Weekly "D181 Family E-Newsletter" Silent on Russell's Resignation

We guess the D181 Administration has chosen to keep mum to the parents about Dr. Russell's resignation, ignoring it entirely in the weekly "D181 Family E-newsletter"sent out moments ago to the D181 parents.  The newsletter is copied in its entirety below.  We fail to understand why no mention is made of his resignation in the one document that ALL parents who have emails receive.  Does the D181 Administration really believe it is meeting its obligation to be informative and transparent simply by posting an announcement of Dr. Russell's resignation on the "news" portion of the D181 website but not mentioning it in the correspondence it sends directly to all parents?

Other items of interest mentioned in the newsletter include the announcement that Dr. Moon's follow-up report will be available on Board Docs tomorrow and that it is also accessible on the D181 website under the Learning tab.  So far, however, it has not been posted on the website, and if it is it is buried.  We are eagerly waiting to read the report and see how, if at all, Dr. Moon addresses the parent concerns voiced during the last Board meeting, in particular on the math acceleration model and how it is hurting some students. Also, will the report include a list of which classrooms she visited and how long she spent in each classroom, as requested by one parent during public comment?

Finally, the newsletter points out that the Summer Work schedule will be on the board meeting agenda. Is this a JOKE?  How embarrassing that the Administration would even put a discussion of this item on the agenda in light of the fact that the "proposal" as previously drafted had the central administrative staff working only 4 day work weeks during the month of July.  That will be the first month the new superintendent will be on the job and perhaps other administrators as well -- such as the replacement for Dr. Russell. We would certainly hope that all administrators will work ON SITE five days a week the first month the new educational leader is in the district. It is mind boggling that the Administration has not tabled this agenda item permanently!

Once Board Docs for Monday's meeting is available to us and the rest of the D181 community, in advance of the meeting, we will review the full agenda and documentation and publish a post addressing Dr. Moon's report and any other items of interest.

Copy of 3/7/14 D181 Family E-Newsletter emailed to parents this afternoon:

"Your District 181 Family E-Newsletter

• Daylight Saving Time on Sunday: Spring Ahead!
• Superintendent Learning Committee: Applications Welcomed
• ISAT Testing Begins Next Week; Preparing for PARCC
• Board Meeting Preview (7:30 p.m. Start Time); Feb. 24 Summary Posted; Dr. Moon Report
• Health News: Measles in McDonough County
• Upcoming D181 Events: Joint Orchestra Concert, CHMS Musical, Common Core Science Parent Presentation
• News from the Community: Event Reminders
• News from SELAS: Taking the Stress Out of Tests

Daylight Saving Time on Sunday: Spring Ahead!
This is a friendly notice that clocks should “spring ahead” on Sunday for Daylight Saving Time.

Superintendent Learning Committee: Applications Welcomed
We are welcoming applicants for the new Superintendent’s Learning Committee being formed for the purpose of providing input on major curriculum, assessment, instruction, and student services practices and policies. The application for committee membership is attached here and is also available in hard copy at the District Administration Center and posted on our District website: www.d181.org > Resources > Committees > Learning. Applications are due no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 21. Applicants will be contacted to confirm receipt of application and application status no later than March 28. Please encourage fellow parents and community members to consider applying!

ISAT Testing Begins Next Week; Preparing for PARCC
Our students in Grades 3-8 will take the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) between March 10 and March 21. This is the last year that the ISAT will be administered. Illinois is among several states working together as the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) to create new assessments specifically aligned with the Common Core State Standards. Starting next school year, the PARCC assessment will replace the ISAT. We encourage all families to visit our website to learn more about this important change: www.d181.org > Learning > Assessment.

Board Meeting Preview (7:30 p.m. Start Time); Feb. 24 Summary Posted; Dr. Moon Follow-Up Report
The Board Summary from the meeting on February 24 is available on our website: www.d181.org > Board > Meetings. The next Board Business meeting is on Monday, March 10 at Elm School. The meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. to allow for an extended closed session, which will begin at 5:30 p.m. Among other items, the tentative meeting agenda includes an update from the Math Committee, a discussion on the summer work schedule, and a report on a data cooperative being developed with District 86 and our fellow feeder districts. Community members can visit BoardDocs online beginning at 12:01 a.m. Saturday to access the reports on each of these agenda items. Additionally available on BoardDocs will be the Follow-Up Report from Dr. Tonya Moon following her progress check conducted last month. We will additionally post Dr. Moon’s report and the resources we provided to her in the Learning section of our website.

Health News: Measles in McDonough County
The Illinois Department of Public Health has advised schools of two cases of measles in McDonough County, Illinois. Early symptoms of measles include a mild to moderate fever, cough, conjunctivitis, and coryza (inflammation of the nasal membranes causing a stuffy or runny nose). Fever usually spikes later and can be as high as 105 degrees (F). A red, maculopapular rash typically starts at the hairline, and spreads rapidly down the body. Koplik’s spots or tiny blue/white spots on the bright red background of mucosa in the mouth may be present. If you child exhibits any of these symptoms, contact your child’s health care provider. Click here for the Illinois Department of Public Health online fact sheet regarding measles.

Upcoming D181 Events

• Thursday, March 13: Middle School Joint Orchestra Concert at HMS (7:00 p.m.)
• Wednesday, March 19: Common Core Science parent presentation at Elm School (6:30 – 8:30 p.m.) This session will include an overview of the Next Generation Science Standards and their impact on teaching and learning in District 181. Representatives from Fermilab will present information about how inquiry-based science practices are reflected in the standards and careers of the future. All community members are invited to attend; pre-registration is not required.
• March 19-March 22: CHMS presents the musical “Once On This Island” at CHMS; tickets go on sale starting Monday.

News from the Community: Event Reminders

• Wednesday, March 12: The Hinsdale Central H.S. PTO Parent Network is hosting an event in the Hinsdale Central Community Room: “Diet & Nutrition: How to Feed Your Kids Right to Improve Performance, Behavior, and Prevent Future Disease” (7:00 p.m.) featuring Lara Field.
• March 13-15: Hinsdale Central H.S. presents “Beauty & the Beast.” Tickets can be ordered by calling the Hinsdale Central Box Office at 630-570-8165.

News from SELAS: Taking the Stress Out of Tests
It’s March, and even if spring doesn’t come, the ISATs and other tests will. For some of us, test taking is a healthy challenge, but for others it provokes anxiety that can disrupt our ability to be productive and content. Performance anxiety plagues even the most prepared of us, claims Sian Beilock, author of the book Choke (2010). Worrying about a test can detract from the “cognitive horsepower” needed to focus and access the memory during a test. Parents and students are discouraged from putting too many stakes on the importance of a test, as Beilock explains in her blog. There are many strategies that can help us, adults and children alike, feel calmer. Beilock and others suggest meditation and mindfulness as valuable approaches. If you notice that your child is anxious, consider enlisting one or several of the following approaches:

• Breath awareness exercise with Dr. Daniel Siegel
• Guided meditation and relaxation for children
• Physical activity and exercise
• Enough sleep and unscheduled time
• A vision of the brain as a muscle that grows stronger with practice
• A focus on good work, but not perfection

A number of teachers in District 181 have introduced students to breathing exercises and meditation and have been encouraged by the positive responses. Give it a try at home with your children; your involvement and example can be a powerful influence, and you are likely to benefit from the calm, as well. Sometimes situations and conditions cause more stress than these strategies can alleviate. We experience stress when we perceive a situation as threatening, too difficult, or painful and we do not have the resources to cope. Parents must be aware of their children’s unique responses to stress, watch for signs that it is having adverse effects, and seek support if necessary. The key to stress reduction is in learning what works for us individually.  Now that’s how to pass the stress test!


Wishing your family a safe and happy weekend!

Bridget McGuiggan, APR
Director of Communications
Community Consolidated School District 181
bmcguiggan@d181.org
630.861.4924"

Breaking News! Russell Resigns.

Moments ago, we received confirmation that Dr. Kevin Russell has resigned to become the Superintendent of Chicago Ridge School District 127 1/2  effective July 1, 2014.  In a comment submitted to us, an anonymous teacher copied the email he sent out to all D181 staff last night and asked that we run it as a free standing post.  Since this is significant news, we are complying with his/her request.

We will be publishing a post in the near future on the implications of this announcement. Until then, we invite our readers to sound off on this news.

Email from Dr. Russell:

From: Russell, Kevin <krussell@d181.org>
Date: Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:13 PM
Subject: Fwd: Kevin Russell
To: ___________@d181.org
Dear Staff,
 
This evening, the Board of Education of Chicago Ridge School District 127½ approved my hiring as Superintendent, effective July 1, 2014. I will be filling the position of Superintendent Dr. Joyce Kleinaitis, who is retiring at the end of this school year.
 
This is an exciting opportunity for me and for my family, but it will be hard to leave District 181. I have truly enjoyed working with our incredible staff in my seven years here. We are in the midst of incredible work that I know will continue to further strengthen the outstanding education we provide thanks to you, the amazing professionals dedicated to our students’ success.
 
I will be working hard with the Department of Learning to continue supporting our schools as we prepare for the months ahead.
Warmly,

Kevin
Dr. Kevin B. Russell
Assistant Superintendent of Learning
CCSD 181

"Many people think you (curriculum department) are delivering a great product.” Marty Turek, Board President of School District 181

Toward the end of the February 24, 2014 Board Meeting, school board president, Marty Turek, made the following statement after Kevin Russell, Co-Assistant Superintendent of Learning, shared the winter MAP results: "There are 4,000 kids in here. You can surmise there are over 4,000 parents, so it seems to me 40 showed up. It seems to me that a lot of people were pretty happy with it if they did not feel a need to come to get this explained. I think it is a testament that many people think you are delivering a great product, not perfect, but the majority are happy with the services you are giving." (Time stamp 3:34:00 of podcast)

We bloggers believe this an important statement for our readers and parents in the district to understand. The board, or at least the board president, is looking at the number of parents who are showing up to board meetings as a reflection of parents' satisfaction with the services that are being provided to our students.  We cannot blame any of the board members for taking this position, because they can only act on what they are told either by the district administration or the district parents.  We have more than 134,000 hits on this blog as of this posting.  We believe there is more dissatisfaction in the parent community than what the board is hearing, but that does not mean anything if the only voices the board hears are the same handful of parents who do consistently speak up at board meetings.  The board cannot react to anonymous postings on this blog. They must operate from the information that is shared with them directly. 

So, is Marty Turek correct?  Are there only 40 parents who are concerned about the direction the district is taking?  Are there only 40 parents who are not happy with the average to negative growth on the MAP test results their children are getting? Are there only 40 parents who are unhappy with the math program and the need for over 100 4th graders to receive tutoring on 4th-grade math skills?  Are there only 40 parents who are not satisfied with what their children are learning with the new reading and writing curriculums? Are there only 40 parents who are not satisfied with having to provide tutoring at their own expense instead of student needs being met in the classroom? Are there only 40 parents who are unhappy about the heterogeneous one-size-fits-all differentiated driven classrooms instead of targeted instructional services? We could continue, but we’re sure you get where we are going with this line of questioning.  

We have tried to provide a forum on this blog for dialog among parents and to get out the facts about what we see as issues in this district that we believe are having a negative effect on our children and the overall success of our district. Mr. Turek has shared his truth with the public and has now stated what we believe is truly the board's position.  If very few parents are attending or speaking out during board meetings, then there is nothing the board can do but assume the majority of parents are happy with the services their children are receiving. 

We informed our readers on our February 24 posting that they should not miss that evening’s board meeting because some important information was being shared: Dr. Moon's comments to the board and the MAP test winter results.  We know many of you are listening to the podcast or the live streaming audio of the meetings, but this is not making a difference. Either parents need to email or attend the board meetings and express their concerns so the board can include your voices in the future decisions they make, or they have no other choice but to follow the direction given to them by the administration.  We are at an important junction in this district, because with the hiring of a new superintendent, the board could give different directions for the district or they can continue on this same path.  We believe it is of the utmost importance that the board has the real story from the teachers and the parents and that they hear from them in enough numbers that there is no doubt about the direction we need to take. 

We know many parents believe they have spoken up and written letters and nothing has changed, and we share that frustration, but now is the time to either step up to the plate and be heard and let the board know what you expect for your children, or we will have no excuses for not accepting things as they now are.  We cannot expect the board to act without hearing many voices expressing concerns.  If your child is bored; if your child is frustrated with the accelerated pace of instruction; if you are providing tutoring for your child to keep up; if you are a teacher and are frustrated with what is expected of you, then all of these voices need to speak up now while there is still a chance to make changes.  If you cannot attend a board meeting, then we encourage you to write to the board.  The only way change will occur is for the board to believe parents are not happy with the services their children are receiving, because right now they believe you are all happy (with the exception of the 40 who showed up to the last board meeting). 

We do not believe we have had over 134,000 hits to this blog because only 40 people are unhappy, but we cannot make changes on our own. The only way change will occur is for all of us to be directly involved at the board level. Only six BOE meetings remain before the end of the school year. They need to hear from you; otherwise, from the lack of presence at the board meetings, we are telling them we are happy.  Are you happy? If not, then you must speak up for your child, for our district, and for our property values. There is no other way change will take place.

We welcome any comments, positive or negative, regarding the status and direction of D181.

Recap of Remainder of 2/24/14 Board Meeting: Superintendent Search, Performance Data, Approval of a Project Manager and Skyrocketing HMS Mold Remediation Costs

Monday's Board Meeting lasted 4 hours 5 minutes, not including a bathroom break and adjournment into Executive Session in the middle of the meeting. Before we address the substance of the agenda items, we want to express our disappointment in the length of the agenda and the declining attention Board Members paid to important items as the evening wore on. Anyone who listened to the entire meeting, either live or via Podcast, will realize that the Board increased the speed at which it plowed through the second half of the agenda items and decreased the thoroughness of the questions asked or discussion held. Frankly, to hear the way the board handled the latter agenda items was embarrassing, because rather than take the responsible course and suggest that some of the agenda items be tabled, multiple items had absolutely no discussion as board members or Dr. Schuster stated that there was not even a need for some of the scheduled administrative presentations, or that the important MAP data and math performance data presentation by Dr. Russell could be shortened.  Such a lackadaisical approach to the agenda was, in our opinion, unacceptable because the community has a right to expect more care and consideration from its elected officials on matters that impact our students --  curriculum, budget and facilities.

So what else besides Dr. Moon's "presentation" was on the agenda?

Superintendent Search Firm Hired:

The evening kicked off with presentations by 3 superintendent search firms:  Ray & Associates Inc., BWP and Associates and Hazard Young Attea and Associates.  (Hazard was the firm that identified Dr. Schuster as a candidate in 2009.)  After hearing presentations from the three firms and adjourning later in the meeting to Executive Session to discuss them, the Board voted in open session to retain BWP and Associates.  During its presentation, BWP assured the Board that they could complete a superintendent search by July 1.  In fact, they were the only firm that said they could complete a search within 8 weeks and explained that the Board should shoot for a hiring date of May 31, 2014.  May 31 is apparently a date of some significance because the salary of an administrator on May 31, the day before the new Illinois Pension Benefit law takes effect, will be "capped" for some of the future pension benefits. As a result, the implication was that now is the time to search for a new superintendent because there may be a greater willingness by sitting superintendents to make a move, especially if their new salary will be higher than their current one.  In fact, BWP was the only firm who brought this information to the Board's attention.  In addition, BWP will "guarantee" the superintendent hire for a period of 2 years. If the superintendent does not work out, then BWP will conduct a "free" search for a replacement.  While the community has not seen the proposals that set out the search process, all three firms said the first step would be developing a superintendent profile and that at some point input from the community will be solicited.

In our opinion, the Board made the right choice.  BWP's presentation certainly seemed like the most thorough and they presented information that neither of the other firms did.  Their aggressive timeline may prove to be a positive, even if it means ultimately paying the new superintendent a higher salary than the one he/she is currently paid at another district, in order to entice them to come to D181.  We would suggest that the Board consider "freeing up some money" by eliminating one or more central administrators, because in our opinion, the central office has grown and grown under Dr. Schuster's watch and is now top heavy. At the March 10 board meeting, Dr. Schuster will be bringing forward her recommendations on administrator contract renewals and salary raises.  In our opinion, there are certain administrators who are not adding value or pulling their weight.  We won't name names or positions here, but we hope the board carefully assesses whether one or more of them should be eliminated. We firmly believe that by eliminating one or two positions, there will be between $150,000 to $320,000 in salary and benefits that can be used toward paying a highly competitive salary for a new superintendent with experience in a high achieving district and a proven, successful track record, especially in the area of curriculum.

We wish BWP good luck in this important undertaking and urge the Board to continue to proceed in a responsible and transparent manner, seeking the most qualified candidate to replace Dr. Schuster.

Next up was Dr. Moon's presentation, which we have already covered in our last post.

Superintendent's Report:

Dr. Schuster then presented her superintendent's report. ( Click to open report.)  The report covered a recent visit to FermiLab by many of our science teachers and an "explanation" on the double acceleration of some 5th grade students who commute each day to the middle schools for math.  Unfortunately, no details of the actual "process" or "standards" required to be identified or be eligible for this double acceleration were described in her report which simply stated that "[t]he decision to have a student attend math class at the middle school is a data-driven team decision and is often included as part of a student’s Individual Learning Plan."  

Why can't the Department of Curriculum publish the process and standards?  To do otherwise reeks of yet another subjective decision made without any real consistency and that most likely results in students being overlooked or perhaps even, over-identified. There may very well be students who NEED double math acceleration while in elementary school, but without transparency and a process that is spelled out for all families to see, the Department of Learning is sliding backwards to the unfair and questionable identification practices that were criticized by Dr. Moon in her January 2012 report used back then to place students into the gifted programs and advanced/accelerated math tiers.  Has Dr. Schuster and the Department of Learning Administrators learned nothing?

Performance Data Presentation:

Dr. Moon Distances Herself from Learning For All Plan -- Ball Thrown Back Into Board's Court

Anyone who attended or listened to Monday's (2/24/14) board meeting hoping to hear Dr. Moon present a progress monitoring report on the implementation of HER 2012 Report recommendations was sorely disappointed.  We are not going to describe every single thing that was said, rather this post is mostly our commentary, and we hope that our readers will weigh in with their opinions.  It is important for each parent and teacher to listen to the whole discussion (including parent comments) and come to their own conclusions.   This portion of the meeting can be accessed at the D181 website, by going to the Board of Education "meetings' tab and then downloading the 2/24/14 podcast. The agenda item dealing with Moon begins at Time Counter 1:01:34.

The agenda item titled "Guest Presentation"was quite enlightening to us for many reasons.

First, opening public comments were not allowed. Apparently now whenever the BOE wants to exclude opening public comments that its own board policy requires be allowed immediately following the pledge of allegiance at each business meeting (click to open Policy 2:230), it simply needs to call something a "guest presentation" and schedule it ahead of any input from the community.  Of course the policy doesn't allow for this, but the board doesn't seem to care that it is violating yet another one of its policies.* Public comments were only allowed following Dr. Moon's "presentation," which was clearly frustrating to all parents who had hoped Dr. Moon would be able to acknowledge or address some of their questions and concerns.  She could not during her presentation, but worst yet, did not comment on any of the the parents' comments or questions raised  following her "presentation."

Second, Dr. Moon did not actually give a "presentation" at all despite the administration repeatedly stating over the last year that Dr. Moon would return -- as required by her contract --  to evaluate and report to the board on the implementation of her recommendations.  Dr. Moon's "presentation" actually began with a prepared speech read by Dr. Schneider.  He went through an 8 slide power point trying to remind everyone of why Dr. Moon had been hired, what her recommendations were and how they are being implemented.  He then turned the microphone over to Dr. Moon, and much to our dismay, she did not present a report at all.  Instead,  she merely explained that she was in the middle of a two day visit during which she would observe classrooms, review documents received from the administration to determine if what's in place is "aligned" to the practices called for in the Board's plan.  She said she had received documents to review from the administration regarding the Board's plan, but that she was still reviewing them.  She said that she was really only in attendance on Monday in order to answer questions the board members might have about the Board's plan. She stated that on Tuesday she would complete her tour of the schools and then prepare a report for the Board that would include "commendations" and "considerations"regarding the Board's plan.  She stated that this report would be different than last time when she had been asked to evaluate existing programs and provide HER recommendations on changes that were needed, but this time her only job was to determine if the Board's plan was being successfully implemented, not whether her recommendations were being implemented. Dr. Moon made some brief observations regarding seeing some differentiation in the classrooms, saying she had seen tremendous amount of growth during her classroom observations, but did really elaborate. She did not specify what any of her final conclusions --- positive or negative might be. She did not say when her written report would be ready and submitted to the BOE.

What was disclosed during the meeting was that after Monday night, the progress monitoring would transition from Dr. Moon to Dr. Reva Friedman, a colleague of Dr. Schneider hired in 2013 to serve as a gifted consultant to D181, but who apparently had never visited D181 until Monday.  Dr. Friedman is not a colleague of Dr. Moon's from the University of Virginia.  She works at the University of Kansas. She was not part of the team that submitted a Request for Proposal to the BOE in 2011 and who were selected after careful consideration of their credentials and proposal when compared to proposals submitted by other educators.  Dr Friedman did not accompany Dr. Moon in 2012 when Dr. Moon spent several days in the district observing classrooms and preparing a written report for the Board.  She was not present when Dr. Moon gave her report to the Board in January 2012.  Instead, Dr. Friedman was handpicked by Dr. Schneider to collaborate -- apparently "for free" - -during the time period when the administration was developing the Advanced Learning Plan/Learning for All Plan.  Dr Friedman was subsequently hired in 2013 to serve as a "gifted consultant" to D181 but despite her contract specifying past dates in 2013 and 2014 when she should have been on site, Monday's was her first visit to D181.  She accompanied Dr. Moon to the classroom observations on Monday, but was silent during the entire "presentation" to the BOE on Monday night.

So we find it very curious to learn during the meeting that following Dr. Moon's 2/24 "presentation" and written report, all work related to monitoring and advising on the implementation of the Learning for All Plan is going to be "transitioned" to Dr. Friedman.  It appears that D181 will never hear from Dr. Moon again.  In response to Board Member Heneghan's question as to why this was happening, Dr. Schuster quickly jumped in and represented that Dr. Moon would no longer be available.

We just don't get it. After paying Dr. Moon nearly $56,000, suddenly the well has run dry? Suddenly she is no longer available, but Dr. Schneider's handpicked choice is?  How can that be? Well the answer may lie in what we learned from the her responses to board member questions. These answers made it abundantly clear that she is washing her hands of D181. And the reason may be because the Board's plan, as she kept referring to it, did not implement her recommendations and is not a plan she can support.  We will have to wait and read what her "commendations" and "considerations" are when she finally submits the written report to the board, but one thing is for sure, no one will be able to ask her questions about what she puts in the report because SHE IS NOT COMING BACK.  Not one board member suggested that she be paid to return to present her findings and conclusions to the board and to be available to answer their questions in a public setting where the parents and teachers whose students are being impacted by the Board's plan can hear the discussion.  In our opinion, this just doesn't make sense, and it doesn't seem logical or right!

So let's look at exactly what we did learn from Dr. Moon on Monday night. She really did not make any substantive comments before addressing the board's questions, but even when those began, Dr. Moon said that there were some she could not answer because they were outside her area of expertise.  Some she said she could not answer because her observations were not yet concluded.  Some she answered in a very generic, non-D181 specific way.  However, several themes or pieces of information did emerge from the Q&A session with the Board.

1.  Her role in returning to the district was NOT to determine if the district was successfully implementing the recommendations she made in her 2012 report.  Her role was to observe classrooms, review data (which she admitted she had not yet reviewed) and determine if what is currently in place in D181 "aligns" with the practices that the Board's plan called for.
2.  The Advanced Learning Plan/Learning for All Plan is the "Board's Plan," NOT HERS.
3.  She did not state that the Board's plan was implementing her recommendations; in fact in our opinion, her answers made it clear that the Board's plan had cherry picked which of her recommendations to incorporate.
4.  It also became clear that she had NOT recommended that D181 implement a math acceleration  for ALL program, nor did she necessarily think it is appropriate for ALL students.
5.  The Board's plan has never been implemented in any other district.
6.  She did point out that in order for the radical changes the Board's plan -- including math acceleration for all -- is trying to implement to be successful, the teachers should have and must continue to receive appropriate professional development.
7.  The Board's plan may take 7 years to implement successfully.

We will say that we were quite pleased that all 7 board members asked thoughtful questions.  Several of them acknowledged parent concerns regarding possible harm to students as a result of the math acceleration for all model.  Board member Nelson -- WHO ACTUALLY WAS PHYSICALLY PRESENT -- pointed out that he wants to know if the plan currently in place is "ultimately hurting" any of our students and did it "go too far."

Those were GREAT questions Mr. Nelson, and we sincerely hope that Dr. Moon's final report will directly answer them and provide the basis for her answer.

Following the Board's questions, public comment was allowed.  As the comments posted since Monday night show, many parents spoke and all comments made regarding the plan were NEGATIVE.  No one stepped up and said the Learning for All Plan was working. Parents reminded the Board and explained to Dr. Moon how their children are being harmed. Again, you should all listen to the parents' comments, as they were very difficult to hear, realizing that the Board's Plan, which was not Dr. Moon's plan, has had direct negative effects on students, regardless of the administration's continued insistence that its data -- mostly NWEA MAP data -- shows otherwise.

Parent Matt Bousquette's public comment was in line with our reflections of what we learned from Dr. Moon.  In his words, she's tossed the ball back over to the Board and now it will be the Board's responsibility to figure out if the Learning for All Plan can continue in its current form without modification.  He pointed out that it is not Dr. Moon's responsibility to fix the problems, it is the Board's responsibility.  He emphasized that the current plan IS hurting students.

So several questions remain. WHAT IS THE BOARD going to do to address the concerns and problems that have resulted from implementation of the Board's plan? As another parent asked during public comment, WHEN is the board going to address these issues publicly and engage with each other to decide how to deal with them?  HOW, if at all, will the Learning for All Plan be modified?

Time is of the essence.  Children are hurting.  Everyone see it.  Board members finally acknowledged that this concern exists.  The issue cannot be ignored and must be dealt with immediately.  Each day that passes without board action is another day that the board is ignoring it's obligations and responsibilities to provide the best learning environment to ALL children and ensure that NO CHILD is left behind or hurt!

We hope to see a Board discussion and action plan addressed at the next board meeting.



_____________________
* Remember, the board is currently in violation of Policy 5:222 titled Tutors, which prohibits teachers from receiving compensation for tutoring their own students in the subject in which they examine them.
The policy states: "No teacher shall tutor, for compensation, any District 181 pupil in any subject in which the pupil was, is, or may be, examined by said teacher for school credit.  A teacher shall not tutor individually or in a group, for compensation, any District 181 pupil enrolled in his/her class.  Exceptions may be made on a case-by-case basis by the Superintendent or designee such as in the case of a special education teacher who has knowledge of the unique needs of the student."
Yet this is exactly what the board is allowing by compensating 4th grade teachers who are now tutoring 107 of their own students in math after school, twice a week. The tutoring is intended to assist 4th grade students who have been identified as needing additional instruction in both 4th grade math concepts and the 5th grade accelerated math they are being forced to participate in.

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.
  

We Are So Over the Moon (Report); What is the Status of D181 Two Years Later? (Part 2)

(taken from Wikipedia fat cow/moon images)

As we reflect on how D181 has traveled off course during the past several years, it’s important for us to recognize that we bloggers believe in equal access and opportunity for every educational possibility that exists within a school setting. We, through reviewing parent and community comments since the inception of this blog, realize that there are probably parents who are happy and relieved that the tiered services of the past are now a distant memory, despite the fact students while in the tiers across the district demonstrated solid gains on ISAT and MAP tests. For soon after Dr. Moon submitted her report to the D181 administration, Dr. Schuster took the first steps in eliminating tiered services and the ACE program for students who had been identified as gifted and talented, or what we now refer to as advanced learners. Subsequently, the Advanced Learning Plan was developed, which then morphed into Learning for All, despite the fact the initial goal was to better meet the needs of gifted and talented students. As many of our readers realize, D181 is in the throws of a massive, unfounded, non-researched ideology called Learning for All, which the administration claims was created as a result of Dr. Moon’s report.

Within the hallowed halls of the University of Virginia’s Curry School of Education are the offices of two professors whose area of focus is the field of Gifted and Talented Education. Yes, at the University of Virginia, the term Gifted is not considered a dirty word, despite the fact Dr. Tonya Moon believes this term should not be used as a label within educational settings, particularly those within impoverished school districts. You can read about Ms. Moon’s education and interests by clicking: http://curry.virginia.edu/academics/directory/tonya-r.-moon . Moon’s focus is largely centered on the use of multiple measures and assessments within educational settings to identify children for gifted and talented programs.  Here is a sampling of her publications:

Standards Reform in High-Poverty Schools: Managing Conflict and Building Capacity  Tonya R. Moon 2004

A Primer on Research Ethics in the Field of Gifted Education

Tonya R. Moon, Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 400265, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4265, USA

Moon, T. R., Brighton, C. M., Jarvis, J. M., & Hall, C. J. (2007). State standardized testing programs: Their effects on teachers and students (RM07228). Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.

Also at the University of Virginia is Dr. Holy Hertberg-Davis, who is a colleague of Moon’s. Ms Davis also consults for various school districts in the areas of gifted education and student performance. Her views on the field appear to differ from those of Moon in that her research promotes the notion that gifted students cannot be fully served within the regular classroom using differentiation as the main strategy. A recent article that appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly illustrates this fact:

Hertberg-Davis H. 2009. Myth 7: Differentiation in the Regular Classroom Is Equivalent to Gifted Programs and Is Sufficient: Classroom Teachers Have the Time, the Skill, and the Will to Differentiate Adequately. Gifted Child Quarterly 53: 251-253. (Click to open article.) 

We encourage our readers to read the Hertberg-Davis article which states in its conclusion: 

"For all these reasons—lack of sustained teacher training in the specific philosophy and methods of differentiation, underlying beliefs prevalent in our school culture that gifted students do fine without any adaptations to curriculum, lack of general education teacher training in the needs and nature of gifted students, and the difficulty of differentiating instruction without a great depth of content knowledge—it does not seem that we are yet at a place where differentiation within the regular classroom is a particularly effective method of challenging our most able learners."

Also of interest to our readers, the following text will offer a review of the most relevant aspects of the field of gifted:

Fundamentals of Gifted Education: Considering Multiple Perspectives

books.google.com/books?isbn=1136946438 (Click to open link to text.)

Within these readings, one will quickly discover that there are basically two major viewpoints concerning the appropriate educational approach that should be taken for gifted/advanced, high-ability students in today’s educational settings.

The first viewpoint, which our very own Kurt Schneider, Co-Assistant Superintendent for Learning, espouses to be a proponent of is the full inclusive strategy with the sole source of teaching through differentiation within a single classroom. He, along with certain college faculty (Moon, Tomlinson, Capper, Frattura, Friedman (newly minted D181 consultant effective June 2013 - click to open Friedman's contract)  believe all students can have their learning needs met by one teacher, maybe the use of a support aide (MRC director, a former gifted specialist (now differentiation specialist), and whoever else might be qualified to come into a classroom to lend support to 22 plus children.

Moreover, much of their descriptive research (compared to empirical research with data driven statistical results) centers on impoverished school districts and students of challenged socio-economic backgrounds. In addition, the use of labels for children is discouraged, and thus all children are collectively treated as a whole within a classroom. There are supposed to be no pullout services or special instruction provided within this framework. We believe this has been the goal of Schuster and Schneider since they began their employment with D181, and we now see the effects of their desire to become “pioneers” in the field of education by also foisting automatic grade-level acceleration into the brainchild of Learning for All.

The other viewpoint concerning gifted/advanced populations centers on the plain and simple fact that not all students should be accelerated. There is simply no research that indicates with certainty that acceleration for all is effective. Let’s take a look at a statement from the National Association for Gifted Children:

We Are So Over the Moon (Report); What is the Real Status of D181 Two Years Later? (Part 1)

(Taken from Wikipedia Moon images.)

In anticipation of Dr. Tonya Moon's return to D181 next Monday, February 24, 7pm at Elm School, today we begin a new series.  Part 1 will provide links to earlier posts from last year in which we discussed when and for what purpose Dr. Moon was initially hired and the district wide curriculum changes that morphed from her original report.  We encourage our readers to read these earlier posts, as well as the additional commentary below, prior to Monday's meeting.  Part 2 of this series will be published prior to Monday's meeting and will provide our readers with insight as to backgrounds, relevant research in the field of gifted and talented education, and the impact of hired consultants Drs. Moon and Friedman on D181. We suggest setting some time aside prior to Monday’s meeting as there is a great deal of information for you to review. You will want to become especially versed in the terminology and semantics that will be on display during Monday’s meeting. Let’s begin by referencing several of our previous posts:

Our 6/5/13 post titled "2012-2013 Year in Review: How did the curriculum change process evolve?" described the chronology of events leading up to and following the hiring of Dr. Moon, who was tasked with evaluating the gifted program during the 2011-2012 school year.  (Click to open 6/5/13 post.) 

In January 2012, Dr. Moon presented a report of her findings to the BOE. Her report went further than simply evaluating the gifted program.  (Click to open Dr. Moon's Report.)  As we previously summarized in our 6/5/13 post, Moon concluded that there was insufficient differentiation across the classrooms in D181, and that there was inadequate identification of students for admission into the gifted, advanced or accelerated math and language arts programs.  She advised that unless there was evidence to show that a student would not be successful in such programs, the opportunity for students to enroll in them should be created. Anything short of this was, in her words, “educational malpractice.” She also recommended that the district create a Philosophy of Learning for all students.  She did not advise that there should not be any gifted programming, but that the door needed to be opened for more students into the advanced programs D181 offered.  Of significance is a statement Dr. Moon made on page 27 of her report regarding math acceleration. Contrary to the administration's continued insistence that they have implemented Dr. Moon's recommendation of math acceleration for "all students," what she actually said was that "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."  

Following Dr. Moon's report, the district developed a Philosophy of Learning, transition plans, and ultimately what was first called the "Advanced Learning Plan," but was later renamed to be the "Learning for All Plan."  What was intended to be an evaluation and improvement of the gifted programs in D181, morphed into a decision to dismantle the gifted program, implement an inclusive model whereby each homeroom teacher would differentiate instruction to each student's individual level, accelerate all students by one full year above grade level in math, transition to all students taking "ACE" social studies at the middle school level, and allow students to opt into higher level math and language arts classes than those they had placed into a the middle school level.  The following posts reviewed data and observations regarding the curriculum changes in 2012-2013, which the administration called the "transition year":

• ACE - The Dismantlement of the Gifted Program. (Click to open post.)
• Middle School Math -- Math Tracks and this Year's Rapid Acceleration Model (Click to open post.)
• Middle School Math - What did the Performance Data Show? (Click to open post.)
• Middle School Math - Implications and Concerns for the Future (Click to open post.)
• Elementary Math - with a focus on Third Grade - The Transition Year Structure (Click to open post.)
• Performance Data for the Third Grade Math "Compacting" Experiment (Click to open post.)
• Elementary Math (with focus on 3rd grade) - What Will Happen Next Year? (Click to open post.)

Each of these posts raised parent and teacher concerns and asked many questions about what would happen as the ALP/Learning for All Plan continued to roll forward, grade by grade.  Interestingly, this year -- Year 1 of the ALP/Learning for All Plan -- despite repeated requests from a couple of board members to Dr. Schuster, asking her to please present student performance data for the 2013-2014, no such presentation has been given, nor has the BOE publicly discussed parent concerns that have been raised regarding math acceleration.  The administration has now identified as many as 25% of this year's 4th grader's who need after school tutoring in order be able to tackle the 5th grade math instruction they must learn. When asked at the February 10 board meeting when data on elementary and middle school performance would be presented, Dr. Schuster referenced the upcoming meeting at which Dr. Moon will be presenting a follow up report.  More than half way through this school year, the parents and community continue to wait to see data that last year was released on a relatively regular basis.

It appears that Dr. Schuster and the entire Department of Learning are putting all of their eggs into Moon's basket.  What will she say?  Will she agree with what has been implemented in D181 since she called for better identification of students for tiered programs and more effective differentiation in the classroom?  Will SHE have been provided the performance data for the first half of the 2013-2014 school year and will she have analyzed it as part of her follow up report?   Dr. Moon will visit the district the same day she presents to the board.  How many classrooms will she visit?  How long will she spend in each classroom?  Will she speak to any teachers?  Will she speak to any students?  Will she speak to any parents before she presents to the BOE?

Our posts over the last 10 months have raised many questions and concerns about the curriculum and program changes/eliminations that began after Dr. Moon's report.  The D181 administration has not answered or addressed them. The majority of the BOE has not requested data and analysis from Dr. Schuster and the Department of Learning to determine the effectiveness of the massive changes that have taken place since Dr. Moon’s last visit.

Gravity, stars, and the Earth’s rotation are sure bets. Moon’s upcoming visit and what we predict will be a grand meteor shower of spin, should be cause for pause for all of us.

Dr. Kevin Russell to Host 2/20/14 Meeting on "Interpreting MAP Assessment Results"

Today parents received an email reminding them of tomorrow night's meeting at Elm School (6:30 p.m.) hosted by Dr. Kevin Russell, the Co-Assistant Superintendent of Learning (Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction).  The topic of the meeting is "Interpreting MAP Assessment Results." We have copied the email below.

According to the email, parents are encouraged to bring their children's recent Winter and Fall MAP test results, in order to be able to "actively participate."  We hope "actively participate" will mean more than parents looking at the score reports and comparing them to general informational slides presented by Dr. Russell via a power point presentation.  We hope parents will be allowed to ask questions and receive answers.  If so, we encourage any parent who attends to ask the following questions:

1.  We understand that at least one school experienced technical difficulties during the MAP testing.  As a result, some students were unable to "complete" their tests (meaning their test did not "end" when they could no longer answer questions, but they were told to stop because time was up).  We have been told that computers loaded the tests slowly or froze in the middle of tests and some students had to restart the test.  Many students ran out of time.  So the question to ask is:  Are the test results valid?  Do the scores accurately reflect a student's knowledge of the test subject? If not, have parents been told to disregard the scores and is the district disregarding them as well?

2.  What training have teachers received on test score interpretation and the use of the "Descartes?" Do teachers ever discuss the "Descartes" with parents, and if so, when?

3.  What analysis, if any, has the Assessment Department conducted on how Math MAP scores have been impacted over the last 3 years as a result of compacting 3rd and 4th grade math during 3rd grade?  The comparison would be this year's 3rd grade MAP scores to those 3rd grade MAP scores from 2 years ago. Have Math MAP scores gone up, gone down or stayed the same?  If an analysis has been done, when will it be presented to the BOE and the community?

4.  What analysis, if any, has the Assessment Department conducted on how Math MAP scores have been impacted over the last 2 years as a result of accelerating all 4th grade math students by one year (so they are learning 5th grade math)?  The comparison would be this year's 4th grade MAP scores compared to last year's 4th grade scores. Have Math MAP scores gone up, gone down or stayed the same?  If an analysis has been done, when will it be presented to the BOE and the community?

5.  What analysis, if any, has the Assessment Department conducted on how Math MAP scores of students who OPTED up in middle school math have been impacted?  If an analysis has been done, when will it be presented to the BOE and the community?

6.  What analysis, if any, has the Assessment Department conducted on how the Language Arts MAP scores have been impacted as a result of the changes to the literacy model currently being used in D181?  If an analysis has been done, when will it be presented to the BOE and the community?

7.  In the past, when MAP presentations were given, the Assessment Director gave the presentation. (The first assessment director D181 hired was Lori Gehrke, the second one was Bonnie Strykowski, the third one was Dr. Russell, the current one is Dawn Benaitis.) Today's reminder announces that Dr. Russell will be the presenter along with "the Department of Learning." Will Ms. Benaitis -- a highly paid administrator -- run this meeting? Will she explain how to interpret MAP data and do more than read from a script? Will she answer parent questions and address parent concerns? Since she was promoted to replace Dr. Russell as the Director of Assessment when he was promoted to Co-Assistant Superintendent of Learning, shouldn't she be handling "all things assessment?"As taxpayers, you have the right to ask and receive an answer to questions on the "value added" by yet another highly paid central administrator.  

We hope that parents who attend the meeting will submit comments reflecting on what transpires during the meeting and any useful information you may learn.

Email from District:

Thursday, February 20
“Interpreting MAP Assessment Results”
A Presentation in the Learning for All Family Education Series
Elm School, 6:30 – 8:30 p.m.
No pre-registration required.

Assistant Superintendent of Learning (CAI) Dr. Kevin Russell and the Department of Learning will present an overview of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessment used in Grades 2-8. Attendees will learn how MAP is used to help guide instruction in District 181 schools. The session will close with an overview of how parents can interpret the data in their child’s results. Parents are encouraged to bring their child’s fall and/or winter MAP scores to actively participate. Visit our website to learn more about each event in the Learning for All Family Education Series and access select videotaped sessions:www.d181.org > Learning > Family Education Series.