In Part 3, we heard the testimony of the alleged victim, P, and the School Resource Officer. Now let’s dive right into the testimony of the administrators. First up, Smyrna Middle School Associate Principal John Camponelli: Continue reading The Smyrna School District Zero Tolerance Pipeline Part 4: The Discipline Hearing- The Testimony Of Smyrna Middle School Administrators
Today the IEP Task Force reconvened in a meeting about the new IEP Plus 5.0. Together with the Governor’s Advisory Council for Exceptional Citizens (GACEC), a meeting was held to go over the new functionalities of the IEP computer system that former Chair of the IEP Task Force Matt Denn wanted to scrap altogether. This meeting was SO important nobody knew about it. And unless legislation has been introduced extending Senate Concurrent Resolution #63 from the 147th General Assembly, anything with the name “IEP Task Force” is technically illegal.
While pretty much nobody showed up to the meeting from the old IEP Task Force, I find it interesting the DOE would stage a meeting in conjunction with the GACEC and this mythical new IEP Task Force. None of the legislators from the previous task force showed up. Matt Denn wasn’t there. So who is running this? Apparently, the Director of the Exceptional Children Resources Group Mary Ann Mieczkowski ran the meeting. She was on the IEP Task Force. And she is also a member of the GACEC.
So we have a non-public meeting of two very public entities. Say the IEP Task Force was just a name thrown on over a month ago (which was when an email was sent to different task force members advising them of this meeting today). The GACEC should have definitely put this on the Delaware Public Meeting Calendar. But I guess non-transparency is okay if nobody finds out about it!
From what I have learned, the meeting was very boring. It was a lot of technical lingo about the updated computer system run by Sunguard. Sunguard also runs e-school, that clever little database that houses EVERYTHING about your child. IEP Plus is the system where ALL IEPs are stored. But that’s not the point. I’ve been in IEP meetings where IEP Plus sucks the oxygen out of the room and technical difficulties take up far too much time. I’m sure it isn’t just schools and the DOE who are fed up by it. But here is the DOE, probably paying tons of money for this upgrade with no one the wiser. By denying any parent the ability to go to this meeting, I have to wonder what other meetings are going on in this state behind closed doors that should be open to the public. I’m sure there are plenty! Like I’ve said a couple times: “Delaware, first to sign the Constitution, the last to follow it!”
Delaware State Rep. Kim Williams introduced a bill yesterday concerning school bullying and when a student can transfer to a different school when “good cause” has been established with school bullying. The current law does not specify what category of bullying can trigger such a transfer. Rep. Williams legislation would create a new law requiring the bullying to be a substantiated incident. This would mean an official bullying complaint would need to be filed by the parent or guardian at the school, who would in turn have to rule bullying did occur. All Delaware schools are required to report this information to the Delaware Department of Education.
This bill would prevent parents from just switching out students without a valid good cause, which unfortunately happens at times in Delaware. The current law does not protect the schools and the loss of funds when these events occur. While some parents may take issue with this due to schools not ruling a bullying incident as substantiated (which is a whole other issue which I would like to see improved), there are other options for parents to take should a school not agree with the complaint. All Delaware schools are required to have the website and contact information for the Delaware Ombudsman for Bullying Prevention through the Department of Justice.
In 2014, then Lieutenant Governor Matt Denned issued a statement regarding the responsibilities of schools reporting bullying incidents:
“It is encouraging to see the progress our schools have made in keeping parents informed about bullying, because that was one of the primary goals of the 2012 legislation,” said Attorney General Denn who co-authored the 2012 legislation as Lieutenant Governor. “But our schools clearly have more work to do in letting parents know what recourse they have when bullying does occur, and the state needs to do a better job accurately tracking bullying incidents so we can accurately monitor our overall progress.”
All bullying complaints, whether substantiated or not, are required to be reported to the Dept. of Education and it is the school’s responsibility to enter the information on a system called E-School. I have always encouraged parents to request a copy of their child’s E-School report. This can be done at a school or district level in most situations. To read the legislation, please see below:
Embedded in the latest Elementary/Secondary Education Act reauthorization are initiatives and agendas that will transform education as we know it. This is not a good thing. Nothing in Delaware currently going on (WEIC, Student Success 2025, Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities) is original. This is happening across the country. The result: students plugged in to computers all the time who will only advance once they have gained proficiency in the Common Core-infused personalized learning technology. The benefits will not be for the students. They come in the form of financial benefits which will belong to the corporate education reformers, hedge fund managers, and investors. Tech-stock will go through the roof if the current ESEA reauthorization passes, and companies like Schoology, Great Schools and 2Revolutions Inc. will become billionaires over-night. Meanwhile, our children will indeed become slaves to the system. The future is here!
The ESEA reauthorization has morphed into the classic quote from Obi-Wan Kenobi in the original Star Wars movie: “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” If you actually think this latest round of ESEA legislation that will come to a vote next Wednesday will reduce testing, you have been sucked down the rabbit hole!
Who is Schoology? I’ve heard their name countless times in the past year. I figured it was long past time I dove into this company that is essentially invading every single school district and charter in the First State. Especially given the information regarding the upcoming ESEA reauthorization vote coming on 12/2.
Schoology offers a cloud service for personalized and blended learning. For those who aren’t aware, personalized learning is defined by a Great Schools sponsored company as the following:
Personalized learning is generally seen as an alternative to so-called “one-size-fits-all” approaches to schooling in which teachers may, for example, provide all students in a given course with the same type of instruction, the same assignments, and the same assessments with little variation or modification from student to student.
But this is what it really is: a cash-cow bonanza for corporate education reform companies, especially those on the tech side who are pushing their internet-based modules out faster than you realize. Schoology opened shop in Delaware with the BRINC partnership between the Brandywine, Indian River, New Castle County Vo-Tech and Colonial school districts. These four districts used Schoology as the base for their personalized learning partnership, and the Caesar Rodney and Appoquinimink districts have joined as well. The News Journal wrote a huge article on Schoology last March, and reporter Matthew Albright wrote:
Schools must figure out how to create the right infrastructure, providing enough bandwidth and wireless network capacity. They have to settle on the right computers or tablets and find ways to pay for them, configure them, and teach students how to use them.
And, while many teachers have taken their own initiative to find new educational tools, schools and districts have to find ways to train teachers in using these systems and make sure all educators are on the same page.
In Delaware, a group of districts has banded together to work out the best way to deal with those challenges.
The consortium is called BRINC, after the four school districts that originally participated: Brandywine, Indian River, New Castle County Vo-Tech and Colonial. The group added two more districts, Appoquinimink and Caesar Rodney, this year.
Over a year ago, I was distracted away from this by a company called 2Revolutions Inc. After their appearance at the annual Vision Coalition conference, I looked into 2Revolutions and did not like what I was seeing. My eye was on 2Revolutions coming into Delaware as a vendor, and I completely missed Schoology who was already here. Meanwhile, 2Revolutions invaded the New Hampshire education landscape. Schoology is not much different. But they don’t just provide a cloud service in Delaware. According to the minutes from the Senate Concurrent Resolution #22 Educational Technology Task Force in Delaware, Schoology has also integrated with e-School and IEP Plus. In a press release from Schoology on 5/20/14, the company announced they were integrating with SunGard K-12 Education (the creators of e-school and IEP Plus):
SunGard K-12 Education’s eSchoolPLUS, an industry-recognized student information system, helps educational stakeholders—students, school administrators, district staff, teachers, parents, and board members—easily manage and immediately access the summary and detailed student information they need, when they need it.
While this seems like a good thing, it is a tremendous amount of data which is now in Schoology’s hands. Schoology is also branching out like crazy all over the country. They just announced a contract with L.A. Unified School District, as well as Seattle Public School District and Boulder Valley School District. In terms of financing, they just secured their fourth round of financing with JMI Investments to the tune of $32 million dollars. This brings their total financing amount to $57 million over the past couple years from investment firms. The trick to all of this is in the surface benefits: the cloud-based service where teachers can share instruction is free. But where it goes from there is unchartered territory, according to Tech-Crunch:
On the other side, there is an enterprise-grade product meant for school districts and universities, that gives richer functionality to administrators to hook into back-end student information systems, build out campuses and building maps, and far more. Schoology said that the price (which is per student, per year) is scaled down for larger clients, but he wouldn’t share the general price range for Schoology Enterprise.
Schoology also provides “assistive technology” services for professional development, according to more minutes from the SCR #22 Task Force:
The creation of comprehensive online professional development using the Schoology platform for both Delaware and Assistive Technology Guidelines documents.
The task force is also going to recommend the following:
Provide district/charters the opportunity to buy-into using Schoology with K-12 students at minimal cost. Increase funding to support growth of the use of Schoology that will drive the per student cost down.
Support the use of Resources within Schoology for sharing teacher-created content and OER.
The SCR #22 Educational Technology Task Force was brought forth by Delaware Senator Bryan Townsend, and sponsored by Senator David Sokola, State Rep. Earl Jaques, State Rep. Trey Paradee, and co-sponsored by Senator Colin Bonini. While this task force is going on, there is another task force called the Student Data Privacy Task Force, which came from an amendment to Senate Bill 79, sponsored by Senator Sokola. Sokola and Jaques also sponsored the current Senate Joint Resolution #2 Assessment Inventory Task Force. I firmly believe every single one of these task forces, aside from having very similar legislators behind the scenes, will also serve to bring about the complete immersion of Delaware into personalized learning. I wrote last month about the clear and present danger behind the data collection occurring with Delaware students. But it doesn’t just stop at personalized learning because at a state and national level there is a big push for “competency-based education”, which I wrote about a few weeks ago.
Competency-Based Education, also called Proficiency Based Learning, is a process where students do not advance until they have mastered the material. Instead of a once a year standardized assessment, students will be tested at the end of a unit, on a computer. Think Smarter Balanced Assessment broken up into numerous chunks throughout the year. This “stealth” testing will effectively “reduce the amount of testing” but would also give the exact same tests but at a micro-level. This is also an opt-out killer as parents would have no way of knowing how often their child is being tested, nor would they likely have access to the actual questions on the mini-assessments. Meanwhile, as President Obama and soon-to-be-former US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan mirror Delaware’s Senate Joint Resolution #2, parents and educators are saying “Yes, yes, yes!” but bloggers like myself are saying “No, no, no!”
Save Maine Schools, a blog written by a teacher from Maine named Emily Talmage, has delved into this digital nightmare in great length. Talmage bought the product these companies were selling until she wisely began to question the motives behind it all. Maine, along with New Hampshire, Alaska, and Delaware, is one of the state guinea pigs where the experiment of Personalized Learning and Competency-Based Education is at the forefront. All four of these states have smaller populations and are led by reform-style education leaders. Talmage recently wrote about what has been going on while we were testing:
The fact is, the state-led testing consortia , which promised to use our tax money to bring us high quality tests that would get our kids “college and career ready”, were actually business consortia, strategically formed to collaborate on “interoperability frameworks” – or, to use simpler terms, ways of passing data and testing content from one locale to the next (from Pearson to Questar, for example, or from your local town to the feds).
Just as the Common Core State Standards were intended to unleash a common market, so, too, was the effort to create a common digital “architecture” that would allow companies like Questar and Pearson and Measured Progress and all the rest to operate in a “plug in play” fashion. (Think of Xbox, Nintendo, PlayStation, and all the rest teaming up to make a super-video-game console.)
The upcoming ESEA reauthorization, called the “Every Student Succeeds Act”, is filled with easter eggs and cash prizes for companies like Schoology, as seen in the below document from EdWeek.
That is a ton of federal money going out to schools from legislation designed on the surface to halt federal interference in education. It sounds like Race To The Top all over again, but on a much bigger scale. The tentacles from the feds reach deep into the states with this latest ESEA reauthorization, and behind the US DOE are all the companies that will feast on tax-payer funds.
The bill also allows for further charter school expansion and the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools recently said:
The National Alliance congratulates the conference committee for taking another step forward in the bipartisan effort to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. While we have not yet seen the full text of the conference agreement, we are pleased to learn the proposal would modernize the Charter Schools Program, supporting the growth and expansion of high-quality charter schools to better meet parental demand.
When the opt-out movement grew in huge numbers earlier this year, many civil rights groups protested opt-out as a means of putting minority children further behind their peers. What they don’t realize is the current ESEA reauthorization will ensure this happens! Even the two largest teacher union organizations are jumping on this version of ESEA. The American Federation of Teachers wrote a letter urging ESEA to pass as soon as possible. National Education Association President Lily Eskelsen Garcia wrote:
We look forward to working with the congressional conference committee members to ensure that we produce a bill that, when signed by the president, gives every student the opportunity, support, tools, and time to learn.
How much do these civil rights groups and leaders of teacher unions really know about what is inside this bill? Do they understand the danger of rushing this ESEA version to a vote and what it will mean for the future of education and children? Don’t the teacher unions realize this will be the death knell for the future of teachers in America? Once personalized learning is embraced by all public schools in America, teachers will become moderators or facilitators of the personalized learning modules. The demand for “old-school” teachers will greatly diminish, and teacher qualifications will simply become how to review and program these digital instructional items. The vast amount of money and resources will pour into technology and only the school leaders will be the ones with high salaries. The current teacher salary models in each state will become a thing of the past. With the charter school protections written in this bill, more and more charters will open up that will drain away local dollars. With each state able to come up with their own accountability systems, the schools with the highest-needs students will slowly give way to charters. Rinse, wash, repeat. If I were a public school teacher that is in a union, I would seriously question why the national leaders are endorsing this.
Even American Institutes for Research (AIR), the testing vendor for the Smarter Balanced Assessment in Delaware and holds numerous other contracts with other states and the US Department of Education is in on this new “digital age”:
As part of the Future Ready initiative, President Obama hosted more than 100 school superintendents at the White House during a November 19, 2014 “ConnectED to the Future” summit. Superintendents signed the Future Ready District Pledge indicating their commitment to work with educators, families and communities to develop broadband infrastructures; make high-quality digital materials and devices more accessible; and support professional development programs for educators, schools and districts as they transition to digital learning.
But it doesn’t stop there, because AIR wants districts to invest heavily in all this technology:
Effectively using technology is an essential skill in today’s workforce but also critical to advancing teaching and learning. Today’s students aren’t just digital natives: they increasingly use digital devices to complete school assignments, stay informed, and network with peers around the world. A tipping point for technology and schooling may be in store soon: instead of merely enhancing teaching and learning, technology may transform both by better accommodating individual learning styles and facilitating collaboration. Whether through the deeper learning, personalized learning, or blended learning approaches districts are exploring and investing heavily in now, technology could finally help your state unlock instruction—educational policy’s “black box”—and ultimately close achievement gaps.
It all comes back to closing those damn achievement gaps, based on the very same state standards and standardized testing that are creating those very same achievement gaps. This is something AIR excels at, creating the “need” and then selling the “fix”. Some have theorized, but been unable to prove due to an inability to get into AIR’s contracts and financial records, that companies like WestEd, Questar, Data Recognition Corp. (the “human scorer” company for the Smarter Balanced Assessment in Delaware), and Measurement Inc. are merely shell companies for AIR. AIR seems to be controlling so much of what is in education. So much so, it is hard to tell the difference between AIR and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Which brings us back to Delaware Governor Jack Markell.
This is a man who has been involved in corporate education reform for well over ten years, possibly longer. He worked at McKinsey and Associates in the 90’s as a consultant, and after coining Nextel, he became the State Treasurer for Delaware, a role he served from 2001-2009. Since then, he has served as the Governor of Delaware and been behind every single education reform movement that has swept the country. When Markell served as the President of the National Governor’s Association in 2013, he attended some very big events. Including the Milken Institute Global Conference. While in attendance, he served on several panels that were not open to the public and were considered private “by invitation only”. Why would an elected official, sworn to uphold the best interests of his state, serve on private panels for huge investment firms? The panels Markell served on at the Milken conference were “Global Capital Markets Advisory Council” (along with Tony Blair, Michael Milken, Eric Cantor and Rupert Murdoch) and “K-12 Education Private Lunch”. Those were the only two panels Markell talked on, both private, and both closed to the public.
Jack Markell, the great violator of parental rights, who vetoed opt-out legislation in Delaware that overwhelmingly passed the Delaware House and Senate, is one of the key political figures and puppet masters behind all of this. With close ties to Achieve, McKinsey, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the Rodel Foundation of Delaware, New America, and the Center for American Progress, Markell is a very dangerous man in education. Markell’s ambitions are not for the good of the citizens of Delaware. His constituents are the very same companies behind the latest ESEA reauthorization, personalized learning, competency-based education, and the public shaming of educators everywhere unless they happen to belong to a charter school. He was even involved in the creation of Common Core:
He has also served for three years as Chair of the National Board of Directors of Jobs for America’s Graduates, co-chair of the Common Core Standards Initiative and chair of the Metropolitan Wilmington Urban League.
The last of those groups is a civil rights organization in Delaware’s largest city, Wilmington. When Markell first announced his “original” idea of assessment inventory, he was joined in the press conference by the head of that organization at the time.
In Delaware, we are led by a tyrant who leads the charge in education reform and allows the money-sucking vampires like Schoology to come in and pocket funds that allow bloated classrooms. Companies like Schoology will make damn sure students with disabilities, children from poverty, and at-risk youth are always behind their peers. This is what their services thrive on, the constant demand to fix education. As our US Congress votes on the ESEA reauthorization, keep this in mind: it is not meant for every student to succeed. It is all about the money. Follow it, and you too will see the path to success.
What can parents and teachers do? Aside from following the money, which is a mammoth task and all too frequently a lesson in humility, look at your local, state and national leaders.
Look at legislation and regulations.
What initiatives and plans are your district boards, charter boards, and state boards of education voting on?
For charter school parents, do you ever question why the boards of charters are appointed rather than elected?
Do you ever look at “task forces”, “working groups” and “committees” in your state and wonder who is on them and why there were appointed?
Does your state sell the term “stakeholders” in determining policies but many of the same people serve on these groups?
Which of your state legislators are introducing legislation that seems harmless on the surface but has caveats and loopholes deeply embedded into it?
Which legislators are up for re-election and could be easily swayed for promises of future power?
Which legislators are running for higher office?
What policies and laws are your state Congress representatives voting on?
What is your Governor up to? Do you see news blips about them speaking at private organizations but it is not on their public schedule?
Do you see action by legislators that seems to defy the beliefs of their individual political party?
Do you see education leaders and legislators comingling with lobbyists in your state Capital?
For teachers, where does your local union and state union stand on these issues? Your national?
Parents: if your school has a PTA or PTO, what are their collective stances on these critical issues?
Do you know if your State Board of Education is elected or appointed?
Find out who your state lobbyists are. Read. Search. Discover. Question everything. Email your state legislators and Congress representatives when you don’t agree with something you believe will have no direct benefit for your individual child. Vote for those who you think will stand against this bi-partisan regime of education vampires. Question those who sit on the sidelines and do nothing. Push them. Make your voice heard. . Look into initiatives going on in your state, or research groups looking into school funding or redistricting. Part of the ESEA reauthorization has states looking at “weighted funding”, whereby funds would pour into more high-needs schools. As well, the reauthorization would allow more Title I dollars to go into the “bottom” schools than they currently do. When I say “bottom”, these are schools usually with the most high-needs students who do not do well on the standardized tests. In many states, these schools become charter schools. Once again, rinse, wash, repeat.
One thing to keep in mind is the corporate education reform movement is everywhere. Like a secret society, they have embedded themselves and they are hiding in plain sight. In every single one of the groups mentioned above. Some of the people I am asking people to look into may not even realize they are a part of these agendas. Some may just think they are doing the right thing. For folks like myself, Diane Ravitch, Mercedes Schneider, Emily Talmage and countless others, our job is to expose and name them. We discover the lies and call them out. We are the last line of defense before your child’s worthwhile education is completely gone, lost in the shadows and truckloads of money behind those who would dare to steal your child’s benefit for their own future. Unless you are part of the wealthy and elite, your child’s fate is being decided on next week during the vote for the ESEA reauthorization. Most of you don’t even realize this. Many that do have been duped and fooled into believing this is the right thing. Many of us have been fighting the evil standardized test and opting out, and the whole time they have been plotting and scheming in closed-door meetings with companies to bring about the last phase of corporate education reform: the complete and utter brainwashing of your child wired into a never-ending state of constant assessment and proficiency based on the curriculum that they wrote. They fooled the bloggers as well. But we are the resistance, and we will not stop the defense of our children. We will protect our schools and our communities from the corporate raiders. We will keep opting out and fighting for the rights of others to do so as well. We will not be bought or sold into the devious and intrinsic methodologies they seek to perpetuate on our society. We will fight, not because we gain personal reward or acclaim, but because it is the right thing to do.
Drew Serres, a member of the Coalition for Fairness & Equity in School, wrote an excellent letter to the editor in the News Journal today about Restorative Justice and suspensions in Delaware Schools.
Since its passage, House Bill 85 has been adversely affecting all students; but it has had a disproportionate effect on students of color and those with disabilities. For instance, African-American and Latino students are suspended three-to-four times more than their white peers, even when they represent a substantially low enrollment rate overall.
This legislation goes back to 1993. Which is about the time when all of the zero tolerance practices came into play. Personally, I think some schools cherry-pick students when it comes to discipline and suspensions. Discrimination rears its ugly head in strange ways in Delaware.
I am lucky. The school policies when I was growing up allowed me to learn from my mistakes. I think all children deserve that opportunity as well.
There are certain offenses that should cause suspensions, in my opinion, especially fighting. But what do we do when someone is just defending their self when someone attacks them. If no adult can stop it in time, should another student allow himself to be pummeled? In today’s world, that student would be suspended as well. I have been told by a school administrator that if a student puts his hands over his face, that is sufficient. Really? That makes the difference? I don’t condone fighting, but if students have to protect themselves than they should be allowed to do it. My issue is adults not intervening in time. I know, fights can happen in an instant, and I don’t blame teachers or school staff for actual fighting. But I do think they can keep a more watchful eye on students to begin with, especially during transition times, recess, or lunch.
Restorative justice is a model of discipline based on appropriate consequences for a student’s poor behavior and reconciliation of the student and the school system. It is a process where offenders, instead of just being punished, have the opportunity to restore the harm done to the community. It is actually a lot more work for the offender, but instead of feeling ostracized and criminalized they are given the opportunity to restore their inner sense of worth and to get on a path where they learn how to contribute.
My biggest question out of this is how this is dealt with when a student with disabilities has “poor behavior” and doesn’t understand their bad behavior because it is a result of a neurological disability. All too often, students with disabilities are ostracized in schools because they don’t understand. Can inclusion truly work in this type of environment or are we putting these kids through the wringer? I’m all for change because the way it is now just isn’t working.
In the Christina School District, they were mandated by the Office of Civil Rights to reduce the amount of suspensions because African-Americans were being disproportionately suspended. As a result, they went from zero tolerance to what they have now. They still have the issues going on they had before the OCR complaint. However, I have been told by many teachers in Christina they are told not to report infractions because of the OCR mandates. That just makes the situation worse, but the district is beholden to Federal law in this situation. As a result, parents who see this do not want to have their child attend Christina schools and they choice them out to charter schools. As a result, Christina loses a lot of local funding. This double-edged sword doesn’t work, so we need to do something.
With all the pressure put on teachers on a district, state, and federal level and the demands on their time, do they actually have the time to establish restorative justice techniques between test prep, evaluations, instruction, professional development and test prep? I heard many teachers had a hard enough time submitting grades into the state E-School system last weekend, on their days off, because the DOE decided that would be a good time to do an upgrade on the system. Furthermore, if administrators aren’t willing to practice what they preach, will these children be able to separate authority from adults with bad behavior? If administrators come down on students with an iron fist but at the same time try these techniques on them, it sends a very mixed message that can be very confusing to a student, especially the younger ones. This obviously depends on the type of behavior exhibited by the student, but this is a very fine line.
What this doesn’t take into account is home life. If a child’s parents just don’t care enough to practice restorative justice in the home, will a student be able to carry this into school? Take Christina for example. As a result of school choice, the “better” students have left. This leaves the schools with all the perceived “troublemakers”. If a “troublemaker” choices out, chances are they will be back if the charter counsels them out or expels them. This leaves a disproportionate number of “troublemakers” in schools. I can’t stand when these students are referred to as animals. I truly can’t. Yes, they have bad behavior and they make bad choices, but to refer to them as barbaric or animalistic demeans them as a human being.
These are tough questions, and I won’t pretend to have all the answers. But we need to find those answers fast as more lives are lost to the justice system.