Saturday, November 29, 2014

The Educational Delusional Scheme: Guest Post

A guest post by Dr. Denise Gordon
I write this short essay to disclose what is happening within my own science classroom, I write to expose the demeaning work environment that I and my fellow colleagues must endure, and I write to give purpose to my years of acquiring the necessary skills and knowledge in teaching science for the secondary student. I am not a failure; however, by the Texas STAAR standard assessment test, I am since this past year I had a 32% failure rate from my 8th grade students in April, 2014. The year before, my students had an 82% passing rate.

What happened in one school year? It does not matter that 2/3 of the student population speaks Spanish in their home. It does not matter their reading capability could be on a 4th grade level. It does not matter homework never gets turned in and parent phone calls bring little results. What does matter was that my students were required to develop a yearlong research project by stating a problem, thinking of a solution, designing the experimental set up, collecting the required data, and formulating a conclusion. Some of the projects were good enough to enter into the regional science fair. From a selection of thirty-five projects, twenty-four were sent to the regional science fair. Some of these projects won ribbons and a chance to go to the state science fair competition. Five of my students were invited to participate in the elite Broadcom Master Science Competition. No other 8th grader in my school district achieved this accomplishment. Other yearlong projects involved entering the Future City Competition sponsored by the IEEE. My eighth graders had seven teams to compete and three came back with special awards. Another science competition for secondary students is eCybermission sponsored by the NSTA and the U.S. Army. My only team of girls who competed in this program won first place for the entire southern region of the eCybermission Competition. Did any of my students get a thank you or congratulations from our school principal or the district about their science achievements? Sadly, the answer is a no. All I got was a call into the principal’s office at the end of the school year for the purpose of being pulled from teaching the 8th grade for the next school year due to my high failure rate on the state test. My students and I did receive two thank you letters from two community partnerships. The Potters Water Action Group, represented by Richard Wukich and Steve Carpenter were thankful for our educational brochure that my students helped design for their water filtration project. Krista Dunham, Project Director of Special Olympics in Fort Worth, sent a thank you to my students for donating the soap box derby race money that my students organized and who built three scrap box cars for this worthy affair.

I am now being monitored on a weekly basis within my 6th grade classes and their posted grades. I am required to have [no higher than] a 15% failure rate. All assignments must be pulled from the district’s online teaching schedule; therefore, no soap box races or water brochures this year. I am not allowed to take any of my students off campus for data collecting. Student project development does not flow well in the district school calendar, so I am being questioned by the principal about my scientific teaching philosophy. Action science with real world data is not on the district’s curriculum website. It does not matter that I have a Ph.D. in curriculum development. I must teach to the test since every three weeks all students will be taking a mandated district test. This means all teachers must review for the test, students take the test, and then we go over the test. That is three days out of fifteen teaching days dedicated to a test every three weeks.

Testing and retesting with documented lesson plans from the scheduled curriculum is what the district wants, but is it what the students need really to enjoy science? Our test scores are posted online and evaluated by the administration. Our performance on these tests weighs heavily into our yearly professional evaluation. I have been placed on a “growth plan” due to the fact that I teach what my students should know rather than what the district has posted. I am somewhat a rebel or just set in my ways; however, this growth plan gives the new principal her leverage to remove me from this school. If I do not meet her standards on the growth plan at the end of the year, then I must be relocated to another school. I teach my students math skills, writing skills, and research skills. I document this growth instead of monitoring their district test scores. I have been ordered to submit weekly announcements to the parent newsletter, but my submissions are deleted by the principal. I have been ordered to attend professional development at the level three tier within our district, but there is no level three offered because level three does not exist. I have been documented that 100% of my students do not understand my lessons when I teach because I use “big” words. The 100% came from asking two or three students in the classroom by the principal when she did her bimonthly walk throughs. I have been pulled out of teaching class to be reprimanded on my poor teaching practices rather than wait for my planning time. I must lower my standards and give less work if I am to maintain a 15% failure rate [or lower]. Is this what the parents want? Will this prepare the students for high school?

I can no longer incorporate the arts within my assignments since my activities do not come from the district’s website. The current push for STEM should be the banner to wave inside my classroom since I have been a secondary science teacher for the past thirty years; however, I could not and we should not trade the arts and music for pure technical science and math course work. Creative problem solving with visual displays or performing arts can be demonstrated instead of just technology and engineering skills. Language arts would implement the importance of writing and research instead of just writing a basic lab report. When a student is allowed to decide on what he/she would like to study for their research project so many necessary skills are required. The student must speak and “sell” their project by presenting to outside judges at the regional science fair, designing skills are needed for the backboard, mathematical and technological skills are used for the data collection. The actual meaning of “science” comes from the Latin verb, scire, “to know” via knowledge gained by a study or a particular branch of study (Ayto, 1990). To know encompasses all topics of interest and that is why I teach science bringing in all areas of skills and interests for the student to develop. This is not found on the district curriculum website. I want the student to be creative, to write, to sing, to explore, to draw, to decipher, and to act in order to gain “knowledge” through the sciences.

I firmly believe students should have a choice in their own curriculum of study, final assessment should come from a variety of skills displaying the student’s individual growth, and what is taught inside the classroom should be applied to help the local community and school partnerships. My principal has cut my fifteen year commitment with community partnerships for the Fort Worth Botanic Gardens, Botanical Research Institute of Texas, and the Fort Worth Science & History Museum by not approving any of my bus requests. Action science does not exist. Science education lies only in the classroom and on the district’s website. This is the educational delusion I must work in; a science classroom that is data driven to the point of paralysis and where students no longer experience real world problem solving projects. Retirement is my ticket out of this madness, but what will be the student’s ticket out?

Saturday, November 22, 2014

NEIFPE 2014 Survey Summary

Poll finds value in public schools

printed in the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette, December 1, 2014

by Phyllis Bush
with Michelle Bandor,  Judith Beineke, Susie Berry, Stu Bloom, Ron Crosby, Anne Duff, Lucy Hess, Terry Springer

Policy makers, politicians and the media love data, so the Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education (NEIFPE) decided to create a survey directed at the people whose lives are affected by the recent and ongoing education reforms. The goal was to gather data from parents, from grandparents, from taxpayers, and from the community to learn what people really think.

NEIFPE spent a great deal of time constructing the questions so as not to bias the answers. We purposefully left a place for comments after most of the questions so that respondents could clarify their responses if they wished. After reading 2,121 comments, we realized that people had a great deal to say and that they wanted their thoughts to be known.

A brief summary of the responses we received.

The majority of respondents were taxpayers (87%), public school employees (50%), and parents and grandparents of public school students (46%). They are major stakeholders in public education. We realize this is not a scientific survey; however, we believe that these respondents, particularly educators and parents, offer a significant voice not usually heard by policy makers.

The majority of respondents oppose the current policies governing schools. Their responses stress the lack of fairness in the way public schools are funded and evaluated in comparison with charter and voucher-accepting schools. The majority (86%) emphatically stated that charter schools and voucher-accepting schools receiving tax revenues should be held to the same standards as traditional public schools to help level the playing field; 86% oppose the A-F grading of schools; 97% said test scores are an inaccurate way to evaluate schools, teachers, and students; 96% felt that if private and charter schools receive tax dollars, they need to accept all students.

As one respondent commented, “Public schools should be funded by public dollars. Any other education system, whether it be charter, private, or home schooled, should be funded by the people that use that system.”

Other questions that elicited strong reactions focused on evaluation of schools and teachers using standardized tests. Since the State Board of Education recently released the school letter grades, these questions seem particularly significant. Respondents concluded that standardized test scores are inadequate measures and reflect a school’s demographics rather than a school’s quality or success. In addition, respondents said that such evaluations are both “demoralizing and demeaning.”

When answering the question, “As a taxpayer/voter, what do you expect of the schools in your community,” this comment summarizes the thoughts of the majority of the respondents about public schools.

“I expect the schools to prepare our children to live, work in, and enjoy our world, and to understand their role in being a citizen in our democracy --their rights and privileges of having a voice, and using it, through communicating with and questioning elected officials and voting to choose those officials.”

We learned:
  • The community cares about the quality of the public schools
  • Children and schools cannot be accurately evaluated by only test scores
  • Children’s growth, creativity, and knowledge are being restricted due to the emphasis on high-stakes tests.
  • All schools that receive tax dollars should be held to the same guidelines and accountability.
To see the complete survey, please visit


Tuesday, November 18, 2014

NEIFPE 2014 Survey Results

Decisions by law makers and policy makers affect the success and failure of local public schools yet often they don't take time to listen to parents, teachers or community members. Our 2014 Public Education Survey was an opportunity for respondents to express their opinions about some of the pressing issues facing local, state and national public schools.

The survey ran from October 5th through October 25th, 2014. Results can be accessed through the links below. All links are to pdf files. All comments are unedited.



NEIFPE Survey Results. Bar graphs for all survey questions except those which were open ended.


Responses to the question: What is the highest level of school you have completed or the highest degree you have received? Answer: Skilled trades apprenticeship or other post-secondary education (please specify). Click here to see the specified answers.

Responses to the question: How are you involved with public education (choose as many as are appropriate)? Answer: Other (please specify). Click here to see the specified answers

Comments for the following questions

1. Are American public schools today...

2. Are your local public schools...

3. Should tax dollars support private (including parochial) education?

4. Do you agree charter and voucher-accepting schools should be held to the same standards as traditional public schools?

5. If charter and private (including parochial) schools accept tax dollars, should they be required to accept all students including students with special needs, English Language Learners, and children of all faiths?

6. Indiana spends nearly 50 million dollars every year on high-stakes testing. Do you think standardized test scores are an adequate measure of a child's learning?

7. Do you think standardized test scores should be the primary factor in evaluating schools, teachers, and students?

8. State law mandates that all public and voucher receiving schools receive a letter grade based primarily on standardized test scores. Do you think your neighborhood schools should receive a letter grade?

9. Have any programs been cut or minimized in your neighborhood school that you want to see restored?

10a. As a taxpayer/voter, what do you expect of the schools in your community?

10b. As a teacher, what do you think is the most important thing for you to teach and for your students to learn?

10c. As a parent, what do you hope your children will learn by the time they have finished school?

11. Additional Comments