A Letter to Faculty on Common Core

I want to take this opportunity to address an issue that has caused anxiety to our teachers and school community this year, the Common Core.  This has been particularly an issue with math as teachers have worked to adopt the new modules which have not been fully released by the SED.  We have heard from many teachers and parents about how difficult this new transition has been given the level of math expected of our students and the method of instruction within the lessons provided by the SED.  You are not alone.  

This past week I spoke to our regional superintendents and like NNCS their schools have mostly adopted the math modules with similar concerns raised.  I also spoke with many around New York State and the issues of excessive copying, time spent on lesson prep and delivery, student homework, and the prescriptive nature of the lessons were expressed again and again.  These issues were also addressed with the Commissioner.  So what can we do?

Though we wish the Commissioner had provided another year to prepare for the implementation of the Common Core, he did not. That we cannot change and it is unlikely that anything will be rolled back to provide the additional time.  The Common Core is here to stay as it is with the other 45 states in the country which have adopted these higher standards.  As a whole student achievement needs to be raised to better prepare the next generation for a successful life and the Common Core has been chosen as the vehicle to get there.  However, we can find ways to work within the curriculum to provide high quality instruction without taking out the gifts each teacher brings to the classroom.

Though like most districts, NNCS has adopted the Common Core math modules it does not mean the teacher has to rotely follow every word of the documents.  We expect that teachers will infuse their own personality, creativity, and supplements to bring these lessons to life; while maintaining the integrity of the lesson components.  Many teachers have already begun to do so as they have become more comfortable with the curriculum.  They have also modified the homework assignments to provide students and their parents with a better understanding of what is expected given the lack of a textbook or other materials which would explain the nature of the work.

On the parent front, I would encourage you to share the resources from the parent section of EngageNY and the PTA website (http://pta.org/parents/content.cfm?ItemNumber=2910).  Any additional suggestions from our teaching staff to assist our parents in understanding would be greatly appreciated.  

I know that people are stressed.  I want all to know that we are in this together and teachers can only do the best they can as we get through this transition period.  There are no easy answers and it is clear that even the SED cannot predict everything that will come up as this reform of historic proportions is implemented.  We have an excellent teaching staff at NNCS and I have great confidence that with time we will work our way through these issues.  We stand ready to support your efforts.   

Jamie

Great Start

Schools are not buildings, curriculums, and machines. Schools are relationships and interactions among people.  (Johnson & Johnson, 1989)

Did you know that I love the beginning of school?  Honestly, my anticipation has prevented me for years from sleeping through the night before the first day of school.  The smells of floor wax, new sneakers, fresh pencils and, of course, the familiar smiles are emotional signposts in my mind.  This summer I missed having school in session.  This is not to say I don’t love my summer vacation, I’m just really happy that school has begun. 

I can tell that many of you are glad to be here, too.  Your energy, passion, and excitement is palpable.  Students were met at the classroom door with greetings and salutations.  The atmosphere was very pleasant.  The children loved their first day of school.  I also have learned that many of you had made calls home before the children even left the building on Thursday.  It goes without saying how appreciative our parents are for this simple act.  You welcomed these nervous and anxious parents into the Norwood-Norfolk family.  Well done!

Building positive relationships with our students and parents is essential to our mission as educators.  I have previously participated in Twitter chats (@CruikshankJamie) with parents and educators on this topic and the consensus was always overwhelming.  Schools that make relationship-building a priority excel in almost all areas.  The results have been touted, shown, and discussed during these chats.  Your small gestures to children and their families forms the foundation for success.  We can build a strong structure on a good foundation.

While we continue to stress relationship-building with our students and parents, I’d also like to encourage you to search for opportunities to practice the 100/0 principle with colleagues, co-workers, and family.  I’m confident that it will improve all relational situations.  

Good luck with this school year.  You’re off to a wonderful beginning.  

Be the light!

Take a Closer Look

Over the past few weeks, I have seen a lot of our NYS Education Commissioner King and Deputy Commissioner Slentz.  Their message has effectively prepared us for the devastating outcomes associated with the 2012-13 state assessments in ELA and mathematics.  As the date for the release of the scores approached, we received many “talking points” to inform our boards, communities, and teachers about the outcomes with explanations of new baselines and how these exams should not be viewed as a reflection on the efforts of students and teachers this year.  Their message, while well-intentioned considering their perspective, seems self-serving and insulting.

The highly trained educators, caring and thoughtful parents, and diligent board of education members across our state are intuitive enough to call this message to question.  How were we really supposed to prepare our students for a newly designed exam – based on a new curriculum – which hadn’t been fully developed in NYS?  To date, NYS has still not disseminated all the curricular documents that our students were tested on last April.  These scores do not represent a new baseline.  They represent the bottom-line.  In the coming months and years, as the state catches up with their own schedule to assist teachers with the necessary curricular items, we will begin to implement a new and robust curriculum. 

In quoting the blog of respected Superintendent Dr. Teresa Thayer Snyder of the Voorheesville Central School District, “If you establish a baseline this low, the subsequent growth over the next few years will indicate that your plans for elevating the outcomes were necessary.  However, it must be recognized that the test developers control the scaled scores—indeed they have developed a draconian statistical formula that is elaborate, if indecipherable, to determine scaled scores.  I would bet my house on the fact that over the next few years, scores will “improve”—not necessarily student learning, but scores.  They must, because the State accepted millions and millions of dollars to increase student scores and increase graduation rates.  If scores do not improve from this baseline, then those ‘powers that be’ will have a lot of explaining to do to justify having accepted those millions.”  This façade was created by designing and executing exams based on a curriculum which hasn't been implemented.  Of course the student scores will increase when the teachers have an adequate opportunity to teach. 

The recently released “talking points” were a necessity to cover the unsuccessful attempt to properly implement new curriculum, not to mention the premature expectation of DDI and APPR requirements based on this curriculum.  Wouldn’t it have made more sense to finish the curriculum, allow teachers and students ample time to familiarize themselves with that curriculum and then hold them accountable for the content (Common Core…then DDI based on CCLS’s…then APPR)?  Considering this barrage of new initiatives, not one of them has a chance of being implemented as effectively as it could have been, had NYSED slowed itself down to realistically consider the perspectives of those who would be directly affected.  In doing so, our educational leaders in NY would have gained tremendous support and respect from the professionals they are entrusted to guide.  Unfortunately, the opposite is true.  NYSED’s ultimate goal of improving student preparedness for successfully navigating this ever-changing world is, indeed, commendable; and I fully support the preparation of students who are college and career ready.  However, their implementation tactics are questionable.

As described in Dr. Snyder’s blog, when we examine the distribution of student scores, there will be a distinct gap between the scores of children of poverty vs. children who live above the poverty line.  While all have been relegated to a point 30 to 40 percent lower than previous years, the exact curve is absolutely connected to socioeconomic status – which has been historically true in such testing from recent memory.  I would suggest the state should have taken the money used to give these recent exams and place it in programs which assist our neediest families with resources to connect them to the school community.  This cost would not have been slight, considering the price NYS paid to Pearson to create, print, ship (2 ways), analyze, and ultimately – shred, the math and ELA exams, which were unreasonably given to students in grades 3-8.  The programs which we could have implemented to assist in developing positive relationships with our families would have paid NYS back ten-fold and narrowed the performance gap previously demonstrated by students in poverty.

The part of this story which remains mostly untold is the effect on our children.  In a previous Blog post I reflect on the effects which are felt by all.  We will now need to talk with parents and children who previously scored 4’s, only now to be told that they are not considered as good as they thought they were – all because of a manipulation of the scaling of their scores.  We will build up our at-risk and underperforming children who were just told by NYS that they aren’t simply below proficiency, but rather, essentially non-learners.  Children are the unwitting pawns in a massive scheme to prove how these “high standards” are improving outcomes over time. 

As we analyze the information and designate resources to improve instruction, please be assured Norwood-Norfolk Central School remains committed to our Mission Statement, which is to prepare all students to be successful in the 21^st Century by engaging them in challenging learning environments that meet the highest academic, social and ethical standards. Students will be empowered to achieve their full potential as creative, purposeful lifelong learners, who strive for academic success, responsible citizenship and well-being in a collaborative, diverse and dynamic learning community.