A Common Core Branding Problem or Implementation Problem?

With current actions having the governor of Louisiana filing suit against the Federal government over the Common Core State Standards and poll after poll showing new data on public perceptions regarding the standards themselves, the name Common Core, and just about everything else related to CCSS, it is no wonder that we aren’t quite sure what to make of it.

It is only going to get louder, as we get closer to the November elections, as we see candidate campaigning against (and a few for, I suppose) Common Core. Just ask the state superintendent in Arizona about the impact of the CCSS issue.

In today’s Waterbury RepublicanAmerican, Bruno Matarazzo has an interesting piece on how the topic is playing out in a true-blue state like Connecticut, a state that, back in the 1990s, was once a beacon for high educational standards. There, the issue is playing out through an Independent candidate for governor and growing concerns about the linkages between the standards and how new assessments will be used in high-stakes ways, such as teacher eval.

As Connecticut is a former stomping ground for dear ol’ Eduflack, I offered a little perspective to Matarazzo for his piece. Important for Connecticut, but also relevant for dozens of other states grappling with Common Core implementation issues. As Matarazzo writes:

PATRICK RICCARDS, THE FORMER DIRECTOR of Connecticut Coalition for Achievement Now and current director of the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation, said Common Core has a branding problem; the standards themselves are not bad. He said supporters of Common Core have done a poor job of demonstrating why a common set of education standards across the country is needed.

Riccards said supporters also forget the emotional impact the topic of education can have on an entire community, from parents to the town gadfly. People don’t want to be made to feel the way they were educated as children was wrong, he said.

“You don’t win that fight with facts and figures, you win that by winning hearts,” Riccards said.

The problem with the state’s rollout is that it wanted to accomplish too much in too little time. Even before Common Core was implemented, a new computerized assessment pilot program was launched and a new teacher evaluation format was introduced.

Riccards said the gold standard in Common Core implementation was Kentucky, which rolled it out over four years and waited until it was complete to begin working on its own assessment test that was tied to the new standards.

Rebranding Common Core and holding town hall meetings to inform the community about the standards won’t help quell the fears of people concerned about the standards, Riccards said. What Connecticut needs to do, he suggested, is focus solely on Common Core implementation and make it sure it’s done right because the state only has one chance.

“If Connecticut screws this up, there’s no going back and doing it over,” Riccards said.

There are no do-overs when it comes to Common Core implementation. In an era of instant gratification, we need to really put the time in with regard to instruction, professional development, curricular materials, and the like before we worry about how the test scores are going to be applied.

 

A Texas-Sized Step Back on Edu-Thinking

Earlier this month, the Texas Young Republicans passed a resolution adopting a two-page platform and recommending the Republican Party of Texas endorse it whole cloth in 2016. Why is this important? Well, the two-page platform included some specific language regarding education policy (in the non-Common Core-adopting Texas).

The Texas Young GOPers stated:

We believe that all children should have access to quality education. Parents have the primary right and responsibility to educate their children, and we support their right to choose public, private, charter, or home education. We support the distribution of educational funds in a manner that they follow the student to any school, whether public, private, charter or home school. We reject federal imposition of educational standards and the tying of federal education funding to adopting federally mandated standards.

Reads like the flag and apple pie, huh? Setting aside the problem of using the Oxford comma at the beginning, and then forgetting the serial comma in the second set of school descriptors, let’s take a look at the statement.

Sentence one, I’m with ya. Every child should have access to quality education. I’ll do you one better, Young Texans, every child should have access to quality public education. And high-quality public education at that.

I’m also with you on parents having the right and responsibility to educate their kids. I didn’t realize that such parental rights were under siege. If anything, the main issue seems to be what we do when parents do not exercise said right, and their kids’ education is then solely the responsibility of teachers. We should be focusing more on getting parents more involved in what happens in our schools.

Then we shift into the “money follows the child” philosophy, with an added wrinkle. Not only are we calling for equal funds to go to charters (school choice) and privates (vouchers, or school choice on steroids, depending on your perspective), but we are now saying that money should follow the home schooler? Are we suggesting that each parent who decided to home school is now entitled to a $10k or $20k tax rebate (per child), for keeping them out of the public schools altogether?

And we finally get the horcrux that continues to dog just about every education discussion. The notion that the evils of everything public education lies embedded in Common Core State Standards. Forget that Texas had no issue rejecting the “imposition of federal standards” in the first place. Forget that most states who put the standards in place didn’t get a federal dime to do so (while they may have hoped to, there were far more Race to the Top losers than there were winners). Yes, now is the time to take a strong stand on a policy decision that was made four years ago (in terms of initial adoption of the standards and tying $$ to them).

At some point, we — and that includes those young Republican Texans writing political platforms — just need to acknowledge that the vast majority of states have adopted CCSS. They decided, for a range of reasons, that these standards were better than the hodgepodge of crappy standards each individual state had developed and adjusted and weakened over the years. They did so by their own free will, and did so (presumably) because they saw it as a positive step for their state, public schools, and communities. We need to see it isn’t a bad thing that many students will be held to higher standards than their older siblings, and we should embrace it.

Most importantly, we need to see it is imprudent to try and undo a policy decision that was made eons ago (politically) and that, instead, we should focus our attentions and energies on ensuring that said standards are implemented well and done so with fidelity. That we focus on the best in terms of instructional materials and PD. That we move forward with efforts to improve those standards and make them stronger and better over time (particularly with regard to early childhood and the math). That we use this as a foundation to build a stronger public education system for ALL students, and not as a “last stand” for those looking to reopen the battles of the past.

I yield the soapbox, and suspect I won’t be asked to speak at the Texas GOP convention in 2016 …

The New PDK Survey Is Here, The New PDK Survey Is Here

In the immortal words of Steve Martin from the movie, The Jerk, “The new phone books are here! The new phone books are here!” Only instead of talking the latest white and yellow pages, where the inclusion of our name shows we are somebody, we are talking about this year’s PDK/Gallup Poll, which validates all we’ve been thinking, hearing, and saying these past 12 months on the shifts in public education.

What do this year’s results tell us? A quick sampling:

  • Overall, only slightly more than a quarter surveyed (27%) give President Obama a grade of “A” or “B” for his performance in support of public schools. That’s down nearly 15 points from three years ago.
  • We have more fait in our local school systems. Half gave their local schools an “A” or a “B.” But when asked about our nation’s schools as a whole, only 17% give similar grades to ‘Merica.
  • As we hear more about the “federal role” in education, the public is starting to absorb it. More than half (56%) said their local school board should have the greatest influence on what is being taught (a big surprise to this former school board chairman who found that the vast majority wanted the school board out of such decisions, and to just focus on the basics like funding). Only 15% though the federal government should have the most influence (and we would ask who actually thinks the feds have much influence at all, let alone the most, on what happens in our local schools.)
  • More than half (54%) do not think standardized tests are helpful to teachers (though I am guessing they are talking about high-stakes, summative tests, and not the formative or interim assessments that even teachers say they want).
  • On the controversial issue of Common Core State Standards, 81% of those surveyed have heard of CCSS, up from about two-thirds last year. And six in 10 say they oppose CCSS. The biggest reason? Standards limit the flexibility of teachers ot teach what they think is best (not the testing issue we hear so much about).
  • And in those further depressing stats, only 30% were familiar with PISA. Only half believe that American students perform below the level of other students around the globe.

What do we take away from all of this? To be kind, we don’t know what we don’t know. Public school performance and President Obama’s education positions have been relatively unchanged in recent years, yet we see huge swings in what we think of both of those today. At a time when most school board meetings go unattended and few can even name who sits on their local board of ed, we now place the greatest trust (and presumed power) in the hands of those unsung officials. We lack an understanding of assessment literacy, and are now equating everything we’ve heard about “high-stakes testing” to anything that bears the name “test.”

And let’s not forget that, while we may have these positions, they still aren’t strong enough for us to act on them. Education policy remains one of those issues that we are all concerned with, until it is time to head into the voting places. We may believe our nation’s schools are headed into the crapper, but we still elect the same federal, state, and local policymakers to oversee those schools. And while we may be concerned about teachers not being able to teach what they think is best under CCSS, other surveys show we are enthusiastic in taking away their tenure and job protections, the very things that may allow them the power to actually do what they think is best in the classroom.

Yet the PDK poll is an important measure for understanding the populace’s temperature on these issues. While we are unlikely to act on them, we are seeing a steady shift that shows we are more cynical when it comes to public education in the United States. We are lest trusting. We remain fairly uninformed. And we seem content in carrying on as is.

Sigh …

 

#CCSStime

Last week, the Learning First Alliance hosted an important Twitter Town Hall. Those of us in the Twitterverse recognize there is a great deal of negativity floating around on the Common Core State Standards. This is particularly true of the testing and high-stakes consequences attached to the coming school year.

Back in the spring, LFA issued a rare public statement urging states to take the proper time in implementing CCSS, making sure that we get it right. In its statement, LFA noted that there is only one chance to get implementation right. There are no do overs in this.

Following the LFA recommendations, several states took note. Places like New York and Washington, DC called for a pause in high-stakes consequences for at least another year so they could focus on proper implementation. Just recently, New Jersey followed suit, asking for more time before CCSS student assessment scores counted in teacher evaluation.

Even the Gates Foundation recently called for implementation and the consequences to be separated, offering a statement quite similar to the original LFA call.

To help focus the education community’s attention further, LFA set out to focus on the success stories regarding Implementation. With so many focused on the challenges and road bumps, it was important to begin talking about those states and districts that were getting it right. The LFA Get It Right podcast series now serves as that venue, spotlighting the best and promising practice in implementation.

LFA took this discussion to a new level last week with this Twitter chat, using the opportunity to talk about what states like NJ, NY, and DC should do with the extra time they have now called for. Hundreds discussed better ways to involve parents and educators. They talked about how to unpack the standards to make them easier to apply to the classroom. They spoke of the importance of real materials aligned to the standards, rather than those bearing a phony seal of approval.

It was the beginning of a very important discussion, all of which can be found at #CCSStime. Why was it so important? Mainly because it was a productive talk on how to get it right, not on urban legends or dreaming ways to short circuit standards that are not going away.

And it is one the public cares about. By early counts, it seems the #CCSStime hour-long discussion, a trending topic on Twitter that evening, included in nearly 2,000 tweets, resulting in more than 15 million impressions. That’s a lot of people giving up a summer evening to ensure we get CCSS implementation right. And a lot of concerned educators committed to improving teaching and learning for their students.

(Full disclosure, Eduflack has worked with LFA and many of its member organizations over the years.)

Universal Design and the Common Core

We continue to hear a constant, deafening drumbeat about the Common Core State Standards. The good, the bad, and the ugly. But how often does Universal Design for Learning fit into that discussion?

Over at BAM Radio, the latest episode of #CommonCoreRadio is now up. This time around, we talk with Dr. Katie Novak, a reading coordinator in the Massachusetts public schools and author of UDL Now! A Teacher’s Monday Morning Guide to Implementing Common Core Standards using Universal Design for Learning.

BAM Radio: Universal Design and the Common Core

It’s an interesting discussion of UDL and how it can actually work as part of our common core implementation efforts. Happy listening!

Seeking Assessments That Matter

To paraphrase from the classic movie Major League, “in case you haven’t noticed, and judging by the chatter and recent urban legends you haven’t, student assessments have managed to have positive impact here and there, and are threatening to be seen as a positive part of the teaching and learning process.”
Sure, student tests aren’t the Cleveland Indians finally making it to the playoffs, but we have long seen the same negative feelings and concerns attached to testing as we did for the Indians before “Wild Thing” Vaughn pitched them out of the cellar.
The improving public perceptions of testing is best seen in a new research survey conducted by Grunwald Associates on behalf of the Northwest Evaluation Association. In Make Assessment Matter: Students and Educators Want Tests That Support Learning, NWEA surveyed more than 2,000 students and educators on their perceptions of assessment. Interestingly, this seems to be the first significant study that actually asked students what they think about the tests they are taking.
There are some great write-ups of the full survey, including this piece at Education Week by Catherine Gewertz and this article at Huffington Post by Rebecca Klein.
Some of the results may surprise you. Among the highlights:
  • 81 percent of students think student test scores reflect how well teachers teach
  • 95 percent of students agree that tests are “very” or “somewhat” important for helping them and their teachers know if they are making progress in their learning during the year
  • 80 percent of students say they have not heard of new state accountability tests, despite all of the CCSS hype we hear about
  • 81 percent of students think student test scores reflect how well teachers teach
  • 64 percent of African-American students, 65 percent of Asian-American students, and 61 percent of Hispanic students believe state accountability tests are very important to their futures, compared to just 47 percent of white students
  • 78 percent of students think taking tests on computers has a positive impact on their engagement during tests, with 95 percent of district administrators and 76 percent of teachers agreeing that adaptive technology-based tests are “extremely” or “very” valuable for engaging students in learning
  • 55 percent of teachers report they never took a course in assessment literacy in their teacher prep programs
  • 96 percent of teachers who say they use assessment results do so to improve teaching and learning in the classroom
So what does it all mean? We see that students and teachers both value testing, as long as it is the right type of test. We see that, while they might not be able to define it, educators find real value in interim assessments and see them very differently than the “high-stakes” summative tests that seem to dominate the headlines. And we clearly see that much work needs to be done to build better understanding of the types of tests, why they are used, and how the data is applied. Or more simply put, we like tests if they are relevant and student learning focused.
Based on its research, NWEA offered up five recommendations for policymakers, administrators, educators, and all those involved in the learning process to consider, including:
  1. Engage with students in policy development process, especially when making testing mandates at the state, district, and classroom levels
  2. Realign assessment priorities in support of teaching and learning
  3. Establish formal learning opportunities on assessment for every teacher, principal, and building administrator
  4. Improve student learning by making educator collaboration a priority in every school district
  5. Prioritize technology readiness in every district, focusing on infrastructure and addressing glitches
It is important to note that most of these reccs do not cost us big bucks, unlike the typical policy reccs we see in education. All are focused on ensuring we spend our resources wisely and are focusing our assessment efforts on student learning, not solely on accountability.
Specifically, we should all be doing the stadium wave for number four. As testing isn’t going anywhere, it is of value to all those in the teaching and learning process to be more assessment literate, to better understand the portfolio of tests available to them, to distinguish the good from the mediocre from the useless, and to ensure that results are put to use and put to use quickly.
As we know in today’s education space, perception is the new truth. Whether we agree or not with these findings, these are the perceptions of students, teachers, and district administrators from across the nation. The scientifically valid sample gives us a clear understanding of how folks are thinking about testing. And it provides us an important building block as we shift to ensure tests have meaning and utility.
Sure, testing is not going to win the triple crown every school year. But this data makes clear that good tests are positioned to have real impact come the end of the school season. 
(Full disclosure: Eduflack has worked with the folks at both Northwest Evaluation Association and Grunwald Associates.)

Common Core Radio: Cast your Bammy Vote!

As many Eduflack readers know, for the past few months I have been a part of the BAM Radio Network, co-hosting its Common Core Radio show with educator Darren Burris. On these segments, we’ve been able to explore important issues related to effective CCSS implementation. Everything from textbook alignment to educator supports, PISA and parochial schools, early childhood education to the delay of high-stakes consequences.

I got involved in the show because I personally believe we need to do more to highlight the importance of CCSS and how to ensure it is implemented effectively. It is far too easy to demonize the standards. It is much harder to talk about what is going right and what we can learn from the process. BAM Radio has provided that platform with Common Core Radio.
With each episode, I learn something new. And I’m fortunate to work with a terrific co-host and a great producer. So it is particularly heartening to learn that Darren and I have been nominated for a Bammy Award in Education in the Talk Show Host(s) category.
The Bammies noted:
Much of the conversation around common core standards involves supporters and detractors talking at each other, past each other or exchanging dueling Twitter posts and blog posts. #Common Core Radio is where you hear Uncommonly, thoughtful, informed and civil discussions about implementing Common Core Standards. Each episode features discussion on new developments, emerging issues, trends and interviews with Common Core news makers. Both Darren and Patrick highlight interesting perspectives as well as gathering from the incredible guests on their program, from Randi Weingarten to Cheryl Scott Williams, to Governor Bob Wise.
Now the voting begins. Yeah, yeah, I know, it is an honor to just be nominated. But let’s get out there and cast some votes and show some love for Common Core Radio. Cast your votes here. As they say in Chicago, vote early, vote often!
 

Ensuring the Time for CCSS Implementation

Each day, we seem to be reading a new headline about states experiencing testing challenges. These concerns, coupled with the conspiracy theories from both the far left and far right on the “true” intents of Common Core State Standards have some looking to pull the plug on CCSS, their implementation, and the tests that go along with it.

There is no question that implementing the CCSS is a complicated endeavor, one that requires significant time and attention. Collectively, we have one chance to get this right. There are no do-overs or second chances. 
So why not ensure that we provide states and districts and schools and educators the time to actually do it right the first time? Why not make sure we take the standards, implement them, align the curriculum and materials, and provide the needed professional development BEFORE we start using test results in high-stakes ways?
That’s the topic of the latest installment of BAM Radio’s Common Core Radio show, found here.  In this episode, we speak with Cheryl Scott Williams, the executive director of the Learning First Alliance and Kathleen Porter Magee, the Bernard Lee Schwartz Fellow at the Fordham Institute.
Give it a listen!  It is a great conversation, reinforcing the importance of identifying those states and districts where CCSS implementation is going well.

“Common Sense on the Common Core”

With states, districts and educators working to ensure that
all students graduate from high school “college and career ready,” we are
hearing more and more about Common Core State Standards and their impact on the
classroom, particularly with regard to testing. What seems to be lacking from
that discussion, though, it a meaningful chronicling of what successful
implementation of the standards means. Until now.

This week, the Learning First Alliance rolled out a new
podcast series—Get It
Right: Common Sense on the Common Core
. In LFA’s own words, “to help those
committed to the standards ensure the proper implementation, the Learning First
Alliance is spotlighting those communities that are working hard to get Common
Core implementation right. These podcasts tell their stories.

The Get It Right series launches with three interesting
discussions, all of which the importance of proper planning and collaboration
in the implementation process. These podcasts include:

In addition to the podcasts themselves, LFA has also provided
resources from each of the states profiled, as well as from its
member organizations
.

If we are serious about ensuring every learner is college
and career ready, it is essential that we get CCSS implementation right. LFA’s
new effort helps all those involved in the process better understand what “getting
it right” really looks like in our states, district and schools.

This post originally appeared on the Collaborative
Communications blog
.

Full disclosure: Eduflack has worked with the Learning First Alliance and many of its member organizations over the years.