The Delaware Department of Education hates parent opt-out. They can’t do anything about it. They know this, yet they continually attempt to greatly exaggerate even the tiniest detail, blow it up, and then add layers to it. Exceptional Delaware was able to get its hands on the actual document the DOE has been sending their “stakeholders” lately in regards to parent opt-out and House Bill 50. What is very telling is the document doesn’t even have the DOE letterhead on it. This is a Department that never misses a chance to spread their name, but on this document, it is oddly missing. Notice how close some of the wording is to the recent Dover Post article on parent opt-out with Secretary of Education Mark Murphy’s editorial.
You can see it in bold print: “There is an alternative- Senate Joint Resolution #2 has been introduced- looking at testing.” Now if anyone doubts the validity of this document coming from the DOE since it doesn’t have their name on it, I would be more than happy to email it to you. When you are in the PDF, and you click on file, go down to properties, and it shows you the author “Young Shana”. Otherwise known as DOE employee Shana Young. This was written by Young on May 22nd. Now some of this may seem familiar. That’s because we have heard it from the DOE numerous times. What wasn’t included in this document was extra wording talking about the General Assembly not having “formal authority” over the assessment inventory with Senate Joint Resolution #2.
What I would like to know is who the DOE is sending these out to. I put in a FOIA request for any emails from Shana Young from May 14th and May 15th to any superintendents in Delaware. Because I know Miss Young knew about Senate Joint Resolution #2 at least five days before it was even introduced, and that would mean this information could have only come from the sponsors of the bill: either Earl Jaques or David Sokola. I emailed Senator Sokola on Tuesday for more information on this mystery but he hasn’t responded at all. I did get the FOIA going with the DOE, but I guess I’m not important enough for Senator Sokola. But I’m sure if it was the DOE emailing him, he would come running.
This is the email I sent to Senator Sokola:
Dear Senator Sokola,
I’m just going to come right out and ask this. Which legislation are you giving more weight to: House Bill 50 or Senate Joint Resolution #2? I know your thoughts on parent opt-out based on your interview with Avi at WHYY, but this is not just about your opinion. It’s about giving this legislation the forum it deserves. The House passed this 36-3. I know there is a lot on the Senate Education Committee’s agenda, and this is not the only education bill out there. But it has been the most mentioned in media (and not just my blog). We have never actually talked person to person, but I am not a lone wolf crying in the dark. HB50 is supported by the vast majority of the public. As parents, we already have the right to opt our kids out. And we will continue to do so in growing numbers. What we will not tolerate is the treatment parents have received from many of our schools in regards to opt-out. As long as one parent is receiving heat from any one school, this matter will not die.
What concerns me the most though is SJR #2 and your history with Achieve Inc. I know you have a long-standing association with Achieve Inc. and Michael Cohen, going back to 2008, if not longer. Achieve is also the vendor on the assessment inventory the DOE is pushing so hard. As well, I have seen a DOE email from the past couple weeks talking about SJR #2 to “stake-holders” stating that SJR #2 is an alternative to House Bill 50. As well, this email from Shana Young stated that SJR #2 will give no “formal authority” to the results of the assessment inventory. Since you and Jaques are the primary sponsors on SJR #2, it is obvious SJR #2 is more about killing HB50 than tackling assessment inventory.
You have the power to make sure HB50 is heard, and heard first in the Senate Education Committee meeting on 6/3. Parents will show up, and it would be a tremendous disservice to make them wait, if it is even heard that day. Parents are now part of the process on education in Delaware. It would be a true shame to ignore them.
I think there needs to be an honest conversation about these backroom deals going on with the DOE and their contracted vendors. It is getting out of hand, and these are funds that should be going to our children in the classroom.
Now since this email with no response went out, the agenda for the Senate Education Committee meeting on 6/3 has gone up, and it has both House Bill #50 and Senate Joint Resolution #2 on it, along with two major autism bills and a bill about identification of students with military connections. There could be a chance HB 50 isn’t even heard that day and it is pushed back until the next week. But I can promise you this: if Senate Joint Resolution #2 is heard, and not HB50, Sokola is going to generate a lot of heat and ire from ticked off parents.
In the meantime, I’m sure the DOE will be sending out more “talking points” filled with half-truths, outdated information, and outright lies. Their high-stakes testing propaganda machine is running out of fuel, so they are obviously googling ANY editorials they can find from other states on civil rights groups opposition to opt-out. And the 27 number they quote for national civil rights groups? That changed to 12 last month. So nice try DOE. At least get something right!
And what does this line even mean: “Without assessment results that shows where these students need support, the support for these students disappears.” So the only support these children need is based off of Common Core standardized tests like the Smarter Balanced Assessment? Okay! Does that mean the DOE won’t give low-income, minority and special needs children support if they don’t take the standardized test? Are you saying that no school or teacher gives these kids supports, ever? This scare tactic doesn’t work cause it is based on a falsehood that Governor Markell and the DOE have promulgated onto the public.
They also wrote “Testing, without over-testing, is valuable and provides us important information for our students and schools.” Who is the “us” Miss Young refers to? And this line shows this testing is important for the DOE, but not the students and the schools. They want this information so they can USE the student data so they can PUNISH the schools.
“Under current Delaware law, all students are required to take statewide assessments.” No, they are not. The schools are required to administer the tests, but children are NOT required to take them. Nice play on words there.
And then we have the (yawn) whole Federal Funding cut threats (getting sleepy) and how Delaware can stand to lose $42 million on one page, and $44 on another, but all coming from the same source. But it never comes right out (zzzzzzzzzzzz…Sorry!) and says it, but there is a “risk”. Sorry DOE, if the Feds are going to cut Title I funding to schools, they aren’t going to start with Delaware. They would start with New York or New Jersey, and they would have done it by now. The only reason they haven’t is because they can’t. So once again, thanks for the empty threats.
Here is my biggest question though: How can the Delaware DOE already know the Fiscal Year 2016 allocation for Title I funds? What if a student switches schools? I truly don’t know the answer to this one so if anyone does, please advise me!
Oh yeah, one other big thing… why is Shana Young, who works in the Teacher Leader Effectiveness Unit at the DOE, writing opt-out talking points to stakeholders? Wouldn’t something of that sort be covered under Penny Schwinn’s area, Office of Accountability, which has Assessment under that umbrella? Could it be that standardized testing is more about Teacher and Leader Effectiveness than Accountability? I’ll let you draw your own conclusion on that one dear readers!
For parents and citizens who are supportive of House Bill 50 and parent opt-out, but against Senate Joint Resolution #2 and assessment inventory, please email the legislators and let them know. For quick reference, just copy and paste the below information:
Harris.McDowell@state.de.us MargaretRose.Henry@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com Ernesto.Lopez@state.de.us Patricia.Blevins@state.de.us David.Sokola@state.de.us Karen.Peterson@state.de.us firstname.lastname@example.org Bryan.Townsend@state.de.us Nicole.Poore@state.de.us David.McBride@state.de.us email@example.com Dave.Lawson@state.de.us firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Brian.Pettyjohn@state.de.us Gerald.Hocker@state.de.us Bryant.Richardson@state.de.us Charles.Potter@state.de.us StephanieT.Bolden@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Bryon.Short@state.de.us Quinton.Johnson@state.de.us Kevin.Hensley@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Deborah.Hudson@state.de.us email@example.com Peter.Schwartzkopf@state.de.us Valerie.Longhurst@state.de.us firstname.lastname@example.org Michael.Mulrooney@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Steve.Smyk@state.de.us Michael.Ramone@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Edward.Osienski@state.de.us email@example.com John.Viola@state.de.us Earl.Jaques@state.de.us firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Sean.Lynn@state.de.us email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Lyndon.Yearick@state.de.us David.L.Wilson@state.de.us Harvey.Kenton@state.de.us Ruth.BriggsKing@state.de.us Ronald.Gray@state.de.us Daniel.Short@state.de.us Timothy.Dukes@state.de.us Richard.G.Collins@state.de.us