Common Core Implementation

We've outsourced this post on Common Core State Standards to guest contributor Christina Hank. Christina is a Curriculum Coordinator for Medina City Schools. You can read more of her work at turnonyourbrain.wordpress.com, and you should definitely follow her on Twitter at @ChristinaHank

There’s been a lot of confusion around what’s happening to curriculum in Ohio education. Let’s break it down into two pieces: standards and assessments.

STANDARDS

Standards are the platform for everything that is taught in a school district, we go above and beyond I the standards to address all the needs of children, such as social and emotional growth. By themselves, standards do not impact anything in our classrooms; they are documents that sit on shelves. It is in how we implement the standards and integrate their intent into our teaching practices that they have any role in teaching and learning.

So, what are the standards in Ohio?

Common Core State Standards (CCSS)—The CCSS are a set of standards in grades kindergarten through twelve in English language arts and mathematics. Many states have adopted this as a common set of standards.

Are included in…

Ohio’s New Learning Standards—Ohio’s New Learning Standards is the title given to all of Ohio’s standards in all contents (including the CCSS in English language arts and math).

ASSESSMENTS

Standards are not the same as their assessments, even though we are seeing “Common Core” used interchangeably with everything that is happening right now. Though the assessments of our new learning standards are rooted in the standards and attempting to assess the intent of these standards, the assessments are a separate piece of educational reform.

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)—PARCC is one of two national testing consortia develop assessments for the CCSS in English language arts and math. Ohio and 21 other states belong to this consortium, which means Ohio’s students will be taking the same test as students in all of those other states (unlike Ohio’s current assessments with are only taken by students in the state). In each subject (English language arts and math), the test is structured to have two optional tests in the fall (may not be finished by 2014-2015) and two tests in the spring. The first of these spring tests in each subject will be around March and will be a performance-based assessment. The second of these will be in May and will be an End of Year test.

Are included in…

Next Generation Assessments—This all-encompassing term includes both Ohio-developed tests in social studies and science as well as the PARCC tests in English language arts and math.

TIMELINE

As it is almost the start of the 2013-2014 school year (where is the summer going?!), we’re entering the final year of Ohio Achievement/Graduation Assessments and getting ready for our first year of Next Generation Assessments in 2014-2015.

	Assessments
English	2014-2015: MS: PARCC Tests for grades 3-8 (National) HS: PARCC End of Course exams (National)
Mathematics	2014-2015: MS: PARCC Tests for grades 3-8 (National) HS: PARCC EOC in Alg 1, Geo, Alg 2 OR Math 1, Math 2, Math 3 depending on student track (National)
Social Studies	2013-2014: MS: Continue with OAA in MS. HS ONLY: our self-created EOC Assessment in U.S. History and Government 2014-2015: MS: Grade 4 and 6, grade-level tests (not cumulative). New SS tests will be "Next Generation Assessments" reflective of PARCC tests HS: State created EOC in U.S. History and Government
Science	2014-2015: MS: Grade 5 and 8, grade-level tests (not cumulative). New science tests will be "Next Generation Assessments" reflective of PARCC tests HS: State created EOC in Biology and Physical Science

Substitute HB59 (budget bill) Analysis

The House finance committee moved their substitute budget bill out of committee yesterday along a party line vote. Few changes were made to the education funding and policy piece, leaving the House budget bill underfunding Ohio's public schools by about $200 million less than the Governor's widely panned funding plan.

The House budget bill continues to hand gifts to the private school and for-profit charter school movement. There is a massive expansion of vouchers, only limited by household income needing ot be below 200% of the federal poverty line (currently ~$46,000). This means that for the first time, high performing districts could lose students and dollars to private schools that likely underperform their public school counterparts.

Steve Dyer has a good run down of the giveaways to charter schools, and especially the catastrophically bad eschools.

Permits an e-school that serves at least grades one through eight to divide into two schools as long as the sponsor agrees and the division is accomplished in either the 2013 – 2014 or 2014 – 2015 school year.

My hunch is this will allow one or both of two things to happen: 1) e-Schools to separate out their higher and lower performing schools and 2) e-Schools to collect more money. I'm becoming more and more impressed with William Lager -- the head of the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow. He is fast becoming the state's new David Brennan, giving big checks to politicians accompanied by nice budget carve outs.
[...]
Provides that an e-school is eligible to receive career technical education funding in addition to the core opportunity grant and special education funding.

Once again, kudos to William Lager for getting e-School hands into another pot of public money! While Career-Tech money only constitutes about $120 million over the budget cycle, it will only add to e-School profits. I mean, what better way to learn woodworking than over a computer! I know watching those YouTube demonstrations of how to cut outside mitres have really helped my carpentry. Ask my wife!
[...]
Permits a community school to charge tuition to a student who is not an Ohio resident.

The addition to the Houses's budget bill that caught the most attention however was a move to criminalize the teacher of sex education

The sex education amendment would ban instructors from endorsing anything other than abstinence as acceptable behavior.

The measure also would prohibit handing out contraception on school property.

A parent could sue an instructor who violates the provision and receive damages and attorney fees. And a court could issue a civil fine against the instructor of up to $5,000.
[...]
Moments before taking a vote on the amended bill, committee Chairman Ron Amstutz assured the budget was not about ideology.

When asked what motivated GOP lawmakers to propose the sex education changes, Amstutz said he didn't "have much to offer," adding that he would have to take another look at the bill's language.

"There's been a lot of questions about that," Amstutz said.

The amendment's language prohibits instruction by those who endorse "non-abstinence" or "gateway sexual activity." It defines "gateway sexual activity" by citing the Ohio Revised Code's definition of "sexual contact" listed under the section on sexual offenses. It describes such activity as any touching of an erogenous zone for the purpose of sexual satisfaction.

Innovation Ohio has a good rundown of this ridiculous piece of legislation.

The language also states that class instruction in Ohio may not provide materials that condone sexual activity among unmarried students. It even allows a parent to sue if an educator violates the restrictive provisions in the law.

In short, the state budget now mandates that Ohio adopt an abstinence-only approach to sex education program.

But abstinence education doesn’t work. Research shows this. Teen pregnancies are highest in states with abstinence-only sex education. By contrast, teens who have had comprehensive sex education are 60 percent less likely to become pregnant.

In a state budget that already defunds Planned Parenthood and directs tax dollars to Crisis Pregnancy Centers that lie to women, Ohio lawmakers are moving the state in the wrong direction for Ohio’s women and young people.

Here's the Ohio Legislative Service Commissions document that compares the House version of the budget bill to that of the Governor's , in somewhat plain English

HB59 Comparison Document House

Voters First - Issue 2 - ballot language

The Ohio ballot board, in a partisan split decision chose the following as the language that will appear as Issue 2 (Voters First) on the November 6th ballot.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment
Proposed by Initiative Petition
To add and repeal language in Section l,3,4,6,7,9 and 13 of Article XI, repeal Sections 8 and 14 of Article XI, and add a new Section 16 to Article XI of the Constitution of the State of Ohio

A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass.

The proposed amendment would:

1. Remove the authority of elected representatives and grant new authority to appointed officials to establish congressional and state legislative district lines.

2. Create a state funded commission of appointed individuals from a limited pool of applicants to replace the aforementioned. The Commission will consist of 12 members as follows: four affiliated with the largest political party, four affiliated with the second largest political party and four not affiliated with either of the two largest political parties. Affirmative votes of 7 of 12 members are needed to select a plan.

3. Require new legislative and congressional districts be immediately established by the Commission to replace the most recent districts adopted by elected representatives, which districts shall not be challenged except by court order until the next federal decennial census and apportionment. In the event the Commission is not able to determine a plan by October 1, the Ohio Supreme Court would need to adopt a plan from all the plans submitted to the Commission.

4. Change the standards and requirements in the Constitution for drawing legislative and congressional districts.

5. Mandate the General Assembly to appropriate all funds as determined by the Commission including, but not be limited to, compensating:
1. Staff
2. Consultants
3. Legal counsel
4. Commision members

If approved, the amendment will be effective thirty days after the election.

SHALL THE AMENDMENT BE APPROVED
YES
NO

Voters first has filed a lawsuit, claiming the ballot language is incomplete

The wording, for example, omits any references to requirements that the commission draw fair districts that reflect the political preferences of Ohio voters.

The ballot language "does not properly identify the substance of the proposal to be voted upon" and was written "to mislead, deceive or defraud the voters," the lawsuit says.

A summary of the initiative can be read, here.

Value-Added Evaluation Hurts Teaching

Here’s the hype: New York City’s “worst teacher” was recently singled out and so labeled by the New York Post after the city’s education department released value-added test-score ratings to the media for thousands of city teachers, identifying each by name.

The tabloid treatment didn’t stop there. Reporters chased down teacher Pascale Mauclair, the subject of the “worst teacher” slam, bombarding her with questions about her lack of skill and commitment. They even went to her father’s home and told him his daughter was among the worst teachers in the city.

Now the facts: Mauclair is an experienced and much-admired English-as-a-second-language teacher. She works with new immigrant students who do not yet speak English at one of the city’s strongest elementary schools. Her school, PS 11, received an A from the city’s rating system and is led by one of the city’s most respected principals, Anna Efkarpides, who declares Mauclair an excellent teacher. She adds: “I would put my own children in her class.”

Most troubling is that the city released the scores while warning that huge margins of error surround the ratings: more than 30 percentile points in math and more than 50 percentile points in English language arts. Soon these scores will be used in a newly negotiated evaluation system that, as it is designed, will identify most teachers in New York state as less than effective.

Is this what we want to achieve with teacher-evaluation reform?

Everyone agrees that teacher evaluation in the United States needs an overhaul. Although successful systems exist, most districts are not using approaches that help teachers improve or remove those who cannot improve in a timely way. Clearly, we need a change.

[readon2 url="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/03/05/24darlinghammond_ep.h31.html?tkn=XSLF8dtEku7dtKu1xSZfeIqk1QmVLXJ5Fp0i&cmp=clp-edweek"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

Charters omitted from evaluation

When it comes to charter schools the playing field isn't just unlevel, there are 2 different fields. A report from Gongwer

Majority Republicans imposed new requirements in the budget bill for public schools to regularly evaluate teachers and principals, but in a little-noticed twist to the hotly debated policy change, many charter schools ended up with an exemption.

The budget language, which is supported by Gov. John Kasich, gives more than 130 charter schools a pass from instituting teacher performance evaluations, which critics say creates unequal accountability among public schools.

So what are both sides saying about this?

Ohio Association of School Business Officials Associate Executive Director Barbara Shaner said the performance evaluation requirement should be applied uniformly.

"We feel like there does need to be the same level of accountability, and if the evaluations are meant to improve student achievement and improve the effectiveness of school districts then I guess our view would be that it should apply to all schools," she said.

That would seem like the common sense response. We hear continually from corporate education reformers how imperative it is that teachers are accountable for their results, and that the continued lack of accountability is causing a crisis in education.

Apparently, when it is suggested to corporate education reformers and their benefactors that charts should be held to similar standards, the story changes

Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools President Bill Sims said he understands the motivation for the budget language. "I think that the rationale there was that in keeping with the original intent or precepts of charter schools was to give them as much autonomy as is possible," he said.

Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols agreed, saying the language reflects that charter schools operate under different oversight than traditional schools do.

But, but but, charters are different!

Yes, yes they are. Let's compare the 2011 state report card for traditional schools and charters. We'll note in red the worst performing of the two

Designation	Charters	Traditional Schools
Academic Emergency	20.9%	4.4%
Academic Watch	16.8%	5.6%
Continuous Improvement	28.9%	12.1%
Effective	11.8%	23.2%
Excellent	7.4%	40.1%
Excellent with Distinction	1.5%	8.7%
Not Rated	12.7%	5.9%

The governor's spokesperson continued

"From the administration's perspective, charter schools by definition operate outside the tentacles of state regulation, which is in part why they've been very, very successful; unsuccessful ones are simply shut down," he said.

That's a lot of red for something that's been very, very successful, don't you think? So much red you might be excused for thinking more oversight is needed, not less.

How Blueberries changed a corporate reformer

Via out friends at American Society Today, comes a short video of how a teacher in the audience changed a corporate education reformers mind. The video starts out slow, but the pay-off at the end is well worth it.

I was dead meat, but I wasn't going to lie to the lady. I said "ma'am I would send them back"

Not a young women, she sprang to her feet, she points her finger at me. She says "that's right, you would send them back. We can never send back the blueberries our suppliers send to us".

"We take 'em big, small, rich, poor, hungry, abused, brilliant, homeless, with bad vision, poor hearing, bad teeth, creative, cautious, frightened, with ADHD, English as a second language - and that's why it's not a business - it's school!"

Yeah - Blueberries Pal! Blueberries!