Category Archives: 2014 Candidate Forum

Laurie Halverson: Supports Idea of Standards, Concerns about Common Core

Common Core Standards.The MCPS web site does not say much about “Common Core” standards but instead focuses on its own “Curriculum 2.0” and has teachers and students learning new standards through the county’s developing curriculum and teacher training. Do you support the Common Core? Is MCPS doing a good job of navigating the new standards? And, how would you direct them to do it differently?

I support the general idea of standards for school districts. Standards help parents know whether their child is meeting or exceeding expectations and parents value test scores per school for comparison purposes. Standardized test scores are one tool to help teachers identify students who need support or acceleration. They also provide a gauge for school district leaders in determining whether schools need more support or intervention.

Former state superintendent, Nancy Grasmick said in the May 25, 26, 2010 state board minutes that the purpose of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) was to close the achievement gap. But, how we can expect students who already aren’t performing at the lower performing state standard, to close the gap with a new higher standard without significant professional development and additional resources? Standards and curriculum by themselves will not close the achievement gap.

It concerns me that 500 early educators signed a statement indicating that they have “grave concerns” about CCSS: http://www.edweek.org/media/joint_statement_on_core_standards.pdf. It also concerns me that some top educators, such as Sandra Stotsky and James Milgram who were on the CCSS validation panel, refused to sign a document to approve CCSS. It concerns me that MCPS has a policy (IFA) on curriculum that states that teachers should have ongoing professional development and parents should be partners in the development of the curriculum. Yet, the minimum amount of teacher training has been optional and parents have had little role in curriculum development and don’t even have access to the learning materials at home. It concerns me that there is no plan in place on how anyone in Maryland can give input if we want to change or improve any of the standards. It concerns me that it is costing our state taxpayers a tremendous amount without legislation or a democratic process: While the federal government gave $4 billion in Race to the Top Grants to certain states, it will cost our nation at least $16 billion to implement it. Many states have passed legislation and are taking action to gain back control over the content of curriculum, but Maryland has not.

What I would do differently to direct MCPS as a Board of Education member:

I want our schools to move away from teaching to the test and emphasize teaching and learning for all subjects. A resident at Leisure World told me she was taught so well at her school years ago that there was no need to “teach to the test” because she could take any test and perform well-that is what I want for MCPS students.
I would want to see measures on how MCPS will evaluate the success of Curriculum 2.0.
If MCPS continues to adhere to CCSS next year, I would pursue mandatory professional development for CCSS. I have spoken to teachers who say that students with teachers who skipped the optional training will be at a disadvantage.
I would push for more accurate and consistent ways of identifying students for acceleration.
I would be involved at the national level, seeking ways for the public to provide feedback on the current standards and how they can be improved in the future.
I would also seek changes to the MCPS grading and reporting policy to make sure the report card accurately measures student performance and is easy for parents and students to understand.
I would ask for more data such as final exam results per school in comparison with the corresponding course grades the student achieved.
Before approving new technology, I would ask financially relevant questions such as, “Will the Chromebooks be compatible for PARCC and MAP testing?” (I heard from an administrator that MAP tests are not compatible with the newly purchased Chromebooks.)

——————————————-

As MCCPTA VP of Educational issues I attended at my expense, a White House Community Partnership Summit at the University of Pennsylvania on March 2, 2012. I wanted to give feedback to the White House about how Race to the Top policies were affecting us at the local level. Here is a link to my report:

http://mccpta.com/curriculum_dir/2011-2012/WhiteHouseSummit.pdf

Here are two excellent links on the CCSS: Building the Machine-The Common Core Documentary http://www.commoncoremovie.com/

Diane Ravitch: Everything You’ve Wanted to Know about Common Core:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/01/18/everything-you-need-to-know-about-common-core-ravitch/

Maryland State BOE Meeting minutes from May 25,26, 2010 when they discussed Race to the Top and Common Core State Standards:

http://marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/5D922A58-42B9-420F-997F-11CF4B13DEB4/24493/May25262010.pdf

Kristin Trible: Supporting Common Core

1 Reply

Responding to a Question from MoCoEdBlog on Common Core Standards. The MCPS web site does not say much about “Common Core” standards but instead focuses on its own “Curriculum 2.0” and has teachers and students learning new standards through the county’s developing curriculum and teacher training. Do you support the Common Core? Is MCPS doing a good job of navigating the new standards? And, how would you direct them to do it differently?

Response: I support the Common Core as it is a unique opportunity to ensure that educational standards are part of the national conversation and that we continue to prioritize the education of our children. The other day, I saw someone share a poorly written test and erroneously blame the Common Core standards. We continue to see individuals become confused between standards, curriculum, and testing. It is unfortunate inaccuracies such as this one that are taking away from a truly important conversation on educational standards and, just as importantly, what methods we will put in place to gather feedback and determine how to improve upon them in the future. The current standards may not yet be perfect but it is up to each school system to work with the standards and implement a strong, comprehensive curriculum that meets or exceeds those standards. MCPS has had its share of missteps in the implementation, but change was going to be difficult no matter what. It’s time to move forward and ensure our teachers are well supported and enthusiastic about teaching in a new manner. If slowing down is appropriate, we can slow down. I would not support turning back.

Candidate Forum: Laurie Halverson on Evaluating Educators

Leave a reply

Evaluating Educators.MCPS has gone its own way in Maryland on teacher evaluation. It did not participate in the Race to the Top (RttT) grant that would have given MCPS funds in exchange for implementing a test-based teacher evaluation system. Now, the state superintendent may require MCPS to adopt MSDE’s requirement that 50% of a teachers’ evaluation be determined by test scores. Would you support MCPS standing its ground or should it become more aligned with the state’s approach? Would you support the new proposal in MCPS to have student, teacher and principal feedback as part of teacher, principal and associate superintendent evaluation, respectively?

Laurie Halverson is long-time resident of Montgomery County, parent and PTA leader for over 10 years. running for Board of Education District 3.

Response

Though I do support testing as one element of input to teacher evaluations, I do not agree with the state that teacher evaluations should be based 50% on test scores. The goal is to provide balanced and fair evaluations based on the individual and professional objectives set out for each teacher. I believe it is better achieved by including feedback from students, teachers, principals and appropriate administrative staff in addition to testing to provide the best analysis of competence.

I have two concerns regarding professional reviews heavily weighted on test results. First, each year any given class will be made up of a wide range of students; some much less ready to learn than others. Expecting all students to achieve at the same rate is not equitably meeting students where they are, and judging their teachers on this same inflexible model is similarly unfair. Secondly, nearly half of the states that first committed to PARCC tests have withdrawn leaving only 12 states plus D.C., which indicates to me that there is an uncertain future for PARCC tests. I have reservations about using a test that the “jury is still out” on whether it will accurately measure learning.

Though Maryland’s Department of Education agreed in 2010 that teacher evaluations would be based 50% on test scores, MCPS disagreed and therefore decided to forego seeking the “Race to the Top” grants. MCPS legally declined to seek these grants, has not been a recipient of any of these funds, and so should not now be bound by their parameters.

The 2015 teacher contract does include a proposal to include student, teacher, principal and associate superintendent feedback as part of the evaluation. According to a recent NY Times article, there is significant value in student feedback and this is a concept I strongly support. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/technology/students-grade-teachers-and-a-start-up-harnesses-the-data.html?_r=0). Finally, I also would like to see parent feedback added to the evaluation process for teachers and principals. Parents and students can provide valuable insight on teacher and principal performance.

Candidate Forum: Evaluating Educators

2 Replies

Evaluating Educators. MCPS has gone its own way in Maryland on teacher evaluation. It did not participate in the Race to the Top (RttT) grant that would have given MCPS funds in exchange for implementing a test-based teacher evaluation system. Now, the state superintendent may require MCPS to adopt MSDE’s requirement that 50% of a teachers’ evaluation be determined by test scores. Would you support MCPS standing its ground or should it become more aligned with the state’s approach? Would you support the new proposal in MCPS to have student, teacher and principal feedback as part of teacher, principal and associate superintendent evaluation, respectively?

Response: I do not support using student test scores as a percentage of teachers’ evaluations. Too many factors play a role for student test scores to be a valid indicator of a teacher’s performance. That said, principals should review test scores with teachers to identify trends, set goals, etc. Test scores are a tool for understanding what our students have learned; they do not necessarily indicate what our teachers have taught.

For years I have supported student surveys to provide “customer” feedback to teachers. Students are able to identify effective teachers, especially when the right survey instruments are used. To take it a step further, 360 degree assessments should be embraced by MCPS as well. These 360 degree assessments (which include peer as well as student and principal evaluations) are easily administered and valuable to staff members and their supervisors. It is critical to have this type of data when evaluating teachers and ALL administrators within MCPS.