Print
Category: Front Page News Front Page News
Published: 11 November 2015 11 November 2015

By Margaret Hopper

At the November 10 TEA Party meeting, Liz Blancett, Party officer, introduced Tony Egan, school board member and moderator of the evening's discussion. Egan, in turn, introduced Beth Lougee, Silver High Principal and Lon Streib, District Superintendent.

Egan explained that this open discussion resulted from a conversation he and Blancett had earlier,
asking what could be done about Common Core. He said he had concluded that not much could be done; CC had been implemented and it could only be changed at the national level. So they had framed the question to ask how CC had impacted Silver Schools and how they were dealing with it. He had asked others to join in the discussion, but at the last minute they had canceled, so the three were there.

Egan said they should start with information about Common Core. Streib picked that up, saying CC was the evolution of No Child Left Behind, (NCLB) implemented under President Bush. The plan was to standardize teaching across the 50 states so parents could know that a child in any state had been exposed to those standards. Governors of the states and their people had designed the standards. The design was to explain the steps taken as well as the answer, expecting people to think, to reason, what 2they were doing, how they did it and why; the process was as important as the answer, he said.

States having a hard time with AYP (Annual Yearly Progress), like New Mexico, took President Obama's offer to opt out of NCLB, but that required going into CC and the PARCC Test. When the
Governor and Secretary of Public Education of New Mexico did this, it brought consequences that schools are paying for now, some quite painful, resulting in the testing, the evaluations, the other agreements and standards forced on them as a result of these deals.

He said the standards are set, but not how they are taught, so there is some choice and the district takes
advantage of that. Silver is trying to pass on values, giving teachers what choices they can have, but there is no choice about the PARCC and the Standard Based Assessment (SBA) that the state gives for science.

Lougee said she was recalling conversations with some of her teachers who are well aware of the standards and benchmarks, but who also appreciate the flexibility that does exist, allows them some freedom. These teachers say the biggest change at Silver High is that students are reading and writing more. History teachers have said they are still teaching history, but at a deeper, conversational level with deeper questions, too.

There is more quality conversation between students and teachers, which the students seem to enjoy. Lesson plans, objectives, are more obvious. It's a lot of work for the daily lesson, but teachers feel good about that; they are teaching better, she said. And that central, lead question is answered by the students, somehow; orally, written, some way. The testing is mandated, but teachers take the attitude that they will not see students fail; they can teach broadly but they must also teach for that eventual testing. They are teaching from every angle.

Egan asked if teachers felt “hamstrung” for having to teach for the PARCC. Lougee said they liked the deeper level of instruction, but would like to avoid much of the mandated testing. That does take time away from the quality teaching they enjoy doing. Streib added that in 36 weeks of school instruction, about six weeks of that is required to meet the needs of this mandated testing, coming at prescribed times rather than when kids are ready. Motivation could be increased if kids could “bank” a really good score to be used a year or two later. That freedom is not yet in place.

He said elementary kids work harder for the tests than at high school, as the rewards, the perks mean more to them at that level. He mentioned that a “play day or popcorn” meant more to them than such things would to a sophomore or a junior. Rewards that might attract older students might be reduced college tuition or college credits, he thought. More freedom to motivate kids would help. Even the freedom to choose when to assess them would help. But the State mandates the timing, and schools are stuck with it.

One question came about types of testing. Egan said they were able to do some testing when kids were ready, but the mandated tests were different. Streib said: “a blank stare can be an assessment of some sort. Then, a teacher has to present the idea in a different way. That happens daily." Presenting
certain facts in isolation still goes on, but with CC, the logic and analysis, written out as a paragraph, shows a major difference in how the answer is assessed. The answer alone is not enough. The higher level thinking is required in CC, now.

Lougee spoke of the simple testing of the past and how CC and NCLB both differed, in the analysis of thinking the question through, as well as answering the question. Egan added that where decisions were made like once a year on how to plan for a student, now it is ongoing and continual. Streib finished the question, saying, on any test, how fast the feedback returns so teachers can use the resulting information is a critical factor. A test can be nearly worthless if what it tests cannot be used.

That is a major frustration with the PARCC, presently, he said. The district wants test information early in the school year, so it can use it to help the kids. Long delays make test information useless. They need that for the benefit of kids, parents, teacher planning, the whole spectrum. The PARCC is still not being used well, many months after taking it. What teachers do and learn daily is much more valuable. The district is bound to give the test, but the teachers have to work around it.

And The PARCC was supposed to be used in teacher evaluations. With the time lapse, it is useless. He said the district told the state it wouldn't use the PARCC in evaluations. Silver might yet get slapped for that, he said.

Egan said he saw the CC as “a one formula fits all." Lougee said CC could bring out some important points, but Silver High was not settling for that. It included other ideas, such as figuring how to add Shakespeare and make it fit the standards. It was more work, but teachers believed in it, and she supported them in their adjustments. History teachers add things CC doesn't consider.

One question asked about students who needed special help. Streib spoke of physical, mental and other needs, saying there were unequal treatments for those who were unequal. These helps took longer, cost more, but gave more people a chance to be what they could be. There were modifications and accommodations; they helped.

Lougee said all students had different strengths, and these interventions made teachers more aware of these hands-on or auditory or other methods of learning. One style of teaching, such as lecturing, can't reach all students. More variety, such as models as well as reports are showing up in presentations. Writing alone fails to assess what students have learned; evaluations now include more variety.

Egan said he had been “labeled” and marginalized in school because he couldn't do well with the few evaluative tools allowed; they restricted him. Lately he has seen how much more teachers are allowing in the process, that opens more ways for students to communicate or prove that they have learned and aren't as limited as was once supposed.

Streib called it “differentiated instruction," and spoke of a number of strategies involved in teaching reading, alone. Students become more aware of stated goals and processes, are shown not only standards to reach, but models of excellence to strive for. Data-driven cutoffs send them back to work on stronger basic skills before weak foundations undermine their future progress; important tools.

At that point, Egan pointed to the time and a number of question-cards that needed attention if they
were to finish anywhere on time. Lougee picked a card asking about the relationship between the board, the state and CC, and the funding that accompanies it. Egan said he could speak only for himself, not the board, but with federal money come the rules, and he'd like to get away from the regulations, but by depending on the money, one has to live “with the devil (he) has."

Streib said the PARCC is tremendously expensive, but it is mandated. New Mexico hasn't much revenue; it depends on federal funds. Would he like to withdraw? Yes! If there was enough money to run the school. Egan said even if they could “opt-out," government still had to be considered. “You're still hooked to the beast!”

Regarding curriculum and how CC affected it, Streib said science, engineering and math were stressed; a lot of arts and humanities had been dropped. There is no funding for it. Egan said the district had worked hard to keep these things where possible, but they faced an uncertain future, with budget cuts.

Question: as tests are mandated, how can they be scheduled differently? Lougee said the teachers have assessed and adjusted as much as possible for the students' benefits, but the times are mandated, too. To prevent student burnout and avoid poor procedures, they have worked very hard. Banking the good scores can reduce some of the future testing, and students and parents appreciate that. On some tests (Discovery) feedback on scores can be the next day and results go into the next lessons. It all helps.

Who scores the PARCC? Streib said Pearson controls that; the school has no say. Bill Hudson wanted to go deeper on the answer, saying rules allowed some to be a part of the process who weren't truly qualified. Streib and Egan agreed, but said there were things in place to limit this.

On the freedom to motivate, Streib said there were several association-groups, for principals, board members, superintendents and others. They lobby for consideration; sometimes they make progress, sometimes they don't. But they don't quit trying.

How is the school evaluated as far as compliance with CC? The percentage of students taking the test, the teachers evaluations, and in future years, how the school compares with other schools in the state. Streib said the sticker-part is that teachers' evaluations should not be tied to student evaluations. It puts stress on teachers of slower classes to raise their performances. It opens the door for dishonest practices when such improvements are not likely. Rating the improvement of a student from his past work might be OK, but not this way.

He further said that the secretary of public education, Skandera, has the power to remove a teacher's license, even the licenses of principals and the superintendent, if she thinks they should have done better. That's a lot of power, based on tests that have not been normed or referenced.

Lougee said selecting CC compliant textbooks is not an easy task. Also, helping kids explain the process of problem solving takes work, too. Egan noted that many people are heavily focused on CC when they should pay more attention to implementation, how to make it happen. He thought Silver had some good texts that worked well and they weren't necessarily new style books. But they worked.

Lougee said she hoped to give a truer perception of how testing is done at Silver. People look at the PARCC and its relationship to graduation. It is more than PARCC: the End of Course exams count, too. The state seems to think the mandated tests help the kids, but, she said, there are other ways. Some can't pass the PARCC. Test-banking can help remove part of that stress. Yes, they have to take the PARCC twice before these other options can be used. After that, these “alternate demonstrations of competence” can be used.

They can pick up scores from the SAT or other tests, and by pulling enough successes from things other than the PARCC, they can prove that these kids have achieved enough to graduate. When kids hear all the talk about the PARCC and things they can't master, it makes the work of teachers harder to keep the kids focused on what they can do to graduate, and they already work very hard to make it happen. She and others have to work harder to remind kids and parents that this support-system is in place and it works. The excessive controversy doesn't help kids, Lougee said.

Concluding, Streib said it was good to be able to talk; the door was open for community. The daily teaching is the district's finest work. The responsibility is heavy, but watching little guys become big guys who eventually start doing things is rewarding. Egan thanked those who attended and said if they want to do more, try giving 45 minutes a week to read to kids at the elementary schools; they could change lives. He'd like to see 500 people try that.

Streib commented that local people knew local needs best; the farther away from home it gets, the less they know about what is needed, so fight for local control.