LWVeducation
Pinellas is taking on its failing schools. This blog reported on the Tampa Bay Times series on south Pinellas schools that had essentially been abandoned when federal desegregation regulations were lifted in 2007. I remember Judge Reynolds’ statement a week ago in the Citizens for Strong Schools case. He said he could not believe that the Florida DOE had not intervened when schools received an ‘F’ grade four years in a row.
The testimony and closing arguments have been made. Now both sides need to put their arguments in a particular format for the judge by April 25th. He then takes the arguments under consideration and will make a ruling. Win or lose, the decision is likely to be appealed.
When you listen to the two sides, a few points stand out:
The plaintiff completed its case today. The State’s attorneys said that the plantiff really had no case, and argued that the case should be dismissed. The judge did not agree. Calls for dismissal may be standard procedure in such trials, but it is a good way to not only see what the defense will argue and but also gives glimpses into what the judge is concerned about.
In spite of the mass rally by private school advocates in Tallahassee last January, the Florida Education Association and the League of Women Voters will have their day in court. The First District Court of Appeals will hear the case on May 10th.
Some arguments may include the following:
I loved the line in this Capital News story about the public education trial going on in Tallahassee right now. Susan Bowles was asked by the defense attorney if she had enough books in her classroom. She answered: “Yes, and guess who paid for them.”
Superintendent Vitti’s testimony was a straight forward account of the demographic makeup of the county schools. The district is 44% African American and 36% white and 11% Hispanic. Nearly half of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch (FRL). About 56% of FRL students were below grade level, and their graduation rate was 67%.
How the needs of students are met was the subject of his testimony. Are districts funded adequately to meet these needs?
I watched the trial yesterday and again this morning.
MONDAY
The witnesses yesterday spoke to the relative funding support for education in Florida vs. other states. While Florida’s funding is very low, the defendants argued that cost comparisons are not indicative of quality. They cited the Florida NAEP fourth grade reading scores that are slightly above the national average. What was not mentioned in the testimony is that about 12 states retain third graders based on their states’ assessment scores. Florida is one of those states. Thus, Florida’s fourth grade NAEP scores are likely to be elevated compared to other states. Florida retains approximately 20% of third graders. In addition, Florida has one of the highest percentage of students with tax credit scholarships whose scores are not included in the NAEP assessment. These FTC scholarships are need based and would include a high percentage of low scoring students from public schools.
The second witness discussed the academic deficiencies of homeless students. The percentage of homeless in Florida is increasing, and these students do less well than students from low income families who have homes.
TUESDAY
This morning, Professor Smith from UCF discussed the Florida DOE comparisons of traditional and charter schools. The DOE reported raw results in which charter students tended to score higher than traditional public school students. When scores were adjusted statistically for the percentages of free and reduced lunch and minority students, based on school scores, charter school students scored somewhat lower than public school students. This comparison also revealed that charter schools had relatively fewer students with FRL and minority status which accounts for the decrease in adjusted scores for charters. Bottom line, charter schools do not out perform traditional public schools.
I had to sign off when the cross examination began. More later
Many states are struggling with a fundamental choice in improving at risk schools. Do you help communities to band together to bring resources and talent to struggling schools or does the state take over these schools and ‘fix’ them by turning them over to charter management companies?
A manifesto appeared in support of a “new” approach to testing signed by a seemingly random list of educators and instructional materials developers. It is frankly a little bizarre. So, I looked up the federal grants they mention which support assessment. Now, I understand why this collection of people is trying to build support. It is the federal department of education’s response to the Common Core testing fiasco.
I am not really opposed to at least some testing, especially if it is used to help students and teachers improve instruction. When I used to be involved in testing, I was intrigued by the possibility of using technology for innovative learning–especially simulations and critical thinking. These end of year marathons for which our district began to prepare 4o days in advance are, however, something else.
This new vision puts an emphasis on individualized learning. Every student moves at his/her own pace. Computerized testing periodically provides feedback. This means cumulative data records must be kept on each child.
It troubles me. Children learn from each other. Teachers facilitate that learning. Computers are machines, not teachers. Yet, I want computers in the classrooms. I want children to have easy access to information, simulations, complex problems and alternative solutions.
We can’t be afraid of the unknown. We have to experiment–yes, even with our children. We cannot move blindly forward either. Technology is creating change all around us that we all recognize. Our phones are attached to us and too often control us. Their convenience is addictive but not necessarily productive. I am sitting here at 7:30 in the morning with my computer on my lap. I should be outside! Who is in control, me or the machine?
So here is the manifesto. We will be OK as long as we are watching, thinking and in control.
There is a better way than the test and punish approach to achieving equity in our educational system. School grades, student retention, student achievement gain scores for teacher evaluations have narrowed the curriculum and resulted in test driven instruction. They do not improve student achievement.
What are the alternatives? Many analysts report that solutions must be community based. Educational, economic, and social factors are intertwined. Improving schools takes the support of the entire community. How this can be accomplished is beginning to emerge.