Monday, March 28, 2011

A whole new thought on Math Teacher Quality: Vern Williams in the NY Times
(fits with WA's CCSS collusion)

Looking at what is going on all around us in WA state, Mr. Williams has hit this Spot On.

Until practicing classroom teachers are allowed to make real decisions regarding curriculum, assessment, textbooks and professional development, the status of teachers will remain low.

At the moment, our profession seems to be in the hands of politicians, researchers, special interest groups, school system bureaucracies, unions, technology companies and textbook publishers. ...... Why should bright high school students decide to become teachers if they suspect that everyone will make decisions concerning their profession except them?

Mr. Williams ...teaches honors math at Longfellow Middle School in Fairfax County, Va. He was named to the National Mathematics Advisory Panel in 2006.

Note Mr. Williams was the only k-12 classroom teacher on the NMAP.

The Washington State Board of Education selected a math advisory panel, which no longer meets.

Seattle MATH Court decision

In the Seattle Times:

Appeals court sides with Seattle schools over math text choice

The Washington State Court of Appeals has reversed an earlier decision in King County Superior Court that found Seattle's choice of a new high-school math series was arbitrary and capricious.

---- be sure and check the comments at the Times.

Here is the Court ruling:

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Friday, March 11, 2011 is coming

Currently under-construction for initial issue on Monday March 14, 2011
for a new look at what is really going on in what is left of our republic.

A Tool for a more Open and Transparent Government.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

My Letter to School Directors in Seattle

Dear Seattle School Director,

It was extremely disheartening to see President Sundquist and Interim Superintendent Enfield so incredibly far off the Math Mark in the Seattle Times Editors 47 minute conversation with them.

It is absolutely appalling after various members of the public spent years testifying coupled with 10 years of worsening math results for Educationally Disadvantaged learners, to find two high level District Decision-Makers so far out of touch with reality. Not to mention the public spending over $15,000 to take Math to Court, while the Board doles out $400,000 to two criminals.

As I said last board meeting: "I've spent a little over four years telling you that to improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data .... and you still don't get it."

Here is a little YouTube video I made... quite some time ago.

WOW!!! Porter, McLaren, Mass, in court today .... and the former CAO is now interim Superintendent and both she and Pres. Sundquist could hardly be further removed from math reality.

Can someone explain to me why only 22 hrs. elapsed from Action proposing buy-out to buy-out school board meeting? {This will involve actually sending me an email or calling me at 360-920-0823)

I still find this 22 Hr. slam dunk move to be an action proposed by a Board President covering up really serious wrong doing, and giving away $400,000 in the process. Here look at the videos and what do you see?

Video presentation poor decision-making on parade Forgery ignored==>

It is quite apparent that Board President Sundquist must have drifted off during several testimonies or else he is a blatant public liar.

Note what Steve Sundquist said in an interview with the Seattle Times editors here ==>

It is hard to believe he was at the Board meeting he presided over ... given his above comments on the Superintendent's wrong doing.

-- Don't forget to write


Director Sundquist, what literature are you referring in this supposed controversy over Math? Remember you were unable to read paragraph 27 on page xxiii in NMAP before voting for the Math adoption that significantly lowered OSPI math scores for grade 10 Black students and English Language Learners in spite of $800,000 in books and $400,000 in professional development. ... Seattle got the same results as Bethel with the same text series. This was hardly a surprise.

Please Director Sundquist resign as you are apparently unable to analyze data or tell the truth.


Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

HS Math Appeals Court hearing today in Seattle

Today the District goes to WA State Appellate Court Division I. THE SPS is attempting to keep another set of very poor textbooks that produced poor results at the end of year one.

Forgery Ignored in Buying Out MGJ and DK for $400,000

First of all Watch this 2 minutes ==>

of Board President Steve Sundquist narrowly focusing on only one area to say that the Board did not believe that the Superintendent was guilty of Malfeasance. Then below start watching the testimonies that Director Sundquist watched before his ridiculous statement that the Board thought the Superintendent innocent of any malfeasance.

My original Testimony Alerting the Board to their obligation to file a police complaint for forgery.

Ricky Malone on What did the Board members know and When?

Followed by Eric Blumhagen on what the contract actually says. Without cause? How can this be?

Then my testimony on the Board's failure to see obvious and repeated wrong doing.
WOW!! 22 hours for the Cover up .... rather than actually looking for cause.

No transparency instead a whitewash. Who could miss the wrong doing? Apparently 7 Board members.

Then the fine testimony on the Board's many failures. David Edleman from Ingraham speaks. He finds a culture of School Board failure of oversight and failure to ask questions.

Now it turns out that Sundquist and Martin-Morris were likely aware of wrong doing at least a year ago. How convenient to only have 22 hours for the public to react. Director Sundquist wrote the Action Reports on March 1 released at 8:00 PM for the Board meeting the next day March 2 at 6 PM to make the two Buy Outs.

THIS WAS A $400,000 attempted cover-up. Director Sundquist should resign ASAP.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Recall Petition served on SPI Randy Dorn through the Office of Secretary of State

The Recall process now shifts to Thurston County Superior Court for the Next Round.

I received the following March 3, 2011 from the Office of the Secretary of State:

The relevant legal pieces are below.

Article 1 Section 33 of the Washington Constitution:

Recall of Elective Officers.

Every elective public officer of the state of Washington expect [except] judges of courts of record is subject to recall and discharge by the legal voters of the state, or of the political subdivision of the state, from which he was elected whenever a petition demanding his recall, reciting that such officer has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office, stating the matters complained of, signed by the percentages of the qualified electors thereof, hereinafter provided, the percentage required to be computed from the total number of votes cast for all candidates for his said office to which he was elected at the preceding election, is filed with the officer with whom a petition for nomination, or certificate for nomination, to such office must be filed under the laws of this state, and the same officer shall call a special election as provided by the general election laws of this state, and the result determined as therein provided.

RCW 29A.56.110

Whenever any legal voter of the state or of any political subdivision thereof, either individually or on behalf of an organization, desires to demand the recall and discharge of any elective public officer of the state or of such political subdivision, as the case may be, under the provisions of sections 33 and 34 of Article 1 of the Constitution, the voter shall prepare a typewritten charge, reciting that such officer, naming him or her and giving the title of the office, has committed an act or acts of malfeasance, or an act or acts of misfeasance while in office, or has violated the oath of office, or has been guilty of any two or more of the acts specified in the Constitution as grounds for recall. The charge shall state the act or acts complained of in concise language, give a detailed description including the approximate date, location, and nature of each act complained of, be signed by the person or persons making the charge, give their respective post office addresses, and be verified under oath that the person or persons believe the charge or charges to be true and have knowledge of the alleged facts upon which the stated grounds for recall are based.

For the purposes of this chapter:

(1) "Misfeasance" or "malfeasance" in office means any wrongful conduct that affects, interrupts, or interferes with the performance of official duty;

(a) Additionally, "misfeasance" in office means the performance of a duty in an improper manner; and

(b) Additionally, "malfeasance" in office means the commission of an unlawful act;

(2) "Violation of the oath of office" means the neglect or knowing failure by an elective public officer to perform faithfully a duty imposed by law.

Sufficiency Hearing - RCW 29A.56.140

Within fifteen days after receiving the petition, the superior court shall have conducted a hearing on and shall have determined, without cost to any party, (1) whether or not the acts stated in the charge satisfy the criteria for which a recall petition may be filed, and (2) the adequacy of the ballot synopsis. The clerk of the superior court shall notify the person subject to recall and the person demanding recall of the hearing date. Both persons may appear with counsel. The court may hear arguments as to the sufficiency of the charges and the adequacy of the ballot synopsis. The court shall not consider the truth of the charges, but only their sufficiency. An appeal of a sufficiency decision shall be filed in the supreme court as specified by RCW 29A.56.270. The superior court shall correct any ballot synopsis it deems inadequate. Any decision regarding the ballot synopsis by the superior court is final. The court shall certify and transmit the ballot synopsis to the officer subject to recall, the person demanding the recall, and either the secretary of state or the county auditor, as appropriate.


I believe that the State Attorney General writes the Recall Synopsis and then forwards that to the Thurston County Superior Court.

Recall Petition filed March 1, with the Secretary of State for the recall of Mr. Randy Dorn from the Office of Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Seattle School Board Streaming available of 3/2/11 meeting

The FIRING of Seattle School Superintendent Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson and her crony Don Kennedy took place at this school board meeting.

The 20 testimonies are perhaps as a package the best ever from the Citizens of Seattle.

NOTE: THE SEATTLE HS MATH "Discovering" Adoption Appeals court hearing will be on MARCH 8, 2011

Here is the video of the Board meeting of 3/2/2011:

Meeting Starts with 20 ... 3 minute testimonies

Noam Gundle begins at minute 7:00

Noam is the first Speaker mentioning Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and is Brilliant

10:30 Counselor Jennifer Greenstein speaks about RIFing and no money while spending $2 million on waste. Then yields time to C. Hewitt. "How about putting money where your sound bites are."

14:00 Omari Tahir

17:20 Chris Jackins

20:20 Ricky Malone (What did you know and when did you know it?)
& 1 minute of Jesse Hagopian at 22:20 (Don't try to pin all the corruption on MGJ there are many more Responsible)

23:45 David Edlemann from Ingraham HS..... offers constructive criticism. Failure of Board Culture .... SAO saw failure of Board oversight ... there was a Board failure to ask questions an amazing incuriousness to ask question while approving every "MGJ Proposal"

26:50 Eric Blumhagen -- firing without cause ... explains how bizarre that idea is ... without cause??? Eric read the contract ... The Superintendent has repeatedly lied to you and that is cause .... examples of her dishonesty goes on and on and on. Why are you wasting $400,000 on a BUYOUT.

30:10 Anastacia Samuelson ... goes through the big list of MGJ's failures.

33:33 Chris Stewart ... MGJ was trained at BROAD Academy ... explains all about that training. Tom Payzant facilitated Goodloe-Johnson's evaluation.
This like many other testimonies is a MUCH WATCH.

36:20 Dora Taylor ... on 17 reasons why the Superintendent should be fired with cause.
Time for listening and responding to the community not the corporations.

39:40 Dan Dempsey .. Evidence of the Superintendent's wrong doing is everywhere but the Board chooses not to look. The 22 hr. introduction/ Action item emergency at one meeting is clearly a white wash to hide from further thoughtful investigation. This $400,000 Buy Out looks like "HUSH" money.

7 more Speakers follow

42:00 Carlina Brown Pres. of RBHS PTSA speaks about good things happening at RBHS in spite of the District Administration.

45:20 Angie Wood, elementary counselor, yields to Wendy Harper, mom, attorney and PTA member speaking on the need for counselors.

48:45 Olga Addae president of the Seattle Education Association speaks

52:08 Don Alexander ... sees a problem with this action .... Media quasi-legal lynching.

56:05 Robert Femiano ... speaks on Network Capacity now needed for MAP testing ... (wasting time and frustrating students and teachers ... so when has that been a central office concern) ... Then goes to the topic of Punishing Whistle Blowers ... and the culture of intimidation ... whistle blowing is at your own risk.

59:30 Harriet Walden yields to Dorothy Hollingsworth, the first African American School Board member in Seattle.

64:05 Corey Goldstein, school counselor, (nonsense = school counselors are expendable) counselors save lives in many ways. 66:25 Quotes Dan Newell of OSPI.

67:32 Stanley Hoffman a maintenance employee and painter ... speaks about the enormous back-log of maintenance work. The maintenance of buildings is not being done adequately. When the District has problems with numbers financially ... the result is crumbling buildings. Note: the District spends an inordinate amount of funding on Central Administration.

At around minute 71:00 School Board President Director Sunquist begins the Spinning of Reality


PI article on the interim Superintendent Enfield:

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Revised Filing for the Recall of Rep. Sharon Tamiko Santos

Likely to be filed on Friday. March 4, 2011

I am in favor of laws and in favor of recall and discharge for Rep. Sharon Tamiko Santos. (same for SPI Dorn)

Does any individual or institution care to read laws, observe them, or enforce them?

Clearly the Seattle School Board rarely has much interest, but does the media have any interest. The bigger question is now where elected officials and the courts stand on enforcement of existing laws or favor any accountability?

I know in regard to enforcement of RCW 28A 645.020 more than one superior court judge in King County ignores violations.

The huge question before our State now involves the adoption of the Common Core State Standards.

#1. Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn violated RCW 28A 655.071

#2. House Education Committee Chairperson Rep. Santos refused to schedule a hearing on HB 1891, a bill to delay the adoption of the CCSS for at least two years. In her opinion the Bill was not submitted in time to get a scheduled hearing.

Rep. Santos’ actions of ignoring Mr. Dorn’s above legal violation and her refusal to schedule an HB 1891 hearing may violate her oath of office to support the Constitution and Laws of the United States as well as the same for Washington State. Her suppression of substantive discussion on such an important matter is completely unjustified.

The adoption by Washington State of the Common Core State Standards could well be in violation of Federal Law. Major problems lie ahead for the CCSS based on Sec 103b of Public Law 96-88, which states the following:

(b) No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law.

The Smart and Balanced Assessment Consortium is not just designing assessments, they are designing curriculum which is specifically prohibited by law. While under present circumstances some people and many of Washington State’s elected officials may be ignoring this violation, this will likely not be sustainable over time as we see ever changing political climates. There could be a major change in attitude with regard to this issue in 2012. There is no justification to make this change “to the CCSS” because it will offer no permanent benefit to Washington students and is likely to end up in more chaos with substantial costs and unintended consequences. A two year delay in this decision would not preclude us from joining this effort in the future and a two year delay could save us from many huge problems that loom on the horizon. Rep. Santos is not acting to support either the laws or the Constitutions of the State and US with her refusal to allow discussion of HB 1891 through a public hearing.

While the assessment consortia PARCC and SMARTER involved with CCSS might be considered independent contractors to a federal governmental agency, their current work with state departments of education to develop curriculum frameworks on which to build out assessments, with state and federal funding, should follow legal and standard protocols vis a vis open meeting laws, good faith inclusive procedures, and abide state and federal divisions of power and decision making.

Curriculum frameworks are what Boards of Education are charged with developing, within a robust, open process, giving opportunity for public comment and engagement, and with eventual approval by majority vote.

It is not a process to be conducted behind the scenes as PARCC and Smarter and some participating states appear now to attempt.

A publicly funded body must abide law and regulations Activities and feedback must be available for inspection, (and FOIA); drafts and changes must be justified by the body itself.

The two testing consortia PARCC and Smarter should be themselves holding public meetings and should have a website for broad public comment and with their responses. This is not the case.

State boards of education should be engaged in good faith efforts to public engagement in the development of the all important "model curriculum frameworks." Engagement should include broad based expert input in the writing, expedition of distribution of drafts and opportunity for comment from the education community and general public across their state, and including the state legislature. There is little if any sufficient evidence this will occur.

The actions of Rep. Santos should encourage engagement, unfortunately her actions repress public engagement.

the attempted end run around THE LAW

From this LINK;

In creating the Department of Education, Congress specified that:

No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law. (Section 103[b], Public Law 96-88)
Thus, the Department does not

* establish schools and colleges;
* develop curricula;
* set requirements for enrollment and graduation;
* determine state education standards; or
* develop or implement testing to measure whether states are meeting their education standards.*

These are responsibilities handled by the various states and districts as well as by public and private organizations of all kinds, not by the U.S. Department of Education.

* Since 1969, the Department's National Center for Education Statistics has conducted the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). It is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what American students know and can do in major academic subjects and provides a wealth of data about the condition of education in the U.S. NAEP is not the same as testing done by each state to measure how well its students meet the state's academic standards; however, a large discrepancy between children's proficiency on a state's test and their performance on NAEP may suggest the state needs to take a closer look at its standards and assessments and consider making improvements.


Through the "Race to the Top" funding and the support for the SMART and BALANCED ASSESSMENT CONSORTIA etc. ... the Secretary of Education and the US DoE are attempting an end run around the US Constitution and US Law.


The Common Core State Standards are poorly written, inferior to Washington's existing Math standards, will cost our state $182 million dollars to implement (mostly in unfunded mandates to local districts), and will result in more educational chaos in schools throughout the state. IMHO the worst thing about the CCSS is that they will essentially require that we give up our state sovereignty over education. Parents, Teachers, and the public at large will be removed from input about what our kids are learning in favor of a national one size fits all approach.

The Smart and Balanced Assessment Consortia is not just designing assessments, but they are designing curriculum which is specifically prohibited by law. While under present circumstances people may be ignoring this violation, this will not be sustainable over time as we see ever changing political climates. In fact, it wouldn't be far fetched to believe that there could be a major change in attitude with regard to this issue in 2012. There is no justification to make this change because it will offer no permanent benefit to Washington students and is likely to end up in more chaos with substantial costs and unintended consequences. A two year delay could save us from huge problems that loom on the horizon.

Don Knotts as Board President
Tim Conway as General Counsel
would have done better

Read the Seattle Superintendent's contract ==>

See Section II C.

It hardly appears that the Superintendent is the employee of the Board and is under much supervision from the Board.

Next Read the Affirmation of Responsibility ==>

Note: #6, #7, #8, & #14

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

About Superintendent's pay in NY state

From the NY Times article:

Mr. Cuomo’s proposal would tie superintendents’ maximum pay to the size of their school districts, with the leaders of New York’s largest districts limited to a salary of $175,000 and those in the smallest limited to $125,000. It would not affect the New York City school system, where the chancellor, Cathleen P. Black, earns $250,000 a year.

The bill was introduced after a month’s worth of sharp words from Mr. Cuomo aimed at school superintendents and their pay. He singled out administrative compensation as one area where districts could find savings as they worked to absorb his proposed $1.5 billion reduction in state school aid, which has drawn criticism from teachers’ unions and education groups.

Cuomo Seeks to Cap Pay for School Superintendents
Published: February 28, 2011

My "To Do List for March 1, 2011"
at Secretary of State's Office
#1 Filing Recall of SPI Randy Dorn
#2 Filing Recall of Rep. Santos

Dan Dempsey's March 1, 2011 to do list:

#1 Filing Recall for SPI Randy Dorn

#2 Filing Recall for Rep. Sharon Tamiko Santos

Why can't elected officials follow the law?

A bunch of house cleaning needs to be done.

For that matter why can't Maria Goodloe-Johnson follow the law?

Oh right .... because the elected Seattle School Directors do not require her to do so.

UPDATE I did make the filing for the Recall of MR. DORN at the Secretary of State's office on March 1.

I need to take the Santos recall to King County and have just revised that document.

Heading up to Seattle for the WED. NIGHT huge School Board Meeting.

The SPS may need to use the huge screen in Seahawk's Quest Field for The Crowd Overflow.

Arithmetic is Important
Hot off the Press

In Defense of Mathematical Foundations: Math Standards tend to short change Arithmetic. But mastery of Arithmetic is just what students need to succeed in Higher Level Math.

In Defense of Mathematical Foundations.

Educational Leadership,
68(6):70-73, March 2011
W. Stephen Wilson.

Here is the article link at Dr. Wilson's website:

Aren't the School Directors to Supervise the Superintendent?
My letter to the Seattle School Board

Dear School Directors and in particular President Sundquist,

Now Forgery is ignored by the School Board.

You have one employee to supervise. You have not done an adequate job of that. This inadequate job is continuing. Why?

Why am I the one contacting Sgt. Charles of Fraud and Forgery division of the Seattle Police Department? I've given you all the evidence and yet not a single director has been courteous enough to even reply.

Please see this posting

It is time for Directors to step up to the plate and require accountability. Begin by firing the Superintendent with cause. A buy-out will reek of more covering-up.

Step two for accountability would be for all four directors whose terms expire in November 2011 to announce they will not be filing and running for re-election.

Did any of you actually listen to my testimony at the last school board meeting?

It contained the following:

"In fact, the entire Board ignored the submission of forged documents submitted to the court by the Chief Academic Officer in an $800,000 contract approval for more discriminatory practices.

Board members: The Seattle Police Department will be happy to accept your complaint in regard to Class C felony forgery involving Seattle School District administrators. In fact your oath of office as Directors requires you to file that complaint against the administrators. Please support the constitution and laws of our state."

Why am I contacting Sgt. Charles and not Board President Sundquist?

Sincerely looking for better performance from ya'll.

Dan Dempsey

See posting below for more information.