http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/b...ve-in-20150526
Lancaster’s Board of Education (BOE), Superintendent Dr. Michael Vallely and the two BOE incumbents got beat up pretty bad in the recent BOE election. They were all charged with lack of transparency, indifference regarding supporting calls for Common Core reforms and not being the voice of the people. The two new elected members promised to be the voice of the people and to work diligently to reform Common Core Standardized testing and in are favor of elimination evaluations based on such state standardized testing.
Good luck to them in their quest when they are dealing with a Governor, state Legislators and NYSUT, a double-dealing group whose best interests are their own. We shall see how effective the newbies will be in making LCSD a better school district as they had promised.
BN Editorial
That was fast.
Hardly six weeks after passing a new state budget that included important changes in the teacher evaluation system and aggressive deadlines for imposing them, the Assembly retreated en masse, voting 135-1 to slow it down.
Either Assembly members didn’t know what they were doing a few weeks ago or they have buckled under pressure from teachers unions. It is also possible, of course, that both are true.
A different bill, with similar intent, is moving through the Senate. If both chambers eventually pass identical bills with majorities anything close to the rout in the Assembly, the Legislature could override the veto that Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo would certainly provide.
It could be that the Assembly really does want only a short delay in implementation of the changes and, if so, it wouldn’t qualify as an unmitigated disaster. Unfortunately, that’s anything but certain, and there is plenty of reason to worry that the Assembly, which has lived happily in the pocket of teachers unions for decades, would be happy to see the whole thing go away.
The fact is that evaluations are important. It should go without saying that New Yorkers, who spend billions of dollars on education every year, have some right to know that their investment is producing results. It’s fundamental.
But the evaluation system hashed out during Cuomo’s first term in office was clearly ineffective, and easily manipulated. Something more accurate – and with a goal of helping teachers improve their performances, where needed – was required.
The Legislature did that, approving a measure that required the Board of Regents to create more stringent regulations by June 30, and giving school districts until this November to negotiate with their local teachers unions and implement the new system.
Then the Assembly blinked. Under unrelenting pressure from the teachers unions and facing deadline doubts by the Regents, it revised the timeline, giving the Regents until mid-November to create the new ratings and delaying implementation by school districts until November 2016, 12 months later than was demanded in the law passed just a few weeks ago. It may not be terrible, but it’s as suspicious as a turtleneck in August.
Now, New Yorkers have to see what the Senate does. If it passes a radically different version of this measure from the Assembly’s, nothing may come of it. Members of both chambers get a free vote that they can brag about to their union supporters.
But if the Senate and Assembly ultimately agree on a bill, each by a veto-proof majority, then New Yorkers will have to watch to ensure that there is no further backsliding by their representatives. The penalty could be too high.
It’s not that education is terrible in all parts of the state. Indeed, many districts – mainly suburban ones – do a fine job of teaching their students, and some have demonstrated, beyond any dispute, that implementing the Common Core is no impossible task.
But accountability must be required in all parts of the state, and in a way that allows valid and useful comparison. If Buffalo and Yonkers used different evaluation systems, there would be no way to know which is doing better and which needs to catch up.
And the purpose isn’t simply to get rid of bad teachers, though that should be the result for those who can’t do the job and also can’t improve. The goal is measurement in service of improvement. That fact too often goes ignored in the din of resistance to evaluations.
If legislators, Regents, school boards and unions would focus on hammering out a system that does that, there would be few people left to complain.
Comment
"It’s not that education is terrible in all parts of the state. Indeed, many districts – mainly suburban ones – do a fine job of teaching their students, and some have demonstrated, beyond any dispute, that implementing the Common Core is no impossible task." Sounds like Lancaster Central School District.
Reform?Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec
Try elimination of...
The destruction of CC has united Libertarians with Teacher's Unions; name another issue that can accomplish that.
Just for fun ask a number of people to describe CC and will get as many different answers.
CC is a pedagogical fad that will be a punch line years from now...
66% of opt-out candidates won their BOE elections.
CC will limp along until the $$$ disappears.
skoorbekim;1542427]So Christopher’s and Depcynski’s agenda is to eliminate Common Core (CC) in its entirety? And how do you think that can be accomplished on a district level?Reform?
Try elimination of...
CC has been around now for several years and the school district has significantly improved academically over that same period of time; how do you explain the disconnect?
Libertarians and unions in the same sentence, isn’t that oxymoronic? Is that really a good thing?The destruction of CC has united Libertarians with Teacher's Unions; name another issue that can accomplish that.
NYSUT loved Governor Cuomo and spent millions to put him in office twice. They loved him until that teacher evaluation accountability thing came along. Funny how for five years when Andy was cutting state aid LCSD lost $23 million in state aid NYSUT remained silent – or could it be they just flourished with the annual Triborough mandated, annual wage step increases of 3.2-3.5%; and where 90% of the budget spending increases came from staff wage and benefit increases.
So, what’s your point? Not everyone wants to eliminate CC.Just for fun ask a number of people to describe CC and will get as many different answers.
Time will tell. We have an inept, dysfunctional Governor and Legislature in place and as they both suck up to NYSUT anything is possible.CC is a pedagogical fad that will be a punch line years from now...
Hopefully they have more than one agenda item and are qualified to be on the BOE.66% of opt-out candidates won their BOE elections.
That's possible.CC will limp along until the $$$ disappears
Lee,
I'm an individualist not a collectivist...
I think CC is a scourge upon education.
Most people (polling wise) disapprove of CC,
Those who support it use the typical bromides in its defense.
The state is already blaming its pending failure on parents not being well informed enough [stupid].
To me it is fascinating that Libertarians, Conservatives, and NYSUT agree so vehemently on one issue.
My political senses tell me that if not completely eliminated, the name "Common Core" will be changed within three years.
(((PS, I could care less about Christopher and Depczynski - If they annoy me, they must go.)))
What component; curriculum, perceived excess state testing or teacher evaluation?CC is a scourge upon education…
I have posted numerous times that I see no problem with the curriculum. If it is has been established that too much time and effort is spent in the classroom teaching to the test and that takes away from creative teaching then the CC mantra ‘critical thinking’ is a misnomer; and Lancaster seems to have no problem adjusting the curriculum to meet proficiency.
As for the state testing rigor, do you believe parents are acting in the future best interest of their children when they let Johnny and Suzie opt out of anything stressful in life; especially testing that has no bearing on his or her final grade point average?
Where you revel in the fact that Libertarians, Conservatives and NYSUT agree so vehemently on one issue, I see NYSUT loving every bit of it as it serves their best interests and agenda above all. Some teachers encouraged parents and students to opt out of the testing to muddy the waters so the evaluation process would have no credibility. Do you believe a ‘good teacher’ would encourage such behavior?
While I read daily of children being murdered, sold into slavery and so malnourished that they die early in life, I find it difficult to understand how some parents can consider ‘sit and stare’ as cruel and unusual punishment.
Yes, the teacher evaluation process needs refining, but that should come from Albany and NYSUT, and is not possible on a local district level. The Legislature has already backed off and delayed the local agreement between school districts and their unions re teacher evaluation. The ball is now in Cuomo’s court; the man NYSUT contributed millions to put into office twice.
Yes, the Common Core name may change because it has become onerous to many, but the meat and potatoes will still be there.
I'm not reveling, I'm observing.
"Opt out" is a tactic I do not subscribe to; but if a parent wants to opt out, have at it.
You cannot standardize education when one child has a supportive home and the other is raised in cyclical depravity.
Forced uniformity hammers the successful...
The curriculum is weak; "text books" are pamphlets; conceptualizing 5 + 3 is psychobabble; Perry's Ice Cream paying for test inclusion is unsavory; (I could go on).
You might not realize it, but once again, you are on the same side of an issue as Governor Cuomo and the ruling class elitists...
Conversely, I will not support CC just because NYSUT is opposed...
the curriculum is weak, how exactly? compared to what? you realize that the most common curriculum complaint is the OPPOSITE of yours, right? (developmentally inappropriate, or too demanding). all text books are pamphlets? by all text book publishers, in all subjects? when did this start?
some the problems I have are:
- the amount of testing required to know how well 8 year old kids can read, write and do math is absurd
- the amount of money wasted created, reviewing, measuring all of that testing
- i think there is validity to the amount rigidity, but i also think its overblown. its not like we had different textbooks, different tests, different expectations per student when we were kids
- kids getting placed in AIS classes based on a single test score
- the amount of emphasis on test scores for evaluation that cuomo was pushing for was out of line. i do support test scores over time as input into teacher evaluation though
these are all implementation problems though.
Do your kids bring home the Common Core workbooks?
Math book/pamphlet as example:
No examples provided to reference; jumping from on topic to the next, then back again a month later (graphs, distribution, averages one lesson, gone the next); instead of concentrated buildup, subjects dealt with sporadically...
Why my youngest son has to draw dots and squares when he already knows the answer is beyond me...
There are better ways to teach math.
a conceptual unproven pedagogy...
epistemological devolution...
i have lots of problems with work sheets that come home. my daughter went through younger grades before common core implementation was rolled out, my son afterwards. i can assure you that they were confusing and lacked examples both before and after.
The lack of examples drives me nuts because as a student I relied on them so much...
Common Core (CC) is the basis of education. We will always see the curriculum transcend throughout the years as each new President comes into power. We should already understand that. What is the ever changing issues that plague education/students/teachers/administration is the inability to maintain continuity. Every new President changes things without continuity. Always starting something different, at a huge cost without truly having the full understanding the impact this has on many levels. I believe education should change to reflect the times, technology and the socio-economics on how this impacts the "individual child."
Children still come home with worksheets, children still struggle and have struggled generationally just as children have excelled. We need to place some of the educational emphasis on the knowledge and understanding that teachers have and allow them to facilitate that change or at least have some autonomy on how education should evolve.
CC is an attempt to reinvent the wheel...
(10-8=2; no need to waste time "regrouping")
Government bureaucracies are spending a fortune on the collection of useless data.
It's pretty obvious that a fatherless immigrant child in the Bronx will learn at a slower pace...
There are six states doing fine without CC; that number will certainly grow.
If school districts want to go a different route, let them.
I view this on both sides of the coin. CC will always drain tax payer money because that is our reality. However, you pose a valid point based on socio-economics and its impact on the outcome (success/failure). Nothing will change unless we address those critical issues that plague our society.
Children do not learn at the same pace, we have now inclusion programs integrated into mainstream classrooms and this is where the next problem exists. We cannot put a square peg into a circle. To expect children to learn at the same time with the same intensity is unrealistic and will cause long term problems. What we need to think about is alternative learning styles/curriculum that meets the needs of the individual child. Create a special unit for language instruction, modify the curricula to meet the needs of our challenged students and offer technology programs that does not require the same graduate degree.
Most importantly, we need to not link teacher evaluations to the assessments, and we need to restructure how we evaluate and test.
Bravo -Shortstuff - Yes - what he said:
"Nothing will change unless we address those critical issues that plague our society.
Children do not learn at the same pace, we have now inclusion programs integrated into mainstream classrooms and this is where the next problem exists. We cannot put a square peg into a circle. To expect children to learn at the same time with the same intensity is unrealistic and will cause long term problems. What we need to think about is alternative learning styles/curriculum that meets the needs of the individual child. Create a special unit for language instruction, modify the curricula to meet the needs of our challenged students and offer technology programs that does not require the same graduate degree."
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
having 2 kids that have had i believe 4 inclusion classes between them, i believe this is done much better in the william street school than in the elementary schools. in william street, the classes remain together for PE, art, science, music, lunch, etc, but then separate for math and ELA for those students who are not at the same level. that seems like a good compromise to me. on the other hand, one of my kids had a 1st or second grade class where 4 kids had individual aids in the room all the time and i did not care for that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
