Notes from a Concerned Indiana Citizen

Thoughts on the Nov. 18th Meeting


Tony Bennett said he is “pushing for change,” that is obvious, the question is what kind of change and who benefits from this change. As I listened for 3 hours to the sub-committees go through their articles, I was amazed and appalled at some of the processes.

First, the amazement, the sub-committees for Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12 and 8-2 went through each article and allowed other members of the board to comment and question what was meant by particular wording. This was a long, tedious and very important process. George Van Horn and Carrie Cate-Clements were especially careful to implement and voice the input they received from the testimonies and emails of concerned teachers.

Kudos to Ray Graves from the Indiana Department of Education for stating that he had not seen any evidence that the Indiana Professional Standards Advisory Board had indeed followed the DOE Standards to make any REPA changes, nor had the Board said this in any forum! Change yes, but for whose benefit???

Now for the appalling part, Article 8, Curriculum was breezed through by David Holt in a flat 3 minutes. Carrie voiced concern that she had not been part of that sub-committee. David said that some members of the sub-committee agreed on some of these changes, and some did not, some people won, some people lost! The method this particular sub-committee operated under was voting for each change and whichever change had the most votes, it carried!

Well, that is one way to make changes…How about the fact that this article was about Curriculum and David asked, “What is scientifically based reading anyway?” I am shocked that he was the leader of this sub-committee without having any knowledge about the content in this article!!

After his 3 minute presentation, Carrie asked a question, David chided her that he was far past that section and going on. Another board member stepped in and asked that this process be slowed down. Additionally, board members continually said that they could not hear each other from one end of the table to the other….well, why wasn’t that taken care of?

I am affirmed by some of the members’ work, especially Carrie Cate-Clements and George Van Horn, I am appalled by the antics, decision making and way David Holt conducted himself and his sub-committee’s work or lack there-of.

A Very Concerned and Perturbed Citizen of Indiana

Our Voices are Being Heard!

The following article from the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette might point to some positive changes from yesterday's professional standards board meeting. 




Educators across Indiana are watching today as the state’s Professional Standards Advisory Board begins work on proposed licensing rules that need plenty of revision. The process began with a top-down approach scornful of expertise and experience. It now demands the thoughtful, deliberate guidance of advisory board members who understand the importance of ensuring Indiana schools have the most qualified teachers and administrators.


David Goodwin, superintendent of Metropolitan School District of Steuben County, is a member of the advisory board. He said this week that he expects the three-hour session today to be the first of several meetings to address proposed changes.

Goodwin, the only school superintendent on the panel, said he was assigned to one of several groups designated to look at one article of the document. The five-member group held three or four conference calls to work through the proposal after reviewing hundreds of comments submitted by mail, e-mail and through testimony at three hearings last month. Goodwin said the comments and the group’s own suggestions resulted in recommendations that will be presented to the full advisory board.

“Our group really took the public testimony to heart,” he said. “We’ve made three or four pages of changes.”

Goodwin said there are recommended changes, for example, in the early-childhood-education provisions, which originally lumped preschool instruction with K-5 guidelines, and with middle-school licensing – which failed in the proposal to recognize the unique needs of students in the middle grades.

“Our group has also addressed the issue of pedagogy – basically the courses you take at Trine University or IPFW on how to teach,” Goodwin said. “The original (recommendation) set a maximum number of course hours. I didn’t think that was the way to go.”

Goodwin said he had received more than 600 e-mail messages about the Revisions for Educator Preparation and Accountability, or REPA, rules. The response didn’t surprise him because the process wasn’t set up the way he had expected. Instead of starting with the existing rules and having Department of Education officials point out what works well and what doesn’t, Goodwin said, advisory board members were given a 70-page document with most of the existing rules stricken.

From the start, the process has placed those most invested in the rules on the defensive rather than in the position of helping to improve them. Both State Superintendent Tony Bennett and Gov. Mitch Daniels have dismissed concerns from teachers, superintendents and college administrators as turf protection, but professional licensing standards have always been the purview of those within a particular field. CPAs don’t set medical licensing standards; dentists don’t run the state bar association. Why shouldn’t professional educators have authority over licensing in their field?

Where Indiana students are struggling, it is not the fault of teachers ignorant of subject matter. It’s where teachers and administrators have failed to recognize that classroom lectures and rote learning aren’t effective with all students, particularly as Indiana classrooms become more diverse.

Investment in learning research hasn’t had the support it needed, leaving teacher preparation lagging for too many years. But new demands for accountability have made their way to colleges and universities, and better training is the result.

Hundreds of educators across the state have stepped forward to point out faults in the REPA proposal, effectively making the case that proposed changes would lower standards. It’s time for the state schools chief and the governor to step back and allow the advisory board to draw on its expertise to develop education licensing rules worthy of Hoosiers’ high expectations for learning.

Teacher-training Ideas not Shared by 3 Hancock Principals

As we wait for more results from yesterday's meeting, it is helpful to remember the changes we are fighting against.  Indiana education needs thoughtful, well researched reform, not reform that is politically motivated. 


November 12, 2009

Teacher-training ideas not shared by 3 Hancock County principals

By Bill McCleery
bill.mccleery@indystar.com

If the views of three Hancock County principals are any indication, Indiana's superintendent of public instruction faces skepticism regarding certain proposals to change teacher-training standards.

Tony Bennett wants to reduce the amount of teaching methodology courses required to become a middle school or high school teacher and increase requirements for coursework in a teacher's intended subject area.

"All we're saying is teachers need to know the subject matter they're going to be teaching," said Cam Savage, a spokesman for Bennett's office. "No one is disputing the need for pedagogy (study of teaching methods). This proposal still requires it. . . . (But) teachers need to have a mastery of subjects they're going to teach at the secondary level."

Some area universities, such as Ball State, Marian and Purdue, already require the level of content-area coursework that Bennett is seeking to mandate, Savage said.

However, many educators following discussions over Bennett's proposal fear state education officials are undervaluing the importance of knowing how to teach, said Steve Bryant, principal of Greenfield-Central High School.

"Teaching is an art," Bryant said. "Those training to be teachers need more training and experience in methodology, not less."

"I'm against any proposal that does not make methodology and the art of teaching important," he said.

Bryant also said he might support a proposal requiring that more hours be spent on subject content areas, so long as it did not involve a reduction in the hours spent on teaching methods.

Bryant's counterparts at Mount Vernon High School and Doe Creek Middle School expressed similar reservations about Bennett's ideas.

"The talk among teachers is that those methods classes they take are valuable and are critical to their success in the classroom," said Bernie Campbell, Mount Vernon's principal.

"It's not black and white. You can come from the private sector, for example, and be a very successful teacher, but I think understanding how to teach is as important as knowledge of your subject matter," Campbell said.

People outside the field of education often underestimate the specialized skills needed for leading a classroom of 25 to 30 teenagers, he said.

"I have expectations of someone I am going to trust after the door shuts in the classroom," Campbell said. "It must be someone who has a working knowledge of how to work with kids."

Still, Campbell said, he is comfortable in knowing that he would retain the authority to hire whomever he considers the strongest teaching candidates, regardless of whether Bennett's ideas become state policy. He would continue looking for applicants with strong backgrounds in teaching methodology, he said.

At Doe Creek Middle School, Principal Jim Voelz said he would do the same thing.

"I've known teachers who have come in and know chemistry extremely well or were big history buffs who really loved their subject, but they did not know how to control a classroom," Voelz said.

"There are things such as classroom management, having rapport with kids, differentiating instruction for students' individual learning styles -- many of these things quite honestly have nothing to do with content knowledge," he said.

Voelz added that he considered content knowledge important in its place.

"You cannot be a great teacher without understanding your content," Voelz said. "But to be a master educator, there is so much more that goes into it than just understanding the content."

The state's Professional Standards Board will next discuss Bennett's proposals on Wednesday. A vote is possible, but the body may make a decision later.

Good News on REPA?

Could be good news from the Indiana Professional Standards Board Meeting yesterday.....we'll wait for it in writing until we celebrate.  Just to reiterate, Indiana Citizens is all for institutions training teachers looking hard at their programs and what works for Indiana children--in no way do we support the status quo.  But, this move by the DOE and the Governor's Office was so blatantly political, disingenuous, and ignorant of the data that it had to taken on.   Hoosiers did.  With more public outcry on this proposal than any other education policy in memory......maybe this is one for the people.

One Observer:  "Based on the meeting today the limitations on education credit hours will be removed.  Secondary students must have the content courses that are equivalent to a content major [which they already do!].  This will mean Schools of Education may have to do some tweaking with the content courses to be sure they are the same as a major.  .....  Otherwise it appears all the other limitations will be removed." 

What have you heard??

The Tip of the Iceberg

Take a look at what's next coming from the Governor's office and our disastrous Superintendent of Public Instruction.....the battle continues.
________________________________________
November 3, 2009


Dear ISTA Member,

Thanks for the activism on the part of those of you who submitted comments online or attended and testified at one of the recent REPA hearings. By our count, more than 600 members took time off from school to attend one of the 10 a.m. hearings. We know that thousands of you also took the time to email your comments to Dr. Bennett and members of the Division of Professional Standards Advisory Board. We hope that the volume and quality of the testimony and comments alter the thinking and decision making of Dr. Bennett and the Board regarding teacher relicensure.

I also wanted to let you know that this morning I attended the Indiana Education Roundtable meeting co-chaired by Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett. Topics of discussion at today's meeting included:

• Elimination of tenure and seniority, meaning that every teacher would only be issued a one-year license;


• Evaluation of teachers by student test scores;


• Pay based on those evaluations;


• School choice;


• Teacher licensure retention tied to passing a test;


• Allowing multiple and non-traditional paths to become a licensed educator;


• Elimination of collective bargaining in Indiana.

When given the opportunity, I spoke to the Roundtable on behalf of all of Indiana's dedicated public educators. After sitting through today's Roundtable meeting, I believe the groundwork is being laid for legislative efforts in the upcoming session of the General Assembly that will advance the same agenda that was shared at today's meeting. Once the legislative session starts in early January, I will be calling on you and other supporters of public education to help me as ISTA works to prevent the passage of legislation that will severely undermine the basis tenets of the public education system in our state.

Rest assured that ISTA will continue to monitor all education issues and advocate on behalf of public education, Indiana's students, and you.

Myth: REPA will help Indiana win "Race to the Top"

Dr. Bennett and Gov. Daniels have repeatedly said that the radical, unsound changes that REPA contains will help Indiana win the Federal Government’s “Race to the Top.” “Race to the Top” is a competition put forth by the Obama administration in which states can receive part of a $4 billion package by proving that they are putting forth sound, researched, and effective educational reform. Indiana Citizens find it interesting that in the following article Indiana isn’t mentioned as one of the states putting forth such measures. In fact, of all the educational reforms mentioned in this article none of them are akin to the radical reforms in REPA. It is time to call out the Daniels’ administration for lying to us about why they are rushing to get REPA ratified.  Indiana Citizens thinks that a clue as to the real reasons might be in the quote from the article below, “States are rushing to stitch together grant proposals that will win points, but many could just turn out to be short-term political plays.”


A link to the original article is at the end.

November 11, 2009



States Compete for Federal School Dollars


By SAM DILLON


DENVER — Colorado’s lieutenant governor, Barbara O’Brien, has been parsing every public statement by Education Secretary Arne Duncan for nuances that could help her position the state as a winner in the $4 billion competition for federal school dollars known as Race to the Top.


And officials in dozens of other states have been doing the same, said Gene Wilhoit, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, a nonpartisan association of state superintendents of education.


“Whenever we have a conversation about any issue these days, Race to the Top is the gorilla in the room,” Mr. Wilhoit said.


The last time education officials were reading tea leaves so obsessively was after the 2001 No Child Left Behind law reshaped America’s public school landscape. Now Race to the Top is again redefining what Washington calls reform, setting in motion a new cycle of federal school improvement efforts.

States’ hunger for details should be sated when final rules are released this week, a Department of Education official said.


The $4 billion is the most money Washington has ever given to overhaul schools. It is to be awarded in two rounds, in April and September, to about a dozen states that propose bold schemes to shake up the way they evaluate and compensate teachers, use data to raise achievement and intervene in failing schools. With $16 billion in school budget shortfalls projected for next year, states are hungry.


Experts say the process is like watching dozens of states bid for the Olympics.


Some critics question whether the competition will bring the sweeping changes to America’s public schools that the administration is seeking.


“I’m hugely concerned about unintended consequences,” said Frederick Hess, an education director at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative research policy group. “States are rushing to stitch together grant proposals that will win points, but many could just turn out to be short-term political plays.”


Colorado has mounted one of the most energetic campaigns. Gov. Bill Ritter Jr., a Democrat, has directed $7 million in federal stimulus money to programs he hopes will improve Colorado’s chances. And he put Ms. O’Brien in charge of assembling hundreds of state officials, mayors, educators and residents for dozens of public meetings to discuss strategies for improving schools.


Ms. O’Brien has enlisted foundations, nonprofit groups and University of Colorado - Denver professors to help. Colorado’s effort so far, she said, has consumed 5,000 hours of staff and volunteer time.


Fifteen states, financed by $250,000 grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, have enlisted high-powered consultants to polish their proposals.


In Oklahoma, Gov. Brad Henry, who had not named an education secretary, recently appointed an education innovation adviser, tasked with landing federal money. The State Board of Education also recently raised Oklahoma’s academic standards, among the nation’s lowest.


Wisconsin is also competing. Gov. James E. Doyle has backed several education bills recommended by the Obama administration, including one that would remove a prohibition on using student data to evaluate teachers, which the administration has made an eligibility requirement of the grant competition.


President Obama traveled to Madison, Wis., last Wednesday and urged lawmakers there to revoke the prohibition, praising California and Indiana for recently taking the same step. By week’s end, Wisconsin lawmakers had done so, too.


Melody Barnes, the president’s domestic policy adviser, called the response from states “overwhelming” and said the competition had already produced important policy changes. “We’ve seen quite a lot of movement, and we haven’t even put out the applications yet,” she said.


One skeptic is Jeanne Allen, executive director of the Center for Education Reform, a Washington group that supports charter schools.


“Some states are just doing what is easy and inconsequential to get qualified for Race to the Top,” she said, and the administration has been portraying minor changes to state laws as significant school reform victories.


The administration has congratulated states “merely for fulfilling budgetary promises of charter funding after the states had first wiped the funding off the books,” Ms. Allen said.


Mr. Obama praised Delaware, for example, for allowing a one-year moratorium on new charter schools to lapse in July, even though that was when it had been scheduled to expire.


“Delaware is getting brownie points for that?” Ms. Allen said.


But Kate Walsh, president of the nonprofit National Council on Teacher Quality who has advised several states on Race to the Top strategy, said praise from the White House did not mean a state would win money next year. Mr. Duncan might include only two or three states among first-round winners to signal that only plans that intend to thoroughly transform state school systems can win, Ms. Walsh said.


“I worry about a backlash from furious states that don’t get money,” Ms. Walsh said.


At the State Capitol here one recent morning, Ms. O’Brien, the lieutenant governor, presided over a meeting of officials working on Colorado’s proposal. There was a review of plans to turn around 80 of the state’s low-performing schools, an update on efforts to create a more thorough teacher evaluation system and discussion of other issues.


“Let’s not forget, we’re producing a blueprint for this state for the next two decades,” Ms. O’Brien said. “So this has to be something we can live with, win or lose Race to the Top.”


As in every state, Colorado’s challenge is to develop a bold proposal — and persuade powerful interests to accept it. Teachers’ union representatives have been participating in the public meetings, and Ms. O’Brien expressed confidence that the union would eventually endorse Colorado’s proposal. But a union spokeswoman said it would withhold judgment.


Persuading Colorado’s 180 local school boards to endorse the proposal is another daunting task. The state education commissioner, Dwight D. Jones, recently barnstormed the state, meeting with dozens of local school superintendents and board members.


“We’re one of those Western states with a rich history of local control,” Mr. Jones said. “There were lots of questions about what does it mean to have a state sign on to common standards with other states. Some people said we shouldn’t chase a shiny new penny. I said our Colorado agenda aligns well with what Secretary Duncan is encouraging.”

 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/education/11educ.html?emc=eta1

Bennett and Daniels are Completely Ignoring All of Us, We Must Speak Louder

How disingenuous are Gov. Daniels and Dr. Bennett? Read the following article from the Howey Report to find out. They have taken the thousands of voices that have spoken out against REPA as evidence to continue with reforms that are dangerous for all students in Indiana. Three hearings in which the overwhelming majority spoke out against REPA, a petition signed by thousands and yet they feel that they can continue on in the face of such criticism? Gov. Daniels arrogantly says further input isn't necessary as the DOE has collected a "ton of input." Indiana Citizens say that we still have time to voice our concerns. Share this website with others and urge them to contact the Indiana Department of Education and tell them that they have no right to ignore other voices in this debate.

Indiana Department of Education
151 West Ohio Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Phone: 317-232-6610
Fax: 317-232-8004


DANIELS, BENNETT VOW TO PASS REFORMS: Indiana schools chief Tony Bennett on Tuesday dismissed criticism of his plan to revamp the state’s teacher licensing standards, saying some in higher education oppose it because they fear how they eventually could be impacted (Callahan, Associated Press). Bennett told members of the Indiana Education Roundtable, an advisory group that includes lawmakers, educators and business leaders, that his proposed changes are needed to help bring more top-notch teachers into Indiana’s schools. “We have to have a newer method of preparing our teachers,” he told the gathering.  the right direction,” Daniels said. The governor also said he did not see a need for more public The roundtable met one day after representatives of several education colleges offered scathing criticism of Bennett’s proposals at the last of three public hearings on the matter. They said the plan had been inadequately researched, would not improve the quality of the state’s teachers, was moving too quickly and urged the state to slow things down. Bennett rejected that criticism at Tuesday’s meeting. “There is really no need to slow down. Right now we should be more concerned if we’re not speeding up. I think it is the time to act,” he said. After the meeting on the IUPUI campus, Gov. Mitch Daniels defended the licensing proposals, saying testimony before the board showed the revisions proposed by Bennett are “long overdue.” “Today we heard that there’s no time to waste. This is absolutely headed inhearings on the matter, as critics have called for, because the Indiana Department of Education had collected “a ton of input” on Bennett’s proposals.

Less time in classroom spells trouble

November 8, 2009


Gerardo Gonzalez
Less time in classroom spells trouble

As we near a decision on the Rule Revision for Educator Preparation and Accountability (REPA) put forward by the Indiana Department of Education, all concerned with the impact of these changes are trying to make a clear final assessment.
We at the Indiana University School of Education are pleased that members of the Professional Standards Advisory Board have listened to our points and have already adjusted many aspects of the regulations.
Still, some troubling items remain. Points made recently by the U.S. Secretary of Education and the state Department of Education itself have reiterated the reasons why.
In both an online podcast and during a conference call with reporters, the Department of Education has sought to quash "myths" about the REPA proposal. "Myth 3" states "The REPA proposal allows persons who have no field experience to teach." The myth "buster" is this answer: "The proposal requires all teaching candidates to complete nine weeks of student teaching."
That is a microcosm of the problematic vision of REPA. It is a small vision of educational change, one that seeks to somehow reform teacher preparation by requiring less of teachers. The IU School of Education requires a minimum of 12 weeks of student teaching for all pre-service teachers; commonly those student teaching experiences are 15 or 16 weeks. Participants in the "Cultural Immersion Projects" gain 18 weeks of student teaching -- twice as much as boasted by the department's REPA "myths" statement -- by choosing to teach in one of 15 countries around the world, on a Navajo reservation, or in inner-city Chicago schools.
Of course, the student teaching doesn't include early field experiences for our education majors, usually about two or three separate experiences amounting to at least 80 clock hours for an undergraduate. For example, at Indianapolis' George Washington Community School, 60 students from the IU School of Education at IUPUI now are spending 14 weeks working directly with students, gaining experience and helping students. The REPA proposal would eliminate the secondary education major as a vehicle for licensure.
With only a content major, future teachers wouldn't have this kind of experience -- and Indiana's public school students would not benefit from their instruction. As we've said repeatedly, and just as troubling, requiring a content major would actually reduce content hours for those secondary majors.
It just doesn't make sense that new teachers would become better by reducing their classroom experience from upwards of 32 weeks to nine and also eliminating hours they study in their teaching field.
In the midst of Indiana's own debate over teacher preparation changes, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan challenged all schools of education in a tough speech he delivered Oct. 22 in New York. Duncan reiterated that, while alternative paths to licensure are valid and should be pursued, education schools will always turn out the vast majority of our future teachers. His call for change did not include any policy measures that align with the REPA proposal, certainly not reducing field experience or content requirements.
Duncan did note, however, that the teachers he oversaw in Chicago often said they needed more hands-on classroom management training and instruction on how to use data to improve instruction and boost student learning. If the charge from Duncan is to address this problem, for the reasons cited above, REPA would undoubtedly exacerbate the problems.
We should demand high-quality, research-based teacher preparation. We should provide more content knowledge and teaching skills for Hoosier teachers. The real myth is that we could do so by asking for less.

It's a Matter of Principal - Discussion of Leadership & Licensure

Wednesday, Nov. 11, 2009, 7–9 p.m.
Butler University, Atherton Union, Reilly Room
A panel of educational leaders will discuss the role of the principal
and the licensure of school principals in Indiana.
The discussion will be focused around themes from the documentary The Principal Story
and from the proposed changes to the licensure process in the
Rules for Educator Preparation and Accountability.
The facilitator for the discussion will be Dr. Walter Bourke,
superintendent of Franklin Township Community School Corporation (Indianapolis).
Panelists include:

* Dr. Todd Whitaker, professor of Education, Indiana State University and author of numerous educational books, including What Great Principals Do Differently.
* Dr. Robert Brower, superintendent of North Montgomery Community School Corporation (Crawfordsville, IN), author of educational books, nationally recognized expert in the trimester schedule, EPPSP graduate.
* Dr. James Halik, superintendent of Community School Corporation of Southern Hancock County (New Palestine, IN).
* Ms. Tina Merriweather, principal of Northview Middle School, Washington Township (Indianapolis), EPPSP graduate.
* Ms. Nicole Law, National Milken Educator, curriculum coordinator MSD Wayne Township (Indianapolis), EPPSP graduate.
Hosted by
Butler University, College of Education, Experiential Program for Preparing School Principals, (EPPSP director, Dr. Marilyn Sudsberry)
and WFYI.
RSVP to vkramer@butler.edu or (317) 940-9684

Are they really going to listen?

Two recent articles after the REPA hearings, one from the AP and the other from the Indianapolis Star, in which Dr. Bennett completely ignores the events of the past week.  It sure doesn't sound like Dr. Bennett and the DOE are going to take into account the thousands of voices that have stood in opposition to REPA.  We must hold them accountable.  

Schools chief defends teacher licensing proposals

Associated Press - November 3, 2009 5:14 PM ET

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - Indiana schools chief Tony Bennett is dismissing criticism by opponents of his plan to revamp the state's teacher licensing standards.

During Tuesday's meeting of the Indiana Education Roundtable, an advisory group that includes lawmakers, educators and business leaders, Bennett said his proposed changes are needed to help bring more top-notch teachers into Indiana's schools.

The roundtable met one day after representatives of several education colleges offered scathing criticism of Bennett's proposals at the last of 3 public hearings on the matter. They said the proposals had been inadequately researched and would not improve the quality of the state's teachers.

Bennett rejected that criticism Tuesday. He says he hopes his licensing proposals can be approved by year's end by the Indiana Professional Standards Board.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

November 3, 2009

Schools chief expects vote on teacher training, licenses by end of year

By Bill Ruthhart
bill.ruthhart@indystar.com

The state’s chief schools official said today that he expected to have a final vote by the end of the year on his proposal to reform how teachers are trained and licensed.

“I dare to say we are going to reform teacher licensing in this state, and my resolve to do that is more galvanized than ever,” said State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett.


“We have to act now.”

Bennett’s comments came after a regular meeting this morning of the Indiana Education Roundtable, in which he once again laid out his plan to require future middle school and high school teachers to major in their academic subject, such as English or math, instead of majoring in secondary education with a minor in an academic subject.

Monday, about 300 people attended the final public hearing on the proposal, during which a petition signed by 2,481 people opposing the rule change was presented to state officials.

Bennett said the Professional Standards board will consider comments from the three hearing in their next meeting Nov. 18. After a couple more meetings, Bennett said he hoped the board could hold a final vote by the end of December.

Editorial: Schools chief's proposals are detrimental to education

Another Editorial against REPA, this time from The Herald Bulletin.  Voices are coming together in their opposition to REPA.  Have you told someone about the dangers?  If the DOE moves forward without listening to us, we must hold them accountable.  Please share this website with your friends and family.  Link to the original article at the bottom of this post.  

"Indiana schools Superintendent Tony Bennett has been courting controversy since he took the office in January. An enthusiastic cheerleader for charter schools, Bennett recently took the bold move of challenging Indiana’s teacher education curriculum. He claims he is only thinking of the schoolchildren, but he’s wrong here. In fact, his policy could be detrimental to children because underqualified personnel could be standing in front of the blackboard.

What is at issue here is pedagogy, which is the study of how a teacher teaches or methods of instruction. How someone teaches and what methods are best to reach children have been discussed and theorized through the ages. Socrates had his method of intense questioning, which was eventually named after him. Noted pedagogy theorists include American philosopher John Dewey. Dewey argued that pedagogy should be a separate department, which would train its students to be specialists in education. Dewey started the Department of Pedagogy at the University of Chicago.
The point is that pedagogy is an evolution of educational thought that assumes that the process of education plays an important role in how children learn. To downplay pedagogy, as Bennett seems to be doing, actually reduces the professionalism of teachers.
Bennett wants teachers to know more about the subjects they teach, especially in elementary education, and wants curricula to reflect that. Secondary education teachers would major in a specialized area — say, math — and minor in education.
Of course, teachers are upset about this. An Associated Press story quoted an educator as saying that teachers never mention needing to know more about a subject but oftentimes say they could use more training in how to teach. It is important, however, that teachers keep abreast of developments in their subject area and continue learning that subject. Bennett’s proposal would make it easier for people in other disciplines to become teachers by reducing pedagogy courses. “You have to know how to teach,” said John Ellis, executive director of the Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents. “There are people who are extraordinarily bright, extraordinarily gifted in their areas of specialty but just simply don’t know how to relate to kids.”
To teachers, Bennett’s ideas are an assault on a profession that no other licensed group would have to undergo. No one is arguing, for example, that doctors need to study more about anatomy than procedure. For lawyers, trying cases is immeasurably more important than knowing precedents, which clerks can look up.
Slapping education with reforms, however, seems to be the status quo, maybe because teachers are paid with taxpayer dollars. Republicans, of which Bennett is one, seem particularly adept at micromanaging education. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan’s administration produced “A Nation at Risk,” a study that concluded that the U.S. education system is falling behind the rest of the world. No Child Left Behind was the product of George W. Bush’s administration.
To put underqualified people in front of the state’s students is asking for trouble. The purpose of a teacher is not only to know the subject, but to know how to guide students through the choppy waters of learning, to challenge and inspire and understand how students learn. The importance of pedagogy shouldn’t be underestimated.
Bennett would like such important changes rushed through, but members of the Indiana Professional Standards Board, which must approve Bennett’s changes, have said that they need more time to study the implications of (in our words) a less professional teaching force. The board should reject Bennett’s attempt to water down educational standards."

Original Article

Hearing on Teacher Requirements Gets Heated

This just in from the evening news: State Wants More Focus On Subject Matter Over Teaching Methods

INDIANAPOLIS -- Dozens of educators criticized a proposal to revamp Indiana's teacher licensing standards during the last of three public hearings on the contentious changes.


Monday's hearing before staff members of the Indiana Department of Education drew more than 250 people to a conference room at the Indiana State Library to voice their opinion on state schools Superintendent Tony Bennett's proposal, 6News' Renee Jameson reported.

Bennett said prospective teachers spend too much time learning classroom methods and not enough on subject matter.

"What we're looking to do is ensure that all future teachers have a deep content knowledge of the subjects they're going to be teaching," said IDOE spokesman Cam Savage.


But a series of teachers, college officials and others said Monday that the state needs to take more time considering the proposed changes, saying they fear the plan would weaken teacher standards.

"You should be concerned because perhaps some of these regulations, if they're passed, will allow someone with no experience and no background in education to run the school, the school corporation or even your child's classroom," said Teresa Meredith with the Indiana State Teachers Association.

Opponents delivered a foot-high stack of petitions signed by teachers, principals and other educators against the changes.

"It's the total package that you need to look at," said Mary Mavis, a teacher from Ft. Wayne.

State education officials will discuss the proposed changes on Nov. 18. The new rules would not go in effect until July of next year.
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/21501536/detail.html

Teacher licensing proposal threatens school progress

More coverage on the REPA hearings.  The fight is not over, we must continue to voice our concerns.  Indiana Citizens encourages you share these links with at least five people.  Spread the message.

This following article is from the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, a link to the original is at the end.

ROCHESTER – From the experts who train early childhood educators to the deans of Indiana’s colleges of education, there’s virtually unanimous agreement that the plan to revise education licensing rules is seriously flawed. Educators have objected loudly and forcefully at two public hearings on the proposals and in hundreds of comments submitted to the state by mail and e-mail.
So what do the arcane provisions of teacher preparation guidelines mean, anyway?
Nothing less than whether Indiana students will succeed or fail. And if that sounds like an overdramatic assertion, consider that it’s based on some knowledge of those who fail.
Tuesday morning, I listened at Rochester High School as dozens of teachers, college officials, school administrators and others passionately called for changes to the proposed Rules for Educator Preparation and Accountability – REPA, for short.
They argued that the rules would place too much power in the hands of a building principal when it comes to renewing teacher licenses.
They complained that early childhood education would suffer if preschool certification is lumped in with licensing for teachers through grade 6.
They complained that the limits on teaching methods courses in schools of education would leave new teachers unprepared to help special-needs students and children from poverty, students learning English and the academically gifted.
Noting the proposal’s emphasis on making it easier for midcareer professionals to become teachers, Calvin Bellamy, a Schererville attorney and former bank chairman, told the hearing officers that there is a profound difference between someone speaking to a class on an occasional basis and what teachers do each day.
“We would be very foolish to think there is nothing special about the science of teaching,” he said. “On a sustained basis, our students deserve better.”
Tuesday night, I observed a full classroom of mostly middle-aged students in a literacy class at the main Allen County Public Library. Most read below the fifth-grade level.
Their stories all are different, but aside from the handful of immigrant students just learning English, these adults share the experience of having been failed, at some point, by Indiana schools. The rigorous academic standards the state has since put in place, the accountability requirements for teachers and schools, instructional techniques that help teachers reach even the most struggling learners, the data that drive classroom learning today – none of these existed when these adult students were first in school.
Certainly, there have always been exceptional teachers who seemed to know instinctively how to reach a struggling student. But for too many years, too many students somehow passed through grade after grade without making the connections that would engage them in learning.
It wasn’t a problem 30 years ago – if you dropped out of school, there were good-paying jobs that didn’t require reading and critical-thinking skills. That has changed. A diploma or GED is the minimum requirement for virtually any job.
Admittedly, it took schools too long to respond to that fact, but they did. Most people would be surprised to learn how different classrooms are today than they were even five or 10 years ago. Just ask recently retired teachers, some of whom retired because they couldn’t keep up with the changes demanded.
The REPA revisions are being protested by the educators who have embraced those very changes. They aren’t protecting turf; they are protecting the gains education has made in finding the best ways to reach every student, whether it’s a New Tech program or curriculum mapping or differentiated instruction or any of the thousands of strategies teachers have developed. Those are gains made in collaboration with the colleges of education, which have increasingly strengthened their ties to public schools to support field experiences and research into best-teaching practices.
No one who testified before the hearing officers Tuesday asked the Indiana Department of Education to leave the teacher and administrator licensing rules untouched; some even expressed support for specific provisions of the proposal. Mostly, they argued the process was moving too quickly and without hearing from the people best positioned to shape the policy.
“We stand willing to work with you to get REPA right,” said Michael Horvath, dean of the School of Education at Indiana University-South Bend. “Call us.”
The rules, if approved, will go into effect July 1, 2010. Students who graduate from college-level teacher-preparation programs before 2011 will be grandfathered under the existing rules. As teacher licenses come up for renewal, they will be subject to the new rules.
After a final public hearing in Indianapolis on Monday, the Advisory Board of the Division of Professional Standards will take the comments under advisement and issue the final rules, subject to approval from the attorney general and governor.
Some at the Rochester hearing suggested the process is an empty exercise, but the overwhelming opposition from educators to what should be a routine revision process presents a test for Tony Bennett, state superintendent of public instruction. Will he continue his push for the changes, or will he listen to calls to slow down and work with the experts?
Indiana’s gains in school improvement are at stake, along with the fate of students who desperately need the best work of skilled teachers, administrators and the state’s schools of education.

Teacher licensing proposal threatens school progress

A Slap in the Face

Two different news organizations have used the term, "slap in the face." The message is being heard, REPA is indeed a slap in the face. The battle is not over, it has only begun.

The following article is from the Evansville Courier and Press, the link to the original article is at the end.

INDIANAPOLIS — Calling state schools chief Tony Bennett’s plan to revise teacher licensing requirements a slap in the face, Indiana’s public education establishment is fighting back hard.

An overflow crowd of nearly 300 teachers, college education professors and more packed into the Indiana State Library on Monday, each awaiting a turn to testify – and in most cases, lambast – a proposed rule change that would have those who are training to become teachers focus more on content and less on methods.

The criticism was direct, and it was aimed at Bennett and Gov. Mitch Daniels, the two Republicans who teachers said have packed their supporters onto the Indiana Professional Standards Board, the licensing panel considering the changes.

Deb Lecklider, the associate dean of education at Butler University, told the panel of Indiana Department of Education staffers running the meeting that the board should slow down and listen “before you vote the way you were selected to vote.”

“The more I study his efforts, the more it becomes apparent that he is making a mockery of the teaching profession,” said Rick Muir, the president of the Indiana Federation of Teachers. “Would anyone let a teacher fly an airplane with a crash course in aviation? Would anyone in this room let your teacher extract a cavity or perform a root canal with an expedited degree in dentistry?”

Muir asked why only three hearings were being held on the issue and why they were during the school day, prohibiting many teachers from participating.

“Since you all already have written the legislation, I don’t know why you’re holding open forums,” said Michelle Ann Smith, a woman whose brief comments drew 30 seconds of applause, after which board members asked the audience to stop clapping. “It’s pretty clear you all have already made your decision.”

Cam Savage, a spokesman for the Indiana Department of Education, said about 100 people total had testified at two hearings last week. Another 1,000, he said, have commented online.

“I’m going to tell you what I tell kids who run in the hallways: Slow down,” said Matt Moll, a teacher from Franklin, south of Indianapolis.

Katie Vollmert, a 20-year-old junior elementary education major at Butler University, said problems in education should not be solved by adding more focus on content, but by emphasizing student engagement.

“Consider that the teacher who meant so much to you did not have a lasting impression simply because of her knowledge of math and sentence structure, but because of the passion and the coherent understanding of learners,” she said.

“Because the critical and thoughtful eye that teachers wear is not built up by their knowledge of content, but because of their knowledge of children, and how to make learning personal, and engaging.”

Bennett’s plan would require those who seek to teach high school and middle school to major in the topic they wish to teach and minor in education. He has asserted that the change would lead to more teachers who are experts in their subject areas.

“Let me be as direct as I can be: It’s not true,” said Gerardo M. Gonzalez, dean of the Indiana University School of Education. “Math education majors are sitting side-by-side with math majors, taking the same classes under the same math department faculty. The only difference is that our majors must take more of these classes than their peers in the math major.”

Business leaders dotted the hearing with occasional support for Bennett’s proposals.

Charles Dunlap, the executive director of the Indiana Bar Foundation, which runs the “We the People” program for Indiana high school social studies students, said content knowledge is particularly important in civic education.

“I personally am very supportive of increasing the content knowledge in this area,” he said.

Charlie Schleigel, a licensed teacher and administrator and the president of the Challenge Foundation Academy, a charter school in Indianapolis, supported Bennett’s proposals.

He said he has found that college education majors often receive A grades in education courses and C grades in other courses. He said the proposals would make the expectations of teachers more rigorous.

It remains to be seen how the hearings will affect Bennett, who has shown since taking office in January that he is not afraid to upset the establishment when he considers it necessary.

His office signaled Monday that it is not willing to take dictation from college education departments whose objections, Savage said, stem at in large part from the fact that they would be dealt a financial blow if the revisions are approved.

Otherwise, Savage said, those education departments would have more faith in the hiring decision-making abilities of the principals who they train.

What’s next is a Nov. 18 meeting of the Indiana Professional Standards Board. There, board members will discuss the public testimony and consider revisions. It’s not clear when the board will vote.

Bennett’s proposals will also need the approval of the Indiana General Assembly. They could run into resistance in the Democratic-controlled House.

State Rep. Sheila Klinker, a Lafayette Democrat who sits on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and attended Monday’s public hearing, said she thinks giving school administrators more flexibility is a reasonable idea. But she also emphasized the need for collaboration between the state Education Department and Indiana’s teachers and education colleges.

Link to Original Article

Educators criticize Indiana teacher licensing changes

If the above video doesn't load, find the original by following this link

Final Public Hearing on REPA

A packed house was there for public comment on the proposal to lower teacher standards this morning. While a few, well-placed, folks spoke in favor of the proposal, the vast majority of the over 100 folks signed up to speak expressed deep concerns over both the proposal and the undemocratic process that has taken place.  The misinformation and misunderstandings persist and it looks like this will move forward even though it was mentioned several times that this type of public outcry has never been seen in Indiana education policy.