A few days ago, I posted that Cindy Marten, the superintendent of the San Diego Unified School District, was cutting back on the time spent testing kids.
This was good news. But some folks are certain that there can never be good news and that I must have been hoodwinked. The usually insightful blogger Emily Talmadge insisted that I was wrong. San Diego was not abandoning high-stakes tests, she wrote, it was buying into “competency based education,” in which children are continually assessed by computers. Emily said that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t.
I went to my sources in San Diego, and the good news is that San Diego is cutting back on testing and it is not adopting competency based education.
Don’t take it on my word alone.
Take it from the teachers’ union, the San Diego Educators Association.
This is their response to the District’s decision to reduce testing:
“After months of organizing and working to educate San Diego Unified School District parents and leaders on the negative impacts of high-stakes testing, the educators of San Diego Education Association applaud the District for today announcing the significant reduction in the amount of District-mandated standardized tests.”
“San Diego’s educators are thrilled to learn that the District has listened to the concerns of nearly 7,000 educators who have said the current system of high-stakes testing is broken,” said SDEA President Lindsay Burningham.
“Today’s announcement from Superintendent Cindy Marten and SDUSD shows the power that educators and parents have when we stand up together to support the true needs of our students.”
I trust the teachers know what is happening in their own district.
Did Superintendent Marten’s cancel the tests mandated by the state and federal governments? No. She does not have the power to do so. But she canceled district assessments and data collections.
Marten notifies parents every year that they have a right to opt out of state testing. Does your superintendent do that?
The San Diego Union-Tribune wrote recently:
“At the start of the last spring testing window, Marten sent a letter parents that all but apologized for the tests. In February of last year, the San Diego school board adopted a resolution calling on Congress and the Obama administration to eliminate federally mandated testing requirements for third- through ninth-graders.”
Did your school district do that?
Emily, you are a bright and passionate educator. Take a trip to San Diego. Meet Superintendent Marten. Visit the schools. Talk to teachers. But go in the winter, when it is 10 degrees in Maine and 70 degrees in SD.
I promise you won’t be disappointed.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I would love to go to San Diego … Even in May it is cold and dreary here in Maine! as for my blog post…This i21 document from the district’s website lays out their vision and agenda, it’s very clear that they are indeed moving to a competency based system with 1:1 digital devices for all….https://www.sandiegounified.org/sites/default/files_link/district/files/dept/props._s_&_z_independent_citizens_oversight_committee_(icoc)_/i21_Quarterly-Update-Exhibit-4.2–9-17-15.pdf
LikeLike
San Diego is buying computers for its students but it is not adopting CBE. Investigate further.
LikeLike
It says they have a goal of implementing competency based learning very clearly on page six of their i21 plan that I linked to above… Have they scrapped this plan since then?
LikeLike
Emily’s original blog post is well written and seems to have a lot of supporting documents directly from San Diego USD’s website. Did something change? Maybe the Superintendent decided to change course.
LikeLike
To me it makes sense – San Diego removed district benchmark assessments to make way for CBE daily testing.
LikeLike
Cindy Marten and her regional superintendents focus on what’s important. Kudos!!!!
LikeLike
Wow, great link Emily. Reading the district’s vision, it is obvious they are full steam ahead for CBE, replacing teachers with computer programs. In fact, I would argue they are farther ahead than most districts.
LikeLike
Page 6 of the i21 Quarterly Update that Emily references/links to reads, in small part:
GOAL
Implement competency-based learning and problem-solving-based assessment, aligned with Common Core standards.
WHERE WE ARE
With competency-based learning, students can receive credit for knowledge that they have acquired outside of a formal educational setting. Students are given direct assessments to determine their knowledge in a given area. Traditionally, credit is based on the number of hours that students spend in a classroom. Many students throughout San Diego Unified School District are enrolled in online classes. These students have the ability to move through classes faster than if they were enrolled in traditional brick and mortar classroom courses. These online courses, which are aligned with Common Core Standards and are San Diego Unified-approved, are quasi competency-based. Students with a great deal of knowledge in a particular area can move through a course quickly. This gives students the ability to graduate earlier than expected or to
recover credits expeditiously.
Perhaps they’ve updated/changed this information recently? They have clearly and completely announced their goal of using CBE …I’ve read many articles attacking high stakes testing that are really setting the stage for the next wave of high stakes all day testing known as Competency Based Education. I shudder to think of what these schools will be like..but it looks like we will get to see just that in San Diego once they’ve reached their stated goal.
LikeLike
I am a teacher in San Diego Unified, and am now also on the executive board of SDEA. There are some concerns with the wording of the announcement that do sound like a doorway to Competency Based Education. Now, they ARE doing away with the benchmark tests, which is GREAT news! It also looks like it will be a more local decision- which should be good, but it really depends on who your principal and area superintendent is. I will be keeping a CLOSE eye on this.
LikeLike
It looks like CBE to me, complete with 1:1 devices. I know because I am seeing it my my own district in Maine.
I would love to know what “learning” software they will be using and if assessments are digital (all year long).
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch – I am placing this here for easy access. I will remove once it gets to you since it is off topic and I do not want to distract from the post.
About a year and a half ago, a blog was featured on this site that detailed the misled comments of South Brunswick School District’s (New Jersey) Superintendent Dr. Jerry Jellig regarding PARCC testing. Since that time, the issues in South Brunswick have extended well beyond PARCC testing.
At the last three board of education meetings we have had hundreds of teachers come out to support the union president, who has testified multiple times against the current behavior of the superintendent and his administration. Some of his points included the following:
– Last November the South Brunswick Education Association (SBEA, a local union of the NJEA) filed several grievances against the administration alleging numerous unfair labor practices. Specifically these grievances alleged the superintendent habitually intimidated teachers and union members with differing views – he allegedly intimidated two teachers last fall after they had attended a union meeting after school.
– The teachers’ union, which represents the 700-some teachers in the district, has filed four separate grievances against the school district. Two of those complaints have been specifically filed against Superintendent Dr. Jerry Jellig (two of the matters have now entered arbitration. Lawyers representing both sides — the teachers and the school district — are currently arguing the issue in Trenton).
– The South Brunswick Board of Education is conducting an investigation into the central office administration, and the application of district policies and procedures (this has been described as “a quid pro quo promotional process”).
– Since Dr. Jellig took office, there have been at least five high-ranking departures from his administration. They are: Business Administrator Anthony Tonzini (leaving June 30); Assistant Superintendent Joanne Kerekes; the director of grounds; the human resources director and the director of professional development.
They are: Business Administrator Anthony Tonzini (leaving June 30); Assistant Superintendent Joanne Kerekes; the director of grounds; the human resources director and the director of professional development.
– In October of 2015, the South Brunswick High School principal sent an email to all high school teachers, blaming the union for canceling five clubs because it would not agree on stipends.
The superintendent is also alleged to have done the following:
– Used his school district “professional development days” – time off not attributed to district employees’ personal or sick time – to travel to India in March.
– Inappropriate and unprofessional administrative conduct.
– Questionable spending habits.
– Antagonist anti-union animus behavior.
**all information is sourced below in the links included here.
Tomorrow night, in partnership between the SBEA and NJEA, there is a protest outside of the board of education meeting before the meeting, which coincides with a two-hour board of education executive session discussing personnel. It will take place at 6:15pm at Crossroads North Middle School in South Brunswick, New Jersey.
We are asking that anyone in the tri-state area who is able to attend and rally in solidarity as well as help us fill the auditorium during the meeting please attend. For those far away, please use the hashtag #DoYourJOBSBBOE and tweet out any of the following links that contain the information explained above:
Protest planned in N.J. school district ‘rife with unrest’ http://www.nj.com/middlesex/index.ssf/2016/05/tensions_run_high_between_south_brunswick_school_o.html
Protest Planned for South Brunswick Board of Education Meeting Monday Night
http://patch.com/new-jersey/southbrunswick/protest-planned-south-brunswick-board-education-meeting-monday-night
Tensions Between Administration, Teachers’ Union Rise in South Brunswick
http://patch.com/new-jersey/southbrunswick/tensions-between-administration-teachers-union-rise-south-brunswick
LikeLike
I continue to be interested in communities where StriveTogether is doing work. They are a program of Knowledgeworks, which has had ties to the Gates Foundation for over a dozen years. Knowledgeworks, the parent organization, has the goal of pushing personalized learning. StriveTogether, is focused on community schools. It is clear that Knowledgeworks envisions a future where learning eco-systems and standards/digital badging enable a shift towards online education and credit-bearing learning opportunities (ELOs) taking place outside schools where teachers are just doing the paperwork.
ELOs are a significant, yet rarely discussed, part of the Community Schools model. Knowledgeworks and StriveTogether are based out of Ohio, and the Ohio Community Schools model is being pushed all over the country, often in communities already targeted for ed-reform. Cindy Marten has strong ties to StriveTogether. In fact she spoke at the plenary session of their 2014 Cradle to Career Networking Convening that was held in San Diego: http://www.strivetogether.org/sites/default/files/images/FINAL%20Detailed%20Agenda-2014%20National%20Convening%209.16.14.pdf
What does she think of Knowledgeworks ties to StriveTogether?
What would she think of a document like this?http://www.knowledgeworks.org/sites/default/files/future-ed-workforce-roles-learning-ecosystem.pdf
Are they grooming San Diego for this model of learning?
So many questions remain unanswered.
LikeLike
I am aware of KnowledgeWorks and its subsidiary StriveTogether. Both non-profits are based in Cincinnati Ohio and have no particular relationship to our so-called Community Schools Our Community Schools are differentiated from others by offering wraparound services usually including preschool, medical and dental care, social workes, adult education, and extensive afterschool programming . These are relatively new public schools (not charters) with facilities planned for year round use.
StriveTogether is best understood by looking at the website. Here are some quotes from the Website with my comments in parentheses.
The StriveTogether Cradle to Career Network has 64 community partnerships in 32 states and Washington D.C. Members of the StriveTogether Cradle to Career Network share a common commitment to:
1. Improving and reporting on a core set of academic outcomes: kindergarten readiness, early grade reading, middle grade math, high school graduation, post-secondary enrollment and post-secondary degree completion.
(That list is pretty much a duplicate of the federal/foundation/business agenda for the last two decades. It begins with an implicit criticism of the public schools for insufficient “improvements” in two measures of academic outcomes–reading and math–and the same milestones for successembedded in ESSA—college and career readiness. That is not very imaginative thinking.)
2. Building cross-sector partnerships with early childhood, K-12, higher education, community-based organizations, business, government and philanthropy. (This is the soft list of “partners.” Another list includes “investors.” “Investors” is a red flag for putting social impact bonds into the mix in pushing for cradle to career initiatives, especially preschools. Investors see profits in schools and social services. See also TurboMetrics below)
3. Developing and sustaining cradle to career civic infrastructure by implementing a data-driven, quality approach to collective impact.
(“Collective impact” is a hot topic in philanthropy. Collective impact is a theory of action on behalf of efficient management, getting more bangs for the buck.Collective impact is now visibly promoted by the Anne E. Casey Foundation where money is from the founders of UPS. The Anne E. Casey Foundation is a multi-million funder of charter schools and charter school facilities with major initiatives in Indianapolis, Atlanta, and DC, including $4.4 million to the DC voucher program.
A former Casey Foundation staffer is part of StriveTogether operation in Cincinnati. The Wallace Foundation is another promoter of “collective impact” thinking. The Wallace has a long-standing interest in afterschool programs. I highly recommend a paper on collective impact commissioned by the Wallace Foundation—a critical and historical perspective on antecedents, conflicts of interest, flawed assumptions, unintended consequences, (e.g., urban planning, Great Society programs, Promise Neighborhoods, Harlem Children’s Zone). http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/summer-and-extended-learning-time/extended-learning-time/Documents/Putting-Collective-Impact-Into-Context.pdf
4. StriveTogether is “focused on aligning existing resources and using data to determine what works best for kids. StriveTogether helps communities develop shared outcomes and success metrics, identifying best practices and solutions to address local disparities and improve “outcomes” for all children.”
If you have been half awake for two decades and working in education you recognize some very tired and bureaucratic language,treates as if as fresh. Notice that there is no intent to increase resources. One of the providers of “outcome and sucess metrics” for collective impact management schemes isTurboMetrics – “a cloud platform designed to aggregate portfolio’s projects, grantees and investees impact, complete with a scorecard, social impact reports, story telling through visualization, marketing solutions” and the rest. http://www.sopact.com
If all this sounds a lot like corporate management for a portfolio of initiatives, or a franchise system, or a conglomerate…. it is. Coincidently, university administrators and management experts at Cincinnati–based Proctor and Gamble inaugurated Strive.
So far, cheerleaders for collective impact do not seem to be interested in hearing from elected school board members, teachers, parents, and students. They are also displaying considerable indifference to local, state, and federal regulations that hold schools responsible for outcomes not community “partners,” not such as United Way, or corporations such as GE, or investment firms such as Bain, or city operated health clinics, or faith-based social services.
So far, Strive and variants are pre-occupied with designing a managerial “backbone” and using existing measurements to monitor “impacts” of any initiatives. The Wallace paper should be required reading for cheerleaders and for skeptics (including me). Small scale collaborations between schools and social service agencies and business are certainly of potential value, but Strive is focussed on scaling up these efforts, creating a managerial backbone to sustain them as if communities were corporations.
As a subsidiary of KnowledgeWorks, StriveTogether will surely press for the use of online delivery of educational programs, personalized playlists of social services, credit bearing “learning modules,“ with stackable badges. The current CEO, once connected with the Open University in Great Britain, is enchanted with future scenerios. KnowledgeWorks has a vision of learning free from classrooms and teachers.
LikeLike
This is actually for Laura, but there wasn’t a reply link on her post for some reason. Laura, are you in San Diego? It wasn’t totally clear from your post. If so, your superintendent does appear to have a close enough relationship with them, that they quote her at the top of their 2016 event program: http://www.strivetogether.org/sites/default/files/Detailed-Agenda-2016-Exploring-Convening.pdf
And this quote indicates they have been doing outreach there at least since 2013:
“In September 2013, Jeff Edmondson, managing director of StriveTogether, was flying from Cincinnati, Ohio to San Diego, California to meet with Tad Seth Parzen, executive director of the City Heights Partnership for Children. Edmondson hoped that they could make additional progress on mobilizing the San Diego community to support the city’s children through an innovative partnership. He also planned to spend time on the cross country flight contemplating some major challenges facing StriveTogether.”
Click to access 314031p2.pdf
LikeLike
And San Diego’s “Partnership for Children” is listed as one of StriveTogether’s 64 Cradle to Career Network members: http://www.strivetogether.org/cradle-career-network
It is affiliated with United Way of San Diego County: http://www.strivetogether.org/blog/2014/10/quality-collective-impact-in-action-city-heights-partnership-for-children/
There are two others in CA: Cradle to Career in Sonoma County and Marin Promise in Marin County.
LikeLike
As a parent and not an educator, it is difficult to sort through all this. The i21 documents indicate the district is moving to Cbe. As a parent of a kid in this type of program, which is called all sorts of shiny words that sound good on the surface, I’m very suspicious of almost everything. Will they be taking this i21 document down from the website? I’d love to hear the leaders off sdusd say they aren’t buying iready or achieve3000 or ascend math or any Pearson program or anything similar for all students. Then I would be reassured. What are they using the computers for?
LikeLike
I work in the neighboring school district between San Diego and Tijuana (Sweetwater Union High School District). We had a terrible time with construction driven corruption and our own Superintendent, Ed Brand, starting a charter school. Some board members from SDUSD helped us elect a very progressive board that cares about schools and students and with there selection for our school leader, It is like we found Nirvana with a wonderful homegrown superintendent.Karen Janney. It is hard for me to imagine these people are in bed with corporate profiteers, but I have been fooled before.
I will look around and see what I can learn.
LikeLike
“• Replace irrelevant district-wide data collection requirements with real time reporting on student progress for teachers to use when and where they need it to support student learning.”
That would be the CBE component of which Emily speaks. “Real time reporting” Panopticon at it’s finest!!! Bentham’s wet dream come true! CBE is standardized testings younger sibling that is increasingly eating up the educational pie and will soon overtake it’s older sibling, destroying it with that “real time reporting”
Folks, standards and standardized testing are a priority to kill, but the “real action” from here on out is CBE.
“We are pleased San Diego Unified has decided to put the interests of our students first and moved to reduce high-stakes standardized testing, which we know from our research is contrary to students’ well-being,” said Lindsay Burningham, president of the San Diego Education Association. “A true reflection of student achievement and improvement is always done through multiple measures and can never focus on just one test score.”
I’m not one to trust any affiliate of the NEA to be a “leader” in what counts as good teaching and learning practices. They’re all GAGA teachers/adminimals who only know how to suck up to the powers that be.
“San Diego Unified has a history of national leadership on the issue of student testing under Superintendent Marten, having previously reduced the number of interim assessment tests by 33 percent (from 3 to 2) and increased the age at which testing starts — Second Grade instead of First.”
YUP! We dun reduced dem standardized tests by 33%. We’s smart!
When the supe tells her district to not do any standardized testing (other than diagnostic tests used to ascertain disabilities) and sends all the testing materials back to the state department of ed stating “We aren’t doing this crap”, then I might consider Ms Marten as supposed “hero” of education. Not before.
LikeLike
Well, they could be doing both- cutting district standardized testing and going to CBE.
“A competency-based approach can be approximated by expanding the online course model throughout San Diego Unified. Developing a Districtwide structure that would allow K -12 students to be fully-enrolled in a virtual school or dually-enrolled in a virtual school and a brick and mortar school would give students more options and choices regarding how they learn and how they demonstrate what they know. In-school counselors would help students make good choices about the types of courses that they would take”
I think public schools will really regret this focus on and investment in online learning but it is undeniable that there is a government/foundations/private sector effort to push them in that direction.
I feel as if it’s more false advertising from ed reform. We were specifically assured this wouldn’t mean replacing live courses with online courses and that it would be “active”- children would use ed tech as a tool rather than as passive consumers.
I don’t believe them. That San Diego plan is passive use and “dual enrollment” in a virtual school is replacing live classes with online classes.
I’m afraid ed tech will be used to sell cheap, gimmicky junk to low and middle income schools and save on staffing. That’s my bottom line. Nothing I have seen with the promotion of this reassures me that ISN’T what it’s about.
LikeLike
I’m just asking people to be skeptical of this- to ask questions. Rocketship is lauded in ed reform circles, including at the US Department of Education.
This is what Rocketship is about:
“Computers shave 25 percent from Rocketship’s labor costs — savings used to extend the school day to eight hours, pay higher salaries to its nonunion teachers and to construct its own school facilities, among other things. One Rocketship school is a replica of the next — everything is identical, down to the paint scheme: forest green and beige with purple accents.”
It isn’t “personalized” at all- that’s a marketing term. They follow a playlist of “competencies” and they use low wage aides to keep children on task.
This isn’t new. It’s how large employers train low wage employees. It’s how manufacturers train “operators” here- the people who work on the line.
I don’t want public schools to get bamboozled by ed reformers again. It doesn’t matter if they have good intentions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/is-a-charter-school-chain-called-rocketship-ready-to-soar-across-america/2012/07/29/gJQASrShIX_story.html
LikeLike
As a lifelong union guy, it doesn’t please me to say that one of the the last places I’d go for corroborating any claims made about testing would be the NEA or AFT.
These folks have been enablers of so-called reform for years, and continue to play disingenuous games of bait-and-switch over matters like testing and teacher evaluations.
I’ll believe it when I see it actually fall apart.
LikeLike
Exacto.
LikeLike
Well said, Michael!
LikeLike
I’m with you, Laura H. Chapman. Turbometrix indeed.
Who’s looking into the “research data” via universities now collected on the children of this district? Whatever you want to call the wrap-around services, Strive Together, Promise, or some other localized iteration of it, all the loopholes exist in the culmination, sharing, sales, etc. of that data. Now focusing on 0-5 age. No one organized to support that sector. Easy targets.
LikeLike
This just came up via my “personalized learning” google alert. Lindsay Unified in CA is using funding from the Chang/Zuckerberg initiative to franchise competency based learning nationally. I would expect that one or more of the five pilot districts would be in CA, too. Pay attention folks. Even if end of year tests are being scaled back, CBE is moving full steam ahead. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2016-05-26-lindsay-unified-joins-the-growing-number-of-schools-franchising-their-models-to-other-systems
LikeLike