Monday, February 24, 2014

REMINDER: Parents and Teachers Should Not Miss Tonight's BOE Meeting

Tonight's BOE Business Meeting -- 7 p.m. at Elm School -- is probably the most important meeting of the year and we encourage all parents and teachers to attend.  Two full years after Dr. Moon was hired to evaluate the gifted program, and presented her "report" that went beyond addressing identification issues and broadened her critique of the gifted curriculum/classroom instruction to address a perceived lack of differentiation across the district, she is back.  Two years after her report, the district curriculum and instructional model looks very different than when she presented her report to the BOE in January 2012.

Today, she is touring the schools and will give a "progress check" presentation to the BOE tonight. (Click on Dept. of Learning report describing her visit.) It is unclear exactly what she will be addressing or how "in depth" her "progress check" can actually be, since she will only have had 7 hours to visit 9 schools and the hundreds of classes district wide. Certainly she will not have time to write a report.  She will not have time to visit all classrooms in all buildings.  She will not have time to meet with teachers and engage in meaningful, in depth discussions addressing their questions and concerns.  She will not have time to meet with parents, nor have any parent meetings even been scheduled.  Despite an obviously compacted schedule, the D181 Department of Learning has already prepared an 8 slide power point presentation for tonight's meeting.  (Click to open power point.)  This power point is another example of how the Administration continues to represent that what has been implemented over the last two years are Dr. Moon's recommendations.  Slide 3, for example, represents that Dr. Moon recommended that the district "accelerate math for all."Anyone who has taken the time to read her report knows that Dr. Moon did not recommend this.  Rather, she recommended D181 MIGHT be a candidate for this step, but that first, a feasibility study needed to be conducted.  As we pointed out in an earlier post, on page 27 of her report, Dr. Moon stated:

"the diverse group of stakeholders tackling the district's philosophy and definition be charged with investigating the feasibility of accelerating the district wide-mathematics program by one grade level."
(Click to open Dr. Moon's Report.)

Will this recommendation be "clarified" by her during tonight's meeting?  Will Dr. Moon address parent concerns regarding the negative impact some students have suffered as a result of the forced math acceleration model?  Will she inquire why the district bypassed a feasibility study and simply concluded that math acceleration was appropriate to implement for ALL students?

If there is one meeting that needs to be well attended this year, this is it.  If parents do not attend, the board will no doubt conclude that there is no need to make any changes to the Learning for All/Advanced Learning programs.  It will discount the comments and concerns of the smaller group of parents who may attend tonight's meeting.  That's what this board has done in the past, and that's what we believe they will continue to do.  So, if you have questions, concerns or even compliments regarding Dr. Moon's past report, how the administration has used the report to influence the Advanced Learning/Learning for All plans, and the impact felt by your children, you should fill the seats at Elm School tonight.  Parents have come forward en mass in the past when they disapproved of the math curriculum materials the BOE wanted approved last Spring.  As a result, the board did not approve the Administration's recommendation.  Parents have come forward en mass when the mold infestation and health concerns at Hinsdale Middle School were finally revealed to the public last month.  As a result, the board was forced to push the administration to take the necessary actions to get the HMS students back into school and implement the split schedule.  

Tonight, parents and teachers must come forward again and be heard regarding the sweeping curriculum changes that have been rolled out (and are currently still scheduled to continue to roll out) over the last two years.  In our opinion, the program should be modified to address the curriculum needs of every student. If students need or want grade level instruction, it should be available. If students need gifted services, they should be offered. If students want the opportunity to try higher level instruction, but missed the arbitrary cutoffs that were used in the past, they should be allowed to enroll in higher level coursework and only be excluded if they cannot successfully perform at that level.  But nothing is going to change unless a large group of concerned parents and teachers come forward to voice their concerns and call for modification of a "plan" that is clearly flawed.  

The time is now.
  


33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Test Scores Now Worthless ? According to Google’s SVP of People Operations (HR) Laszlo Bock, as quoted by the New York Times on 2/23/2014, “GPA’s are worthless as a criteria for hiring, and test scores are worthless … We found they don’t predict anything.”

Bock went on to say, “The proportion of people without any college education at Google has increased over time” – now as high as 14% on some teams.

If Google is any measure of success and has anything to do with the future, which they might, Google just may be on to something here.

Maybe the value of that Dr EdD isn’t much more than Mr. Ed without the horse sense.

Anonymous said...

Simple Gifted Solution ?

For parents laboring under the fals belief that their little darling is gifted, there is a simple solution, opt our of the public school system.

There are programs for the genuinely gifted, but for the mere student who is only "gifted" because he or she is "good at school" - - - Well there's a reality check here, not everyone gets to play on varsity or be a cheerleader and sometimes you have to accept the simple fact that your kid is just a good student.

Nothing to be embarassed about but nothing to brag about either - just another kid that's good at school.

Gifted parents, get a hold of yourselves, brace yourself, reality is around the corner.

Anonymous said...

Thanks be to the Blog

Sincere thanks an gratitude to the D181 Parents for Accountability and Transparency for providing a genuinely democratic venue to allow all to express their views rather than suffer the oppression of views all to common within the educational leadership and oversight arenas.

No doubt, your efforts at editorial oversights and moderation has come with some criticism. Thank you for persevering and not giving up.

My views rarely reflect the majority but my voice always has access on the blog.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Collaboration ?

The 8 page PowerPoint for tonights presentation relly more of a pictographic to "buy time"

Title slide is a picture
Slide 5 is a picture

So it's really just 6 slides.

These slides would not pass muster for even an intern in today's corporate environment but in today's public education system, it's another cartoon classic.

Anonymous said...

Many of our children aren't "truly gifted" but they are capable of learning far more that is being taught.

Anonymous said...

My response to "truly gifted" is that, you are right. Children don't have to be truly gifted to be able to learn more. Some students are capable of learning more and at a quicker pace than others. I don't think anybody is disagreeing with that. But that doesn't mean that ALL students should be taught in that manner b/c some students aren't capable of compacting/acceleration. And that should be ok.

Anonymous said...

I invite everyone to read Ms. Garg's insightful questions on board docs and the administrations refusal to answer them.

Anonymous said...

My child is not gifted, so I am not "one of those parents" that two prior commenters have criticized. Every child is their parents "little darling." It is sad that the tone of the two commenters is so negative in describing a CHILD!! Every child should be taught at their own instructional level, but that is probably impossible to actually do for one teacher. So most school districts create a tiered system of sorts and try and slot students in as best they can. That means that some kids who -- shock of shock -- are "smarter" or have a Higher IQ and really can learn faster and in fact should, are in a different tier. That means that average kids are taught regular grade level material. That means that kids with IEP's also get special services and different kinds of instruction to maximize their academic experience. The problem is when the identification is so flawed or arbitrary that kids fall through the cracks on both ends. Not enough kids were in the "gifted programs" at D181 that existed two/three years ago. Why? Because the identification system sucked. Crass? Yes, but true. The administration would not fix it. The administration made it worse. They grandfathered kids in, kept kids out who were just under the glorified cut off scores and refused to budge from their stubborn insistence that what they were doing was right. Enter Dr. Moon. She said quite clearly that our identification model was crap. Rather than fix it so more kids could opt up if they missed an arbitrary cut off, the D181 Administration decided to treat everyone as gifted.

Again, my kid is not gifted. My kid is average. Now my kid is failing. Why? Because he's like a square peg that's being pushed into a round hole. He is not gifted, can't perform as gifted. I don't want him to be treated as gifted. I want him to be taught and treated like the average kid he is. My little darling. D181 is now hurting my child. Shame on D181, not shame on the parents who only want the best for their kids.

The Parents said...

Here is the link (you must cut and paste it) of the questions that Garg asked that were not answered because apparently the administration has been too busy today dealing with Moon's visit?

http://www.boarddocs.com/il/hccsdil/Board.nsf/files/9GN5J475C9FB/$file/Board%20Questions_2_24_14.pdf

What was there to do to prepare? We thought she was going to "observe classes?" How many people does it take to arrange that or accompany her and Friedman? Are we the only ones who cannot believe how top heavy the Department of Learning is?

Anonymous said...

The term "gifted" is one that is misued by parents on both sides of the discussion. Instead of getting hung up on it, look at it this way. There are some kids who are above average in intelligence, ability to learn, quicker learners, etc... than the average student. Those children should be offered a more rigorous, fast paced curriculum than the average student who would be unable to keep up with it. Period. No gifted tag needed. The problem is, and always has been, identification and tracking. The administration should have fixed those two minor items and then gotten busy with focusing on Balanced Literacy, Common Core and, if they felt it was needed, a new math curriculum. The fact that we have endured the craziness of the past two years and are in the mess we are in is the result of an administration out of control and a lackadaisical BOE who doesn't seem to understand what is going on or doesn't care enough to stop it. It doesn't take a Ph.D in Education to see what is happening and that it isn't good for the vast majority of students.

Anonymous said...

And, for those who continue to believe that "one size fits all" when it comes to education, or that it is more important to make all kids "feel good about themselves" at the expense of properly educating the most academically able students (say, the top third), you are the ones who need the reality check. While I believe in the core principles of SELAS, they are also being misused as a way to shame anyone who dares suggest that some kids might need more than others. Educational political correctness. I send my kids to school to be educated, not to have their feelings monitored at every turn. By the same token, if my child doesn't make the baseball All-Star team, I certainly don't expect for someone to place him there because to do otherwise might make him "feel bad" about his baseball skills. It's not real life. Certainly I hope in both of my examples, kindness and tact would be used by the adults involved but, to not promote excellence and achievement in any area of society is to settle for mediocrity and don't we have enough of that already? Let the acheivers shine and let's not only celebrate their hard work and accomplishemnts but also use them as an example to motivate and inspire us, not slow them down or hold them back as has been done in this district for the past 2 years. Two lost years that my children can never get back. In a district such as ours with the taxes we pay, one size fits all just isn't good enough.

Gary Tietelbaum said...

Board Member Garg prepares thoughtful questions and the school administrators shoot her the Moon in traditional stonewalling fashion.

We need to get behind these board members and support them.

They are our voice against the administrative wall of obstinence.

Anonymous said...

How on earth does the administration continue to get away with these stunts? Will anyone on the board hold them accountable? And it is not okay for the Drs. to simply listen to parents AFTER the presentation is all said and done! We need to be heard first so our concerns are incorporated into the discussion. I hope the BOE does the right thing tonight - they are the boss and they need to exert some authority.

Anonymous said...

There are not enough parents at the meeting . If you care about these issues come now and speak up.

Anonymous said...

I am listening to the meeting online, and Moon is pointng out to the Board that her state, Virignia , is not even a common core state. She clearly says that schools need to stop focung on standardized testing, and instead, focus on assessing in what they actually taught. We need to spend more time on INSTRUCTION, instead of testing. So why aren't they? The administration messed up big time.

She also pointed out that the district should have established a clear plan for teacher professional development in conjunction with the acceleration! This did not happen. Our district only instituted acceleration.

Anonymous said...

A BIG THANK YOU to EVERYONE who spoke tonight! On behalf of my children, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. From hearing the Monroe mom's pleas for foreign language, and pointing out the free resources available to districts to do so. Thank you to the cooperative trio of moms who have spent countless hours analyzing data and pleaing for help, for not just THEIR , but ALL children. To the OB gyny moms from The Lane who pointed out that differentiation is not working for anyone, and who are shocked that the standards are so low for our children and schools! To Matt , who cut through Dr. Moon's gobbledygook to point out that she is washing her hands of us! Susan, thank you for your excellent question to Moon. John, great job! Thanks for stepping forward! This district needs your professional advice. And Yvonne and Ann, thank you for always there for us, even though your kids are done here. We are so lucky to have you as advocates for our children. Everyone who spoke was amazing.

Jill, Brendan, Mridu - thanks for trying to make Moon answer your questions. She seemed a little slippery. Let's see if the $50,000 was worth it. I think you and the board should strongly question the expertise of Dr. Friedman, and take the advice of hiring a local consultant from National University, Northwestern, or any other college of education (except for the one where Dawn Benaitis got her degree).

Hearing all of your honest, passionate voices is making me proud to live in this town again.

Village Mom

Anonymous said...

The take away from last night is that the administration and the BOE think Learning for All is working. If you disagree, I suggest that you email the BOE today and tell them just that. I was disappointed by the attendance last night. It cannot just be the same people at each board meeting. If people on this blog want change, they need to become more active. Turek himself said that few people attended the MAP presentation so that means they are happy with the MAP results. Again, if you disagree tell the BOE, do not just write it on this blog.

The Parents said...

Readers: We will be posting a summary of last nights meeting in 2 parts. Part one will deal with Dr. Moon's "report," or rather lack thereof. Part two will deal with other agenda items. We hope to have these posts up within the next 24 hours, however, those of you who listened to, or attended, the meeting know it ran past 11 o'clock at night. We listened to the entire meeting and so we ask for your patience since we need to "recover" this morning and actually attend to other aspects of our lives.

Anonymous said...

Really? To me the key takeaway is that the data looks promising and that the vast majority of parents are happy with the direction of the District.

Anonymous said...

We obviously did not listen to the same meeting.

Anonymous said...

Multiple parents spoke last night and not a single parent had anything good to say about Learning for All. In fact, the comments were scathing. There was not one single positive comment in the bunch. Just because parents do not show up does not mean that they support the plan. Most of the parents I know are too fed up and defeated to attend the meetings - they know, as you just proved, that they will not be heard. They are also too busy running their kids to tutors, language stars and Kumon. Check out the private school waitlists - they are longer than they have ever been in history. Get your head out of the sand and start listening!

Anonymous said...

Yes, Mr Turek, we know how you feel. You have made it quite clear.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Turek - I thought you promised Jill that parents would be heard at the meeting. Obviously you forgot to listen.

Anonymous said...

I would like the administration to poll the 4th grade parents and see if they have hired professional tutors. Then we need to triangulate the data. Is there a correlation between MAP growth and home tutoring? Is there a correlation between lack of growth and no home tutoring?

Anonymous said...

Fourth grade teachers and principals have never ONCE asked how parents feel now, or how they felt last year. Not at conferences, in conversations, or surveys. So why does the board believe that only a handful of people are complaining? Why are parents constantly being ignored and dismissed?

I hope an admintrator who knows how to communicate WITH , not just TO parents is hired. Commutation is a 2 way street. I am shocked by Nelson's, Clarin's and Turek's callous, dismissive treatment of parents. Why are they so stupid to think that the majority of parents are happy, if so many people showed up to the meeting upset and unhappy with the plan? These are the parents who KNOW the issues, and who have concerns. Every single one of them who spoke made excellent points - so why do Nelson, Clarin, and Turek dismiss them? Truly disgusting. They feign concern, and interest in children, but their lack of knowledge in educational issues and failure to even attempt to learn about them is beyond disappointing.

Anonymous said...

The BOE has never had a survey with a satisfaction question. In fact, they have gone out of their way to avoid having satisfaction questions. So how on earth can Turek proclaim that the vast majority of the district is happy with the curriculum changes? Also, many people did not go to the MAP presentation because they know how to interpret MAP data.

People have given up going to meetings because when they do go their voices are not heard. Parents had to wait 2 hours last night for public comments. When they did get up they were reminded rudely about the 3 minute rule. There was no follow up to the troubling questions and concerns raised during public comments. It was a mere after thought to an already concluded discussion. So when parents are treated like this why on earth would they continue to show up?

I find it interesting that Ms. Benaitis did not present the MAP data last night. Dr. Russell did.

jay_wick said...

Part 1 of 2 part response to recent meeting

I did not find the reminder about "three minutes" for each person's public comment to be particularly rude, heck I probably rambled for an extra minute or two to mention my points about how the district is spending more with "accelerated math for all" and getting less benefit than with prior arrangements.

I frankly don't mind hearing the BOE members talk about issues before "public comment" either -- that  does give parents / community members an opportunity to at least hear what sorts of things drive the thinking the BOE...

That said I cannot imagine that anyone on the BOE gets feedback from parent's or community members that suggests things are "fine". I do not recall any of the BOE really trying to make such an argument so much as trying to "spin" reports from staff & consultants into a "positive" when the data are far less conclusive.
It would shock the heck out of me if any well informed person could even comment on what actual direction the district is moving in -- while there is no longer the kind of wholesale physical shifting of kids between classrooms for grouping in distinctly different levels of math at the elementary school (which I know many parents and teachers appreciated as it left a smaller number of kids for the teacher to  deliver more one-one-one attention  to kids who needed it....) there is still "doubly accelerated math" with an even less well defined selection process than prior efforts... Even the maligned / missed "social justice" efforts are poorly understood -- does anyone really beleive any kind of systemic discrimination is happening by our kids in K-8? Are there kids in the elementary schools looking to support or impede  marriage equality, racial harmony, or income disparities?  WTF?!? Who is driving these things and why? Have some of our district staff really been so unsupervised that they are acting on their own whims?

Parents across the whole range of income / student ability are starting to ask questions about what is really underpinning decisions in this district. The district has not been forthcoming about what drives the tutoting of students (or how long a day is appropraite for kids / staff to toil away where their peers are released...) nor has their been enough data about what motivate changes. Similarly I doubt that there are just a tiny minority of parents / community memeners that would be capable of an analysis of the grades like Mr Henegan attempted. It is pretty clear that the data  shows a whole lot more "C" grades for the middle school advanced math compared to more advanced social studies -- it suggests some kind of non-uniformity. Are the social studies teachers'  standards not as rigid as those of the math teachers'? Are one set of classes providing more support to weaker students? Is their something about our student population that biases against high performance in math? Without data there could be endless speculation and with inadequate direction from the BOE there is unlikely to be any effort to either find more data about why this disparities exist or make a decisosn to address them. Part of me things maybe these differnces are not a big deal -- I suspect but there are lots more families in town where casual talk at home might involve poltics or similar "social studies" than more quantitative discussions. OTOH I also know that the lack of success that our nation has in STEM is a big deal and the roots of that problems are embedded in not just schools but culture -- if we truly want to address things like this we need BOE members that put some thought into these things NOT DISMISS THOSE THAT RAISE THESE ISSUES.

jay_wick said...

Part 2 of  3

I still get a bad feeling that too many BOE members are just utterly disconnected from the real issues in the classroomsand the district overall.  I have said before and I will say again, these problems are PERVASIVE across all ability groups. Both my kids are active in sports and  have a wide range of kids on their teams. Where once the other parents with kids in our district schools felt like our kids where getting a higher quality education than kids in neighboring districts those feeling have now been replaced with dissatisfaction. Neighboring districts are much more coherent in addressing Common Core, largely far ahead of us in implementing technology for more kids, more honest is informing parents about changes in testing and overall just more clearly trying to coherently move forward with the increasingly complex challenges facing schools.

 What the heck has happened?  Has the BOE left the district on "autopilot" with an adminstration that is completely unsupervised? Where is the sense of responsiblilty to ensure that things are just being run "on the cheap" but in the best intersts of all the community? Whether it  is the physical system / facilities or the curricular offerings or the foundational philosphosies these things cannot be dumped in the lap of a third party contractor without some very clearly defined points of accountbility. Rehiring past employees that allowed previous screw-ups in facilite or hiring another consultant from far away won"5 fix anything IF THE BOE DOES NIT STEP UP AND CLEARLY ARTICULATE what is expects from these people. Frankly the facilites thing is pretty easy for me articulate but they are not hiring a person with the skills or knowledge to deliver a detailed professional level of supervision. How can I say this? Simple, this is the same under-qualified person that worked hand-inland with the firm that was SUPPOSED to provide the coordinated "energy concervation" upgrades to HMS. Instead that firm very likely MADE THE PROBLEM WORSE and still the district goes back to the person with no specialized training. / degree / certification. 

It is this same pattern of going back to "trough where you last got sick" that I see in the hiring of a consultant from four states away instead of really first ARTICULATING what kind of PHILOSPHY the district has toward ensuring that the needs of children are met AND THEN seeking the most cost effective means of getting staff up to speed in delivering that. There is no evidence that Dr, Friedman was hiried through anything other than a "closed " process and no justification of why she is best suited to help the district. Make no mistake, she seems not to have personally done anything improper but the BOE has given no indication of what they expect to be delivered by her nor what strategies she was brought in to support. This is wasteful spending not necessarily in scale but in lack of clarity. It is like spending money on new shoes that might not go with a suit in your closet or of size / style that is an inappropriate for one's climate. If she turns out a report that suggest "sandals" but the real needs of the district's students and staff are "winter boots" that is not money wisely spent... Dr. Moon reminded the BOE that our district is very rare to be able to have so many aides and volunteers to help in some classrooms but I got no sense that she understands that these aides are employed as an alternative to smaller class sizes (which are universally supported as superior in all truly honest studies) nor that  the affluence as our community is tempered by often vocal critics of "high property taxes" which truly are crushing to those on fixed incomes.

jay_wick said...

Part 3 of 4

Of course maybe it is too much to expect that there are experts in dealing with the unique challenges of not just our affluent district but one, as pointed out by the Superintendent Search Firms, that is stuck in Illnois with its dirty politics and fatally broken pension system -- the hasty limits that the legislature has enacted in an effort to make the pension system less underfunded severely impacts higher income adminstrators. This creates a major disincentive for those from other states and also  will result in a greatly accelerated amount of admisntestive turnover throughout Illinois. This news came as a surprise to the BOE and they hastily went to to executive sessions (which may not have even been technically permissible ....) to hash out a quick decision on who to award the contract for the search, { I am not an expert on these matters but I beleive the intent of the Illniis Open Meeting Act is to have the elected body hash out the pros & cons of such contracts IN PUBLIC, While I personally did not mind that this may have been a technical violation as I don't really care to run to States Attorney over this nor Losa Madigan, I think it is telling that the a majority if the BOE would prefer not to have these discussions in public. What do they care if they say "firm A dis nit give me the warm fuzzie that firm B did, firm C's lead guy  was too old". This is not technically a personnel discussion where the employee has legal rights to privacy. This was a discussion of the qualifications of the firms / best fit for the district. I think they may have broke the law but more importantly they refused to act in the most transparent manner...}.This shows the lack of forethought and consideration of the consquences of their own lack of understanding.


.

jay_wick said...

Part 4

I wonder how little forethought the BOE really gives to the financial helath of the district given the overall state of finances? In the eyes of some a district like ours is a target to drain resources from in "pension reform" enancted by Chicago biased politicians. The thing too is that as I talk to more and more of my neighbors that make their living in the financial markets there is a PERVASIVE feeling that shifts away from "little guy" firms is going to hurt not just the "bottom line" of peope that are accustomed to high incomes but also the mobility of those in the industry. Even if you have STEM skills of a  "rocket scientist" level quantitative understanding of the relationships between things like aggregate volatility and the movement of options prices unless you have enough staff and capital to invest in the "arms race" of ever faster algorithmic  trading to say nothing of the often capricious rules regulators apply in biased ways, you might find yourself "retired early" becuase of things outside your control. WHEN this happens families that once lavishly supported local schools may find themselves thinking very much like older retirees that also live on a "fixed income". Such a shift could have severe negative consequences for schools...

I doubt that any of the BOE members have given any thought to what sort of "strategic planning"  the district should engage in to deal the likelihood of such a shift. While there is not yet any obvious "canary in the coal mine" with many new homes still under construction at promisingly high prices  one need not look back in time more than a few years to remember the rapid downward spiral in home values. Another such shock could come very quickly and the subsequaent belt tightening that would result would very likely see pressure for staff reductions in our schools when many people already beleive that class sizes are too large to implement the range of differntion that is prefered among educational researchers.

I challenge all readers to DISCUSS THESE THINGS WITH ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS AS  OFTEN AS POSSIBLE. If they still "shrug" and let the BOE continue down its path of carelessness  then maybe there is no real hope of again putting the district back on path toward truly delivering the best education for the most children, however I do beleive that such discussions will help more people understand the pressing nature of problems. These problems can be addressed "top down" by a BOE that continues to press for real answers instead of allowing "experts" to dance around the core issues by tossing around educatiionalese & buzzwords. If parents and communty members need to arrive at BOE meetings in greater numbers to impress reluctant BOE members to take responsibility for the direction of the district  such a task is well suited to those that already know how to mobilize people..

jay_wick said...

Postscript --

I have to stop trying to type 16,000 word summaries on my iPhone...

I really am capable of better grammar but I wanted to get this stuff out there....

Anonymous said...

Jay-Wick-

Thank you for articulating many of my own thoughts. I appreciated the time you spent typing away!!

Anonymous said...

Jay,

Very well said. Unfortunately, the people who most need to listen to what you have to say, (a handful of people on our BOE) probably can not comprehend what you just said! It is probably above the comprehension level of 2 of them, for sure.

All of your points were spot on. Let's see if the administration and board takes your very valuable advice.

Elementary School Dad