Archives for category: Administrators, superintendents
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

The Original Purpose of Teacher Evaluation Was….

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2013 //
25

Dr. Stephen Mucher is an assistant professor of history and
education at Bard College. In
this public radio interview, he explains the original
(and still valid!) purpose of teacher evaluation.

Professors visited classrooms not to grade teachers, but to learn about
instruction and how to improve it. It was a mutual endeavor,
intended to help, not to destroy and punish and fire. History has
much to teach us, if only we are willing to learn.

Here is my take, not Mucher’s:

The current era of teacher evaluation can be traced
to the social efficiency movement that began with the work of
Frederick Winslow Taylor. His time-and-motion studies emphasized
the importance of measuring the worker’s output and challenging all
workers to meet the same metric. In the 1920s, efficiency experts
took a leading role in the field of curriculum and instruction. Men
like John Franklin Bobbitt and W.W. Charters devised elaborate
checklists to measure teacher quality. Bobbitt came up with
cost-benefit analyses for subject matter, and he decided that Latin
should be discarded because it cost too much and produced nothing
of value, by his measures.

I wrote about the efficiency movement in
my 2000 book Left Back: A Century of Battles Over School
Reform. The original title was Left Back: A
Century of Failed School Reforms. I hated the title and
I hated the subtitle. The editor at Simon & Schuster, Alice
Mayhew–a legendary figure–insisted that the title had to have the
word “fail” in it. When the book came out in paperback, I was
allowed to change the subtitle to more accurately reflect the
content of the book (forgive the split infinitive).

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Teacher Evaluations

New York Principal: “I Am a Nine”

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2013 //
34

This principal works hard to support his staff and inspire them.

This principal protects the children in his school.

This principal learned that the State rated him as a 9.

Nine out of twenty.

That meant that no matter how many more points (out of 80) he might accumulate, he could never be rated “Highly Effective.”

So, in the spirit of evaluation madness, he decided to offer nine suggestions for State Commissioner John King (who by the way, has less experience as an administrator than the principal who wrote this post):

1) Our children, staff and communities are much more than a number. Instead of trying to reduce us all to a number (evaluative scores, test results, rankings, etc.) please take the time to get to know us and know what we are doing well because we are more than a number. 
 
2) Figure out what schools are doing well and try and emulate those practices instead of trying to make us all fit into the same box. I understand it’s difficult to know what’s going on in each school because there are thousands of schools in NYS, but a more robust understanding of the current landscape throughout the state would be greatly appreciated. Are there issues throughout the state? Yes! Are there schools and districts that need to improve significantly because the children deserve better? Yes! But, why must educational reform in NYS be rooted in what’s wrong in our schools instead of what’s right in our schools? Instead of feeling pressured to get our test scores up, I would much rather spend time sharing and collaborating with colleagues from around the state about best practices – these practices are what make a difference in the daily lives of children.
 
3) Give us time to shift, implement and take risks with our practices! We just adopted and implemented the Common Core State Standards all within the last year (many districts are still working on the implementation) and yet already, we are all being assessed against these standards. How is that fair? Just because a teenager passes his/her permit test and takes a few driving lessons, doesn’t mean he/she are ready to race at the Daytona 500! Instead, we need time to experiment, fail and problem solve without being judged. Give us time!
 
4) Take feedback from the people working in schools, with children, to help enhance, modify and improve various mandates and policies. We are living APPR each day – let us tell you what should change! We administered the Common Core NYS Tests to actual children – let us tell you what happened and what could be changed. We are struggling to “fit it all in” – let us tell you what could possibly change. Instead of implementing all these sweeping large scale changes across the entire state, things should have been piloted or tested in pockets so State Ed could have worked out the kinks before imposing it all on every child and educator in the state. 
 
5) Evaluating a teacher based on how students perform on high stakes testing is not a reliable measure (check out this article about the issues with value added models). The scores for individual educators will go up and down each year with little ability to predict where they will end up. So, what’s the point? For example, I know of an educator who received a 2 out of 20 last year but this year received a 13 out of 20. My guess is that next year the same educator will have a totally different score because of the student population. The number fluctuates dramatically each year and that is because there are too many variables to control for when evaluating an educator against how their students perform on high stakes testing. Eliminate this part of the APPR plan – let’s implement something more robust and thorough (maybe a digital portfolio) and less quick and dirty (ratings that are based on high stakes tests that rely heavily on multiple choice questions).
 
6) Change the NYS Tests! Instead of letting them be so one dimensional with an over abundance of multiple choice questions, give our children an opportunity to show you what THEY know and can do in the areas of literacy and mathematics. Instead of trying to trick them with multiple choice questions that many adults cannot answer and trying to exhaust them with days of testing, give them a chance to evaluate, synthesize, think critically and apply the skills they have to solve real life problems and situations. This way, we can have a true understanding of what our children know and can do. Instead, currently, all we can really figure out is if they bubbled in the right answer – not WHY they bubbled it in just if they did. The current testing situation, where the results are used to evaluate educators, does NOT work. Furthermore, it seems that NYS is saying that we can assess college and career readiness with how students perform on multiple choice tests – REALLY?!? We need to consider multiple data points – not just the results of one test! By considering multiple data points we do not have to rely on annual standardized state testing to evaluate our students or educators. For example, our students could be tested independently every three years, starting in third grade, using a standardized test. This way, we will have data points that span from elementary to high school graduation. Additionally, there should be group task oriented assessments during the years between standardized tests where the students must collaborate to solve a set of real life problems. Furthermore, our students should be expected to maintain a digital portfolio that will feature work from all content areas that will be scored against rubrics generated collaboratively between teachers and students. By integrating all these assessments we can use multiple data points to determine student growth over an extended period of time and across all content areas, not just in Mathematics and English Language Arts. Multiple data points mean that we do not have to rely on summative assessments for evaluation purposes and instead we will have access to formative assessment data that can help us meet the needs of our students in real time and give every student an entry point to learning. 
 
7) Give us data we can use to inform instruction and help our children learn and grow! Our children spend hours taking these tests, which we are never allowed to see again, and we receive the results just in time for the next school! What’s the point? We cannot do anything with this information because we don’t have all the pieces in a timely fashion. As educators, many of us dedicate our lives to using as many assessment points as possible to help us plan and guide future instructional decisions to best meet the needs of our children. The data from NYS seems to be used for one purpose, and one purpose only, to judge.       
 
8) Implement policies and mandates that foster and expect the use of 21st century skills and innovation in our schools! Challenge us to make technology a regular part of instruction- not an add on. Ask us to encourage our children to collaborate for the purposes of thinking critically and creating – that is the root of innovation. Innovative thinkers who are willing to keep failing until they perfect their vision are the ones changing the world and affecting the global economic landscape – not the people who can pick the correct answer on a multiple choice test.
 
9) Don’t use our children and educators as pawns in some massive money making scheme. Let Pearson figure out other ways to make money. Don’t try and privatize public education and turn it into a business. Our children should be the focus – each and every day we should be driven by doing what is best for our children; not what is going to put more money into the already fat pockets of different individuals and corporations. 
Categories Administrators, superintendents, New York, Principals

Scott Kuffel: I’m No Hero

By dianeravitch
September 6, 2013 //
20

A few days ago, I named Scott Kuffel to the honor roll for
his courage in speaking out against the state’s arbitrary decision to
raise the cut scores on state tests, thus lowering student grades,
in preparation for Common Core testing. Anytime a superintendent is
willing to stand up for what is right and to defend students and
teachers from misguided policies, they are heroic. We need many
more of them to stop the train wreck that is mistakenly called
“reform.” After I saluted him, Superintendent Kuffel responded with
this comment:

“To those above who state that I am not a hero, you are absolutely correct. I’ve neither made that claim nor asked to be on this honor roll. There is always more that can be done. I’m not going to bore you with the context of the consequences for pulling funding by not taking state mandated tests in Illinois, but trust me, I have explored as many options as possible to direct our district to be non-compliant without jeopardizing essential programs for our students.

“And yes, I do need to make mortgage payments and buy groceries for my family, and perhaps it would be more heroic to disregard personal, professional and programmatic damages and “opt out” of state tests… and it may come to that, but for now, we in Illinois still work under guidelines and laws that would require more than just my decision to authorize said “civil disobedience”. There are many in Illinois who join me in trying to return us to a time of more common sense (and yes, it may reference Thomas Paine), creativity, and constructivism. And believe me, we have refused to take part in several “reform” structures and resource draining initiatives that we believe do not improve our mission.

“So, you’re correct, I am no hero. I’m a superintendent of a public, PK-12 school district in rural Illinois. The hero is the principal who comes in early on a Sunday morning to replace sod on the football field where vandals damaged the turf before graduation. The hero is the school nurses who makes the difficult call home to parents and tends to a scarcely seen scratch on a kindergartner’s arm. The hero is the AP US History teacher who holds study sessions, at 8 pm at night after kids are finished with their practices. The hero is the art teacher who spends her own money for supplies and materials because she knows the budget is dwindling, but the need for the arts is more important than ever. The heroes are the parents who sacrifice time for fundraising and make meals for another parent who just tragically lost a child. The heroes are school board members who take the criticism and complaints for hiring, for spending, for firing, for taking “hard lines” in difficult times.

“The heroes are those who try. They try every day for their “littles” who come with scant learning experiences or understanding of manners. They try for the businesses and realtors in town who pressure for high quality schools because that drives local economies and housing. They try because they believe that what happens today has impacts on tomorrow that we’re never really sure we’ll see.

“And those are the heroes in whom I believe. They are the heroes who keep me coming to work every day. They’ve kept me coming to District 228 for 10 years, and I know they’ll keep me coming for a few more. Thanks for listening, and thanks for the many good suggestions in these previous comments. Scott Kuffel, Geneseo CUSD 228 Superintendent”

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Honor Roll, Illinois

A Brave Superintendent in Long Island

By dianeravitch
September 5, 2013 //
10

Steven Cohen is superintendent of the Shoreham-Wading River
Central School district on Long Island in Néw York. At a time when
others quietly acquiesce, Superintendent Cohen spoke out in
“Newsday.”

He wrote that the schools are being swamped by a
tsunami of untested “reforms,” at the same time that their budgets
are restricted by Governor Cuomo’s 2% tax cap, which voters may
override only by winning 60% of the local vote. Costs don’t stop
rising, so many district will be forced to cut teachers and
essential services to students. He bravely calls out the state
Regents for forcing a “reform agenda” on public schools that may
yet hurt children.

For his courage, insight, and willingness to
speak against an unjust status quo, Steven Cohen is a hero of
public education.

“By Steven Cohen Shoreham-Wading River Central
School District

“Shoreham-Wading River’s greatest challenges in the
2013-14 school year are the same as those of sister districts
throughout Long Island and the rest of NYS. Will we find ways to
preserve, and where possible improve, valued educational programs
without having sufficient resources to cover increasing costs? Will
NYSED’s demands to implement untested — and very controversial —
changes in curriculum standards and assessment, called for in the
Regents Reform Agenda, help or hurt children?

“We do not control increasing pension costs. We have little control over increases in
the cost of medical benefits. We have little control over costs
associated with state mandates. We are bound by the new tax levy
limit. What we do control is the size of our teaching and support
staffs. So if we do not get help to meet increases in pension
costs, health costs and mandate costs, either we must ask our
communities to provide greater resources by a supermajority vote
(while the economy continues to sputter), or we must increase class
size, eliminate valuable programs, or do both. And while we
confront these difficult fiscal problems, we are required to train
new teachers and retrain veteran teachers to instruct students
according to new, untested, curriculum standards, and assess both
students and teachers by methods whose reliability is highly
uncertain.

“Our public schools are being told to do things that no
private schools are forced to do. Private schools have not embraced
the so-called benefits of the Regents Reform Agenda (why not?). An
entire generation of children is being put at risk of receiving a
defective — and perhaps damaging — education should these
untested “reforms” prove to be what many of us fear: false gods.
Will the Regents, many of whom send their own children to private
schools that are not hobbled by insufficient resources, or subject
to their own “reforms,” insist that all children — whether they
learn in public, private or parochial schools — be forced to
benefit from their recommended improvements? “These are the
challenges we face in 2013-14.”

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Budget Cuts, Honor Roll, New York, Students, Teachers

A Hero Superintendent in Illinois

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2013 //
20

Scott Kuffel is the superintendent of the Geneseo schools,
District 228, in Illinois. He has been superintendent of schools
there for five years. When he learned that the State Education
Department had decided to raise the passing marks (cut scores) so
that more students would be rated as failing, he was not at all
pleased. The state claimed it was lowering scores to get students
and teachers ready for the new Common Core standards and the PARCC
assessments. Superintendent Kuffel joins our honor roll because he
fearlessly blasted this callous indifference to the students and
teachers. It is great when leaders show leadership. He wrote to his
parents and community that the State Board of Education
was shoving schools and kids off a cliff. He sent out this public
letter to explain how the state was manufacturing failure:
  Last week school districts across the state
received an email from Illinois State Superintendent Chris Koch
pertaining to the proposed increase in “cut” scores used for the
Illinois Standards Achievement Test ( ISAT) that is administered
each spring to students in grades 3-8. Cut scores are used to
determine a range of scores necessary to assign a student an
overall performance level of “exceeds standards,” “meets
standards,” “below standards,” or “academic warning,” in the areas
of reading, math, and science.
Superintendent Koch stated in his email to schools that
“the increase in performance levels will align our expectations for
our grade 3-8 students with the more rigorous standards of the new
Common Core State Standards that are focused on college and career
readiness.” ISBE staff has made it clear to districts that the
increase in cut scores is part of the transition to the new
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers
(PARCC) assessment that all schools will be required to administer
beginning with the 2014-2015 school year.
The impact of these new cut scores will be
dramatic. Geneseo CUSD 228 staff applied the proposed new cut
scores to third grade math results from the 2012 ISAT tests. This
would change the number of third grade students who failed to meet
state standards in math from 1% to 17%. Similar trends will be seen
across all grade levels in districts across the state. ISBE has
advised school administrators to prepare to have “tough”
conversations with the many parents who will be alarmed that their
child is now performing “below” standards on the same state
assessment that in previous years they earned a “meets” or
“exceeds” designation. Essentially, Geneseo Schools will become
part of a traditional “bell shaped curve” to inequitably sort and
separate students, for purposes no one really seems to
know. ISBE acknowledges
that Illinois’ previous expectations for grade 3-8 students did not
align to the new Common Core State Standards that are now focused
on success in college and the workforce. So, why are schools
wasting valuable instructional time and resources by continuing to
administer a test that fails to produce meaningful
results? Perhaps the
most distressing aspect of the “transition” from the ISAT to PARCC
assessments and the increase in cut scores is the disregard how
these changes will impact the children in our classrooms. Why are
we subjecting thousands of children and teachers to the stress of
ISAT administration for the next two years and the humiliation of a
pre-determined course of failure on the ISAT? How do school staff
and parents explain to a 9-year-old that their failure to meet
state standards is to due to a statistical adjustment that will
enable ISBE to avoid the public relations disaster of a dramatic
drop in test scores with the new PARCC assessment? How do school
administrators explain to their dedicated teachers that they are
doing an outstanding job of working with children despite a
dramatic downturn in test results?
Furthermore, we will continue to administer a
test in the spring of 2013, called “The Illinois Standards
Achievement Test” (ISAT), but this year it will contain 20% of the
questions that we will eventually see on the PARCC assessment, and
100% of the test questions in 2014 will be Common Core-type
questions. So again, Illinois schools see a “double whammy”, this
time in the form of assessment coupled with increased cuts in state
funding. School
districts across the state face historic cuts in state funding
coupled with an overwhelming increase in state mandates, rules and
regulations. The pace of these changes under the guise of
“reforms,” has accelerated at the same time that schools face
unprecedented budget deficits, due in part, to existing state
mandates. This latest decision by ISBE illustrates the complete
disconnect that has developed between the agency and the dedicated
school administrators and teachers who work every day with the
children in our school districts. It also represents a further
erosion of the local control of duly elected school board members,
who represent the very property tax owners who are paying an
increasing percentage of the cost of education while the state
abdicates its responsibility to fund our schools. Most importantly,
it is not good for the children that we serve.
   

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Honor Roll, Illinois

Experience Matters for MY Children: Not THEIRS

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2013 //
4

Jersey Jazzman finds a reformer who is delighted that the new superintendent of the Camden, NJ, schools has no experience. Her proof: she names experienced educators who did not succeed.

But JJ points out that this reformer is president of the school board in Lawrence Township. In her district, experience is very important.

Not so much for less fortunate districts

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Corporate Reformers, New Jersey

What Is a “Failing School”?

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2013 //
28

NOTE: I cross-posted this piece on Huffington Post. Be sure to leave comments there too.

Two years ago, Kevin Kosar, a former graduate student of mine, conducted an Internet search for the term “failing school.” What he discovered was fascinating. Until the 1990s, the term was virtually unknown. About the mid-1990s, the term began appearing with greater frequency. With the passage of No Child Left Behind, the use of the expression exploded and became a commonplace.

Kosar did not speculate on the reasons. But I venture to say that the rise of the accountability movement created the idea of “failing schools.”

“Accountability” was taken to mean that if students have low test scores, someone must be blamed. Since Bush’s NCLB, it became conventional to blame the school. With President Obama’s Race to the Top, blame shifted to teachers. The solution to “failing schools,” according to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, is to fire the staff and close the school.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo recently took this idea to an extreme by saying that he wanted a “death penalty” for “failing schools.” His believes that when schools have persistently low test scores, they should lose democratic control.

They should be taken over by the state, given to private charter corporations, or put under mayoral control. In fact, none of these ideas has been successful.

Low-performing school districts in New Jersey have been under state control for more than 20 years without turning them into high-performing districts. Mayoral control in Cleveland and Chicago has been a flop. And private charters typically do no better than public schools, except when they exclude low-scoring students.

Undoubtedly there are some schools where the leadership is rotten and corrupt. In such cases, the responsibility lies with the district superintendent to review the staff and programs, and make significant changes as needed

But these days, any school with low test scores is called a “failing school,” without any inquiry into the circumstances of the school.

Instead of closing the school or privatizing it, the responsible officials should act to improve the school. they should ask:

What proportion of the students are new immigrants and need help learning English? What proportion entered the school far behind their grade level? What proportion have disabilities and need more time to learn? What resources are available to the school? An in-depth analysis is likely to reveal that most “failing schools” are not failing schools, but are schools that enroll high proportions of students who need extra help, extra tutoring, smaller classes, social workers, guidance counselors, psychologists, and a variety of other interventions.

Firing the staff does not turn around a low-performing school. Nor does handing it over to a charter chain. Nor does mayoral control. Most of the time, what we call a “failing school” is a school that lacks the personnel and resources to meet the needs of its students.

Closing schools does not make them better. Nor does closing schools help students. It’s way past time to stop blaming the people who work in troubled schools and start helping them by providing the tools they need and the support their students need.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Closing schools, Cuomo, Andrew, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Privatization, Race to the Top

Are You a Hero Superintendent?

By dianeravitch
September 1, 2013 //
29

Over the past several months, I have honored several superintendents who have stood up for their students, their staff, and their community schools.

I have identified hero superintendents in Michigan, New York, Oklahoma, Illinois, and elsewhere. We need to find them and thank them.

These are men and women who have upheld their ethical responsibility to their profession and to children.

They have spoken out boldly and fearlessly against the misuse of standardized tests to judge teacher quality and to label schools as “failing.” They have spoken in support of professional standards for teachers and for teacher and principal evaluation. They have withstood the bullying of uninformed politicians and arrogant policymakers. They have refused to bow to misguided conventional wisdom. They have been a source of wisdom and inspiration for their staff and their community.

When the superintendent is a hero, he or she enables the staff to act with dignity and professionalism.

Do you have a hero superintendent in your community?

If so, send me public statements they have made so I may highlight their courage and integrity.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Honor Roll, Students, Supporting public schools, Testing

A Brilliant Article by a Retired Superintendent: Please Read It and Help It Go Viral

By dianeravitch
August 31, 2013 //
20

If you read about education, you are sometimes tempted to think that all common sense has departed this nation, its leaders, and its mass media.

They keep looking for quick fixes, miracles, turnarounds, and magical answers as “solutions” to education problems.

Here is Ray Strabeck, a retired school superintendent in Mississippi, who reminds us that there are still people who know what they are talking about and who are willing to speak up.

He reminds his readers of the fads that came and went over his 50 years in education.

He reminds them of the limitations of standardized tests.

As for all the weeping and wailing about how “our schools are failing,” “we are losing the race to nations with higher test scores,” Strabeck has a few wise observations about the goal of “beating” other nations:

 

I find such a motivation ridiculous. Who first landed on the moon? Americans trained in American public schools. Who has orbited Earth more times than any other nation? Americans who were educated in public schools. Who has probed deeper in the sea than anyone else — maybe excluding Jacques Cousteau? Again the answer is Americans who began their learning in public schools. Solar energy, fossil fuels, electronic technologies, social programs, jurisprudence — and the list goes on and on.

If history is to be examined regarding Common Core, it is a program that might last some four to eight years. Having been involved in public education for nearly 50 years, I have watched this timeline remain fairly constant across the years: both politicians and educators finally conclude that the latest fad is not working, and something new arises they want to try.

What, then, assures good schools and higher student achievement? Economics, pure and simple. Find me a good school, and nine times out of 10 there will also be found a flourishing economy in that school community.

Our plea that good schools bring good industries is a misnomer, a case of getting the cart before the horse. Make sure that parents have good jobs, that small businesses are flourishing in the neighborhood and that people take pride in where they live and one of the unfailing outcomes is good schools.

And he adds:

If we would spend the money currently being spent on Common Core on economic development and sustain that kind of effort for, say, four or five years, we would soon see “good” schools emerging. 

Please read the whole article.

 

 

 

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Common Core, Economy, International

George Wood: Why Does Ohio Keep Changing the Rules for Judging Schools?

By dianeravitch
August 30, 2013 //
6

George Wood is superintendent of Federal Hocking School District and an articulate supporter of public education in a state where public education is under siege by the governor and legislature. How can schools function in an atmosphere of constant turmoil and interference by politicians? Here are his thoughts about the state’s new report card for schools:

 

A perspective on the State’s new report card by Dr. George Wood, Executive Director of The Forum for Education and Democracy

Below is a statement regarding the State’s new report card released by Dr. George Wood. Dr. Wood is the Superintendent of Federal Hocking School District and the Executive Director of The Forum for Education and Democracy. His perspective is worth a read.

 William Phillis
Ohio E & A 

Response to New State Report Card

George Wood, Superintendent, Federal Hocking Local Schools

August 23, 2013

 

            With the release of the new state school report cards we are again being led down a dead-end road. There is no evidence that the way the state reports on student achievement, or school performance, primarily by using standardized test scores, helps children learn or our teachers teach. The ‘new’ report card simply continues this attempt to grade our schools with tools that are not up to the job.

            In the Federal Hocking District we are pleased that our schools received an “A” on the one measure that really matters-graduation rate. Our schools have one of the highest graduation rates in Ohio, and we have some of the highest standards for graduation in the state (including requiring that graduates earn more credits than the state minimum, pass all state tests, and produce a senior project and a graduation portfolio). It should also be noted that among those students that graduated in 2013, and were FHHS students for four years, 87% of them are going on to higher education having been admitted to Ohio University, Marietta College, Middlebury College, New York University, and Ohio State.

            Unfortunately, most of the new state report card is based upon the standardized tests students take. These tests have never been shown to have a positive effect on students after they leave school; be it in college, the workplace, or the military. While they are one measure that helps us identify some strengths and weaknesses in our program, they should not be the sole measure of the success of our children.

            Further, the new report card continues a history of Ohio constantly changing the rules and standards for schools without sound reason or research to make such changes. Over the past two decades we have had a myriad of state programs and mandates on testing, teacher evaluation, and curriculum. In fact, by my count, in the past eighteen years Ohio has instituted, dropped, changed, and added over three dozen mandated standardized tests at virtually all grade levels. As the new report card is issued schools are grappling with a new mandated curriculum (known as The Common Core), a new teacher evaluation system (the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System), soon to be released new high school end-of-course tests, the Third Grade Reading Guarantee, and new health and safety regulations.

            The constant changing of the rules almost seems to be designed to make our schools look bad. All over Ohio schools that have had positive report cards in the past saw their scores tumble. One of our schools went from being rated “Effective” by the state last year to having an “F” grade in achievement-how is that possible?

            It should also be noted that these new programs are more of the ‘unfunded mandates’ for which the State is so well known. There are no additional dollars directly provided to districts to implement these mandates (you can apply for grants, but even if you do not get one you still have to carry out the work). For most districts, such as ours, the current state budget has continued the trend of reduced or flat funding. We have now seen in the past two decades more than half a dozen school funding plans and have yet to see any of them carry out the Ohio State Supreme Court’s order to fix school funding.

            Yet while state funding goes down or is static, their attempt at controlling our schools goes on. At Federal Hocking the state provides around 52% of our budget, but through the new state reporting system and the new state mandates they are attempting to control 100% of our agenda.

            While we will use the new state report card as one measure of our work, we will not rely upon it as a sole or even the best measure of what we are doing. In fact, it would be short sighted for us to focus solely on test preparation, as it would have a negative effect upon our children limiting the range of educational experiences we offer them in our schools.

            Our agenda will be driven by a set of progressive operating principles put together by our staff and approved by our school board in the true spirit of local control. Experience tells us that the state will, in the blink of an eye, change the rules we face again and again. (In fact, as I write this the rules for the testing of high school students for graduation are so unclear they are not even posted on the Ohio Department of Education web site.) In order not to keep trying to dance to the tune played in Columbus we will focus on what is best for our kids. We may not get the best grades on the state report card, and we may be singled out for additional scrutiny by the state. But we will continue to keep our focus on the most important standard of all, providing our families with the schools and classrooms that move our children on to graduation and a productive life after school.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Ohio
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »