Key Audio Recording Links From State Board of Education Meeting Yesterday

Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities.  Wilmington Education Improvement Commission Redistricting Plan.  Christina Priority Schools.  Delaware Met.  All are here.  Please listen.  Please pay attention.  Listen to the words that are said by our unelected Governor appointed State Board of Education.  This meeting touched on most of the hot education issues of our state in one form or another.  Then email your state legislator politely requesting legislation for our State Board of Education to be elected officials.

WEIC Public Comment: Part 2

Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities: Part 3

WEIC Presentation to State Board: Part 5

Christina Priority Schools (about 1/3rd of the way in), Update on Opt-Out Penalties via ESEA Waiver Request with US DOE: Part 6

Delaware Met (starts about 1/3rd of the way in for Del Met) and Charter Renewals: Part 7

 

Competency-Based Education & Personalized Learning Invaded Delaware…We Didn’t Even Realize It…

Delaware Governor Jack Markell, who has held the role of state leader in Delaware since 2009, also serves on the National Governor’s Association.  This collective of all the United States Governors has several different committees they serve on.  Governor Markell serves on the Education & Workforce Committee.  To any citizen of Delaware, this is not a shock.  Markell serves on this committee with the Chair, Governor Jay Inslee (WA), the Vice-Chair, Governor Robert Bentley (AL), Governor Pete Ricketts (NE), Governor Kate Brown (OR), Governor Tom Wolf (PA), Governor Dennis Daugaard (SD), Governor Bill Haslam (TN) and Governor Scott Walker (WI).  Four of these states, Delaware, Washington, Oregon and South Dakota all administer the Smarter Balanced Assessment.  None of these Governors represent the nine states where the PARCC assessment is administered.

From their website, the Education & Workforce Committee’s main goal is this:

The Education and Workforce Committee has jurisdiction over issues in the area of education (including early childhood, K-12 and postsecondary) as well as in the areas of workforce development. Members of the committee ensure that the governors’ views are represented in the shaping of federal policy.

The committee released a paper two and half weeks ago about “Competency-Based Education” from Kindergarten to college.  In a nutshell, the document (which can be read below), wants to completely gut what is currently done in education.  Instead of students going through grades K-12, this new model would have students advance when they are proficient in a subject.

CBE shows promise for helping more elementary and secondary students meet higher standards of learning and become better prepared for college or a career training program.  Once in higher education or job training, CBE allows older students (traditional-age college students or adult learners) to learn on their own time at their own pace.

While some envision personalized learning as the wave of the future, I think it is ripe for abuse.  If the goal of personalized learning is for each student to advance at their own pace, it presents a clear danger to students who are already behind to become even more so.  Even more frightening is the role of the teacher in this personalized learning environment:

In a CBE system, the role of the educator changes from an individual lecturing in a classroom to that of a coach or facilitator who guides learning.  In a CBE system, the training, certification, evaluation, pay, promotion, and leadership role of educators should all be reexamined.

The role of assessment plays a major part in this.  For those reading this and may be thinking none of this has happened yet, this is exactly what is going on right now in Delaware.  This is the Delaware School Success Framework.

Assessment is frequently tied to accountability in K-12; therefore, policymakers should rethink what their accountability systems measure and value.

The third big area with this revolves around student funding, which has become a hotbed issue in Delaware in the past year.

Altering structures to award funding based on learning could provide incentives for the wider adoption of CBE efforts and allow states to pay for the learning outcomes according to their value.

So we have this competency-based education that turns teachers into facilitators of a computer program, students who either advance fast or fall even further behind (and we all know who that will be: minorities, low-income students, and students with disabilities), and funding that translates to which companies will get very rich very fast off this initiative.  And let’s face it, anytime we hear the word “incentives”, it is more “waivers” where nothing really gets waived except an antiquated No Child Left Behind standard that nobody can meet and forces states to comply with Federal standards.  And when they say “wider adoption” that means comply or you get nothing, just like they did with the Common Core State Standards (developed by this group and the Council of Chief State School Officers) and Race To The Top.  Lest we forget, none of this means Common Core and the current crop of state assessments are going away, because the whole reasoning for this is based on 1/3rd of children in America were proficient on the state assessments.  Which allows them to complete the vicious cycle all over again for their next initiative, Competency-Based Learning.

Imagine, if you will, you are an education-tech company and your personalized program gets picked in this CBE world.  You are instantly rich!  And you will align with all the other companies to make sure you stay that way.  You will join consortiums and committees, and as your company grows, you will own employees in the US DOE and all the State DOEs as well.  But guess what?  This has already happened!  Things in Delaware like BRINC, Schoology, Student Success 2025, the Wilmington Education Improvement Commission, and the DOE/State Board led Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities are all about this.  Even the Assessment Inventory Task Force will make sure assessments are designed towards this model.  We blinked, and personalized learning already infiltrated over half the state.  I warned folks a year ago how this would be a special education killer and competency-based education will do exactly that!

If you don’t think Delaware has been planning ahead for this for a long time, take this piece of information in the paper which talks about New Hampshire and their role in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium:

New Hampshire is working with other states on a task force as part of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium to describe how the assessments can comprehensively support a CBE-aligned system.  The task force will recommend enhancements and changes to the assessment components to provide more precise information to teachers that they can use to improve students’ learning within a CBE system.

In other words, the teacher facilitator will simply switch the module in the personalized learning computer system that some Fortune 500 company created so the student can do better on the assessment which is designed to show how much we need this new system based on the amount of students not scoring as proficient.  It is a vicious cycle which rewards students who come from a better economic background and drags the students who struggle through a proficiency nightmare.  If the goal is to challenge “smarter” kids and to make proficiency the goal for “not as smart” kids, what happens when the “not as smart” kids get tired of waiting to become proficient?  If there is no challenge for them and they go over the same material over and over again, they will quickly become very bored and will start to act out in this CBE classroom.  And what is a CBE classroom?  Will it have inclusion for students with disabilities?  How does discipline work with this new working class of facilitators?

There are more questions than answers with all of this, but it is painfully transparent how the stage was set for all of this.  The Common Core was developed to set the “standard”, the state assessments were developed to set the “proficiency”, the accountability systems for teachers and schools (not the students) were set up to “destroy” the public education system as we know it, all leading to this: students getting even more screen time all day in school and getting brief amounts of time off the computer to hear a facilitator summarize or say “time for lunch”.  This is also why we see such a huge push for charter schools.  They have no teacher unions for the most part, and their “models” are based on this type of environment.  As more and more charters choke the traditional school districts, the path to this get-rich future becomes even more clear.  And our Governors seem to be okay with all of this!  Why?

The promise of such a system is that it can adjust the methods of instruction and assistance to provide deeper, more personalized learning and help ensure that all students meet or exceed the high expectations of rigorous and relevant standards.

Or, you can believe this will further separate the haves from the have-nots.  Can anyone stop this train which left the station years ago?  Or is the future already here?  Parents across the country are actually making a difference in stopping this runaway train by opting their children out of the state assessment.  While the motivation is to look out for their child’s well-being, they are also throwing a wrench into this massive machine and stopping it dead in its tracks.  We just need much higher opt-out numbers to blow the whole thing up!

The full document is below:

This Is Bad! DOE Picks Public Consulting Group To Handle Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities!!!

The Delaware Department of Education has contracted with Public Consulting Group to be the vendor for Governor Markell’s “suggested” Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities.  Who is Public Consulting Group?  I was all over them last summer when I saw over $400,000 pouring out of the DOE to this company.  They handle the Medicaid Reimbursement for service providers that help out students with disabilities in schools.  People like occupational therapists, psychologists, etc.  If a disabled student is on the state Medicaid plan, Medicaid actually reimburses school districts and charters for those providers.  On paper, it looks great!  The state gets back a lot of money from this.  But the data that goes out to PCG and the DOE during this process is truly frightening!

This company caught my eye a year ago when I was just doing a random search at the money pouring out of the DOE on Delaware Online Checkbook.  I noticed a hell of a lot of cash going to this one company.  As a result, I wrote three articles on PCG that truly became scarier with each one.  PCG has been busy in Delaware lately.  They also bid for the Delaware Report Card Survey, but that contract was awarded to Tembo Inc., out of Philadelphia (they did the very controversial Teach For America report the legislators wanted last year.  Tembo also won the bid for the Report Card Portal contract).  While their financial award for doing this work on the SREO initiative is ONLY $70,000.00 for the next year, I don’t buy DOE’s claim that they are contracting this out so they don’t look biased.  This company already has their hands on a lot of data with Delaware students…

If you read the below RFP for this, the truly horrifying part comes in this one sentence: Data will be available from the state’s longitudinal data system.  So we are going to let a company that already has their hands on actual notes from psychologists into the whole DOE data system?  Are they out of their minds?

This is a company that did the same Medicaid program for New Jersey and if you read the third article on PCG I wrote last year, it shows how New Jersey had some FERPA issues with PCG.  As well, PCG developed the entire data longitudinal system for New Jersey, so they have access to that whole system as well.  And they even set up a system to profile students with their “early warning system”.  What every student needs, the ability to be tracked on a data system to see how you turn out!  Big brother isn’t just watching you, he’s controlling your future now!

It is insane that our DOE and Governor Markell allow so much of children’s data into the hands of outside companies.  As well, if you go to PCG’s website, you can see they are dipping into personalized learning and other online initiatives.  So not only does this company have the keys to get into data systems but they are also developing data systems.  Should one company have this much power?  Probably not, but I’m sure the knuckleheads at the DOE don’t even think of this kind of stuff…

Legislative Hall Duo Leading Delaware Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities

On Thursday’s State Board of Education agenda, there will be a presentation on the progress of the Delaware Statewide Review of Educational Opportunities.  This was announced by Governor Jack Markell when he showed up at the State Board meeting to make a big speech about this grand idea.  It was no coincidence the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee, led by Tony Allen, were also there that day to make a presentation on their recommendations for the future of Wilmington education.

My first concern in reading this presentation when it appeared on their agenda last month was who the stakeholders are.  Since Executive Director of the State Board of Education Donna Johnson is one of the co-leaders on this initiative, alongside the DOE’s Susan Haberstroh (another frequent DOE individual seen frequently at Legislative Hall) I reached out to Donna to see who the stakeholders are.

Hey Donna, I was looking at the Power Point for the SREO presentation at the meeting on Thursday.  Who are the stakeholders that are frequently mentioned?  It would really help people to understand these types of things if they knew who was going to be involved!!! Thanks,

Kevin

She did respond, and very fast I might add!

The SREO is not a task force nor does it have additional meetings scheduled at any set intervals. The presentation listed on the SBE page is from the SREO mtg that was held on June 1st, the first mtg was held on April 27th and reported on at the May SBE mtg. 

The SREO is a project to collect data, make some projections based on data trends, and then let policy makers and other stakeholders utilize the data to inform decisions or policy recommendations. It’s hard to limit the stakeholders to a defined subset, the data report will be public. We announced the first and second meeting at the SBE meeting and the DOE site, since we are co-leading the work, to invite anyone who was interested to attend and help provide suggestions to further clarify the scope of work. 

Once the RFP has closed and is scored, we will likely announce another meeting to discuss the data collection process, especially since some of the data is not in the state data system but in the individual districts/schools. We have been very transparent in the process and engaged people that will be directly impacted or engaged in the work of this project as much as they wanted. Legislators, researchers, DSEA, DASA, superintendents, GACEC, WEAC, parents, charter reps, school board members, etc. have attended the two meetings to help provide guidance in finalizing the scope of work and research questions in the RFP.

The information is all detailed in the RFP, which may have gone live today, if not it should tomorrow. 

The biggest confusion seemed to be what the SREO was versus what it was not, thus the slide that you saw with that title.

Donna Johnson (Sent from my iPad)

I was skeptical when Markell first announced this, and I’m even more skeptical now.  This just seems like another pep rally to get the ball rolling on more charters and “specialty programs” at magnets and vo-techs, while students not interested in those programs are left out in the cold.  I do see they will review special education kids with this, but my fear is what the cold, hard data will tell them, if they are completely honest about it.