Kentucky did not receive Race to the Top funding. While it was a disappointment last fall, we did not let it slow our work down.
Kentucky had strong reform legislation in 2009’s Senate Bill 1, and we have moved to implement our Race to the Top plan, which doubled as our Senate Bill 1 deployment plan. We have adopted Common Core Academic Standards and have used leadership networks to involve teachers, principals and district leadership in developing capacity to implement the Common Core Standards. We have approved a contract for testing in grades 3-8 and will soon approve a contract for high school end-of-course that will be among the first in the nation to assess the Common Core Standards.
We are the first state in the nation to adopt a “next-generation” accountability model that will hopefully replace the federal No Child Left Behind proficiency emphasis with an emphasis on college/career ready. It is my strong belief that Kentucky will lead the nation in the percentage gain of those who graduate college/career ready between our 2010 and 2015 graduates. My thanks to all the hardworking teachers, principals, staff, partners and KDE employees who are making this happen in spite of major budget challenges.
Today, I am proud of the KDE team and all of our leadership network participants for the work they have done in preparing for the launch of our Continuous Instructional Improvement Technology System (CIITS). Today, our teacher and leader networks will begin reviewing the Common Core Standards and deconstructed English/language arts and mathematics standards within our online SchoolNet tool. (For more information about this tool, see the press release.) Over the summer months, we will be adding all of the deconstructed standards and links to resources that are aligned to the Common Core Standards. EVERY teacher in Kentucky will have access to this tool prior to the start of the 2011-12 school year.
I thought readers would be interested in how we described the CIITS tool (powered by SchoolNet) in our Race to the Top application.
The Continuous Instructional Improvement Technology System (CIITS)
It is the Commonwealth’s vision that every Kentucky teacher will have a full set of tools available at his/her fingertips to improve every student’s learning. As a teacher prepares for a lesson, through the CIITS, he/she can access each student’s data to identify which concepts need further exploration and attention in the classroom, access exemplary lesson/unit plans and even view podcasts from master teachers or higher education faculty on key concepts across the standards. This online environment will allow educators to engage in dialogue about educational practice through social networking tools. Teachers’ use and application of the CIITS in their daily classroom practice will become an important aspect of their ongoing professional learning.
Once the first set of high-quality, aligned instructional tools have been finalized by the end of August 2010, they will be made available through the CIITS. This instructional improvement system will include the following components:
* Curriculum Resources will provide resources for curriculum mapping and vertical and horizontal alignment of instruction; also allow for cross-walking of the previous Kentucky standards to the new core standards and allows for development of learning progressions and learning targets.
* Assessment Resources will provide rich information on student learning by allowing users to build, deliver, score, and report on assessments for formative and summative purposes across all relevant levels of assessment use: classroom assessment, interim benchmark assessment, and annual accountability testing; will support assessment for learning by putting the results of these frequent assessments into teachers and students hands – increasing the descriptive feedback (and decreasing the evaluative feedback) and helping students and their teachers truly understand what they are learning; also will include standards-based grade book, student portfolios, and multiple measures reporting.
* Instruction Resources will provide instructional strategies, interventions and student learning resources, incorporating existing resources that Kentucky teachers already have and use (e.g., EncycloMedia, Kentucky Learning Depot, Kentucky Virtual Library).
* Professional Learning Resources will provide rich tools for teacher and principal informal observation and formal evaluation, teacher portfolios, and the evaluation of professional learning opportunities themselves; also will provide resources such as online learning courses for job-embedded professional development including custom publishing tools to support collaborative development and sharing of local content among professional learning teams and networks.
* School Improvement Resources will allow schools and districts to create, monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their improvement efforts. The system will allow for continuous improvement planning within schools and across districts. It will also allow school and district audits to be conducted in a more efficient manner and for schools and districts to track results against a variety of data sets.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Friday, April 22, 2011
Next Steps for Transforming Education in Kentucky Task Force
On February 21, the final report of the Transforming Education in Kentucky Task Force, Breaking New Ground, was released to the public. This task force was appointed by Governor Steven L. Beshear in October 2009 and worked over a period of 15 months studying Kentucky’s education system in order to provide recommendations to the Governor for transforming the state’s education system to meet the needs of 21st-century students.
The report contains 35 recommendations “... that would serve as a blueprint for how schools throughout the Commonwealth can make prompt and significant gains in school readiness, student proficiency, the closing of persistent achievement gaps, graduation rates and college and career readiness and how elected leaders can develop a supportive state policy environment.”
As commissioner, I will be pushing hard for three major areas of the recommendations from the task force.
The first effort centers on career and technical education (CTE). While we have some excellent programs in Kentucky through both the Education and Workforce Development Cabinet Area Technical Centers and the Carl D. Perkins programs at many of our high schools, the Governor’s task force recommended that we look at ways to elevate and integrate CTE. We will be convening a work group very soon that will include key legislators and other stakeholders. We will be asking this group to make legislative and budget recommendations for the 2012 session that will elevate and integrate career and technical education. CTE is a major tool for our efforts to increase the number of graduates who are college/career ready.
The second area of focus is alternative education. Over 75,000 students in Kentucky are in some form of alternative education; however, our data system to track the progress of these students is in great need of improvement. We will be convening a group of experts to develop legislative language and budget language for the 2012 session that will hopefully address three areas of improvement. The first area is a definition of alternative education. We must develop a definition that includes a continuum of alternative education. Alternative education could include but not be limited to behavior programs, digital learning, blended learning, early graduation, dual credit, mastery based, performance-based and other non-traditional approaches that we have not yet developed. Second, we must do a better job of tracking the data for alternative programs. We must track attendance, assignment, student results, interventions and funding. Finally, we need to address assignment to alternative programs not only for students but also staff.
Readers will recognize the two areas (career and technical education and alternative education) as major components not only of the Governor’s task force but also the graduation bill that was proposed in the recent session. These two areas have the potential to have a huge impact on graduation rates and college/career ready rates.
Finally, we will see a continued focus on early childhood education. I strongly support and will work with the Kentucky Board of Education to support, in the upcoming legislative session, the recommendations from the Governor’s task force toward funding for full-day kindergarten and increasing the number of children served in preschool programs. At the Kentucky Department of Education, we also have begun work on a Program Review for primary grades that would include kindergarten readiness standards and assessments, diagnostic assessments in primary grades and tracking students from kindergarten entry to end-of-3rd grade proficiency in math and reading. We hope to add this Program Review in the 2012-13 school year as part of the accountability model.
The Governor’s Transforming Education in Kentucky Task Force recommendations are alive, and many groups are working to implement the recommendations. We will have an annual report to the Kentucky Board of Education and the citizens of Kentucky on our progress.
The report contains 35 recommendations “... that would serve as a blueprint for how schools throughout the Commonwealth can make prompt and significant gains in school readiness, student proficiency, the closing of persistent achievement gaps, graduation rates and college and career readiness and how elected leaders can develop a supportive state policy environment.”
As commissioner, I will be pushing hard for three major areas of the recommendations from the task force.
The first effort centers on career and technical education (CTE). While we have some excellent programs in Kentucky through both the Education and Workforce Development Cabinet Area Technical Centers and the Carl D. Perkins programs at many of our high schools, the Governor’s task force recommended that we look at ways to elevate and integrate CTE. We will be convening a work group very soon that will include key legislators and other stakeholders. We will be asking this group to make legislative and budget recommendations for the 2012 session that will elevate and integrate career and technical education. CTE is a major tool for our efforts to increase the number of graduates who are college/career ready.
The second area of focus is alternative education. Over 75,000 students in Kentucky are in some form of alternative education; however, our data system to track the progress of these students is in great need of improvement. We will be convening a group of experts to develop legislative language and budget language for the 2012 session that will hopefully address three areas of improvement. The first area is a definition of alternative education. We must develop a definition that includes a continuum of alternative education. Alternative education could include but not be limited to behavior programs, digital learning, blended learning, early graduation, dual credit, mastery based, performance-based and other non-traditional approaches that we have not yet developed. Second, we must do a better job of tracking the data for alternative programs. We must track attendance, assignment, student results, interventions and funding. Finally, we need to address assignment to alternative programs not only for students but also staff.
Readers will recognize the two areas (career and technical education and alternative education) as major components not only of the Governor’s task force but also the graduation bill that was proposed in the recent session. These two areas have the potential to have a huge impact on graduation rates and college/career ready rates.
Finally, we will see a continued focus on early childhood education. I strongly support and will work with the Kentucky Board of Education to support, in the upcoming legislative session, the recommendations from the Governor’s task force toward funding for full-day kindergarten and increasing the number of children served in preschool programs. At the Kentucky Department of Education, we also have begun work on a Program Review for primary grades that would include kindergarten readiness standards and assessments, diagnostic assessments in primary grades and tracking students from kindergarten entry to end-of-3rd grade proficiency in math and reading. We hope to add this Program Review in the 2012-13 school year as part of the accountability model.
The Governor’s Transforming Education in Kentucky Task Force recommendations are alive, and many groups are working to implement the recommendations. We will have an annual report to the Kentucky Board of Education and the citizens of Kentucky on our progress.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Transparency: Best-Practice, But Messy
This week, the Kentucky Board of Education approved, in a second reading, the first step toward a Next-Generation Accountability Model for Kentucky. The board approved the next-generation student learning components for the accountability model. For more information about the model, visit the Unbridled Learning page on the KDE website.
This major step did not come easily. Since the passage of 2009’s Senate Bill 1, KDE has been working very closely with stakeholders to develop the components of the accountability model. I am certain many stakeholders have felt frustrated or confused at least once during the process. While we are always concerned that there is confusion or frustration, it is our hope that stakeholders understand the need for transparency and two-way communication in the development of the accountability model.
The Kentucky Board of Education, through the Commissioner’s Office, utilizes advisory groups to gain feedback on major policy issues. For more information about these advisory groups, check out the recent edition of Kentucky Teacher.
Over the past 12-14 months, we have worked with each of these groups to gain feedback on the proposed accountability model. We have traveled to each educational cooperative on numerous occasions to present and gain feedback from superintendents, principals and teachers.
This process is messy. We would present components of the model one week and get feedback that led to changes the next week. Superintendents would then meet in state-level meetings, and there would be confusion about the latest version of the accountability model. In an attempt to ensure that all superintendents heard the same message at the same time, we moved to a monthly webinar to provide the latest updates and hear concerns from the field.
While the entire process has been very messy with lots of potential for communication gaps, we feel that stakeholder feedback and transparency will in the long run provide the best opportunity for successful implementation of the accountability model. With the KBE action this week, it appears that we are certainly on our way to successful implementation.
Thanks to all of our stakeholders for their patience as we build a system of accountability that will drive behaviors that help more children graduate from high school with the skills needed to be ready for college and careers.
This major step did not come easily. Since the passage of 2009’s Senate Bill 1, KDE has been working very closely with stakeholders to develop the components of the accountability model. I am certain many stakeholders have felt frustrated or confused at least once during the process. While we are always concerned that there is confusion or frustration, it is our hope that stakeholders understand the need for transparency and two-way communication in the development of the accountability model.
The Kentucky Board of Education, through the Commissioner’s Office, utilizes advisory groups to gain feedback on major policy issues. For more information about these advisory groups, check out the recent edition of Kentucky Teacher.
Over the past 12-14 months, we have worked with each of these groups to gain feedback on the proposed accountability model. We have traveled to each educational cooperative on numerous occasions to present and gain feedback from superintendents, principals and teachers.
This process is messy. We would present components of the model one week and get feedback that led to changes the next week. Superintendents would then meet in state-level meetings, and there would be confusion about the latest version of the accountability model. In an attempt to ensure that all superintendents heard the same message at the same time, we moved to a monthly webinar to provide the latest updates and hear concerns from the field.
While the entire process has been very messy with lots of potential for communication gaps, we feel that stakeholder feedback and transparency will in the long run provide the best opportunity for successful implementation of the accountability model. With the KBE action this week, it appears that we are certainly on our way to successful implementation.
Thanks to all of our stakeholders for their patience as we build a system of accountability that will drive behaviors that help more children graduate from high school with the skills needed to be ready for college and careers.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Priorities for Children Should Drive Education Laws
Last weekend, I had the opportunity to attend the annual legislative session of the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). While in Washington, D.C., I also took the time to meet with legislative staff. The topic of the meeting and my visits to the “Hill” was reauthorization of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which also is known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
I have written many times that the intent of NCLB was powerful; however, we now need to push forward with a focus on college and career readiness that 2009’s Senate Bill 1 required. What is great about our position in Kentucky is that we now are leading the reform effort through our work on the Common Core Academic Standards and the work on the next-generation accountability model. It was evident in conversations with key senators, House members, legislative staff and other chief state school officers that there is a great deal of agreement on the components that will replace No Child Left Behind.
President Barack Obama has set a goal that the law would be reauthorized prior to the start of the 2011-12 school year. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has talked a great deal about the need for reauthorization and the focus on college and career readiness. Sec. Duncan also has projected that 82 percent of schools across the nation will not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) this year and thus be labeled as “failing” schools by local media. In Kentucky, our projection is that 87 percent of school districts and 60 percent of individual schools will not meet AYP this year and will be labeled as failing districts and schools by media.
Let me be clear that no one is wanting to lower standards. The push in Kentucky is to raise standards and raise expectations that ALL children will graduate from high school with the skills needed to be college- and/or career-ready.
Now is the time for action. Principals, superintendents, teachers and parents need to be communicating with their Congressional delegation that No Child Left Behind needs to be reauthorized. The following three points will be most effective:
* While NCLB had the right vision, the details of implementation have not been consistent or rigorous enough across the states.
* A reauthorization of NCLB should set high expectations for college and career readiness but leave flexibility to the states on how to meet the goals and expend funds.
* If Congress does not reauthorize NCLB, then states should be allowed to submit new accountability models for rigorous peer review and approval. The Kentucky Board of Education (KBE) will review a proposed accountability model at its April 13 meeting – see that model on KDE’s Unbridled Learning page.
The coming months are crucial. At its April and June meetings, the KBE will consider, for approval, the next-generation accountability model. We will need either reauthorization of NCLB or a waiver of requirements to implement this model, which meets the requirements of 2009’s Senate Bill 1.
But most of all, our children are waiting on us to improve their chances for success beyond high school. Thanks in advance for your advocacy.
I have written many times that the intent of NCLB was powerful; however, we now need to push forward with a focus on college and career readiness that 2009’s Senate Bill 1 required. What is great about our position in Kentucky is that we now are leading the reform effort through our work on the Common Core Academic Standards and the work on the next-generation accountability model. It was evident in conversations with key senators, House members, legislative staff and other chief state school officers that there is a great deal of agreement on the components that will replace No Child Left Behind.
President Barack Obama has set a goal that the law would be reauthorized prior to the start of the 2011-12 school year. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has talked a great deal about the need for reauthorization and the focus on college and career readiness. Sec. Duncan also has projected that 82 percent of schools across the nation will not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) this year and thus be labeled as “failing” schools by local media. In Kentucky, our projection is that 87 percent of school districts and 60 percent of individual schools will not meet AYP this year and will be labeled as failing districts and schools by media.
Let me be clear that no one is wanting to lower standards. The push in Kentucky is to raise standards and raise expectations that ALL children will graduate from high school with the skills needed to be college- and/or career-ready.
Now is the time for action. Principals, superintendents, teachers and parents need to be communicating with their Congressional delegation that No Child Left Behind needs to be reauthorized. The following three points will be most effective:
* While NCLB had the right vision, the details of implementation have not been consistent or rigorous enough across the states.
* A reauthorization of NCLB should set high expectations for college and career readiness but leave flexibility to the states on how to meet the goals and expend funds.
* If Congress does not reauthorize NCLB, then states should be allowed to submit new accountability models for rigorous peer review and approval. The Kentucky Board of Education (KBE) will review a proposed accountability model at its April 13 meeting – see that model on KDE’s Unbridled Learning page.
The coming months are crucial. At its April and June meetings, the KBE will consider, for approval, the next-generation accountability model. We will need either reauthorization of NCLB or a waiver of requirements to implement this model, which meets the requirements of 2009’s Senate Bill 1.
But most of all, our children are waiting on us to improve their chances for success beyond high school. Thanks in advance for your advocacy.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Changing Expectations for Our Children
David Karem, chair of the Kentucky Board of Education (KBE), recently provided the following letter to the editor.
House Bill 2 supported
House Bill 2 is a piece of legislation in front of the General Assembly that would raise the state's high school dropout age from 16 to 18. One of the arguments being raised against this legislation is that it is an unfunded mandate. The truth is that one of the greatest “unfunded” mandates in our commonwealth is the enormous number of Kentucky adults who have no high school diploma.
It is an absolute that without a high school diploma, you are less employable, more likely to be a resident in one of our state prisons, more likely to require welfare, and will earn significantly less over your lifetime. One of Kentucky's great challenges with regard to economic development is demonstrating to employers that we have a high quality work force. Lack of a high school diploma contributes greatly to the negative image of our commonwealth.
So strongly does the Kentucky Board of Education feel about HB 2 that it is our No. 1 and only legislative priority. The board has taken a unanimous position in favor of this legislation. The time is now to move Kentucky forward and eliminate the true unfunded mandate of a lack of high school diploma.
DAVID K. KAREM
Chairman
State Board of Education
Louisville 40202
Chairman Karem and the KBE have been clear on their goals. As commissioner, I have worked to meet the goal of the KBE by working with numerous stakeholders to draft legislation that eventually became House Bill 2 (the Graduation Bill) in the 2011 Special Session. I have testified numerous times to House and Senate committees and have been a champion for this effort during numerous Graduate Kentucky summits across Kentucky and many other public events.
We need this tool to help children reach success; however, this tool alone is not enough. We must implement excellent alternative programs for students to address behavior and learning needs. We must have programs like early graduation, early college, virtual/blended learning, mastery based learning and career/technical education. We must provide support for teachers and principals as they improve their ability to meet the needs of ALL children.
Every day and in every speech, I try to put a face on this issue. In our schools today, there are 50,000 8th-grade students. If we don’t do something different, only 17,000 of these students will graduate in 2015 having the readiness skills for college and career. We are working hard to double that number to 34,000 by 2015 through the support of tools like 2009’s Senate Bill 1. However, we also know that about 15,000 of these 8th graders will drop out of school when they are 16 or 17.
We must do MANY things differently; however, the first step begins with changing the expectations for Kentucky children and the expectations of adults (parents, teachers and administrators). It is time to come together as policy makers and decision makers in Kentucky and set these expectations through legislation and then implement the programs to make the legislation successful.
House Bill 2 supported
House Bill 2 is a piece of legislation in front of the General Assembly that would raise the state's high school dropout age from 16 to 18. One of the arguments being raised against this legislation is that it is an unfunded mandate. The truth is that one of the greatest “unfunded” mandates in our commonwealth is the enormous number of Kentucky adults who have no high school diploma.
It is an absolute that without a high school diploma, you are less employable, more likely to be a resident in one of our state prisons, more likely to require welfare, and will earn significantly less over your lifetime. One of Kentucky's great challenges with regard to economic development is demonstrating to employers that we have a high quality work force. Lack of a high school diploma contributes greatly to the negative image of our commonwealth.
So strongly does the Kentucky Board of Education feel about HB 2 that it is our No. 1 and only legislative priority. The board has taken a unanimous position in favor of this legislation. The time is now to move Kentucky forward and eliminate the true unfunded mandate of a lack of high school diploma.
DAVID K. KAREM
Chairman
State Board of Education
Louisville 40202
Chairman Karem and the KBE have been clear on their goals. As commissioner, I have worked to meet the goal of the KBE by working with numerous stakeholders to draft legislation that eventually became House Bill 2 (the Graduation Bill) in the 2011 Special Session. I have testified numerous times to House and Senate committees and have been a champion for this effort during numerous Graduate Kentucky summits across Kentucky and many other public events.
We need this tool to help children reach success; however, this tool alone is not enough. We must implement excellent alternative programs for students to address behavior and learning needs. We must have programs like early graduation, early college, virtual/blended learning, mastery based learning and career/technical education. We must provide support for teachers and principals as they improve their ability to meet the needs of ALL children.
Every day and in every speech, I try to put a face on this issue. In our schools today, there are 50,000 8th-grade students. If we don’t do something different, only 17,000 of these students will graduate in 2015 having the readiness skills for college and career. We are working hard to double that number to 34,000 by 2015 through the support of tools like 2009’s Senate Bill 1. However, we also know that about 15,000 of these 8th graders will drop out of school when they are 16 or 17.
We must do MANY things differently; however, the first step begins with changing the expectations for Kentucky children and the expectations of adults (parents, teachers and administrators). It is time to come together as policy makers and decision makers in Kentucky and set these expectations through legislation and then implement the programs to make the legislation successful.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Staff Evaluations: Performance and Process
Having been a teacher, principal, superintendent and commissioner, I have experienced the evaluation process at every level. My two key principles for evaluation are that all instruments should be aligned and that all instruments should be growth instruments.
I realize that employment decisions must eventually be made; however, I have always adhered to W. Edwards Deming’s principle that up to 95 percent of an organization’s performance is related to the processes in the organization, and most people want to do a great job. I always push for continuous improvement and growth of individuals while also working to improve processes in the organization.
The alignment principle takes some work. In Kentucky, we have 174 different versions of principal, teacher and superintendent evaluations. As I travel the state, most administrators tell me that we need to address this broken process. We are addressing this through two state committees that I have written about in numerous blogs. The Kentucky Department of Education’s (KDE’s) teacher and principal effectiveness committee work can be found at http://kyprofessionalgrowth.webs.com/.
The superintendent and school board evaluation process is work that properly resides with the Kentucky Association of School Administrators and the Kentucky School Boards Association. To ensure alignment, I hope that these groups will include the following components:
Learning Conditions/Environment – We expect every teacher to create positive conditions for learning in every classroom. We measure that by observation, discipline records, student input, parent input and many other evidences. We also should expect principals, superintendents and school boards to create a positive learning environment in the school or district. One possible measure for learning conditions is the TELL Kentucky survey that we initiated this year. Of course, the evaluation process should include the data from the survey only as a starting place to set priorities for improvement. The actual evaluation should be focused on setting goals and then working to improve processes such as facilities, empowerment, budgeting, resources and more.
Student Learning Results – Most teachers I talk with agree that student learning results are important; however, proficiency on standardized tests is not always the best way to measure teacher impact. A more valid and reliable method is growth. Most teachers agree that evaluations should include student growth from multiple measures (formative and summative). Also, most teachers agree that evaluations should include what teachers do to improve the instructional processes in the classroom, and again, there are multiple evidences of this improvement. Superintendents and principals also should be evaluated on student growth in learning. These evaluations should come from agreed-upon goals and evidences that are directly linked to the district’s strategic plan or school improvement plan.
Finally, as commissioner, I believe my evaluation process is a good model for local superintendents. The Kentucky Board of Education and I agree upon yearly goals that include student learning and improvement of key processes such as communications and support processes (e.g., budgeting, personnel, working conditions). The evaluation process happens mid-year and end-of-year and is done in public.
The ultimate goal that I want to be measured by is the college and career readiness of graduates from Kentucky public schools. The goal is a 50 percent increase in the number of graduates who are college- and career-ready. There are yearly goals that measure the progress and yearly goals for the processes that support the college and career readiness goal.
It is my hope that every board will work with their superintendents to include this key goal in the evaluation process, and then every superintendent will work with their principals to include measures that predict our success toward this goal. Finally, every teacher should know how their work is aligned to this goal of college and career readiness.
Evaluation systems should be driven by the student learning goals and learning conditions at each level. We have a lot of work to do in Kentucky, and I know our boards, superintendents, principals and teachers are all committed to this work that so directly impacts our children’s future.
I realize that employment decisions must eventually be made; however, I have always adhered to W. Edwards Deming’s principle that up to 95 percent of an organization’s performance is related to the processes in the organization, and most people want to do a great job. I always push for continuous improvement and growth of individuals while also working to improve processes in the organization.
The alignment principle takes some work. In Kentucky, we have 174 different versions of principal, teacher and superintendent evaluations. As I travel the state, most administrators tell me that we need to address this broken process. We are addressing this through two state committees that I have written about in numerous blogs. The Kentucky Department of Education’s (KDE’s) teacher and principal effectiveness committee work can be found at http://kyprofessionalgrowth.webs.com/.
The superintendent and school board evaluation process is work that properly resides with the Kentucky Association of School Administrators and the Kentucky School Boards Association. To ensure alignment, I hope that these groups will include the following components:
Learning Conditions/Environment – We expect every teacher to create positive conditions for learning in every classroom. We measure that by observation, discipline records, student input, parent input and many other evidences. We also should expect principals, superintendents and school boards to create a positive learning environment in the school or district. One possible measure for learning conditions is the TELL Kentucky survey that we initiated this year. Of course, the evaluation process should include the data from the survey only as a starting place to set priorities for improvement. The actual evaluation should be focused on setting goals and then working to improve processes such as facilities, empowerment, budgeting, resources and more.
Student Learning Results – Most teachers I talk with agree that student learning results are important; however, proficiency on standardized tests is not always the best way to measure teacher impact. A more valid and reliable method is growth. Most teachers agree that evaluations should include student growth from multiple measures (formative and summative). Also, most teachers agree that evaluations should include what teachers do to improve the instructional processes in the classroom, and again, there are multiple evidences of this improvement. Superintendents and principals also should be evaluated on student growth in learning. These evaluations should come from agreed-upon goals and evidences that are directly linked to the district’s strategic plan or school improvement plan.
Finally, as commissioner, I believe my evaluation process is a good model for local superintendents. The Kentucky Board of Education and I agree upon yearly goals that include student learning and improvement of key processes such as communications and support processes (e.g., budgeting, personnel, working conditions). The evaluation process happens mid-year and end-of-year and is done in public.
The ultimate goal that I want to be measured by is the college and career readiness of graduates from Kentucky public schools. The goal is a 50 percent increase in the number of graduates who are college- and career-ready. There are yearly goals that measure the progress and yearly goals for the processes that support the college and career readiness goal.
It is my hope that every board will work with their superintendents to include this key goal in the evaluation process, and then every superintendent will work with their principals to include measures that predict our success toward this goal. Finally, every teacher should know how their work is aligned to this goal of college and career readiness.
Evaluation systems should be driven by the student learning goals and learning conditions at each level. We have a lot of work to do in Kentucky, and I know our boards, superintendents, principals and teachers are all committed to this work that so directly impacts our children’s future.
Friday, March 11, 2011
ESEA/NCLB: Time for Refocusing
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan testified at the House Education and Workforce Committee this week. He addressed many topics, including budget issues and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization.
One statement he made gained attention from the media. Sec. Duncan said that the U.S. Department of Education was projecting that as many as 82 percent of schools will not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) next year. Many people have questioned this number; however, I believe he is pretty accurate in the projection. Certainly, something must be wrong with a system that labels 82 percent of our schools and districts as failures.
I have written about this issue in several past blogs. (NOTE: See the links at the end of this blog for those postings.) On a few occasions, my support for a rewrite of ESEA has been misinterpreted. Let me be clear that I support high expectations for all students, teachers, principals, school districts and state agencies. Our number-one goal should be student success. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) focused on student success; however, the actual details of implementation lacked equity across the nation.
What I am supporting is a change from the NCLB minimum levels of proficiency for students and schools to a focus on a college and career readiness and a focus on student growth. Kentucky is leading the way in developing an accountability model with these components to replace No Child Left Behind. I have requested that Sec. Duncan review our model. I have worked with the Council of Chief State School Officers’ (CCSSO’s) committee on next-generation accountability systems to mirror our state model after the committee’s work.
Our proposed model will be reviewed for the final time by the Kentucky Board of Education at its April 2011 meeting. If you are interested in the details of our model, see the model and the regulatory language that the KBE will be asked to approve next month here.
Finally, let me be clear that no one is trying to avoid the consequences of NCLB. We are trying to build a system that promotes high expectations for ALL children, accountability for students, teachers, principals, districts, and state agencies, and resources/support for all involved.
Blog Postings on ESEA
March 26, 2010 – Focusing on Post-High School Life and Achievement Gaps
April 23, 2010 – Vision for Education Reform in Kentucky
April 30, 2010 – Priorities for School and District Accountability
June 11, 2010 – Teacher Effectiveness
August 6, 2010 – Planning for Proficiency
One statement he made gained attention from the media. Sec. Duncan said that the U.S. Department of Education was projecting that as many as 82 percent of schools will not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) next year. Many people have questioned this number; however, I believe he is pretty accurate in the projection. Certainly, something must be wrong with a system that labels 82 percent of our schools and districts as failures.
I have written about this issue in several past blogs. (NOTE: See the links at the end of this blog for those postings.) On a few occasions, my support for a rewrite of ESEA has been misinterpreted. Let me be clear that I support high expectations for all students, teachers, principals, school districts and state agencies. Our number-one goal should be student success. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) focused on student success; however, the actual details of implementation lacked equity across the nation.
What I am supporting is a change from the NCLB minimum levels of proficiency for students and schools to a focus on a college and career readiness and a focus on student growth. Kentucky is leading the way in developing an accountability model with these components to replace No Child Left Behind. I have requested that Sec. Duncan review our model. I have worked with the Council of Chief State School Officers’ (CCSSO’s) committee on next-generation accountability systems to mirror our state model after the committee’s work.
Our proposed model will be reviewed for the final time by the Kentucky Board of Education at its April 2011 meeting. If you are interested in the details of our model, see the model and the regulatory language that the KBE will be asked to approve next month here.
Finally, let me be clear that no one is trying to avoid the consequences of NCLB. We are trying to build a system that promotes high expectations for ALL children, accountability for students, teachers, principals, districts, and state agencies, and resources/support for all involved.
Blog Postings on ESEA
March 26, 2010 – Focusing on Post-High School Life and Achievement Gaps
April 23, 2010 – Vision for Education Reform in Kentucky
April 30, 2010 – Priorities for School and District Accountability
June 11, 2010 – Teacher Effectiveness
August 6, 2010 – Planning for Proficiency
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)