Schooled - schooled's Blog - Bakersfield.com

Goodbye exit exams?

Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:29:16 PDT

Texas is getting rid of its exit exam ... sort of.

This is from the Austin American-Statesman:

"The Legislature has ordered educators to stop giving the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in high school and replace it with 12 end-of-course exams. They'll be similar to final exams in a class, but they will come from the state instead of local teachers. ...

End-of-course exams will differ from the TAKS in two significant ways. For one, students must average a passing score on the 12 tests to graduate instead of having to pass each major subject area. In other words, there's more room for a bad day, but only one or two.

Second, students will take the tests right after the material is taught to them, avoiding the lags between learning and testing that can now last a couple of years or more."

California just started counting its exit exam in 2005-2006. California students have to pass the exit exam to graduate. They have to pass two parts -- English and math. There's no averaging between the two like what Texas is going to do. Also, California students have many shots at the exit exam starting in 10th grade, but they take the whole thing at once, not in parts.

What do you think of Texas' new approach? Will it work? Is it better or worse than California's exit exam program?

Go here for the full Statesman story:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/07/08/0708tests.html

Preventing Another Va. Tech

Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:28:30 PDT

I thought this was kind of interesting ...

The UC Davis Police Department will will hold training sessions starting Monday to "help members of the campus community increase their likelihood of surviving a shooting incident, like Virginia Tech's," according to a UC Davis press release.

The new community training will include how to:

-- escape, take cover and hide
-- make your body a smaller target
-- recognize opportunities to seize a weapon or overpower a gunman
-- make an effective 911 call for help
-- describe a suspect
-- follow police direction

Also, from the release:

"A shooting incident is among the top five hazards identified for this campus."

"The training at times could be unsettling for some. It includes a recording of a 911 call made from the school library during the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School ..."

What do you think? Useful or scary?

Is No Child Left Behind working?

Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:44:34 PDT

Today, the Center for Education Policy released a report, "Answering the Question That Matters Most: Has Student Achievement Increased Since No Child Left Behind?" The report is about 98 pages, but here are its five main conclusions (No Child Left Behind is federal legislation that requires all schools to have 100 percent of students reading and doing math on grade level by 2014. Schools are expected to make a certain amount of progress each year toward the goal and some schools face sanctions for failing to do so):

1. In most states with three or more years of comparable test data, student achievement in reading and math has gone up since 2002, the year NCLB was enacted.

2. There is more evidence of achievement gaps between groups of students narrowing since 2002 than of gaps widening. Still, the magnitude of the gaps is often substantial.

3. In 9 of the 13 states with sufficient data to determine pre- and post-NCLB trends, average yearly gains in test scores were greater after NCLB took effect than before.

4. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to determine the extent to which these trends in test results have occurred because of NCLB. Since 2002, states, school districts, and schools have simultaneously implemented many different but interconnected policies to raise achievement.

5. Although NCLB emphasizes public reporting of state test data, the data necessary to reach definitive conclusions about achievement were sometimes hard to find or unavailable, or had holes or discrepancies. More attention should be given to issues of the quality and transparency of state data.

Go here to see the full report: http://www.cep-dc.org/

Go here to see California's profile: http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document.showDocumentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=201

Here is State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell's response:

"California has had rigorous content standards and accountability in place since well before the implementation of No Child Left Behind, and the hard work done to align instruction, materials, professional development, and testing to our standards is clearly paying off," O'Connell said. "Public education in California is on the right track.
I strongly agree with the goals of No Child Left Behind, but as the Center's report points out, the federal system's single measure of achievement gives no credit for even significant gains in achievement by students who have not yet reached the high bar of proficiency. Also, because state standards vary widely, states such as California that expect more of their students are more likely to fall short of the federal accountability goal, while states that hold lower expectations may appear to be doing better. That is both misleading and unfair. I firmly believe that California's Academic Performance Index - a model based on achievement growth from year to year - offers the public a more accurate and more comprehensive picture of school performance."

Furthermore, O'Connell is recommending the federal government do the following to "fix" NCLB, among other things:

— Fully fund the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (aka NCLB) and make the investment commensurate to ESEA's expectations a priority throughout the federal appropriations cycle;
— Extend and expand common-sense flexibility for meeting highly qualified teacher requirements;
— Allow states and school districts more flexibility and provide more efficient funding for the provision of supplemental educational services and school choice; and
— Recognize parental rights to exempt their children from state testing, and not penalize schools where more than 5 percent of parents exercise that right.

See the letter he sent members of Congress here:
file:///Users/lschencker/Desktop/CDE%20Reauthorization%20of%20the%20ESEA%5B1%5D.pdf

It's true that student achievement in math and English has basically gone up since No Child Left Behind was enacted, including locally in Kern County. Most educators I talk to say they like the idea behind NCLB (making sure all students get the best education possible and are given high expectations) but believe the goal of having 100 percent of kids on grade level by 2014 is unrealistic and feel NCLB doesn't recognize many instances of progress and instead only punishes for falling short. In fact, over the past year and a half, I don't think I've ever talked to a teacher who was happy with the 100 percent goal.

What do you think?

Cal State University salaries

Tue, 15 May 2007 17:27:08 PDT

The California State University Board of Trustees is scheduled to vote on a new contract for faculty Wednesday. Here are the terms, in case you ever wondered what CSU professors make:

"The four-year agreement covers budget years 2006/07 through 2010/11 and will cost the CSU more than $400 million.

Under the new contract, projected average salaries for full professors will be $105,531; for tenure track faculty (all ranks combined) will be $90,593; and for part-time lecturers will be $53,677."

money money money money

Tue, 15 May 2007 11:13:15 PDT

I was off yesterday, but came in today to many dueling press releases about Gov. Schwarzenegger's newly revised budget plan. Below, according to a press release from his office, is what his proposals mean for K-12 education.

Also, I got many press releases from other education groups/people about how they feel about the revisions. In the interest of saving space, here are excerpts from of a few of those:

Kern County Superintendent of Schools Larry Reider: "Governor Schwarzenegger has honored his commitment made in January to fully fund K-12 education in his revised budget proposal released today (5/14.) I thank the governor for again making good on his commitment to put our students first by fully funding our schools. In
addition, I am very appreciative of the fact that the governor protected the Home-to-School Transportation funding with his revised transportation proposal. This proposal is important because it protects a seriously underfunded education program. Both actions demonstrate the governor's knowledge and support for our public schools."

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell: "The May Revision to the Governor's budget is good news for education in the context of the overall budget picture, and I applaud Governor Schwarzenegger for this commitment. As comprehensive research on California schools recently made clear, however, our state will need to find both greater efficiencies and new ways to significantly increase the investment in our schools if we are to maintain our competitiveness in the global economy."

University of California system: “We are very pleased that, with the state’s resources still highly constrained, the governor has reaffirmed his support for the work the University of California is doing for California,” said UC President Robert C. Dynes. “We will continue working with the Legislature and governor to advance our budget priorities, which include those identified in the governor’s plan and also the continuation of state support for our student academic preparation and labor research programs.”

California State University system: "With the release Monday of his revised 2007/08 state budget plan known as the "May Revise," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger budget falls short of investing adequately in California's future with too little funding for our public
state universities. The plan provides no additional money to prevent yet another 10% fee increase for California State University students. Combined with previous
fee increases, the latest hike means CSU undergrad fees will have nearly
doubled since 2002, rising 94%. This is far in excess of inflation. "Unfortunately it seems that students are the ones who will bear the brunt of this flawed budget," said CFA President John Travis. "The governor has been adamant about not increasing taxes, yet this fee increase is an additional tax imposed on a small group of Californians- CSU students."

AND HERE, according to the California Budget Project, is what the gov's revision could mean for education:

K-12 Education

The May Revision:

• Reflects an increase in 2007-08 spending covered by the Proposition 98 guarantee relative to the
Governor’s January budget, from $56.8 billion to $57.6 billion. This results in a $112 increase in 2007-08
Proposition 98 K-12 per pupil spending, from $8,569 to $8,681. The May Revision also reflects an increase in
2006-07 Proposition 98 spending, from $55.0 billion to $55.4 billion.
• Revises the Governor’s January proposal to shift $627 million in home-to-school transportation costs from the
General Fund to the PTA and adjust the Proposition 98 guarantee downward by an equal amount. The new
proposal would use PTA dollars to reimburse the General Fund for a total of $630 million in home-to-school
transportation costs for 2007-08. The May Revision also proposes to reimburse the General Fund for an
additional $200 million in home-to-school transportation costs from the PTA for 2006-07. The revised proposal
would not affect the Proposition 98 school funding guarantee, but it would still result in a loss of operating funds
for public transit.
• Reflects a reduction of $285.6 million in revenue limit funding for 2007-08 due to a projected enrollment drop of
0.48 percent. The Governor’s January budget assumed an enrollment decline of only 0.39 percent. The May Revision also increases 2006-07 revenue limit funding by $41.2 million due to an increase in estimated
enrollment relative to the Governor’s January budget. Revenue limits provide general purpose funds for schools.
• Includes a $226.8 million increase to fund a 4.53 percent COLA for 2007-08. The Governor’s January budget
assumed that the COLA would be 4.04 percent. The additional funds would provide $160.8 million for revenue
limits, $31.7 million for various categorical programs, and $17.8 million for special education.
• Provides a total increase of $35.9 million for special education, which reflects changes in enrollment and local
property tax collections.
• Allocates $50 million for the second phase of the PreKindergarten Family Literacy program, a three-year
preschool initiative. The program targets four-year-olds living in the attendance areas of schools with Academic
Performance Index scores in the lowest three deciles.
• Provides $50 million to support hiring additional Career Technical Education (CTE) teachers and $50 million to
support hiring additional teachers of college preparatory courses.
• Allocates $25 million to support hiring additional high school counselors specializing in CTE.
• Includes $24.9 million for the School Nutrition Program – which helps schools serve nutritious meals to students
– to support a 4.7 cent increase in the per meal reimbursement rate.
• Allocates $11.1 million to the California Fresh Start Program, which provides funds for schools to provide fruits
and vegetables to students.
• Includes $341.7 million in one-time funding for a variety of purposes, including $100 million for the purchase of
CTE equipment to be split equally between K-12 schools and community colleges; $100 million for a three-year
school safety pilot program; $65 million to help school districts implement the California Achievement
Longitudinal Pupil Data System; $48.1 million to fund Supplemental Instruction Program costs for afterschool and
summer school programs; $20 million for the purchase of instructional materials for English learners; and $8.6
million for school breakfast and nutrition programs.

Higher Education

The May Revision:

• Allocates $2 million for the University of California (UC) in 2007-08 to provide additional support for tobacco-
related research.
• Increases funding for the California State University by $3.6 million in 2007-08 to support an additional 340 full-
time equivalent undergraduate nursing students.
• States the Administration’s intent to seek legislation that would reinstate the employer’s contribution to the UC employees’ retirement plan. According to the May Revision, this contribution is needed to avert a shortfall in the
fund.

AND HERE, is what the budget could mean for K-12 education, according to a relase from the Gov.'s office:

Proposition 98

Proposition 98 funding for 2007-08 is proposed at $57.6 billion, a four percent increase over the Governor's Budget estimate. The General Fund comprises approximately 72.7 percent, or $41.9 billion of total proposed Proposition 98 funding. The totals include funding for K-12, community colleges, and other state agencies that serve students. Total per-pupil expenditures from all sources are projected to be $11,225 in 2006-07 and $11,562 in 2007-08,

The May Revision also proposes one-time Proposition 98 Reversion Account funding totaling $56.7 million appropriated as follows:

o      An additional $4.4 million for School Breakfast Startup grants.

o      $4.2 million for one-time activities for the implementation of changes in school nutrition requirements.

o      $48.1 million to fund Supplemental Program obligations.

Major Changes Included in the May Revision

Total Funding Increases

o      The May Revise reflects total K-12 education funding increases of $297.5 million for 2007-2008 and of $172 million for 2006-2007. This results in total 2007-08 spending of $66.6 billion. This spending increase comes in spite of a slight decrease in the projected enrollment for 2007-08, to 5,932,000 (ADA).

Addressing the Teacher Shortage and Improving Teacher Quality

The Governor's May Revision proposes funding for several programs to address the teacher shortage:

o      $50 million for grants to school districts to support the hiring of more than 1,000 additional credentialed career technology education teachers.

o      An increase of $2 million to the already allocated $10 million to create the EnCorps Teachers Program to add 2,000 experienced retirees to the teaching corps. The EnCorps Teachers Program will establish a public-private partnership with industry and business to actively recruit retiring professionals to the classroom.

o      $50 million in grants for school districts to hire more teachers for college preparatory courses (a through g courses) in an effort to assist more students to become eligible to attend college.

o      $7.5 million to fund a variety of incentives for existing credentialed teachers in other subject areas to become authorized to teach science and math.

o      $2 million for a grant program to assist public school employers and exclusive representatives of credentialed teachers to plan an alternative teacher salary schedule based on criteria in addition to years of training and experience.

o      $3 million to continue funding for the Personnel Management Assistance Teams to provide technical assistance to school districts in establishing and maintaining effective personnel management, recruitment, and hiring process.

o      $2.5 million for enhancement and expansion of the Administrator Training Program. This program provides effective training and coaching for new K-12 school principals on leadership skills, financial and personnel management, the interrelation between academic standards, instructional materials, and curriculum frameworks, and the effective use of pupil assessments. The current program does not adequately serve existing administrators; the primary purpose of the additional funding is to ensure that these existing administrators receive appropriate training and coaching.

Special Education

o      The May Revision proposes a Proposition 98 General Fund increase of $35.9 million and a Federal Fund increase of $7.6 million over amounts proposed in the January budget. These changes include adjustments for revised figures for local property tax and ADA growth.

Home-to-School Transportation

o      The Budget proposes to shift the fund source for the $627 million Home-to-School Transportation program from Proposition 98 General Fund to the Public Transportation Account (PTA); the May Revision proposes that, instead of shifting the fund source, the PTA should reimburse the General Fund for the cost of the Home-to-School Transportation program.

o      In addition, the May Revision proposes to increase the 2007-08 reimbursement from the PTA for Home-to-School Transportation by $3 million to reflect the increase in the COLA for the program and to reflect $2.6 million in transportation costs for the State Special Schools and to reimburse the General Fund for $200 million in 2006-07 Home-to-School Transportation expenditures.

Making School Meals Healthy

The May Revision builds on the progress made by the Governor's Obesity Initiative by proposing funding for several school nutrition programs:

o      $11.1 million to permanently establish the California Fresh Start Program which was created by the Governor's Obesity Initiative.

o      $24.9 million to support a 4.7 cent increase in the meal rate for the School Nutrition Program; however, this funding is contingent upon enactment of Administration-sponsored legislation that will provide a financial incentive to schools that eliminate fried foods and reduce unnatural, trans-fatty acids.

o      $4.4 million one-time allocation from the Proposition 98 Reversion Account is included to provide a total of $5.4 million for School Breakfast Startup grants. This program provides up to $15,000 per school site for initiating or expanding a School Breakfast program or Summer Food Service Program and is expected to fund an estimated 501 grants.

o      $8.5 million for county offices of education to provide educational services and technical assistance to schools and districts to cover the many nutrition requirement changes currently underway and on the horizon ($4.3 million for ongoing program activities and $4.2 million for one-time implementation activities).

Governor's School Safety Initiative

o      $100 million one-time block grant for a three-year pilot program to increase school safety. The funding will be distributed though a competitive process to county offices of education which will then partner with K-12 schools for a variety of one-time activities including but not limited to: (1) training for safe school trainers; (2) developing immediate emergency notification systems; and (3) identifying best practices for prevention/mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery.

o      $9 million in ongoing funding to county offices of education to hire approximately 120 additional school resource officers who are widely acknowledged by educators and law enforcement as a primary strategy to prevent violence on school campuses.

Expanding Pre-Kindergarten Family Literacy

o      $50 million in ongoing Proposition 98 funding for the second phase of a three-year initiative to expand preschool opportunities for 4-year olds residing in attendance areas of schools ranked in the lowest three deciles of the 2005 Academic Performance Index. This brings total PKFL funding to $100 million and total state funding for preschool programs to $470.7 million.

o      In addition, the May Revision continues to propose $5 million in ongoing funding to provide full day wrap-around care for children of parents who work full-time to participate in preschool and still receive quality child care for the remainder of the day.

Meeting California's Information Needs

o      The Governor's Budget included $2.5 million to continue the development of the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CalPIDS) and $1.1 million to continue the development of the California Longitudinal Teacher Integrated Data Education System (CalTIDES); the May Revision includes an additional $65 million one-time funding to be allocated by the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team to school districts based on their assessment of each district's training and pre-implementation needs.

o      $2 million is included for local staff and equipment support for the California School Information Services program which issues student identifiers.

Summer of Safety

o      $2 million to county offices of education to collaborate with experienced community-based organizations that serve youth ages 11-18. This program is intended to veer teens away from poor choices and towards activities such as sports, art, music, dance, academic achievement programs, and community service projects and is expected to provide enrichment programs for up to 5,000 teens beginning in summer of 2008.

English Learner Supplemental Instructional Materials for After School and Summer School Programs

o      $20 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund for English learner supplemental instructional materials.

Supplemental Instruction

o      $48.1 million Proposition 98 Reversion Account to fund Supplemental Instruction Program obligations. This program consists of four smaller programs which support after school instruction and summer school activities; this one-time funding should sufficiently fund the mandatory Grades 7-12 and Grades 2-9 programs.

Preparing Students to Graduate

o      $5 million for school districts to purchase individual intervention materials for students who have failed or are at risk of failing the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE); the May Revision proposes $8.5 million for county offices of education to provide school districts with instructional assistance that will help high school students pass the CAHSEE.

Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA)
o      $226.8 million increase for COLA: $160.8 million for revenue limits, $7.5 million for child care programs, $9 million for class size reduction and $31.7 million for various categorical programs. This is on top of the Governor's Budget proposal of a $1.9 billion: $1.4 billion for revenue limits, $133 million for special education, $62.1 million for child care programs, $49.6 million for class size reduction and $277.9 million for various categorical programs

Providing Online, User-Friendly Information on Schools

o      In an effort to strengthen school transparency for the public, the May Revision includes $300,000 to coordinate along with the Department of Education, a working group to develop criteria and definitions within the state's Standardized Account Code Structure for the purpose of tracking district revenues and expenditures at the school site level.

Items Largely Unchanged from the Governor's 2007 January Budget

School Construction

The Budget proposes a $2.8 billion increase in 2006-07 and a $3.8 billion increase in 2007-08 for school facilities. The largest portion of the increases is for the 2004 and 2006 School Facilities Bonds. In particular, the newly approved 2006 bond fund adds over $3 billion in new funding for current and budget years.

The Budget includes an augmentation of $575,000 for the Department of General Services' Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) to assist in the implementation of Proposition 1D, the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006.
o      The Governor's continued efforts to rebuild the Golden State include a proposal for $11.6 billion of additional general obligation bonds to provide state bond funding for schools into 2012-13.

o      This funding, when combined with the $7.3 billion contained in Proposition 1D on last November's ballot, is estimated to provide for approximately 32,000 new classrooms to house approximately 826,000 students and almost 79,000 renovated classrooms - providing state-of-the-art facilities for over 2 million students.

Charter School Facility Grants

o      To ensure that pupils from low-income families have access to high-quality educational alternatives, the Budget proposes $43.9 million from the Proposition 98 Reversion Account to fund the Charter School Facility Grant Program.

New Resources and Tools for Low Performing School

The budget includes $268 million to be provided to approximately 450 to 500 school sites to meet specific goals such as reducing class sizes, reducing student-to-counselor ratios and providing teacher professional development.

o     The Budget also includes $50 million in one-time funding to continue the Low-Performing School Enrichment Block Grant for a third year. These funds are available for activities including: (1) assuring a safe, clean school environment for teaching and learning; (2) providing support services for students and teachers; (3) creating incentives, including differential pay, to help recruit and retain highly qualified teachers and highly skilled principals; (4) fostering small group instruction; and (5) giving teachers and principals time to work together to improve academic outcomes for students.

California Program Improvement Management System (PIMS)

o      The budget proposes $1 million to establish the California Program Improvement Management System (Cal PIMS). This system will provide low-achieving schools and school districts a unified intervention program, including research-based programs and virtual coaching, to turn around federal Program Improvement schools or those that are subject to academic intervention by the state.

Child Care Shift

o      The Budget proposes to increase Proposition 98 funding for CalWORKs Child Care by $269 million to ensure that California's children have their basic needs met so they are prepared to succeed in school.

Did anyone make it to the end of this blog post? Pat yourself on the back ...

Holding back freshmen

Wed, 09 May 2007 10:36:59 PDT

In today's story, I spelled out what this new Kern High School District policy of holding back failing freshmen means. I'll attach that story to the end of this post.

When I go to schools to talk to students and parents about the new policy, there seems to be a lot of support. I have, however, gotten several anonymous or semi-anonymous letters and phone calls criticizing the policy.

Here are some excerpts from those letters:

"The motivation of the principals in recommending the adoption of this policy is to eliminate the lowest-performing students from taking the CAHSEE. The effect will be to raise the pass percentage of sophomores taking the exam. In today’s article, you cite Chad Vegas as saying that “holding failing students back gives those students one more year to prepare.” Actually, not true. They have until the end of their senior year to pass the test. Not allowing them to take the exam during their second year of high school eliminates one opportunity for them to take the exam. Even if they are not likely to pass it, I think most educators would agree that something is gained, and nothing lost (by the student, at least) by taking the exam one extra time. This policy is way less about helping students, and way more about making schools look stronger in regard to No Child Left Behind."

Another comment from a different letter writer:

"Students who repeat 9th grade (2nd year freshmen) will still graduate with their classmates. How? They will skip sophomore year and move directly from 2nd year freshmen to being juniors. These students who fail their first attempt at freshman year will repeat their freshman year but will still graduate in four years (assuming they don't drop out). They will NOT be in HS for five years or longer. So, why bother? Here's the reason: They will then never have to take the High School Exit Exam as sophomores, the only group whose scores affect API. The KHSD is in program improvement, meaning it is marching toward takeover by the government if it can't raise its scores. This 2nd year freshman bit is sleight of hand aimed at raising scores. It's like the shell game of hiding the ball under the cup except this time it's "hide the sophomore."

I address some of these concerns in today's article. Other than these few anonymous letters and phone calls, most of the people I've spoken with seem to think the new policy is a good one. They don't want to see failing kids pushed through the system without help. Obviously, some of the kids who might be held back weren't very happy.

What do you think of this policy?

(Today's story explaining the policy)

Freshman rule change will still allow students to graduate on time

By LISA SCHENCKER, Californian staff writer

e-mail: lschencker@bakersfield.com | Wednesday, May 9 2007 10:22 AM

Last Updated: Wednesday, May 9 2007 10:21 AM

Kern High School District officials say most of the freshmen who might be held back this year will still be able to graduate in four years.

Trustees voted unanimously Monday night to create new requirements for freshmen to move on to 10th grade. The requirements include passing a certain number of classes, state tests or passing at least math and English. The change means as many as 2,000 freshmen might not move on to 10th grade this year. The idea is to help failing students before they fall too far behind.

Freshmen will, however, be able to retake one class during summer school and then another next year. The rest of their classes — the ones they didn’t fail freshman year — will be sophomore classes. That means, hypothetically, a freshman who failed math and English this school year could catch up with the rest of his class by junior year.

He could essentially have two freshman years and then become a junior. Students who still haven’t caught up by the end of their senior years can continue working toward a diploma at Bakersfield Adult School, said district Assistant Superintendent of Instruction Joe Thompson. They won’t stay at their high schools for a fifth year, Thompson said.

He said the district expects most students will be caught up by their fourth year of high school.

“Our goal is to catch these kids when they’re young so they don’t have to go to the adult school and so we can keep our graduation rates up high,” Thompson said.

No one spoke against the policy change before the school board Monday night, and many parents seem to support the change. Some, however, have criticized the district, saying the new policy is only to boost test scores.

That’s because normally sophomores take the California High School Exit Exam. The state calculates a school’s academic performance index (API) — a measure of how schools are performing — partly by using sophomore exit exam results. In fact, those results account for 20 percent of a high school’s API score.

Freshmen who are held back this year won’t take the exit exam next school year. Essentially, only students who passed their classes freshman year will take the exam, which might boost schools’ API scores.

Also, students who are held back will have fewer chances to take the exit exam, which students must pass to graduate from high school.

Thompson said students who are held back as freshmen will have six chances to take the exam instead of seven.

Thompson, however, said the district believes the move will help students. There’s no sense in students taking a test for which they’re not prepared, he said.

He and all five trustees have said the change is to help students before they fall too far behind, not to boost test scores. Trustee Chad Vegas even acknowledged Monday night that though the move might help boost the district’s API scores, it could ultimately hurt the district’s AYP (adequate yearly progress), a federal measure of school progress that takes graduation rates into account. If the new policy causes more students to drop out, it could hurt the district’s AYP.

“Testing was never a part of this discussion,” Thompson said. “It’s something we think will benefit our students, reduce the dropout rate. What we’re asking is pretty reasonable.”

Still, some freshmen weren’t happy about the change Tuesday.

Bakersfield High freshman Joel Navarro said he’s one of the 1,500 to 2,000 freshmen who might not move on to 10th grade now because of the change.

“I think it sucks,” Navarro said of the policy change. “Freshman year is the hardest year out of all four years. You’re introduced to whole new things.”

Navarro said he plans to take classes this summer and is seeking extra credit now.

BHS freshman Yva Schmalzer called the policy change a “scare tactic” that she doesn’t think will work well.

“They told us too late in the year,” Schmalzer said.

Kern High Faculty Association President Mitch Olson made a similar argument before the board Monday night. He urged them to hold off on the policy saying it was a “little bit rushed.” Trustees, however, said they felt they’d do a disservice to students by waiting. They said they didn’t want to let one more group of failing students pass on to next grade.

Schmalzer said she knows “quite a few” students who won’t go on to 10th grade next school year.

Other students wondered whether the new policy would lead to classes crowded with kids who were held back. Thompson said freshman class sizes won’t be any larger because of the policy.

He said schools will still have the same number of classes they would have had regardless of who was held back. The difference will likely be more freshmen sections of certain classes to accommodate those who need to repeat classes and fewer sophomore sections.

Other students said Tuesday they support the change.

“I think it’s better because there are people in classes who are holding other people back,” said BHS freshman Ronald David. “If they don’t learn what they’re supposed to, they should learn it again.”

BHS freshman Joey Chavira said he can see both sides of the issue.

“I think it’s good, but also kind of unfair,” Chavira said.

School officials' hidden talents

Mon, 07 May 2007 21:54:25 PDT

Here are some funny/interesting tidbits from Monday night's Kern High School District meeting you won't see in the paper:

Jim Burke Education Foundation Teacher of the Year Michael McQuerrey of Liberty High said a few words to the trustees:

McQuerrey (a music instructor) congratulated district Assistant Superintendent of Personnel Bill Jones for his "excellent baritone" voice. Apparently, he knows this from a church choir. He also remembered trustee Joel Heinrichs as student body president at his high school and for being an "ace journalist" in high school. Who knew?

Joel Heinrichs

On a more serious note, McQuerry (we ran a story about the award he won April 26) implored trustees to continue to support classes that go "beyond testing."

"What I don't want to do is leave the profession in worse shape than I found it," McQuerrey said.

Is your handwriting young or old?

Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:53:58 PDT

A colleague sent me this very interesting article on how handwriting and the teaching of handwriting is changing with the advent of technology:

http://news.com.com/Is+the+pen+still+mighty+in+the+computer+age/2100-1022_3-6177372.html

I especially like the "featured gallery" off to the side where you can see two handwriting samples and guess which one was written by the young person and which by the older one.

Easter break on Fox News

Mon, 02 Apr 2007 10:44:20 PDT

Note* -- The story was on Fox's Web site Monday morning but was gone as of about 4:15 in the afternoon. If anyone finds it again, let me know where. Thanks!

Fox News is now reporting on the Kern High School District's decision in December to change the names of winter and spring breaks to Christmas and Easter breaks. You can find a Web version of the story here:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/index.html
(look for the picture of Ken Mettler next to the headline "What's in a name?")

Basically, Fox interviews a local rabbi and KHSD trustee Ken Mettler about both sides of the issue. The Fox story includes a few inaccuracies (KHSD is not the second largest school district in the state, it's not called the Kern County School District and there's no West End High School).

Just for a little refresher on the issue: Trustees voted 4-1 to change the names in December. Joel Heinrichs, Ken Mettler, Bryan Batey and Chad Vegas voted for the change. Bob Hampton voted against it. If you look at past postings on my blog, you'll find a letter from local religious leaders sent months ago to the board urging them not to vote for the name change.

What do you think about Fox picking this up now?

Grading schools and the achievement gap

Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:04:08 PDT

Where does your school rank?

Each year, the state gives all schools rankings based on test scores. Schools can rank from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best. To find out how your school did go here:

api.cde.ca.gov/reports/page2.asp

You can also see there how groups of students within your school did (i.e. African American, Hispanic, white, Asian, students with disabilities, socioeconomically disadvantaged students). If you look at those API numbers, you'll see the much talked about achievement gap at many schools, meaning API scores for some groups will be lower than for others. One of the goals of No Child Left Behind is to make sure all students perform equally regardless of race or income.
The results there also include:
State ranking which show how schools compare with others across the state. Those with a ranking of 1, rank in the bottom 10 percent of schools statewide. Those with a 10 rank in the top 10 percent of schools statewide. There's also a similar schools ranking that shows how schools are doing just compared to schools with similar types of students.

It's important to keep in mind 10 percent of schools will always get a 1, and 10 percent will always get a 10. That's the way the system is built.

The results also include an API base, which is a reflection of last year's test scores. They also include an API target, which is the API the state expects your school to reach this school year.

In Kern County, APIs are generally going up but still aren't as high as the rest of the state. Generally, educators say that's because we have a huge number of students learning English here (which makes it harder to do well on state tests) and more students from low-income families than in some other areas of the state.

The accountability system seems kind of complicated at first. It's all part of the state and federal governments' efforts to make sure no child is left behind (per the legislation No Child Left Behind). The tests students take each spring are part of what the state uses to get these API and ranking numbers.

In the late summer/ fall, the state will release the actual results of those tests (i.e. how many kids can read, do math, science at grade level). The state will then also release more figures showing whether local schools are progressing fast enough toward meeting the goal of No Child Left Behind: that all students be proficient in math and reading by 2014.

Any questions?

(disclaimer: I can respond to questions with factual answers, such as how this system works or what a specific number means, but I can't respond to philosophical questions or give any opinions).

Autism reaction

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:39:03 PDT

This past Sunday, we ran four articles about autism and education (click on the following links to read them).

Schools try to keep up with autism
No easy answers in autism
Family cherishes small victories
Officials move to aid special education funding

I spent about a month and a half interviewing people and doing research on the topic before writing the articles. I spent a lot of time talking to experts and parents. I basically lived a day in the life with a 4-year-old with an ASD (autism spectrum disorder) and a 19-year-old girl with an ASD (that story is coming this Sunday).

I think it was probably one of the most interesting stories I've ever worked on (as in I personally find the topic fascinating). I hope that came through in the stories.

It kind of blows my mind that the government is now estimating about one in every 150 children is being diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. For decades, the estimate was more like one in every 2,000, according to the Centers for Disease Control. It further blows my mind that there's still no known cure and experts don't know exactly what causes it.

Generally, people with autism spectrum disorders have problems communicating, socializing and balancing their senses. Cases fall at all levels of severity. Some people with ASD can't talk or function independently. Others hold jobs and get married. Cases also fall at every point in between those two extremes.

In many ways, autism is a controversial topic. Experts disagree on what causes it. They disagree about whether there are actually more people coming down with autism now or if we simply diagnosed these people differently in the past. They disagree on some of the "treatments."

Because of this controversy, I knew I was going to get some letters from people invested in the topic.

I was right. I've probably gotten more letters about this than anything else I've ever written (with the exception of an article about tax cuts I wrote at The Arizona Republic in 2003 ... go figure).

I thought it might be interesting to show you excerpts of some of the letters I've received:

— The subject line of one e-mail was simply "Answers to your autism questions." That e-mail directed me to an opinion piece written by a Wisconsin chemist and published by The Capital Times.

— One letter writer wrote the following:
"the press never seems to demand that officials prove that autism hasn't increased. All we seem to hear about are autistic kids. Where are all the autistic adults who were missed in the past? Show us the autistic kids from the 1980s who are now the autistic adults in their 20s and 30s at the same rate as children today. Where are the 40-, 50- and 60-year-olds with autism at a rate of one in 150? What are they doing? Lots and lots of parents desperate about the future for their autistic children would like to know. News sources never give us the proof and neither does the CDC."

— From a parent of autistic children:
"My two children receive or have received Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA)
therapy, the only treatment protocol proven effective with autistic
children. ABA is expensive. ... The districts need more money for these programs, but they should be fighting the federal government in court to get the legislated funding
level. They don‚t do that because in relationship to the federal government,
school districts are the little guy. Because of a lack of courage, they have
chosen to find someone they can beat and have found that one in their own
students and parents."

— Another letter writer:
"Your autism articles in Sunday's (Mar. 11th) Californian correctly mentioned the lack of medical "cures" for the condition of autism, but the articles failed to mention the most scientifically based non-medical treatment approach for autism behaviors: Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). There is no other treatment method that has as much scientific support as ABA for the treatment of autistic behaviors. It is highly successful, more so than any other approch. ... Local universities would do the community a great service by preparing its school psychologists and special education teachers in the skillful use of ABA principles and procedures. These strategies could be used effectively with all children who display challenging behavior, not just children on the autism spectrum."

— Another (my personal favorite type of letter, and no, it's not from my mother):
"That was a GREAT story(s) in yesterday's newspaper. I could tell it was a
lot of work and a labor of love."

— "There is surely a need for more education in this area. It has to be very overwhelming for these families to deal with the diagnosis and then weed through all the information when deciding on treatment."

— "Paternal age has risen steeply 35-49 and 50 and above since 1980. With the rise of paternal age the research shows that neural developmental disorders would increase ... Please consider keeping this information and someday doing an article on it. Men and women should be warned . Men in their 20s could cryopreserve semen for any fathering past ones mid 30s."

All this is just a sampling of what I've received. (Thank you to everyone who's taken the time to write and/or call me. I enjoy hearing everyone's different perspectives and opinions). It's a complex, expansive topic.

One could write a book on autism, and still not say everything there is to say.

If you still want to learn more about this topic, here are some Web sites that might help:

http://www.autism-society.org
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/autism.cfm
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/autism/detail_autism.htm
http://www.autismspeaks.org/goals.php
http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/

Also, I encourage you to join the discussion here.

No Child Left Behind

Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:06:35 PST

The big news today has to do with recommendations from a commission on how to change No Child Left Behind. (No Child Left Behind is federal legislation that requires all students be proficient or better in math and reading by 2014, among other things. Congress will reconsider the law this year.)

You'll likely see this in the news tomorrow, but for those who want to see the report for themselves it's here (all 222 pages):

http://www.aspeninstitute.org/site/c.huLWJeMRKpH/b.938015/k.40DA/Commission_on_No_Child_Left_Behind.htm

What better way to celebrate Valentine's Day than by reading the report with the one you love? Or, if you don't have time for that or have other more "traditional" romantic ideas in mind, I recommend the lighter executive summary (about 15 pages) on the same Web site above.

For those who don't have time for either for the 222 pages or the executive summary here are a few sample recommendations:

— Teachers should not only be "highly qualified." They should also be effective in the classroom. Teachers should be measured by how much their students are learning as well as principal evaluations or teacher peer reviews.

— Establish a definition for and seek "Highly Effective Principals."

— Schools facing corrective action should have a full year to implement a new plan before facing serious sanctions.

— States assess their reading or language arts, mathematics and science standards against requirements for success in college and in challenging jobs.

Among many, many others.

This is what State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell had to say about the report today:

"I applaud the commission for undertaking this important and comprehensive evaluation of the No Child Left Behind Act, and I share the commission's goal of modifying NCLB to more effectively address the achievement gap. I have held hearings throughout California to get feedback from parents, educators, and business people on how we can improve NCLB through reauthorization and have heard many ideas that are mirrored in this report.

"I'm pleased with the commission's acknowledgment that accountability, as currently constructed under NCLB, is a 'blunt instrument' that does not distinguish between schools on the right track and those showing little or no progress. I have long argued that to fairly measure school performance, an accountability system must account for growth, as does California's Academic Performance Index.

"I also believe that effective teachers and principals are the most essential ingredients to improving achievement and closing achievement gaps. Through its implementation of NCLB's Highly Qualified Teacher requirements, coupled with professional development aligned to our rigorous standards, California is working toward the shared goal of excellent teachers in every classroom. While it is important that all teachers are qualified, we know that qualifications 'on paper' do not guarantee effectiveness in a classroom or in any job. A more robust system of ensuring that all students are provided with effective teachers must be developed. In my efforts over the next year to find best practices for addressing the achievement gap, I will be seeking workable solutions to the complex challenge of ensuring excellent teachers and school leaders for all students.

"I applaud the commission's focus on improving high school and ensuring that all states hold students to high standards that prepare them for success in college and in challenging jobs. California's academic standards have been nationally recognized for their quality and rigor. We want to maintain the integrity of our standards-based education system, and encourage other states to raise the achievement bar for their students as well.

"NCLB has been a powerful tool for focusing public schools on the need to improve achievement by all student groups. Its biggest weakness, in my view, is that it has been overly inflexible and in some cases has not allowed states, schools, or districts to pursue successful practices. I hope that mistake won't be made again when NCLB is reauthorized."

School delays

Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:16:16 PST

What is this? Chicago? Scranton? I'm cold.

The start of classes this morning was delayed at Buttonwillow due to "snow and/or ice." Elk Hills also had some issues.

You can generally find alerts about school closings and delays at:

http://alertline.kern.org/

Another option is to sign up for alerts sent to your cell phone about fog delays at:

http://sms.netinformer.com/tbc/fogalerts/

You can set the cell phone service to only send you alerts about your specific school or district.

On a side note, I'm probably to blame for this chilliness. I think I jinxed everyone by finally — after more than a year of living in California — removing the ice scraper I've always kept in my car. I'll try to get that back in there for everyone.

Dropouts and movie stars

Fri, 05 Jan 2007 09:50:33 PST

Did anyone else watch Jay Leno last night?

Oscar winner Hilary Swank was on promoting her new movie "Freedom Writers" about a teacher who inspires inner city high school students. It was all fun and games until Leno lobbed an a question at her about her own high school career. Apparently Swank is actually a high school dropout.

Hmmm. A high school dropout is starring in what's supposed to be an inspirational movie about the value of education? It struck me as odd — to say the least.

Will you see the movie? Will knowing this about Swank take away from it? Or does it not matter?

Grading California

Wed, 03 Jan 2007 10:25:40 PST

Two big reports came out today about education in California. One is the Children Now Report Card for the state of California. The other is Quality Counts 2007 in Education Week, which ranks all 50 states based on which provide the best opportunities for young people to succeed in life.

Drum roll please.

Here are the results:

The Children Now Report card gives California the following grades:

Health Insurance: B-
Dental Health: C-
Obesity: D+
Infant and Young Children's Health: B-
Adolescent Children's Health: B-
Early Care and Education: C-
K-12 Education: C-
After School: B+
Family well-being: D+

Based on chance for success, Quality Counts ranked each of the 50 states.

-- California ranked 34th.

-- The top five states in order are Virginia, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey and Maryland, Massachusetts and New Hampshire (those last three tied for fifth).

-- The bottom five states in order are Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee (which tied for 45th), then Texas, Arizona, Louisiana and lastly, New Mexico (Arizona and Louisiana tied for 49th).

The rankings are based on family income, parent employment, parent education, linguistic integration, preschool enrollment, kindergarten enrollment, elementary reading, middle school mathematics, high school graduation, postsecondary participation, adult educational attainment, annual income and steady employment.

AND there are a lot more statistics where those came from. Check out the links to see the full reports.

publications.childrennow.org/publications/invest/reportcard_2007.cfm

www.edweek.org/ew/toc/2007/01/04/index.html

Here's what State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell had to say about the two reports today:

"Taken together, these reports provide a sobering look at the current state of education and other services for California's children. While both reports recognize that there are factors outside of the public education system that are important, Education Week's report does note that California has made public policy decisions that have put on us on the right track in public education. However, I am still not satisfied. If we are to fulfill our promise as a state and as a nation, we can't start addressing the needs of children the day they enter kindergarten, and stop addressing them once they graduate high school.

"It is clearly time for the public and policymakers to understand that preparing the next generation to succeed in a demanding global economy will require closing the achievement gap. Our schools must deliver rigorous academic content to all students, no matter what challenges they bring into the classroom, and be held accountable for increasing lifting student achievement. However, we must also recognize that fulfilling the potential of our students and our state requires a multifaceted approach involving partners not just from all segments of education but from businesses, government and communities."

Whatchamacallit break

Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:00:06 PST

I know this is getting old, so I'll be brief.

It seems as though EVERYONE has an opinion about the now-fading news that Kern High changed the name of its winter and spring breaks to Christmas and Easter breaks.

And I do mean everyone. Just in case you missed it, this is an editorial The Los Angeles Times recently wrote about the Kern High decision:

www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-recess26dec26,0,4860047.story

Religious leaders chime in

Wed, 20 Dec 2006 13:40:55 PST

Boundary Change Proposals

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:26:55 PST

This is one of those issues that's likely to affect a HUGE number of Kern County families, and I'm not talking about an upcoming vote on a yet-to-be-named December/January break. (Check back later this week for more on that.)

The boundaries of almost every high school in the Kern High School District are about to change in order to accommodate the openings of two new high schools in 2008.

These plans are two proposals of how that might happen. They will be presented at a public hearing at Bakersfield High School at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 19.

Can't make the hearing? E-mail your comments to boundaryquestions@khsd.k12.ca.us.

Go to www.khsd.k12.ca.us/boundary/december-06-boundary-proposals.htm for a more detailed look. On that site, you can see close-ups of how each of these plans would affect specific parts of town.

I'd say conservatively, more than 100 people showed up to the last public hearing in November. How many will show up at BHS Tuesday? Which issues do you care about?

Winter break woes at 8:30 a.m.?

Thu, 07 Dec 2006 16:55:08 PST

The blogs are already buzzing with news that Kern High School District trustee Chad Vegas wants to rename winter and spring breaks as Christmas and Easter breaks.

You already know from reading my article (because I know you read all my articles, or at least the headlines, sometimes) that the trustees will likely vote on the matter at a Dec. 21 meeting. But did you know that the meeting is at 8:30 a.m.?

Everyone seems to have an opinion about this issue. But will you express that opinion to your elected officials at 8:30 a.m. on a Thursday?

The last time the board addressed a hot button issue at a special morning meeting in October (when the trustees decided not to let school activity groups practice on Sundays) a small crowd showed up. In September when former trustee Sam Thomas wanted the board to make an exception to the travel rule and pay for another trip for him to an education conference, only one or two people besides myself showed up to the district office. That was also a morning meeting.

People have jobs. People have stuff to do.

People seem to have a lot to say on this issue, but it will be interesting to see how many people have something to say Dec. 21.

Not ready for high school

Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:50:33 PST

Kern High School District Superintendent Don Carter said at a study session Monday night that two-thirds of freshmen entering the district come in performing below grade level.

Who's to blame? Most people's instincts would have them pointing fingers at the junior highs . But Carter pointed out that some of the junior highs send students at all different ends of the spectrum. If those students have the same teachers, same books and same education in junior high, but some are performing at grade level and some not, then are the junior highs still to blame? Are socioeconomics to blame? Parents?

But enough with the blame game. Pointing fingers is nothing new in education. What is new is the district's idea of how to solve the problem of students entering high school unready for ninth grade. Carter said the district is in the early stages of planning a "High School Prep Academy." The idea would be to send struggling junior high students to the academy, so they could catch up before high school. They could also take intensive summer classes. When they were caught up, they could rejoin their peers. All this would be instead of simply holding students back a grade, which can cause problems for junior highs.

Some board members pointed out that the threat of not getting to go straight to high school from eighth grade might even be enough to make some students buckle down in junior high.

Carter said he hopes to discuss this idea with the elementary school districts that feed into the high school (there are about 26). I think this will be an issue to watch in 2007.