Welcome to " The Math UnderGround " -- Seattle & Washington State

E2SHB 1443 ... Insanity reigns in the State Senate on 4/12 30 Senators go gaga over ed reform Where is the evidence?

2011-04-13T15:37:00.000-07:00

OMG this is beyond irrational .....

Get the complete scoop E2SHB 1443 on School-Truth here.

Remember WPPSS when there was an attempt to build 5 nukes without consideration of number of laborers in the trades and without ever building anything before... => result a massive BOND Default.

===========
Senators...... Anyone remember Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) ?.... WPPSS tried to build five nuclear power plants simultaneously .... but failed to create any prototypes and the failure to build sequentially was an enormous mistake that had a huge negative impact upon the public well-being.

WPPSS has at least two too many parallels to the CCSS proposal.

(1) No orderly rational approach to the problem because states are in an Obama/Duncan Federal hurry …. thus no prototype is proposed {Fast Food like Test creation with 40+ franchises needed now, would you invest in this without even a single successful outlet in existence? Only RttT bribe money put this on the table.}.

(2) WPPSS had never built anything of any size before..... the testing consortia have never created anything before either.

It is way past time for the legislature to stop wasting resources on incomplete, defective education proposals. I figured that being out of money this session would lead to better decision-making. I’ve been wrong on that so far.

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

2011-03-28T21:11:00.000-07:00

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/27/how-to-raise-the-status-of-teachers/let-us-teach

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

2011-03-28T20:06:00.001-07:00

In the Seattle Times:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014623419_mathbook29m.html

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:

http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/index.cfm?fa=opinions.showOpinion&filename=650360MAJ

Major Battle Gound CCSS and More (EdNews.org)

2011-03-24T23:20:00.000-07:00

http://www.educationnews.org/blogs/152220.html

Washington State: Major Battleground for CCSS and More

School-Truth.com is coming

2011-03-11T14:42:00.000-08:00

Currently under-construction for initial issue on Monday March 14, 2011

School-Truth.com 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.

My Letter to School Directors in Seattle

2011-03-08T16:24:00.000-08:00

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdAbbyM5ZLo

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... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEpbSicnvr4 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==>

http://mathunderground.blogspot.com/2011/03/forgery-ignored-in-buying-out-mgj-and.html

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 ==>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiO_V-s9dU8

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.
-----

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

HS Math Appeals Court hearing today in Seattle

2011-03-08T05:45:00.000-08:00

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

2011-03-08T05:10:00.000-08:00

First of all Watch this 2 minutes ==>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiO_V-s9dU8

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgcmSsrJ_c8

Ricky Malone on What did the Board members know and When?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkwzLiPFrNw

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.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVXRdBouyCs

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. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLvNYAFCVPE

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.

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

2011-03-03T16:58:00.000-08:00

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:
http://www.box.net/shared/5b9ax43y6d

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

2011-03-03T11:13:00.000-08:00

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:

http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/video.asp?ID=4794

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:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/436424_enfield02.html

Revised Filing for the Recall of Rep. Sharon Tamiko Santos

2011-03-02T16:04:00.000-08:00

http://www.box.net/shared/6sjp3uttay

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)

2011-03-02T15:03:00.000-08:00

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.

CCSS - the attempted end run around THE LAW

2011-03-02T11:49:00.000-08:00

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 PresidentTim Conway as General Counselwould have done better

2011-03-02T10:15:00.000-08:00

Read the Seattle Superintendent's contract ==>
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/board/10-11agendas/030211agenda/GoodloeJohnsoncontract.pdf

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 ==>
http://www.box.net/shared/jhirm392yz

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

About Superintendent's pay in NY state

2011-03-01T05:38:00.000-08:00

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
By THOMAS KAPLAN
Published: February 28, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/nyregion/01superintendent.html?src=twrhp

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

2011-03-01T05:00:00.000-08:00

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

2011-03-01T01:52:00.000-08:00

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:

http://www.math.jhu.edu/~wsw/ED/ramblepublished.pdf

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

2011-03-01T01:26:00.000-08:00

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.

Forgery: the SPS Action Report forNew Tech Network $800,000 contract

2011-02-28T22:41:00.000-08:00

Dear Sgt. Charles of the Seattle Police,

The following information will support my charge of forgery in decision making in the Seattle Public Schools. The Superintendent Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson and the Chief Academic Officer produced an Action Report on March 12, 2010. This Action Report was introduced at the Seattle School Board meeting on March 17, 2010. It was based on a document masquerading as the original.

On Feb. 3, 2010, without intelligently applying any relevant data or common sense the Superintendent's proposal was approved by the Board for an $800,000 contract that did not match the action report. Upon the filing of an appeal on March 5, 2010, the Superintendent and the Board did a "nevermind" .... and introduced the NTN contract with a new Action Report, this one was based on a forged document. This NTN contract was approved by the Board on April 7, 2010.

Subsequently another appeal was filed and eventually the forgery discovered.

Here is the "Original Action Report" that was abandoned after appeal filed in Superior Court.

Here is the contract that the Board approved on Feb. 3, 2010 that did not match the above linked Action Report.

Action Report of March 12, 2010 introduced on March 17, 2010 the Board approved the contract on April 7, 2010.

Letter in which I received the Original Anderson Memo on which the Action Report was supposedly based.

The document that the SPS submitted to the Court that masqueraded as the original Anderson Memo.

---
Legal Affairs Officer Joy Stevens wrote:

The email from Susan Enfield to the School Board Directors with two attachments (January 29, 2010 memo from Eric M. Anderson to Dr. Goodloe-Johnson regarding Standards-based achievement results for New Technology Network (NTN) schools, and February 1,2010 memo from Dr. Susan Enfield and Michael Tolley to the School Board Directors regarding Comparisons between NTN, Project Lead the Way and other STEM Models) sent on February 2, 2010 at 7:31 AM

· The two attachments to the February 2, 2010 email as listed above (attached separately in case you had difficulty opening them)

· The January 29, 2010 memo from Eric M. Anderson to Dr. Goodloe-Johnson regarding
Standards-based achievement results for New Technology Network (NTN) schools that I sent to Dan Dempsey on March 16, 2010 in response to his request

You will note that the final version of the January 29, 2010 memo from Eric M. Anderson that I sent Dan Dempsey on March 16, 2010 is the exact same version that was sent to the School Board Directors on February 2, 2010. Any other versions of that memo would be draft versions created prior to finalization.

Please let me know if you have any questions or would like anything else.
Best regards,

Joy Stevens
Joy A. Stevens
Sr. Legal Assistant/Public Records Officer
General Counsel's Office
Seattle Public Schools
206-252-0117

-----

Note this version submitted to the court is missing the original's last paragraph:

The “Forgery” occurred in that the memo version used to write the Action Report and submitted as evidence to the court was NOT the memo sent to the Board. The memo MGJ used appears to be an earlier draft version. The memo used by MGJ was a less than complete version that omitted several important components of the Original Memo sent to the School Board on 2-2-10.

Among these significant differences was the omission of the entire last paragraph from the original Eric Anderson memo:

"Since the data is mixed, the primary question is whether Seattle Public Schools believes strongly in the Research based NTN learning model. Success will more than likely depend on the quality of program implementation. Knowing ahead of time that the NTN model does not guarantee strong results only enhances the degree to which the burden falls on the district and the schools to achieve success. (Bold and underline added)

How could a board member defend a vote for a non-competitive bid contract of $800,000 with that piece of evidence in the Action Report?

More importantly:

“How could the District successfully defend an appeal in Superior Court if the appellants used that piece of evidence?”

It appears that Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson and Chief Academic Officer Enfield had a solution.

Solution: Do not use that memo, but claim it was used, and then exclude it from the evidence provided to the court.

Here is CAO Enfield's May 20, 2010 documentation to the court in submitting the evidence. See page 3 and notice this submission contains "no certification" that this information is correct. The information provided to the court is not correct as it does not contain the memo Dr. Eric Anderson sent to the School Board.

-----

We eventually dropped the NTN legal appeal when we found out that the State Attorney General and the State Auditor will not act on actions that are in current litigation.

It has been a most bizarre series of events trying to get any accountability from anyone in investigating this Class C Felony Forgery issue.

RCW 28A 645.020 has requirements that the SPS Board continually fails to follow when appeals of their decisions are filed.

RCW 28A 645.020 states:
"Within twenty days of service of the notice of appeal, the school board, at its expense, or the school official, at such official's expense, shall file the complete transcript of the evidence and the papers and exhibits relating to the decision for which a complaint has been filed. Such filings shall be certified to be correct.

===============
Seven days after the Superintendent submitted the Action Report of March 12, 2010, she had little knowledge of much in regard to evidence on which the Action Report was based. LOOK HERE.

Here is a report from Dr. Eric Anderson on "The Correlates of High Achieving Schools", which the Superintendent and Board routinely ignore.

==============

Additionally Director Sunquist facilitated the approval of this $800,000 contract by stating that the school he visited in California, New Tech Sacramento, had an apparently high graduation rate. I had provided him statistics showing that the first two cohorts of graduates from NT Sacramento had graduation rates of 37% and 44% and yet he voted for the NTN Contract.

Additionally Director Martin-Morris stated that he was for the NTN contract in voting for the NTN contract on 2-3-2010 because of information he had about success at New Tech Hillsdale in Durham, NC. I provided then him with information that NT Hillsdale was in the lowest 19% of NC Schools. He ignored the relevant data, did not respond, and approved the NTN contract again on April 7, 2010, without comment.

==========

The above information is correct to the best of my knowledge. Should you need additional information, I can likely supply it. Please ask the King County Prosecutor to investigate this forgery.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Pottergate Poster

2011-02-28T21:39:00.000-08:00

Here is a snappy poster (3.5 meg .pdf)

Featuring Fred Stephens, Silas Potter, and MGJ.

Common Core State Standards SPI Randy Dorn Violates State Law and House Educ. Chair Santos gives her OK

2011-02-28T19:49:00.000-08:00

Washington's possible adoption of the $183+ million dollar CCSS is not receiving a thoughtful discussion. .. Why??

RCW 28A.655.071 states clearly:

(2) By January 1, 2011, the superintendent of public instruction shall submit to the education committees of the house of representatives and the senate:

(a) A detailed comparison of the provisionally adopted standards and the state essential academic learning requirements as of June 10, 2010, including the comparative level of rigor and specificity of the standards and the implications of any identified differences; and

(b) An estimated timeline and costs to the state and to school districts to implement the provisionally adopted standards, including providing necessary training, realignment of curriculum, adjustment of state assessments, and other actions.

======
Superintendent of Public Instruction clearly violated the law by making the above submission....
.... on January 31, 2011 = .. 30 days late.
(See this from OSPI Public Records officer Wilson.)

There was a hearing on Feb 4, 2011. In response to that hearing of Feb 4, 2011, Representative Brad Klippert wrote HB 1891 to delay the CCSS adoption by at least two years. Rep. Klippert submitted that bill on Feb. 8, 2011. House Chair Santos never allowed that bill a hearing as she stated through her legislative assistant that HB 1891 was submitted too late for her to schedule a hearing.

The REALLY BIG QUESTION for House Education Chair Sharon Tamiko Santos is why Randy Dorn gets a complete pass for his flagrant 30 day violation of RCW 28A.655.071

============
It is my opinion that:

(1) the $183 million over 5 years should be headed to Washington Classrooms and not used as a stimulus act for more levels of administration.

(2) Arne Duncan's "Race to the Top" is little more than a "Race to the Bank" for privileged groups and corporations.

(3) The 37th District in Seattle has the lowest scoring schools in Seattle. Of 47 "failing schools" in the state, three are located in Seattle and two: "failing" Hawthorne and "failing" Cleveland are in the 37th. The Reps. from the 37th are Santos and Pettigrew. It is long past time for these two to begin assisting in creating a better learning environment for students in the 37th. Rep. Santos was an active supporter of Mr. Dorn in his 2008 election. Rep. Santos needs to now be supporting students in the 37th and the processes of a republic NOT Mr. Dorn's violation of the LAW.

----------------
Here is the Seattle Times Op-Ed from Dr. Cliff Mass on the Common Core Math Standards.

Is America's best high school soft on math? Washington PostJay Matthews

2011-02-28T12:09:00.000-08:00

Is America's best high school soft on math?

=======
Relates what happens when the primary goal of academic excellence is sacrificed to the goal of social transformation.

Seattle Times displays complete ignorance once again

2011-02-17T00:04:00.000-08:00

Check it out and do not miss the comments.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2014247489_edit17teachers.html
------------

OSPI has spent the last 14 years trying to make work, what they would like to have work and it has been almost a complete failure. Using what had been proven to work elsewhere was not going to happen with Ed leadership in WA State running the SHOW.

Now look at the Times. This article reports on what the Times Editorial Board would have liked to have happened at the hearing, as if it actually happened. Reporting what actually happened at the hearing is NOT going to happen, because its the Times.

New TIMSS Video Public Use Website

2011-02-16T20:18:00.000-08:00

Announcing Launch of New TIMSS Video Public Use Website

We are pleased to announce that the 53 public use lessons collected as part of the TIMSS video studies are now available for everyone on a new website, http://www.timssvideo.com/.

Users must register on the site to access the videos, but registration is free. In addition to the 53 full-length videos of eighth-grade mathematics and science lessons from seven countries, the site also provides full English-translation subtitles for each lesson, a searchable transcript, and a set of resources collected with each lesson such as scanned text materials and teacher commentaries. The site also includes a discussion forum where users can share ideas for how they are using the site, and suggest new features that might be added in the future.

The site is a project of UCLA and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Funding was provided by The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Please explore the site, and feedback is always welcome!

~Jim Stigler, UCLA

The Facts and CCSS ... The public is getting shafted

2011-02-16T14:56:00.000-08:00

The failure to delay the legislature's 2010 6696 approval of the CCSSI, done one year ago, will obligate the taxpayers to spend $183 million. Of this amount more than $160 million will come directly from local school districts.

If HB 1891 were passed to delay CCSS adoption for at least two years, then we could revise WA standards if needed.

Instead we will be forced to buy unproven brand X, yet again.

States are free right now to benchmark their standards to the CCSS. But that’s an option we retain only by rejecting or delaying adoption of CCSS. With the passage of 6696, legislators put themselves into the position that they must now take a position (vote) to either delay or reject CCSS, or we lose the option to benchmark our state standards by default.

Note there is no assessment scheduled of the CCSS until Spring 2015.

We are buying an expensive half-baked product prematurely. Buying more nonsense is a fact, unless the legislature acts and fast. By Friday, if a bill to delay did not get a committee hearing, it will be too late.

Call 1-800-562-6000 NOW.

Reps. Pettigrew and Santos are failing to act in the best interests of students in the 37th. Why?

=============================

{more wisdom from Mike}

Note: There is scant evidence to support the CCSSI as likely to improve anything, except perhaps some corporation's bottom lines.

On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that the CCSSI is about the centralization of control coupled with the homogenization of education markets to benefit certain well-connected & organized companies from both the technology and publishing sectors.

Neither of these scenarios would be likely to occur absent the coercive reins of federal initiatives & dollars.
========

State officials were bribed to pass 6696 by the hope for "Race to the Top" dollars of which WA received none.

What is the excuse for folly this time? Perhaps head of House Education Committee Representative Sharon Tamiko Santos could explain.

Seattle School Board Testimony 2-16-2011 ... NSAP = increasingly separate and unequal schools ... Forgery Complaint Needed

2011-02-16T13:02:00.000-08:00

Link to full testimony as .pdf ==>http://www.box.net/shared/oh1vp70qpe

Tonight we have a one meeting introduction/action item about the New Student Assignment Plan, which deals with an immediate need. Unfortunately it ignores the true NSAP emergency, the failure to have any mechanism to make every school a quality school.

Over four years ago, I began testifying here with the intent of improving school quality. I’ve submitted evidence, which has either been ignored or rejected in Board decision-making. The result is now greater math achievement gaps for all classifications of educationally disadvantaged learners. This is particularly true for Southeast Seattle’s Schools in the 37th District.

Yesterday OSPI Math Director, Greta Bornemann, wrote an email that states:
-----------------------
For far too long Special Ed and ELL students were ignored in the math world. There wasn’t good evidence for how to support teachers,

[ and quite frankly for many districts with limited funds, reading has been the focus. But much of that is changing. I believe, with all its faults, part of the reason people are paying attention is because of No Child Left Behind. We’ve always had a problem supporting teachers working with Special Ed and ELL kids,]

but we are beginning to shine a light on this issue.

Thankfully, we do have some new research to guide our work.

The National Math Advisory Panel (NMAP) is one such landmark document. I have a copy of the document close to my desk and use it constantly to guide my thinking.
------------------------

How shocking that the OSPI Math Director, who spoke to you for 11 minutes before your highly discriminatory High School math adoption approval now calls the NMAP new research. It was released in March of 2008, 14 months before your “arbitrary and capricious action”, which lowered Black student pass rates to 12.5%, increased that achievement gap to 55% and lowered ELL pass rates by 4.5% in a year when the state’s ELL rate went up.

The Superintendent’s response was to appeal the court ruling rather than to reconsider that decision and select suitable math materials. The Superintendent’s appeal was supported by four board members, who refuse to fulfill their obligation under the law to provide certified correct transcripts of evidence to the court, when board decisions are appealed.

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.

Get with it... start acting to close achievement Gaps not widen them.

Also please request a delay in the state approval of Common Core Standards if you wish to do anything positive about closing the achievements gaps your Superintendent so often acts to create.

Urge the passage of House Bill 1891. Complete information is available on my Blog The Math Underground. Please call 1-800-562-6000 urging passage of HB 1891 to delay passage of the Common Core Standards. It will stop the spending of $183 million on more levels of bureaucratic nonsense.

Thank you, Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr. http://mathunderground.blogspot.com/

Great News: SPD will accept forgery complaint involving Seattle School Administrators

2011-02-16T12:22:00.000-08:00

From the Office of the King County Prosecutor.

Mr. Dempsey,

I have had a chance to look into this issue. I spoke with an attorney in our Fraud Unit and she spoke with SPD. Sgt. Darrell Charles of SPD did not know why a report was not taken in response to your complaint. At this point he suggests that you contact SPD again and ask to file a report. If you are again told that a report will not be taken, please ask for Sgt. Charles.

I hope this information is helpful.

Janine Joly
Sr. Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
----

From: Dan Dempsey [mailto:dempsey_dan@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 9:18 PM
To: Joly, Janine

Dear Ms. Joly,

Our level of frustration with the laws and legal system of the city, state, and county has reached an extremely high level.

I will not go into great detail but get right to the heart of one matter.

The class C felony of forgery was committed by one or two Seattle Public Schools administrators involving an $800,000 contract.

I verbally reported this to the K.C. Prosecutor's office and was told no action would be taken without a police report.

I went to the Seattle Police and they told me they will not allow a complaint to be filed as this should be handled by the Attorney General.

I went to the AG and they will not act without a referral from a County Prosecutor, the Governor, or the State Auditor.

I went to the Governor's office and after three visits was informed it is the King County prosecutor's job to investigate this alleged felony.

In a review of the laws of the state I appears to me that the King County prosecutor is to investigate felonies.

So how do we get the King County Prosecutor to act?

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr. for the Seattle Shadow School Board

Note: we dropped an appeal of a school board decision that involved this forgery so the matter would no longer be in litigation and could be investigated and prosecuted.

These laws should not exempt public school officials from the law.

Do they?

Thoughts from Mike on Common Core Standards

2011-02-16T11:15:00.000-08:00

Common Core State Standards will continue the "dumbing down" of Washington's Students. -- Dan Dempsey

The Rest is from Mike:

Paving the way for the redistribution of education resources (money & talent).

The “equity” versus “equality” debate is over (as if it ever really happened). We are on the path of government imposed “equitable” redistribution, and not nearly enough recognize it, much less question or resist. It is a lie… it will not work… it never has. The problem with any “equitable” redistribution model is that they’re based on the false assumption that the decision making collective (bureaucracies) are honest, benevolent, virtuous, and endowed with uncommon wisdom. Somebody must decide what is “fair”, and it won’t be you or I. It will be impersonal bureaucratic collectives. Nobel laureate Milton Freidman explained it much clearer than I can, 30 years ago to Phil Donahue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjH4QBSwWlg&feature=related

Continuous ongoing violations of the law in the SPS need to STOP ... but do not look to the Directors to act.

2011-02-16T01:41:00.000-08:00

It is the responsibility of the Seattle Police Department to investigate the Class C felony of Forgery that occurred in the construction of the New Tech Contract action report that resulted in an $800,000 contract award for a sub-standard product.

For the hearing on November 18, 2010 Directors Sundquist, Maier (a lawyer), Carr, and Martin-Morris submitted declarations for the Court in a recall sufficiency hearing in which each declared: that even though the law requires the board to submit a certified correct transcript in an appeal and this was not done. It was someone else's responsibility to do so ... staff's fault if there is any fault but not the fault of any director.

This is legally incorrect it is the Board's responsibility. STRIKE #1.

The oath of office clearly calls upon the Directors to support the US Constitution, the Washington Constitution, and the Laws of the State. They are not doing well there.

Hummm ... so how is it Directors have failed to report the failures to follow RCW 28A 645.020 and in particular the submission of forged evidence in the NTN contract approval decision. The forgery was used in the construction of the Action Report submitted to the Board by the Superintendent and CAO. The forged evidence was submitted to the court by the CAO, as if it was a correct original. Why have directors failed to report the Class C felony of Forgery committed by one or two administrators in the SPS to the Seattle Police Department? STRIKE #2

Do the Directors ever hold anyone accountable for anything?

Here comes a possible Strike #3.... Will any Director act to ask the Seattle Police to investigate this felony of forgery?

===================

Another answer to why the huge achievement gaps ... complete abdication of the responsibility to make evidence based decisions ... these folks make decisions using forged evidence and apparently could care less.

===============

New Student Assignment Plan ... every school a quality school ... what a joke.

Increased separation and increasingly unequal schools ... quite a plan.

The Beatles, Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, and the mess we are in. Looking to John Lennon to save us.

2011-02-15T23:41:00.000-08:00

Famous sociologist and thinker Malclom Gladwell tells us that to become an expert requires more than talent it requires practice and lots of it. 10,000 hours = 3 hrs. a day for 10 years. The exceptionally talented Beatles put in way more than 10,000 hours before their assent to stardom.

"The greatest athletes, entrepreneurs, musicians and scientists emerge only after spending at least three hours a day for a decade mastering their chosen field.

Ability, according to Gladwell, is just one factor in success. Work ethic, luck, a strong support base and even being born in the right year play a far larger role."

I bring this up because today I listened to a bill proposing to allow principals to have "NO" teaching experience. That makes them 10,000 short on grasping instructional expertise at the expert level.

As ridiculous as this bill sounds it has its genesis in the Race to the Top Turn-Around models. When "low performing schools" must fire their principals, where will the new replacements come from? ....

The answer is the military and corporate board rooms and those exiting the world of business. Yes the search is for executive decision-makers. Again it must be that "process trumps content" mindset.

Beats me how knowing "essentially zero about a field" allows one to be a competent decision-maker. I guess watching the legislators make decisions without evidence much of the time, perhaps they might extend their process to principals and figure that principals could likely make decisions without much evidence or background knowledge also.

Check the results!!! Educational decision-making is pathetic at almost every level in the USA. The results in Washington State are abysmal in many areas.

The biggest scam is painting this as all the teachers fault. WOW check the administrative decision-making!!! Next up is more pointless wasteful spending on a higher level of bureaucrats to order us around (to produce improvement -- I am totally serious ... that is the "for" argument.) .... Well I can see why Rep. Santos does not want HB 1891 out of committee and getting a hearing as then folks would need to actually try to make sense out of the next horrible idea, the CCSS, in order to get it approved. No hearing and this $183 million expenditure just slides on by.

Far too often "educational decision-makers" do not have the slightest understanding or ability or maybe interest in making an evidence based decision in regard to education.

To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data. Thus we have no improvement. We listen to supposed educators who in many cases possess but one real skill.... how to rise high in a system based largely on politics not achievement.

Bush's Rod Paige and Obama's Arne Duncan spring immediately to mind.

Oh yes lets all Race to the Top, or Race to the Bank or whatever .... but why?

It seems when it comes to education one really bad idea deserves another.

I just watched Rep. Eric Pettigrew explain how HB 1609 will close the achievement gap by allowing districts to use tools that are not developed and are completely unreliable to be used to make RIF decisions. .. Huh???

The real voice of sanity was the School Board President that testified: We should be avoiding litigation not making decisions that will surely windup in court.

Typical high stakes testing scenario ... but this time someone would get to lose their job because of an insane system that would use defective tools to make decisions. It was really interesting watching people testify for this bizarre proposal.

Well the 37th in Seattle has a big number of "the supposed failing schools" and 2 of the 47 failing schools in the state. Its Reps are Pettigrew and Santos, good well intentioned hard working nice folks, who apparently have no idea how to close the achievement gaps.

Rep. Santos is apparently blocking HB 1891 from getting a hearing. Thus instead of spending resources on students.... We will be spending $183 million on the next too early half-baked idea.

Why wait for two years to see what is happening? We can jump right in and make a giant costly mistake right now. And the Achievement Gap gets bigger and bigger and Washington is #49 out of 51 states + WA DC in class size ranking. Thank God for Utah and California..... and Santos is all for spending $183 million on more administration instead of students .... and all done without a hearing on HB 1891 because she is blocking the hearing.

Typical OSPI ... more than a day late and Multi-Millions short

2011-02-15T12:15:00.000-08:00

BIG ADVICE -- if you wish to decipher the mumbo-jumbo that flows forth in regard to education and the achievement gap etc. from OSPI, SBE, and various school board ramblings, then spend less than 40 bucks here. You will then understand how to make an evidence based decision. You will understand that the focus on differences of opinion is nonsense; the focus must be on facts. The system will not be improved without the intelligent application of relevant data. It appears there will be little if any improvement in the foreseeable future.

A couple years and $1.2 million later in the life of OSPI Math Director Greta Bornemann is the topic of this example of OSPI incompetence. Note the SBE had found "Discovering" to be mathematically unsound. Apparently Ms. Bornemann did not get it at that time. The SPS Black student pass rate was 12.5% on the grade 10 math HSPE in 2010. Limited English Speaking students state wide from 2009 to 2010 went up +1.20% in Math yet in Seattle $1.2 million later they went down -4.20%.

There was enough evidence available for Porter, McLaren, and Mass and friends to spend $15,000 so far appealing the Seattle High School ultra Discriminatory Math Adoption of May 2009 on behalf of Black Students and English Language Learners.

Clearly the night of the HS Math Adoption, May 2009 Greta did not understand much.
Her 12 minutes of advice begins here at 117:00. OR Just 14 minutes right here.

Here is my posting from June 2009 on NMAP and explicit instruction. You will note both OSPI and four Seattle School Board members blew it. We have a large achievement GAP in math in the SPS because leadership is completely unable to make evidence based decisions.

Now $1.2 million later and 21 months later Greta finally gets it. (see email below)
SBE's executive Director Edie Harding was opposed to McLaren et al. filing this legal appeal. I wonder if she gets it yet?

Any sign if the WA legislature will ever get it?

How about the Gov. and AG? They refuse to investigate felony Forgery by the Seattle Superintendent and CAO, will the Gov and AG ever get it?

UPDATE!! - I learned at 4:00 PM 2-15-2011, it is the job of the Seattle Police Department to investigate the forged document submitted in the $800,000 contract approval for NTN services by central office administration. The Gov's Office spoke with the AG and the SPD was wrong in saying not our job.
=========

Here is Greta's email:

From: Greta Bornemann [mailto:Greta.Bornemann@k12.wa.us]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 11:24 AM
To: 'katemartin@theseattlejournal.com'
Cc: Edie Harding
Subject: RE: National Panel on Math 2008 Report and OSPI work with districts on instruction

Hi Kate (and Edie),

This is a great topic. For far too long Special Ed and ELL students were ignored in the math world. There wasn’t good evidence for how to support teachers, and quite frankly for many districts with limited funds, reading has been the focus. But much of that is changing. I believe, with all its faults, part of the reason people are paying attention is because of No Child Left Behind. We’ve always had a problem supporting teachers working with Special Ed and ELL kids, but we are beginning to shine a light on this issue.

Thankfully, we do have some new research to guide our work.

{Unfreaking-Believeable NEW RESEARCH OSPI lives in a CAVE. The NMAP was released in March 2008. Hattie's Visible Learning in December 2008. Project Follow Through started in 1967 and was the largest study in Ed History and focused on Educationally Disadvantaged Learners K-3. Now OSPI's Greta is finding New Research after pushing Pointless ineffective Reform Math like all the UW cronies}

The National Math Advisory Panel (NMAP) is one such landmark document. I have a copy of the document close to my desk and use it constantly to guide my thinking.

{When did Greta start using NMAP to guide her thinking? Yesterday? Last week? or when she wrote this letter? How has it guided her thinking?}

We point to it when districts ask what research they should be reading. In fact, we are working on a document right now, the Mathematics Improvement Systems Framework, that gives support to districts in improving math achievement. It is just in draft form now, and our workgroups are working on providing more documents for implementation of the framework. We don’t have funding for this effort, so it is done by folks on their own time. We hope to have something final out by this summer.

If you look at the document you will find that we call out the NMAP research several times. And while ELL isn’t specifically attended to in this draft, we have received feedback from districts that they would like guidance on that topic as well. So we will be adding some guidance in our next draft.

You can find a link to the framework document at: http://www.k12.wa.us/Mathematics/pubdocs/MathImprovementFramework.pdf

I hope that helps answer your questions. If you have others, don’t hesitate to email me.

Thanks.

Take care.

Greta

Greta Bornemann

Math Director - Teaching and Learning
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
Email: greta.bornemann@k12.wa.us

============
============

THANKS to KATE MARTIN of the Seattle Journal for pursuing this issue long enough to finally get a response for completely irresponsible actions by OSPI and SBE. For years OSPI, SBE, and the SPS have failed to serve educationally disadvantaged learners, while mindlessly chanting "Achievement GAP" concern.

Look for the same from the FEDS, given RttT and actions by NSF/EHR and OIG NSF and US DOE's no response to discriminatory complaints about Seattle Schools.
================

From: Edie Harding
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 4:00 PM
To: Greta Bornemann
Cc: 'katemartin@theseattlejournal.com'
Subject: National Panel on Math 2008 Report and OSPI work with districts on instruction

Greta- Hello! I understand you are in Portland today thus this email. I received a call from a Seattle Parent, Kate Martin, who has some questions about how the state was working with districts on math instruction particularly in the areas of ELL and Special Ed. She cited the recommendations of the National Math Advisory Panel in 2008. She wanted to know how the state used their recommendations in working with districts. I know you are familiar with the report. Can you shed some light on what kind of math technical assistance you guys are doing on OSPI with school districts to help special ed and ELL kids and others close the achievement gap on math and whether you recommend pieces of the NMAP report? If you can respond to Kate and cc me that would be lovely! She is focused on the instruction part not standards or curriculum and understands that it is up to school districts to do instruction but wants to know if the state guides them in anyway.

Cheers, Edie

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf

Edie Harding

Executive Director - Washington State Board of Education.

2-15-2011 Public Hearing on HB 1609 at 1:30 PM

2011-02-14T22:58:00.000-08:00

http://dlr.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/default.aspx?Bill=1609&year=2011

HB 1609 - DIGEST
Addresses school employee workforce reductions and assignments.

Brief Summary of Bill

#1 .. Instates a new performance based framework and procedures for reductions in force due to declines in enrollment or revenue losses.

#2 .. Provides for a school based hiring process that requires the mutual consent of both principal and teacher.

#3 .. Puts in place a displacement process governing situations in which a teacher or educational staff associate is displaced due to transfer, a drop in enrollment, phase out or reduction of a program, reductions in a building, or implementation of an accountability intervention model.
====================================

The Math Underground Analysis:

HB 1609 is a shockingly naive attempt to solve a problem. HB 1609 plans to use tools that are completely unreliable. The enactment of this Bill will enable administrators to get a far more compliant workforce but hardly an improved one. The near and long term effects will be a complete disaster.
Who would wish to teach under incoherent education leadership at nearly every level of government? Welcome to life in WA State.

======

My story: Hired by Fife SD to improve a math program at Fife HS in great need of improvement.

Created a highly effective program that greatly improved student learning (according to WASL math test data) and participation.

Fife wanted to abandon this program. I was encouraged to leave. Fife planned on implementing the OSPI WASL math modules the following year and did so.

Was there improvement? Of course not but they got someone a lot more compliant with OSPI math nonsense than me.

Here are the Scores for 5 years.... the 2 years before, my year, and the 2 years* after.

Educational decision making in WA State is an absolute fiasco. Look for the Feds to do even worse.

WASL all student pass rates grade 10 MATH Fife high school:

10th Grade Math Fife High School
Year .:. School .:. District .:. State :: diff from State
2001 .:. 41.70% .:. 40.30% : 38.90% :: +2.8
2002 .:. 45.10% .:. 44.50% : 37.30% :: +7.8
2003 .:. 54.70% .:. 53.20% :39.40% :: +15.3
2004* .:. 44.60% .:. 44.60% : 43.90% :: +0.7
2005* .:. 47.90% .:. 47.70% :47.50% :: +0.4

Students scoring at level 1 far below standard by percent + no scores.

10th Grade Math Fife High School
Year .:. School .:. State
2001 .:. 40.30% .:. 40.60%
2002 .:. 29.30% .:. 40.10%
2003 .:. 24.80% .:. 39.20%
2004* .:. 32.50% .:. 36.90%
2005* .:. 32.00% .:. 33.50%

Students scoring at level 4 above standard by percent.

10th Grade Math Fife High School
Year .:. School .:. State :: compare FHS results
2001 .:. 14.60% .:. 19.00% :: -4.4
2002 .:. 17.40% .:. 15.60% :: +1.8
2003 .:. 25.50% .:. 18.80% :: +6.7
2004* .:. 21.30% .:. 21.90% :: -0.6
2005* .:. 17.00% .:. 18.00% :: -1.0

* years OSPI Math modules used at Fife.

To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data.

There are no short cuts via fairy-tales. It does not matter who tells the tales.

Without a significant improvement in instructional materials and practices (via Hattie's effect sizes in Visible Learning and using Project Follow Through results) ... look for hundreds of Millions of dollars to be misspent in WA state and Billions nationally.

Common Core Standards approach and Race to the Top are not based on an intelligent analysis of relevant data ==> They will not produce improvement.

===================

According to the Seattle Schools website, where they describe their strategic plan, "Excellence for All:" "Excellence for All is focused on what matters most: every student achieving, everyone accountable." Say what?

Checking the remediation data ... it seems they have a ways to go.

Fall 2009: Recent high school graduates enrolled in remedial pre-college courses..

North Seattle CC
English 51%
Math .... 66%

Central Seattle CC
English 31%
Math …. 69%

South Seattle CC
English 72%
Math …. 83%

Every student achieving, everyone accountable...... Sure thing spinners of baloney. How does forgery by likely the Seattle Schools Superintendent and the CAO enter this mix?

An unmonitored damaging whole school 3-year instructional experiment on a 50% Black student population How long does it take to investigate?

2011-02-14T21:31:00.000-08:00

"Shades of Tuskegee 1932" in Seattle:

Cleveland High School ==>
50% Black students and 70% low income students.

The results of a three year unmonitored math experiment done by UW, produced such low math scores Cleveland became one of 47 failing schools in the state.

The Seattle Schools adopted a similar set of HS math instructional materials in May 2009. These produced Black student Math pass rates of 12.5% for Black students on the 2010 math HSPE. The 10th grade White minus Black math achievement Gap in Seattle is 55.6%.

Porter, Mass, and McLaren appealed the "Discovering Math" adoption in Superior Court. SBE executive director, Edie Harding, faulted McLaren for bringing legal action instead of working to get better school directors in Seattle.

The adoption was ruled "Arbitrary and Capricious" on Feb. 4, 2010. The SPS appealed and changed nothing about its damaging approach to mathematics. Appellate Court hearing coming March 8, 2011.

Meanwhile the SBE no longer has its math advisory panel meet. An all volunteer panel is too expensive in budget restricted times. Yet there is $183 million that OSPI and the SBE believe should be spent to adopt the Common Core Standards.

Check these remediation rates from Seattle's three community colleges in Fall 2009.

Recent high school graduates enrolled in remedial pre-college courses..

North Seattle CC
English 51%
Math .... 66%

Central Seattle CC
English 31%
Math …. 69%

South Seattle CC
English 72%
Math …. 83%

NOTE: In 2010 after the $1.2 million adoption of "Discovering" the Black student Pass rate for Grade 10 Seattle Students on the MATH HSPE dropped to 12.5%. What will the District do win or lose in Appeals Court after the March 8, 2011 hearing?

For The Common Core State Standards Initiative, WA is planning on spending $183 million to kick the can further down the road. The first CCSS assessment will be Spring 2015. OSPI, the SBE, and the Seattle Schools administration have done nothing to improve education for struggling students but they have increased the number of struggling students.

SBE Executive Director Harding is incredibly naive if she thinks new SPS School Directors can be elected to solve this problem. The SBE and OSPI are a major part of the problem. Note the four SPS Directors elected in 2007 spent almost $500,000 to win four unpaid positions. There are no campaign limits on contributions to School Directors.
===============

My last contact from the NSF investigator was July 2010.

My letter:

2-14-2011

To: The Office of the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation

Dear Dr. Scott Moore,

How long does an investigation take?

This is a fairly straight forward matter.

Lots of spending and no positive results.

This is often the case with Math Ed efforts from the UW. In fact negative outcomes are fairly common.

Note the following:

http://mathunderground.blogspot.com/2010/09/uw-professional-development-gone-bad.html

Thank You,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

========================

The result of this "Failing School" was turning Cleveland into an Option School using one of the "Race to the Top" "Turn-Around Models" and selecting the New Technology Network as a turn-around adviser for $800,000.

The Seattle Schools administration committed a class C felony of forgery, in construction of the action report used to facilitate the NTN selection. Note: NTN has an absolutely pathetic math model. The results from a multiplicity of NTN schools confirm this but the SPS Directors Sundquist, Carr, Maier, and Martin-Morris ignore those ongoing repeated failures.

The Governor, Seattle Police, King County Prosecutor, and the Governor's office have absolutely no interest in investigating this forgery crime. Certainly the Seattle School Directors have no interest.

What state constitution?

What State Laws?

There is apparently "Zero" accountability and zero enforcement. Rights and Laws are for those with money to go to court; free and reduced lunch students need not apply.

The Tuskegee syphilis experiment began in 1932. Seattle's version is still continuing in the 37th District on students.

Take a bow: UW, Seattle School Board, Rep. Santos, Gov. Gregoire, Attorney General McKenna, King County Prosecutor's office and Seattle police. These folks certainly deserve some credit.

Honorable mention goes to the US Department of Education and the Office of the Inspector General of the NSF for their assistance in continuing this disaster unchecked. Complaints have been filed and they go nowhere. Anyone who thinks Federal Involvement through Race to the Top or the Common Core Standards will be helpful is removed from reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

This is absurd that "Disruptive Innovation" will improve education. To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data. Apparently doing what has repeatedly been shown to work should not be done in WA State or the USA.

"Where's the Math?" Opposes Common Core Standards

2011-02-14T20:28:00.000-08:00

http://www.wheresthemath.com/Pages/Where%27s%20The%20Math.aspx

Check the "Where's the Math?" website above.

So "Where's the Money?"

Next Wave of Education Lunacy is proposed by Oregon Gov. .... and ... It looks a lot like Gov. Gregoire's plan

2011-02-14T18:55:00.000-08:00

http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics_impact/print.html?entry=/2011/02/gov_john_kitzhaber_plans_to_cr.html

Naturally it is all about control and based on more fairy-tale assumptions.

The intelligent application of relevant data to improve a system remains untried and unexamined.

Also Apparently unwanted by those in power.

My Letter to the Governor: so ....Who needs to be recalled? for failure to investigate.

2011-02-14T18:33:00.000-08:00

Dear Ms. Younglove,

Here is my letter to the Governor.

==========

Dear Gov, 4:45 PM 2-14-2011

Ms. Melody Younglove, your Constituent Services Manager has been provided extensive proof of a class C Felony, Forgery, committed in the Seattle Public Schools, which is neither being investigated nor prosecuted. See has been given information on three separate occasions. The first two times she failed to contact me. Only on a third face to face visit did I have contact with her. It appears that she has no intention of following up on a felony committed by one or more Seattle School Administrators.

Do I need to file a recall action for the recall and discharge of a public official?

Should I begin recall action with the King County Prosecutor, the Attorney General, or the Governor?

Or recall action against all three?

Please advise.

Thanks,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

My letter to Susanna Williams, chair of 37th Dems

2011-02-14T15:20:00.000-08:00

Dear Chairperson, 2-14-2011

I understand there is a meeting at 7:30 this evening at the Rainier Valley Cultural Center (3515 S Alaska St) in Columbia City.
(Social time begins at 7:00)

Please request Rep. Santos to have a hearing on HB 1891 to delay Washington's adoption of the Common Core Standards.

Four 4 years I and many others have worked diligently to attempt to improve education in the Seattle Schools and particularly the schools in the 37th.

I have zero to show for results.

The best thing about NCLB was that OSPI testing gives us results for each school by demographic category. That was about the only good thing that has happened for education in the 37th for the last 14 years under OSPI and Bush's NCLB.

I thought with a President, US Congress, Governor, and State House all under democratic party control for the majority of 2008-2011 things would be better. Unfortunately, the situation has not improved over the last two years and now the future for WA State Education is looking substantially worse.

Washington State's adoption of the Common Core State Standards promises to be more expensive kicking of the can down the road for many additional years.

The Four RttT "Turn around models" are incredibly poorly designed.

The Seattle Schools and the State regularly violate the State constitution.

Check out the two attached pieces of data. Why was this allowed to happen?

Why is Rep. Santos in favor of spending $183,000,000 on more pointless activity?

Note: Dec. 11, 2010 The Gov. and the Legislature decided to essentially steal $208,000,000 headed to help local school districts from the Feds and put it in the general fund. Now the adoption of more misdirection will cost $183,000,000 ...... WOW how will they misuse the other $25 million left over?

In depth information on the Governor's failure to act on Seattle School District forgery is attached (Melody Younglove).

A lot of additional information can be found on my BLOG.

In closing, let me say that both the Federal Dept of Education and the Inspector General's Office of the National Science Foundation have failed to act on substantive complaints. They are just as useless as the Governor in correcting our rampant education problems in the 37th. The Idea of Federal control of State Standards and curriculum is completely absurd ... take a look at the schools in the 37th ... how can that spending be a solution?

Thanks,

Dan Dempsey

Attached were these four:

37th District Schools in Seattle result from the SPS Scorecard.
http://www.box.net/shared/qots8cjhgk

Melody Younglove of Gov's Office apparently is opposed to enforcement of felony laws.
http://www.box.net/shared/p1flo9i49o

Overview of Seattle Community Colleges remediation Data for Fall 2009
http://www.box.net/shared/ts9pnvltaq

Remediation rates for several years.
http://www.box.net/shared/69rk11569d

===============

We are finishing the fifth week of the session, and heading into the year’s first legislative milestone – policy committee cut-off. After February 17, no further House bills can be voted out of policy committees this session. I’ve learned that there are many points in the legislative process where bills can die but no place that a bill can board an express train to passage. This committee cut-off is the first hurdle that will eliminate many bills from further consideration. The normally frenetic pace here will get even more hectic as this deadline approaches!

Delaware is just Like WA

2011-02-14T14:49:00.000-08:00

from Transparent Christina: Community Crossfire
http://transparentchristina.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/community-crossfire-with-norman-oliver-21311/

Governor Markell has sold Delaware out to common core standards and has bought into corporate school reform,

which has at its core completely unproven methods to fix schools.

He has given us a bunch of trumped up, poorly attended roadshows to suggest that there is widespread support for Race to the Top when in fact there is just plain ignorance on Race to the Top.

The bankers and billionaires have control of the message and Gov. Markell appears to be the messenger.

To top off a "successful" 2010 for Gov. Markell, he is now proposing a 10% slash to transportation for schools and is also recommending the elimination of funding for bus routes deemed to be "unique hazards"

The Christina School District is actively seeking to make the Partnership Zone a wild success under the leadership of Dr. Lillian Lowery, but make no mistake about this: the Governor's support for failing ideas to fix failing schools will make this work very very hard in my opinion.

There is no doubt about it from where I sit: Governor Markell is bad for education in Delaware.

============

From where The Math Underground sits: Governor Gregoire is bad for education in Washington State.

February 17th is "D" day Decision or Destruction?

2011-02-14T07:46:00.000-08:00

If the Legislature does not schedule a hearing on a Bill "Delaying the Common Core Standards" on or before February 17, Randy Dorn will certainly spend $183,000,000 on the CCSS without anyone even taking a formal vote this legislative session.

It appears once again the fix is in.

It seems that Rep. Santos, the Seattle School Board, the Governor, or the legislature care much or do much about the ongoing failure to serve a huge number of students in the 37th district, ironically represented by Rep. Santos.

CCSSI likely putting Cart in Front of Horse Another Fiasco

2011-02-14T07:35:00.000-08:00

In response to this Article:

Education Week
Curriculum Matters
Can the Federal Government Fund Curriculum Materials?

Richard Innes of the Bluegrass Policy Institute writes:

This is a potentially huge deal.

How do you create tests if you don't have a good idea about the underlying curriculum?

Kentucky fell into precisely this same trap in 1990 when it started to create the state's first reform assessment, the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS).

KIRIS was created before the state even had decent education standards (which, for that matter, it still doesn't have), let alone a well-designed curriculum. Then, the state developed curriculum frameworks (just like the test consortia are proposing) that were supposed to improve KIRIS as well as instruction.

That didn't happen, either, and KIRIS crashed in 1998.

It's replacement, CATS, didn't make enough changes from KIRIS. It crashed in 2009.

If you are going to develop good state tests, you first have to start with very complete statements about what kids are supposed to know and be able to do at the end of the instruction. Those statements have to be set up in such a way that the goals and outcomes are measurable.

THEN, you design a curriculum to teach to those goals.

ONLY THEN, do you start to develop an assessment program.

Now, we are told that the two Common Core State Assessment efforts may, by law, have to leave out the essential curriculum step.

That's going to be really problematic.

To learn more about what happened with KIRIS, so you can better discuss why the Common Core State Assessments may be heading into serious trouble, trouble Kentucky already faced before, check out the reports on the Kentucky Education Reform Act at 20 Years, available here:

http://www.freedomkentucky.org/index.php?title=KERA_Portal

SPS Class C felony Forgery update

2011-02-12T22:24:00.000-08:00

A letter to the Governor's Office: 2-12-2011

Dear Ms. Melody Younglove,

I believe the misunderstanding that you refer to is your misunderstanding not mine. I want class C felony forgery investigated and prosecuted. Do you?

Complete communication as a .pdf is HERE.

Common Core Standards: an early entry into expensive chaos should be avoided

2011-02-12T19:46:00.000-08:00

About the Common Core State Standards Initiative:
CCSSI is More of the Same: Spending Goes Up and Results will be Mediocre at Best.

Despite claims of data driven decision-making, there has been very little of such decision-making. To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data. Effective and efficient system improvement is drastically needed but is nowhere in sight. Three sources of information of vital importance are continually neglected in WA State and most of the our nation.

#1. Project Follow Through results, which show exactly which of 9 methods of instruction is the most effective in meeting the needs of educationally disadvantaged learners in grades k-3. PFT was the largest most exhaustive educational research project in history. PFT began in 1967 as part of the efforts of LBJ's administration to serve disadvantaged learners. (Civil Rights Act passed in 1964) Most educational decision-makers have no idea of either the magnitude of this project or its results.
PFT info: here 1, : here 2, : here 3.

#2. Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement by John Hattie (December 2008). Dr. Hattie examines a large number of educational practices and not only described them but calculates effect size for each based on results from millions of students world-wide. Hattie’s table of effect sizes is extremely easy to use. Hattie’s analyses confirm that educational decision-making is not based on the intelligent application of relevant data.

#3. Foundations for Success, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s final report (2008). Specifically states that (page xxiii, paragraph 27) struggling students need increased explicit instruction.

OSPI, the Seattle School Board, and many other educational decision makers have missed all of the above. Additionally these decision-makers have also missed the preamble to article IX of the state constitution and additionally the Seattle Schools have ignored a variety of state laws.

Washington State’s involvement and spending of $183 million to join the Common Core State Standards Initiative will be more of the same. At a time when known proven educational practices and instructional materials need to be used, Race to the Top encourages disruptive innovation. CCSSI will likely do the same.

In the last hundred years, medicine made enormous strides by making decisions based on evidence. Education remains in turmoil and evidence based decision-making has yet to occur.

One only needs to look at:

A. the four RttT “Turn Around Models” together with results from

B. the last decade plus at OSPI,

C. 20 years of Math advice from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics leadership,

D. NSF funded development of math instructional materials (= approx. $100 million),

E. NSF spending to try to make those materials actually work ( > $100 million) and

F. the results of NSF funded UW math programs for Southeast Seattle schools.

to see a continuation of further expensive chaos with no accountability for past and continuing poor decision-making.

Why should the parents in 37th district, represented by Reps. Santos and Pettigrew, be asked to wait even longer for something positive and significant to actually happen?

See video clip of Yolanda Gill Masundire, speaking at Town Hall meeting =>(here) and data from Schools in the 37th District (here) as well as Seattle Community College remediation percentages (here 1) (here 2) for recent high school graduates.

Dr. Joseph Willhoft, the man primarily responsible for the incredibly expensive and ineffective WASL testing, will be heading the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium to construct Common Core assessments. First one is due in Spring 2015.

The State Board of Education’s Math Advisory Panel composed of volunteers no longer meets because of lack of available funds. $208 million Federal dollars headed to assist local school districts was taken via a one-day special session on December 11, 2010 and placed in the General Fund. Yet $183 million may be spent on an early entry into chaos instead of waiting and improving WA schools now, through data based decision-making for the first time.

HB 1891 needs to get out of Committee and have a hearing so that Washington’s adoption of the Common Core State Standards Initiative can be delayed or perhaps eventually cancelled. Currently representative Santos, who has among the worst performing schools in the state in her district, heads the committee that is failing to grant a hearing on HB 1891.

$183,000,000 for an early entry into more chaos. Administrators are always in favor of more spending on administration. Note: Feb 4, 2010 The State was found in violation of the Constitution for failing to adequately fund education of students, which is the Paramount Duty of the State. The state appealed this decision. It seems that now the state legislators, Governor, and leaders of OSPI, SBE, PTSA, WEA, League of Education Voters are all in favor of more spending on administrative chaos at the expense of Washington's k-12 students.

==============
Please see Democracy Denied (so far) HERE
for what you can do about this deplorable situation.

=============
See "Where's the Money" at The Underground Parent.

============
Link to Myth Busters Letter Exposing 11 Education Myths as complete nonsense.

LINK to SEATTLE SCHOOLS discussion on 2/10/2011 Town Hall Meeting with C.R. Douglas on the Seattle Channel

2011-02-11T05:56:00.000-08:00

90 minutes led by CR Douglas

http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/video.asp?ID=3381101

Where is the Money for CCSS? and what about the students?

2011-02-10T14:50:00.000-08:00

Where is the Money for CCSS?

#1 On Dec 11, 2010 ==> WA Gov. et al. take $208 million, headed to local school districts and intended to assist districts in meeting the needs of students in this economic downturn, and places it in the general fund.

#2 The CCSS will cost $185 million and according to OSPI 91% of that will be born by local districts.

#3 On February 4, 2010 the Court found WA State failing to fulfill the Constitution article IX and not adequately funding schools. The State appealed.

#4 Unless HB 1891 passes the State will be underfunding each local district’s primary work of educating students even further, as OSPI estimates $160+ million of the needed $185 million will come out of District funds.

#5 To adopt the CCSS at this time is an assault on WA students. HB 1891 is urgently needed.

Tribune's Callaghan is WRONG about CCSS

2011-02-10T13:35:00.000-08:00

Rarely do I take this amount of space to respond to an article. Peter Callaghan is so far off on his 2-10-2011 article, I must respond in full.

#1.. The Title is incorrect. If the title is incorrect, it certainly confirms either an author's ignorance or perhaps agenda.

#2.. Here is the hyper-link to:
Common K-12 standards are rigorous, used in many states

PETER CALLAGHAN; STAFF WRITER
Published: 02/10/1112:05 am

#3.. Here is my complete take on this: my responses are in navy the rest is from the Callaghan column.

Common K-12 standards are rigorous, used in many states

When doing nothing produces the same result as doing something, most of us would opt to do nothing.

addition: I would prefer to respond by doing something thoughtful based on the intelligent application of relevant data, rather than believe that more "ed reform packages" will be a solution.

That may be the path state lawmakers take when it comes to Common Core Standards in language arts and math.

Developed not by the federal government but by a consortium of governors and school superintendents, they would replace the state-by-state standards of what kids should learn in each grade of school.

correction: Developed by a panel secretly selected and initiated in private and funded by the Gates Foundation. This proposal eventually came into public view.

By using common standards we can finally have accurate comparisons of state education, no longer letting some states look good in testing by having lower standards.

Addition: Washington State can be part of uniformly dumbing-down our students further.

It will also make it easier for students to move among school districts and among states because what is taught in third grade in Takoma Park, Md., will be pretty similar to what is taught in Tacoma, Wash.

Addition: Only if what is taught is in Tacoma, WA is actually learned. ==> The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1989 Standards, coupled with over $200 million from the NSF, and direction from the last 14 years at OSPI have produced absolute math instruction chaos. It is absurd to believe that after taking $208 million headed to local school districts on December 11, 2010 in a one-day special session to help students, that requiring Districts to pay for 91% of the OSPI estimated $185 million needed to adopt the CCSS, will increase learning.

And rather than have 50 different sets of curriculum and textbooks and 50 different tests, states could band together and develop them together, saving money in the long run.

Addition: Not necessarily so. Another likely highly inefficient process led by an amalgamation of diverse interests will not necessarily produce either a great product or do so in an economical fashion.

Consider Seattle’s Schmitz Park elementary, which decided to use Singapore Math, instead of the Seattle Selected “Everyday Math” which was highly WASL aligned when selected in May 2007. Singapore Math eventually earned the distinction of, according to OSPI, being the least aligned k-5 series to the new 2008 math standards.

When the 2008 Math Standards were tested for the first time in Spring 2008, Schmitz Park grade 5 scored #3 in the state out of more than 1000 elementary schools. Quite nice for using a Math text series far cheaper than "Everyday Math" and rated by OSPI as the most misaligned to the WA Math standards tested.

The 2008 Math standards were tested for the first time in Spring 2010 with the MSP. Seattle’s Schmitz Park 5th grade scored at #3 in the state out of more than 1000 elementary schools. Quite a performance using the least aligned to the test materials according to OSPI.

Last year’s school reform bill allowed state schools chief Randy Dorn to make Common Core Standards Washington’s standards. But because lawmakers had seen only drafts, they asked that Dorn bring back the final product this session for a look-see.

Addition: OSPI was legislated by 6696 to give the legislature a document by January 1, 2011, which among other things detailed adoption costs. That information was submitted by OSPI on February 1, 2011 only three days before the hearing on HB 1443.

If lawmakers do nothing, the standards will begin to replace Washington’s current math and language arts learning requirements. Forty-one states have already adopted them.

Addition: Contrary to the title of this article, not a single state is using them. Note: the first assessment of the CCSS is due four years from now in the 2014-2015 school year.

Some lawmakers decided to do something instead by having the Legislature take a vote to adopt – readopt actually – the standards. House Bill 1443 also would endorse the latest recommendations of the Quality Education Council, created to implement recent education reform legislation.

While endorsed by most in the education community – reform advocates, teachers, principals, school boards – the bill has been targeted by those leery of any education standards not written locally. The math standards also are opposed by those grouped under the organization Where’s The Math.

The local-control argument is puzzling since the state hasn’t done a very good job with its own standards. Our language arts learning requirements have barely gotten passing grades by various analyses while Common Core got a B-plus.

And our math standards were so weak that state education leaders realized they needed to be replaced.

I’m not sure what’s magical about locally drafted standards. The question should be whether they are as good or better than what we have, not where they were written.

Addition: It is absurd to believe that changing standards will do anything to speak of unless instructional materials and practices that are efficient and effective are put into use. Spending $185 million on CCSS standards, instead of providing the resources needed to educate students in the classroom is absurd. On February 4, 2010 the state was found to be in violation of the State constitution for failing to fully fund k-12 education. The State appealed. It appears the state has no intention of adequately funding what happens in the classroom. Administrators seem always in favor of paying more administration.

The math issue is a bit more complex. Partly because of pressure from Where’s The Math, Washington has just completed improved standards at considerable time and cost. Those would now be replaced.

That has math advocates unhappy, not just because they think a lot of hard work will be wasted but because they think Common Core isn’t as rigorous as the new state standards.

They even cite a comparison that gives our new state standards a higher grade. The Fordham Institute – a think tank that supports tougher education standards – gave Washington’s new math standards an A and Common Core an A-minus.

The difference in grade isn’t based on rigor but on a conclusion that the Common Core Standards are written in mathese while the state’s are in plain English.

The differences are hardly enough to keep Washington from adopting Common Core and gaining the many benefits that come from being in line with nearly every other state.

Addition: There are a tremendous number of liabilities that may well out weigh the supposed benefits.

“With some minor differences, Common Core and Washington State both cover the essential content for a rigorous, K-12 mathematics program,” Fordham concludes.

Dorn suggests clarifying the narrative in Common Core so it is easier to understand. And Washington can exceed the Common Core math standards if it chooses.

Where’s the Math deserves credit for getting the state to a choice between two rigorous standards. It should take that credit, declare victory and get out of the way.

But it may not matter. Legislative leaders are considering taking the Common Core sections out of HB 1443 and letting the standards take effect when the Legislature adjourns in late April.

conclusion: The legislature needs to pass HB 1891, which would delay the adoption of CCSS for at least two years. Where is the funding to educate the students? It seems to increasingly be going to administration. What happens if the “NEWS” school funding lawsuit is upheld in Appeals Court?

HB 1443 may pass out of Committee on 2-10-2011 UGH!!

2011-02-09T16:06:00.000-08:00

HB 1443, which is likely pass out of committee tomorrow (2-10-2011), is a complete disaster.

HB 1443 will spend $187,000,000 (as in $187 million) on implementing the Common Core State Standards in WA State.

Recently the State took $208 million headed for Local School Districts and dumped it into the General Fund.

HB 1891 was written in response to this insanity and who knows if it will get out of committee.

The Bureaucrats love paying for more bureaucracy ... even if taking money from schools is required to fund it.

--------- What will the Ed Committee in the House of Representatives DO?

=============
If past patterns continue, look for more tests and requirements for struggling students .... paid for with the money that should be assisting those students
-- (This is insanity cubed)

HB 1443 is essentially an administrators jobs stimulus act.

"To Improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data." Olympia has spent decades failing to apply the relevant data intelligently but has inflated the size of OSPI .... look for that to continue.

If you don't like it call 1-800-562-6000 and register your support for HB 1891 and opposition to HB 1443.

================
UPDATE ... I believe that the CCSS language has been deleted from HB 1443. Note: The CCSS are automatically approved and adopted if the legislature does not act to STOP the adoption.

HB 1891 is needed.

HB 1891 needs your help.... NOW

2011-02-08T15:02:00.000-08:00

HB 1891 is sponsored by Klippert, Angel, Hargrove, Rivers, Orcutt, and McCune.

It will delay the CCSS for at least 2 years. OSPI had a report due to the legislature by Jan 1, 2011 that report was finally available one month late on Feb 1, 2011.

OSPI calculates the cost of adopting CCSS at $187 million.

The Gov. in December took $208 million headed to local WA school districts from the Feds, which was to help reduce teacher layoffs and recessionary impacts on local districts, and placed the $208 million in the General Fund.

Now under HB 1443, the Gov. wants $187 million spent on CCSS.

HB 1443 is completely absurd. The Gov. SBE and OSPI have done little if anything to enable struggling students to meet higher standards. HB 1443 is a push for more spending on administration and less for classrooms.

Call 1-800-562-6000 and voice support for HB 1891 and opposition to HB 1443.

======

Slightly Off-task comment:

In Spokane we seen educational employees disrupting a meeting called to educate citizens about Mathematics Education in Spokane.
See BETRAYED BLOG HERE.

With increased Federal Control via CCSS, the chance of parents having any control of education will be even less. Please call about your support for HB 1891 and urge its passage through the House Education Committee.

1-800-562-6000

Felony Forgery and the Gov's Office: Now What?

2011-02-08T05:30:00.000-08:00

To:
Ms. Melody Younglove
Constituent's Services Manager
Governor's Office
State of Washington

Dear Ms. Melody Younglove,

I am deeply disappointed and offended by the actions of the Governor's Office and your actions in particular.

Details of my three visits to the Office of the Governor are detailed in the attached report "Catch 22 for Seattle Schools".

Summary of my three visits to the Governor's Office:

#1. I contacted Lindsay with information and heard nothing.

#2. I contacted Lindsay again. She assured me that she had given information to you. I gave her additional proof of Felony Forgery and asked her to contact me when she had given the information to you. Additionally I asked her to have you contact me.

#3. Again despite my requests in number 2, I received absolutely no contact from you or anyone in the Governor's office.

#4. Yesterday, Monday Feb. 7, 2011 I met with you. You seemed quite familiar with my math advocacy and had been in contact with the AG's office, but never in contact with me.

#5. You told me that the investigation of alleged felony forgery in Seattle was currently beyond the scope of both the Governor and the Attorney General and advised me to contact the King County Prosecutor's office. I find it more than peculiar that you never contacted me with this information. Why did I need to contact the Governor's office a third time to hear this?

#6. As I outlined for you, there will be no referral from the King County Prosecutor because they only act on police complaints. There will be no complaint from the Seattle Police because they believe this action should be covered by the Attorney General.

#7. I find you and Governor's Office and likely the Governor and Attorney General irresponsible in fulfilling the statutory responsibility to uphold the laws of the state and the state constitution.

#8. Your move. Now what?

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

My Busy Opposition to CCSSI and Felony Forgery in the Seattle Public Schools

2011-02-08T02:13:00.000-08:00

I testified at a Senate Ways and Means committee hearing and at the House Education Committee's HB 1443 hearing.

I strongly oppose HB 1443 as it continues neglect of struggling students and appears to be a jobs stimulus bill for OSPI administrators.

Representative Brad Klippert now has HB 1891 in the hopper. Hooray, it will postpone the CCSSI Common Core State Standards Initiative for at least two years, if not forever.

A quick recap of the Governor Christine Gregoire's leadership on Education:

A... Gov. Chris G. appealed the court finding that the State does not fulfill its obligation to amply fund and provide an education to all Washington residents, as detailed in Article IX of the State's Constitution.

B... In December Gov. Chris G. called a special one day legislative session and diverted $208 million in Federal dollars headed to Washington School District's into the General fund. That money was to be used to allow districts to prevent the lay offs of teachers. Rep. Pat Sullivan was quoted as saying in regard to the diversion of funds: "We think its legal."

C... The Gov. has supported the CCSSI, which will require at least $187 million to implement.

D... The Governor's office knows all about alleged felony forgery committed by Seattle Schools Superintendent and or the Chief Academic Officer and has chosen to do nothing.

Here is the Scoop on the Gov's refusal to act on felony forgery:
http://www.box.net/shared/jjk7mgpizl

Here is my Myth Busters letter .... Busting 11 myths:
http://www.box.net/shared/0g1d1kka49

Enjoy.

Then call the legislative hotline in support of HB 1891
and in opposition to HB 1443.

The number is
1-800-562-6000

===================

Thoughts from Mark ....

In regard to only MATH: OSPI says implementing CCSS will cost almost $100 million.
This lowers the bar for math education.

On Saturday, I heard Governor Gregoire on the radio wailing about her “immoral” budget and lamenting the “draconian” cuts. After pulling myself together, I thought to myself “Gosh, how else could we spend the $100 million slated for CCSS math?”
(note with Language Arts make that $187 million).

So I went through Governor Gregoire’s budget proposal http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget11/highlights/highlights.pdf and saw all the proposed cuts and the associated dollar savings.

The only conclusion I can reach is that a vote for CCSS is a vote against women, children, immigrants, a clean environment, ..... , and safe streets. Yikes...what kind of monster would want that?

So let’s ask our legislators the following questions:

1. Would it be better to lower math education standards or to decrease class size by 3%?

2. Would it be better to lower math education standards or kick thousands of kindergarten students out of class?

3. Would it be better to lower math education standards or suspend bonuses for outstanding teachers?

4. Would it be better to lower math educations standards or eliminate the Children’s Health Program which provides medical coverage for 27,000 children whose citizenship has not been documented?

5. Would it be better to lower math education standards or reduce in-home Medicaid personal care hours to 45,000 individuals?

6. Would it be better to lower math education standards or eliminate supervision of 293 sexually violent predators civilly committed at the Special Commitment Center at McNeil Island?

7. Would it be better to lower math education standards or eliminate funding for oil spill prevention and preparedness?

8. Would it be better to lower math education standards or turn 454 criminals from Walla Walla loose on the public?

=============

Note that OSPI
does not have it together.

FINAL BILL REPORT E2SSB 6696 states

Common Core Standards. The SPI is authorized to adopt a common set of standards based on those developed by a multi-state consortium on a provisional basis by August 2, 2010, but must not implement the standards until the legislative Education committees have an opportunity for review. By January 1, 2011, the SPI must submit a detailed comparison of the provisional standards and the state standards, as well as an estimated timeline and costs to implement the provisional standards.

This report was one month late and only available three days before the Friday February 4 hearing on HB 1443.

The Governor thinks giving this crew $187 million is a great idea. I do not; how about you?

Call 1-800-562-6000 in opposition to HB 1443.

==========
Honor roll of legislators who I know have a clue, as they support HB 1891.

Rep. Brad Klippert
Rep. Mark Hargrove

Perhaps I may hear from more. Be sure and call your legislators.

NAEP Science results (credibility?)

2011-01-25T13:44:00.000-08:00

The new NAEP science scores just released, and there is a big problem with credibility of the results.

Very simply, it looks like the proficiency rates could be seriously inflated, which is very unlike the situation for NAEP math and reading. Learn about this in more detail here:

http://bluegrasspolicy-blog.blogspot.com/2011/01/new-federal-science-test-results-are.html

Richard Innes

March 8, 2011 Court Date For Appeal of Seattle's High School Math Text Decision

2011-01-25T12:53:00.000-08:00

District appeals Judge's order to reconsider text adoption

A court hearing has been set on Tuesday, March 8, 9:30 AM in the Seattle Public Schools' appeal of Judge Julie Spector's 2010 decision in favor of three plaintiffs who challenged the adoption of the Discovering high school math text series.

In the case heard on January 26, 2010, plaintiffs DaZanne Porter, Martha McLaren, and Cliff Mass had presented information in support of their claim that an abundance of evidence showed that the texts were confusing and would impede learning. On February 4th, 2010, Judge Spector ruled the textbook adoption “arbitrary and capricious,” citing a lack of evidence of the texts' efficacy. She ordered the School Board to reconsider its decision. The Seattle School District filed an appeal on March 3, 2010.

In a January 14 brief responding to a “Friend of the Court” statement in support of Seattle Schools by the Washington State School Directors' Association, Plaintiffs' Attorney, Keith Scully stated: “The Superior Court was not empowered to and did not attempt to select a math series for Seattle. It was not empowered to express an opinion on math pedagogy…, and did not do so. There are no impacts of this decision on any other district’s selection of math books, and the Seattle School District is free to develop a record supporting the Discovering Series....[on reconsideration].”

The hearing is scheduled at the Court of Appeals, Division I, One Union Square, 600 University Street, Seattle, at 9:30 AM. The case is listed 6th on the docket; oral arguments in appeals cases are limited to 10 minutes for each side. Presiding over the hearing will be Judges Schindler, Applewick, and Becker.

Link to Plaintiffs' Response to Amicus Curae:
http://www.box.net/shared/vkmvi4qz62

Link to Martha McLaren's blog on this lawsuit, beginning March 4, 2010: http://seattlemathgroup.blogspot.com/

-------------
Article IX of the Washington State Constitution states:

Preamble.

It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.

This is an interesting statement. Look at the performance of the Seattle Public Schools .... There is no mechanism enforcing the delivery of this ample provision for the education of all.

The paramount duty not only lacks funding but lacks any enforcement of performance metrics. So here we sit with the SPS headed to appeals court.

Note: after Judge Spector's ruling, the results from OSPI's annual testing revealed the 10th grade pass rate for Black students dropped to 12.5% for the District, 5.7% at Cleveland, and 3.9% at Rainier Beach High School. The District's response is no change of math program, but rather to keep outside attorneys employed and head to appeals court.

The Washington State Constitution is a shallow hollow document. How can the Superintendent or the Seattle School Board justify such actions? They do not even try; they just act.

It is interesting that the oath of office taken by school directors seems to be violated so often by them:

Each Director has sworn to “support the Constitution and Laws of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington, and will to the best of my judgment, skill and ability, truly, faithfully, diligently and impartially perform the duties of the office of Seattle School Director."

....hummm ... Have any of the directors read the preamble of Article IX?

Opposition to HB 1443 needed NOW.

2011-01-24T21:54:00.000-08:00

Please oppose more damage to our schools.

As we have watched the dictates of top down management of schools produce no improvement at great expense, it is NOT the time for more.

The State took $208 million that was headed to local school districts and dropped the entire amount into state funds.

It is time to give schools the support they need not more mandates from above. To fix something try this: put control and resources into the hands of the school principals not centralized bureaucrats. Check out what happened in Baltimore and compare that with Seattle or most districts in WA State.

Please call the legislative hotline and state that you are against House Bill HB 1443.

The Common Core State Standards should not be approved. We hardly need more control from outside the schools districts. In this case it will be control from outside the state.

More administration is not the answer.

============
This call will take from two to five minutes of your time and is urgently needed -----

Please call the HB1443 Hotline 1-800-562-6000 and voice your opposition to HB1443.

Every call matters. You don't need to explain anything. You need only say you are against it.

If you don't have an opinion on HB1443, look below at bullet points under "Objections to the CCSS, In a Nutshell" (written by Laurie Rogers, author and education activist).

=============
Block the Permanent Adoption of the Common Core State Standards in Washington State

To all who oppose the Common Core State Standards: Now is the time to let the legislature know how you feel. The first bill authorizing the permanent adoption of the CCSS has hit the education committee HB1443. Click on the bill and read it.

Please call your legislators and tell them you are against this bill.
http://www.leg.wa.gov/House/Committees/ED/Pages/MembersStaff.aspx

http://www.leg.wa.gov/pages/home.aspx

Call the bill Hotline 1-800-562-6000 and voice your opposition to HB1443.

Tell them you don't want unknowns in Washington DC to tell Washingtonians how to educate our children.

Please tell them to vote “No” to HB1443.

The Common Core State Standards are known by the acronym CCSS. These are national learning standards organized by the NGA and the CCSSO and supported by the Department of Education. In an effort to “encourage” states to adopt these national standards, the ED supposedly gives states a leg up on Race to the Top applications if they adopted the CCSS.

Several states are backing away from the adoption of the CCSS over issues of money, quality, state sovereignty, and local control.

Ask your legislators to
1) vote no to HB1443, and
2) actively prepare or co-sponsor a bill to block the permanent adoption of the CCSS in this state.

Key Points

Last year’s SB6696 requires a “legislative review” of the Common Core State Standards before they can be fully adopted. (The CCSS were provisionally adopted last year by Superintendent Dorn.)
Legislators must 1) vote no to HB1443, and 2) prepare a bill this session to block the permanent adoption of the CCSS.
Bob Dean waslchronicles@hotmail.com has prepared a sample bill he’s happy to share.

Objections to the CCSS, In a Nutshell

Expensive: In a time of tightened budgets, the CCSS will cost the state and districts a great deal of money -- no one seems to know exactly how much. It’s certain that the $2 million asked for by OSPI to implement the CCSS is ridiculously low – just the tip of an iceberg. This request does not include district costs, and it’s a small fraction of the taxpayer money spent on previous standards implementations.

Untested: The CCSS are untested and unproved, with no student data to support them. Our children and our teachers are the subjects of this new, federal education experiment.

Weaker: According to the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, as well as various analyses done by professionals in Washington State, the CCSS for math are weaker and less clear than Washington State’s current math standards.

Redundant: Washington State taxpayers just spent $1.6 million developing rigorous math standards in 2008. Districts also spent a great deal of taxpayer money on professional development for these new standards, as well as on curricula, conferences and other related costs. The CCSS will initiate another round of expenditures, without any indication of how they will improve student learning or help teachers.

Loss of local input and control: Adoption of the CCSS will result in a loss of local decision-making and parent input on what our children are learning.

Bottom line:
The CCSS will cost taxpayers an as-yet unknown amount of money in implementation, adoption of new curricula, and professional development – and they will neither help our children learn better, nor help our teachers teach better. They are counterproductive and a waste of taxpayer money.

History:

SB6696

Signed into law in 2010, SB6696 was designed to force Washington State to apply for the federal Race to the Top "grant" initiative (RTTT), and to make changes in public education according to a federal vision. Initially, SB6696 would have forced Washington to adopt the CCSS sight unseen, with the word "shall." At that point, the CCSS weren’t even written.

That language was changed to require a legislative review. In 2010, after heavy lobbying around the state and school districts by Gov. Gregoire and Superintendent Dorn, Dorn “provisionally” adopted the CCSS. When OSPI presented on the CCSS in Spokane, they were “full steam ahead” on the CCSS and on the RTTT initiative, even though they could not or would not answer questions about process or long-term effects on students and teachers.

HB1443, introduced to the House Education Committee Jan. 21, 2011, is a wide-ranging bill that also authorizes OSPI to permanently adopt the Common Core State Standards.

Taxpayer Money
Adopting the CCSS is “supposed” to give states a leg up in competing for Race to the Top grants. Many states have not received RTTT money, even after falling in line with the federal vision. RTTT grants sound like “found” money, but they are still paid for with taxpayer money. Public education does not need more funding through RTTT. It needs to spend the money it gets in more appropriate ways.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, as of January 2010, the country was projected to spend $664 billion (from all sources - federal, state, local and other) on K-12 education. That number doesn’t include later infusions of “emergency” funding, much of which never made it to the classrooms or even to school districts. As you know. Gov. Gregoire redirected $208 million in Edujobs money to the General Fund. The RTTT deal is that 50% of any money WA gets will stay at the state level with OSPI.

Clearly, something needs to be done, but not this. Not the CCSS. Not RTTT. Not the centralization and federalization of public education. Not the removal of the people’s voice and their vote. We need MORE voice, more choice, and more options for parents and teachers. Competition is good for education. The CCSS, however, will add to costs, lower standards, eliminate choice, and ultimately not help children learn better.

Please ask your legislators to 1) vote no to HB1443, and 2) prepare a bill this session to block the permanent adoption of the CCSS.

The House Education Committee is located at
http://www.leg.wa.gov/House/Committees/ED/Pages/MembersStaff.aspx

Call the Legislative Hotline at 1-800-562-6000, or find a list of state legislator e-mail addresses at http://www.leg.wa.gov/pages/home.aspx

If you have any questions, please contact Laurie Rogers at wlroge@comcast.net

Laurie H. Rogers
Author of "Betrayed: How the Education Establishment Has Betrayed America and What You Can Do about it"
and "Betrayed" - a blog on education
http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/
wlroge@comcast.net

Got Dough? How Billionaires rule our Schools

2011-01-24T21:30:00.000-08:00

http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=3781

Got Dough? How Billionaires rule our Schools.

From Winter 2011 - Dissent Magazine

By Joanne Barkan ====

-----

In 2007 I ran for Seattle School Board from West Seattle. Steve Sundquist won that position. He was in favor of corporate philanthropy assisting the schools.

At the time that sounded like a good idea to me.

Now after three and a half years it is most apparent that the Seattle School District is not requesting financial assistance but rather has turned control over to the corporate philanthropists. The district leaders just do what the corporate monarchs tell them to do.

This has been a disaster for the district and especially for educationally disadvantaged learners.

The State Constitution is violated on a regular basis by District decision-makers ... No one could possibly believe the district is making ample provision for the education of all.

Article IX of the WA State Constitution:

Text of Section 1: Preamble.

It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.

NSAP = Separate and Increasingly Unequal

2011-01-19T00:10:00.000-08:00

As published in EdNews

Seattle's New Student Assignment Plan:

Separate and
Increasingly Unequal Schools

Forever

Testimony for January 19, 2011 ….

Directors, I am Dan Dempsey.

Tonight you consider more about the New Student Assignment Plan, but there is no mention of improving schools.

The NSAP shows that separate and increasingly unequal schools are the plan. Check the Data.

The NSAP was to make every school a quality school … but lacked any mechanism to do that.

Recent actions on the transition are about capacity and drawing lines. Not a single thought is given to school quality.

The following data screams separate and increasingly unequal:

May 2007 Everyday Math adopted and
'Achievement Gaps" increased and requests for increased explicit instruction and interventions were ignored.

May 2009 three southeast high school teachers testified that increased practice was needed and that the proposed adoption would fail their students. The Board approved a $1.2 million high school math adoption and lost in Superior Court.

Spring 2010 OSPI testing showed the 10th grade math test pass rate for Black Students in Seattle dropped to 12.5%. At Cleveland after 4 years of UW assistance that rate was 6%. At Rainier Beach after two years of UW College of Ed “math help” the Black student pass rate was 4% … down more than 30 points from 4 years earlier.

You’re operating two districts. The poorest section of the city gets the failing district.

The State constitution prohibits your actions but there is no enforcement. Instead of intelligently applying relevant data and research to increase student achievement, the Superintendent hires law firms to show the district is not operating illegally.

The actions of the Board and Superintendent might not be illegal but are definitely immoral.

Math adoptions, Failure to provide interventions, Teach for America "Newbies", NWEA/MAP testing, Carryover funds transferred away from 31 low income schools, Substandard math performance at every New Tech school, State Auditor Ignored, and the New Student Assignment Plan is for increasingly unequal schools.

The list is incredible …. yet the District fixes nothing.

The District’s response to horrible math pass rates for Black students is sending attorneys to Appeals court, while refusing to make changes.

How long will the inferior district continue?

Tonight is about drawing lines, not providing better programs.
Decisions are all politics, having nothing to do with improving learning. The inferior district is currently planned to continue forever.

The Superintendent regularly fails to intelligently apply relevant data. Instead of accountability the Board dances around the resulting chaos and ignores the public. Separate and increasingly unequal is the plan.

300 Intel Science Winners announced -- -- 3 from WA

2011-01-17T20:47:00.000-08:00

2010 population
USA = 308 million
WA state = 6.725 million

So with 300 science winners WA would have 6 ..... NO try 3.
One student from Pullman, one from Sequim, and one from Bonney Lake.

Hey Seattle how is that Fuzzy math going? Discovering adopted for $1.2 million and Seattle's Black student grade ten math pass rate drops to 12.5% with Rainier Beach after a couple years of UW help at 3.9% for Black students down from 36% in 2006-2007 and Cleveland Black students after 4 years of UW help at 5.7%.

300 semi finalists

The Intel Science Talent Search (Intel STS) is America's most prestigious pre-college science competition. Alumni of STS have made extraordinary contributions to science and hold more than 100 of the world's most coveted science and math honors, including seven Nobel Prizes and three National Medals of Science. The Intel STS recognizes 300 students and their schools as Semifinalists each year pulling from approximately 1,700 applicants to compete for $1.25 million in awards. From that select pool, 40 student Finalists are then invited to Washington, D.C. in March to participate in final judging, display their work to the public, meet with notable scientists, and compete for the top award of $100,000.

You can get the full list here:
http://www.societyforscience.org/page.aspx?pid=489

=================
I attended the Senate hearing about k-12 funding today. It was tragic listening to many of the proposed cuts to balance the budget.

Gifted Education was one of the proposed cuts. {Maybe 3 winners from WA is too many}

The Testimony on New Student Assignment Plan producing increasingly unequal schools

2011-01-06T01:00:00.000-08:00

Directors, I am Dan Dempsey, 1-5-2011

The Transition for the New Student Assignment Plan is an introduction item.

The NSAP is based on making every school into a quality school, but “Quality Schools” are not mentioned in the transition plan tonight and that “quality school” thought is painfully absent from any thinking lately.

The Southeast Education Initiative results from Aki Kurose, Cleveland, and Rainier Beach showed increased spending produced no improvement, yet increased spending to produce quality is the basis for the NSAP.

To have a quality school requires (1) coherence of instructional planning and (2) execution in the delivery of that instruction. Neither occurs often enough in many schools, largely because of the failing preferences of central leaders.

Does ideology trump data?

IS SEATTLE close to every school a quality school?

(1) Close enough to stop the quality discussion?
(2) Close enough to divert carryover funds from 31 low-income schools to Cleveland STEM?
(3) Close enough to continue using “Discovering Math” in high schools?
(4) Close enough to assign students to separate and increasingly unequal schools?

Seattle widened math achievement gaps with Everyday Math, then “Discovering Math” for the high school. The Black 10th grade OSPI Math test pass rate is now 12.5% at grade 10 …. {White = 68.1%} That achievement gap is 55.6%

Glancing at school report cards for “8th graders ready for high school math,” gives false hope; as further investigation of the school reports reveals shallow statistical coverage disguising serious learning and “grade inflation” problems.

“Ready for high school math” is determined solely from transcripts. In 2009 100% of Madrona 8th graders were ready for high school math, but only 15% passed the math WASL.

Consider Aki Kurose’s 2008 8th graders; 64% were ready for high school math and 24% passed the WASL. Many of that cohort went to Cleveland or Rainier Beach, which in 2010 each had OSPI math pass rates in the teens. 64% ready for high school math, yet only one fourth of them could pass the OSPI high school math test two years later.

Blaine k-8 is the only school where ready for High School math closely matches the OSPI pass rate, where 67% “are ready” aligns with 69% “passing the test”. Aki Kurose in 2010 was less than half way reliable as 73% are supposedly ready but only 35% pass the test.

Not surprisingly for Seattle Math, the schools with the largest mismatches between OSPI pass rates and HS readiness were often Low-Income High Minority schools.

The NSAP transition is not going well unless producing separate and increasingly unequal schools is its goal.

The NSAP in its current form is ethically and academically unacceptable.

Grade Inflation: in Grade 8 MathSome schools inflate grades more than others

2011-01-04T19:53:00.000-08:00

At last I have finally figured a way to measure grade inflation in eighth grade math in the Seattle Public Schools. Great thanks is extended to the Seattle Central administration for their publication of school report cards for each middle school and the category of 8th grade students leaving and ready for high school math. This percentage was computed from the percentage of students earning a C or better in 8th grade math classes at grade level or above.

The most inflated award goes to Madrona k-8 with 100% ready for high school math in 2009 and yet only 15% passing OSPI's Math WASL in 2009.

The no inflation award goes to Catherine Blaine k-8 where the prepared for high school math is almost the same as the OSPI math pass rate. In fact in 2010 67% prepared for high school math and 69% passing the OSPI MSP math test. Compare that with Aki Kurose in 2010: 73% prepared for high school math and 35% passing the OSPI MSP math test.

Anyway the data shows that for the comprehensive middle schools the higher the percentage of white students, coupled with lowest percentage of black students , and having a low percentage of Low Income students correlates with higher OSPI test pass rates and with substantially less grade inflation than in high minority, high poverty, low income SPS schools.

Here is the data for the three most economically advantaged comprehensive middle schools Eckstein, Whitman, and Hamilton; and the three least economically advantaged Aki Kurose, Mercer, and Denny.

Note in 2010:
The three most financially advantaged schools shown in Blue give shocking evidence to separate and unequal schools when compared to the three financially least advantaged schools shown in Green.

The Blue OSPI pass rates in 2010 for Hamilton, Whitman, and Eckstein:
H: 62.1 W: 74.8 E: 84.1 … avg = 73.7%

Prepared of HS math in “10: H: 77% W: 83% E: 92% … avg = 84%
Reliability factors: H: 0.81 W: 0.90 E: 0.92 average = 87.3%

note these are in the same order as expected from Low-Income %:
H: 35.2% W: 24.7% E: 15.2%; avg = 25.0%

The Green pass rates in 2010 for Aki, Mercer, Denny:
A: 34.8 M: 57.0 D: 51.9 … avg = 47.9%
Prepared of HS math in “10: A: 73% M: 86% D: 76% … avg = 78.3%
Reliability factors: A: 0.48 M: 0.66 D: 0.68 average = 60.3%

note these Reliability numbers are in the same order as expected from Low-Income %:
A: 82.3% M: 75.4% D: 65.4%; avg = 74.4%

When I say “expected”; in the SPS the lower the income level of the school the more likely the grades are inflated.
Clearly, no one wants to tell the truth about how bad math is in the Seattle Public Schools, especially in Southeast Seattle and West Seattle.

The prepared for HS math differential is only 6% lower in the three poor schools but the pass rate is 26% lower and the differential in reliability factor is 27% lower.

The district does not care to reliably tell the truth about the poor quality of math education delivered to educationally disadvantaged learners.

If you have not read my "Disproportionality and Discipline in Seattle" check it out at Ed News linked. It is another major part of the ongoing violation of article IX of the State Constitution, which states: It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.

The full stats are available with my School Board testimony for 1-5-2011 HERE.

End of Year letter to School Board

2011-01-01T11:41:00.000-08:00

Dear Seattle Schools Directors,

The linked article below identifies the Seattle School District's actions quite well. Hope you all get a copy of the book "BETRAYED"; it certainly applies to the piece.

From Schools Matter comes this posting:

"Highly-Qualified" Temporary School Missionaries
for Children Who Need Experienced Teachers

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/12/highly-qualified-temporary-school.html

Arne and the Disruptors (great name for a bad band) are always talking about edu-reform taking us beyond the status quo. Well, they are at it again, and the resulting changes this time are like most of the rest, taking the status quo backward, rather than forward.

The arrogant corporate fools in charge of federal education policy have slid language into a continuing resolution that will allow alternate route "certification" programs like TFA to claim that their candidates are "highly qualified" for NCLB purposes after four weeks of preparation.

With these clueless, well-meaning 2-year missionaries of TFA serving only in poor, brown, and black schools that desperately need teachers, rather than trainees, this has to be a solid basis for a civil rights lawsuit.

No sense just stopping there. Let us take a look at plummeting year to year score changes for Seattle's students in Special Ed and for ELL students. Was that well reported on Dec 15 at the Board Work session by MGJ? ... NO ..
So where is the accountability?
Where is the action in response to failing plans?

There is none, the children are Betrayed.

It seems the only hope of constructive action is huge political pressure because evidence is continually rejected as a basis for making Board decisions.

Betrayed and Betrayed again, some strategic plan.

And off the public marches to appeals court over the math decision because the Board just refuses to make use of evidence in decision-making.

So looking at those Black Student Math scores of only 12.5% of Black students passing in math with the Discovering Text in year one (at a cost of $1.2 million). ELL pass rate is now down to 7%.

The UW had their CoE MEC project in action at CHS and RBHS and with increased professional development and produced Black pass rates of 5.7% and 3.9%.

So what is the Plan? Where's the Beef?

Sincerely,

Dan Dempsey

Waiting for SuperFraud

2010-12-31T15:51:00.000-08:00

http://ksdcitizens.org/2010/12/22/waiting-for-superfraud/

.....
Waiting For SuperFraud
By Michael T. Martin
Public schools have to fail. There is no alternative. So give up trying to argue otherwise with facts and logic.

The mockumentary Waiting For Superman made this clear. Funded by millionaires, the movie told the story of some privatized schools in Harlem portrayed as saviors of children otherwise condemned to public schools. Privatized schools mostly funded by hedge fund millionaires on Wall Street. They spent two million dollars to promote the film nationally. Another major film titled “The Lottery” told a similar tale: children in Harlem desperate to escape public schools. Funded by more millionaires.

State Senator Bill Perkins, who represents the people of Harlem, tried to put profit restrictions on these privatized schools. So the millionaires spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to run an opponent against him in the November, 2010, election. The people of Harlem voted overwhelmingly to re-elect Perkins.

A Better Plan ... one that works ... ... and is less expensive

2010-12-21T22:39:00.000-08:00

{[ It may not be less filling and taste great but it is a whole lot better than what we have been stuck with for the two and a half years of "Excellence for All". ]}

Dear Seattle School Director, 8/21/2010

KUOW’s Phyliss Fletcher reported in her article “Seattle School District: Gregoire Cuts ‘Shocking’ ” on December 17, that:

This year, for the first time, the state auditor told the School Board it should be more involved in district finances. The school district's first internal auditor just quit. He calls the district finance problems "systemic" and claims district staff ignored his warnings.

Duggan Harman says anything the school district can do to be more efficient will help students, and that district staff will work over the holiday break to come up with recommendations of cuts to present to the School Board in January.

After analyzing some of the 88 slides from the Dec 15, 2010 Board "Work Session" involving the strategic plan "Excellence for All", I have a recommendation for more than tinkering with cost cutting during the holiday break.

The focus must shift to efficiency.

My thoughts develop an entirely new direction for the SPS, based on relevant data and proven instructional strategies.
It is attached.

This took a fair amount of time to construct and I hope you will find it worthwhile. I know the data will be more useful than what Dr. Goodloe-Johnson provides.

If you have any questions or comments, please write.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Where's the data? MGJ has quarterly work session for Board but lacks data.

2010-12-21T18:37:00.000-08:00

It was Decmeber 15, 2010 and the Board was at the quarterly work session for the strategic plan "Excellence for ALL", which is failing to live up to the hype and spin. Thus the real data that people can actually understand is not presented.

Director DeBell wanted to know about SpED and Peter Maier wondered:
How can we have a Work Session with no data?

Here are the Special Education data changes contrasting the year before MGJ's arrival ('06-'07) with the changes in 2009 to 2010.

Check it out here. If you wish to print this it requires a 14" wide printer to print as you see it.

So why doesn't the Superintendent bring readable data to work sessions?

Oh yes, because then the Board would know the full extent of this expensive debacle.

I would not bring any data either if I was planning on no changes and was intent on avoiding accountability.

Why is the Board waiting any longer to fire MGJ with cause?

Need data check this response

From the link directly above:
Around Nov 15, five parents had a meeting with CAO Enfield. These parents had questions but the CAO had no answers but she told them she would get back to them in January.

Response to 88 slide power point of MGJ on 12-15-2010; "Excellence for all" is a failure and the Board likely knows it.

2010-12-21T08:22:00.000-08:00

I just finished my 13 page response to MGJ's 88 slides. Unfortunately I was so appalled by most of this "Propaganda Push" from the superintendent I did not finish all 88 slides. I watched enough to know a con job.

I wound up making 14 proposals based largely on evidence.

Here is the entire 13 page document.

======================

Here is a piece from near the beginning:

In recent years the huge changes in information technology, enabled productive workers below the middle management level to make decisions in an extremely effective way. This has led to a reduction in the percentage of mid-management employees and an increase in productivity. Workers who are close to the production line level now have access to the information through innovative tools and have become a vital part of businesses decision making. This structure drives productivity gains.

Seattle Schools leadership has encouraged and done the exact opposite:
1. Increased the size of central administration.
2. Increased coaches for teachers
3. Increased class sizes
4. Increase centralized control and decreased school and classroom based decision making
5. Emphasized fidelity of implementation over teacher based decision making.
6. Expressed concern about the math achievement gaps; but produced markedly worse math results for each subgroup of educationally disadvantaged learners. Only last year did things improve in middle school math annual testing but at k-5 and 9-12 the situation remains bleak.

(((The results from the MGJ agenda are terrible.)))

=======================================

The ending 14 recommendations follow. (Explanations of these are in the last 3 pages of the 13 page linked document.)

1. Board must recognize that current results are sub par and a continuation of the current direction is unadvisable. Here are 2009 to 2010 changes.

2. There is inadequate funding to continue this bloated ineffective and inefficient centralized model preferred by the Superintendent. Despite financial difficulties and predictions of a slowing economy, she proposed lavish spending on experimental programs of questionable worth, while failing to provide efficient and effective interventions for struggling students. ........

3. A much leaner model that focuses on providing instructional programs aimed at academic advancement and suited to each student’s needs, must be put in place. The new model must deal with current realities and focus on the needs of individual students rather than pursuing an ideological and philosophical path of what certain adults believe should happen. .....

4. A huge increase in teacher autonomy is necessary. Teachers need to be supported rather than ordered about by others. Teachers today know what is needed for the students in their classrooms. Example of SPS incompetence. => At the African American Academy the District mandated that Everyday Math and Connected Math be used. These programs do not use much explicit instruction and need increased practice problems and exercises. Teachers had a much better idea about what was needed in Southeast high schools than the central administration during the “Discovering” math adoption. Two teachers from RBHS and one from Franklin testified that increased practice was needed. Glenda Madison, an RBHS math teacher with many years of experience dealing with students at risk, precisely told the Board what was needed for her students to succeed and was ignored. .....

5. In the past a “building based approach” was tried and found wanting. Much better models can now be developed. Recently, a profusion of ideas around models that decentralize school systems has emerged; while some of these ideas are part of misguided “Ed Reform” mania, some are not.

6. Scott Oki suggested a model in his book “Outrageous Learning” for the improvement of schools. While I disagree with some of his suggestions, he has many thoughts worthy of consideration for the decentralization of the current bloated ineffective model.

7. The most prominent feature of the “innovative” model of the Seattle Schools System, which I propose be developed, must be increased school control and guidance by building principals. As Mr. Oki suggested principals need to be held accountable by the community that a particular school serves, he talks about each school having a board of trustees, which supports and assists the principal, while still holding the principal accountable. .....

8. Seattle’s current Superintendent has pushed a plan founded on the way she believes things ought to be. Unfortunately it is a flop. Of particular interest to me was MGJ’s quotation at time mark 57:25 of part III of 11/3/2010 Board meeting:-

"Assessing every student and placing them according to ability sounds like tracking and discrimination…and we’ve moved light years away from that."

This is at the core of her inefficient wasteful defective approach to educating students. She sees the best route as a uniform approach to deliver instruction through almost identical instructional materials and pedagogical practices in nearly every classroom throughout the district. She has dismantled programs that attempt to do otherwise. ......

The fact is her aversion to anything that remotely hints that all students are not the same and may be better off with some placement by ability is causing significant damage to many students. ......... A look at recent OSPI annual testing reveals that English Language Learners and Special Education students are very poorly served by her “Differentiated Instruction” model, which she has attempted to successfully install. The year to year changes in results of OSPI annual school testing for Special Education students reveal that under her direction scores are incredibly worse than before she became superintendent.

9. Dr. Goodloe-Johnson’s moving light years away from placement by ability is unjustified. It even extends all the way to AP Calculus, where she would have anyone that wishes signup for AP Calc. There is a reason for prerequisite skills being required for entrance into many courses, unfortunately she views this as tracking.

10. The percentage of students struggling is increasing under her direction. This would be expected, when decision making occurs without an intelligent application of relevant data. Her proposals for instructional materials and programs are not driven by the evidence of what works for students, but rather by alignment with her “inappropriate for the job at hand” beliefs. The percentages of students struggling in math in SE high schools increased as the UW offered more assistance.

11. An administration that does adequate research before making proposals needs to be put in place. Then decision-makers will not need to hide data, ignore data, and falsely report on what documents state, when explaining decision-making to the public. The frantic rush of proposals has been characteristic of the Goodloe-Johnson administration. Unfortunately, during the rush, four directors regularly choose to improperly weigh the evidence in decision making and to continually support the Superintendent’s poor proposals. This was often apparent in the statements those directors made when explaining their decisions. This needs to change. With a better administration in place, directors will have time to think. Then decision-makers will not need to hide data, ignore data, and falsely report on what documents state, in explaining their decision-making process to the public. The frantic rush of proposals that has been characteristic of the Goodloe-Johnson administration must end.

12. A Superintendent that is accountable for his/her actions and a School Board that holds the Superintendent accountable is drastically needed. The current superintendent has a lengthy list of inadequacies, which the board has apparently continually ignored as only when issues were brought to light in an embarrassing way were they even mentioned. The point about not discussing legal failings because they are in litigation may be a policy but it is not a law. Recently the appeal in regard to the many failings of the Superintendent in regard to the NTN contracts approved at two votes, was dropped. The dropping of ligigation was to enable the board to sanction and/or ask for an investigation of the superintendent. The District fails to fulfill the requirements of RCW 28A 645.020, which requires particular actions from the Board when Board decision’s are appealed. The Superintendent is the secretary of the Board. Instead of providing a certified correct transcript in the NTN case the transcript was inaccurate because of likely evidence tampering, which concealed a forgery. Not a single director has made a comment about this matter. The is no accountability for the Superintendent and apparently the Board is not interested in any accountability from the Superintendent. Like many in the community I have 100% no confidence in the Superintendent and close to 100% no confidence in the School Board as a collective group. Look at the results of the last three years, any confidence would be unjustified.

13. A decentralized model is desperately needed. Seattle has competent teachers and competent principals to put a decentralized model in place. In today’s high Info-Tech environment, there is absolutely no need to continue with bloated levels of management and mid-management. A greatly increased focus needs to be on assisting each student to learn. The current model, Superintendent, and School Board are failing to serve the community.

14. Effective efficient targeted interventions are needed by struggling students and must be provided as this is a high priority. MGJ’s spending was focused on expensive tools for performance management. She provided little usable information to the Board on student performance. TEAM MGJ spent very little on interventions and apparently little time planning for interventions. The Superintendent rarely reports on the academic performance of students in an accurate intelligible honest format to anyone.

Stemming the Tidal Flow of Misinformation from MGJ

2010-12-20T12:02:00.000-08:00

Seattle Schools Superintendent Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson reflects on some of the district's successes in 2010, looks ahead to next year, and introduces their new website in a letter to parents.

In an attempt to correct the enormous flow of misleading information generated by TEAM MGJ often with the help of four Seattle School Board members, I offer illumination in Blue.

MGJ's letter in black, my comments in blue.

Looking back, 2010 has been a year of progress and change for Seattle Public Schools. We signed a historic teacher contract, which supports quality teaching in every classroom. (No it does not. It continues to deny teachers the autonomy needed to meet the needs of each child. The District spends money on expensive experimental stuff, for example the NWEA/ MAP testing tool instead of spending on providing the interventions needed by students struggling to learn) We received a $12.5 million federal teacher incentive fund grant that is devoted to instructional and leadership excellence at 29 high needs schools. (Dr. MGJ diverted carry over funds from high needs low income schools to fund her grandiose expensive plans for Cleveland’s NTN STEM program.) For the first time, the District released individual School Reports, giving families, schools and the community detailed information on the performance of every school, as well as a plan to improve. (These school reports painted an incorrect picture of improvement by showing that 66% of students were making gains. This will always be true when all the students are compared with those in the bottom third of students.The actual change in scores from year to year paints an entirely different picture.) Finally - thanks to our supportive community - voters approved the $48.2 million supplemental school levy, which will help reduce the number and severity of budget cuts, support teachers and provide classroom materials. (This is highly unlikely given the way money is spent on programs, which lack a track record of success.)

We continue our work on implementing a new Student Assignment Plan that responds to what parents and families have requested. (How odd. Director Betty Patu advised waiting at least a year. This plan was based on making every school a quality school, but there was no evidence anything other than increasing income and ethnic imbalances would occur.) Thank you for your support and patience. We are committed to providing you with a plan that is predictable, equitable and easy to understand. (But given the complete failure of her three year Southeast Education Initiative the District has no idea how to make every school a quality school, after increasing the percentages of ethnic minorities and low-income students at many of them.)

We're starting the third year of our strategic plan, Excellence for All, which was approved in 2008 based on extensive community input and best practices nationally, and is aimed at ensuring all students graduate college and career ready. (After two years, an analysis of the data reveals “Excellence for All” is an expensive flop. Those supposed “Best Practices” are hardly that when analyzed in the light of “Project Follow Through” or Hattie’s “Visible Learning”.)

Looking ahead to 2011, I see the District moving closer to realizing our goal: every student achieving, everyone accountable. Personally, I will continue to focus on Listening, Learning and Responding. (Personally, I would focus on holding MGJ accountable for her many illegal actions; among them are:

(1) misleading public officials with her 17% lie about SPS graduates, (this is a gross misdemeanor) and

(2) her failure to submit transcripts of evidence that are “certified to be correct” when Board decisions are appealed in King County Superior Court, (this is a violation of RCW 28A 645.020) and

(3) her proposal to bring trainee teachers into Low-Income High Minority schools, where currently only 1 out of 200 classes is taught by a teacher who is not highly qualified. The Board approved her plan 6-1 to pay TfA trainees with 5-weeks of training full teaching salaries as full time teachers in Low-Income schools, while they continue training to become full certified teachers, (the legality of this action in contracting with TfA remains in doubt) and

(4) her forging of the 3-12-2010 NTN School Board Action Report, which led to spending $800,000. This is a class C felony.

Joy Anderson et al. recently dropped legal action so the Board and Superintendent would have no reason for failing to discuss this approval to spend $800,000, which was based on a forged action report.) This fall, I was able to meet and talk with parents and community members at regional meetings, coffee chats and numerous other events and activities across the District. I was impressed with what our families, parents and students have to say, and I will continue to listen to all the voices of the Seattle community. (It is really unlikely MGJ will act on any of the community voices she hears.)

I encourage families to stay involved in your student's learning. (Because many of our programs lack explicit instruction and enough practice for many a child to succeed without enormous help from parents, tutors, or others.) Be a volunteer in the classroom, attend school meetings and contact your teacher or principal with any suggestions or concerns. And beginning today I invite you to preview our new District website, designed to provide much easier access to the timely information you need. With your continued support, we have the momentum to provide our children with education as a strong foundation for their futures.
(What momentum is she referring to evidence or her press releases?)

Seattle Schools Urban Outlaw BehaviorPlease ...Stop This by writing a letter

2010-12-20T07:55:00.000-08:00

Here are the email addresses:

superintendent@seattleschools.org
schoolboard@seattleschools.org

A few thousand letters or more are apparently needed to get this school board to possibly act on criminal wrong doing.

More of
The Seattle Schools
continuing adventures in
Urban Outlaw Behavior

Dan writes:

Anderson memo-gate forgery is just another example of SPS business as usual. The fact that this included written evidence of forgery, is just another thing for the Board to ignore.

MGJ was simply too busy to actually read the memo she referenced in regard to an $800,000 contract approval. Besides it was all CAO Enfield's fault for she was the lead person on the 3-12-2010 Forged action report and she sent the memo to the Board on 2-2-2010 not 1-29-2010 as claimed. Apparently MGJ did not read the memo, which was critical of her proposal, but she did submit the bogus action report and claimed to have used the memo in constructing it. It seems that CAO Enfield is responsible for submitting the bogus memo in place of the real one to the court. The Superintendent is the secretary of the Seattle School Board, so it was likely her responsibility to submit the actual memo referenced.

Keep in mind the Board was too busy on 2-3-2010 to read the $800,000 NTN contract, which was a mismatch with School Board action report. This mismatch of contract and action report was not a major concern until the appeal of the contract approval by Anderson et al. on 3-5-2010. The appeal initiated the NTN do over complete with forged action report of 3-12-2010 and a new contract that correctly aligned with action report as well as to what the public had been previously told over three months. Approval took place on 4-7-2010 same four (2007) directors voting for in a 4-3 approval.

The 2-2-2010 action report used on 2-3-2010 was filled with incorrect data. "Four (2007) Board" members ignored extensive correct valid data submitted to them by the public in order to approve the contract they had not read.

Joan Sias wrote:

I think that the board should get a letter, explaining that MGJ, despite her Ph.D., cannot be trusted to present the most relevant, reliable research, and to present valid assessments of that research. She cannot be trusted to not cherry pick research results.

{[ The problem with that is over half of the Board members are cherry-pickers, who deceive the public by omitting various facts to make unjustified "Official Board" decisions. New Board President, Steve Sundquist, is perhaps the most flagrant example of such misbehavior.

On the other hand at least "writing to the Board" will produce one more document showing the Board refuses to do the job they were elected to do, which includes supervising only one employee Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson. ]}

Her citing of this biased Pearson review of a weak study is evidence of either incompetence or intellectual dishonesty.
{[ Normal MGJ practice ]}

We are not able to know whether she is dishonest or incompetent. In either case, this behavior causes serious harm to children, and should be grounds for dismissal. How can the Board know, in general, when this woman's advice to the Board is valid and trustworthy?
[{ By fact checking her proposals and reading the evidence submitted by the public, which they prefer not to do or heed. }]

It seems quite apparent that four Directors elected in 2007, who began service in November 2007, do not care about whether MGJ's advice to the Board is valid and/or trustworthy. They participated in bolstering many of her misleading statements and often approved proposals based on a collection of misleading statements both oral and written.
=====================================

It is very apparent that a few letters are ignored by the Superintendent and the Board.

I urge you to write

the Superintendent asking her to resign

and I urge you to write to

the Seattle School Directors demanding they fire the Superintendent with cause
for numerous violations of State Laws.

Here are the email addresses:

superintendent@seattleschools.org

schoolboard@seattleschools.org

Proposed Rally on January 5 to Fire Dr. Goodloe-Johnson with cause

2010-12-18T17:10:00.001-08:00

I propose that before the 6:00 PM School Board meeting on Wednesday, January 5, we gather at 5:00 PM with formal speeches at 5:30.

---- ---- ----
It has been suggested that with darkness in January a Saturday rally may be better.
What are the thoughts of others?
---- ---- ----

Dr. Goodloe-Johnson has lied (17%-gate), and failed on numerous occasions to submit certified correct evidence to the court when decisions of the Board are appealed.
On 2-3-2010 she had the Board vote to approve a contract that did not match the action plan. In the redo do-over for that she forged the 3-12-2010 Action report. Someone tampered with evidence submitted to the court in regard to the memo of 1-29-2010 sent to the Bpard on 2-2-10 but never submitted to the court. A different memo masqueraded as the authentic memo.

She forged the NTN Action Report which was presented on 3-12-2010 and used for an introductory item on March 17, 2010.

Her current instructional approach and management have increased math achievement gaps for most subgroups of educationally disadvantaged learners at the high school level.

Reading achievement gaps at the high school level for many subgroups are growing faster than math gaps.

Three documents are available as .pdf downloads or for viewing at box.net

HS GAPS ..:.. : ..:.. Forgery Facts

A response to the Board Work session of Dec. 15, 2010

The above three documents are in a somewhat rough stage at the moment.
First draft but I wanted to get them up for your perusal.

HERE are some pages from the FOIA:

Sent by Enfield ..:.. ..:.. Forgery Proof

======================================

PeoneyPower nominates Phil Brockman for next Superintendent.

Do we have a second for that nomination?

Any other nominations from cyberspace?

=======================================

DOWNLOAD IT NOW !!!
The document the Board and the Superintendent ignored =>

The study produced by Gates Data Fellow Eric M. Anderson PhD. :

"Correlates of High Achieving Schools: Learning from Top Performing Inner City Public Schools" produced in March 2010.

My latest FOIA arrived and Dr. Goodloe-Johnson needs to be fired with cause or some School Directors should be recalled

2010-12-18T05:34:00.000-08:00

Liar, Liar, Liar, Lair,
Forgery, from a lying Forger and
Evidence Tampering.

The big six questions I have are:

(1) How many people are lying?

(2) Who is lying? and

(3) How many directors tolerate gross misdemeanors and a felony from the Superintendent, while believing they are not violating their oath of office as a Seattle School Director?

A Director swears to: “support the Constitution and Laws of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington, and will to the best of my judgment, skill and ability, truly, faithfully, diligently and impartially perform the duties of the office of Seattle School Director.

(4) Where did MGJ get the bogus version of the Anderson memo that she used and that was submitted to the court?

(5) How long will it take for the Board to fire the Superintendent with cause?

(6) How long will it take someone in authority to request an investigation into illegal activities on the part of the Superintendent, so that she is charged and held accountable?

I have no more questions as I have evidence to answer all the rest. Thanks to Joy Stevens the handler of public requests for information at the JSCEE.

Forgery Facts HERE

Big News from WA DC onTeach for AmericaWho wants 5-week wonders labeled "Highly Qualified"?

2010-12-17T23:34:00.000-08:00

Senate Sought to Call
Novice Teachers"Highly Qualified"
and Allow Concentration in
Poor, Minority Schools.
Seems that the U.S. Senate is a bit slow. The Seattle School Board with approval of their General Counsel and likely a thumbs up from OSPI's Randy Dorn decided to approve that exact plan as submitted by Superintendent and frequent liar Dr. Goodloe-Johnson.

From Transparent Christina comes the following:
Wow, just wow. Four words I didn’t think I would say:

Thank You Harry Reid.
Buried deep in the nearly 2,000 page Senate omnibus appropriations bill that Harry Reid just pulled is an amendment slipped in on Tuesday that seeks to lower the standard of teacher owed every child in the nation under No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

The provision, which has grassroots and community groups across the country up in arms, would have permitted teachers still training in night or weekend alternative preparation programs (known as interns in some states) to be labeled as “highly qualified” teachers. That designation relieves districts of having to tell parents of the teacher’s sub-par preparation and allows their continued concentration in poor and minority schools.

=====================
In Seattle, a group of parents filed an appeal of a Seattle School Board decision that looked as if 25 TfA teachers might be headed to Seattle's low income schools.

The situation gets even more interesting as it is believed that Randy Dorn may have been willing to assert these 5 week wonders are highly qualified.

The School Board was aware that:

1.. The is no teacher shortage in Seattle.

2.. That there is no data showing that TfA is a reasonable choice for a district with an abundance of highly qualified teachers. In Seattle 199 out of 200 classes is taught by a highly qualified teacher. Low-Income and Non Low-Income are both at that 199/200 rate.

3.. The Board and the District were fully aware of the 9th circuit court ruling in regard to TfA not meeting the Highly Qualified Standard in California. Well so much for Washington seeking higher standards than California, right Mr. Dorn.

4.. Director Sherry Carr, with or without help, cherry-picked half a sentence out of Helig's Great Lakes report to show that her vote for TfA was justified. Helig's report specifically states NOT to use TfA in situations where highly qualified teachers are available.

More on Director Carr's use of Helig's study HERE.
5.. The Board voted approval of TfA by a vote of 6-1.
Betty Patu once again was the voice of sanity.

Here is the link to the Huff Post article used by Transparent Christina.

The Student Teacher said: .... to which Mike said ... and Dan supplied a bit of data

2010-12-17T15:06:00.001-08:00

As a student teacher, I respectfully disagree.

K-5 in Seattle uses the Everyday Math curriculum, which has proven to be the most effective curriculum in the country.

Constructivist math helps students construct traditonal [sic] algorithms rather ...than memorize them, thus creating a deeper, more conceptual understanding.

The problem is that veteran teachers don't get it, which in turn leads to parents freaking out. However, this type of math curriculum, if taught correctly, pushes students beyond memorizing formulas towards developing into little mathmaticians [sic].

Too many students learn algorithms for testing without having true number sense.

To which Mike replied

Wow… Where to begin?

Dear student teacher,

First, you are to be commended for choosing to be a teacher of children. I genuinely believe there is no higher calling or more noble a cause. Second, you are to be commended for your willingness to engage in respectful dialogue on a topic of paramount importance.

Respectfully, I adamantly disagree with each of your assertions. But I think I understand from where they come, as each of your unfounded contentions have been repeated over-and-over by champions of ed-reform for years. Incessant repetition of a falsehood does not make it true. I urge you, I beg you to subject what you’ve been told & taught by “the experts” to critical examination of your own. Ask for validating empirical data, evidence, and research; discriminate between genuine research and opinion pieces; and seek out and read referenced material.

As for my respectful dialogue, I’ll attempt to address your contentions one at a time.

“K-5 in Seattle uses the Everyday Math curriculum, which has proven to be the most effective curriculum in the country.”

Really? Where’s the evidence and empirical data to support such a statement of proven effectiveness? I suppose the truth of this statement could hinge on your definition of “effective.” If by effective, you mean that the EM curriculum boosts employment in the Seattle area, you may be able to build a case. The need for remedial mathematics at community colleges has skyrocketed, as have math tutoring boutiques in the private sector.

“Constructivist math helps students construct tradit[i]onal algorithms rather ...than memorize them, thus creating a deeper, more conceptual understanding.”
Poppycock.

In the first place, EM does not emphasize traditional algorithms. Instead, it emphasizes “focus” or alternative algorithms that have proven less effective or totally inadequate for higher mathematics over time. Secondly, building any classroom on a framework approaching exclusive constructivist pedagogy is child abuse, as it denies the child the benefit of exposure to (direct instruction in) the accumulated wisdom and knowledge of generations over centuries. Thirdly, your statement implies a disdain for memorization (rote learning) in favor of the ed-reformist “holy grail” of conceptual understanding. Conceptual understanding in any particular domain cannot be taught in the absence of the accumulation of knowledge in that same domain. In mathematics, conceptual understanding develops over time as we gradually learn to efficiently manipulate numbers in the abstract, and in turn apply those manipulations to the concrete. It is both counter-intuitive and false to believe that this gradual learning, which due to time constraints must be efficient, can best occur in an environment where students are required to construct or discover for themselves the accumulated knowledge of generations.

“The problem is that veteran teachers don't get it, which in turn leads to parents freaking out.”

Hmmm… So your education has not only led you to a philosophical allegiance to the anti-intellectualism of constructivism, but also to a disdain for the temperance of actual experience (veteran teachers), as well as a contempt for the legitimate concerns of parents. I don’t know how to respond, except to implore you to remember this once you’ve advanced to the position of parent or veteran teacher. Such reflection may enable you to respond to youthful arrogance with patience. Ironically though, your quip does touch on one of the practical problems of these reform curricula. Because the “veteran teachers don't get it”, the adoption of these reform curricula are usually accompanied by requests for enormous amounts of “professional development.” Have you ever wondered who benefits from creating an environment in public education where perpetual “professional development” is the norm? Have you ever questioned why the increase in professional development requirements has run coincident with the decline in American public education?

“However, this type of math curriculum, if taught correctly, pushes students beyond memorizing formulas towards developing into little math[e]maticians.”

I don’t believe there is enough time to teach this type of curriculum correctly. I also don’t believe in mandating the required homogenization of pedagogical techniques, which would be the implication of the first part of your statement. The last part of your statement, again, reflects a disdain for memorization as a tool of learning. Yet, you’ve memorized the talking points of proponents of reform mathematics quite well. Left to your own devises, I wonder if you’d have “developed into a little student teacher” by personally discovering or constructing the philosophical underpinnings of constructivism? No… you were taught, weren’t you?

“Too many students learn algorithms for testing without having true number sense.”

“Number sense” has been defined several different ways. The two most common interpretations have to do with “fluidity & competence” and the personal “dispositions” (confidence) that occur as a result of said competence. I assume, because of how you phrased your statement, that you’re applying the “personal dispositions” definition/interpretation to your use of “number sense.” These two interpretations must be addressed separately, because one is objective and the other subjective.

Fluidity & competence can be accurately & objectively measured (or tested, if you prefer) based on performance.

Personal disposition can only be subjectively assessed; it cannot be objectively measured. Additionally, any subjective assessment of personal disposition must be weighed against an objective measure of performance in order to gauge whether the personal disposition is warranted based upon the objective performance of the student. (It’s just as illegitimate for a student to think he’s good at something if he’s not, as it is for a student to lack confidence but exhibit superior performance.) Students must “learn algorithms for testing” because actual performance is the only objective measure we have to ascertain a student’s development.

In this way, this argument is related to the argument of procedural fluency versus conceptual understanding. Of the two, only procedural fluency can be objectively measured.

-- mike

================

Seattle adopted Everyday Math on May 30, 2007. EM was put into service September 2007 after professional development of most if not all elementary school teachers. In May 2007, CAO Carla Santorno told the Board that fidelity of implementation was necessary for the EM program to bring good results and said within four to five years the Achievement Gaps for groups of educationally disadvantaged learners would be gone as measured by annual OSPI testing at grade 4.

Such OSPI testing in Spring 2008 showed increased achievement GAPS for Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, American Indians, low income students, and limited English speaking students. Gaps became even larger in Spring 2009.

The Seattle School District since EM adoption required Math to be taught 75 minutes a day everyday. It seems that Mike is correct. Apparently, there is not enough time to teach Everyday Math correctly.

The District adopted Key Curriculum Press' "Discovering Algebra", "Discovering Geometry", and "Discovering Advanced Algebra", on May 6, 2009. Spending $800,000 on books and $400,000 on professional development. The Bethel School District had adopted "EM" and "Discovering" in Spring 2007 and has seen declining achievement. Seattle's grade 10 math OSPI HSPE results in Spring 2010 were disappointing.

"To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data"
-- W. Edwards Deming (1900-1993)

The 2010 OSPI Math tests showed a pass rate for Black students in Seattle schools of

28.2% grade 4 (note the scores during the last three years and this after previous widespread use of TERC/Investigations)

12.5% grade 10 and Sophomore credit standing required to test.

4th Grade Math Black Students

Year ................. District : State
1997-98 WASL : 14.2% : 13.0%
1998-99 WASL : 12.0% : 15.3%
1999-00 WASL : 17.2% : 18.7%
2000-01 WASL : 15.0% : 19.5%
2001-02 WASL : 22.3% : 28.6%
2002-03 WASL : 31.1% : 35.5%
2003-04 WASL : 36.4% : 37.5%
2004-05 WASL : 33.1% : 37.7%
2005-06 WASL : 31.3% : 36.4%
2006-07 WASL : 32.0% : 35.1%
2007-08 WASL :27.6% : 31.3% <== EM begins in Seattle
2008-09 WASL :29.1% : 30.2%
2009-10 MSP .:28.2% : 32.5%

10th Grade Math Black Students

Year ................. District : State
1998-99 WASL .:. 5.4% : 9.5%
1999-00 WASL .:. 8.3% : 11.7%
2000-01 WASL .:. 6.1% : 11.9%
2001-02 WASL .:. 8.1% : 13.0%
2002-03 WASL .:. 7.0% : 14.2%
2003-04 WASL : 11.3% : 16.1%
2004-05 WASL : 12.9% : 20.4%
2005-06 WASL : 21.7% : 23.2% <= Seattle begins
2006-07 WASL : 19.6% : 22.5% .. requiring
2007-08 WASL : 16.0% : 22.2% .. Sophomore
2008-09 WASL : 16.3% : 20.9% .. Credits to Test
2009-10 HSPE : 12.5% : 19.0% <= "Discovering" begins

====================================
Bethel School District All students:

10th Grade Math All Students

Year ................. District : State
1998-99 WASL : 21.1% : 33.0%
1999-00 WASL : 26.7% : 35.0%
2000-01 WASL : 26.3% : 38.9%
2001-02 WASL : 23.2% : 37.3%
2002-03 WASL : 28.9% : 39.4%
2003-04 WASL : 31.6% : 43.9%
2004-05 WASL : 39.9% : 47.5%
2005-06 WASL : 39.2% : 51.0%
2006-07 WASL : 36.1% : 50.4%
2007-08 WASL : 35.0% : 49.6% <= BSD adopts Discovering
2008-09 WASL : 30.3% : 45.4%
2009-10 HSPE : 26.5% : 41.7%

Bethel
10th Grade Math Black Students

Year ................. District : State
1998-99 WASL : 10.1% : 9.5%
1999-00 WASL : 13.4% : 11.7%
2000-01 WASL : 10.2% : 11.9%
2001-02 WASL : 13.5% : 13.0%
2002-03 WASL : 17.8% : 14.2%
2003-04 WASL : 19.7% : 16.1%
2004-05 WASL : 21.4% : 20.4%
2005-06 WASL : 23.3% : 23.2%
2006-07 WASL : 26.6% : 22.5%
2007-08 WASL : 22.5% : 22.2% <= BSD adopts Discovering
2008-09 WASL : 17.6% : 20.9%
2009-10 HSPE : 15.8% : 19.0%

Data obtained from OSPI Report Cards

========================
I have removed two comments below, which were abusive and contained NO Constructive thoughts.

I would like this blog to be not just a source for information but a place for constructive civilized discussion of issues. My thanks to Mr. McCall for his contributions. I apologize to him for the responses of several of those posting comments. Others might wish to read their own comments and consider if they contribute anything to the discussion.

Let me say that my opposition to EDM remains firm. Prior to the EDM adoption by Seattle in May 2007, I analyzed data from all districts using EDM at the time of the 2005 Spring ITBS. What I saw were reasonable scores on ITBS grade three that dropped by grade 6 in every district except 1.

The drops were of 10 points in districts with below 10% Black and Hispanic populations.
In districts between 10% and 20% Black and Hispanic populations the drop was the same 10 points from grades 3 to grade 6.
For Districts above 20% Black and Hispanic populations the drop was 15.5 points.

This is the highly standardized ITBS not the flaky WASL.

The first two years of EDM use in Seattle the math achievement Gaps increased for every subgroup of disadvantaged learner. At the African American Academy at grades 3rd and 4th the WASL math scores fell off the map those two years.

===========

I've removed two comments.
If someone wishes to discuss avenues to improvement great, if not no name calling etc. just read but do not write.

I have always believed that a strong program includes some constructivist activities but delivered in moderation and in a guided way. I remain a strong proponent of Singapore Math.

As Mr. McCall points out below, arithmetic fluency is required for math success. I do not believe from what I have seen that the continual spiraling without emphasizing mastery is delivering the goods for most educationally disadvantaged learners. I have encountered no data to convince me otherwise. Perhaps Mr. McCall, who uses his name (unlike those who had their comments removed), could provide some.

Huff Post on VAM : Value Added Growth Model Gates' Evidence versus Gates' Spin

2010-12-17T03:19:00.000-08:00

VAM : Value Added Growth Model

Hooray for the Huff Post !!!!

Gates' Evidence versus Gates' Spin

Having taught in an extremely wide variety of situations, I find the VAM to be total bunk.

Put a teacher in a high performing school with motivated kids and supportive parents and watch that VAM speedometer "Really Rock on Big Time."

Put that same teacher in inner city urban LA or on some Indian Reservations and watch that test driven speedo needle slow to at best a crawl.

VAM what a ridiculous idea. Unless of course you wish to see teachers exiting the hardest to teach students at an even faster rate.

VAM is another idea brought to you from the experts that enjoy philosophizing and pontificating about education but remain comfortably distant from the real work of teaching students.

If the Edu-Elite club would put as much energy into advocating for instructional materials and practices that are proven to work, rather than supporting faddish attempts to improve schools it would be a vast improvement.

The secret is to focus on improving each student's skills, knowledge, and performance. Unfortunately that takes effort and a certain amount of teacher autonomy, which most of these top down folks have no interest in.

=========
Look at how technology has given us great research tools. In many work environments middle management is disappearing, as the people doing the work are more than capable of making a lot more decisions and usually better than the old middle managers.

Unfortunately this is NOT happening in the Seattle Schools, where $11 million were spent annually on Coaches for teachers (over 110 of them). Seattle is also big on Top Down management. They must use management books from 1957.

Get a clue, Seattle; that model never worked well and could hardly be worse in today's school environment. No wonder blaming teachers has become the new national scapegoat sport. The administration does not those guns aimed where they really belong, which is at them.

Central Administration focuses on tools and policies to implement VAM.
(Is VAM working anywhere to actually improve student learning?)

Hey what about focusing on student skills and the teaching and learning of core knowledge. --- Oh right that would require a greatly different model than the one desired by the Central Administrative oligarchs.

===============================================

Update from LA on VAM :

L.A. teachers union won’t accept pay cuts, ‘value-added’ evaluations

The state’s largest teachers union Wednesday fired an early salvo in contract negotiations, serving notice that it wouldn’t accept pay cuts easily and that it won’t consider linking teacher evaluations to student test scores.

Appeal of Board's TfA approval filing at 11 am on Dec 17

2010-12-17T00:16:00.000-08:00

Joan Sias and Cecilia Palao-Vargas, along with the two organizations the Seattle Shadow School Board (S3B) and Parents Across America - Seattle (PAA-S) will file an appeal of the Seattle School Board's Teach for America (TFA) approval.

This appeal filing will take place at the King County Courthouse at 11 am (barring unforeseen circumstances) on Friday December 17, 2010.

There is a possibility of legal action in Federal Court in regard to this matter in early 2011.

Financial contributions are needed and will be greatly appreciated.

Those who can chip in some money...any amount will help.

Please mail to: Cecilia Palao-Vargas

11260 37th Ave SW,
Seattle, WA
98146

State Steals $208 million from local districts

2010-12-15T22:29:00.000-08:00

From the Tacoma News Tribune comes ......

State snags money meant for school jobs

Congress threw school districts a lifeline. State government yanked it away.

Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/12/12/1461902/state-snags-money-meant-for-school.html#ixzz18FnImJyT

It was reported ==>

Sen. Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma, who backed the deal, said schools would have to live without the windfall they had until recently thought was in hand.

“The reality of the world today is, things change – that what was true last week may not be able to stand up today,” Regala said. She added that in trying economic times, “Lots of families certainly know that.”
-----------------

This was an interesting comment about "things change and what was true last week may not be true this week." This shows the planning and forethought of several legislators I guess or how they attempt to fool us.

I thought it was well known that finances were in a sorry condition at the time this vote for our $208 million. Do the legislators think that the public is so ignorant as not to be aware that in big down turns the effect on government revenues lags the overall economy by 18 months or more?

n0t_thatgirl is "spot on" in her analysis of this theft.

A number of school districts were counting on those funds.

Republics are characterized by a respect for laws and lawful actions. Welcome to the "State of Washington, an Oligarchy not a Republic.”

“We’re pretty certain that this is allowable use,” House Majority Leader Pat Sullivan said of the transfer.

===========================

“Lots of families certainly know that.….” in times like these, local decision making maybe crushed by those in more powerful positions.

Two questions:
#1 Is the legislature planning on accepting or rejecting ESSB 6696 in January?

Acceptance means large financial obligations as acceptance of the Common Core Standards will commit WA State to large expenditures with the Dumping of the New 2008 State math standards and adoption of Big Brother's plans for us. The CCSS were largely funded by the Gates Foundation and other oligarchs with big plans for their minions. Race to the Top, was the extortion attempt to get states to sell the souls of their children. So NOW is the legislature stealing $208 million to fund grandiose plans beyond the control of local school boards and even state officials?

#2 What is happening with CORE 24?

The State Board of Education's pet project should be suspended for at least two years if not five years.

In a time of austerity is it advisable to increase graduation requirements to 24 credits when currently only about 70% of Washington students graduate from high schools requiring minimums of 19 to 22 credits? Clearly the state needs to fund effective interventions for struggling learners rather than producing more mandates. The SBE has no real need to expand its turf. There are many students today who graduate with more than 24 credits. In fact with running start some graduate from high school and receive an AA degree at the same time.

This does not seem to be a wise expenditure of funds when k-8 interventions, remediations, and accelerations, are far more pressing needs.

It is time to talk about where education funds are going and where they are not going.

Local districts need the money that had already been promised to them. Students need assistance and local school districts need the money to assist the students.

It looks like more mandates from others far distant from the children will be forced upon the locals and funded with the $208 million intended for them.

===========
CORE 24 and ESSB 6696 funding will keep those employed, who prefer to pontificate about education while remaining removed from the real classroom work of educating children. That $208 million is needed at the school district level. It was intended to help students not keep bureaucrats employed.

SPS to work on Explaining Numbers

2010-12-15T11:50:00.000-08:00

Today the School Board will have a work session with an emphasis on explaining numbers.

The way the numbers have manipulated by the Superintendent to manipulate the public as exposed in the Seattle Times and on the Seattle Schools Blog has certainly necessitated today's meeting.

I figured the directors might need a little help so I wrote and email with an attached letter. Here it is:

Dear Directors,

I have never cherry-picked numbers or attempted to mislead anyone, but I am not in Seattle school leadership either.

I am happy to see that there will be an emphasis on explaining numbers.

I have several questions that perhaps you or the Superintendent could answer today.

See attached letter, which contains numbers (accurate numbers from OSPI):

#1. What does it mean when 87% of 8th graders are ready for High School Math?

#2. How can the accuracy of that number be determined after two years in high school?

#3. At Denny why in the three years 2008, 2009, 2010 is there NO correlation between Readiness percentages and OSPI test results?

#4. What is going on with the UW's Math Education Project in Southeast High Schools?
If something worthwhile is happening, then why are the scores so abysmal?

#5. Given the:
A. Extreme lack of progress in math,
(except at middle school last year for many students)
(and especially for many educationally disadvantaged learners)
B. Dr. Deming's recommendations,
C. The top down structure of Seattle school management,
D. The disregard of relevant data, and
E. Craig Parsley's article in Crosscuts

What is the plan for improvement?

#6. Why does the Board allow the Superintendent to commit apparent criminal acts and not call for an investigation?

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

HERE is that attached letter.

Will the School Board continue to tolerate the Bad Acts of Seattle's Superintendent?

2010-12-14T11:25:00.000-08:00

December 14, 2010

  Dear Director Sherry Carr,  

Thanks for the attachment and your prompt response.

  What I am looking for are Directors who direct the Superintendent. I have seen preciously little of that from the School Board as a group over the entire duration of the Goodloe-Johnson administration.   It is now apparent that not only does the Board fail to direct the Superintendent on far too many matters but apparently the Directors also sanction her illegal actions by failing to initiate appropriate investigations into her activities aimed at eventual prosecution for her significant violations of state laws.   

The question many in Seattle are currently asking is: Why are the Directors remiss in fulfilling their duties?  

Thanks for the attachment. I hope you send it to all directors to read. It seems to me that the kind of actions that Charlie Mas, many others, and I have been asking for is again loudly proclaimed in the attachment, which you sent.

The results from the Positive Deviance Projects persuade me that we might be better off looking for and funding interventions that explore “positive deviance” within a community and within a school.

All of which was why I was so excited when Tofi’a followed up on our snatched lunchtime exchange by sending me a copy of a recent Masters Research Thesis from Massey University written by Sione Tu’itahi.

Langa Fonua: In Search of Success. How a Tongan Kainga Strived to be Socially and Economically Successful in New Zealand by Sione Tu’itahi is a description of intergenerational positive deviance and what I have long been looking for. You can get a copy from The Directorate Pasifika@Massey Office, Albany Campus, Auckland.

The thesis “Langa Fonua” argues that “to find solutions to the low socio-economic status of Tongans in New Zealand, research should focus on their demonstrated strengths and positive achievements, rather than their deficits.” {Dr. Goodloe-Johnson seems far to focused on teacher deficits both real and imaginary} p82 Tu'itahi uses the Tongan model of fonua – ongoing inter-connected relationship between people and environment (reciprocity) as the framework for understanding the successful progress of the Tongan Tahi kainga over the last 30 years.

I have advocated for longer than the entire time you have been a director that:

1. “Project Follow Through” results be used rather than ignored. The Board and the Superintendent have continued to ignore the situation and despite lots of achievement gaps talk the situation has grown worse.

2. Effective and efficient interventions are urgently needed. This situation remains the same or worse than it was four years ago.

More recently I advised the following:

3. John Hattie’s “Visible Learning” should be used as a guide in decision-making, which has not happened.

4. The work of cognitive scientists David C. Geary, Paul A. Kirschner, and John Sweller needs to be used to evaluate and correct the continuing failures of "Minimally Guided Instruction." Dr. Geary was instrumental in helping to end the "Whole Language" debacle. It seems that the Board wants to continue the similar "Whole Math" debacle of the last decade as if proclaiming a decade of failure is not enough to change direction in Seattle.

5. “Foundations for Success” from the NMAP in 2008 needs to be used for something more than cherry-picking statements in support of actions it does not recommend. The same could be said for the Great Lakes study document you cherry-picked or someone else cherry-picked for you in support of TfA.

Note: In Nashville and most other places TfA participant’s retention as teachers is abysmal. It seems that as Pam Hook feared TfA is producing more folks to tell teachers what to do as they distance themselves from the actual doing of teaching. Given the results from listening to the "experts" in Seattle, we have no need of more experts.

6. RCW 28A 645.020 needs to be followed rather than ignored. It certainly seems that Dr. Goodloe-Johnson as Board Secretary and Superintendent is not only responsible for ignoring a legally required duty to submit a filing within 20 days of an appeal of a Board decision, a filing that is certified to be correct, but she is also in direct violation of this law through evidence tampering. She or Dr. Enfield, or someone submitted the memo Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and/or Dr. Enfield used in constructing the 3-12-10 NTN Action Report. This fraudulent submission in place of the original memo that the superintendent claimed to be using was apparently done to cover the forgery used in the construction of the NTN action report.

I could continue with this list making it much longer, but the Board has heard and read it all before and failed to do anything of substance.

It has now reached the point where many Directors appear to enable the Superintendent's illegal actions or are accomplices in her wrongdoing. It is just really difficult to see anything other than that. The Superintendent produces few positive results anywhere; the community has "NO Confidence" in her and not much confidence in the Board that fails to direct her.

The Board’s and the Superintendent’s actions laud those "supposed educators" that tell others how to teach. TfA is a fine model of this, although some TfA participants continue in education past two years most prefer not to continue as teachers.

The Board's actions proclaim an acceptance of the tenants of the "Value Added Model" for teacher evaluation, while giving itself, and its Superintendent a pass for their hands in the creation of the currently proclaimed no results stagnation.

It is apparent that nationally instructional materials and practices are largely deficient. The following of advice from UW experts and from the stream of paid consultants selected by the Superintendent will assure Seattle of more of the same deficiencies or perhaps new deficiencies.

There are practices and materials, which are known to work successfully, but the Board has no interest in those as the Board focuses on supporting the every action of its Superintendent. Whether her actions are legal or illegal is apparently of no concern in the Board's continual support of Dr. Goodloe-Johnson.

Now each director has a currently lengthening list of the Superintendent's bad acts; to do nothing to bring the Superintendent to justice will certainly be an intentional failure to fulfill the duties of the office of school director.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Will Seattle School Directors Ever Act? or is it more Lessons in: Oligarchy v. the Republic

2010-12-14T00:43:00.000-08:00

December 14, 2010

Dear Seattle School Director,

It has come to my attention that you will meet to discuss the evaluation of the Superintendent on December 15, 2010.

This would be an excellent time for you to determine what course of action you will pursue in regard to the Superintendent's likely violation of state laws on several occasions.

Her role as Board secretary and yet failing to comply with RCW 28A 645.020 on several occasions is very troublesome. It his her actions in regard to the NTN contract in which I believe she tampered with evidence and forged the 3-12-2010 NTN Action Report, that should have each of you and the Board as a body calling for an investigation by authorities into possible prosecution for misdemeanors and felonies.

If you fail to act on Wednesday, it will be apparent that you are intentionally not fulfilling your oath of office and need to be recalled.

I look forward to being informed of any action that you decide to pursue in this regard. I would also like to be informed if you decide against investigation of the Superintendent's frequent and sometimes very serious violations of state laws.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

=====================

My letter to KIRO's Dori Monson:

Dori,

This is just incredible. It has now become:

Will Seattle School Directors Ever Act?
or is it more Lessons in:
Oligarchy v. the Republic

It seems that public service in some respects has become doing a real number on the public.

Lying and forgery are just not a big deal when one is a public school official.

The reason for this is there are no apparent mechanisms to prosecute school officials that only lie and forge things.

You see the Attorney General usually defends the public officials against complaints.

HELP!!!! Apparently we are only the tax paying public and can be ignored by the rulers (pardon me I meant to say public servants).

-- Dan

Dan Willingham's Big Whiff

2010-12-13T20:07:00.000-08:00

From the Washington Post:

Willingham: What Causes Performance Decline Across Grades?
By Valerie Strauss

My guest today is cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham,
a psychology professor at the University of Virginia and author of “Why Don’t Students Like School?”

---------------
Willingham, who is one of my favorites, had an absolute Whiff. It was like he swung at a wild pitch as it headed into the screen with the following statement:

"A parallel phenomenon is happening in math. In the early grades U.S. kids are not very strong on conceptual understanding, but they are pretty good at learning math facts and algorithms.That’s sufficient to produce good test scores in the early grades. Kids can recognize problem types and know which algorithms to apply.But once you start algebra, the absent conceptual knowledge really starts to hurt you."

I am now wondering if a Randy Johnson fast ball hit Dr. Willingham in the head as he swung at the pitch. It is hard to be further off the mark than his analysis of the Algebra difficulty above.

Note if he was correct then recent high school graduates from Seattle's High Schools would not be placing into their first Community College Math class at Seattle Central C.C. with 50% unable to place into a class above the equivalent of High School Math 1. Note 20% of recent high school graduates get a math placement into the equivalent of middle school math or lower. This is clearly not because these students have arithmetic fluency; again these are recent high school graduates' placements into a first math course.

Is Virginia that much different than Seattle?

"US students in the early grades are certainly not facile with math facts and algorithms and it is precisely their lack of fluency in both that causes them to hit a wall when they start algebra." -- Elizabeth Carson

Willingham's assertion seems to indicate we only need to better teach conceptual understanding in the early grades. This will play right into the hands of the those who promote ideology instead of reality: NCTM and TERC and Everyday Math and Trailblazers et al. For those are the pushers of fantasy who ignore results.

Note: Teachers and coaches of Band, Orchestra, Football, Basketball, Chess, etc. are focused on results and see a necessity for sound instruction and practice.

"An “absolute wake up call” is what Education Secretary Arne Duncan called the latest results of the the PISA test, which measures 10th grader’s achievement in reading, math, and science.

"Willingham needs to wake up - and fast" says Elizabeth Carson of NYC HOLD

Longer School Year ... why? Trailblazers math ... why? says the public

2010-12-13T19:52:00.000-08:00

Longer School Year? Longer School Day?

Offhand, I don't see how more time to make posters or watch movies would produce more learning - ?!

I agree absolutely that students need more practice, but public schools like ours aren't going to use extra time to give students practice because public schools don't believe in practice.

Education schools, which train all public school teachers & administrators, believe that memorization and drill are bad. Drill and kill.

U.S. education schools believe in 'conceptual understanding' and 'problem solving,' and they believe that understanding and problem solving are separate from memory, memorization, and practice.

Absence of memorization and practice are a major selling point of Math Trailblazers, by the way. Trailblazers promotional material promises students will achieve 'fluency' in the math facts & the standard algorithms without memorization, worksheets, and drill.

-- parent in New York state

Gender and 2010 SAT Math Results Adding Up the Differences between Boys and Girls

2010-12-13T14:03:00.000-08:00

Adding Up the Differences between Boys and Girls

By Mark Perry Friday, December 10, 2010

Despite claims that there are no gender differences in math performance, the data tell a different story.

The College Board recently released 2010 SAT test results for college-bound high school seniors, and here are some highlights.

1. Boys scored significantly higher on the 2010 SAT math test than their female counterparts, by a difference of 34 points. This 30-point-plus male advantage on the SAT math test follows a pattern that has persisted since at least 1972.

2. For all SAT math scores of 580 and above (70th percentile and higher), male students outnumbered female students. As test scores increased by 10-point intervals from 580 to 800, the male-female ratio steadily increased, reaching a peak of 2.08 males per female for perfect scores of 800 (8,072 males vs. 3,887 females).

3. More females (827,197) than males (720,793) took the test in 2010. Adjusting for those differences in sample sizes, 1.12 percent of males scored a perfect 800 compared to 0.47 percent of females who did so, for an adjusted male-female ratio of 2.38 to 1.

A New Zealand Analysis of Seattle Schools Leadership

2010-12-13T12:46:00.000-08:00

December 13, 2010

Directors,

As I look over the last four years and particularly Dr. Goodloe Johnson's 3.5 years, I think of what I read at Pam Hook's Artichoke Blog in New Zealand:
----
I have looked out for a conversation about positive deviance – one that could be used to make a difference in educational policy and programmes. I am certain you can knock out an edu_ground hog day list, most of us can. Those issues/outcomes that despite numerous initiatives/ projects/ contestable funding etc we consistently fail to change in classrooms and schools. Indeed the enduring nature of things we never seem to fix when “doing school” makes even the most enthusiast educator cynical in time – or else sees them prone to “this too will pass thinking” behaviour like becoming educational facilitators or consultants - or adopting other escapology tactics like applying for study awards – anything that allows them to keep thinking about school but at a safe distance from the doing of it. If you don't believe me check out the Twitter stream balance of tweets from educators who have just made “a presentation” to show someone else “how to do teaching” against those “who are doing the teaching” and tweet about their classroom planning. I am always fearful that one day we will run out of the people prepared to keep doing school and be left with those who want to tell us all how to do it.

{The above is from Potalanoa (talking into the night) and conversational transience}

==============
Characteristics of the MGJ administration:

(1).. Employing lots of consultants and creating additional positions for educators that allows them to keep thinking about school but at a safe distance from the doing of it.

(2).. Astonishing lack of positive results ... but lots of edu_jargon and fairy-tales.

(3).. Deception in reporting results

(4).. Complete failure to use information intelligently and apply it to make decisions.

(5).. Extremely poor management.

(6).. Pam's request to: check out the Twitter stream balance of tweets from educators who have just made “a presentation” to show someone else “how to do teaching” against those “who are doing the teaching” and tweet about their classroom planning.

The Goodloe Johnson-Administration is characterized by a failure to listen to those who do the teaching. MGJ is equally poor at listening to most parents and actual community members as well.

Here is where the SPS are now:
The District uses data improperly. About four years ago I began submitting data and items from relevant studies, which were ignored at the Everyday Math adoption in May 2007, as Directors chose to trust their hired professionals instead of intelligently applying the relevant data. The results from EDM mirror exactly what I spent months testifying would happen.

"To improve a System requires the intelligent application of relevant data."

We have just seen the damage from the 17% lie and now we are on to the 66% lie.

The saddest part of this for me is that the data shows that the UW and the Central Administration are completely clueless as to how to bring about improvement. But from Page 9 of MGJ's Quarterly Update on "Listening and Responding":

"We also feel strongly that our principals need ongoing support and training and so we provide them with ongoing opportunities to learn and grow as well. We established a new program, Superintendent Initiative for Leadership Development (SILD), which pairs central office leaders with principals in professional development sessions. As central office leaders we must find innovative ways to ensure all our schools, specifically struggling schools, have meaningful partnerships and support for high-quality teaching and learning."

(I am not so sure SILD is "New" as it is more than a year old.)

It seems far more likely that solutions will be coming from those on learning's front lines than those at JSCEE.

These JSCEE folks need to give up on finding new innovative ways and try listening to parents and teachers. MGJ does not listen and does not intelligently and successfully apply either data or research. (In addition to being a very poor manager.)

TEAM MGJ has exhibited no feel for much of anything.

The Superintendent regularly violates laws and policies.

The decisions, which would produce positive results, would be based on peer reviewed research and a knowledge of a school's community and students. Team MGJ does neither of these things and as a result we see from OSPI 2009 to 2010 MSP and HSPE results:

Limited English Students doing poorly, Special Education Students doing poorly. I could go on but I've sent you all the data and Blog posted it and rarely get a response from any of you.

The Board and the Superintendent are thus far oblivious.

It often seems that any success at schools occurs in spite of those at the JSCEE.

The best comment on this is from Dr. Eric Anderson's original memo sent to you School Director's on 2-2-2010 in regard to the New Tech Network contract for Cleveland:

"Since the data is mixed, the primary question is whether Seattle Public Schools believes strongly in the research-based NTN learning model. Success will more than likely depend on the quality of the program implementation. Knowing ahead of time that the NTN model does not guarantee strong results only enhances the degree to which the burden falls on the district and the schools to achieve success."

Of course MGJ never sent that message as evidence to the Superior Court nor is that the message she used in constructing the 3-12-2010 NTN action report. She said she used that memo sent to the Board but instead she used a draft memo from an earlier time. (More lies)

That means she committed forgery. MGJ is filled with jargon and completely devoid of recommendations that are based on sound and thoughtful research.

Are you aware the TfA Teachers in Nashville had only 10% of them teaching in year three.

MGJ and her team have NO ability to intelligently apply relevant data in the making of thoughtful decisions.

This is so sad. The Attorney General should have already been investigating the Superintendent but clearly none of you seem to have any interest in making such a request.

Joy Anderson et al. dropped the NTN lawsuit filed in regard to the Board's 4-7-10 decision so that (1) You directors can talk openly about what happened as there is no litigation happening and (2) the Attorney General can investigate as there is no longer legal action filed in regard to the case that involved forgery and the submission of tampered evidence.

Will any of the seven director's contact the Governor and have her get the AG on this important task?

When $800,000 goes to NTN, millions for MAP, and tens of millions to close schools and reopen them, it is no wonder that there is little money left for interventions for struggling learners ... Oh right, Dr. Enfield said the SPS are looking for outside funds for interventions. Interventions would be a core item in any instructional plan, yet the SPS are hopeful of maybe finding outside funding for interventions.

Good Luck to struggling learners and families with this crew entrenched at the JSCEE.

It seems the BOARD is assisting the Superintendent in insulting and attacking those “who are doing the teaching” and tweeting about their classroom planning.

Hard to forget Bob Murphy, Mike Rice, and Glenda Madison testifying about what the math kids in SE high schools need (more practice and increases in explicit instruction) and then the Board excluding evidence submitted by the public in making another pathetic decision based on no data and no thinking. Oh but Greta from OSPI testified anything might work ... right Greta who is another one who gets to keep thinking about school but at a safe distance from the doing of it.

I sure would appreciate a response. Peter Maier has never written me anything.
Steve Sundquist ceased all substantive communications after I informed him that he missed vital evidence on pg xxiii paragraph #27 of the NMAP report.

It seems that the evidence is continually presented to push a pre-made decision.

Sherry Carr's TfA study half sentence that seemed to say the exact opposite of the report she was using.

Do Directors consciously go looking for things to support administration or does the administration feed the Directors these cherry-picked sound-bites?

Well you Directors certainly have a mess. Are you going to doing anything about the clearly illegal acts of the Superintendent or does the public just keep on filing recall and discharge actions against the directors?

This current situation looks like a clear conscious violation of oath of office. If any director chooses to ignore the repeated illegal actions of the Superintendent, how can this not be intentional?

Are Directors planning on adopting other escapology tactics?

Pam Hook looked out for a conversation about positive deviance – one that could be used to make a difference in educational policy and programmes. Its a good thing she was not in Seattle because she would find nothing here.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

=============

It seems that many TfA folks put in the two years at the school level and then choose to join "those who want to tell us all how to do it."

That is hardly the solution to closing achievement gaps.

On Wednesday the Board members will be having a meeting to evaluate the Superintendent. If they continue to let the Superintendent's gross misdemeanors and felonies like fraud and forgery go unreported to proper authorities look for yet another filing for the recall and discharge of School Directors.

No Trespass Orders issued against members of the public another inadequate policy from the Seattle School District

2010-12-11T05:53:00.000-08:00

Dear Mr. Cerqui and Mr. Treat,

There appears to be a problem with Seattle Schools Board Policy F44.01. This policy - which concerns, in part, No Trespass Orders issued against members of the public - does NOT inform the public of their right to appeal a Notice of Trespass to the King County Superior Court. This appears to violate the Division 1 Court of Appeals ruling in Green vs. State of Washington (Sept. 27,2010; attached).

From page 14 of the Green Ruling:

"The bare right to a judicial appeal, without being informed of that right, was insufficient to protect Green from arbitrary action by the school district."

In the email that is copied below, Joy Stevens addresses this problem with F44.01 by asserting that persons who avail themselves of the appeal process described in F44.01 will be told, in the District's response to their appeal, of their right, per RCW 28A.645.010, to a judicial appeal.

Notwithstanding Joy Stevens' assurance, it appears to me that Board Policy F44.01 does not provide sufficient assurance that every person who is issued a No Trespass order will be told in a timely way of their bare right to a judicial appeal.

*
F44.01 does not inform people of their bare right to judicial appeal. F44.01 makes no reference to the law that creates this right.

* Under current policy, as elaborated by Joy Stevens, people served Notices of Trespass will NOT be told of their right to judicial appeal unless both of these happen: The person decides to appeal. The person exhausts the appeal process, and is not happy with the outcome. This creates a situation where at best only a SUBSET of individuals served Notices of Trespass will be told, eventually, of their right to judicial appeal.

* Joy Stevens' assurance notwithstanding, there exists considerable risk that even persons who do avail themselves of the F44.01 appeal process will never learn of their right to judicial appeal. There are no structures in place to assure that District officials who respond to the person's appeal will remember to inform the person of this right.

* Furthermore, the timing of when a person receives notice of their bare right to judicial appeal may influence whether that person decides to avail themselves of the F44.01 appeal process in the first place. The District's failure to inform served people of this right contemporaneous to time of service very probably increases the probability that the served person will NOT avail themselves of the appeal process.

* Finally, in my view, the Green ruling makes clear that "at minimum" a school district must tell the excluded person of their right to judicial appeal to superior court. If the District fails to tell the person of this right in a timely way, then the Green Ruling makes clear that the thirty day limitation on filing an appeal is not binding on the served person. By failing to mention the judicial appeal right in the appeal section of F44.01, it seems to me that the Seattle Public School Board of Directors is not meeting this "minimum" due process requirement.

* In so far as case law is "law," it seems that F44.01 is legally invalid, due to the fact that both of these are true: 1. Board policy may not violate law (RCW 28A.320.015). 2. this policy violates the Green Ruling. It would seem to be a solemn responsibility of lawyers in the employ of the District, and serving at the pleasure of the board, to inform the Board when such situation exists.

The District can eliminate all risk of a person not learning of this right if the Board would amend policy F44.01 to provide the following:

1.The standard Notice of trespass form in use by the District must refer a person to the District website pages where they can learn of the appeal process. (It would be even better if the appeal process were attached to the Notice of Trespass.)
2. Each and every Notice of Trespass issued by any school official must be submitted in writing, using the most current District-adopted Notice of Trespass Form.
3. F44.01 states very clearly that the person has the right to appeal to the Superior Court of King County.

It seems that it is clearly in the District's interest to rectify this problem with F44.01.

* The Green Ruling makes clear that the district has violated and excluded a person's due process rights if they do not inform that person of their "bare right to a judicial appeal." The Green Ruling makes clear that failure of a school district to fully address a person's due process rights in a timely way renders a Notice of Trespass unlawful, and therefore subject to judicial appeal, for all time.

* It is in the District's interest that when Notices of Trespass are issued for lawful reasons, that these Notice not be rendered unlawful, due to failure of the District to fully, timely, correctly address the served person's procedural due process rights.

* It is in the District's interest to avoid violating the civil rights of members of the public, through allowing principals to issue, and then enforcing, de fact unwritten Notices of Trespass.

It is clearly in the public's interest that the district fully, timely, correctly address procedural due process rights of individuals who are issued Notices of Trespass for lawful reasons.

This email does not address certain other problems with F44.01:

* Under current policy there is considerable risk that issued Notices of Trespass are unlawful for reason that either

o the person did not in fact engage in any adequately documented behavior that is deemed by RCW 28A.635.020 to be unlawful.

o the person was a parent of an enrolled student, and was lawfully exercising the right provided by RCW 28A.605.020

* Under current policy, there is considerable risk of a person having their name posted publicly on the basis of a factually or legally unlawful Notice of Trespass.

* District does not provide literature to notified persons of the valid (statutory) reasons for a school official to order a person to leave school grounds, and to issue Notices of Trespass.

These additional problems will be addressed in a School Board Action Report that will be submitted by Seattle Shadow School Board at a future date.

Please indicate if you will be making a recommendation to the board that they amend F44.01 according to the recommendation in this communication.

Thank you,

Joan Sias,

authorized to speak for, and to serve as
Seattle Shadow School Board (S3B) contact on this matter.

======================
Next Letter:

Mr. Noel Treat, General Counsel, Seattle Public Schools
Mr. John Cerqui, Assistant General Counsel, Seattle Public Schools

Dear Mr. Treat and Mr. Cerqui,

An article posted on the Seattle Times website last night at 10:12 pm, authored by Lauren Williams, underscores the email sent to you earlier yesterday evening. The Williams article reported on a proposed change in Seattle Police's trespass policy. The email was about Seattle Public School's trespass policy (F44.01).

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013651350_trespass13m.html

In this article, William's reports that under a proposed revision to its trespass policy, Seattle Police will no longer issue what in effect are restraining orders for public access to private commercial property. Only judges can issue restraining orders. The proposed policy will be implemented in a pilot program beginning Jan 1, 2011.

Khandelwal [*] said the pilot program will call for officers to warn offenders orally or in writing before further action....The key difference from the current program would be that those who had violated the rules in the past would not be banned from the property in the future, as long as they abide by the code of conduct. That means even if a person were loitering in a convenience-store parking lot one night, the person still could go to the store during the day as a legitimate customer, police said.

We urge you, as District lawyers, to review policy F44.01 in light of the following, and to recommend to the Board such changes as will bring this policy into alignment with recent judicial decisions:

* District Court 1 Ruling in Green v. State of Washington (attached)
* Court settlement referred to in the Lauren Williams' Seattle Times article
* Proposed revised Seattle Police trespass policy

Members of the public have requested copies of all written and unwritten Notices of Trespass issued by SPS in the past five years. The SPS Public Information officer has indicated that she was able to locate about sixty four notices.

We urge you, as District lawyers, to review the legality of all written and unwritten exclusions as are currently in force, dismiss bans that are unlawful, and issue letters of apology to unlawfully banned persons.

Thank you,

Joan Sias,
authorized to speak, in this matter, for Seattle Shadow School Board

Attorney General needs to investigate Seattle Schools Superintendent

2010-12-10T07:59:00.000-08:00

December 10, 2010

Dear Seattle Schools Director Michael DeBell,

Given a significant number of revelations about Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson’s actions, it is clearly time for the Seattle School Board to request that the Governor ask the Washington State Attorney General to investigate the Seattle Schools Superintendent in regard to a series of violations of state laws. I believe that the AG will find “gross misdemeanors” and at least one “felony”. Please request the Governor to have the Attorney General investigate.

Joy Anderson et al. have notified Superior Court Judge Gregory Canova that they are dropping the appeal of the Board’s NTN contract decision of April 7, 2010. This is being done so that the Board can publicly discuss what happened in the making of that decision. On October 25, 2010 I left a copy of the initial brief and all the exhibits in this case for you at the JSCEE.

Among the actions that we wish to have you bring to the attention of the Governor to request the Attorney General to investigate are:

(1).. Misleading public officials by providing them with oral and written information that she knew was incorrect. The June 4, 2008 Strategic Plan statement on page 11 that 17% of SPS graduates meet the minimum credit requirements to enter a four-year college is a prime example of her work. The fact you and others asked:
“How this figure could possibly be correct?”
Yet she failed to clarify this lie for more than two years. This speaks volumes about the Superintendent’s mode of operation.

(2).. As recently as this week’s article in the Seattle Times, I find deception continuing with:

“the district wanted to make it clear that, in its new school reports, it measured test-score gains based on students' performance compared with their academic peers, not their past performance”.

Yet when viewed on the whole district level the reports say absolutely nothing of value because comparing a cohort against the bottom third of a cohort will always produce 66% of the students making gains regardless of the performance of the students. This fallacy has been repeatedly pointed-out; in fact, I did so in my testimony before the Board and Superintendent at the Board meeting on Wednesday December 8. You have my written testimony in regard to 66% of the District’s English Language Learners making progress on the State Reading test. I included the test performance gauges for that group of students from grade 6 in 2008 to grade 8 in 2010, which reveals and entirely different picture. This is another example of the Superintendent’s desire to produce misleading statistics for the School Directors and others in the public, which makes things appear far better than they are.

(3).. The Superintendent is the Secretary of the School Board as such she bears a lot of responsibility for the Board’s failure to fulfill RCW 28A 645.020 in failing to provide the filing of a complete certified correct transcript of evidence to the court in the appeal of the April 7, 2010 New Tech Network contract. Not only was the filing not certified correct, it was incorrect. The filing shows that the memo used in the preparation of the New Tech Network contract was not the original memo sent to the Board but rather a draft version of that memo masquerading as the original. The Superintendent and Chief Academic Officer were responsible for the production of the Action Report. In the evidence submitted to the court the draft version of the memo was placed into evidence and the memo sent to the Board was missing. The Superintendent in my opinion is guilty of the class C felony of forgery in the production of the 3-12-2010 NTN Action Report.

It is time to get the Attorney General to investigate the actions of the Superintendent.

The oath of office you took as director states I:

“Will to the best of my judgment, skill and ability, truly, faithfully, diligently and impartially perform the duties of the office of Seattle School Director.”

A diligent and impartial performance of the duties of the office of Seattle School Director given the knowledge you have in regard to the actions of the Superintendent would require you to contact the Governor to get the Attorney General to investigate the Seattle Schools Superintendent for multiple violations of state laws. Your duty calls for this action.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

=================
To our faithful blog readers:

Do NOT miss the Fabulous Meg Diaz with:

Sunday, December 5, 2010
Crappy! Chart! Thursday! Simple Cons: Beating the Last 17% Out of a Dead Horse.

Which includes my comment:

Note on page 11 of the plan it states:
17% of students satisfied Minimum credit requirements to enter a four-year college.

It seems only reasonable to put forth a figure that actually applied to the students graduating. The students and their counselors were not trying to meet 2012 or 2013 standards for admission but rather 2007 standards.

This is just another example of the Superintendent failing to report the relevant data and preferring to submit something less relevant in a deceptive way. That has become her hallmark in Seattle. Her title of "Dr. No Confidence" is definitely merited by her actions and words.

2010-12-09T22:27:00.000-08:00

December 9, 2010

Open Letter to each Seattle School Director,

Joy Anderson et al. are dropping their appeal of the New Tech Network contract signed on April 7, 2010. This appeal is being discontinued largely because of three items.

(1).. The Board will not talk about issues in litigation. Now Board members can talk about this entire mess.

(2).. The State Attorney General will not investigate actions in current litigation. This is no longer in litigation so the Attorney General can now investigate the actions taken by the Superintendent, which we believe include the Class C Felony of Forgery.

(3).. If we were to win this NTN contract case, the District would likely appeal and drag this out another year just as has happened in the HS math adoption, which Porter et al. won on Feb 4, 2010. The District made no Math changes. The District’s appeal of Judge Spector’s math ruling will be heard in Appeals court sometime in 2011.

The Board is aware that the Superintendent lied to public officials but has taken no substantive action.

The Board is also aware of exactly how the NTN action report of 3-12-2010 was produced and again took no action. ⇒ …. This is not in litigation anymore, so Directors give us a statement and some action.

The Superintendent is quoted in the Seattle Times article “Seattle schools chief apologizes for false figure”:

In the future, she said, the district will make sure that all definitions of the numbers in its reports are "crystal clear." To that end, she said, the district wanted to make it clear that, in its new school reports, it measured test-score gains based on students' performance compared with their academic peers, not their past performance.

This statement is completely absurd. It measured absolutely nothing. Because of the way that this “supposed measure” was designed the performance of the students was completely irrelevant. The students were measured against a cohort of the bottom third of the students …. And no surprise 2/3 of the students did better than the bottom 1/3. It will happen that way every time with 66% of students reported as making gains no matter how poorly or how well the students do.

So there you have it. The lying is continuing. The deception is continuing.

The Board needs to fire the Superintendent with cause immediately.

There is NO confidence in the Superintendent and not much in the School Board either.

Director, please act now. This is more embarrassing by the day.

I can send you complete information on the forgery. I should receive my final Freedom of Information Act request from SPS legal affairs officer Ms. Joy Stevens in the next few days.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Reminder:
In your oath of office you swore to: “support the Constitution and Laws of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington, and will to the best of my judgment, skill and ability, truly, faithfully, diligently and impartially perform the duties of the office of Seattle School Director. …. So what is up with doing nothing about the crimes committed by the superintendent?

The Latest lie from Seattle Schools 66% are making gains on state tests.

2010-12-08T12:05:00.000-08:00

Recently Elementary school report cards showed 66% of 5th graders district-wide making gains on both State Math and Reading tests from grade 4. Incredibly it was the same gain on each test for 8th graders 66% from grade 6. Additionally 66% of 8th Grade English language learners were reported making gains on the state reading test since grade 6.
This is the 66% lie, how long will it live?

THE DATA

Limited English Reading scores

8th Grade Reading
Year District State Diff
2005-06 WASL 24.20% 27.50% -3.30%
2006-07 WASL 21.50% 22.80% -1.30%
2007-08 WASL 24.10% 22.70% 1.40%
2008-09 WASL 29.00% 21.10% 7.90%
2009-10 MSP 11.00% 14.00% -3.00%

7th Grade Reading
Year District State Diff
2004-05 WASL 20.60% 23.10% -2.50%
2005-06 WASL 15.40% 16.50% -1.10%
2006-07 WASL 22.00% 20.00% 2.00%
2007-08 WASL 21.60% 13.00% 8.60%
2008-09 WASL 15.60% 12.30% 3.30%
2009-10 MSP 14.50% 13.30% 1.20%

6th Grade Reading
Year District State Diff
2005-06 WASL 18.40% 19.10% -0.70%
2006-07 WASL 24.50% 21.20% 3.30%
2007-08 WASL 23.90% 25.70% -1.80%
2008-09 WASL 36.20% 30.50% 5.70%
2009-10 MSP 12.40% 14.20% -1.80%

The Limited English speaking student
Reading Cohort for grade 8 2010
Percent passing
6th grade in 2008 23.90%
8th grade in 2010 11.00%

The Cohort for grade 8 2010
Differentials
6th -1.80%
7th 3.30%
8th -3.00%

Change from 6th to 8th a differential net change of -1.20%

2009 to 2010 DROP
8th grade -10.90%

2009 to 2010 DROP
7th grade -2.10%

2009 to 2010 DROP
6th grade -7.50%

So why were 66% of Limited English Speaking students credited with making gains on OSPI reading tests from grade 6 to 8?

Because the District set up a bogus statistical measure and called it GAINS.

Although interventions for struggling students should be a core mission of the District, the District failed to provide interventions stating outside funding had not been procured. The District continues to fail those it should be serving by not using core instructional materials and practices proven to be effective with struggling learners.

Is lying to cover this up a sound strategy?

Well it has worked pretty well for the Superintendent so far.

Note the 4th to 5th grade gains for all students in math and reading are bogus as well.
Differentials for Reading down by 1.1% and in Math by 1.30%

The 6th to 8th grade gains for all students in math and reading are better than the others in these 5 comparison groups reported by the District, as these two groups made gains on OSPI tests as these two went up instead of down. Differential for Reading up by 1.70% and Math up by 6.30%.

So It could be that the district was only lying on 4 out of 5 reports.

"Battle for Seattle" Part I Do NOT miss this one

2010-12-01T21:58:00.000-08:00

From Dora Taylor at Seattle Ed 2010 comes this:

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/the-battle-for-seattle-part-one/

Packed with relevant history as to how this mess happened in Seattle.

Do not miss reading this.

Teach for America and the Problem of Study Laudering

2010-11-27T20:06:00.000-08:00

Two sides to every argument and the following from EduWonk.com makes this abundantly clear.

http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/07/teach-for-america-and-the-problem-of-study-laundering.html

..... the report conveniently highlights two problems: Our field’s pathetic and weaponized approach to research and the problem of “study laundering.”

Pile ‘em up: The two big takeaways of this report from the Great Lakes Center is that retention of TFA teachers is bad and the program’s results are, at best, mixed. There are substantial problems with both findings.

see the link for lots more....

Pointless Waiting for School Directors to raise any objections to MGJ's apparent misdemeanors and felony

2010-11-27T15:52:00.000-08:00

I was actually writing letters to the Seattle School Directors in expectation they would act on the Superintendent's apparent misdemeanors and felony, which misled the Public and perhaps some Public officials.

WOW.... I must be a country boy born yesterday.

OK after analyzing Director Carr's action on TfA. Even naive Dan finally gets it.

The executive summary of the report Seattle School Director Sherry Carr referenced, made some major points. Ms. Carr reported on half of one point (marked with blue below) while neglecting everything else.
The report contained the following:

The evidence suggests that districts may benefit from using TFA personnel to fill teacher shortages when the available labor pool consists of temporary or substitute teachers or other novice alternatively and provisionally certified teachers likely to leave in a few years. Nevertheless, if educational leaders plan to use TFA teachers as a solution to the problem of shortages, they should be prepared for constant attrition and the associated costs of ongoing recruitment and training.

A district whose primary goal is to improve achievement should explore and fund other educational reform that may have more promise such as universal preschool, mentoring programs pairing novice and expert teachers, elimination of tracking, and reduction in early grade class size.

It is therefore recommended that policymakers and districts:

 Support TFA staffing only when the alternative hiring pool consists of uncertified and emergency teachers or substitutes.

 Consider the significant recurring costs of TFA, estimated at over $70,000 per recruit, and press for a five-year commitment to improve achievement and reduce re-staffing.

 Invest strategically in evidence-based educational reform options that build long-term capacity in schools.

As Director Carr picked only the Blue from the Maroon, it seems she wished to mislead the public.

Director Carr's action reminds me of Director Sunquist's statement about supposedly pouring over "Foundations for Success" the National Math Advisory Panel's final report in search of guidance and then making his decision to approve the adoption of Key Curriculum Press's "Discovering Series" on May 6, 2009. This resulted in a 4-3 Board decision, which was "Remanded back to the Board" for failure to include evidence submitted by the Public in decision-making by Judge Julie Spector on 2-4-10, which MGJ appealed on 3-5-10 with support from Directors Carr, Martin-Morris, Sundquist, and Maier.

At the school board meeting on Feb 3, 2010 Director Sundquist read aloud paragraph 23 from NMAP page xxii:

All-encompassing recommendations that instruction should be entirely “student centered” or “teacher directed” are not supported by research. If such recommendations exist, they should be rescinded. If they are being considered, they should be avoided. High-quality research does not support the exclusive use of either approach.

Yet on the next page, Director Sundquist missed paragraph 27:

Explicit instruction with students who have mathematical difficulties has shown consistently positive effects on performance with word problems and computation. Results are consistent for students with learning disabilities, as well as other students who perform in the lowest third of a typical class. By the term explicit instruction, the Panel means that teachers provide clear models for solving a problem type using an array of examples, that students receive extensive practice in use of newly learned strategies and skills, that students are provided with opportunities to think aloud (i.e., talk through the decisions they make and the steps they take), and that students are provided with extensive feedback.

This finding does not mean that all of a student’s mathematics instruction should be delivered in an explicit fashion. However, the Panel recommends that struggling students receive some explicit mathematics instruction regularly. Some of this time should be dedicated to ensuring that these students possess the foundational skills and conceptual knowledge necessary for understanding the mathematics they are learning at their grade level.

================
On August 24, 2009 Director Sundquist wrote the following to me:

Dan: thank you for copying me on your message. On page three of your letter you state:

"The National Math Advisory Panel recommends against the EDM type of spiraling. The NMAP also recommends “Explicit Instruction” for those struggling to learn math."

I have read the NMAP report, and I recall the first point about spiraling, but not the second about explicit instruction. In fact, my recollection is that the NMAP was quite pointed in stating that high-quality research does not support the exclusive use of either teacher-directed instruction or student-centered instruction (p.45).

I would appreciate it if you would refer me to the citation in the NMAP that you are using as the basis for your second claim above.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide.

Best wishes,

Steve Sundquist
Seattle School Board, District 6

-----++++++-----

To which I quickly responded:

Steve,

The fact that apparently you missed #27 in the NMAP recommendations about instructional practices on page xxiii is disturbing to me. However, it is not nearly as disturbing as the fact that the HS adoption committee did not use the NMAP final report in making decisions about the high school math adoption. The district provided 1200 pages of materials to attorney Keith Scully in the coming court action involving the appeal of the May 6, 2009 HS adoption decision brought by McLaren, Mas [sic Mass], and Porter. The NMAP final report "Foundations for Success" was not among the materials used by the committee.

Thus the people you represent get to spend thousands of dollars to appeal the decision of the board to adopt materials recommended by a clearly stacked committee, which failed to use the most relevant applicable document.

The Central Administration wishes to continue a failing math plan rather than do it right and four board members assisted the administration in doing so. Check the data for Seattle's k-12 Black and Hispanic Students, read NMAP, read Kirschner-Sweller- Clark, read Sweller on Geary, read Hattie's "Visible Learning" ...... Ten years of ethnically discriminatory math practices straight out of the Bergeson administration continue because the board allows it.

27) Explicit instruction with students who have mathematical difficulties has shown consistently positive effects on performance with word problems and computation. etc. etc.

=============================

The result:
I have rarely heard from Director Sundquist since.
He did however voice support on 3-5-10 for the MGJ appeal of the Spector decision and now we wait for the 2011 Spring session of Washington Appeals Court Division I.

=============================
Correction:
I referred to Helig's June 2010 Study as peer-reviewed. While it addresses peer-reviewed articles, the study "Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence" is NOT peer reviewed.

More reasons to Fire MGJ and Recall several School Directors

2010-11-27T10:04:00.000-08:00

The peer reviewed study on TfA and my letter to Director Sherry Carr contain more reasons to fire Seattle Schools' Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson and Recall several Seattle School Board directors.
Teach for America a False Promise

11-27-2010

On this question, studies indicate that the students of novice TFA teachers perform significantly less well in reading and mathematics than those of credentialed beginning teachers.

From: Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence
by Julian Vasquez Heilig -- University of Texas at Austin
Su Jin Jez, Ph.D. -- California State University, Sacramento
June 2010

Dear Seattle School Director Sherry Carr,

You stated:

"One of the research documents said: If you are looking to close the achievement gap, it is important to invest strategically in evidence based "reform options". I believe that we are doing that through the work in our strategic plan".

This appears to be another example of cherry-picking from a research document.

Thank you for referring me to the research document above to which you referred, the Helig study published in June 2010.

I am really confused as to your motivation in voting for TfA. This seemed like a great amount of effort to do absolutely "ZERO" to address the SPS's ongoing failure to provide proven effective instructional materials and practices with effective interventions for those students struggling in Low Income schools.

Why the Board allows the administration to fraudulently mislead the public on proposals like NTN, and then the Board votes for proposals like NTN and TfA as an answer to under achievement is bewildering.

You and five other directors voted for TfA.

Now you send me a peer reviewed study published in June 2010, which contains numerous reasons to vote against TfA and NOT a single reason for bringing TfA to Seattle.

What can be your justification in voting for TfA? You just sent me the title to a "Peer Reviewed Paper" that clearly demonstrates TfA should NOT be in Seattle? Why did you vote for TfA?

As I said in my testimony another experiment likely to damage students is not needed.

Please explain this. As things stand without a credible explanation this 6-1 TfA Board decision will likely be appealed in Superior Court.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Here is the Executive Summary of
Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence
by J. V. Heilig and Su Jin Jez.
http://www.box.net/shared/xl8ep791k4

=======================================================

The Board no longer amazes me with its failure to make decisions based on evidence because this has become a recurrent practice.

The abdication of duty on the part of the Board collectively and Directors individually to confront the Superintendent over her frequent deceptions continues and grows worse.

Many members of the Public will continue to seek "Recall" of Directors that so often fail to act in the best interests of the students in the Seattle Schools.

=============================
Correction:
I referred to Helig's June 2010 Study as peer-reviewed. While it addresses peer-reviewed articles, the study "Teach For America: A Review of the Evidence" is NOT peer reviewed.

The District is Building a Pyramid of Lies around Dr. Goodloe-Johnson's fradulent statements

2010-11-25T19:57:00.000-08:00

Complex lies from the SPS.

MGJ's letter of Nov. 23, explaining the 17% fiasco is framed on the District's News Page HERE.
It follows:

College and Career Readiness of Seattle Public Schools Graduates

In 2008, Seattle Public Schools (SPS) published a conservative data point aimed at determining the percent of students that graduate from SPS ready for a 4-year college. This specific data point is complex and one that districts across the state and the country grapple with as they try to quantify college and career ready.

{{Do all Districts across the state and country misrepresent data like the Seattle Central Administration does? On June 4, 2008 in the Strategic Plan, the SPS did NOT publish a conservative data point aimed at ready for a four year college. A statistic of 17% was presented as "Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-year colleges".}}

College readiness measures can be defined in multiple ways: the minimum requirements necessary to graduate high school, minimum requirements necessary to apply to a 4-year college, minimum requirements to successfully enroll in a college or university or meeting the necessary requirements to succeed in and graduate from college.

{{However, when the Superintendent stated in her Strategic Plan on June 4, 2008: "Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-year colleges = 17%". She was lying and misleading both the Board and the Public. This is fraud..}}

For additional information, please review this letter to the community from Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson. The letter describes the process of agreeing on the current definition of the measure and sets this topic in the context of our goal of all SPS students graduating ready for college and career.

So does this supposed process of agreeing on "the current measure" ... retroactively make that "the measure" presented on June, 4, 2008 and following?
NO WAY!! ...... NO WAY!!

The "Superintendent" takes lying to a whole new level and the Board is apparently inert or endorsing her fraudulent behavior.

Broad Alum Busted in Seattle Public School Scandal for Lying to Advance Corporate Ed Reform

2010-11-25T15:07:00.000-08:00

As reported on Schools Matter, Seattle deception goes big time as we've made it to the East Coast.

http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/11/broad-alum-busted-in-seattle-public.html
==========================

Note to Brad Bernetek, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Susan Enfield, and the Seattle School Board:

"To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant statistics."
-- W. Edwards Deming (1900-1993)

Statistics that one makes up to mislead others to follow an agenda are not relevant.
Fraud and Forgery are often found to be Class C Felonies.

MGJ what she wrote and what she should have written.

2010-11-25T14:50:00.000-08:00

In the interest of transparency rather than more deception this posting is made.

Unfortunately the Superintendent wrote the following:

November 23, 2010

Dear Seattle Public Schools Community,

In 2008, Seattle Public Schools (SPS) published a conservative data point aimed at determining the percent of students that graduate from SPS ready for a 4-year college. This specific data point is complex and one that districts across the state and the country grapple with as they try to quantify college and career ready. College readiness measures can be defined in multiple ways: the minimum requirements necessary to graduate high school, minimum requirements necessary to apply to a 4-year college, minimum requirements to successfully enroll in a college or university or meeting the necessary requirements to succeed in and graduate from college.

At the time we calculated that 17% of our students graduated from SPS college and career ready, we used a very aggressive standard to determine the percent of SPS students that were college ready based on our understanding of what is needed to be admitted and succeed in college, not simply the minimum requirements to apply. (i.e. graduating high school in four years, successful completion of four years of mathematics, successful completion of three years of science and earning a letter grade of “B” or higher in each of their core classes).

This specific data point sparked significant public dialogue. In 2009, we chose not to include this statistic in the initial release of the district scorecard because we wanted to review it further; we publicly announced it was under review. In 2010, after additional research and discussion, we revised the statistic on the district scorecard using reduced math and science requirements as well as a reduction in the minimum core GPA from a letter grade of “B” to a “C” that are more in line with the Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board (HECB) minimum requirements to apply to college. Further, at the 11/17/2010 board workshop, the district stated that the statistic changed and provided an explanation.

In retrospect, this review should have been accelerated and we should have been more proactive, both internally with staff and externally with key stakeholders, when the original statistic was held back in 2009 and was under further review. In addition, we should have been clearer that this represented a standard more rigorous than the minimum HECB requirements.

Our five-year strategic plan, Excellence for All, explicitly calls out ambitious and aggressive goals for our students because as a district we believe that all of our students can meet these standards. The primary purpose of the plan is to shine a light on an array of student achievement data so that the community could have a conversation about the progress of our students and so that we could collectively act on it. We thought then, and continue to believe now, that it is critical to communicate measures related to high school readiness for college and careers. This measure was of one of ten measures focusing on high school test results and college and career readiness. We have rigorously evaluated this measure and determined, for accountability purposes, that it is more appropriate to align our measure with the more common definition of the minimum entrance requirements as defined by the Washington HECB.

The efforts in which we are engaged are critical to the success of our students. We envision a school system in which all of our students graduate from high school, meet the requirements for, and are successful in, college and are career ready. We remain confident that we will achieve these goals. We also look forward to further communication and discussion on the district scorecard and school reports at our upcoming regional meetings Regional_Meetings_School_Reports, co-sponsored by the Seattle Council PTSA. The first meeting is scheduled for November 29. I also encourage you to email me directly at superintendent@seattleschools.org if you have any additional questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Maria L. Goodloe-Johnson, Ph.D.
Superintendent
=======================

MGJ thanks so much for 6 paragraphs of Blah, Blah, Blah, which completed distorted what occurred.

The Superintendent in the interests of complete transparency should have written this:

=======================
November 23, 2010

Dear Students, Parents, and others in the Seattle Community,

I misled the Public by publishing fraudulent information on page 11 of my Strategic Plan on June 4, 2008.

Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-years colleges = 17%

I shall attempt to continue to try to deceive you, especially in regard to the 17% matter. Just read my 6 paragraphs if you have any doubt.

I have the Board in my "Back Pocket" and a contract with three more years to run.

Go away and stop bothering me. I find public testimonies an annoyance and school activism distasteful.

Everyone Accountable,

Maria Goodloe-Johnson, PhD.

You too can be a Parrot for Baloney. Training is available from LEVThe League of Education Voters

2010-11-25T10:54:00.000-08:00

http://www.educationvoters.org/2010/11/22/workshops-for-our-january-activist-training/

You can be trained to become a poorly informed "faux activist", which will enable you to parrot refrains for others.

++++=======++++++

The League of Education Voters announces Workshops for coming January activist training:

As you may know, we’ll be hosting a training on Saturday, Jan. 8th for folks who are interested in learning more about become advocates for education.

* Find out more details here.
* Register here.

We’ve been busy brainstorming a list of possible workshops to present. Here are some of the ones that we are considering now, but we’d love your feedback.

What do you want to learn about?

What information and strategies would be beneficial to you?

Leave a comment below or send an email to our state field director Kelly Munn with your thoughts and suggestions.

* Innovative Schools: Going beyond the discussion of charter schools. How can our schools in Washington really innovate and make significant changes for the better?

* Peer-to-Peer Roundtable on Advocacy: Learn from your peers based on their experiences, successes and pitfalls.

* Keeping Ed Reform On Track: Especially facing this tough fiscal situation, how do we keep moving ahead?

* Achievement Gap: What is it? Why does it matter? How can we make significant strides?

* School Year/Class Size: What about a longer school year? What role does class size really play in learning?

* Media/Blogging/Social Media in Advocacy: How can you be an effective voice for change?

* Community Values in Contract Negotiations: Bringing the community’s voice into contract negotiations.

* Basic Advocacy: Don’t know where to start?

* Budget: We’ll give you the latest figures and forecasts for what cuts might be coming to ed.

* How Do Things Really Work in Olympia ? Toss out the civics lessons. How do things really get done in the Legislature?
================================================

The views below are brought to you by Mike.
(and do not necessarily reflect those of blog management)

Mikes writes:

There probably are things one can learn by attending events like this; but one should attend with a very critical eye. Many groups nowadays (like Stand For Children, and the Parent Revolution) don’t bill themselves with complete honesty. I’m not sure where LEV fits into that spectrum.

Some of these groups are not about empowering parents with the knowledge to find their own solutions (like WTM), but are instead “community organizing” organizations. Generally speaking, community organizing organizations primarily function not as disseminators of empowering knowledge, but rather as “agitators for action.” They want you to sign-on to their agenda.

Just for fun, let’s read between the lines of a few of LEV’s “possible workshops”, and employ some critical & higher-order thinking (analysis & speculation) as to what may be the real message.

1) Innovative Schools: Going beyond the discussion of charter schools. How can our schools in Washington really innovate and make significant changes for the better?

Translation- “We’re not in favor of charter schools, so let’s not talk about that. Come let us tell you what changes we want.”

2) Peer-to-Peer Roundtable on Advocacy: Learn from your peers based on their experiences, successes and pitfalls.

Translation- “We’ve got to convince these parents that these are complicated issues and they can’t be effective advocates on their own. They need to join their voices with ours to help us push our vision of change (Every Child, One Voice).”

3) Keeping Ed Reform On Track: Especially facing this tough fiscal situation, how do we keep moving ahead?

Comment- Moving ahead? Really!?! I thought we were falling behind.

Translation- “Pay no attention to that $13 trillion debt behind the curtain! More, more, more money is always the answer. We must do whatever we can to get more dollars into the hands of educrats.”

4) Achievement Gap: What is it? Why does it matter? How can we make significant strides?

Translation- “We can’t agitate for perpetual change without division and a crisis. Even though we speak against racism, we’ll divide by race, and ‘equity’ will be our crisis du jour. Those kids in the classroom aren’t individuals; they’re simply units of a sub-group. The disparity between these subgroups is a social injustice. The primary purpose of your tax-dollars and the primary job of your child’s teacher is to rectify these injustices.” Questions to consider- What’s the most efficient way to close the achievement gap? Bring up the masses at the bottom, or hold back the few at the top?

5) School Year/Class Size: What about a longer school year? What role does class size really play in learning?

Translation- “Pay no attention to the increased burden being placed on teachers, and ignore your intuition that smaller classes would be better for kids. Yes, smaller classes would afford each student more 1-on-1 direct instruction, but that’s not what kids need. Haven’t you read, students need to take ownership and be responsible for their own learning. Smaller class sizes are just too expensive. What kids need is less time at home with their parents. Even though what schools are doing isn’t working, they need to take your child earlier (pre-k) and keep them longer, to enable what isn’t working to work better. Got that?

6) Media/Blogging/Social Media in Advocacy: How can you be an effective voice for change?

Translation-
“Want to be a ‘squeaky wheel’ ?

We’ll not only teach you how,
we’ll also tell you what to 'squeak'.”

=========================================

Too eager to wait for January training ...

Then on Dec 8, 2010

http://www.educationvoters.org/revolution/speakers/

The Parent Revolution: Using Your Voice for Your Kids, Your Community and Our Future

Ben Austin, Executive Director of the Parent Revolution
Trise Moore, Advocate for Effective Family/School Partnerships for Federal Way Public Schools
Wednesday, December 8th at 5:30pm
Aki Kurose Middle School
3928 South Graham Street, Seattle

This event is free.
Childcare is provided.

* Please RSVP as seating is limited.

============

Who provides the funding for many of these organizations? I hope it is not the Taxpayer. Perhaps if one follows the money, one will find the real authors of the messages.

============
Anyone know anything about Parents for Student Success.

Hospitals Need Improvement : ....How about Seattle Schools? Parallel Universes

2010-11-25T05:22:00.000-08:00

Dave writes:
All human organizations have their problems and all have difficulties in rectifying them. See below for Medical Practice in Hospitals. While we wait for them to make improvements the best defense is an educated and alert consumer. Ditto for parents with kids in any school, public or private.

It sure would be nice if educated people like Tom Friedman would look a little deeper and not serve as a parrot for baloney like, “Tony Wagner, the Harvard-based education expert and author of “The Global Achievement Gap,” explains it this way. There are three basic skills that students need if they want to thrive in a knowledge economy: the ability to do critical thinking and problem-solving; the ability to communicate effectively; and the ability to collaborate.”

To thrive in a knowledge economy our children, first and foremost, need knowledge. If more people had more knowledge maybe we would see fewer events like the current financial crisis with so many bogus mortgages written. Maybe we wouldn’t have had the Gulf Oil spill. Maybe we wouldn’t have seen two space shuttles destroyed. Maybe the 787 wouldn’t be three years late. Maybe people would see through the bogus claims of Tony Wagner who don’t know how to teach basic math and writing knowledge/skills to low-income kids but would have us believe he and others like him are certain students need the 3 C’s and that they have any idea how to teach those skills. It’s a classic “change the subject” tactic.

Friedman would do better to spend less time rubbing elbows with the elites and more time in early elementary school classrooms so he wouldn’t get snookered by the “Harvard-based education experts” of the world.

From this NY Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/health/research/25patient.html

(1) Efforts to make hospitals safer for patients are falling short.

(2) Harm to patients was common and that the number of incidents did not decrease over time.

(3) The most common problems were complications from procedures or drugs and hospital-acquired infections.

(4) Medical mistakes caused as many as 98,000 deaths and more than one million injuries a year in the United States.

(5) Among the preventable problems .... were:
A.. severe bleeding during an operation,
B.. serious breathing trouble caused by a procedure that was performed incorrectly,
C.. a fall that dislocated a patient’s hip and damaged a nerve, and
D.. vaginal cuts caused by a vacuum device used to help deliver a baby.

(6) Programs to improve patient safety.....

But instead of improvements, the researchers found a high rate of problems.
A.. About 18 percent of patients were harmed by medical care, some more than once, and B.. 63.1 percent of the injuries were judged to be preventable.

(7) The findings were a disappointment but not a surprise.
Many of the problems were caused by the hospitals’ failure to:
A.. use measures that had been proved to avert mistakes and to prevent infections

“Until there is a more coordinated effort to implement those strategies proven beneficial, I think that progress in patient safety will be very slow,”

(8) An expert on hospital safety who was not associated with the study said the findings were a warning for the patient-safety movement. “We need to do more, and to do it more quickly,”

134,000 patients — experienced “adverse events” during hospital stays. The report said the extra treatment required as a result of the injuries could cost Medicare several billion dollars a year.

The researchers found 588 instances in which a patient was harmed by medical care, or 25.1 injuries per 100 admissions.

(9) Not all the problems were serious. Most were temporary and treatable.

For the most part, the reporting of medical errors or harm to patients is voluntary, and that “vastly underestimates the frequency of errors and injuries that occur,”

(10) “We need a monitoring system that is mandatory,”

The bottom line, he said, “is that preventable complications are way too frequent in American health care, and “it’s not a problem we’re going to get rid of in six months or a year.”

(11) The study made clear the difficulty in improving patients’ safety.

it was essential that hospitals be more open about reporting problems.

“What we know works in a general sense..... Right now you ought to be able to know the infection rate of every hospital in your community.”

For hospitals with poor scores, there should be consequences.

Seattle Schools a parallel Universe

(1) Efforts to improve student learning are falling short.

(2) As students progress through school, the percentage of skill deficient students increases.
{grade 3 math = 15% far below basic.... grade 10 math = 31% far below basic and in addition 7% no score}

(3) The most common problems are compounded by a lack of efficient effective interventions applied in a timely manner.

(4) Failure to provide effective interventions is confirmed by a 30+% drop out rate and high remediation rates for graduates entering post secondary programs.

(5) Among the preventable problems .... were:

A.. those caused by excessive use of minimally guided instruction

B.. an emphasis on process which neglected the learning of significant content and skills

C.. a failure to provide timely meaningful interventions

D.. ongoing failure to make evidence based decisions in regard to instructional materials and practices

E.. Continued use of faulty programs due to a failure to evaluate programs or the disconnection from results when evaluating the success of existing programs

F.. District's failure to realize that for anyone to become an expert in any meaningful activity requires effort and guided practice.

{To effectively think outside the Box ... it helps to know what is in the Box}

(6) Programs to improve student learning were attempted especially efforts to close Achievement Gaps

But instead of improvements, OSPI annual testing revealed:

A.. Large declines in Writing scores (Writers' Workshop has been emphasized)

B.. Continually widening Achievement Gaps in mathematics (except in middle school in 2010)

C.. Special Education Students, Limited English Speaking Students, and American Indian Students seem particularly ill served during the second full year of the Strategic Plan "Excellence for All".

(7) After three years of Dr, Goodloe-Johnson, the findings were a disappointment but not a surprise.

Many of the problems were caused by the Central Administration's and School Board's failure to:
A.. use evidence before making proposals and evaluate proposals through the use of evidence.

“Until there is a more coordinated effort to implement those instructional materials and practices proven to be effective in a coordinated way, strategies proven beneficial, any improvement in student learning will be very slow,”

(8) An expert on student learning who was not associated with the Seattle Central Administrative cabal said the findings were a warning for All Students and Parents. “We need much better instructional materials and practices with timely effective interventions quickly provided.”

Of every 45,000 students passing through the system approximately 15,000 are so severely effected by “adverse events” during their school years that they fail to graduate. The extra treatment in the form of post high school remediation is costly but the costs rest on the student and/or student's family not the Seattle Schools.

The researchers are finding that the high percentages of students unable to score above far below basic on OSPI annual tests are normally not reflected in those same students' course grades.

Particularly disturbing: Many 8th graders that scored "Far Below Basic" in 8th grade math were placed in the category "Ready for High School Math" on recently issued school report cards.

(9) Not all the problems were serious. Most would have been temporary if treated.

For the most part, the Strategic Plan despite increased spending is a colossal flop, that “vastly underestimates the District's failure to serve students and families.”

(10) “We need a monitoring system that can be productively used. Teacher judgment has been gradually replaced by high tech gizmos yet few if any effective interventions are provided in a timely manner.” The materials used in many k-8 subjects make providing meaningful interventions very difficult. A chaotic spiraling as in Everyday Math makes skill development very difficult.

The bottom line, “is that disruption to student learning may always occur, that's life, but the Chaotic Instructional approach to student learning in Seattle and actions of the School Board and Administration have been noticed by the State Auditor and are the subject of frequent legal action" and “it’s not a problem we’re going to get rid of until Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson leaves.”

(11) The results made clear the difficulty in improving student learning under Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson.

It was essential that the school system be more open about reporting problems and stop the frequent deception of the public.

“We know works in a general sense..... to improve student learning but the Board and the Central Administration refuse to use practices known to bring about improvement.”

For any ineffective Superintendent who deceives the public and violates laws, there should be consequences.

"What's Up" with the School Board directing the Superintendent? The School Board has seven directors and it has one employee, how can supervision be such a big problem?

Letter about the (17%) Fraud of 2.5 years & MORE LIES

2010-11-22T20:09:00.000-08:00

SAO assistant audit manager, Tony Martinez, may have an interest in your response, in regard to the linked Seattle Times Truth Needle article.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013491751_truthneedle22m.html
by Linda Shaw.
=======================================

Dear School Board President Michael DeBell,

The Strategic Plan, Excellence for All, at bottom of page 11 in the Table (this is .pdf page 14/55)

SPS Goals 2008 - 2013

Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-years colleges = 17%

This was done on June 4, 2008 .... so 2.5 years of Fraud.....

Brought to you by the Strategic Plan.

The Superintendent and Mr. Bernetek have mislead public officials; this is a gross misdemeanor at the minimum.

You now have substantial evidence from the production of the 3-12-2010 NTN Action Report of Forgery, a Class C Felony. Are any directors planning to fulfill their oath of office by taking appropriate action in regard to a Superintendent and some of her Team Members, who mislead public officials in violation of the law?

SAO assistant audit manager, Tony Martinez, may have an interest in your response.

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

The Recall sufficiency failure and Judicial Activism

2010-11-21T02:03:00.000-08:00

When people speak of legislation from the Bench they usually think of a Judge that has departed from what the law intends.

It is particularly interesting that the Washington laws, which govern Recall of public officials contain NO MENTION of INTENT. As case law has developed "Intent" has worked its way into how the court judges the sufficiency of a Recall Petition. This is a very convenient development for Seattle School Directors.

If you read the actual laws passed by the legislature there is no mention of intent. Kate Martin and Joy Anderson failed on 11-18-2010 in their attempted recall of The Seattle Directors who violate state laws on a fairly regular basis because Anderson and Martin failed to show intent on the part of the Directors to violate the law. How convenient for incumbents.

How is it that legislation passed by the legislature transforms itself into something other than the legislation passed by the legislature? How do court interpretations become case law that effectively shields Seattle School Directors from accountability for failing to follow laws?

It is time for the legislature to inform the courts that the legislation written has been corrupted by the Judiciary and the law should be enforced as written.

Arbitrary and Capricious : Evidence not desired

2010-11-21T01:45:00.000-08:00

Linked below are the declarations of four Directors submitted to the court on 11-17-2010.

http://mathunderground.blogspot.com/2010/11/those-seeking-recall-respond-to.html

These are the four directors that vocally supported MGJ's appeal of the Spector High School Math Adoption decision of 2-4-2010, which remanded the decision back to the Board with instructions to include all the evidence in decision-making.

It is interesting that Carr, Maier, and Sundquist state:

"I did not believe that considering any additional material would help me reach a decision on this difficult issue."

Right on ... why consider any information from the public even when ordered to by the court.

An interesting feature of these declarations is the use of the words "opinion" and "information". Never is the word evidence used. It seems there is no focus on making evidence based decisions by these directors. WOW!!! could these folks get any more arbitrary and capricious?

A BIG DATA reporting Mistake

2010-11-20T13:23:00.000-08:00

Richard writes:

I'm used to getting bad data from Kentucky's educators, but this time it's the NCES that messed up.

In a new set of web pages that accompanied the recent release of the 12th grade reading and math scores from 2009. the NCES included a graph supposedly showing the proficiency gaps between whites, blacks and Hispanics.

The only problem is they used the wrong numbers! They totally forgot to add in the kids who scored at or above NAEP "Advanced." The result is the black-white gap is understated for 2009 by a significant amount. The real gap is 30 percent larger than the gap shown on the graph.

For all the details, including graphs in living color:

http://bluegrasspolicy-blog.blogspot.com/2010/11/new-naep-data-out.html

Those seeking recall respond to Directors' declarations but the petition for recall is ruled insufficient.

2010-11-18T13:58:00.000-08:00

Here are the Declarations of each director on 11-16-2010 or 11-17-2010 that were submitted on 11-17-2010:
Maier :: Carr :: Martin-Morris :: Sundquist

Here are the Responses, to the above four declarations, submitted by Ms. Anderson and Ms. Martin, who sought the recall:
Maier :: Carr :: Martin-Morris :: Sundquist

There may be typos etc. as there were only 24 hours to turn this around. Directors submitted on Nov 17, not November 15 as originally required. Anderson and Martin made Nov 15 filings as required. Anderson and Martin's responses to directors' declarations were submitted at the court hearing on Nov. 18th at 3:00 p.m.

===============================

Result = Anderson and Martin lost as they failed to show any director intended to violate a law.

There were legal violations taking place but those seeking recall failed to show intent.

Officer I was unaware I was driving 80 mph. Isn't 80 mph the speed limit in this county. --------- No intention and no awareness. What officer would argue with that?

Most every officer would issue a citation given that response from a driver, but that violation would be insufficient to "Recall" a Driver is my guess. Note recall applies to only elected officials.

Thanks to Directors submitting individual declarations on Nov. 17 to the court. There is even more evidence that points to how poorly each of those four directors do their job.

===========================

It is quite apparent that these directors consider lots of opinions but fail to evaluate facts and thereby do not produce evidence based decisions.

Of particular interest is that the directors apparently failed to notice the large amount of information that Mr. Dempsey submitted that was non math related.

Mr Maier wrote: (beginning at page 3 line 25)

Mr. Dempsey expressed his opinion that the District should not approve a contract with NTN because in his view the NTN model was not an effective way to teach math [Evidence is of little interest to most directors]. Mr. Dempsey's emails provided some standardized testing relating data in math from a number of NTN schools that he claimed supported his view. I considered the information and opinions submitted by Mr. Dempsey and others before I voted to approve the NTN contract. The services that were to be provided through NTN's Program [sic: should be Project] Based Learning approach were much broader than just the subject of math instruction.

It is clear that Director Maier fails to evaluate evidence or read my emails. What evidence did Mr. Maier use to make his decision to vote for the NTN contract?

(1) There was extensive evidence submitted to Director Maier that concerned poor results at established NTN schools in non-math subjects.

(2) Mr. Maier focuses on opinions. Where is the data to contradict the evidence I and others presented?

(3) Where is Mr. Maier's judgment on the evidence submitted to him? A broad dismissal by way of "data that he claimed supported his view" lacks a judgment from Mr. Maier on the data.

(4) Since in #7 of his declaration, Mr. Maier is confused about San Diego, for there is no NTN school there. So Directors could not have visited it and he is incorrect in believing that I submitted only data related to math, how does he make decisions?

(5) On 2-3-10 Director Maier stated the the NTN contract was about Project Based Learning and that alone would be sufficient for his vote.

(6) It seems likely NTN was just another "Arbitrary and Capricious" approval by a 4-3 vote. This time it involved tampering with evidence and the production of a forged document.

================
Judge Inveen ruled the petition insufficient for recall but thanked the Activists for bringing issues to light that would otherwise be buried from Public View.

The equivalent of the "Golden Apple" for Martin & Anderson from Judge Inveen,
while Maier et al. deserve Schrammies.

==================
Note the Board did it again on 11-17-10 with the approval of TfA .... based on happy fairy-tales and total disregard of evidence.

The representative for the directors at the recall hearing, Lawrence Ransom, stated that the directors were being abused by a stream of litigation. Kathleen Martin responded that the directors continually abuse their constituents with their failure to make evidence based decisions. ....humm... looks like more litigation is likely as the directors just refuse to use evidence and continue making "arbitrary and capricious" decisions.

-- Dan

Directors respond to Recall Sufficiency Hearing for 11-18-2010

2010-11-17T15:30:00.000-08:00

Check it out HERE.

My TfA letter written to Seattle School Board

2010-11-17T12:55:00.000-08:00

Here is the letter:
http://www.box.net/shared/v6ag0l6exj

Here are excerpts from the letter.

If this TfA action is for the benefit of Seattle's students then closing of the achievement gaps is the only possible reason provided for bringing provisionally certified teachers with very little training into classrooms.

Please note that the CAO disclosed that the District has no centralized plan for effective Interventions.

The average of All students and the average of most every ethnic group declined on the 4th grade and 7th grade OSPI annual test of Writing. The District is completely failing to serve the needs of far too many students in writing. Is "Writer's Workshop" being examined as a possible cause?

Math scores are still abysmal in grade 4 and getting worse for many groups of educationally disadvantaged learners.

The Board's decision to illegally approve the non-competitive bid NTN contract, in which the Superintendent and CAO misinformed both the Public and the Board with the bogus action report of 3-12-2010 is further evidence of the disregard for so many educationally disadvantaged learners in the District.

Project Based Learning and Problem Based Learning have been devastating for most educationally disadvantaged learners in mathematics.

The District had NO Community engagement of the TfA contract. The vendor’s engagement can hardly be the District's engagement.

Note: the filing of the evidence in the NTN appeal apparently lacked the Actual Anderson memo sent to the Board. This memo was obtained through public records requests.

The Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson should be fired with cause for the misleading action reports she and her CAO produced in regard to the proposal to have the Board approve the NTN contract. The Action Reports used on 2-3-2010 and the 3-12-2010 Action Report used on 4-7-2010 each had serious flaws that would mislead any member of the public that read them. The 3-12-2010 Action report was fraudulently produced by referencing a memo as sent to the board, when in fact the memo sent to the board was NOT referenced in construction of the memo.

The Board might also begin thinking about the District's defense in various class action lawsuits about the disparate impact on members of various groups of the failed education practices of Seattle Schools.

Tonight is an opportunity to begin to end experimentation on Low Income and Special Education students. Do NOT miss it. Reject the obviously discriminatory TfA contract proposal.

Why only marginally prepared provisionally certified teachers for low-income schools, when both low-income and non-low-income SPS schools lack Highly Qualified Teachers in the same ratio 1 out of 200?

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.