based on knowledge that for many students is gained only through the civic mission of our public schools. We must not ignore the mission of building responsible citizens with breadth in their knowledge and balance in their perspectives. Extending to the next generation our priceless heritage of freedom under the Constitution depends on it.
Glenda Ritz Needs Your Support
For the sake of our democracy, our economy and our culture, we must broaden our priorities. Glenda Ritz has called for the restoration of common sense in pulling back from the overemphasis on high stakes testing and for restoration of the balance in our curriculum. I hope you will support Glenda Ritz by participating in the grassroots campaign to elect her as State Superintendent of Public Instruction. We must have a new direction.
The November 6th election is now two weeks away and will have huge consequences for education in Indiana. I urge you to support Glenda Ritz in any way you can by talking with family members, neighbors and friends, especially those with no connection to education issues. Her name recognition is rising but is still low. The Wabash College debate tomorrow night will help. Tony Bennett’s expensive TV commercials are everywhere. Glenda Ritz needs your involvement and your support at the grassroots level. Please do what you can to speak up for her before Election Day.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
Tony Bennett’s policies have narrowed the curriculum to Math and English/Language Arts.
His focus on high stakes testing has put a huge priority on the two subjects schools must score well in for a high grade. Even survival as a school is at stake under the threat of state closure or takeover. Going further in this campaign, Tony Bennett has proposed state takeovers of whole school districts based on math and English/Language Arts scores.
The tremendous impact of this pressure on schools is not well understood by the public. Nor is it well understood by Tony Bennett, whose IDOE recently defended testing in the schools (“The Truth about Testing” posted 10/9/12 on the IDOE website) by saying that students only spend 6.5 hours per year taking ISTEP+ and that requirement only applies to seven grade levels. Tony Bennett apparently has not been in enough schools lately to know that the obsession to drive test scores higher, even if they are high already, is palpable in the life of our schools. It has undermined support for every other subject and elective.
We no longer have a balanced curriculum as we did up through the 1980’s. We used to a have state curriculum rule requiring a balanced curriculum, but this rule was repealed as the accountability movement picked up steam in the 1990’s. Now, school success is defined as success on math and language arts tests.
This is dangerous for the long term development of our democracy and our culture. Consider the areas of our curriculum and community life that are being left to atrophy as we push for higher math and English scores:
Music and Art
Specialists in music and art have suffered under the current priorities. They are grieving the decline of what they know is a vital portion of our curriculum. When Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett cut the already appropriated school budget by $300 million in December 2009 and never restored it as revenues improved, the consequences didn’t fall on reading and math teachers. They fell first on music and art teachers and on other “optional” specialists listed in areas below. Of course, state officials mandated the cuts, but local officials got blamed for the choices made for the cuts. It’s been tough to be a local school official in recent years, while Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett got praised for cutting the budget.
The irony is that research has well established that the arts can promote the brain development that unleashes reading and math development. That research is validated in my own experience as I look back to the 5th grade when I started playing cello in Elkhart’s outstanding music program. Looking back, it is clear now that my academic and intellectual development paralleled my intense interest and participation in music starting in the 5th grade. We need the arts in our schools.
Health and Physical Education
The Indianapolis Star proclaimed in a front page story in September (9/19/12) that Indiana is now tied for 8th among all states in the highest rate of obesity. Clearly health and physical education in our schools deserves a high priority.
Tony Bennett thinks otherwise. In the 2012 session of the General Assembly, he tried to repeal a long standing law that required a state health education curriculum and a state health education consultant. Years ago, health educators worked hard to pass a law that they thought would institutionalize a state role in health education. Tony Bennett didn’t want a health education consultant and three years into his term tried to repeal the law. Health and obesity issues apparently didn’t concern him. The heart association fought the repeal and in the end, Tony Bennett’s repeal bill failed. The law is still on the books, but there is obviously no priority on this program within IDOE.
Social Studies
Public schools have from their beginnings nearly 200 years ago been charged with building skilled citizens to protect and defend our democracy. This arena is often called the civic mission of schools, a mission which includes helping young people become informed voters, active participants in community concerns, and protectors of our Constitution.
Tony Bennett has ignored the civic mission of our schools.
Here is the record:
- A new strategic plan for the Indiana Department of Education, developed internally without public input, was issued in the opening weeks of the new administration, setting high goals for math and language arts test scores, for Advanced Placement tests, and for graduation rates. Dubbed the “90-25-90” plan, it omits any mention of developing the skills of responsible citizens.
- The two social studies consultants serving Indiana were fired in the first two weeks of the new administration and not replaced. Questions about geography, economics, civics and history were answered by staff not experienced in these areas. This was the first time IDOE had functioned without a social studies consultant since the position was first established in the 1960’s. I held the position for 2 years in the 1980’s and I know it plays a crucial role in citizenship education in Indiana. About a year and a half later, a part time social studies consultant was added because the new common core curriculum had a social studies strand. When I last asked the president of the Indiana Council for the Social Studies about social studies staff in IDOE, I was told there was a new part-time person but he wasn’t sure who it was. Tony Bennett has ended the long tradition of providing IDOE staff leadership for the civic mission.
- Funding for the extremely successful “Economic Education Mini-Grant” program which had planted seeds of entrepreneurial skills in students across Indiana for 30 years was cut off, as was the funding for staff to direct it. One would think that in the Great Recession, Tony Bennett would want to prominently support any program with a great track record of developing entrepreneurs. Not so.
The laser focus on raising English and math scores is increasingly taking time and resources from the civic mission and, indeed, from any mission other than literacy and numeracy.
Science
Science is part of the STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Math) emphasis that gets much attention at the national level. Despite that status, science is suffering the same neglect as social studies in the elementary schools, and the lack of a strong foundation at the elementary level leaves science educators very concerned. Indiana gives science tests at 4th and 6th, just as they give social studies tests at the 5th and 7th grade. Everyone knows, however, that these subject matter tests do not count toward the letter grade system of the school which carries life or death consequences for the school, and potentially if Tony Bennett is re-elected, for the school district. Given the stakes, it is not surprising that all the attention is flowing to math and English. Science, for all of its importance for our future, is suffering.
Vocational programs
Seemingly every candidate is talking about a revival of vocational education in this year’s campaign. As I see it, candidates are responding to frustrated advocates for vocational education who have seen vocational electives erode in the face of other mandated courses. Why are there fewer electives available in a student’s schedule for vocational courses? When a high school student fails the math or English end-of-course assessment, they are generally placed in another math or English course to make up the deficiencies in order to qualify for graduation. Taking additional math or English means taking fewer electives, and vocational courses are among those that take the hit.
World Language programs
In today’s global economy, we need more people who are fluent in the languages of other nations. In Tony Bennett’s reforms, this need is ignored. At the high school, electives in foreign language are being squeezed out for the same reasons described above for vocational programs. Additional math and English courses have to replace something, and foreign languages classes have been hit hard. Research shows that the younger the student is, the easier they will learn another language, which would suggest more such programs at the elementary level. Budget cuts have prevented additional elementary programs to blossom, along with the relentless pressure elementary and middle schools face to raise math and English scores. The entire school letter grade in elementary and middle schools is entirely based on math and English scores, and this puts everything else such as foreign languages in a second class status.
Priorities: Taking a Broader View
Tony Bennett has pushed Indiana to focus nearly exclusively on reading and math. In defending the 2010 3rd grade reading retention bill and contradicting Gov. Daniels claim that the bill “needn’t, shouldn’t, won’t cost one extra cent,” Dr. Bennett “acknowledged the reality of potential expenses but said none of the funding would have to come from new state dollars. All of it, he said, is funding that is already available to local schools; it would simply need to be redirected. ‘I was thinking that this is about us focusing local resources on this initiative.’ Bennett said it’s a question of priorities.” (Indpls Star, 1/22/10, p. A23)
Going on, the article reported that Dr. Bennett “suggested the cost of an extra 90 minutes a day of reading intervention could be mitigated by embedding it within the normal school day, perhaps at the expense of recess or an arts class, which students would have to give up to focus on reading.”
English and math scores have dominated schools since PL221 (1999) and No Child Left Behind (2002) made scores in both subjects the determinants of whether a school lived or died under accountability rules. Now in 2011 legislation, Tony Bennett brought a quantum leap in the same direction. Now teacher evaluations and merit pay will be based on reading and math scores. When jobs are on the line, everything else will be put on the back burner.
Reading and math are indeed crucial priorities, but should they be the only priorities? Our democracy cannot survive without instruction in basic civics, geography, economics and history. At the elementary level, these subjects are disappearing and at the secondary level, IDOE leadership to promote vibrant programs like We the People, Project Citizen, History Day, Geography Bee and the Indiana Kids Election is missing. Our economy cannot survive without instruction in science, foreign language and economics to give us more inventors, exporters and entrepreneurs. Our culture cannot survive without instruction in music and art. Does anyone doubt that the loss of public and private support for the world renown Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra is rooted in part in the loss of music and arts programs in the last decade, since the accountability movement began crowding them out of the curriculum in the late 1990’s. These vitally important programs struggle for attention in a test-driven curriculum.
Only about half of all Americans of voting age cast votes in Presidential elections. Even with all the interest shown in the 2008 elections, participation only rose to 57%, the highest in 40 years. In crucial Congressional elections in non-Presidential years, less than 40% vote. Citizen participation needs an upgrade. Participation in our representative government is based on knowledge that for many students is gained only through the civic mission of our public schools. We must not ignore the mission of building responsible citizens with breadth in their knowledge and balance in their perspectives. Extending to the next generation our priceless heritage of freedom under the Constitution depends on it.
Glenda Ritz Needs Your Support
For the sake of our democracy, our economy and our culture, we must broaden our priorities. Glenda Ritz has called for the restoration of common sense in pulling back from the overemphasis on high stakes testing and for restoration of the balance in our curriculum. I hope you will support Glenda Ritz by participating in the grassroots campaign to elect her as State Superintendent of Public Instruction. We must have a new direction.
The November 6th election is now two weeks away and will have huge consequences for education in Indiana. I urge you to support Glenda Ritz in any way you can by talking with family members, neighbors and friends, especially those with no connection to education issues. Her name recognition is rising but is still low. The Wabash College debate tomorrow night will help. Tony Bennett’s expensive TV commercials are everywhere. Glenda Ritz needs your involvement and your support at the grassroots level. Please do what you can to speak up for her before Election Day.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Vic’s Election Notes on Education #6– October 16, 2012
Here is the latest from Vic Smith. His document, A 22-YEAR REVIEW: IMPROVEMENT IN INDIANA’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS is available by clicking HERE.
Dear Friends,
For all the angst he has caused and the retirements he has motivated with his tactics, Tony Bennett’s record on raising test scores and graduation rates is essentially on par with the record of his predecessor, Suellen Reed.
In two campaign commercials and in his “State of Education” address on September 25th, he has touted raising both graduation rates and test scores. Let’s look at the precise record.
Graduation Rates: A Continuation of Steady Improvement
Graduation rates have been the fodder for political campaign debates since the Frank O’Bannon-David McIntire race for Governor in 2000. After great squabbles over the formula for determining graduation rates, the Indiana General Assembly finally authorized a count based on giving every student a number and then tracking every student who stays in that school to see how many graduate in four years. If they take five or six years to graduate, as in the case of many special education students, they do not count in the graduation rate.
The formula was clarified and students tracked from 9th to 12th grades beginning with the Class of 2006. Here are the results of the six years IDOE has reported the revised method:
Year % Graduating in Four Years % Drop Outs
Class of 2006 76.1 11.2
Class of 2007 76.4 11.9
Class of 2008 77.8 10.3
Class of 2009 81.5 8.7
Class of 2010 84.1 6.4
Class of 2011 85.7 6.1
Data for the Class of 2012 is not expected until December. The columns above do not add up to 100% because the new method of tracking every student revealed that an unexpectedly large number of students, as many as 7 or 8 percent, stay in school for a 5th or 6th year. Special education students have the right to stay in high school until their 22nd birthday. Others leave school without graduating and without dropping out by completing a special education certificate or by completing a course completion certificate, given to those who did not pass the required high school graduation tests.
Tony Bennett has complained that too many schools are granting graduations based on the waiver law. Waiver graduations occur when students do not pass the high school graduation tests in math and English but do meet the alternative list of criteria set up by the General Assembly for graduation. The General Assembly passed legislation authorizing waiver graduations after parents appealed to legislators to not allow a single test to nullify a four-year record of successful course work and achievement. The percentage of diplomas based on waivers has ranged between 5% and 8% since 2006. Waiver diplomas are the subject of much debate, but the focus here is on the total graduation figures listed above because those are the figures Dr. Bennett has cited in his campaign.
The next question is how the above scores should be divided between Dr. Reed and Dr. Bennett. This is a matter of judgment. Since Dr. Reed was in office for seven of the eight semesters for the Class of 2009, I include 2009 data with Dr. Reed’s record. Since Dr. Bennett took office in January of 2009 before the Class of 2009 graduated in June, I also include the Class of 2009 with Dr. Bennett’s record. Using these guidelines, the comparison comes out as follows:
Dr. Reed (2006-2009):
That leaves an important question: What did all of Tony Bennett’s comparative turmoil and controversy accomplish if his record is about the same as that of Suellen Reed?
Test Scores: A Conveniently Timed Adjustment
The record on ISTEP+ scores is, as always, more complex.
The Indianapolis Star took Tony Bennett to task in his “State of Education” address for saying that the ISTEP+ scores went up by 8 percent, from 63% to 71%, for those passing both math and English parts of the test. He was, the Star said, supposed to say the scores went up by 8 percentage points, not 8 percent. A change, they said, from 63% to 71% was a 12% increase.
That was the first fact-checking on Tony Bennett I had seen in the Star in a long, long time. I wish, however, they had discovered a deeper problem.
The deeper concern was buried in the fine print of the 2011 ISTEP+ results. Many of you have seen the report I produce every year, currently showing 22 years of year-by-year data on improvement in Indiana’s public schools. When I was preparing the most recent report last spring, which is attached for your reference, the Spring 2011 results carried a surprising advisory, saying that the 2011 results could not be compared to the Spring 2010 results. The reason given was that in 2011, the “Undetermined” scores were removed from the analysis.
At this point, you are asking: What does all this mean?
Undetermined scores are for students who have only partially completed the test. This could be due to students getting sick before the test is completed or to any number of calamities that could occur when students are tested: weather problems, floods, family emergencies. Schools have seen it all.
Until the Spring 2011 tests, the long term practice throughout Dr. Reed’s time in office was to include undetermined scores in the denominator when percent passing was calculated. In effect, that meant undetermined scores were treated as failing scores. Suddenly, in 2011, a different decision was made. Undetermined scores were set aside and excluded from the analysis. They were left out of the denominator. The net effect of that decision was to lower the denominator and raise the percentage passing totals across the board by about 2%. That is why the advisory said that comparisons between 2010 and 2011 should not be made. It was a “one-time in history” 2% bump up in the scores.
Now fast forward to 2012. The new results issued last summer again excluded the undetermined scores. Therefore, 2012 results can appropriately be compared with 2011 results. However, Tony Bennett in his speech compared the 2012 results (“71%”) with the 2009 results (“63%”). That would be an inappropriate comparison due to the change in IDOE policy on undetermined scores. Instead of a change of 8 percentage points, it should be reported as a probable change of 6 percentage points, since changing the policy on undetermined scores lifts all passing percentage figures by approximately 2 percentage points.
Like I said, the ISTEP+ story is more complex.
The interesting question for speculation is why the change was made. I have no inside information. I don’t even know if Tony Bennett is aware of this nuance produced by his testing staff. All I can do is observe that the change was made in one of the middle years of his term so Tony Bennett would not have to see words saying “comparisons should not be made to the previous year” in 2012. It was timed just right to show a slightly bigger gain (about 2% bigger) since the 2009 tests.
Website Changes
After telling you the story of undetermined scores, I planned to tell you the story of my independent efforts to verify the gains claimed on test scores. My framework was to be the 22-year review, which is attached. The analysis in that document counts, grade by grade, the number of valid year-by-year comparisons that went up, the number that went down, and the number that stayed the same.
To my dismay, when I went to the IDOE website to get the 2012 data to bring my tables up to date, the data I have used for years was not on the website. I have used ISTEP+ reports that were statewide grade by grade disaggregated totals. They are no longer available on the IDOE website.
IDOE has changed their website several times, starting in 2010. I don’t know anyone who thinks the changes have been in the direction of more transparency and more data available. Instead, there is less available.
Then when I went to the archive of previous ISTEP years, the archive files did not open. It could be a problem with the IDOE website or it could be a problem with my trusted computer, which has opened everything else. Draw your own conclusions.
Summary
My quest to verify graduation rate and test score gains during Tony Bennett’s years in office has ended in two conclusions:
A key question that must be asked is whether the gains in test scores and graduation rates during Tony Bennett’s four-year term have come at a cost. Did he sacrifice in other areas to bring these gains, areas that Suellen Reed did not sacrifice? What were the opportunity costs of his intense focus on math and English tests?
I will explore that important question in the next “Notes.”
A Strong Endorsement for Glenda Ritz
The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette strongly endorsed Glenda Ritz in their October 14th editorial entitled “Time to Halt Bennett’s Ambitions.” I agree with everything they wrote, from their opening words, “Indiana public schools are struggling under the leadership of Tony Bennett” to their closing words, “Voters should compare the leadership styles and results of a politically ambitious superintendent versus his two widely respected predecessors. Ritz promises to serve more in the mold of Evans and Reed; she’s the easy choice for Indiana’s top education post.”
Please talk with neighbors and friends who are not familiar with education issues to enlist their support for Glenda Ritz. That is a vital step to counteract the enormous advantage in TV advertising held by Tony Bennett and his campaign that has been so well funded by out-of –state interests. Your actions will make all the difference if Glenda Ritz is going to win in this grassroots campaign.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
----
Dear Friends,
For all the angst he has caused and the retirements he has motivated with his tactics, Tony Bennett’s record on raising test scores and graduation rates is essentially on par with the record of his predecessor, Suellen Reed.
In two campaign commercials and in his “State of Education” address on September 25th, he has touted raising both graduation rates and test scores. Let’s look at the precise record.
Graduation Rates: A Continuation of Steady Improvement
Graduation rates have been the fodder for political campaign debates since the Frank O’Bannon-David McIntire race for Governor in 2000. After great squabbles over the formula for determining graduation rates, the Indiana General Assembly finally authorized a count based on giving every student a number and then tracking every student who stays in that school to see how many graduate in four years. If they take five or six years to graduate, as in the case of many special education students, they do not count in the graduation rate.
The formula was clarified and students tracked from 9th to 12th grades beginning with the Class of 2006. Here are the results of the six years IDOE has reported the revised method:
Year % Graduating in Four Years % Drop Outs
Class of 2006 76.1 11.2
Class of 2007 76.4 11.9
Class of 2008 77.8 10.3
Class of 2009 81.5 8.7
Class of 2010 84.1 6.4
Class of 2011 85.7 6.1
Data for the Class of 2012 is not expected until December. The columns above do not add up to 100% because the new method of tracking every student revealed that an unexpectedly large number of students, as many as 7 or 8 percent, stay in school for a 5th or 6th year. Special education students have the right to stay in high school until their 22nd birthday. Others leave school without graduating and without dropping out by completing a special education certificate or by completing a course completion certificate, given to those who did not pass the required high school graduation tests.
Tony Bennett has complained that too many schools are granting graduations based on the waiver law. Waiver graduations occur when students do not pass the high school graduation tests in math and English but do meet the alternative list of criteria set up by the General Assembly for graduation. The General Assembly passed legislation authorizing waiver graduations after parents appealed to legislators to not allow a single test to nullify a four-year record of successful course work and achievement. The percentage of diplomas based on waivers has ranged between 5% and 8% since 2006. Waiver diplomas are the subject of much debate, but the focus here is on the total graduation figures listed above because those are the figures Dr. Bennett has cited in his campaign.
The next question is how the above scores should be divided between Dr. Reed and Dr. Bennett. This is a matter of judgment. Since Dr. Reed was in office for seven of the eight semesters for the Class of 2009, I include 2009 data with Dr. Reed’s record. Since Dr. Bennett took office in January of 2009 before the Class of 2009 graduated in June, I also include the Class of 2009 with Dr. Bennett’s record. Using these guidelines, the comparison comes out as follows:
Dr. Reed (2006-2009):
- Graduation rate 76.1% in 2006
- Graduation rate 81.5% in 2009, up 5.4% in 3 years after her baseline year.
- Drop out rate 11.2% in 2006
- Drop out rate8.7% in 2009, down 2.5% in 3 years after her baseline year.
- Graduation rate 81.5% in 2009
- Graduation rate 85.7% in 2011, up 4.2% in 2 years after his baseline year.
- Drop out rate 8.7% in 2009
- Drop out rate 6.1% in 2011, down 2.6% in 2 years after his baseline year.
That leaves an important question: What did all of Tony Bennett’s comparative turmoil and controversy accomplish if his record is about the same as that of Suellen Reed?
Test Scores: A Conveniently Timed Adjustment
The record on ISTEP+ scores is, as always, more complex.
The Indianapolis Star took Tony Bennett to task in his “State of Education” address for saying that the ISTEP+ scores went up by 8 percent, from 63% to 71%, for those passing both math and English parts of the test. He was, the Star said, supposed to say the scores went up by 8 percentage points, not 8 percent. A change, they said, from 63% to 71% was a 12% increase.
That was the first fact-checking on Tony Bennett I had seen in the Star in a long, long time. I wish, however, they had discovered a deeper problem.
The deeper concern was buried in the fine print of the 2011 ISTEP+ results. Many of you have seen the report I produce every year, currently showing 22 years of year-by-year data on improvement in Indiana’s public schools. When I was preparing the most recent report last spring, which is attached for your reference, the Spring 2011 results carried a surprising advisory, saying that the 2011 results could not be compared to the Spring 2010 results. The reason given was that in 2011, the “Undetermined” scores were removed from the analysis.
At this point, you are asking: What does all this mean?
Undetermined scores are for students who have only partially completed the test. This could be due to students getting sick before the test is completed or to any number of calamities that could occur when students are tested: weather problems, floods, family emergencies. Schools have seen it all.
Until the Spring 2011 tests, the long term practice throughout Dr. Reed’s time in office was to include undetermined scores in the denominator when percent passing was calculated. In effect, that meant undetermined scores were treated as failing scores. Suddenly, in 2011, a different decision was made. Undetermined scores were set aside and excluded from the analysis. They were left out of the denominator. The net effect of that decision was to lower the denominator and raise the percentage passing totals across the board by about 2%. That is why the advisory said that comparisons between 2010 and 2011 should not be made. It was a “one-time in history” 2% bump up in the scores.
Now fast forward to 2012. The new results issued last summer again excluded the undetermined scores. Therefore, 2012 results can appropriately be compared with 2011 results. However, Tony Bennett in his speech compared the 2012 results (“71%”) with the 2009 results (“63%”). That would be an inappropriate comparison due to the change in IDOE policy on undetermined scores. Instead of a change of 8 percentage points, it should be reported as a probable change of 6 percentage points, since changing the policy on undetermined scores lifts all passing percentage figures by approximately 2 percentage points.
Like I said, the ISTEP+ story is more complex.
The interesting question for speculation is why the change was made. I have no inside information. I don’t even know if Tony Bennett is aware of this nuance produced by his testing staff. All I can do is observe that the change was made in one of the middle years of his term so Tony Bennett would not have to see words saying “comparisons should not be made to the previous year” in 2012. It was timed just right to show a slightly bigger gain (about 2% bigger) since the 2009 tests.
Website Changes
After telling you the story of undetermined scores, I planned to tell you the story of my independent efforts to verify the gains claimed on test scores. My framework was to be the 22-year review, which is attached. The analysis in that document counts, grade by grade, the number of valid year-by-year comparisons that went up, the number that went down, and the number that stayed the same.
To my dismay, when I went to the IDOE website to get the 2012 data to bring my tables up to date, the data I have used for years was not on the website. I have used ISTEP+ reports that were statewide grade by grade disaggregated totals. They are no longer available on the IDOE website.
IDOE has changed their website several times, starting in 2010. I don’t know anyone who thinks the changes have been in the direction of more transparency and more data available. Instead, there is less available.
Then when I went to the archive of previous ISTEP years, the archive files did not open. It could be a problem with the IDOE website or it could be a problem with my trusted computer, which has opened everything else. Draw your own conclusions.
Summary
My quest to verify graduation rate and test score gains during Tony Bennett’s years in office has ended in two conclusions:
- Graduation rate increases during Dr. Bennett’s term are about on par with graduation rate increases while Dr. Reed was in office.
- The switch in 2011 to excluding undetermined scores from the calculations provided an approximate 2% boost to all percentage passing levels.
A key question that must be asked is whether the gains in test scores and graduation rates during Tony Bennett’s four-year term have come at a cost. Did he sacrifice in other areas to bring these gains, areas that Suellen Reed did not sacrifice? What were the opportunity costs of his intense focus on math and English tests?
I will explore that important question in the next “Notes.”
A Strong Endorsement for Glenda Ritz
The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette strongly endorsed Glenda Ritz in their October 14th editorial entitled “Time to Halt Bennett’s Ambitions.” I agree with everything they wrote, from their opening words, “Indiana public schools are struggling under the leadership of Tony Bennett” to their closing words, “Voters should compare the leadership styles and results of a politically ambitious superintendent versus his two widely respected predecessors. Ritz promises to serve more in the mold of Evans and Reed; she’s the easy choice for Indiana’s top education post.”
Please talk with neighbors and friends who are not familiar with education issues to enlist their support for Glenda Ritz. That is a vital step to counteract the enormous advantage in TV advertising held by Tony Bennett and his campaign that has been so well funded by out-of –state interests. Your actions will make all the difference if Glenda Ritz is going to win in this grassroots campaign.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Vic’s Election Notes on Education #2– September 12, 2012
Dear Friends,
Tony Bennett’s flawed A-F system is hurting efforts to bring jobs to Indiana.
The Mayor of Goshen drove three hours to bring that message to the only public hearing on the A-F model last January. His community was working overtime to attract new businesses, and the first thing businesses ask is about the quality of the schools. He knew the schools were top notch, serving a student population of great diversity, but Tony Bennett’s grading system was undervaluing the schools in his community. For the sake of economic development, he asked for a revised plan to grade schools.
He was ignored, but in an election season when jobs and the economy are the biggest issues, Tony Bennett should have listened. Since January, I have heard many express the mayor’s concern, asking: Why would Tony Bennett want to undervalue and degrade the schools of Indiana when our communities are struggling with the Great Recession and the loss of jobs? Why wouldn’t he want a more accurate and more realistic profile of our schools to be available for economic development efforts?
Is the A-F system unfair in the way it devalues many Indiana schools?
Clearly and definitively, the answer is yes.
What is the evidence of this injustice?
Florida was Tony Bennett’s role model as he worked to change Indiana’s PL221 to a letter grade system, a change that has been one of the signature efforts of his four-year term as state superintendent. He brought Jeb Bush to Indiana to speak to the Roundtable in September of 2009 about Florida’s system. He brought Florida leaders to testify during legislative debates. Thus, the comparison between Indiana scores and Florida scores on the National Assessment, which some of you have seen, is crucial.
The comparison shows that Indiana students, on the same test, absolutely outscored Florida students on 4th and 8th grade math, most recently by 3% and 9% respectively, and on 8th grade reading, most recently by 5%. The same pattern has held true during the last four national assessments. Only 4th grade reading scores favored Florida over Indiana, which were the only data presented to the Roundtable meeting when Jeb Bush visited. For those who prefer to look at the proficient standard for high ability students, the same pattern holds. Overall, Indiana has consistently outperformed Florida on the National Assessment.
Then why, one must ask, is Tony Bennett ready to impose a grading system that, by IDOE figures released in February, would give D’s or F’s to 22% of Indiana’s schools, while Florida gives D’s or F’s to only 6% of its schools? He has incorrectly calibrated this system and given Indiana schools lower grades than they deserve to the detriment of economic development in communities across Indiana. Indiana does not deserve school letter grades that are over three times lower than Florida.
When I presented this Indiana vs. Florida comparison in testimony to the Select Commission on Education in June, I heard only one weak response from IDOE officials. They told the Select Commission that Florida had higher numbers of low grades when they started their system several years back, and now Indiana can expect to have higher numbers of low grades as we begin our system.
Think about that for a moment. That kind of reasoning is why we are having trouble in Indiana.
I characterize this as a weak response because it ignores the fact that the National Assessment shows the most recent performance of both states, and Indiana clearly outscores Florida. This reality should have nothing to do with phase in expectations or start-up issues. If Indiana is currently outperforming Florida, our letter grades should be at least in the same ballpark as Florida’s.
Is there additional evidence?
The National Assessment provides direct and devastating evidence of how Tony Bennett’s A-F system defames and devalues the schools of Indiana compared to Florida, but it is not the only evidence available on this issue. In addition, there is corroborating evidence that Indiana schools do not deserve a kick in the teeth. Take a look at the last 22 years of historical trends in Indiana schools on ten indicators, as seen on page 2 HERE. These data show whether Indiana has gone up or down over the years on everything from attendance and graduation rates to SAT and ISTEP scores. Then the range of results for the past 22 years is displayed. As you will see on the bottom line, the conclusion is that on eight of the ten indicators studied, Indiana stands at or near its historic high. Our schools on most points have never been better. We currently have the best graduation rate in our history – 85.7%-- and our lowest dropout rate in our history – 6.1%.
This provides additional evidence that Indiana schools deserve far better than Tony Bennett’s A-F system.
The second attachment shows the two summary pages of my 22-year review of Indiana public school improvement. If you would like a copy of all ten tables and the full 16 page report, just send me an email or click HERE to download a copy.
When will we see the grades?
The rollout of Tony Bennett’s flawed A-F system is off to a shaky start and has become an issue in itself.
Instead of approving preliminary school grades at the August 30th State Board meeting as originally scheduled in the board agenda, Dr. Bennett revised the agenda on the day of the meeting and announced an 11-day delay until September 10th. After schools get their preliminary grades on that date, he said they would have until September 21st to appeal. He said that the State Board would approve the grades and make them public on October 3rd, the day of the next State Board meeting.
While he tried to put a good face on this delay, Dr. Bennett can’t be pleased that his grading system, one of the biggest initiatives in his four-year term, missed its first announced deadline in the midst of his first reelection campaign. I have heard three questions as people speculate on the cause of the delay: 1) Is his staff too small for calculations that are too complex? 2) Are so many highly regarded schools about to get low grades that he wanted to recheck every figure to be ready to defend the system? and 3) Is this the first of a series of delays designed to delay school grade announcements until after the election, so that the heat that is sure to come over unfair grades will fall after the voting on November 6th?
Or is it all of the above?
And now word came this week on September 10th of another delay, saying that preliminary school letter grades “will be released later this week.” Does anyone want to add more speculation about what caused a second delay?
Conclusion
That the A-F system has become an issue in the November 6th election is a natural result of our democracy. When all 35 speakers testified against the flawed system in the only public hearing last January, Tony Bennett didn’t listen. He didn’t even attend the hearing. Over the objections of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, the Indiana Public Charter School Association, and many other groups and individuals, he got the system passed through his sheer power over the State Board of Education.
When the Indiana Chamber of Commerce called in June for a putting this system on hold for a year to repair the flaws, Tony Bennett didn’t listen. He said he had to comply with the federal waiver that he wrote.
Clearly, objecting to federal control is not in Tony Bennett’s mindset.
Besides incorrectly calibrating the school letter grades to a more punitive result than Indiana schools deserve, there are two major, and I would say illegal, flaws in Tony Bennett’s A-F system:
1) It does not set up categories of improvement as the law requires.
2) The growth model used for bonuses and penalties is based, not on a clear criterion score, but on the performance of peers across the state.
School leaders are frustrated that they can’t calculate their own grade without statewide data they don’t have regarding growth. The bonuses and the penalties for growth can only be calculated based on each individual’s growth compared to the total state performance of peers. This, in my view, violates IC 20-31-8-2(b): (b) The department shall assess improvement in the following manner: (1) Compare each school and each school corporation with its own prior performance and not to the performance of other schools or school corporations. The labeling of high and low growth students does indeed use comparisons involving the students of other schools and school corporations.
The only remaining path to repairing the A-F system is at the ballot box on November 6th. Elections are the accountability system for leaders who ignore their stakeholders.
Glenda Ritz has called for a revised A-F system. She listens. I support Glenda Ritz for State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
I urge you to support Glenda Ritz in any way you can, with yard signs, bumper stickers or by talking with family members, neighbors and friends. The general public knows very little about the A-F system and the injustice to our schools that I have just described. Help your friends and neighbors understand this issue, and ask them to support Glenda Ritz to remedy this problem.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
Attachments (Click to view):
1. Table: Why Indiana Does Not Deserve Significantly Lower Letter Grades Than Florida
2. A Twenty-two Year Review: Improvement in Indiana's Schools
Tony Bennett’s flawed A-F system is hurting efforts to bring jobs to Indiana.
The Mayor of Goshen drove three hours to bring that message to the only public hearing on the A-F model last January. His community was working overtime to attract new businesses, and the first thing businesses ask is about the quality of the schools. He knew the schools were top notch, serving a student population of great diversity, but Tony Bennett’s grading system was undervaluing the schools in his community. For the sake of economic development, he asked for a revised plan to grade schools.
He was ignored, but in an election season when jobs and the economy are the biggest issues, Tony Bennett should have listened. Since January, I have heard many express the mayor’s concern, asking: Why would Tony Bennett want to undervalue and degrade the schools of Indiana when our communities are struggling with the Great Recession and the loss of jobs? Why wouldn’t he want a more accurate and more realistic profile of our schools to be available for economic development efforts?
Is the A-F system unfair in the way it devalues many Indiana schools?
Clearly and definitively, the answer is yes.
What is the evidence of this injustice?
Florida was Tony Bennett’s role model as he worked to change Indiana’s PL221 to a letter grade system, a change that has been one of the signature efforts of his four-year term as state superintendent. He brought Jeb Bush to Indiana to speak to the Roundtable in September of 2009 about Florida’s system. He brought Florida leaders to testify during legislative debates. Thus, the comparison between Indiana scores and Florida scores on the National Assessment, which some of you have seen, is crucial.
The comparison shows that Indiana students, on the same test, absolutely outscored Florida students on 4th and 8th grade math, most recently by 3% and 9% respectively, and on 8th grade reading, most recently by 5%. The same pattern has held true during the last four national assessments. Only 4th grade reading scores favored Florida over Indiana, which were the only data presented to the Roundtable meeting when Jeb Bush visited. For those who prefer to look at the proficient standard for high ability students, the same pattern holds. Overall, Indiana has consistently outperformed Florida on the National Assessment.
Then why, one must ask, is Tony Bennett ready to impose a grading system that, by IDOE figures released in February, would give D’s or F’s to 22% of Indiana’s schools, while Florida gives D’s or F’s to only 6% of its schools? He has incorrectly calibrated this system and given Indiana schools lower grades than they deserve to the detriment of economic development in communities across Indiana. Indiana does not deserve school letter grades that are over three times lower than Florida.
When I presented this Indiana vs. Florida comparison in testimony to the Select Commission on Education in June, I heard only one weak response from IDOE officials. They told the Select Commission that Florida had higher numbers of low grades when they started their system several years back, and now Indiana can expect to have higher numbers of low grades as we begin our system.
Think about that for a moment. That kind of reasoning is why we are having trouble in Indiana.
I characterize this as a weak response because it ignores the fact that the National Assessment shows the most recent performance of both states, and Indiana clearly outscores Florida. This reality should have nothing to do with phase in expectations or start-up issues. If Indiana is currently outperforming Florida, our letter grades should be at least in the same ballpark as Florida’s.
Is there additional evidence?
The National Assessment provides direct and devastating evidence of how Tony Bennett’s A-F system defames and devalues the schools of Indiana compared to Florida, but it is not the only evidence available on this issue. In addition, there is corroborating evidence that Indiana schools do not deserve a kick in the teeth. Take a look at the last 22 years of historical trends in Indiana schools on ten indicators, as seen on page 2 HERE. These data show whether Indiana has gone up or down over the years on everything from attendance and graduation rates to SAT and ISTEP scores. Then the range of results for the past 22 years is displayed. As you will see on the bottom line, the conclusion is that on eight of the ten indicators studied, Indiana stands at or near its historic high. Our schools on most points have never been better. We currently have the best graduation rate in our history – 85.7%-- and our lowest dropout rate in our history – 6.1%.
This provides additional evidence that Indiana schools deserve far better than Tony Bennett’s A-F system.
The second attachment shows the two summary pages of my 22-year review of Indiana public school improvement. If you would like a copy of all ten tables and the full 16 page report, just send me an email or click HERE to download a copy.
When will we see the grades?
The rollout of Tony Bennett’s flawed A-F system is off to a shaky start and has become an issue in itself.
Instead of approving preliminary school grades at the August 30th State Board meeting as originally scheduled in the board agenda, Dr. Bennett revised the agenda on the day of the meeting and announced an 11-day delay until September 10th. After schools get their preliminary grades on that date, he said they would have until September 21st to appeal. He said that the State Board would approve the grades and make them public on October 3rd, the day of the next State Board meeting.
While he tried to put a good face on this delay, Dr. Bennett can’t be pleased that his grading system, one of the biggest initiatives in his four-year term, missed its first announced deadline in the midst of his first reelection campaign. I have heard three questions as people speculate on the cause of the delay: 1) Is his staff too small for calculations that are too complex? 2) Are so many highly regarded schools about to get low grades that he wanted to recheck every figure to be ready to defend the system? and 3) Is this the first of a series of delays designed to delay school grade announcements until after the election, so that the heat that is sure to come over unfair grades will fall after the voting on November 6th?
Or is it all of the above?
And now word came this week on September 10th of another delay, saying that preliminary school letter grades “will be released later this week.” Does anyone want to add more speculation about what caused a second delay?
Conclusion
That the A-F system has become an issue in the November 6th election is a natural result of our democracy. When all 35 speakers testified against the flawed system in the only public hearing last January, Tony Bennett didn’t listen. He didn’t even attend the hearing. Over the objections of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, the Indiana Public Charter School Association, and many other groups and individuals, he got the system passed through his sheer power over the State Board of Education.
When the Indiana Chamber of Commerce called in June for a putting this system on hold for a year to repair the flaws, Tony Bennett didn’t listen. He said he had to comply with the federal waiver that he wrote.
Clearly, objecting to federal control is not in Tony Bennett’s mindset.
Besides incorrectly calibrating the school letter grades to a more punitive result than Indiana schools deserve, there are two major, and I would say illegal, flaws in Tony Bennett’s A-F system:
1) It does not set up categories of improvement as the law requires.
“IC 20-31-8-3 Sec. 3. The state board shall establish a number of categories or designations of school improvement based on the improvement that a school makes in performance of the measures determined by the board with the advice of the education roundtable. The categories or designations must reflect various levels of improvement.”Instead of setting up categories based on improvement or growth, Tony Bennett’s system bases letter grades on performance. The most important factor in the school grade will be the performance of the school on math and English tests. The base grade is only tweaked based on growth. The Indiana Chamber of Commerce noted this as the first problem in their list of objections presented to the Select Commission, saying that the focus on the pass/fail rate “incentives continuing focus on the bubble kids”, referring to the problem that students who are close to getting over the cut score get the most attention. We need a system that gets us away from over-attention to the “bubble kids.”
2) The growth model used for bonuses and penalties is based, not on a clear criterion score, but on the performance of peers across the state.
School leaders are frustrated that they can’t calculate their own grade without statewide data they don’t have regarding growth. The bonuses and the penalties for growth can only be calculated based on each individual’s growth compared to the total state performance of peers. This, in my view, violates IC 20-31-8-2(b): (b) The department shall assess improvement in the following manner: (1) Compare each school and each school corporation with its own prior performance and not to the performance of other schools or school corporations. The labeling of high and low growth students does indeed use comparisons involving the students of other schools and school corporations.
The only remaining path to repairing the A-F system is at the ballot box on November 6th. Elections are the accountability system for leaders who ignore their stakeholders.
Glenda Ritz has called for a revised A-F system. She listens. I support Glenda Ritz for State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
I urge you to support Glenda Ritz in any way you can, with yard signs, bumper stickers or by talking with family members, neighbors and friends. The general public knows very little about the A-F system and the injustice to our schools that I have just described. Help your friends and neighbors understand this issue, and ask them to support Glenda Ritz to remedy this problem.
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
“Vic’s Election Notes on Education” is not linked to any organization and is not being distributed by me to any organization. It is only being distributed to those who have previously sent personal requests for my commentaries. If you want to pass it along to others, you do not need to ask my permission. If you want to be taken off the distribution list, just let me know. If you know of others who want to be added to the list, just send me an email.
Attachments (Click to view):
1. Table: Why Indiana Does Not Deserve Significantly Lower Letter Grades Than Florida
2. A Twenty-two Year Review: Improvement in Indiana's Schools
~~~
Monday, April 30, 2012
ICPE Candidates' Forum
From: Mark A. Burkhart
Date: Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:33 PM
Subject: ICPE Candidates' Forum
Friends of Public Education:
The Delaware County Chapter of the Indiana Coalition for Public Education (ICPE) is sponsoring a legislative candidates’ forum Tuesday afternoon, May 1, 2012. The forum will be held at the Muncie Area Career Center Presidents’ Room, 2500 N. Elgin Avenue, Muncie (park in the south lot for nearest entry). Indiana House of Representatives candidates from all districts (31-32-33-34-35) covering Delaware County have been invited A meet-and-greet with light refreshments will start at 4 p.m. with a formal program at 4:30 p.m. It is anticipated that the entire event will conclude no later than 5:30 p.m. Please invite anyone interested in public education. Thanks.
Mark Burkhart
External/Corresponding Secretary
Delaware County ICPE
Date: Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:33 PM
Subject: ICPE Candidates' Forum
Friends of Public Education:
The Delaware County Chapter of the Indiana Coalition for Public Education (ICPE) is sponsoring a legislative candidates’ forum Tuesday afternoon, May 1, 2012. The forum will be held at the Muncie Area Career Center Presidents’ Room, 2500 N. Elgin Avenue, Muncie (park in the south lot for nearest entry). Indiana House of Representatives candidates from all districts (31-32-33-34-35) covering Delaware County have been invited A meet-and-greet with light refreshments will start at 4 p.m. with a formal program at 4:30 p.m. It is anticipated that the entire event will conclude no later than 5:30 p.m. Please invite anyone interested in public education. Thanks.
Mark Burkhart
External/Corresponding Secretary
Delaware County ICPE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)