Educator Standards Public Comment
Posted: Fri, 03/16/2012 - 9:15am Updated: Thu, 03/22/2012 - 9:32am The Indiana Department of Education is seeking public comment in regards to two newly developed sets of standards. These standards are intended to serve in the preparation and assessment of preservice teachers or school counselors. Please note the Exceptional Needs-Mild Intervention Reading Instruction Standards are meant to serve as an addendum to the existing Exceptional Needs-Mild Intervention Standards which may be found HERE. Once you have read the draft standards below, please visit the survey site (link below) to contribute your feedback.
The IDOE will be collecting public comment on these standards between March 23 and April 23, 2012, at the following link: Survey for Public Comment on Educator Standards.
Indiana School Counselor Standards
Indiana Exceptional Needs-Mild Intervention Reading Instruction Standards
If you have further questions, please contact us at eel@doe.in.gov.
Showing posts with label bennett. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bennett. Show all posts
Friday, March 23, 2012
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Hear! Hear!
School turnaround companies not a sure thing; let community try 1st
Dear Mr. Tully,
I agree with you and the state's superintendent of public instruction, Tony Bennett, on one thing: It's sad that we as a community have let Indianapolis Public Schools get to this point. Few could look at the performance of the seven district schools under threat of a state takeover and feel any other way.
Everyone wants to do something to turn things around. Continuing to do nothing is absolutely unacceptable. But doing something doesn't mean we should try anything. And, in my book, allowing the state to take over any of the schools and then turn them over to a management company definitely counts as "anything."
Who's to say a private and possibly out-of-state company would do any better than a locally run and elected school board?
After all, the research on the effectiveness of these turnaround companies is anything but conclusive. Even those who support them admit that. "There really isn't a big track record for many of these groups to stand on," said M. René Islas, an education consultant who has worked in Indianapolis and is the director of the Learning Forward Center for Results. "We're kind of in uncharted territory."
Kind of like California during the Gold Rush. Never before has there been $5 billion of federal funding available to turn around failing schools. Education Secretary Arne Duncan hopes to overhaul 5,000 of the nation's 100,000 public schools in the next few years.
A lot of those turnaround efforts, as is the case here, involve paying a private, for-profit company to overhaul schools. Yet nationwide, oversight of these companies hasn't been the best. Many of them are new, formed in response to a burgeoning market for fixing schools, and they have yet to establish proven records of success.
And the privatization of government services doesn't always work. The botched attempt to modernize Indiana's welfare system comes to mind. Gov. Mitch Daniels pulled the plug on the $1.3 billion contract with IBM less than three years into the supposed 10-year implementation.
Do we really want to take that chance with our schools? With our children? What happens if the state hires a turnaround company, and then a year from now or two years from now, test scores at a school don't go up? Will Bennett fire that company and hire a new one? Will that new company once again fire half the staff and oust the principal?
These are things we need to think about long before we consider crossing the bridge into state takeover land.
Why? Because, above all else, students need stability and consistency.
This came through loud and clear at both of last week's meetings to gather public feedback on the possible state takeover. At Arlington Community High School, teachers and parents complained about the inconsistent meting out of discipline and the rotating cast of principals and teachers over the past four years.
At Broad Ripple, IPS Superintendent Eugene White pointed out that the school is only in its second year of being a full magnet high school for the arts. My point is, there hasn't been enough consistency or stability at either of these schools for the students or teachers to develop any kind of traction for success."The research tells us that the full turnaround of any organization takes three to five years," Islas said.Ripping everything up again at these schools likely would do more harm than good.
What do we do instead? Let the community take up this fight first.
One result of Bennett saying the state should intervene has been that parents and community groups appear to be serious about improving education. The Indianapolis Urban League has vowed to work with the NAACP and the National Council on Educating Black Children to help implement improvement plans at all the schools.
This should have happened years ago when students' grades first started to slide, but that's a gripe for another day. The success of students depends as much on what goes on in the classroom as at home. Without support from parents and the community, kids, especially kids in poor urban districts, have a much harder time making the grade. Their involvement could make all the difference.
Let the community and parents try again. Don't take these schools out of their hands just yet.
That's a "something" I can get behind.
Call Star columnist Erika D. Smith at erika.smith@indystar.com, or reach on Twitter @indystar_erika.
Dear Mr. Tully,
I agree with you and the state's superintendent of public instruction, Tony Bennett, on one thing: It's sad that we as a community have let Indianapolis Public Schools get to this point. Few could look at the performance of the seven district schools under threat of a state takeover and feel any other way.
Everyone wants to do something to turn things around. Continuing to do nothing is absolutely unacceptable. But doing something doesn't mean we should try anything. And, in my book, allowing the state to take over any of the schools and then turn them over to a management company definitely counts as "anything."
Who's to say a private and possibly out-of-state company would do any better than a locally run and elected school board?
After all, the research on the effectiveness of these turnaround companies is anything but conclusive. Even those who support them admit that. "There really isn't a big track record for many of these groups to stand on," said M. René Islas, an education consultant who has worked in Indianapolis and is the director of the Learning Forward Center for Results. "We're kind of in uncharted territory."
Kind of like California during the Gold Rush. Never before has there been $5 billion of federal funding available to turn around failing schools. Education Secretary Arne Duncan hopes to overhaul 5,000 of the nation's 100,000 public schools in the next few years.
A lot of those turnaround efforts, as is the case here, involve paying a private, for-profit company to overhaul schools. Yet nationwide, oversight of these companies hasn't been the best. Many of them are new, formed in response to a burgeoning market for fixing schools, and they have yet to establish proven records of success.
And the privatization of government services doesn't always work. The botched attempt to modernize Indiana's welfare system comes to mind. Gov. Mitch Daniels pulled the plug on the $1.3 billion contract with IBM less than three years into the supposed 10-year implementation.
Do we really want to take that chance with our schools? With our children? What happens if the state hires a turnaround company, and then a year from now or two years from now, test scores at a school don't go up? Will Bennett fire that company and hire a new one? Will that new company once again fire half the staff and oust the principal?
These are things we need to think about long before we consider crossing the bridge into state takeover land.
Why? Because, above all else, students need stability and consistency.
This came through loud and clear at both of last week's meetings to gather public feedback on the possible state takeover. At Arlington Community High School, teachers and parents complained about the inconsistent meting out of discipline and the rotating cast of principals and teachers over the past four years.
At Broad Ripple, IPS Superintendent Eugene White pointed out that the school is only in its second year of being a full magnet high school for the arts. My point is, there hasn't been enough consistency or stability at either of these schools for the students or teachers to develop any kind of traction for success."The research tells us that the full turnaround of any organization takes three to five years," Islas said.Ripping everything up again at these schools likely would do more harm than good.
What do we do instead? Let the community take up this fight first.
One result of Bennett saying the state should intervene has been that parents and community groups appear to be serious about improving education. The Indianapolis Urban League has vowed to work with the NAACP and the National Council on Educating Black Children to help implement improvement plans at all the schools.
This should have happened years ago when students' grades first started to slide, but that's a gripe for another day. The success of students depends as much on what goes on in the classroom as at home. Without support from parents and the community, kids, especially kids in poor urban districts, have a much harder time making the grade. Their involvement could make all the difference.
Let the community and parents try again. Don't take these schools out of their hands just yet.
That's a "something" I can get behind.
Call Star columnist Erika D. Smith at erika.smith@indystar.com, or reach on Twitter @indystar_erika.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Indiana's Reform: Follow the Money
Bennett's education ties
Tony BennettAs the GOP-controlled Indiana General Assembly continues its assault on public education, Hoosiers should consider who benefits from the legislation under consideration. They'll see that Tony Bennett, superintendent of public instruction, would clearly be a winner.
The first-term Republican is backing an ambitious legislative agenda that includes private-school vouchers, expansion of charter schools, privatization of struggling schools and relaxed teacher-licensing requirements. Bennett told The Journal Gazette editorial board last week that he didn't really have a priority list for the bills. He said he instead wanted to focus on "comprehensive education reform."
"We've tried to do one thing at a time too much," he said. "My priority is to get it all accomplished."
Indeed, with Republican majorities in both the Indiana House and Senate, the state superintendent doesn't need to name a priority: He's finding enthusiastic support from GOP lawmakers for measures that have been dead on arrival in previous sessions. Approval of the legislation will surely boost the political profile of an official who some observers believe is positioning himself for a run for governor.
But Bennett, an unabashed charter-school supporter, also stands to benefit directly if the education bills are approved. His wife, Tina Bennett, is school improvement/new schools development consultant for the Indiana Public Charter Schools Association. Her work would presumably increase with the opening of new Indiana charter schools.
Tina Bennett is also assistant director of the Teach for America program at Marian University in Indianapolis. Marian's president is Daniel J. Elsener, who also happens to serve on the Indiana State Board of Education.
The small Catholic university was awarded a $500,000 principal training grant from the Indiana Department of Education last year. A spokeswoman for Tony Bennett told the Indianapolis Star at the time that the superintendent's wife wasn't involved in the program, but the contract proposal cites Marian's partnership with Teach for America as an example of prior leadership in the area of school turnaround programs.
Some in the education community say that Marian University had no experience in training school principals, while Indiana University, one of the unsuccessful bidders, has a well-established program in educational leadership. Critics don't want to be quoted on the record – they fear retribution from a powerful administration with the authority to control budgets and regulatory oversight.
Tony Bennett listed both Marian University and the charter school organization as his wife's employers on his handwritten financial disclosure form for 2010. Indiana law requires only that state officials disclose the names of a spouse's employers and the nature of their business.
It's left to voters to decide whether the official's responsibilities pose a conflict with his or her spouse's work. But in weighing education bills that will clearly benefit the state's charter school community and its turnaround school programs, Indiana lawmakers should take a closer look at who benefits from their support.
Tony BennettAs the GOP-controlled Indiana General Assembly continues its assault on public education, Hoosiers should consider who benefits from the legislation under consideration. They'll see that Tony Bennett, superintendent of public instruction, would clearly be a winner.
The first-term Republican is backing an ambitious legislative agenda that includes private-school vouchers, expansion of charter schools, privatization of struggling schools and relaxed teacher-licensing requirements. Bennett told The Journal Gazette editorial board last week that he didn't really have a priority list for the bills. He said he instead wanted to focus on "comprehensive education reform."
"We've tried to do one thing at a time too much," he said. "My priority is to get it all accomplished."
Indeed, with Republican majorities in both the Indiana House and Senate, the state superintendent doesn't need to name a priority: He's finding enthusiastic support from GOP lawmakers for measures that have been dead on arrival in previous sessions. Approval of the legislation will surely boost the political profile of an official who some observers believe is positioning himself for a run for governor.
But Bennett, an unabashed charter-school supporter, also stands to benefit directly if the education bills are approved. His wife, Tina Bennett, is school improvement/new schools development consultant for the Indiana Public Charter Schools Association. Her work would presumably increase with the opening of new Indiana charter schools.
Tina Bennett is also assistant director of the Teach for America program at Marian University in Indianapolis. Marian's president is Daniel J. Elsener, who also happens to serve on the Indiana State Board of Education.
The small Catholic university was awarded a $500,000 principal training grant from the Indiana Department of Education last year. A spokeswoman for Tony Bennett told the Indianapolis Star at the time that the superintendent's wife wasn't involved in the program, but the contract proposal cites Marian's partnership with Teach for America as an example of prior leadership in the area of school turnaround programs.
Some in the education community say that Marian University had no experience in training school principals, while Indiana University, one of the unsuccessful bidders, has a well-established program in educational leadership. Critics don't want to be quoted on the record – they fear retribution from a powerful administration with the authority to control budgets and regulatory oversight.
Tony Bennett listed both Marian University and the charter school organization as his wife's employers on his handwritten financial disclosure form for 2010. Indiana law requires only that state officials disclose the names of a spouse's employers and the nature of their business.
It's left to voters to decide whether the official's responsibilities pose a conflict with his or her spouse's work. But in weighing education bills that will clearly benefit the state's charter school community and its turnaround school programs, Indiana lawmakers should take a closer look at who benefits from their support.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
How the "Logic" of Reform Works in Indiana
Good, thoughtful critique of Tony Bennett's mode of operation: misinformation, selective memory, and hyperbole in order to further an ideological agenda. She's right, we have to rebut these efforts of bad information and speak with our neighbors and colleagues; we have to continue to tell the other side of the story.
STEPHANIE SALTER: Another batch of my status-quo-defending misinformation on schools
TERRE HAUTE — The day after state schools chief Tony Bennett responded to my three-column education series, a longtime friend and veteran teacher called.
“I just read the superintendent’s rebuttal in the Tribune-Star,” my friend said. “All I can conclude from it is that you are a dumbass. Welcome to the club. Anybody who doesn’t buy into his vision of education reform is considered a dumbass.”
The superintendent didn’t use such a coarse term in his opinion piece, but my friend is right. Ignorance (or worse) was implied throughout Bennett’s column. Among the charges: My series “completely misinterprets” the Indiana Department of Education’s “efforts to provide all Hoosier students with quality education opportunities.”
“I just read the superintendent’s rebuttal in the Tribune-Star,” my friend said. “All I can conclude from it is that you are a dumbass. Welcome to the club. Anybody who doesn’t buy into his vision of education reform is considered a dumbass.”
The superintendent didn’t use such a coarse term in his opinion piece, but my friend is right. Ignorance (or worse) was implied throughout Bennett’s column. Among the charges: My series “completely misinterprets” the Indiana Department of Education’s “efforts to provide all Hoosier students with quality education opportunities.”
For those who missed it, I wrote what thousands of Indiana teachers know in their heart — that Bennett and his boss, Gov. Mitch Daniels, play fast and loose with statistics and anecdotal evidence in their committed campaign to paint Hoosier schools as “a mess” in need of radical reform. The last of the three columns consisted entirely of quotes from teachers, all over the state, who responded to the first two pieces.
Although Bennett accused me of repeatedly spreading “both inaccurate information and fear,” he provided not a single example of either. If the errors were in my Dec. 5 piece — a fact-filled attempt to counter a few of the gross misrepresentations offered by Bennett and Daniels — the superintendent didn’t say. If the alleged misinformation was in the fact-filled Dec. 5 sidebar by retired educator Vic Smith, none of that made Bennett’s essay, either.
In another omission, Bennett waxed poetic about a large, Dec. 9 gathering of educators at Deming Elementary in Terre Haute. He said he left with “an overwhelming feeling of optimism regarding IDOE’s efforts to provide all Hoosier students with an academically rigorous and globally competitive education.”
Sounds like a real join-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya scene, right? Typical of his (and Daniel’s) selective memory, Bennett left out the part about the thunderous ovation Vigo County schools superintendent Dan Tanoos received that night when he feistily challenged the state chief to “make us feel like you are advocating on our behalf instead of against us.”
Neither did Bennett mention West Vigo High School Principal Tom Balitiewicz’s refusal to wear the mantle of stumbling failure that Bennett and Daniels seem determined to hang around every school district’s neck.
Bennett also chose not to recount a stellar point made by Patty Curley, who has taught in Vigo public schools since 1984. Describing stints at two schools with very different socio-economic makeups, Curley said that if she had been judged as a teacher based on students’ test scores — as Bennett and Daniels advocate — she would have been deemed a bad one at the lower economic school and a “very highly effective teacher” at the wealthier school. Her teaching skills would not have changed, Curley said, only the situation in which she employed them.
Bennett did offer one curious example in his essay to indicate that I choose to short-change children so I can “defend the status quo.” Twenty of Indiana’s “consistently low-performing schools are at risk of facing state intervention at the end of the school year,” he wrote. Acknowledging that those 20 schools make up “only about 1 percent of all Indiana schools,” Bennett nonetheless scolded me and my ilk, saying, “we must not forget the thousands of real students held captive in those classrooms.” My series, he wrote, “ignores the plight of children in desperate need of better schooling.”
See the way the logic works?
I show in print how the governor and schools chief wrongly portray all of Indiana public education as an oil spill in need of a Herculean cleanup — the BP disaster metaphor is Bennett’s, not mine — and that makes me a compassion-challenged misinformation peddler who cares nothing for thousands of kids in a handful of schools that really are failing.
I show with numbers, studies and legitimate context that Indiana public education, overall, is pretty much in the middle of the nation’s pack — not ready for life support as Daniels and Bennett seem to imply every time they get near a PowerPoint — and I become another selfish, change-resistant defender of the status quo.
Another dumbass.
Like many elected and appointed leaders these days, Daniels and Bennett have an education agenda — and it looks like major restructuring better suited for a failing mega-business than for a public school system. The cruel irony is, some of the system’s thorniest problems are the result of often conflicting standards and benchmarks foisted upon educators by state and federal legislators who could not survive one day in a real classroom.
To sell such reform to taxpayers, bad news must be emphasized (or presented out of context), good news must be ignored, and people who question wholesale change for everyone must be vilified.
As I learned from scores of e-mails, letters and phone calls, many of Indiana’s most dedicated public school teachers and administrators feel beaten down by the Bennett-Daniels’ campaign to reform them. These teachers contend with social and economic problems that educators of my era could not have imagined in their worst nightmares. Whether it’s numerous students with severe learning disabilities or kids whose parents sell their teacher-donated clothes to buy methamphetamine, 21st century public schools demand that teachers use everything they’ve learned in college — and in life — every day.
A recent, telling statistic: In 2006, 36 percent of Hoosier students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch, the litmus for what we now call economic hardship. This year, the percentage is more than 45 percent. Do you suppose that factor influences a kid’s ability to pass ISTEP?
Here’s a more encouraging statistic, regarding graduation rates, which frequently are cited as dismal by Daniels: Hoosier rates tumbled in 2006 to 76.4 percent from 89.5 percent, when the state recalibrated its method of graduation accounting. They have been rising ever since, recovering to 84.1 percent this year. The increase includes the Indianapolis Public School system, which still has an alarmingly low rate (58.3 percent), but has risen 10 percent in four years.
As a Fort Wayne Journal Gazette editorial put it: “The figures show steady and encouraging progress statewide — without the influence of vouchers, merit pay or teacher evaluations tied to test scores.”
After my series, message after message included a request to “keep telling our side of the story.” I understand the urgency, but even if I were not taking the next few months off, I couldn’t counter the misinformation about public education that flows from Indianapolis and Washington. Teachers, principals and district superintendents have to find a way to do that.
Teachers, let your unions bargain for your contracts, but hire or draft a team of knowledgeable spokespeople not connected to the unions who can rebut skewed sound bites and twisted statistics every time one is uttered. Speak up to your neighbors, your church members, your students’ parents and your local newspaper when you hear another politician accuse you of something you know isn’t true — like the governor’s repeated claim about how poorly Hoosier students perform on national reading and math tests.
The best defense is a good offense. Make certain all those incoming members of the Indiana General Assembly understand that if they rubber-stamp unproven, radical education reforms — instead of funding proven approaches such as full-day kindergarten — they will pay in the next election.
Parents and other taxpayers, at the very least, exercise some skepticism. A clear picture of education requires context. Examine statistics; find out whether an accuser is talking about 20 failing schools or an entire state system. Beware of open-and-shut vilification. Don’t accept a one-size-fits-all solution from either side of the issue. If you are confused or concerned about a politician-reformer’s charges, ask a teacher you trust to weigh in.
In the meantime, if someone implies you’re a dumbass because you think the majority of Indiana’s public educators are doing a good job and want to do even better — smile. You are in excellent and plentiful company. Welcome to the club.
Although Bennett accused me of repeatedly spreading “both inaccurate information and fear,” he provided not a single example of either. If the errors were in my Dec. 5 piece — a fact-filled attempt to counter a few of the gross misrepresentations offered by Bennett and Daniels — the superintendent didn’t say. If the alleged misinformation was in the fact-filled Dec. 5 sidebar by retired educator Vic Smith, none of that made Bennett’s essay, either.
In another omission, Bennett waxed poetic about a large, Dec. 9 gathering of educators at Deming Elementary in Terre Haute. He said he left with “an overwhelming feeling of optimism regarding IDOE’s efforts to provide all Hoosier students with an academically rigorous and globally competitive education.”
Sounds like a real join-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya scene, right? Typical of his (and Daniel’s) selective memory, Bennett left out the part about the thunderous ovation Vigo County schools superintendent Dan Tanoos received that night when he feistily challenged the state chief to “make us feel like you are advocating on our behalf instead of against us.”
Neither did Bennett mention West Vigo High School Principal Tom Balitiewicz’s refusal to wear the mantle of stumbling failure that Bennett and Daniels seem determined to hang around every school district’s neck.
Bennett also chose not to recount a stellar point made by Patty Curley, who has taught in Vigo public schools since 1984. Describing stints at two schools with very different socio-economic makeups, Curley said that if she had been judged as a teacher based on students’ test scores — as Bennett and Daniels advocate — she would have been deemed a bad one at the lower economic school and a “very highly effective teacher” at the wealthier school. Her teaching skills would not have changed, Curley said, only the situation in which she employed them.
Bennett did offer one curious example in his essay to indicate that I choose to short-change children so I can “defend the status quo.” Twenty of Indiana’s “consistently low-performing schools are at risk of facing state intervention at the end of the school year,” he wrote. Acknowledging that those 20 schools make up “only about 1 percent of all Indiana schools,” Bennett nonetheless scolded me and my ilk, saying, “we must not forget the thousands of real students held captive in those classrooms.” My series, he wrote, “ignores the plight of children in desperate need of better schooling.”
See the way the logic works?
I show in print how the governor and schools chief wrongly portray all of Indiana public education as an oil spill in need of a Herculean cleanup — the BP disaster metaphor is Bennett’s, not mine — and that makes me a compassion-challenged misinformation peddler who cares nothing for thousands of kids in a handful of schools that really are failing.
I show with numbers, studies and legitimate context that Indiana public education, overall, is pretty much in the middle of the nation’s pack — not ready for life support as Daniels and Bennett seem to imply every time they get near a PowerPoint — and I become another selfish, change-resistant defender of the status quo.
Another dumbass.
Like many elected and appointed leaders these days, Daniels and Bennett have an education agenda — and it looks like major restructuring better suited for a failing mega-business than for a public school system. The cruel irony is, some of the system’s thorniest problems are the result of often conflicting standards and benchmarks foisted upon educators by state and federal legislators who could not survive one day in a real classroom.
To sell such reform to taxpayers, bad news must be emphasized (or presented out of context), good news must be ignored, and people who question wholesale change for everyone must be vilified.
As I learned from scores of e-mails, letters and phone calls, many of Indiana’s most dedicated public school teachers and administrators feel beaten down by the Bennett-Daniels’ campaign to reform them. These teachers contend with social and economic problems that educators of my era could not have imagined in their worst nightmares. Whether it’s numerous students with severe learning disabilities or kids whose parents sell their teacher-donated clothes to buy methamphetamine, 21st century public schools demand that teachers use everything they’ve learned in college — and in life — every day.
A recent, telling statistic: In 2006, 36 percent of Hoosier students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch, the litmus for what we now call economic hardship. This year, the percentage is more than 45 percent. Do you suppose that factor influences a kid’s ability to pass ISTEP?
Here’s a more encouraging statistic, regarding graduation rates, which frequently are cited as dismal by Daniels: Hoosier rates tumbled in 2006 to 76.4 percent from 89.5 percent, when the state recalibrated its method of graduation accounting. They have been rising ever since, recovering to 84.1 percent this year. The increase includes the Indianapolis Public School system, which still has an alarmingly low rate (58.3 percent), but has risen 10 percent in four years.
As a Fort Wayne Journal Gazette editorial put it: “The figures show steady and encouraging progress statewide — without the influence of vouchers, merit pay or teacher evaluations tied to test scores.”
After my series, message after message included a request to “keep telling our side of the story.” I understand the urgency, but even if I were not taking the next few months off, I couldn’t counter the misinformation about public education that flows from Indianapolis and Washington. Teachers, principals and district superintendents have to find a way to do that.
Teachers, let your unions bargain for your contracts, but hire or draft a team of knowledgeable spokespeople not connected to the unions who can rebut skewed sound bites and twisted statistics every time one is uttered. Speak up to your neighbors, your church members, your students’ parents and your local newspaper when you hear another politician accuse you of something you know isn’t true — like the governor’s repeated claim about how poorly Hoosier students perform on national reading and math tests.
The best defense is a good offense. Make certain all those incoming members of the Indiana General Assembly understand that if they rubber-stamp unproven, radical education reforms — instead of funding proven approaches such as full-day kindergarten — they will pay in the next election.
Parents and other taxpayers, at the very least, exercise some skepticism. A clear picture of education requires context. Examine statistics; find out whether an accuser is talking about 20 failing schools or an entire state system. Beware of open-and-shut vilification. Don’t accept a one-size-fits-all solution from either side of the issue. If you are confused or concerned about a politician-reformer’s charges, ask a teacher you trust to weigh in.
In the meantime, if someone implies you’re a dumbass because you think the majority of Indiana’s public educators are doing a good job and want to do even better — smile. You are in excellent and plentiful company. Welcome to the club.
LINK:
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Bennett silent on dramatic graduation gains
A letter to the editor at the IndyStar points to the troubling evidence that more is going on with Supt. Bennett/Mitch Daniels and their education agenda. Certainly statistics can be manipulated (a critique offered in the comments) but NCLB has improved our ability to report on actual student achievement. The problem is that findings showing progress don't fit the party line of blaming teachers and claiming the system is irretreivably broken. We all need to be asking these hard questions as this agenda moves forward.
___________________________________
I'd like to congratulate the public school students and teachers in Marion County and across the state for the dramatic gain in the graduation rates. As a recently retired teacher who was involved in implementing the tougher state standards that are now in place, it is heartwarming to see students and schools meet the challenges and succeed.
There will always be those who say the rate is still too low. Fine. Of course we want all students to graduate, so we just keep working toward that goal.
What I find most disappointing is the lack of acknowledgement from state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett about this accomplishment. Bennett's silence, when taken in the context of the agenda he intends to put forward in the next legislative session, is further evidence that his unspoken intention is to dismantle the public school system in the state.
What other conclusion could be drawn? An acknowledgment of successful and improving public schools certainly doesn't support the need for more charter schools.
Jay Hill, Indianapolis
___________________________________
I'd like to congratulate the public school students and teachers in Marion County and across the state for the dramatic gain in the graduation rates. As a recently retired teacher who was involved in implementing the tougher state standards that are now in place, it is heartwarming to see students and schools meet the challenges and succeed.
There will always be those who say the rate is still too low. Fine. Of course we want all students to graduate, so we just keep working toward that goal.
What I find most disappointing is the lack of acknowledgement from state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett about this accomplishment. Bennett's silence, when taken in the context of the agenda he intends to put forward in the next legislative session, is further evidence that his unspoken intention is to dismantle the public school system in the state.
What other conclusion could be drawn? An acknowledgment of successful and improving public schools certainly doesn't support the need for more charter schools.
Jay Hill, Indianapolis
Monday, November 8, 2010
Thoughful Moderator in Education Reform
An editorial from the Indy Star unusually offers a bit of a voice of reason in the fervor to "reform" Indiana's schools. Good cautions here but if you've been following the Daniels/Bennett agenda, "a thoughtful moderator" doesn't seem likely.
Thoughts?
Strike balance in push to better educate children- Indy Star
Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Indiana General Assembly need to move quickly but also thoughtfully to overhaul Indiana's educational system. Last week's election results gave the governor and his Republican allies in the Statehouse a clear path to pursue reforms they've long desired, including merit pay for teachers, less rigidity in union work rules, and more freedom to open charter schools.
Much of Daniels' agenda makes sense, at least on paper. But the governor, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett and legislative leaders still need to show how ideas such as bonus pay for top-performing teachers will work in real-life schools.
And although the push to provide parents with additional options for educating their children is certainly welcome, the track record for charter schools is mixed. Some charters, like some traditional schools, are outstanding [19%, that's one in five people]. Others are mediocre at best. [and some are criminally negligent]
Teachers unions in Indiana have long brandished too much power in the General Assembly. Year after year, they've persuaded allies such as outgoing House Speaker Pat Bauer to kill good ideas and to promote measures that favor adults' interests over children's. Curtailing the unions' power is long overdue.
Yet, a balance must be struck. Veteran teachers need enough job security to ensure that they're not driven from classrooms because of the failure of others, including administrators and parents. Accountability is a vital concept, but it's critical that results are measured accurately and rewards and demerits are meted out fairly.
On Tuesday, the governor and the state superintendent were given a clear opportunity to move aggressively. They can't waste it. But every reform-minded leader needs someone who is able to moderate excesses and promote accountability.
With Democrats reduced to the point of irrelevancy in the Statehouse, and deservedly so because of their absolute refusal to confront Indiana's educational problems, others must emerge to vet ideas driven by Daniels and Bennett.
It wouldn't be disloyal but prudent for Republican leaders such as likely House Education Committee Chairman Robert Behning and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Luke Kenley to take the lead on ensuring that reform measures aren't rushed through the legislative process.
Educators in the state's public and private universities also can help evaluate the flood of new proposals, including one that would provide financial incentives for some students to skip their senior year of high school to start college early.
Is the status quo acceptable in Indiana's schools? Absolutely not. But not every reform idea has merit.
Daniels and Bennett clearly understand the task ahead of them. They will be aggressive agents of change on behalf of the state's children. The key job of thoughtful moderator, however, is for now vacant.
Thoughts?
Strike balance in push to better educate children- Indy Star
Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Indiana General Assembly need to move quickly but also thoughtfully to overhaul Indiana's educational system. Last week's election results gave the governor and his Republican allies in the Statehouse a clear path to pursue reforms they've long desired, including merit pay for teachers, less rigidity in union work rules, and more freedom to open charter schools.
Much of Daniels' agenda makes sense, at least on paper. But the governor, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett and legislative leaders still need to show how ideas such as bonus pay for top-performing teachers will work in real-life schools.
And although the push to provide parents with additional options for educating their children is certainly welcome, the track record for charter schools is mixed. Some charters, like some traditional schools, are outstanding [19%, that's one in five people]. Others are mediocre at best. [and some are criminally negligent]
Teachers unions in Indiana have long brandished too much power in the General Assembly. Year after year, they've persuaded allies such as outgoing House Speaker Pat Bauer to kill good ideas and to promote measures that favor adults' interests over children's. Curtailing the unions' power is long overdue.
Yet, a balance must be struck. Veteran teachers need enough job security to ensure that they're not driven from classrooms because of the failure of others, including administrators and parents. Accountability is a vital concept, but it's critical that results are measured accurately and rewards and demerits are meted out fairly.
On Tuesday, the governor and the state superintendent were given a clear opportunity to move aggressively. They can't waste it. But every reform-minded leader needs someone who is able to moderate excesses and promote accountability.
With Democrats reduced to the point of irrelevancy in the Statehouse, and deservedly so because of their absolute refusal to confront Indiana's educational problems, others must emerge to vet ideas driven by Daniels and Bennett.
It wouldn't be disloyal but prudent for Republican leaders such as likely House Education Committee Chairman Robert Behning and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Luke Kenley to take the lead on ensuring that reform measures aren't rushed through the legislative process.
Educators in the state's public and private universities also can help evaluate the flood of new proposals, including one that would provide financial incentives for some students to skip their senior year of high school to start college early.
Is the status quo acceptable in Indiana's schools? Absolutely not. But not every reform idea has merit.
Daniels and Bennett clearly understand the task ahead of them. They will be aggressive agents of change on behalf of the state's children. The key job of thoughtful moderator, however, is for now vacant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)