While deciding which national standardized assessment is “better”, DE entered into an MOU with PARCC, the other test. Here are those terms…

Clearly, the commitment to use these tests for teacher eval is front and center…

This was signed in JUNE 2010,  less than three months after “winning” RTTT, and BEFORE DE “adopted” the CCSS “officially”.

What Scares Me

John Young:

Love this!

Originally posted on Minding My Matters:

There is a lot of misinformation, intention (good and bad), double speak, and confusion floating around these days about standardized testing and its myriad uses. I’d like to go on record about this, and about why I object to the use of standardized tests as part of educator evaluations.

What scares me about using standardized test scores in educator evaluations is NOT fear of being held accountable for the scores of my students because I am a bad teacher.

What scares me is the students who have a bad day and bomb the test, or don’t take the test seriously and bomb it, or are all tested out and bomb it, or didn’t get enough sleep or enough to eat or had no where to stay or had a fight with a best friend or…. And bomb the test.

What scares me is there being no good back-up plan for…

View original 418 more words

DIBELS: Pedagogy of the Absurd Hurts Children? #amplify #$122K

DIBELS: Pedagogy of the Absurd Hurts Children

The federal Reading First program has come under repeated scrutiny for corruption, exposing how individuals in charge of monitoring the program have pushed products, such as the DIBELS test, from which they have benefited financially (see “Reading First,” this issue). Complementing the financial corruption is ideological corruption. In Examining DIBELS: What It Is and What It Does, Ken Goodman and his colleagues carefully dissect the test, concluding that it is conceptually flawed and educationally harmful.

DIBELS is one of the most common tools used to assess student early progress in learning to read. Goodman summarizes each subtest, examining the design of each and “the extent to which it tests what it is intended to measure.” He finds it does not assess even the limited things it purports to test. He then critiques the underlying view of reading embedded in the DIBELS and the consequences of its use for curriculum, reading and “the lives of students and teachers.” This book extends and complements Gerald Cole’s Reading the Naked Truth: Literacy, Legislation and Lies(see Examiner, Fall 2004). It also could serve as a useful model for evaluating other standardized tests.

Goodman criticizes the implicit view underlying DIBELS that reading can be reduced to a few skills, each of which can be accurately tested in a minute or so. He charges that this approach is conceptually flawed and leads to harmful instructional practices. For example, the test of “oral reading fluency…equate(s) a score which represents correct words read in one minute with the totality of reading competently with comprehension.” DIBELS does not assess comprehension.

He points out that speed-“reading” nonsense words, one of the subtests, could cause students to believe that reading does not involve making sense. Dialect differences, speaking English as a second language, and seeing fake words that look like real words all can induce confusion in children. Confirming Goodman’s fears, one of the other essays in the book, by Robert Tierney and Elizabeth Thome, notes that publishers are now peddling nonsense word workbooks.

Not only do the subtests reduce reading to a few skills, they test only a fragment of even these narrow skills. DIBELS’ approach rewards speed, which could lead to “children being drilled on doing each test as fast as possible.” The exam’s instructions, Goodman charges, are also hard to understand. Teachers must score kids on the fly while administering the test and paying attention to the student. While administering the test, teachers must use a stopwatch, which students find distracting. Because of these flaws, concludes Goodman, DIBELS “can not be administered and scored consistently.”

Goodman adds that DIBELS appears to have one sensible, albeit optional, subtest – “Retelling.” To most educators, this would be a means to evaluate student comprehension. But DIBELS retelling is scored simply by counting the number of words the student speaks in response to the teacher’s questioning.

Reading, Goodman explains, is an ultimately qualitative act: making meaning from text. But DIBELS reduces reading to discrete skills that have at best minimal connection to actual reading. It then further shrinks these skills to a limited set of purely quantitative measures. As a result, he concludes, “Focus on improving performance on DIBELS is likely to contribute little or nothing to reading development and could actually interfere” with it.

The DIBELS is being used in thousands of schools, often “chosen” under duress from the U.S. Department of Education, as revealed in the fiscal corruption investigation. The consequences of its use include drilling to nonsense words; focusing on narrow slices of what reading is; reducing if not eliminating the reading, writing and discussion of real stories; confusing students; and demeaning if not deskilling teachers.

As Tierney and Thome conclude, “DIBELS may be perpetuating the (race and class) literacy gap it has promised to eliminate… [The] definition of literacy has been narrowed for the most vulnerable students… Once again, the rich get richer and the poor are left only with the most basic of basics.”

Timecapsule edition: An Open Letter to Jack Markell, our Governor. #SignHB50NOW

deoo

Dear Governor Markell,

Any reader of this blog knows there is no shared vision between the two of us on public education except that I choose to believe that each of us deeply respects that passion we both have for the subject. If I were to place myself in the role of personal political adviser on the issue of the Opt Out movement here in Delaware… and could go back 3 months, I would give you one piece of advice your closest advisers failed to give you: support Opt Out.

My advice is not based on you agreeing with the movement, but rather the political capital you will spend opposing it AND the likely effects of opposing it compared to supporting it. A quick pro/con list of opposing Opt-Out

Pros: it’s what you believe, it allows you to oppose John Kowalko which you like to do, it keeps you aligned with the state’s business interests and “non-profits” like Rodel, et. al., demonstrates support for “accountability”, get to enlist bullies like Sokola and Jaques to lift for you against parents

Cons: draws attention to an issue you are concerned about, alienates parents, disrespects parents, draws battle line with your own party’s legislators who are listening to parents, pitches you against the PTA, gives light and space to the discussion in the paper and other news media in such a way that more parents get to exercise this right(one they already have)

If you support Opt-Out here’s the pro/con:

Cons: appear weak to big monied interests, betray your own beliefs, let down Sokola and Jaques

Pros: support parents, make the news cycle go away almost a year before the next testing window (fighting now all but guarantees a vicious, pitched battle next Spring with more awareness…again on a right parents ALREADY have), build bridges with PTA and teachers unlike what your DOE does now.

Remember, if the test is as awesome and necessary as you and your supporters believe it to be, then the parents of this state will follow your lead and NOT Opt-Out, right?  Stand up for what you truly believe: believe in the power of SBAC, and let parents have their say without fear, bullying, and intimidation.

It makes the most political sense to just sign the bill. I know me saying it probably pisses you off some, but my advice is to sign it in a closet in Woodburn and post it to the bill tracking website. No press conference, no signing ceremony, no fanfare.

Just do it. Let us find it. We’ll celebrate…

and for the most part, this then just goes away…like you need it to…because if you don’t sign it, the political ramifications in your ultimate lame duck year will be significant and likely twice as unacceptable as now. #SignHB50NOW

BREAKING NEWS: Oregon Passes Strong Opt Out Bill

Originally posted on Diane Ravitch's blog:

Despite the pressure exerted by the U.S. Department of Education and threats to cut off federal funding, the Oregon legislature passed a strong opt out bill, protecting parental rights.

From: Oregon Education Association

Oregon Senate passes HB2655–first step on path to a better way

Senate Passes “Student Assessment Bill of Rights”

Today the Oregon Senate overwhelmingly passed HB 2655 (24-6) — one of the strongest bills in the nation to support all students and parents on statewide standardized assessments. The bill establishes the Student Assessment Bill of Rights which requires assessment transparency by giving students:

the right to know the purpose of statewide assessments and how the results will be used

when exactly the assessments will be administered

the amount of class time required for the assessment

the learning targets that make up the assessment

how students can self-assess and track their own progress

when the results will be made…

View original 176 more words

DDOE asks for SBAC feedback, and only gives choices that are positive towards the test. Folks, these people are in charge of teaching and learning and allegedly providing direction to schools on how to best yield critical thinkers for our society. #facepalm

gsbs

DOE is at it again…..

Here’s why it sucks:

http://www.responsivemanagement.com/news_from/2010-05-04.htm

http://www.aapor.org/AAPORKentico/Education-Resources/For-Researchers/Poll-Survey-FAQ/Bad-Samples.aspx

An open letter to Delaware Senators regarding House Bill 50: Opt Out.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRg5MEfniYOqD5SnMGJGMXeu7-g50mNUwkABqOfBJnuDAGpAtyivA

In today’s world of policy making, it often a facile and easy technique to challenge those that wish to move the needle on an issue by challenging them to “offer a solution”. In Delaware, some of our elected leaders, who are elected to lead and solve problems, will sometimes fall prey to turning constituent concerns back onto their constituents using this logic. It’s their right, but sometimes they are just wrong. Take House Bill 50, a simple bill that identifies a clear problem and offers a clear solution.

  • Problem: schools and districts challenging parents’ right to opt out with letters and conversations designed to bully and intimidate parents into not exercising their rights. Often, these threats use tactics like declaring loss of federal funds (has not happened from opt out ever) or attempting to suggest that supporters of this right are seeking, without any evidence, the total elimination of standardized tests. The worst is this unproven sense that policy makers would lose data they claim allow them to properly assign funds (this is the most pernicious, duplicitous, and irresponsible of lies): policy makers know where the gaps are from EXISTING data and still fail to equitably fund our schools or support school seeking such funding.

  • Solution: A simple bill, that if passed, would have the following effects: support parents, defend parents from retaliation from their schools (CSD has done this with our resolution, but only 2 other districts have joined officially), and respect their decision making and role in their child’s education…a holy grail of policy makers.

There are opponents. They are literally making up arguments that have no basis in fact. For example, the idea that failing to test children is a threat to civil rights. We have been testing, identifying, shaming, and labeling schools using standardized tests for almost 20 years non-stop. These same folks are also arguing that schools are failing yet want to perpetuate this status quo   by oddly suggesting the tests that have so persistently used to solve the problem but have actually widened it are the solution?   Strange I say.

At the end of the day, to use an overused phrase, HB 50’s brilliance is its simplicity: it deals with a problem directly and succinctly by codifying an existing right.

How many bills to members for the GA get that are this clarion, this simple? All the other concerns like: SBAC good/bad, federal funds loss threat, and civil rights violations are either trumped up or need different solutions like funding action or proof of efficacy to be demanded by policy makers.

All this problem needs is a Senate committee to agree to the following premise: we support parents and their rights. Punishing parents for DOE promises or threats just feels like the wrong idea to me.

Please support HB 50 in committee on 6/3/15.

I Don’t Think You Get It

Originally posted on Minding My Matters:

My decision to prevent my child from taking the Smarter Balanced Assessment is not about the anti-testing movement.

Now that THAT’S out of the way, let’s talk.

This particular test serves zero purpose in the education of my child. This test will not in any way inform the instruction of my child. It will be taken at the end of the school year and its results will be available well after her teacher could potentially use them to address her learning needs.

I just used truth to debunk the largest rationale for why students should take this particular assessment.

My child is already taking numerous other standardized tests, the results of which are available immediately and highly useful for informing her teacher of her needs. Could she benefit from taking fewer of those tests? Certainly. Do I have a major issue with her taking those other tests? Not really, no…

View original 286 more words

Christina referendum NO voters are NOT cowards. #netDE #eduDE

Wednesday, the Christina residents who chose to vote in the operating referendum, elected to reject our request for $0.37 per $100 assessed value. At first this made me sad, then mad, now I am in “fix what’s wrong” mode.

In my six years on the board we have allowed the state to demonize us and tell the world who they think we are. We have been the cowards. We have refused to stand up for ourselves with the conviction necessary to sell Christina’s successes and have refused to confront our own ineffective areas with viable solutions.

Contrary to some advice offered to me recently, defending yourself from a vicious, sustained policy attack is not doing nothing or not offering ideas. It’s actually the epitome of leadership, particularly when the policies are so poorly conceived, designed , and implemented that the HARM children.

Policies that disrupt schools, policies that deploy failed methods of improving teaching like merit pay, policies that shame and label schools crippled by poverty into a place where they are so undesirable that no school could possibly deliver a stable environment for young children, are just a few of the unrelenting attacks of idiocy offered by our DOE that have earned our deserved opposition.

We have tried to fight. But in the end, we seem to just undo ourselves. It’s hard to fight the DOE. It’s enervating. While I may personally have the stamina to keep telling the DOE to take a long stroll on a short pier, none of that matters right now.

Our classrooms are going to be difficult next year. All because we have been the cowards. We failed to message ourselves, over time. As a result, we will CONTINUE to manage the finances responsibly and our classroom sizes will rise as a result.

Those who voted no did not want this. They were told it would happen, yet they voted no anyway. Why? Why would they do this to kids…I’ve been muttering to myself? Well, I’ve decided that the NO voters have simply reached their limit.

Well, there’s my common ground.

Our referendum committee Co-chair, Christy Mannering, whom I shared a  WDEL  radio segment with recently (http://www.wdel.com/features/christina-referendum-fail-recap01.mp3), has been saying this phrase lately: let’s build bridges.

We need our NO voters. As much as I could not have disagreed more with their vote, we need them. More now than ever.

Let’s win them back. It’s not going to be easy, but I’m all in.

Let’s do this. Whatever it takes.

Budget Me Some of Your Time

Originally posted on Those In Favor:

By now, everyone knows of the failed second attempt at a referendum by the Christina School District and its supporters.  In the last 6 months we have had many, many more residents beginning to look into the way our public schools are funded.  Even with the referendum failures, one silver lining is the renewed public interest in public school finances.  On a personal note, I am absolutely thrilled that anyone is taking even 5 minutes to look at a financial report for the District because that is 5 minutes more than they were spending on it prior to the referenda.

What I’d like to do going forward is use this blog (and anyone who might share my posts) as a platform to start bringing public school financing, particularly CSD’s, in to the spotlight and transforming it into “the real world”.  Let’s be honest, a 25 page financial report is going…

View original 400 more words

Tomorrow night, the Christina School District Board of Education is holding a “special” board meeting without a purpose.

  • There is no action to be taken

  • There is a paid employee to run PA equipment

  • There are light refreshments for board members

  • There is a lit room ($$$)

  • No rationale was given other than to meet in the wake of the referendum to “talk” about it

  • We have two full meetings scheduled in June to execute board business and to react to the referendum. There are no items under the section of actions needed based on referendum results. Anything organically discussed cannot be voted on since those items are not on the agenda for public consideration: that’s the LAW.

  • This meeting feels wholly unnecessary and likely very unproductive

  • I informed Mr. Polaski of my concerns and of my intent to not attend based on the wastefulness of this exercise.

  • CSD residents deserve better than a hastily called meeting that costs money and has no likely result to move CSD forward…here’s the agenda:

A. CALL TO ORDER
Subject
1. Call to Order
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Action, Procedural

Recommended Action
Motion to go into Executive Session to discuss Personnel and Legal Matters.
Admin Content
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Subject
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Procedural

Admin Content
Mr. Polaski asked the audience to stand and recite the The Pledge of Allegiance.

C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Subject
1. Approval of this evening’s agenda
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Action

Recommended Action
It is recommended that this evening’s agenda be approved.
D. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Subject
1. Public Comments
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Procedural, Report

Admin Content
E. SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT
Subject
1. Referendum Update
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Information, Report

F. ACTION ITEMS
Subject
1. Actions Needed Based on Referendum Results
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Action

Recommended Action
Motion
G. ITEMS SUBMITTED BY THE BOARD
Subject
1. Items submitted by the Board
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Information, Procedural

H. ADJOURNMENT
Subject
1. Adjournment
Meeting
May 28, 2015 – General Business Meeting

Action

Recommended Action
Motion to adjourn the meeting.
I won’t waste money like this, we need every penny Christina.

CSDWeAllWin video collection! #CSDPride #community

Childhood Is Temporary: Defend your child from threatening high stakes testing

Originally posted on Reclaim Reform:

You are not alone. Parents across America are refusing the unfair and harsh high stakes, state mandated tests. Defend your child, and file complaints against those who threaten or intimidate your child.

childhood opt out now

Your child, at any age, is your child. Call the police on any school official who won’t immediately release your child to you for any reason that you as a parent give.

Don’t allow your child to be threatened or intimidated with promises of reprisal for what you as a parent have done.

Punishing a child for a parent’s valid decision is a violation of your civil rights and your child’s civil rights.

File a Civil Rights Complaint against any school board or school official who threatens or punishes a child for your actions. Here are the directions on how to file a valid Civil Rights Complaint. (One valid complaint is an aggravation to that school official…

View original 139 more words

12 Civil Rights Groups Oppose Opting Out. It Could Have Been 28.

Originally posted on deutsch29:

On May 5, 2015, twelve civil rights groups led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights issued a statement “opposing anti-testing efforts.” In short, these groups are confronting the growing strength of the Opt Out/Resist the Test movement.

These groups are the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the American Association of University Women (AAUW), Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD), Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Inc. (COPAA), Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), NAACP, National Council of La Raza (NCLR), National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), National Urban League (NUL), Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC), and TASH.

I wrote about their statement in this May 5, 2015, post, entitled, Opting Out Interfering with the “Civil Right” of Testing?

When I first read the May 5, 2015, statement by these 12 civil rights organizations that are defending annual testing even in the face of nationwide standardized-testing overuse…

View original 798 more words

My letter in Support of HB 50. #supportHB50

Featured image

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: John Young <jyd1988@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:03 PM
Subject: Don’t get distracted: Parents are our student’s first teachers, and your constituents. Not to mention, they fund our schools.
To: “Potter, Jr Charles” <Charles.Potter@state.de.us>, Bolden StephanieT <StephanieT.Bolden@state.de.us>, Keeley Helene <helene.keeley@state.de.us>, Brady Gerald <gerald.brady@state.de.us>, Smith Melanie G <melanie.g.smith@state.de.us>, Heffernan Debra <debra.heffernan@state.de.us>, Short Bryon <Bryon.Short@state.de.us>, Johnson Quinton <Quinton.Johnson@state.de.us>, Hensley Kevin S <Kevin.Hensley@state.de.us>,Alan.Jackson@state.de.us, Matthews Sean <sean.matthews@state.de.us>, Spiegelman Jeff <jeff.spiegelman@state.de.us>, Hudson Deborah <Deborah.Hudson@state.de.us>, Mitchell John L <john.l.mitchell@state.de.us>, Schwartzkopf Peter <Peter.Schwartzkopf@state.de.us>, valerie longhurst <Valerie.Longhurst@state.de.us>, Johnson JJ <jj.johnson@state.de.us>, Mulrooney Michael <Michael.Mulrooney@state.de.us>, Barbieri Michael <michael.barbieri@state.de.us>, “Williams, Kimberly (LegHall)” <kimberly.williams@state.de.us>, Smyk Steve <Steve.Smyk@state.de.us>, Ramone Michael <Michael.Ramone@state.de.us>, Miro Joseph <joseph.miro@state.de.us>, “Baumbach, Paul (LegHall)” <paul.baumbach@state.de.us>, “Osienski Edward (LegHall)” <Edward.Osienski@state.de.us>, “Kowalko John (LegHall)” <john.kowalko@state.de.us>, Viola John <John.Viola@state.de.us>, “Jaques, Jr Earl” <Earl.Jaques@state.de.us>, Carson William <william.carson@state.de.us>, Paradee Trey <trey.paradee@state.de.us>, Outten Bobby <bobby.outten@state.de.us>, Lynn Sean M <Sean.Lynn@state.de.us>, Bennett Andria <andria.bennett@state.de.us>, jack.peterman@state.de.us, Yearick Lyndon D <Lyndon.Yearick@state.de.us>, Wilson David L <David.L.Wilson@state.de.us>, Kenton Harvey <Harvey.Kenton@state.de.us>, BriggsKing Ruth <Ruth.BriggsKing@state.de.us>, Gray Ronald <Ronald.Gray@state.de.us>, Short Daniel <Daniel.Short@state.de.us>, Dukes Timothy <Timothy.Dukes@state.de.us>, Collins Richard G <Richard.G.Collins@state.de.us>

Dear Delaware Legislators,

Please consider full support of HB 50, an act to affirm a right that already exists.

  • Passing HB 50 will not cost Delaware funding:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/04/02/will-schools-lose-federal-funds-if-kids-dont-take-mandated-tests-fact-vs-threat/
  • Passing HB 50 does not Opt Delaware out of federally mandated standardized testing
  •  
  • Passing HB 50 does not violate a “made up” civil right​
  •  
  • Passing HB 50 does not stop the measuring of schools based on tests that has no basis in peer reviewed research while the framework that mandates said measurement, NCLB, has been virtually universally ​​panned as bad policy in a very bipartisan manner
  • Passing HB 50 does not threaten the reform movement or agenda and therefore is no threat in reality to our Governor(therefore demanding an answer to the question: why is he against HB 50 or so concerned by this bill?​
    ​)​
  • Passing HB 50​​ does not permit schools to not administer tests or to opt out ANY children. Only parents have this right, and DE code already compels schools to administer the test. Therefore, concerns over “mischief” by school districts is blatant fear mongering​​, particularly when married to the convenient lie that somehow testing is a necessary component of identifying needs. TEACHERS identify needs, Administrators fight to allocate resources to ​​meet these needs. Let’s put our effort in supporting our professional educators and administrators. ​
    ​Proper funding is a great place to start.
  • Passing HB 50 will give parents and students protections.Protection from schools and districts who will coerce them into taking tests to satisfy mandates that they, the parents and students, were full disenfranchised from the process of determining.​​ (I think we fought a couple of wars over that concept in the past)​
  • ​. Also, its the law that they should have been included:  Title 1 funding, Section 1118…Did You Know…(FROM U.S. Department of Education:http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg2.html#sec1118)
  • (c) POLICY INVOLVEMENT- Each school served under this part shall —(1) convene an annual meeting, at a convenient time, to which all parents of participating children shall be invited and encouraged to attend, to inform parents of their school’s participation under this part and to explain the requirements of this part, and the right of the parents to be involved;(2) offer a flexible number of meetings, such as meetings in the morning or evening, and may provide, with funds provided under this part, transportation, child care, or home visits, as such services relate to parental involvement;(3) involve parents, in an organized, ongoing, and timely way, in the planning, review, and improvement of programs under this part, including the planning, review, and improvement of the school parental involvement policy and the joint development of the schoolwideprogram plan under section 1114(b)(2), except that if a school has in place a process for involving parents in the joint planning and design of the school’s programs, the school may use that process, if such process includes an adequate representation of parents of participating children;(4) provide parents of participating children —(A) timely information about programs under this part;(B) a description and explanation of the curriculum in use at the school, the forms of academic assessment used to measure student progress, and the proficiency levels students are expected to meet; and(C) if requested by parents, opportunities for regular meetings to formulate suggestions and to participate, as appropriate, in decisions relating to the education of their children, and respond to any such suggestions as soon as practicably possible; and(5) if the schoolwide program plan under section 1114(b)(2) is not satisfactory to the parents of participating children, submit any parent comments on the plan when the school makes the plan available to the local educational agency.
    It’s a about a parent, a child, and a choice.​
 

Do not get distracted by Common Core​ discussion​s
, or threats of sanctions, or the false notion that relentless measurement via testing is required to allocate resources…we’re all smarter than that I believe.

Lastly, I respect our Governor’s passion on the issue. I often meet that passion head on to disagree with Mr. Markell on education policy, but it’s not because I think he does not care. He does care, but his policies are often reflective of poor use of evidence to support the efficacy of his policies. This is why our teachers have 1) voted no confidence in Common Core implementation,2)  no confidence in his education Secretary, and 3) to support a resolution for affirming a parent’s right to opt their child out of testing. Agree or disagree with DSEA on those three things…it’s notable that they even occurred at all. Teachers loathe politics generally, so why did they do these three extraordinary things? That’s why this debate is so pitched. The fervor against HB 50 from our Governor’s office is a red flag. The status quo is to bully parents and schools to take these unproven tests. Let’s affirm their right to not be bullied on the issue. Those that want to test, get to keep testing. HB 50 changes nothing about that!
 

 Let’s stand up for our children and their parents.

 

One time.

No Distractions.

As Parents, for Parents.

As Children, for Parents.

 

Support HB 50.

 
Thank you for reading this.

#SupportHB50 Send and Email: MASS E-MAIL list here, just copy/paste!

Charles.Potter@state.de.us; StephanieT.Bolden@state.de.us; helene.keeley@state.de.us; gerald.brady@state.de.us; melanie.g.smith@state.de.us; debra.heffernan@state.de.us; Bryon.Short@state.de.us; Quinton.Johnson@state.de.us; Kevin.Hensley@state.de.us; Alan.Jackson@state.de.us; sean.matthews@state.de.us; jeff.spiegelman@state.de.us; Deborah.Hudson@state.de.us; john.l.mitchell@state.de.us; Peter.Schwartzkopf@state.de.us; Valerie.Longhurst@state.de.us; jj.johnson@state.de.us; Michael.Mulrooney@state.de.us; michael.barbieri@state.de.us; kimberly.williams@state.de.us; Steve.Smyk@state.de.us; Michael.Ramone@state.de.us; joseph.miro@state.de.us; paul.baumbach@state.de.us; Edward.Osienski@state.de.us; john.kowalko@state.de.us; John.Viola@state.de.us; Earl.Jaques@state.de.us; william.carson@state.de.us; trey.paradee@state.de.us; bobby.outten@state.de.us; Sean.Lynn@state.de.us; andria.bennett@state.de.us; jack.peterman@state.de.us; Lyndon.Yearick@state.de.us; David.L.Wilson@state.de.us; Harvey.Kenton@state.de.us; Ruth.BriggsKing@state.de.us; Ronald.Gray@state.de.us; Daniel.Short@state.de.us; Timothy.Dukes@state.de.us; Richard.G.Collins@state.de.us

“Someday yeah, we’ll put it together and we’ll get it undone, Someday when your head is much lighter, Someday yeah, we’ll walk in the rays of a beautiful sun, Someday when the world is much brighter,”- The 5 Stairsteps.

Can’t love this song enough. It has it all: shuffle kick line, pimp hats, alien headgear, and some truly amazing lyrics. It makes me think maybe us adults will someday fix the mess we’ve made of our schools…

Oooh child things are gonna get easier,
Oooh child things’ll get brighter,
Oooh child things are gonna get easier,
Oooh child things’ll get brighter,

Oooh child things are gonna be easier,
Oooh child things’ll be brighter,
Oooh child things are gonna be easier,
Oooh child things’ll be brighter,

Someday yeah, we’ll put it together and we’ll get it undone,
Someday when your head is much lighter,
Someday yeah, we’ll walk in the raise of a beautiful sun,
Someday when the world is much brighter,

La la la la la la la la la-ah (x4)

Someday (Someday, someday someday) we’ll put it together and we’ll get it undone
Someday when you head is much lighter,
Someday (Someday, someday, someday) we’ll walk in the raise of a beautiful sun,
Someday when the world is much brighter,

Oooh child things are gonna get easier,
Oooh child things’ll get brighter,
Oooh child things are gonna get easier,
Oooh child things’ll get brighter,

Right nowww, (oh yeah),
Right nowww, (oh baby),
Right nowww, (And your just the way I see, that things are gonna be) (x3 fading out)


Delaware PTA’s Yvonne Johnson Will Be On WDEL w/Rick Jensen Tomorrow at 2:30 AND On Delaware Way w/Larry Mendte May 9th on Me-TV

Originally posted on Exceptional Delaware:

The Delaware PTA has been a HUGE advocate for parent opt-out in 2015.  They hosted Parent Opt-Out Town Halls in Newcastle County and Kent County.  They have gone to many meetings at Legislative Hall.  They passed a resolution supporting parent opt-out.  Now Delaware PTA’s own Yvonne Johnson is on the media circuit.

Tomorrow, May 5th, she will be on WDEL with Rick Jensen at 2:30pm.  This should be a very interesting interview based on Governor Markell’s potential veto of House Bill 50.  When I say potential, that’s if it passes the Delaware House and Senate.

Then, in a pre-recorded segment, she will appear on Larry Mendte’s Delaware Way on Me-TV on Saturday May 9th (time to be announced).  If you don’t live in Wilmington, Mendte puts all his Delaware Way videos up on Youtube a few days later.

Is Yvonne running for Governor?  Just kidding on that one.  I’m glad to…

View original 17 more words

HB 50 opponents must think “this” is good for kids? #crazy #SupportHB50

The Delaware DOE is about to run Tell Delaware survey part two. Here’s what they think of teachers and their union…#SMOKINGGUN

A few RED PENS INSIDE THIS FOIA E-MAIL CHAIN TO ID players and antecedents and strategies.

To: “Alleyne Atnre” <atnre.alleyne@DOE.K12.DE.US>
Return-Path: christopher.ruszkowski@doe.k12.de.us
From: “Ruszkowski Christopher” <christopher.ruszkowski@doe.k12.de.us>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 10:07:17 -0400
How’s March 1-31??
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Alleyne Atnre <atnre.alleyne@DOE.K12.DE.US> wrote:

I’ll keep them engaged. I designed a survey for them to collect feedback in Feb that they never sent to their members (http://tinyurl.com/tell-de-feedback). this is the doe saying the dsea is a poor partner and does not work with their members
The next TELL DE administration is scheduled for Feb 15th-Mar 15th. I think if he announces this survey now DSEA will get slaughtered by the vocal members. So we’ll need to see how to deal with this. Apparently, vocal members are something to be “dealt with”…amazing candor here.
 -Atnre
From: Ruszkowski Christopher
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 9:48 AM
To: Alleyne Atnre
Subject: Re: Spoke to Jeff
Keep the dialogue open…this is good…
By the time we do the survey (proposed dates??), Priority will be less hot (& only in 6 schools) and comp reform is barely on the survey.  They are actively seeking to time the survey to skew the results!!!
Let’s discuss this…there’s a way for you to respond w/ data to keep him on-board, assuming that his argument is 100% genuine.  here, christopher ruszkowski is speaking ill of dsea and it’s executive jeff taschner, essentially calling him a liar.
If they want high participation, they’ll get it…  this appears to be Christopher ruszkowski suggesting the doe will willfully manipulate the survey, i.e. cheat.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Alleyne Atnre <atnre.alleyne@DOE.K12.DE.US> wrote:

Hi CR,
I spoke to Jeff and he said he’ll have his secretary find a few dates that work for the DSEA team for a TELL Delaware Advisory Committee meeting in early December.
However, he let me know that he’s not too sure if it’s a good idea to move forward with the study given his members’ concerns with Priority Schools, Comp Reform, etc right now. He thinks we’ll get low participation given the current climate.  this is the dsea trying to time the survey…why would it need to be timed if it’s a genuinely neutral effort to guage conditions? This shows that the results are sought for political purposes, not their actual content.
I told him that we should get the advisory committee together in December to discuss this as a group.
-Atnre
Atnreakn Alleyne
Director, Talent Management & Educator Effectiveness
Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Unit
Delaware Department of Education
401 Federal Street, Suite #2
Dover, DE 19901-3639
302.735.4130 (T)  302.739.5894 (F)
atnre.alleyne@doe.k12.de.us
*Join. Teach. Lead. www.joindelawareschools.org*
This email and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged.  Any dissemination, copying or use of this communication by or to anyone other than the designated and intended recipient(s) is unauthorized.  If you are not the intended recipient, please delete or destroy this communication immediately.
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

email screen shot