"Philosophical Difference" or Reckless Disregard of Legitimate Concerns by Hinsdale Central High School's Math Department?

As we near the end of the first half of the 2013-2014 school year, we wanted to spotlight what we believe is one of the most serious concerns we have identified this year -- the disconnect between what the D181 administration believes is the correct course to take with the Math Curriculum -- the plan to accelerate all students by one grade level so that all students will complete Algebra before they begin high school -- and the position taken at D86 by the Hinsdale Central High School math department -- that not all students should be accelerated in such a manner.  Dr.  Schuster, who by her own admission at the last board meeting, has not spoken to the math department chairman, claims that the two districts simply have a "philosophical difference."  We don't care what she calls it, the point is that D181 feeds into D86 and the two districts should be on the same page.   They clearly are not and as Concerned Parents we find this completely unacceptable.  Not only should both districts' curriculum departments be collaborating, but the expertise of the math department chair at Hinsdale Central should be deferred to, rather than the D181 administrators who do not have math backgrounds and are certainly not experts in math, let alone curriculum.

We plan to follow very closely what the D181 Board of Education does in 2014, now that it has learned about the difference of opinion between the 2 districts.  Because we have received many comments on the math issue, we have decided to post them below so that they are easy to find and update in the coming months.  One of them references an article that was provided to a parent by the Hinsdale Central Math Department Chair.  We encourage all of you to read it and circulate it to other D181 parents.

The link to the article is:  http://www.nctm.org/about/content.aspx?id=40258. (The text is also included below in one of the comments submitted by a community member.)

The article is called "Algebra:  Not 'If' but 'When'." It was written on December 3, 2013 by Linda M. Gojak who is the President of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

We will, as appropriate, update this post -- including adding any new comments that are submitted on the math issue -- and alert our readers to any new developments by the BOE or the D181 administration. Let's hope the D181 BOE does not sit idly by and allow the administration to continue pushing all our students, including those who struggled in the past and those who have now become struggling learners, down this reckless path of math acceleration for all.  Only those students who are truly mastering accelerated math concepts should be allowed to continue.  And the definition of what "mastery" really requires should be determined in collaboration with the high school math department chairman.  Last year, Dr. Schuster presented to the BOE data at the end of each quarter on how the 8th grade math students were doing in the Algebra course.  The data was not promising and it certainly called into question whether all students were mastering the material, despite their being allowed to continue in the class.  Interestingly, this year, she has not made any such presentations to the BOE.  One can only wonder why not.....

COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY OUR READERS ON THE MATH ISSUE:

Machiavelli Would Be Proud: D181 BOE Majority and Administration Continue Deception of District Status to Community

Portrait of Niccolò Machiavelli by Santi di Tito

Portrait of Niccolò Machiavelli by Santi di Tito

As we pause for reflection in the aftermath of Monday’s BOE meeting that ran in excess of 4 hours, we are reminded of the Prince, Machiavelli, who would be elated at the apparent wistful joy of the majority of Board Members, Dr. Schuster and her administrative team, who by all accounts, have managed to deceive the public on the true status of the district on a grand scale.  (Click to open link to Podcast.) Their ability to spin a web of half-truths and deception would make Machiavelli blush in that he is historically known for being a master of deception himself. Taken from Webster’s:

Machiavellian |ˌmakēəˈvelēən; ˌmäk-|
adjective
1 cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, esp. in politics or in advancing one's career.
2 of or relating to Niccolò Machiavelli.
noun

Yahoo Answers provides this description:

Someone described as "Machiavellian" uses manipulation and deceit to achieve his own gains. If a singer, for example, befriended another singer with the express intention of replacing him in his band, that would be Machiavellian behavior. Or: Politician A has a piece of legislation that needs support. He meets with Politician B and tells him, "If you vote for my bill, I give you my word I'll vote in favor of your next bill." So Politician B votes in favor of Politician A's bill, but then votes against Politician B's next bill. Basically, he's lying to further his own interests at the expense of others' interests.

It is through these definitions we bloggers see direct parallels to the practices of the administration and BOE majority who appear to be incapable or unwilling to hear the public outcries of concern and instead vote for their own self-interest. On top of this, you throw in Schuster’s skill as a spinmaster, which was on display Monday night even with the downward trending of ISAT and MAP scores glaring off the screen on full display for everyone to see. As parents spoke up at the meeting, their voices were squelched by the recurring mantra of: “You have to follow the learner” as it relates to the obvious overall decline in test scores across the district and how teachers will remedy this problem. As we have pointed out, numbers don’t lie and the test results are very telling as to the state of education currently in D181. Which leads us to several questions:

1.     Why is it that week after week we typically observe mainly two BOE members, Garg and Heneghan, consistently asking the most questions? How can the remaining board members sit back silently and not be engaged in the important discussions that take place, particularly when the education of our children is radically being affected? For example, with slide after slide of test results, there was a clear indication that students in the at-grade level quintiles were not demonstrating the need for accelerated programming, yet Schuster and her administrators indicated otherwise. Why do such comments go unchallenged? If it were not for the truth- seekers, Garg and Heneghan, there would be no challenge at all to the countless misstatements made during a board meeting.

2.     We have checked the teacher certification credentials needed to become a “Differentiation Specialist” and no specific credentials are required. None. This means a Teacher’s Aide or other paraprofessional could be classified as a Differentiation Specialist. Schuster is now on record of saying she will seek to add additional Differentiation Specialists at the December 9 meeting, believing the addition will help to balance teaching within the largest schools. If there is no formal education, certification, or license required to be a Differentiation Specialist, what is this adding to our children’s’ education?

3.     Where were the concrete strategies the district will use to improve student performance? We heard the double talk of generalities by Kevin Russell and Dawn Benaitis, but nothing concrete. Teacher collaboration is simply not enough to recover the losses in ISAT and MAP scores. Schuster and her administrators are fortunate in that many district parents have sought out the assistance of tutors to keep up with the now accelerated math curriculum, which, by the way, is not required for the Common Core Standards.

4.     It was discovered that The Lane School will now begin tutoring by paid teachers before and after school in order to remediate the skills 4^th-grade students have not mastered. After testing was completed last week, it was determined students had not been taught the basic skills of the 4^th-grade math curriculum, especially multiplication. First, why was this just communicated as recently as Monday, the same day as the BOE meeting to parents? And why is this type of testing and teacher tutoring seemingly only taking place at one school? Are there not other children who would benefit from such tutoring? The ISAT and MAP results sure indicate as such. We must ask ourselves, is it our goal as parents to accelerate our children to average because that is the new standard the administration has set for the accelerated math program?

5.     Board Member Gary Clarin gave his rendition on the events that took place surrounding the mishandled funds related to Donoroo donations. Given his explanation and his findings that clears everyone involved, it appears as though the issue is over and done with in the eyes of Schuster and the board. This, despite the fact, that employees of CHMS stepped forward and provided their description of the Donoroo funds in question to a local newspaper reporter, who then wrote up the complete story.  The board saw to it to squelch the story and sweep it under the rug, which is where it will remain as the Donoroo account was closed.

Yes, indeed.  We have elected board members who are clearly not engaged in facts, nor are they inquisitive enough to question the practices of our highly paid superintendent or her administrative foot soldiers. The days and weeks of the school year roll on; our children are subjects in a massive unfounded experiment, that being “Learning for All.” And now we are being asked to “Follow the Learner” all the while half-truths and distortions abound.

Were he alive today, Machiavelli would have met his match.

How Far We Have Fallen: D181 On Downward Slide as Reality of ISAT Results and Learning for All Shock Community

Our last post published the Illinois State Report Card rankings of all 9 D181 schools as reported by the Chicago SunTimes.  These rankings are based upon the overall performance of schools on the Illinois State Achievement Test (ISAT) that our students took last Spring.  We expressed our disappointment in the rankings, especially since the majority of our schools dropped in the rankings and we are still well behind the ranking of Butler, our neighboring district in Oak Brook and one of the districts that feeds into Hinsdale Central High School.

While we expressed concern, on Friday, Dr. Schuster chose to celebrate the results in the letter she sent to D181 Families and Staff.  Her letter lacked transparency, failed to report any actual data, and spun the harsh reality of the rankings into a celebration dance that we find downright shocking and offensive to our sensibilities. 

Rather than address or even acknowledge the drop in rankings of most of our schools, she spun the bad news as follows:

"D181 Schools Shine in 2013 ISAT Data Rankings
The 2013 Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) results are in, and We are currently ranked #7 for all elementary school districts in the state based on the 2013 ISAT results. When compared to elementary school districts of 2,000 students or more, our ISAT results are the highest in the state! As you may have seen in our Chicago media, we did very well in the various methods of rankings that compare schools’ ISAT data. In the Chicago Sun-Times, six of our seven elementary schools were listed in the top 50 out of more than 3,000 ranked schools, and both CHMS and HMS were listed in the top 50 for middle schools. In the Chicago Tribune listing, three of our schools were listed in the top 50 (elementary and middle school combined). Additionally, the Chicago Tribunereported that Walker School was among the top ten schools in the state with the highest percentage of students who earned the highest scores in reading, math or science on the ISAT."...

ISAT Data Shows Areas to Celebrate, Improve
As our team of educators continues to review data from the 2013 ISAT, we will find many strengths and many reasons to celebrate. Additionally, we know there will be areas needing improvement. With the new cut scores and increased rigor due to the inclusion of 20% Common Core-based questions, all schools in Illinois anticipated a more challenging assessment. We welcomed that challenge, and we look forward to the opportunity to better identify those areas for improvement." (11/1/13 Letter to Parents and Staff from Dr. Renee Schuster.)


We highlighted in red the 7 times in two short paragraphs that Dr. Schuster tried to paint a picture of how well our students did when compared to other districts.  We also highlighted in blue the 2 times that Dr. Schuster briefly notes that there may be areas for improvement that her administration will find as they analyze the data.  


After reading this letter, one parent sent an email to Dr. Schuster calling her out for the representations she made in her letter.  The parent's letter was then submitted as a comment to this blog. The parent said:

"I am horrified that you are celebrating these results. This administration has a habit of sugar coating hard truths and putting a spin on them. Since you refuse to tell the truth, I will."

We couldn't have said it better ourselves.  We whole-heartedly agree with this parent's reaction and hope you do too, after we expose the hard truth that Dr. Schuster has refused to acknowledge or address.

The reality is that last Spring's ISAT data and our school's rankings show that D181 is on a downward slide.  There is no reason to celebrate at this time, and what needs to happen is an open, transparent, candid and harsh discussion led by our elected representatives -- the Board of Education -- to immediately identify and address exactly what needs to happen STARTING NOW to improve the performance of all of our students in D181.

Here are the facts that show just how far D181 schools have fallen:  

D181 has fallen from a district that used to have all SEVEN elementary schools ranked in the TOP 25 schools in the state, to a district that has only three in the top 25.

As parents who have had children in D181 in a span of over 15 years, we recalled that our schools USED to truly be BEACONS of EXCELLENCE.  That beacon shown brightest less than 10 years ago -- in 2004.  The title of an article in the December 15, 2004 SunTimes read as follows:

"The Donoroo Debacle" -- Has The Public Been Told the Full Story? Will the Board Really "Get to the Bottom of It?"

Last week, we received an anonymous comment publishing a letter that had gone out to all CHMS staff on October 17.  The comment stated:

The following email went out to the staff at CHMS yesterday.  Ms Donohue brought the financial misconduct to the attention of Dr S in early summer.  Dr S has chosen to sweep this under the D181 rug.  Why? 


On behalf of my family, I would like to thank the CHMS community for their enthusiastic support of Donoroo over the past six years. The event has raised over $30,000.00 and has become part of the fabric of CHMS.

It is with a heavy heart that I tell you that Donoroo has come to an end. This summer, I became aware of the fact that some of the charities that were advertised as beneficiaries of Donoroo over the past three years had never been paid. I notified CHMS and district administration of the irregularities in the Donoroo account and that the event would not be held again.

I can tell you that after a long summer of fact-finding and heartache , all charities have finally received their donations from Donoroo.  

I cannot thank you all enough for your support of my family over the years.

Sincerely,
Kathy
-- 
Kathy Donohue, RN
School Nurse 
Clarendon Hills Middle School
630 887 4260 extension 1826


Subsequently in a letter we published as a free standing post, a Concerned Anonymous Teacher stated:

Please, bloggers, look into the CHMS Donoroo debacle. What started out as a wonderful charitable event (the first three years) ended up a slush fund for the CHMS music department and was condoned by the principal. This fund was mismanaged and misused. I hope parents will demand an explanation into what happened and learn the truth about what has happened over the past three years.

On Friday, the Doings' Online Edition published an article on the questions of possible financial impropriety that arose out of what community members are now calling the "Donoroo Debacle." The following is the link to the Doings' article:

http://clarendonhills.suntimes.com/news/schools/donoroo-CHD-10252013:article

According to the article, the Donoroo fundraisers "raised more than $30,000....over its six year run" and the "funds raised through ticket sales were designated for four charities: Lurie Children's Hospital; the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation; Engineers Without Borders; and the CHMS Gives Back Fund, which provides funds for students in need."

We read this article with dismay because it is the first time that any D181 administrator has publicly acknowledged issues -- which they are calling "honest mistakes" --  occurred in the distribution of the funds raised by the Donoroo fundraisers. As Concerned Parents, we agree with the retired CHMS teacher who was interviewed for the news story and as reported by the Doings "wasn't buying the explanation" given by the D181 staff interviewed about the situation. Neither do we. Why?  Because there are still many questions that should be answered for the public.

As reported in the Doings' article, "Board President Marty Turek said Oct. 24 that he had just been made aware of the Donoroo happenings.  He promised the board would look into it and "get to the bottom of it."  We hope he means it and if so, the following are the questions that we, as Concerned Parents, want answered.  And the questions should be asked during a full, independent investigation that is NOT conducted by Dr. Schuster, any D181 staff member or the Board of Education.  Rather an investigation should be conducted by an external party, such as the Regional Office of Education or perhaps by the State's Attorney's Office.

In our opinion, the Investigation should determine:

Brave, Anonymous Teacher Raises Concerns

Today we received the comment below from a brave "Anonymous Concerned Teacher." We consider the issues raised of such serious importance that we are publishing it as a free-standing post, because we want to make sure that all of our readers see it.  Following the Anonymous Teacher's Comment is the response we published. As we point out, the teacher is correct when he/she states that "only the parents can stop the madness." It is time more parents contact the Board of Education with their concerns. Concerned parents successfully convinced the Board of Education to vote NO to "Late Start Days." Concerned parents successfully convinced the Board of Education to vote NO on the "Math Pilots." 

Concerned parents should come forward once again and convince the Board of Education to address not only the Curriculum Concerns, but also the newly identified "Donoroo" fundraising debacle first brought to our attention in a comment posted on the 10/16/13 Post on "The Experimentation on our Children Must Stop."  

As we state in our response comment," "It is time the Board Members realize that they need to ask Dr. Schuster and her administrators some tough questions and get answers, not spin.

ANONYMOUS TEACHER'S COMMENT

Dear 181 Blog,

I am a teacher in our school district. I have never been so disheartened and dismayed at the morale of teachers and the state of education in District 181. What happened? We went from a fully high functioning district with a handful of higher level administrators to a district with a huge increase in the amount of administrators, with little experience in the area of their supposed expertise. These leaders want to take all that is good and change it to their vision. The students are ultimately the ones who will lose.

The "Learning for All" (aka Advanced Learning) directive is one of those ideas that appears good on paper and fails in reality. One of the goals of this directive is to eventually get rid of the bubbles of support educators--reading specialists, special education teachers, academic strategy teachers, gifted specialists etc. Right now, administration wants these teachers to "push in." We now have our most fragile and needy students trying to receive support in a classroom where other things are going on. How do we expect them to focus? Is it fair to have them working in the corner of the room? Eventually, the district wants to put all of those students in our classrooms and let the regular education teacher meet their needs. I was told that I need to "increase my capacity." I think I do a pretty good job meeting the needs in my classroom, but I am NOT a special education, reading, or gifted teacher. I do not have the specialized education that they do. And, for years, I have witnessed students growing under and with these "special" teachers and classes. I am outraged that a few administrators think that teachers should be able to handle EVERYTHING that the district is throwing at them and that we should buy in or "find another job." By everything I mean the following: implementing the new Common Core standards (which should be first and foremost), differentiate (for gifted, standard, and struggling students) all subjects and activities every day, form flexible grouping work for all subjects and classes, meet the social/emotional needs of students, view data on each student to set individual goals for each student (even if you have 90-180 students at the middle school), prepare students for testing, choose multi-leveled texts for students for every area of the curriculum (even if you have 90-180 at the middle school level), incorporate technology into our lesson plans (even if it's not available in all buildings), and increase rigor and develop relationships that are so important with our students. I was taught that humans have developmental stages and that you can't force an individual through these stages unless he/she is ready. So, are our students who aren't ready developmentally somehow behind? I think that would be like expecting all of our students to be ready to complete in the Olympics. We understand that some students can achieve this and we foster that, but we don't expect everyone to achieve this. That would be an unrealistic goal and humiliating to some students.

Please, bloggers, look into the CHMS Donoroo debacle. What started out as a wonderful charitable event (the first three years) ended up a slush fund for the CHMS music department and was condoned by the principal. This fund was mismanaged and misused. I hope parents will demand an explanation into what happened and learn the truth about what has happened over the past three years.

I would personally like to thank all the informed, supportive parents who have realized that "the Emperor has no clothes!" Teachers know that it is only the parents that can stop the madness in District 181. The teachers fear retribution, poor performance evaluations, and a possible loss of employment for speaking up.

Sincerely,

An anonymous concerned teacher

Is This Really Strategic Planning? The "Visioning" Workshop to be Held at the 10/7/13 Committee of the Whole Meeting is not a Fair or Focused Process.

The Board Docs for Monday's (10/7/13) Committee of the Whole Meeting have been posted.  The meeting will begin at 7 p.m. at Walker School.  The only topic for discussion is something called "Visioning and Long Range Planning." The tab for this agenda item explains:

"Ms. Barb Toney from the Illinois Association of School Boards will lead the Board of Educaiton, Administration, and representatives from the PTO, District 181 Foundation, Finance Committee, Technology Committee, SELAS Committee, Safety & Crisis Committee, HCHTA, and HESS in a visioning and long-range planning discussion. Members of the public are invited to observe and make comments before and after the workshop." (Note:  The spelling mistake found above is not ours, but that of the D181 administrators, who once again failed to spell check materials posted for the public.)

The 10/3/13 edition of The Hinsdalean described this agenda item as follows:

"Visioning workshop with round tables of staff, parents, residents and business leaders discussing with the board the past, present and future of the district." 

While we acknowledge that school boards typically participate in strategic planning, we question how effective or fair the upcoming "visioning" meeting will be.  Here are our concerns:

1.  The materials leave the mis-impression that this strategic planning meeting is the latest in a series of strategic plans started by the Schuster Administration after an 8 year lull. Slide 3 of the Board Docs' Power Point presentation (Click to open Power Point) is titled Strategic Planning History and lays out a timeline of "bubbles" of events.  The first bubble is dated February 25, 2002.  The next bubble is dated October 20, 2010.  While we acknowledge that the Schuster Administration has made radical and sweeping curriculum changes that began in October 2010, to leave the impression that the three Superintendents who served from 2002 to 2010 -- Dr. Curley, Dr. Tenbusch and Dr. Sabatino -- did NO strategic planning is disingenuous at best.  The reality is that those of us who have had children in D181 for many years recall that under past administrations, the Board of Education hired nationally recognized strategic planning facilitators, such as Doug Eadie, to lead the board in strategic planning sessions.  We hope that the current board asks for historical information on what procedurally and substantively took place in the area of Strategic Planning during those 8 years.

2.  Strategic planning is supposed to be what the Board of Education does. There are commonly accepted definitions of the term "strategic planning" and commonly accepted processes to follow. Going into any kind of long range "planning" meeting, the BOE should first give direction on the process.  Has the D181 board done this and do any of the board members really know what this process is supposed to be and how it should be structured? Moreover, what is the focus of this meeting? There doesn't appear to be any. The Hinsdalean must have been given additional information not posted on Board Docs for them to report that what will be discussed is the "past, present and future of the district."  This seems overly broad and open ended, so just how much can round table discussion groups accomplish if that is what they are tasked with?  Even if you conclude from the materials posted on Board Docs that the discussion will be more chatter about the Learning for All (formerly ALP) plan, then this should concern everyone because it lends itself to the possibility that the Administration is simply trying to get more "buy in" for the Learning for All Plan from the workshop participants.  If that is the case, then there is really nothing "strategic" that requires public input.  So what exactly is the goal of these round table discussions?  Is it to set long term strategic goals for the district, and if so, in what specific areas?  Class Size, facilities maintenance, all day kindergarten, financial health of the district, foreign language expansion?  Or is the goal simply to rubber stamp the ALP/Learning for All Plans?  It seems the first thing the BOE and Administration need to do is have a discussion amongst themselves about what they are "strategically" planning for and then seek input from participants -- including all parents, teachers and taxpayers in the community. 

3.  How were the individuals -- PTO representatives, 181 Foundation members, other "committee members," teachers and support staff  -- selected to participate in this round table discussion? If the PTO representatives are the "parents" referred to in The Hinsdalean, did the PTO representatives meet with their PTO membership in advance of Monday's meeting to discuss what issues their memberships want them to bring to the table for discussion?  If not, then the PTO members attending the strategic planning meeting can only represent their own individual opinions and ideas, and not those of their broader school populations.  Similarly, whose interests are the other members representing?  Those of their "group" or their own individual views? Again, unless they met with their groups prior to Monday's meeting to determine the "group's" ideas/opinions, they can only express their individual opinions.  And if any of the "parents" participating in the round table discussion are only representing their own individual views, then why didn't the administration/BOE conduct a fair and random selection process open to everyone?

More Transparency and Respect towards community members needed from the Board of Education

Let's talk about the current D181 Board of Education.

1.  Board Member responsibilities:  We would suggest that all board members take the time to read and understand their powers and duties as defined in Board Policies 2:010, 2:020, 2:080 and 2:110.  In the past there has been a lot of criticism by the Administration that certain board members are over-reaching.  The reality is, however, that there are 16 defined duties in Board Policy 2:020 alone, all of which require oversight and action by the board.

2.  The new board members and officers:  A new board convened on May 6, 2013.  New members Jill Vorobiev, Mridu Garg and Gary Clarin joined the two year veterans, Michael Nelson, Brendan Heneghan, Marty Turek and Glenn Yaeger.  Immediately following the swearing in of new members, a reorganization meeting was held and board officers were elected for a one year term.  Turek was elected to replace Nelson as president, Vorobiev replaced Yaeger as vice-president, and Garg replaced out-going Sarah Lewensohn as secretary.  What was striking about this reorganization, was that it was obvious that the elections had been pre-arranged and most of the board members knew who was going to be elected for president and vice-president.