ACT: The Time is Now

There is a growing movement in Oklahoma to change how we assess student achievement.  For years, many educators, including myself, have worked diligently to persuade our Senators and Representatives to move to the ACT and ACT Aspire as a better option over the current End of Instruction Exams and their 3-8 counterpart, the OCCT.  Yesterday, ROPE (Restore Oklahoma’s Public Education) wrote a blog opposing this movement.  I have a lot of respect for ROPE and the work they do educating parents about Oklahoma’s education policies and their blog does an excellent job of stating why they oppose the movement toward the ACT suite of assessments.  However, I felt compelled to share with #oklaed why moving to the ACT is the very best option for Oklahoma students if we are to maintain a high stakes testing culture in Oklahoma. 

In ROPE’s blog, they outlined 2 major reasons why Oklahoma shouldn’t move to the ACT (Yes, Mr. Hime I know you are not supposed to write a rebuttal blog, but I couldn’t help myself):  1) The ACT is aligned to Common Core and 2) Oklahoma needs to maintain its sovereignty over test questions and state academic standards. Noble goals, but both needs to be clarified.  First, the ACT test is standardized (meaning all students answers the same questions), criterion referenced (meaning its questions measure student knowledge against a specific learning target), and norm referenced (meaning it compares student answers to students from around the nation). ROPE would have you believe the ACT is aligned to Common Core.  Actually, the ACT is aligned to the College and Career Readiness standards.  CCR standards are nationally recognized academic learning targets American high school students should know if they are to be successful post-secondary education.  This is the very same goal of Oklahoma’s public education system: College and Career Readiness. Recently, the Oklahoma Regents of Higher Education certified that PASS standards were aligned to College and Career Readiness Standards.  We should not claim PASS, ACT, and Common Core are the same thing just because they are all aligned to a minimum set of knowledge standards we want all high school students to know when they graduate.

The idea that Oklahoma should maintain sovereignty over its standards is right on the mark.  Oklahoma teachers should have autonomy over the learning activities in their classrooms.  Oklahoma teachers should work together to develop rigorous standards for Oklahoma children.  No one is denying the necessity for sovereignty over standards.  However, there are only a few companies which are proficient in writing, developing, and administering assessments to measure Oklahoma student achievement.  ROPE mentioned the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and the Stanford Achievement Tests as viable options.  YES, they both are standardized, norm referenced tests.  YES, both are not aligned to CCR or Common Core.  And YES, neither are developed by Oklahoma teachers nor controlled by Oklahoma standards.  And YES, neither are used for college admission.  Isn’t the purpose of our testing reform movement to find an assessment that has practical application to our students?  The ACT is the basic test used for college entrance.  Using the ITBS or the Stanford 10 would be just like the EOI – providing us information about student achievement (after the fact mind you) but not having any validity toward post-secondary life.   

The ACT and its ACT Aspire tests would provide Oklahoma teachers a comprehensive assessment program to provide formative data from grade 3 through graduation.  The test would satisfy college entrance requirements for those students who wish to seek a college education.  The work keys aspect of the ACT suite of exams would provide our business and industry organizations with vital information about a student’s ability to go to work.  Both of those are key components to Gov. Fallin’s goals of increasing more college degrees and career tech certifications.  It only makes sense we use a test aligned to Oklahoma’s College and Career Ready goals.  It only makes sense we use a test which is more cost effective (putting more educational dollars back into the classroom).  It only makes sense we minimize the time needed for testing (thus maximizing instructional time).  It only makes sense we use an assessment which benefits our students in the pursuit of their post high school goals.  The ACT is the right assessment to meet all these goals.  Join the movement.  Make Oklahoma education better for ALL our students.    

The Slogan War

I know it has been some time since my last blog and I hope you will forgive my absence from the blogosphere.  I’ve been a little busy, but mostly I’ve been just trying to keep my head down and my mouth shut (I have the right to remain silent, but not the ability).  Furthermore, with bloggers like my friends Claudia Swisher, Rick Cobb (formerly OKeducationtruths), Rob Miller, Brett Dickerson, and Blue Cereal banging away at the keyboard all the really good topics where completely covered.  That was until today.  I, and a bunch of other first year superintendents, attended the State Board of Education meeting fulfilling a requirement in what Dr. Ann Caine of Stillwater calls Superintendent’s Kindergarten.  I didn’t know what to expect; I didn’t think it would be as contentious as it was four years ago, but I also didn’t know it would go so smoothly.  My friends….. what a difference leadership makes.

I have said all along that Oklahoma public education has been losing a slogan war.  The anti-public education crowd has had us playing defense for the better part of my 17 year career.  It started with “All kids can learn” and then morphed to “No Child Left Behind”.  From there we have heard politicians bloviate with “hold our schools accountable” so that now they claim without fear from reprisal that “our schools are failing”.  The school choice people have now started referring to public schools as “government schools” instead of public schools.  Why?  Because it is a better slogan and allows them to refer to public schools as “monopoly schools”. Some even go to calling us “drop out factories”.    For far too long, Oklahoma public education officials have played defense in the slogan war.  But our silence has stopped as Supt. Hofmeister openly embraced social media with her #OKhigh5 slogan. Declaring once and for all that every Oklahoma child deserves to have the very best education provided by the very best educators. #OKhigh5 calls for the end of the shortest educational calendar in the region and shines a spotlight on the more than 500 classrooms with an emergency certified teacher …..what a difference leadership makes.

I refer to this onslaught of words as the slogan war because its sole purpose is to destroy public schools and not to help the children of Oklahoma.  It is a carefully crafted money grab.  I firmly believe that the majority of education reformers are less interested in helping your child get a better education and more interested in helping their child get a cheaper education.  But I honestly believe the tide is changing.  Oklahoma now has a leader….an advocate for ALL of Oklahoma’s children.  Supt. Hofmeister has always held firm to the Oklahoma conservative belief that parents not only have the right, but an obligation to make a quality educational choice for their child.  The difference here is that she doesn’t think you have to destroy one to make the other better.  What a difference leadership makes.        

The New AMERICAN way

We live in a time when it is perfectly acceptable to shape the news instead of simply report it.  I know the realities of the time in which we live; talking heads and entire staffs of "think tanks" operating with an agenda.  My problem is not with the media, the think tanks, or the "staff" editorials which seem to be all the rage in the information age, but with today's consumers of information.  As consumers we have gotten so wrapped up in this "fast food" world of neatly packaged, instantaneous information we don't even recognize that our ability to decide for ourselves has been stolen from us - we don't even get to think about what we are being told because think tanks, talking heads, and editorial staffs are there to tell us how we should feel or what we should think.  Here are some examples and my thoughts on some recent events in Oklahoma.

• Sexual Assault Protest at Norman - The Oklahoma media reported this story as if a Norman High School student was going around assaulting girls in the hallways and then his friends were harassing the girl for going to the police to report the crime.  Never mind the incident happened during the summer and the school took every action allowed to them by law in removing the alleged rapist from attending school.  The media formed the story to make it look like the school was turning a blind eye to the safety and security of female students instead of reporting the delay in prosecution within our legal system or the limits the law places on schools when these situations arrive.  
• Superintendent elect Joy Hofmeister's education survey - The Daily Oklahoman editorial staff slams Hofmeister for seeking input on educational issues. This just shows how far education and teachers have fallen from grace in today's society.  If you want to fix a bridge, shouldn't you seek input from bridge builders? If you want to design a better airplane, shouldn't you seek input from pilots, aerospace engineers, and people who travel on airplanes?  If you want to improve education, you would think it would reasonable to talk to teachers, counselors, principals, parents, and STUDENTS. Apparently not. The DOK just trashed the effort based solely on the fact teachers were included in the survey.  The DOK hates teachers and educators so much it tries to convince its readership the people who know education the best can't be trusted to be included in the planning of better education.  If you wanted a legit criticism of the survey, it would be the limited number of student responses. In Oklahoma we have internet and computer labs in every school in the state; why didn't schools take 10 minutes out of the day to allow students an opportunity to respond? I'm guilty too.  If Mrs. Hofmeister wants to open up her survey again, I think every student should get to answer it.  I promise the students in my school will.
• The think tank OCPA decries the education spending policy in Oklahoma.  OCPA, a conservative think tank, uses an effective infographic to convince its members of all the fraud and tax money waste going on in public schools.  They use the Federal, state, and local average of dollars per pupil spent ($8494) to grossly exaggerate the money not being spent in the classroom.  If you believe their example, students in Oklahoma must be taught in an open field without a building, heat, light, books, desks, chairs, paper, libraries, cafeteria, food, or a bus since the OCPA didn't calculate any money for these necessities.  Because the OCPA uses Federal money, I hope none of the students in their example have a learning disability, is gifted, has any parents, needs to talk to a counselor, or wants to eat anything while they are at school.  Because the OCPA uses state monies, the open field must have Wi-Fi so the kids can take state required exams on their personal computers because the OCPA didn't calculate any money for that.  Not to mention the requirements for RSA Reading, Art, Physical Education, and Foreign Language.  So if you believe the OCPA numbers to be accurate, we have a group of students who live close enough to a public park where they walk to school every day carrying their breakfast and lunch in a backpack with their laptop computer.  Their classroom teacher is a Special Education teacher who is highly qualified in Reading, Math, Science, Social Studies, Foreign Language, Physical Education, Gifted Education, and Art.  Furthermore, the teacher must be the counselor, test coordinator, and be responsible for all the paperwork required of both the Feds and the State of Oklahoma.  

To be fair, pro education organizations can be just as guilty.  OEA zealously advocates for all teachers, even those who need to find another profession.  The Huffington Post, CCOSA, OSSBA, OKpolicy.org, and others use information that is beneficial to them and their specific cause.  However, most of the time these groups do not over sensationalize the story to try to sell you on a point of view.  Do we need to improve education? Yes. Do we need to look at ways to eliminate waste in our schools? Yes.  Should we reduce the number of schools in Oklahoma, increase the number of days taught, should we get more money into our classrooms, and do we need to look at the factors causing a teacher shortage in our great state? These are serious questions educational stakeholders will have to decide.  Wouldn't it be in the best interest of the students if the consumers of education policy actually took the time to gather all the facts and decide for themselves?  Our future depends upon it.

Purpose: We don't need no stinking Purpose

Efforts and courage are not enough without purpose and direction.

John F. Kennedy

JFK could spin a phrase. I love this quote because I believe education has lost its purpose.  Maybe lost is not the best way to describe it.  Maybe education hasn't actually lost its purpose in so much as we have been given multiple, conflicting purposes.  I think the plethora of educational purposes are at the root of today's problems.  Is our purpose to prepare every student for college? Their Career? To become a good Citizen?  Is our purpose to get kids to pass tests and graduate high school?  Is common education's purpose to produce a suitable workforce for Oklahoma's industries? Is the school's purpose to teach students good manners, good character, and other necessary social skills?  If you said yes to each purpose, then you are right in line with the College, Career, Citizenship BS being shoveled by politicians trying to appease everyone while accomplishing nothing. 

Let me ask you C3 believers a question: How do we accomplish all 3 when all the punitive aspects of education are centered around test scores?  Every reform aimed at making schools better has been concocted straight out of the "lets get more kids to pass standardized tests" point of view.  TLE was created to give teachers and principals a grade on how well their students do on tests.  A-F comparability was created to let parents and businesses know how well the students do on standardized tests.  Kids have to pass 4 out of 7 standardized tests to graduate high school, so therefore graduation rates are just an indication of how many students can pass tests.  You think a teacher who might be fired at the end of the year because of their TLE score is going to take a day away from instruction to teach students about any of the mandated "citizenship" lessons? How many music programs, field trips, science experiments, class projects, and other valuable learning activities have been cancelled or made to wait until "after testing" all in the name of increasing test scores?

It is no secret Oklahoma public education is at a crossroads.  Academic achievement, as measured by standardized tests, has plateaued. Students are unhappy.  Teachers are unhappy.  Parents and other educational stakeholders are unhappy.  All this unhappiness has led to stagnation in the system; students are not motivated, teachers are leaving the profession faster than they can be replaced, and parents are searching for the right fit for their children. Adding to the stagnation are a series of reforms which are meant to "jolt" the system, but which is actually perpetuating the problem.  Education is being pulled in multiple directions by multiple groups of stakeholders.  How can we improve the system when we are spending all our time fighting with each other?  How can we improve student experiences when we focus so much on passing a test and not the understanding of the material?  How can we expect our best teachers to stay in the profession when all that seems to matter is the passing rate on the end of the year test?  How can we expect parents to understand that a 70% passing rate school might be a better school than an 80% passing rate school?  

 College, Career, and Citizen ready is a worthy and lofty purpose for our teachers.  I think it is a purpose worth our courage and effort.  But if we want to improve education in this state, we have to stop talking about one purpose while passing legislation that creates another.  Efforts and courage are not enough without purpose and direction. If Oklahoma wants to be a great education state, we must focus our efforts and courage toward a purpose that is not bound by the number of students who pass a test.

Accountability vs. Comparability: Its a big difference

There it was in all its glory.  Beaming with pride and begging for someone to take up the challenge.  As a matter of fact, I was beginning to think it was a set up; a trap placed on twitter by the ed reformists trying to bait an unsuspecting educator into a war of words.  For those who don't know me personally, I have never been short of words.  In my family, those who use 5 words instead of 50 to answer a question simply aren't trying hard enough.  But I digress..... The bait, the trap, the question was "Can schools be held accountable without standardized testing?" Challenge accepted!

If my keyboard could scream, it would have as I typed "High Stakes, Standardized testing isn't accountability, it is comparability."  Schools are held accountable everyday of the year without the need for a standardized test.  Does anyone believe there is a shortage of mad mommas waiting outside the principal's office?  Parents avail themselves of their right to conference with teachers, administrators, and make phone calls to board members everyday.  I call that local accountability.  Almost every school has an online grade book where parents and students can see in near real time the "grades" and assignments being used to assess learning.  I call that academic accountability.  On almost every board meeting agenda is an item giving visitors a chance to address the board of education during a public comments period.  I call that stakeholder accountability.  Multiple times per year a State Department of Education Regional Accreditation Officer sits in my office and interviews our staff regarding our accreditation compliance.  Their checklist has gotten so long, it now takes up the front and back of 6 pages.  I call that organizational accountability.  Every year the board of education hires an expensive accounting firm to comb thoroughly through the financial records of the school and report such findings to the board of education, the State Department of Education, and the Oklahoma State Auditor's office.  I call that financial accountability.  If schools are held "accountable" to the parents on a daily basis, the community on a monthly basis, the SDE and State Auditor on a yearly basis, HOW ARE SCHOOLS NOT ACCOUNTABLE WITH OR WITHOUT YOUR STUPID TEST!

The answer was not shocking.  I didn't expect the argument to work because high stakes standardized testing has never been about accountability.  The ed reformists views what they call "government schools" through tinted glasses. The lens through which they view public schools is clouded in either mistrust of educators or through the greed of potential profits.  It is not hard to tell from which paradigm they are making their argument if you know their basic vocabulary.  Mistrust of teachers reformists want to talk about accountability systems such as A-F grading, Value Added Measures, or other statistically manufactured data as a way to COMPARE one school/teacher/student to another.  That is why everything has to be measured and reported has a single metric..... so they can COMPARE one outcome to another.  Greed driven reformists use manufactured COMPARISON to convince people schools are failing and there needs to be some "product" introduced into the school which will help get them back on track.  They like to use the phrase "return on investment" to persuade stakeholders to one of two profitable decisions..... The school needs to purchase "test prep" or other "curriculum" from them to be better at the outcome or the state needs to allow more taxpayer funded school choice.  

Standardized tests are just the "product" being purchased by schools to satisfy the ed reformists greed.  Standardized tests are the means to an end which the "mistrust of educators" crowd uses to invent bad teachers and identify schools who need to do better.  This entire accountability reform agenda has never been about making sure Alex Public Schools teaches math or reading.  The whole accountability craze has never been about "seeing the academic growth" of students in reading and math.  The accountability movement is a cleverly disguised ruse to compare my school to your school.  They want to perpetuate the myth that public schools are failing.  They want what they want, and it has nothing to do with accountability.

Hanta Yo

Hanta Yo! It's the Sioux phrase which can be roughly translated into "Lead the Way".  Essentially, Hanta Yo is a meditative state of mind in which one calls on a higher power to provide them with the strength, faith, energy, ability, etc to accomplish what is necessary, but difficult or nearly impossible to accomplish on one's own.  Hanta Yo is fitting for Oklahoma's Public Education; our task is difficult and to accomplish what we think is best for students, we need all the guidance, energy, focus, ability, and faith we can get.  

Earlier this week, Kevin Hime of Clinton Public Schools wrote an excellent blog about the upcoming legislative session.  If you haven't read it yet, you can read it here. Although, Kevin doesn't come right out and say it, he is telling us stop being reactive to the Republican legislative agenda and start LEADING Oklahoma education policy.  Educators can LEAD us toward better ed policy by working with the Republican legislators to create policy educators know works best for students.  Think this is impossible - it is exactly what we did for the right to local control on the 3rd grade retention law.  Think that was a one time event? Not even close.  Last January I sat and watched a panel of legislators tell a room full of administrators they couldn't even consider ACT and its battery of assessments as a possible upgrade to the End of Instruction catastrophe we have now.  Last month, Senator Ford stated publicly he was open to legislation removing EOIs in favor of the ACT and Aspire to measure academic achievement.  

Is this ideal?  No. Does this end the terrible reign of over testing?  Not even close.  However, it does remove the policy of using a worthless test, and, at a minimum, gives our students the chance to take a test colleges actually look at when making college acceptance decisions.  Should we accept this policy as an end result?  No, but it is a step in the right direction for our students.  And it all came to fruition because educators decided the cause was more important than ideology.  

Let's consider the RSA law for a moment.  Remember Gov. Fallin and Dr. Barresi worked the vote hard to override the local control of parents and schools to make decisions regarding student grade placement.  The override failed.  Children and parents won.  How? Because parents, teachers, and administrators worked with the Republican majority to author a bill that was beneficial to #OKlaED AND could be supported by Republicans in the legislature.

Hanta Yo! Lead the Way!  Educators need to stop being ideologues and accept guidance from our association directors so that we can move education forward.  As educators we should pray for the strength, energy, ability, and perseverance to make Oklahoma public education better one policy at a time.  We should educate ourselves as to what is possible and what is a pipe dream; we should start with acknowledging what is mandated by SDE rules, Oklahoma legislation, and what is required of us through the federal law.  We should not waste precious energy and political capitol trying to change what is not within our state's power to change.  Thus, we can't end testing, and we can't rid ourselves of accountability.  We should work with legislators to make better policies for our students.  We should allow Joy Hofmeister the chance to change SDE rules to make things better for us.  We should lead the way for a better Oklahoma.  Hanta Yo!

Solutions not just problems

I’m part of the educational reform problem. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.  So there, I just admitted I have a problem. It was good to get that off my chest.  However, admitting I have a problem is only the first step and only half the story. I’m also part of the solution.  How can I be part of the problem AND part of the solution? It’s a matter of choice:  instead of sitting on the sidelines complaining about the faults and flaws of our system, I need to offer up solutions to the problems I am so quick to point out.  If admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery then offering up a possible solution is the second step in that recovery.  The third step to recovery is action.

Solution plans need action.  As an educational leader, action comes in the form of leadership: vision, creating a culture of lasting educational transformation, resource allocation, and genuine support my teachers need to be successful.  It is not an easy job….. one which will have plenty of pitfalls and other setbacks. However, it is the only way our school (and thus the entire educational system) can move forward toward the improved version we all seek.  So the choice we have as leaders is either to sit back, complain about the problems, game the compliance system, blame our problems on Politicians and educational reformers OR choose to do none of those.  We could choose to talk to our teachers and reassure them on how things will affect them and how things will look in our districts.  We could choose to objectively look at the issue and work to incorporate the intended outcomes into our specific situations.  We could choose to be part of the solution and not just part of the problem.  If you want to learn more about how you can be part of the solution, check out “For the People: A vision for Oklahoma Public Education”.

My previous post was about quantitative data in teacher evaluations titled TLE or POS? I was quick to point out the problems with quantitative data.  Now I’m going to point out our school’s solution:

•         Every teacher regardless of teaching a tested subject will create an SLO or SOO that meets the growth target criteria set up by either their PLC team or principal.
• In August during in-service training of professional development days, teachers will be given time, resources, and training in SLO/SOO development.
• Teachers will decide the content/focus, their student population, the window of instruction, and the assessment tools needed to successfully complete their SLO/SOO.
• Teachers will have autonomy over their SLO/SOO; they decide if they want to measure all their standards or just a specific aspect of it.  They decide which subject, which class, or which demographic group the SLO/SOO will focus. These decisions will have the educational rationale of looking at data to improve instruction.
• Teachers will be expected to select realistic growth targets for their students which are robust and moves students toward mastery of skills/standards.

·        

      In our district EVERY teacher will have the opportunity to adjust, re-teach, and re-assess based on the results of their SLO outcomes.  To preserve the integrity of the process & to conform to the law, this adjustment will come in the form on a second SLO.  However, our teachers will be armed with relevant information specific to what they wanted to know and allowed to use the data to improve what they wanted to measure. 

The SLO/SOO process will be used to affirm great teaching and learning or provide teachers much needed information about where improvement is needed.  Either way, teachers and students will be supported in this process to make our school better.  The SLO/SOO aspect of teacher evaluations had the intention of improving professional practice.  Instead of complaining about the flaws and faults with using quantitative data in evaluations, I choose to comply with TLE’s intent: to improve professional practice in a positive, nurturing way. I choose to be part of the solution and not just the problem.