| Board Update 1-22-01 The Good News (Thank goodness for the parents and teachers)! Congratulations to Darlene Bullock, the Physical Education Teacher at the Area Elementary school. In March, Ms. Bullock will receive the Elementary School Outstanding Service Award from the National Intramural Sports Council. The Council noted the quality of the after school programs (PeeWee Basketball and Gymnastic Gems) that she developed. Ms. Bullock is also being inducted into SRU’s Athletic Hall of Fame. Ms. Bullock is my child’s teacher as well as her coach in both PeeWee and Gems. These awards are well deserved! Sigma Tau Gamma, a local fraternity, presented a check for $300 to the Area Elementary School in appreciation for the huge number of books donated to the fraternity’s annual book drive (Last year a $200 check was given to Moraine, and a $500 check was given to Har-Mer the year before that). Principal Cokain informed the Board that the Home and School Association at Har-Mer has arranged for a visit by 2 players from the Pittsburgh Pirates, the team’s manager, and two broadcast announcers. Originally, all they asked for was the Parrot, but it turns out the team is in between mascots. A player and announcer were scheduled to come on Dec. 12, but the snow delay caused the event to be canceled. Sounds like things worked out for the best, though. And Student Representative Ismail had a spirited suggestion. The student council has recommended changing the address of the HS from 201 Kiester to 201 Rocket Drive. Good idea, but no action was taken. The Pretty Good News You know, Superintendent Beaton seems to be trying to do the right thing. Last meeting, the Board directed her to develop a school calendar for next year that has school starting after Labor Day, and a calendar that has school starting before Labor Day. So she did, never suspecting the ambush Adams and Christmann had planned. Well, Adams began beating that old drum once again. If Adams is correct, working families can only take vacations around Labor Day, so school needs to begin after that (um hm, chorused Christmann). Adams reminded the Board that they voted in March 2000 to begin the 2001-2002 academic year after Labor Day. Beaton, though, (not being aware of the March vote) understood from last week’s meeting that this was done in order to provide more time for construction. And since that wasn’t happening at this point in time…. Anyway, Beaton had already directed the principals to survey the staff, support personnel and PTA groups to see which schedule they prefer (Gee that seems logical. Thank you Dr. Beaton!!). Adams was concerned that these groups really weren’t speaking for the mass of parents (and, of course, he is!), but President Watson was willing to wait for feedback before a decision was made. Christmann, though, said the Board had already voted on starting after Labor Day ( hmmm, wonder why he didn’t tell her last week about the March vote), so…Attorney King reminded him that motions could be amended. Dr. Beaton noted that there are drawbacks to starting after Labor Day, with the last day of school on June 13. Athletics begin before Labor Day. Graduating seniors aren’t able to take college classes. Military enlistments may be affected. Adams, though, is always thinking. Teens who work on Labor Day make time and a half. Needy folks need that money. Dr. Beaton quipped, that defeats your whole purpose. If they’re working, they aren’t on vacation with their families. I like this woman’s style! Seems that Adams and Christmann are the only ones really pushing for this schedule. Wonder why? Beaton also presented the Board with the “modified 180 day” calendar (translation – year round schooling) that Brad Smith had requested. The audience wasn’t given a copy, but is sounded like she said it was 9 weeks on, 2 weeks off. 8 weeks on, 2 weeks off. 6 weeks on, 2 weeks off, with the entire month of July off. This schedule would help with the unpaid leave problem, she stated. The As Expected News Value engineers looked at the Middle School renovation plan. A Building and Grounds meeting will be scheduled to discuss the details. But wait. It seems to me that parents and teachers were asked for their input regarding renovations at the Middle School. Surely in this election year, Board members wouldn’t ignore the suggestions of their employees and constituents, would they? Politics, Politics, Politics A January 29th court date has been set to review the District’s petition to alter the method of election of school directors (1:00, courtroom 3, Judge O’Brien presiding). The proposed reapportionment of the three regions will be presented. Mr. Cessar will testify. Board member Giesler has volunteered to attend, and Board member Youngman might be there, too. Citizens wishing to speak will be heard should just give solicitor King a call. Smith and Adams, though, were surprised to find out that they could have tried for 9 regions, or even a combination of regions and at large. And they’re the ones making recommendations for how school directors are elected? Geez… This Ain’t Political, This is Legal! The Board voted to send a letter of support to the Seneca Valley School District regarding their challenge to the PSSA Writing test. The legislature got rid of the test, and the Dept. of Education is still making districts give it. Several of Mr. King’s districts have sent similar letters and are taking the State to court. King assured the Board that this is a legal, not a philosophical, challenge, and went on to explain the weakness of the test, with the less than objective test questions and the less than qualified assessors. None the less, it was good to have Mr. King himself back in the solicitor’s seat. And So It Goes The Board didn’t actually adjourn (they forgot to in haste to get to the Ex. Session), but the meeting was over and an executive session was held for legal matters, personnel, and litigation not yet filed. That doesn’t sound too good, does it? The Board apparently was meeting in private prior to the meeting. However, they didn’t announce that they had been in executive session! If they did meet and didn’t announce it, they are in violation of the Open Meeting law. Business as usual….. In a final note. I asked last week when the Board approved the “integration” of Core Knowledge. Watson directed that they would look into it. No mention was made about their findings……… Board Update February 9, 2001 (well...sorta) Well, almost two years after hearing “Connie Jones says…”, parents from the District were graced with her presence during a one hour meeting in the Middle School. The meeting was well attended by 50 or so parents, Superintendent Beaton, Assistant Superintendent Nogay, and Core Knowledge President Connie Jones (no Board members, though). There was a sense of urgency in the meeting…hurry up, hurry up…Connie Jones has to catch a plane…hurry up…Lots of questions were asked, but not all were answered. A Panacea for a Fuzzy Curriculum Dr. Jones explained that Core Knowledge is a non-profit research foundation, not a company. The Foundation has identified topics and a sequence to teach, but Core Knowledge is really just a grassroots effort to share information. Too many times, content is left to chance. It is fragmented and random, relying on individual teachers who pick and choose what is taught (Gee, I didn’t realize our curriculum was so fuzzy. Now why would our Board approve something like that? And I didn’t realize the textbooks that were adopted were so fragmented – those darn companies. I thought they always had some sort of systematic scope and sequence for what was taught. I guess they’ve fooled me!). Adopting Core Knowledge, continued Jones, is a local decision. Hopefully you won’t go into it unless you give it your best shot. Where’s The Board? Parents had apparently done their homework in preparing for the meeting. Jones, though, was unable to answer many of the parents’ questions, saying they were “local issues”. Will this put too much stress on children? Why are we the guinea pigs of Western PA? Will more special classes be added to help struggling students, especially with the grading scale being pushed up district wide? Will sexual reproduction be taught in 5th grade? Who contacted you from the Board? Why does the Board feel this is needed? Can parents still vote and say no to Core Knowledge? These questions went unanswered (I guess the superintendent really couldn’t speak for the Board!!!). Some parents were very vocal about where all this was heading. The boat has left the dock, one said. If this Board wants it, that’s what will happen. Another parent expressed frustration saying, the Board is pushing this, and we’re getting pushed aside. And where were Board members during this discussion? Who knows? For some reason, they didn’t want to come to this Core Knowledge meeting. I guess they want us to come to them during a Board meeting – that way they can limit our time to speak and, as we all know, they have to listen to us, but they don’t have to reply. You know, this Board hasn’t been too willing to publicly discuss Core Knowledge. True, they’ve had lots of speakers in. And they even went/sent people to Core Knowledge’s annual conference. But if I remember right, the teachers who attended the Conference didn’t come speak in public. Instead, they went to Board member Smith’s house for a private meeting. And until the contract talks, the public didn’t really know what the teachers had told him (some of the ideas had merit, but CK was not right for our District). Maybe the Board wants to silence the teachers, too. How Much Will Core Knowledge Cost? One big concern of parents is cost – indeed that question was asked 4 different times. Surely that question is one for the Foundation’s president. How much will it cost our district, the first parent asked? According to Dr. Jones, the Core Knowledge sequence costs $22.50 - $17.50 if you buy multiple copies. The foundation sells a few things, and they do conduct training. A second parent asked a simple question - what is the total cost to the taxpayer? The response? Core Knowledge doesn’t have contracts. The Core Knowledge Sequence book costs $22.50, and it’s cheaper if you buy multiple copies. OK, asked a third parent. School districts have to pay for the knowledge. But what is the cost for implementing Core Knowledge? We already have a curriculum…No comment from Jones, but Superintendent Beaton said yes, we have a curriculum. But it’s not specific. We’ll plug Core knowledge into the curriculum we have, and maybe teachers will have to skip around in the textbook (Now what page is Ancient Egypt on in that first grade social studies book? And all that religion? What chapter is that?) And the cost is????? And a fourth parent, just before Dr. Jones is rushed to the airport. What are the general costs for the District to adopt Core Knowledge? Surely as President of the Foundation…. Well, Jones answered; it depends on what you already have in terms of materials. OK. So we know how much the knowledge costs - $22.50 and $17.50 for multiple copies (Gee, could we just buy one copy of the sequence and then Xerox it? If we really want teachers to share the knowledge….). And Dr. Jones is right. I don’t think anyone knows exactly how much it will cost to buy materials to support the curriculum. The Foundation, though, does have an idea. According to the American Association of School Administrators, the Core Knowledge Foundation estimates that schools will spend over $10,000 to purchase sufficient materials in the first year. Costs for new and replacement materials will be on going. Fortunately, the Core Knowledge Foundation will provide start-up grants to schools who want to become official Core Knowledge Schools. It was curious that neither Dr. Jones nor Dr. Beaton (both Core Knowledge trainers) mentioned the training costs associated with Core Knowledge. The website quotes different figures, but on the “Planning Your Professional Development worksheet”, training for Year One will cost $4,000 per day for 51-75 participants. Each teacher needs a Teacher Kit, which costs $50 per teacher. Site visits cost $1,500 and do not include the trainer’s transportation, food and lodging. Now I don’t work for the Foundation, but using their worksheet, this is what I estimate the first year’s training to cost. They recommend 6 days of training ($24,000) and 3 site visits ($4,500). 3 airline tickets, etc. for the site visits? Let’s estimate it at around $1500. And materials for teachers? If we have about 66 teachers @ $50 each, that’s $3300. The grand total for training and Teacher Kits - $33,300. And let’s not forget the Annual Core Knowledge Conference. I don’t remember the exact figure, but it seems to me they spent about $10,000 on that last year and are planning another conference junket this year. So in one year we can expect to pay about $53,000 to the non-profit Core Knowledge Research Foundation. Of course, one could argue that we don’t need to have that much training. Just like people say we don’t have to have all of the content from Core Knowledge in our curriculum. But if it’s going to be done, then let’s do it right. I haven’t seen any research on do it yourself Core Knowledge schools. It seems to me that the schools that were studied fully implemented Core Knowledge. If we do anything different, then we can’t expect the same results. The Future Ain’t What It Used to Be Core Knowledge, a grassroots movement. Teacher working together to develop lesson plans and gather materials. Research by Johns Hopkins and research in Oklahoma City. Test scores on Core Knowledge content go up. Test scores in basic skills sometimes go up. Were any of the schools like our district, a parent asked. Jones stated that the demographics of some schools in the Johns Hopkins study were similar. I’m not sure how familiar with our District she is. The schools in the Johns Hopkins study targeted children who are at risk of educational failure because of limited English proficiency, poverty, race, geographic location, or economic disadvantage. The rural schools that used Core Knowledge had high poverty rates – 37.8% in one, and 46% in another. Now I don’t know, but I don’t think that sounds like our children. And is Core Knowledge going to continue to be a grassroots effort? One parent asked about Pearson Education, a huge multi-national company (they are based in London and do a lot with computer based learning. They also produce Baywatch!). Last year, Pearson Learning acquired several imprints, including Core Knowledge Publications. Dr. Jones admitted that Pearson Education has bought the rights to use the Core Knowledge content in textbooks (so the knowledge is for sale!). And yes, it is still a grassroots because it’s the teachers who want textbooks. So much for teachers controlling what they teach. Core Knowledge may not be totally teacher proof yet, but it will be soon. Gee, do you think it will become just another textbook series? Hmmm. And, surprise, surprise. There are even official Core Knowledge tests. TASA, a company who develops national tests, has just published “Core Knowledge Curriculum-Referenced Tests” for grades 1-5. Each grade level has a test for Math, Language Arts, History & Geography, and Science. And TASA Scoring Services will even grade the tests for you. Wonder how much that will cost? Of course no one mentioned that during the presentation, but I guess it isn’t relevant. More to Come Superintendent Beaton has promised to schedule another meeting for parents to discuss Core Knowledge. Bring the Board, someone suggested. No comment. Have a point/counterpoint debate, another said. No comment. Why can’t we have parents and teachers at the same meeting, someone asked. You can talk to the teachers anytime, was the reply. So I guess there’ll be another meeting soon. Can’t wait. And Finally You know, it’s an election year. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the incumbent Mr. Adams and the man who brought this brilliant curriculum to us backing away from Core Knowledge altogether…. Update 2-19-01 NOW IT CAN BE TOLD!!! Breaking news…Slippery Rock Core Knowledge. It’s bigger than the Johns Hopkins study. It’s more conclusive than the results in Oklahoma City. It goes way beyond test scores. Have we indeed been victims of misinformation? Are we all suffering from a lack of understanding? Startling evidence regarding the effects of Core Knowledge has just been discovered. At last night’s Board meeting, it was revealed that Core Knowledge is on its way to becoming a voluntary program, for both teachers and children. As the Superintendent put it, maybe District parents are happy with their children being average or below average. Parents who want their kids to excel, though, will sign them up for a Core Knowledge classroom. Teachers who want to make their classes exciting and dynamic will volunteer to be Core Knowledge teachers. Everyone else can just carry on with the status quo. But newly released information shows, without a doubt, that Core Knowledge has benefits beyond test scores. To see the incredible effects of Core Knowledge, click here. |
|