| School Information System |
 | Sponsorships |
|
|
On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations (2004)
Curricula play a vital role in educational practice. They provide a crucial link between standards and accountability measures. They shape and are shaped by the professionals who teach with them. Typically, they also determine the content of the subjects being taught. Furthermore, because decisions about curricula are typically made at the local level in the United States, a wide variety of curricula are available for any given subject area.
Under the auspices of the National Research Council, this committee�s charge was to evaluate the quality of the evaluations of the 13 mathematics curriculum materials supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) (an estimated $93 million) and 6 of the commercially generated mathematics curriculum materials (listing in Chapter 2).
Posted by at 3:37 PM
Subscribe to this site via RSS/Atom: Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
The Madison School Performance Series of issue briefs will offer parents and others accessible information and analysis of critical school program and funding issues. The first paper on Reading Instruction is attached. In a question and answer format it discusses the failing Reading Recovery program and how the District�s commitment to the program is costing us more per student than other more effective programs. Upcoming papers will address issues such as fine arts, programs for talented and gifted students and administration funding.
The WSJ Editorial page published a very useful editorial this morning on the Madison School District's rejection of $2M in federal Reading First funds for reading improvement programs:
Taxpayers have the right to ask why the Madison School District would turn its back on a $2 million grant.Read a number of other articles on the district's rejection of the $2M reading first funds here.
OUR OPINION
Reading between the lines of rigidity
Given that its own evaluator says the Madison School District�s Reading Recovery program is not working as well as was hoped, it seems clear the district acted too quickly in turning down a possible $2 million federal grant for reading instruction.
Earlier this fall, superintendent Art Rainwater informed the Madison School Board that the district was ending its participation in the federal "Reading First" program after one year. Rainwater said federal evaluators refused to accept the district�s homegrown reading program, called the Comprehensive Literacy Instruction Program (CLIP), and insisted the district switch to one of many federally approved reading programs.
Rainwater noted that the $2 million federal grant would not have translated directly into a $2 million savings in local taxes because the federal money had to be devoted to materials and staffing specific to "Reading First."
He said that the tightly scripted phonics-based "commercial" programs approved by "ReadingFirst" would hamstring teachers� ability to use different methods with different children. He also contended that none of the federally approved programs are backed by data demonstrating success. In contrast, under CLIP 80 percent of Madison third graders were reading at the proficient level or better, so, Rainwater claimed, there was no need to change.
But what about the other 20 percent? How can one of the nation's finest school systems accept sub-par outcomes by a fifth of its students?
Just five out of 30 elementary schools qualifed for participation in "Reading First" - Glendale, Hawthorne, Lincoln, Midvale and Orchard Ridge. All have substantial minority and low income populations and all are below the 80 percent proficient ideal.
Despite Rainwater's contention that students continue to improve using CLIP, third grade reading scores have actually declined since 2001 at Lincoln, where (as at Glendale) fewer than 70% of students are proficient or better.
Meanwhile, a district analysis of Reading Recovery an intensive, expensive program aimed at helping the worst first grade readers improve asked whether the program is really worth the money. Reading Recovery, which costs about $8,400 per graduate, does not yield statistically significant achievement gains when participating students� performance is compared to nonparticipating students. This analysis echoes the findings of reading re searchers throughout the country, who advised Congress and the federal Department of Education that Reading Recovery should not be included among the federally approved Reading First programs.
If Reading Recovery isn�t helping the 20 to 30 percent of Madison school children who struggle with reading, it�s the district�s responsibility to find a program that can. Maybe the answer is in one of the approved "Reading First" curricula - but we�ll never know, because of the district�s decision to pull out of the program.
That was a mistake. The district should have taken the money and tried a new approach at the five qualified schools, while simultaneously getting the federal evaluators to take a good hard look at CLIP. It is possible that CLIP could get a federal OK - but again we'll never know because the district pulled out of the process.
School Board Member Ruth Robarts was right: A decision this important should have been made by the board, not the administration. Taxpayers have every right to ask why the district would turn its back on a reading program funded by a $2 million grant.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
The head of the East parent network e-mailed the letter below to people who'd signed up to get news about East.
Ed
November 22, 2004
Dear East High School Parent, Family or Community Member,
You are invited to attend a special meeting to discuss the selection and hiring of the next principal of East High School. The meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 14 at 6:30 PM in the forum at East High School. Valencia Douglas, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education for the Madison Metropolitan School District will be facilitating the meeting.
This meeting is the first step in the formal process that will culminate with the hiring of the new principal. Your input is important. If you have any questions, please contact the main office at East School at 204-1600.
Sincerely yours,
Loren J. Rathert
Interim Principal
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Reminder: The Madison School Board Performance & Achievement Committee will meet monday night, 11.29 @ 7:00p.m. to discuss "Research-Base Underlying MMSD Mathematics Curriculum & Instruction" Room 103 Doyle Administration building [Map].
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
We've started to ask local PTO/A organizations for a list of their view of the Madison School District Priorities. Here's two from John Muir Elementary:
I would encourage the PTO to invite school board members to attend a meeting, and to have them explain what has been cut or changed, and what is yet to come. Because we have a budget crisis in Wisconsin, we are losing staff, programs are being cut, teachers are being overloaded by more responsibilities. This is not going to end. We still have millions of dollars more to cut next year, and the next and the next.
The point of the meeting, besides voicing concerns about these cuts, is to have the school board talk about what the public can and should do. I believe this should be our chief priority.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
MTI Executive Director John Matthews on LaFollette Principal Mike Meissen's basketball coach selection process.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
The following letter was submitted to the Madison papers today.
Dear Editor:
What joy I experience when I attend performances at the new Overture Center for the Performing Arts! I�ve been to a variety of free and paid performances, including the MSO and Kanopy Dance. Thank you Jerry Frautschi and Pleasant Rowland for your gift to the City of Madison, your vision for a vibrant arts community, and your support for the city�s economic and cultural future. Yet sadly, we are in danger of this joy not lasting into the future.
The problem is not Madison�s citizens. Their support for arts organizations is impressive. The Great Performance Fund is a major step in that direction, and the UW-Madison is undertaking a major renovation and investment in the arts as well. These foundations are critical to the support of a vibrant Madison future, but they are not sufficient.
What is missing? We are lacking a commitment to a strong Fine Arts foundation in the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD), which serves nearly 25,000 students.
continue reading entire letter.
Overture Center Soars while MMSD Fine Arts Curriculum Sinks
Dear Editor,
What joy I experience when I attend performances at the new Overture Center for the Performing Arts! I�ve been to a variety of free and paid performances, including the MSO and Kanopy Dance. Thank you Jerry Frautschi and Pleasant Rowland for your gift to the City of Madison, your vision for a vibrant arts community, and your support for the city�s economic and cultural future. Yet sadly, we are in danger of this joy not lasting into the future.
The problem is not Madison�s citizens. Their support for arts organizations is impressive. The Great Performance Fund is a major step in that direction, and the UW-Madison is undertaking a major renovation and investment in the arts as well. These foundations are critical to the support of a vibrant Madison future, but they are not sufficient.
What is missing? We are lacking a commitment to a strong Fine Arts foundation in the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD), which serves nearly 25,000 students. Over the past 5 years, delivery of the Fine Arts curriculum in the district has been deteriorating: classes have been eliminated; staff has been reduced; some teachers are required to travel to 5 schools to teach; no Fine Arts Coordinator is in place; and the District�s own School Board approved curriculum and its standards are not being evaluated before making administrative decisions. Today�s public school students are not getting the Fine Arts academics outlined in national and state standards and there is danger that this downward spiral will continue.
What needs to happen? A first step is commitment to the existing Fine Arts curriculum and its standards, and this commitment must come from the School Board and the Superintendent. Their actions to date do not demonstrate support for the curriculum or the community�s values for our children. The next step is funding. The District�s current Fine Arts budget is about 3% of the total budget for all K-12 music, art, dance, etc., and costs districtwide about $200-250 per participant. Cuts to already cost-effective Fine Arts classes make curriculum delivery more ineffective and inefficient � the District will end up paying more for less.
Who suffers the most? Low-income children � who are predominantly minority children � are affected more than any other children. These children simply do not have the same opportunities outside public school to take private lessons or to perform in private organizations. Public schools provide the opportunity to open a child�s world to possibility.
Does the quality of Fine Arts education matter? Absolutely. Research shows that Fine Arts education directly benefits children in other academic areas, especially math and reading. Why shouldn�t these benefits be available for Madison�s public school children?
Madison�s school children need to know that the community will help them by contacting Board members (comments@madison.k12.wi.us ). We need to come together with the School Board to develop a vision for Fine Arts education that will benefit Madison�s future performers and educate its future audiences.
Barbara M. Schrank, Ph.D., former management consultant
Currently, Artist and Spouse of MSO Principal Bassist and MMSD Teacher
www.schoolinfosystem.org
Monday, December 13
5:00pm - Peformance & Achievement, Doyle Admin Building, Rm 103
Research-Base Underlying MMSD Classroom Reading Programs
Alternative Programs
Apparently this committee meeting comes as a response to the Isthmus article on the failures of Reading Recovery.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Madison's preschool leaders are advocating for an innovative K-4 program that involves a public/private partnership with the Madison Metropolitan School District, City of Madison and Madison preschools. There are proposed options that will build upon current preschool programs and entry into public school.
As the article below states, innovative pre-school programs can have decades long positive effects on children who participate in them as they grow into adults.
David L. Kirp, writing in the Sunday New York Times Magazine (November 21, 2004:
"The power of education to level the playing field has long
been an American article of faith. Education is the
''balance wheel of the social machinery,'' argued Horace
Mann, the first great advocate of public schooling. ''It
prevents being poor.'' But that belief has been undermined
by research findings -- seized on ever since by skeptics --
that federal programs like Head Start, designed to benefit
poor children, actually have little long-term impact.
Now evidence from an experiment that has lasted nearly four
decades may revive Horace Mann's faith. ''Lifetime Effects:
The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40,'' was
released earlier this week. It shows that an innovative
early education program can make a marked difference in the
lives of poor minority youngsters -- not just while they
are in school but for decades afterward. "
The complete article follows:
Idea Lab: Life Way After Head Start
November 21, 2004
By DAVID L. KIRP
The power of education to level the playing field has long
been an American article of faith. Education is the
''balance wheel of the social machinery,'' argued Horace
Mann, the first great advocate of public schooling. ''It
prevents being poor.'' But that belief has been undermined
by research findings -- seized on ever since by skeptics --
that federal programs like Head Start, designed to benefit
poor children, actually have little long-term impact.
Now evidence from an experiment that has lasted nearly four
decades may revive Horace Mann's faith. ''Lifetime Effects:
The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40,'' was
released earlier this week. It shows that an innovative
early education program can make a marked difference in the
lives of poor minority youngsters -- not just while they
are in school but for decades afterward. The 123
participants in this experiment, says David Ellwood, dean
of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and an
architect of the Clinton administration's original welfare
reform plan, ''may be the most powerfully influential group
in the recent history of social science.''
The life stories of the Perry students have been tracked
since they left preschool in the 1960's. Like so much in
education research, the findings have been known mainly in
professional circles. But this latest dispatch from the
field, confirming the remarkable and enduring impact of a
long-ago experience, should alter the way we understand
preschool and, maybe, the way society invests in the
future.
The study began without fanfare in the fall of 1962,
several years before Head Start was conceived. In the
mostly blue-collar town Ypsilanti, Mich., 21 3- and
4-year-old children started preschool. All of them, as well
as 37 more youngsters who enrolled over the next three
years, were black. They came from poor families, and the
South Side neighborhood, with its rundown public housing
and high crime rates, was a rough place to grow up.
Based on past experience, it was a near certainty that most
of these kids would fail in school. During the previous
decade, not a single class in the Perry elementary school
had ever scored above the 10th percentile on national
achievement tests, while across town, in the school that
served the children of well-off professionals, no class had
ever scored below the 90th percentile.
The reformers who developed the High/Scope Perry model
hoped that exposure at an early age to a program
emphasizing cognitive development could rewrite this
script. Most children attended Perry for two years, three
hours a day, five days a week. The curriculum emphasized
problem-solving rather than unstructured play or ''repeat
after me'' drills. The children were viewed as active
learners, not sponges; a major part of their daily routine
involved planning, carrying out and reviewing what they
were learning. Teachers were well trained and decently
paid, and there was a teacher for every five youngsters.
They made weekly home visits to parents, helping them teach
their own children. ''The message was, 'Read to your
child,' '' one woman, whose daughter went to Perry in 1962,
remembered. ''If you read the newspaper, put your child on
your lap, read out loud and ask her, 'What did I just
read?' When you take her to the grocery store, have her
count the change.''
Even though prosperous children had thrived in similar
settings for well over a century, 3-year-olds from poverty
backgrounds had never had the same chance. Leading
developmental psychologists cautioned against the idea.
Such an intellectually rigorous regime, they argued, could
actually harm such children by asking too much of them.
David Weikart, the moving force behind Perry Preschool, was
not convinced. The experts had a theory but no evidence,
and Weikart decided to conduct an experiment. From a group
of 123 South Side neighborhood children, 58 were randomly
assigned to the Perry program, while the rest, identical in
virtually all respects, didn't attend preschool. Random
assignment is the research gold standard because the
''treatment'' -- in this case, preschool -- best explains
any subsequent differences between the two groups.
Early results were discouraging. In reading and arithmetic,
the preschoolers' achievement scores at 7 and 8 weren't
much better than the control group's, and while the
preschoolers' IQ scores spiked, that difference soon
disappeared. Those results were consistent with the
dispiriting conclusion of a 1969 nationwide evaluation of
Head Start. That study's key finding -- that the boost in
test scores recorded by Head Start children faded by second
grade -- was widely interpreted to mean that Head Start
and, by implication, most other early childhood education
programs for poor kids, were a waste of time.
But in Ypsilanti the researchers didn't give up. They
collected data every year from age 3 through 11, then at
ages 14, 15, 19, 27 and now 40 -- an astonishingly long
time span in the research annals. Just as astonishingly,
they have kept track of 97 percent of the surviving group.
''I've found people on the streets, gone to crack houses
where there were AK-47's,'' said Van Loggins, a gym teacher
who coached many of the participants when they were
teenagers and who has been interviewing them for 25 years.
''I'm bilingual -- ghetto and English.''
Not only has the Perry study set records for longevity, but
it also asks the truly pertinent question: what is the
impact of preschool, not on the test scores of 7-year-olds
but on their life chances? The answer is positive -- a
well-designed program really works.
As they progressed through school, the Perry children were
less likely to be assigned to a special education class for
the mentally retarded. Their attitude toward school was
also better, and their parents were more enthusiastic about
their youngsters' schooling. Their high-school grade point
average was higher. By age 19, two-thirds had graduated
from high school, compared with 45 percent of those who
didn't attend preschool.
Most remarkably, the impact of those preschool years still
persists. By almost any measure we might care about --
education, income, crime, family stability -- the contrast
with those who didn't attend Perry is striking. When they
were 27, the preschool group scored higher on tests of
literacy. Now they are in their 40's, many with children
and even grandchildren of their own. Nearly twice as many
have earned college degrees (one has a Ph.D.). More of them
have jobs: 76 percent versus 62 percent. They are more
likely to own their home, own a car and have a savings
account. They are less likely to have been on welfare. They
earn considerably more -- $20,800 versus $15,300 -- and
that difference pushes them well above the poverty line.
The crime statistics reveal similarly significant
differences. Compared with the control group, fewer
preschoolers have gone on to be arrested for violent
crimes, drug-related crimes or property crimes. Only about
half as many (28 percent versus 52 percent) have been
sentenced to prison or jail. Preschool also seems to have
affected their decisions about family life. More of the
males in the Perry contingent have been married (68 percent
versus 51 percent, though they are also more likely than
those who didn't attend Perry to have been married more
than once) and almost twice as many have raised their own
children (57 percent versus 30 percent). These men report
fewer serious complaints about their health and are less
likely to use drugs.
The newest report attaches a dollar-and-cents figure to
this good news. Economists estimate that the return to
society is more than $250,000 (calculated in 2000 dollars)
on an investment of just $15,166 -- that's 17 dollars for
every dollar invested.
There are no miracles here. Not everyone who attended Perry
became a model citizen -- the crime figures alone make that
plain -- and some of those who didn't attend preschool have
fared well. But because their opportunities are so
constricted, the odds are stacked against kids who grow up
in neighborhoods like Ypsilanti's South Side. Bluntly put,
these are the children of whom we expect the least -- and
overall, the life histories of the control group confirm
those expectations.
By contrast, many of those who went to Perry found their
way to more stable lives. One graduate, a sales manager,
has moved back to the South Side neighborhood, where he
devotes much of his time to his church group, ''giving
back'' to the community. ''I'm still using the discipline
of school,'' he said. ''The harder you work in school or in
life, the more you get out of it.'' One Perry alum said
that when she was in her mid-20's, living on welfare and
''borrowing'' from her mother, she ''woke up one day to
decide that was just wrong. I apologized to my mother and
went to work in the factory. When I had the money, I bought
Mom all new living-room furniture. I stopped dating the
wrong kind of guys, and eventually I got married.'' Now
she's a union leader, and when she had children of her own,
there was no doubt they'd go to preschool.
Why did Perry have such an impact? Though the data can't
provide a definitive answer, a plausible interpretation is
that the experience proved to be a timely intervention,
altering the arc of these children's lives. Preschool gave
them the intellectual tools to do better in school. When
they succeeded academically, they became more committed to
education, and so they stayed on. Then, because a diploma
opened up new economic opportunities, crime proved a less
appealing alternative.
The strategy first developed at Perry is now packaged as
the High/Scope curriculum and is widely used across the
nation. Other well-conceived preschool initiatives have
also generated impressive long-term results, including the
Chicago school district's Child-Parent Center Program,
which brings mothers and relatives into the schools, and
the Carolina Abecedarian Project, in which intervention
begins during the very first weeks of an infant's life and
carries on until kindergarten.
These successes have given ammunition to those who champion
expanded preschool opportunities -- not just for poor
children but for all children. Oklahoma and Georgia have
been leaders in the movement for universal prekindergarten,
and two years ago, Florida became the first state to pass a
constitutional amendment requiring ''high quality''
preschool for all 4-year-olds. ''I testified in Florida,''
said Evelyn Moore, one of the original teachers at Perry
Preschool, who is now president of the National Black Child
Development Institute. ''The research has been vital in
getting people to understand why early childhood education
matters.'' Give us the child to age 7, the Jesuits say, and
we'll give you the man. Give us the child at age 3, these
findings suggest, and with quality preschool it's possible
to work wonders.
David L. Kirp is a professor of public policy at the
University of California at Berkeley and the author of
''Shakespeare, Einstein and the Bottom Line: The Marketing
of Higher Education.''
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/magazine/21IDEA.html?ex=1102147786&ei=1&en=d2b29de68db7dcc5
At one level, the debate is over current controversies in public education: Many parents believe that their children, mostly in elite schools, are being pushed too hard in a hypercompetitive atmosphere. But other parents are complaining about a decline in programs for gifted children, leaving students to languish in "untracked" and unstimulating classrooms. Some critics of education believe that boys especially are languishing in schools that emphasize cooperation instead of competition. No Child Left Behind, indeed.Fascinating look at the tyranny of low expectations....But the basic issue is the same one raised four decades ago by Kurt Vonnegut in "Harrison Bergeron," a short story set in the America of 2081, about a 14-year-old genius and star athlete. To keep others from feeling inferior, the Handicapper General weighs him down with 300-pound weights and makes him wear earphones that blast noise, so he cannot take "unfair advantage" of his brain.
That's hardly the America of 2004, but today's children do grow up with soccer leagues and spelling bees where everyone gets a prize. On some playgrounds dodge ball is deemed too traumatic to the dodging-impaired. Some parents consider musical chairs dangerously exclusionary.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Board President Bill Keys said any talk of closing a school is "very preliminary" and rests on enrollment forecasts for 2010.He said, though, that it was important for people to know that a school closure is among the options the district is putting forward.
"It might be necessary," he said, "but it's not something that's desirable."
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
"Madison School District parents could face a difficult community discussion next spring over whether to close one of the district's 30 elementary schools.
Superintendent Art Rainwater said Thursday that all options, including closing a school, must be considered to deal with an expected shift in student population from the city's East and North sides to the South and West sides."
Story continues at the State Journal.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Steve Rosenblum forwarded this article and asks "Are we training our children to accept this level of monitoring....?" A few schools have begun monitoring students' arrivals and departures using technology similar to that used to track livestock. - Matt Richtel
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Sara Tarver forwarded this 10 point piece on MYTHS ABOUT DIRECT INSTRUCTION And RESEARCH THAT REFUTES THOSE MYTHS
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
This announcement was posted on the MMSD Web site:
Monday November 29th, 2004
7:00pm - Performance & Achievement, Doyle Admin Building, Rm 103
* Research-Base Underlying MMSD Mathematics Curriculum & Instruction
If you have questions or concerns about the math curriculum, I'd guess that you might want to attend this meeting.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Sarah Carr on the growing use of private funding sources in public schools.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
An article in the Wisconsin State Journal on Tuesday, November 16, reports that Carol Carstensen and Bill Clingan will run for re-election to the school board.
A lively debate during school board elections will help shape better policies and improve programs for Madison�s children. A lively debate, of course, requires a candidate to challenge the incumbents.
You can be a candidate!
You can begin circulating nomination papers on Sunday, December 1, barely three weeks from now! You need only 100 signatures by January 7, 2005, to get your name on the ballot! You can get full details at the Web pages of the city clerk.
You won�t be alone. A strong network of experienced activists from all across the city will help with research, organizing, fundraising, and all the other necessities of running a campaign.
As a candidate, you would run city-wide for a one of two numbered seats currently held by Bill Clingan (Seat 6) and Carol Carstensen (Seat 7).
If you�d like to know more about how to run, you can find the details on the Web site of the city clerk. Or, feel free to contact Jim Zellmer, webmaster of www.schoolinfosystem.org, (608)271-9622, zellmer@mac.com; Don Severson, Active Citizens for Education, (608)238-8300, donleader@aol.com; Ed Blume, (608)225-6591, edblume@mailbag.com.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Jamall Abdul-Alim on the Maple Dale-Indian Hill School District's attempt to use DVD's for first through third graders.
"Buenos dias," says Senor Morris, the instructor featured in the DVD set "Elementary Spanish" - a program the Maple Dale-Indian Hill School District is using for the first time this year to teach Spanish to first- through third-graders.In Spanish, the phrase means "good morning."
But the days of Spanish instruction for students at Indian Hill may not be as good as they once were, educators say.
Last year, a teacher stood in the place now occupied by the TV set and DVD player. Budget cuts brought on by declining enrollment led district officials to say adios to Spanish teacher Mara Malloy - called Senora Malloy by her students.
She has been replaced by the DVD Spanish instruction package produced by Northern Arizona University.
The district saved thousands of dollars in Malloy's part-time teacher salary and benefits. The DVD package cost $3,000.
But educators and students say there is a deeper cost associated with the switch from live teacher to technology that transcends dollars. They lament the lack of interaction between student and teacher, and worry that will lead to less academic success.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Reading Jason Shephard's excellent "Robarts Gets The Treatment" made me think about what we should expect from our elected officials.
Here are my initial thoughts:
I consider Russ Feingold to be nearly a perfect politician. He's idealist, yet has classic political abilities. He's also very smart. Idealist in terms of compaign finance and local communications, political in terms of timely, political votes (NRA and Tax Giveaway) and smart (debates: where he shows that he knows the game very well). To his credit, he's always willing to chat and ask questions. I'm interested in hearing your views. Click comments and write.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
On October 8, 2004, Isthmus newspaper ran a story about how the Madison Schools replaced two not-for-profit after school day care programs with its own "Safe Haven" programs run by the Madison School-Community Recreation department.
Jane Sekulski, a mother whose child was in a displaced program, provides her responses to the article. This letter is a longer version of a letter published in Isthmus on November 11.
To the Editor:
As a parent of a 5th grader at Midvale-Lincoln school, I would like to respond to the article "Not just for rich white kids" by Jason Shepard, Oct 8, 2004.
Our school is a "paired" school, meaning that the combined population of both the Midvale and Lincoln neighborhoods attend the Midvale "campus" for grades K-2, and then they attend grades 3-5 at the Lincoln "campus". The schools are about 8 miles apart.
As a single mother, working full time, I need full time after school child care. For 5 years my son has attended the Wisconsin Youth
Company After School program at the Midvale campus. Grades 3-5 take the regular school bus from Lincoln to the program at Midvale. We live near Midvale.
After School has served Midvale as a K-5 program for 25 years, and over the years its program has gotten better and better. I have had many interactions with staff about issues that have come up, and in some cases my son's teachers and the school counselor were also
involved. I am glad to say that I respect After School all the more for being able to work out situations with parents, kids and teachers
in a caring and professional way, where it was so obvious that the
most important goal was the welfare of my child.
When a Safe Haven program was started at the Lincoln campus, some years ago, I thought it was great that the Lincoln neighborhood kids
would have a program too. No one has to tell me how much kids benefit from an after school program. I assumed that the Lincoln
Safe Haven was K-5, like After School at Midvale. But, in 2003they started a K-2 Safe Haven program at the Midvale campus, and each day when I picked up my son I saw taxi cabs and Mr. Mom's vans loading up kids to take them home to the Lincoln neighborhood. Many parents wondered why these kids weren't taking the regular buses to Lincoln at 3pm to attend the Safe Haven there. It seemed odd -- why would Lincoln families prefer to have their kids 8 miles away, and
separated from their siblings in grades 3-5? For one year, Safe Haven and After School both operated programs at Midvale.
In spring of 2004, the K-2 parents were told that After School would
no longer provide care at Midvale, and that instead the care would be
by Safe Haven. The hours of Safe Haven would be until 4:30pm (After School is 5:45). There would be care at ONLY the Lincoln campus on days when the kids are off school. There would be no care anywhere for Spring or Winter break. (After School provides this.) And, the K-2 children would attend the Midvale Safe Haven, while the 3-5 children (like my son) would attend the Lincoln Safe Haven, with transportation home provided back to the children's home neighborhood.
They were told that the reason for the change was sothat "substantially more" low income kids would be served.
The After School parents of grades 3-5 were not informed of any of this. The principal, alas, forgot to tell us. We heard about it several weeks later, when we got a flyer from MSCR saying that "due to excellent parent input" they had decided to change several things with Safe Haven. Evidently the K-2 parents had something to say.
The hours were increased to match After School's, and the programs were changed completely to BOTH be K-5 programs, with the children
to attend the one near their homes. The fee structure now allowed for
part time care (which After School had always provided). Full time care was to cost $32/month MORE than After School, while the cost of
Monday-only care would be $50/month LESS than After School had charged.
Many of us met with the principal then and beseeched him to reconsider. We felt that After School had been such a great asset to our community and a very good partner with the school district. We knew that After School was non-profit, and felt it was probably not in the business to make money, but rather that it seemed really devoted to children. The program was by no means "all white rich kids". One of the lead counselors was African American, and our kids loved him and the other staff, too. We asked why the district couldn't contract out with After School to serve kids who needed
scholarships. We couldn't believe that such a good program, with 25 years of experience, was being replaced by a program that didn't even know that a working parent needs care past 4:30pm.
I pointed out to him that the cost of full time care for me would go up $32/month with Safe Haven, while the 'Monday-only' part-time care would be, strangely, $50 less. Later, MSCR changed the full time tuition to match After School's, but kept the bargain rate for Monday-only care.
The reason After School charges more for fewer days of care seems
obvious -- it is less cost effective to staff a program that is tilted to more attendence on Mondays. How does Safe Haven do it? Ah, that is the question. Safe Haven has something that After School doesn't have -- Fund 80.
I requested and received the following figures on the enrollment and expensesat the Lincoln and Midvale Safe Havens, from the director of MSCR:
Lincoln Safe Haven: Total cost in projected budget: $69,047
Revenues: United Way $15,000
Fees paid and Dane County funds: $8,500
Tax Levy: $45,547
Children enrolled: 28
Children on assistance: 23
Children paying full fees: 5
Full time children: 28 out of 28
Midvale Safe Haven: Total cost in projected budget: $87,914
Revenues: United Way $0
Fees paid and Dane County funds: $35,000
Tax Levy: $52,914
Children enrolled 35 (Capacity = 60)
Children on assistance: 3 (2 others unknown yet)
Children paying full fees: 30
Full time children: 10 out of 35
So, even though only 5 out of 35 students at the Midvale program are on public assistance (15%), about 60% of the budget comes from Fund 80 tax levy. More importantly, ONLY 10 of the Midvale children are full time. This is about 30%. For 5 low-income children, scholarships for full time at After School would have been $11,070. This seems a lot less than the $52,914 the tax payers are now
paying for Midvale.
And, as a tax payer, where would you rather have your tax dollars go -- to fund a child at Safe Haven, where the Monday-only "rich white kids" pay $50/month LESS, or at After School, where the paying families are pulling their own weight?
MMSD has communicated to me that, "It will take a few more months to get the Midvale program filled up with low-income children, with the help of the school social worker and the principal making referrals and contact with families who need the program." It is true that the principal may recommend more students to Safe Haven. But for the district to assume that 25 more of them are living near Midvale and will attend the Midvale program is unrealistic -- if not impossible.
Much more likely is that new low-income referrals will attend the Lincoln Safe Haven.
Mr. Shepard says in his article that "private providers have not done a good job recruiting students from low-income families who would qualify for scholarships paid for by Dane County and outside grants". The question is, who is responsible for "recruiting" students for Safe Haven? The Wisconsin Youth Company has said that
they did not turn away any students at the Midvale program last year. Is Wisconsin Youth expected to have a list of students in each school who need after school services, so that they can recruit those that are low-income? But at the same time, does even Safe Haven itself do this? MMSD seems to say that the principals and
social workers at the schools make referrals, not Safe Haven.
Could the principals refer students for subsidized care and ask that they be funded to attend After School instead of Safe Haven? After School has expressed interest in providing such care, including the homework component. Why is it considered ok for Safe Haven to receive Fund 80 tax payer funds to do the job of serving low-income kids, but After School is somehow expected to do that job by
"recruiting students from low-income families who would qualify for scholarships paid for by Dane County and outside grants"?
Jane Sekulski
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Marcia Bastian forwarded this link to edweek's article on Science DI.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
She sees the school for the first time on her daughter's last day, and on a late June afternoon, with a crowd around, Sheila Hutton does not see much. The halls are locked and the classrooms disassembled. The teachers are indistinguishable from the parents, all in familiar conversation with neighbors and friends. Hutton, the stranger from Washington, takes in what she can as she finds a seat in the gymnasium. Purple banners herald the athletic championships the high school has won. Shimmery silver balloons bob on their tethers. The place already is packed.Via Joanne Jacobs Maria Glod's High Achiever's Leaving Schools Behind is also well worth reading.In this faraway dot on a New Hampshire map -- a rural curve in the road, nearly to Canada -- her daughter is graduating. Hutton scans the program listing the 37 members of the Groveton High Class of '04. About halfway down the names, after Holmes, before Karl: Michelle Teresa Hutton, a girl with bubbly charm and a Pepsodent smile.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
A lively debate during school board elections will help shape better policies and improve programs for Madison�s children. A lively debate, of course, requires more than one candidate in a race. You can be one of those candidates!
You can begin circulating nomination papers on Sunday, December 1, barely three weeks from now! You need only 100 signatures by 5:00 p.m. on January 4, 2005, to get your name on the ballot! You can get full details at the Web pages of the city clerk.
You won�t be alone. A strong network of experienced activists from all across the city will help with research, organizing, fundraising, and all the other necessities of running a campaign.
As a candidate, you would run city-wide for a one of two numbered seats currently held by Bill Clingan (Seat 6) and Carol Carstensen (Seat 7).
If you�d like to know more about how to run, you can find the details on the Web site of the city clerk. Or, feel free to contact Jim Zellmer, webmaster of www.schoolinfosystem.org, (608)271-9622, zellmer@mac.com; Don Severson, Active Citizens for Education, (608)238-8300, donleader@aol.com; Ed Blume, (608)225-6591, edblume@mailbag.com.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
David Bernhardt sent along information on Clyde Hertzman: Professor of Health Care and Epidemiology Director, Human Early Learning Partnership Co-Editor, Developmental Health and the Wealth of Nations University of British Columbia presentation November 18, 2004 @ The Waisman Conference Center (North Tower, 2nd Floor): 3:30 to 4:30p.m. Directions
Questions: contact Jane Lambert 608 265 4592 or jflamber at wisc dot edu
PDF announcement document (8.5 x 11)
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Community members are invited to join the Madison TAG Parents Group to hear Pam Clinkenbeard, Ph.D. talk on the topic of "Best Practices in Gifted and Talented Education" this Thursday, November 11, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 209 of the Doyle Administration Building.
Dr. Clinkendbeard is Professor of Educational Foundations at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. She teaches courses in educational psychology, student motivation, child and adolescent development, and testing and measurement. She is a past president of the Wisconsin Association for Talented and Gifted and is currently on its board. She was a member of the Board of Directors of the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) from 1990-1996, and also served as Recording Secretary. She is also on the advisory boards of the Midwest Talent Search (MTS) and the Wisconsin Center for Academically Talented Youth (WCATY). Pam received her doctorate in educational psychology and gifted education from Purdue University, studying with John Feldhusen. She then ran educational programs for the Duke University Talent Search, followed by several years teaching at the University of Georgia and coordinating the graduate program in gifted education. She was on the faculty of Yale University and the National Research Center for the Gifted and Talented, and worked with Robert J. Sternberg conducting research on his triarchic theory of intelligence and on motivation and gifted students. She has written several book chapters and has published articles in Gifted Child Quarterly, Journal for Education of the Gifted, and Roeper Review. She received the NAGC Early Researcher award, and is working on a project investigating the motivational patterns of gifted students. Pam grew up in Indiana, where her parents were teachers, and she graduated from DePauw University. She currently lives in Madison, and we are delighted that she is willing to share her expertise with us.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Norm and Dolores Mishelow gave an informative presentation Sunday on their successful Milwaukee Barton School and 27th Street school reading programs. Background
3.7MB MP3 - ideal for your MP3 Player/iPod | Quicktime Video
Transcripts to Follow. DVD copy is also available - email me if you'd like one: zellmer at mailbag dot com
In a related matter, Madison School Board Member Carol Carstensen writes in the Wisconsin State Journal in support of the District's recent rejection of $2m in Federal Reading First money (click below).
Carol Carstensen: Why Madison schools rejected federal grant
2:04 pm 11/02/04
Carol Carstensen
Discussions about approaches to teaching reading seem to generate a lot of heat and not much light.
The Madison School District s approach to reading meets the criteria (80 percent proficient readers) established by the federal government's Reading First initiative. However, the district was told by the federal government evaluator, Kathy Howe, that if we wanted to continue to receive Reading First money, we would have to adopt a program where teachers were given scripted daily lesson plans that would not allow for teacher judgment about instruction.
The district's approach to reading has been developed over several years in consultation with UW-Madison and national reading experts. It is not, however, one of the commercially produced programs that the Bush administration demands as a condition of continuing the funding.
The requirement that we adopt a scripted program is in direct conflict with the national research that shows students learn best with highly trained teachers making sound judgments about the content, sequence and pacing of instruction for individual students.
As a result of the district's approach, we have seen steady growth in the percentage of third-graders who score at the proficient and advanced levels and the growth has been especially significant for low-income children of color.
Howe admits that she cannot provide data indicating the same level of success if the district adopted one of the Bush administration's approved programs. In fact, a recent study by UW-Milwaukee professor Randall Ryder found that the scripted programs were less effective than programs that encouraged a more flexible approach. That finding is supported by Madison's own data.
For the last six years, one of the school board's priorities has been to have all third- graders read at grade level. We are close to achieving that goal. The progress we have made could not have occurred without highly trained, effective teachers.
Our success is also due to the hundreds of community volunteers who have been trained by the Schools of Hope initiative to work with children on reading. Madison has good reason to be proud that the cooperation between the schools and the community has worked to help so many children become successful readers.
Carstensen is a Madison School Board member. Here's a link to the original WSJ page (they will 404 (page not found) this link in the near future)
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
This week's Isthmus includes a damning internal assessment of Reading Recovery, "a remedial first-grade reading program considered a cornerstone of Madison's school iteracy efforts."
"The district would be 'well-served to investigate other methods' to reach struggling reaaders, says the report."
One of those other methods will be presented Sunday, at 1:00 p.m., at the Madison Community Center.
You can link to the Isthmus article.
The notice of Sunday's meeting follows.
Could Madison Use Milwaukee�s Successful Reading Programs?
Norm and Dolores Mishelow
1:00 p.m.
Sunday, November 7
Madison Senior Center
330 W. Mifflin
Madison
Principal Norm Mishelow will discuss how academic achievement excels at Barton, because the school teaches reading using Direct Instruction (DI), a program that provides a detailed script for teacher-student interaction. The program focuses on small group learning and emphasizes phonics. The school also uses a math curriculum that focuses generally on building basic arithmetic skills.
Norm�s wife Dolores is a former principal of 27th Street School which was a failing school before she took over. She started DI, and their test scores soared. She used to believe in all the whole language and warm fuzzy teaching until, of course, she saw the light with DI. Norm was not using DI until Dolores nudged him to try it (after she retired) and his scores, though decent without DI, hit the stratosphere once DI got humming.
The same curriculum in MMSD elementary schools could help close the achievement gap, cut instructional costs, reduce special ed referrals, and raise achievement overall.
You can read more by connecting to Barton School.
Sponsored by www.schoolinfosystems.org and Active Citizens for Education (ACE).
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas
Two of the nation's leading education groups are calling for schools, teachers, and parents to assure that all middle school youngsters are in classrooms where "both equity and excellence are persistent goals for each learner." National Middle School Association (NMSA) and the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) have issued a joint position statement and call for action to meet the needs of high-ability and high-potential learners between 10 and 15 years of age.
The statement, entitled "Meeting the Needs of High-Ability and High-Potential Learners in the Middle Grades," is being sent to education and government leaders throughout the United States. "Our challenge is to assure that every learner has access to the highest possible quality education and the opportunities to maximize his or her learning potential," said Carol Tomlinson, past president, NAGC. "Today's middle level schools must provide strong academic programs for all young adolescents, including advanced learners," said Sue Swaim, executive director, NMSA. "Yet, these opportunities must be presented in a developmentally responsive manner for students whose development differs at a given time."
NMSA and NACG are urging schools to implement appropriate identification, assessment, and curriculum and instruction programs for students with advanced abilities and/or advanced potential. Additionally, schools should build partnerships with all adults key to these students' development, and focus on the affective development of these youngsters. Finally, the position statement calls for increased pre-service and in-service staff development for middle level teachers dealing with gifted students. The position statement includes a "call to action" to ensure equity and excellence for all learners, including those of advanced performance or potential. It suggests specific steps for district and school leaders; teachers, gifted education specialists, and support personnel; and parents to take.
The position statement can be downloaded at
www.nmsa.org/news/716_gifted.htm.
Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas