I received this communication from OSPI today where Superintendent Dorn answers the question about what we need to do to be competitive in the RttT grant process. In summary, he shares that the proposed legislation in Senate Bill 6696 gets us to the starting gate, but will not result in a winning proposal. He goes on to share his reasons that follow in the communication below.
What do we need to do to be competitive for Race to the Top?
I’ve been asked many times if Washington has a chance to acquire a federal Race to the Top grant. My best response is that Senate Bill 6696 will move us past the starting line but will not win the race.
There are good points to the bill. An evaluation system that divides teachers into four levels of effectiveness, instead of the current two, will better pinpoint both good teachers and poor teachers. Principals will receive similar four-level evaluations. Teachers will receive tenure after three years, instead of the current two years.
However, OSPI’s evaluation of RTTT criteria, and my discussions with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and other federal officials, indicate that we still fall short in a number of areas, such as:
*Our lack of truly independent charter schools. The 500-point scale on which grant applications are scored assigns 40 points for charter schools. Even with some innovative schools, such as the School of the Arts in Tacoma and Aviation High School in Des Moines, we likely will receive no more than 10 points. Other states that are more competitive for RTTT money are allowing the poorest performing 5 percent of schools to become charter schools or innovation zones.
*Our cumbersome process to remove poor teachers. Currently it takes too long to remove a poor teacher in Washington state. RTTT guidelines don’t assign a specific point value to the removal of poor teachers but include many categories for ensuring effective teachers.
*Our need to link data and teacher performance. To comply with RTTT guidelines, the bill needs stronger language that student achievement – how they perform on statewide and other tests, and how they might improve over time – be one of multiple measures of a teacher’s success. A total of 58 points are given in RTTT scoring for this category.
These are initiatives that President Obama wants, and they will make us more competitive for an RTTT grant. My staff and I are prepared to answer any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
Randy Dorn State Superintendent of Public Instruction
If this is the thinking of the person closest to the process why are we putting so much energy into passing this legislation? It certainly doesn’t make me want to put much time and energy into this proposal. Do the other members of the coalition that has formed to push this legislation have the same belief? From previous posts you know that I have questioned whether any of these changes will matter for our state, because they don’t go far enough to align with what I read as the intent of the grant. This statement goes a long way towards affirming my thinking. Again, we’ll know much more when we see who wins round 1 and what they did to achieve success.
If we will not be successful, why agree to adopt the Common Core Standards and the assessments that will follow? I must be getting a little too cynical in my old, old age, but this is starting to bother me.
You might also want to view on the OSPI site where Superintendent Dorn is asking the legislature to delay mathematics and science requirements for graduation. He will be testifying Tuesday before the House Education Committee. Do you agree?
3 comments:
I find it a little ironic that the state sets standards and so-called requirements, yet when students are achieving those standards the next best alternative is to continue postponing the effective date. Shouldn't we rather be looking at what we can do to reach the standards and prepare our students rather than putting these things on the back burner until students are meeting the standard?
That's just my two cents...
**when students AREN'T achieving**
I heard somewhere that we should always begin giving feedback with something positive, so before criticizing this mess, here it is: as a teacher, I actually agree that there needs to be reform in how teachers are evaluated and, if necessary, removed from the classroom. I love my job, but if I am actually hindering students from becoming better people and preventing them from achieving their potential, then I shouldn't be in the classroom trying to teach them.
That said, there are countless problems with evaluating teacher performance based on student achievement. We all know that there are, whether because of nature or nurture, are not high achievers. If we teachers are evaluated based on student achievement, how do we ensure an equal balance of the high- and low-achieving students? No doubt all teachers will fight for the right to teach honors and AP level courses, while no sane teacher would consent to teaching remedial or credit-retrieval classes. Doesn't this contradict the mission of RttT - to close the achievement gap and improve education for all students?
While there is certainly room for improvement in the way we evaluate teachers, I really can't see how this is the best solution to the problem.
Post a Comment