Everyone's Voice - What have you got to say?: 2010

Standards Based Pilot Survey Results are in for the Elementary School.

Below are comments from parents on the Standards Based Learning/Grading program surveys.

Is there anything else you would like us to know regarding the pilot?

1. I want to emphasize that the COMMUNICATION to the parents was not good at

all. I blame Dr. Fredisdorf for the lack of communicating this new standards

based program to parents. Nov 19, 2010 7:38 PM

2. I really do believe that the concept is one that has the potential to be successful.

However, I also feel that there was not nearly enough research, site based

visits/discussions with other schools currently using the system, or expectations

communicated to parents done to adequately implement the system. Furthermore

I am very afraid if the ecpectation to implement the system distrcit wide next year

still exists. Given the current status of the program, I feel that line of thinking

needs to be reviewed. Nov 19, 2010 7:48 PM

3. My child was very stressed during this time. She did not like the retakes. She

was unusually worried about these tests. Nov 19, 2010 8:46 PM

4. There are no "do overs" in life and I think this is a dangerous lesson we are

teaching our children. My child knew that they could retake the test so didn't put

as much effort into the first taking. This is not a lesson I want my child to learn.

Nov 19, 2010 10:18 PM

5. # 6 & 9 are tricky. I love giving my child access to opportunties. However in the

real world, there are multiple opportunities to re-do test/evaluations. I think we

need to prepare our children for the real world. Also, my child is equally motivated

to learn either in the standards based approach or traditional. I stongly agree that

Standard based does not prepare them for the real world. Nov 19, 2010 11:10 PM

6. na Nov 20, 2010 1:49 AM

7. I understand the concept, but the grading sheets that were sent home were very

confusing. Nov 20, 2010 2:09 AM

8. The standards based unit was not encouraging to my child. The belief that

students cannot know sophisticated ideas because the definition is not completely

reproduced on the assessment was frustrating to my child. Many times very

intelligent individuals "know" without knowing why - in an intuitive sense. This

intuitive part of learning or knowing is sabotaged by the standards based method.

There are adequate indicators already in place within the ITBS and other

assessments our children take for the teachers to know how well the standards

are being learned. My child did not feel the learning of definition for the sake of

definitions was important and therefore did not try as hard as in the past. Nov 20, 2010 3:17 AM

9. I have no idea if my child was more or less motivated by this program, he did not

express anything about it to us at all. Nov 20, 2010 7:11 AM

10. Once they "get it"...the subject becomes,unfortuately--boring. It was hard for me

to keep her interested with other features of simple machines. Any suggestions

on how do you address that? Nov 20, 2010 11:21 AM

11. tHE GRADING WAS EXPLAINED POORLY NOT ONLY TO THE PARENTS BUT

TO THE STUDENTS AS WELL. LESS EMPHASIS SHOULD BE PUT ON

GRADES AND MORE ON LEARNING.STUDENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO

RETAKE TESTS NOR SHOULD THIS BE OFFERRED TO THEM. Nov 20, 2010 2:24 PM

12. I really don't understand the grading system and am not sure the multiple retakes

are advantageous. Nov 20, 2010 2:35 PM

13. We were pleased to be a part of the standards-based approach. Our child

understood what was expected to learn for each test. We like the level type

questions being explained to our child. We realize this takes alot of teacher time

to prepare and grade but this was a good program for our child. Nov 20, 2010 4:07 PM

14. A primary concern I have is that by implementing this program, it would seem as if

we are missing time to be teaching new concepts. If we weren't using this system

to "retest" the kids, that time could be better spent on new material. How would

the time that is spent retaking the tests have been spent if we were teaching it in a

regular manner? This also begs the question of how do we justify letting kids who

have received a 4.0 on the initial test sit there "reading" while others are taking the

retest. While independent reading is wonderful, there are already PLENTY (too

many, in my opinion) of opportunities for quiet reading. It doesn't seem fair to

make some children wait for others to catch up. I have no problem inherently with

the idea of helping kids really understand concepts that they may not have initially

learned...however, this should take place outside of regular classroom time and

should not entirely replace an initial grade, but perhaps could serve as extra credit

or something similar.

Secondly, there seems to be a lack of uniformity in the program as it stands. I'd

like much more specific information about how this will play out in subjects like

Language Arts and Math. I'm having difficulty envisioning a rollout in these two.

Finally, I find the entire program so bureaucratically top-heavy. You need not look

further than the science folder to see this. The paperwork, jargon and process

alone is off-putting, and more irritatingly, the kids are subjected to it. Why should

our children be taking time incorporating "KWL," "first attempt," and other

administrative lingo into their collective vocabulary when they could be doing

something like furthering their knowledge of concepts or conducting experiments.

It's my preference that we stick with current grading practices, but if we are

already married to this program (which is extremely unfortunate), then at a

minimum, the project needs to be rolled out at a much, much slower pace. An

autumn start date seems foolhardy when there are so many glitches in the current

pilot. Nov 20, 2010 7:53 PM

15. Were not happy with the standard base approach at this time I don't know

enough. I'm worried this is putting many kids on hold on new material they should

be learning, due to the retakes. So at this time, I hope the school will discontinue

this pilot program. Nov 20, 2010 10:00 PM

16. I felt like much of the teaching was done by the parents. It was like we had turned

in to the teachers. Okay for a short bit, and okay for enhancing the students

learning. But these were complex concepts and as non-teachers, we as parents

aren't equipped to provide the 'basics' of these topics for our kids. Also,

enhancement opportunities such as certain websites weren't provided to kids until

much later. This would have made it easier for us to work with the kids at home.

All in all, I felt that although parents should share in the teaching of our kids, I feel

like we were doing all/most of the teaching. Nov 21, 2010 2:57 PM

17. the numerical system was confusing because often a number was given without a

reference to what the max possible score was. a 2 may be good if out of 2 , but

really bad if out of 4. i'm still not really sure how my son did. he was even offered

retakes when he got the max score. why? overall, the concept makes sense, but

the results reporting is confusing. Nov 21, 2010 10:39 PM

18. I have several issues with the SB approach. First off, the "goal" of the program

seems to be almost absent as it has not yet been clearly articulated in open

meetings. If the goal is to increase test scores, I would like to know who decided

test scores were not high enough. Second, the logistics of this project are

absolutely ridiculous. Not only does the teacher have to grade and regrade and

distribute and redistribute, but students who perform extremely well are required

to get 100% on assessments. If a student can write a paragraph that ultimately

describes a concept, why is one true/false question holding him or her back with

scores of a two. In addition, those who chose not to or do not have to retake, sit

and WASTE time while others are retesting. Third, the inconsistencies from test

to test and class to class are unbearable. My child missed one t/f on one test and

got a 2 because it was a “two” question. However, on the next test, with the same

performance, my child received a 3 because the teacher felt as though it did not

represent two-quality work. Fourth, perfection is not reality. Students are already

being pressured at the middle school to take SATs, Explore, etc. Adding the

issue that your “should” retake until a 4 is earned is not realistic. Why would we

as the responsible parents want to add more pressure to these students. Those

students who struggle with school and don’t like it, are only going to not like it

more because they are going to continually see a low/retakeable grade. Fifth,

research has not been done on the school district’s end. I cannot believe

research is not readily available for parents to become better educated on the

SBA. I also have not heard evidence that a site visit was done to further support

this move either. And finally, your initial letter claimed this to be a “pilot.” A pilot is

a study, or test. You did not use a test group in this case. Nor did you wait to see

if this worked prior to suggesting that grades 3-8 would move in this direction for

every subject. I’m concerned that the Board of Education let this slip by in a

flippant manner. I am also concerned that the administrators/curriculum experts

are not following through on research of educational trends and rather making a

quick move to make a statement. This move has definitely put the district under

a microscope; a well deserved position for your schools. Nov 22, 2010 4:08 AM

19. I was not able to attend the session about this and am not sure that my child

showed me the data folder every time it came home. I am not that familiar with

the process but I suppose it is partly my fault. Nov 22, 2010 4:19 AM

20. #2 was hard to answer, because we looked at the folder every time it came home.

We know what is in it. However, ultimately, interpretation was difficult for us. For

example, how are data points that are worth a maximum of 2 averaged into the

final grade? If a child receives a 1.5 on an item with a maximum score of 2, does

this still mean that the child does not understand the material? The grading

system seems too black-and-white below 3, and rife with subjectivity between 3

and 4. There has to be room for a child to make a mistake.

#9. My child was actually de-motivated by the process as my child knew that,

should he get one item on the level 2 section wrong, he would have to retake the

WHOLE instrument over again. If our goal is really to get the kids to learn the

material, it would make more sense for the child to re-work the items missed,

instead of retaking the whole test.

#10. The whole communication process was lacking. There were not enough

parents involved in the decision to implement this sweeping change. There is not

enough data to prove that this is the best and only way to lift the children's test

scores. More information about why SBG is needed, where it came from, etc. was

needed - and is still needed. It seems only to be a "repackaged" way to teach to

the test. When I did talk with my child's teacher, they were unable to provide

enough information. The pilot should have been set up with measurable

outcomes, and with a control group.

In general, the folder is FAR too complex for younger children to understand. A

simplified folder - functioning more like a syllabus - would be more effective for

younger children. The idea that the kids will be spending time on paperwork while

they "take responsibility for their own learning" is pointless bureaucracy when this

time could be spent with teachers teaching curriculum. MAJOR simplification for

grades K - 5 or 6 is needed.

The KWL is an interesting tool that could really be used to a positive end but

SHOULD NOT BE GRADED. The idea of penalizing a child with a grade for failing

to know anything PRIOR to being taught is outrageous.

As with the complex folder being simplified for younger children, level four

questions should also not be graded until grades 5 or 6. Each child should be able

to do their best on a level four question. The responses could be listed and

discussed in class. This training should be made a part of the curriculum until

grade 5 or 6. There are some children who will naturally be able to produce level

four answers; there are more that need to be taught how the expectations have

changed, and how to produce level four responses. Again, the grading between 3

and 4 is wildly subjective and WAY too vulnerable to being wielded as a tool

against children a teacher may not think much of. Again, as the

curriculum/syllabus folder might become more complex as a child ages, the level

four expectations should become higher as a child ages.

As mentioned above, it seems that this model of SBG is simply another way to

teach to the test. Simply teaching children how to answer level four questions is

not enough to help our kids compete on the global stage. It has been said that

SBG helps teachers identify what kids do or do not know. It has also been said

that this model will allow teachers to teach kids who are visual, kinesthetic,

auditory, etc learners. Shouldn't teachers have already been able to know where a

child was "missing the boat" with any given unit of study? Shouldn't teachers have

already been addressing the different ways children learn?

It has been said that parents have expressed concern that they weren't getting

enough information on what made up their child's grades. A syllabus process with

data points outlined AND WHAT EACH DATA POINT IS WORTH would address

these concerns.

Finally, when a child receives less than a 2, which is considered mastery of the Nov 22, 2010 4:51 AM

21. I was unable to attend the meeting, so I do not understand the program

completely. I read some general information about it that another parent passed

onto me. I think it is a good idea, but I am unclear exactly how we are

implementing it. I believe it should have been discussed at Curriculium Night

and/or there should have been multiple presentations of the program. I have seen

far less important issues at the school get more coverage. One example of good

communication from our district was about 8 years ago, the second or third grade

teachers invited the parents to come into the classroom one day to show how they

taught LA. We helpled our children complete their paragraph for the day. It was

extremely helpful to me as a parent and helpled me support the program at home.

Maybe some meetings like this could be used to teach us how the program is

being used. I have read about the use of the approach and think it is a good idea.

It is possible that my husband signed my son's forms, but I can honestly say I only

saw it once. This may be a function of our family dynamics more than the school

implementation. However, I have asked my son on several occassions about the

program and he finds it a bit difficult to explain what's going on in class. He

doesn't seem to mind it, but I can't get him to really talk about it either. Its seems

to be a bit elusive to him as well. However, I feel that the success of the program

will rely heavily on the communication aspect of it, especially because it is clearly

different from the way we all went to school so, our normal parental advise on

studying or working through the material might be completely wrong and counter

productive. It seems to me what parents' are most afraid of is the unknown and

the unknown is how to get an A. That is understandable in the highly competitive

world and school district we live in and parents' concerns should be answered.

People worry about A's when we should be concerned about how much our

children are learning, especially in 3rd and 4th grade, however there is also the

self image aspect to consider and the pygmalion effect that information can have

on a child. Telling a child, he is average influences that student's self image and

can eventually become his self image. One concern I have is if students are A

students now, are told they are just right and that is perceived as a C student,

some very negative feelings may arise for individual students. I know we

implemented a similiar rating system at work several years ago, and human

nature resists it. We are must tell employees they either exceed,consistently

meet expectation, Meets mostly or does not meet expectaions but, almost

everyone translates it back to an A,B,C,D rating system. Managers give almost

all CMs and are very reluctant to give honest feeback to employees. Employees

get very defensive about anything less that a CM and do not see it as very

encouraging, usually. Just a little food for thought on the implementation of new

rating systems. I also, feel that the name of the program is quite intimidating.

There is nothing warm and fuzzy about a Standards Approach. I think the district

should continue to investigate the use of it, but should definately communicate

more to the parents about how it is specifically being implemented in our schools.

In my mind there is nothing wrong with mastering the information or developing

the minds to go beyond the classroom, so we should definately keep our minds

open to it. Hope this helps. Nov 22, 2010 5:34 PM

22. Don't feel that study materials were given to the child so they can learn at home. It

seems like the child has to already know the information or struggle with poor

grades until they learn the material. No book or homework ever comes home and

it seems as if there is no way to prepare for the upcoming test. I would like to be

able to stay involved with my childs education and help at home and this program

does not seem to support this. Nov 22, 2010 5:58 PM

23. My child never showed us a folder along the way. We have a good student so we

were okay with this pilot. Nov 23, 2010 5:25 PM

24. The pilot suffered from poor communication and poor execution. Goals were not

clearly stated nor was success criteria. In addition, the district did not clearly state

the reason for changing to the grading system.

My child had to be reminded that they needed to study and excel on the test the

first time. Their belief was that they had multiple attempts to do well, consequently

they did not have to try hard the first time. In addition kids who do well have to

wait for the rest of the class to catch up. It seems like the program to geared to

the lowest common denominator ... making every kid average and not rewarding

strong performance. It seems to follow the trend of trophies and snacks for every

child mentality that has permeated all children's activities. Nov 24, 2010 1:08 AM

25. this is very de-motivating for the kids. They know they can re-take and therefore

don't have to try hard. Why are we changing? Nov 24, 2010 1:39 AM

26. I felt it just fell short of what the parent meeting said it would be. I'm not

completely against it, but I never knew what they were supposed to study. There

was not enough info. sent home to study. The teacher told me they were

supposed to get the info in the classroom. But isn't there supposed to be some

info. to study at home. It was all too confusing. I think it has a long, long way to go

before implementing it across the board. I hope my kids are in high school by

then!! And if the teacher has moved on to another area of study, and your child

has not mastered the other area, then they still don't know the info. to be a 3.0 or

a 4.0. I also think the teachers need a litle more training on it so they can answer

your questions. Nov 27, 2010 5:24 PM

27. Had conflicts with every parent meeting you offered, including the one on the

30th. We are interested but life is so crazy with a very busy family as much

advance warning you could give to parent presentations would be helpful so it can

make it on the calendar. Nov 29, 2010 2:28 PM

28. This is a terrible pilot, helping to push children through the system! Nov 29, 2010 4:10 PM

29. I do not like this program. I we do not try this out. Nov 29, 2010 4:11 PM

30. I like how the information that the kids learned was broken down. I think smaller

doses of information is easier to learn at this age. Nov 29, 2010 4:26 PM

31. I hope that this is not implemented in our school. Nov 30, 2010 3:37 PM

32. What was presented at the parent meeting and what actually took place were two

completely different things. I never once saw opportunities for singing songs,

doing puzzles or telling stories in order to show proficiency as stated at the

meeting would happen. Do you even have puzzles for every concept that is

taught?

This program needs a lot of work before it should be sent out school wide. First of

all, how can we as parents expect to know what it is all about if the administration

and teachers don't have a good grasp of it?

I have no problem with re-takes during class time but it should be optional not

mandatory. My child was given a re-take notice on a test that had not even been

graded! My child was also given a re-take notice on a test that earned a 3.5. That

is crazy. Also, for the kids that don't need a re-take, they should not be made to sit

in the classroom reading a science book. How are they expected to extend their

learning by just sitting there? Give them something fun to do to spark their

interest! Hands on activities work best!

Also, the grading was rather subjective. It is totally ridiculous that a student cannot

get a grade higher than a D if they missed a single level two question. The level

threes and fours were correct, but one level two error and a D was given. That is

terrible!

Also, if a child needs a re-take, why do they have to re-take the entire test? Why

not just the parts they missed? If you want the kids to have multiple chances to

show knowledge in a particular area, that is one thing, but re-taking the entire test

causes multiple stresses in these kids.

The communication in regard to this pilot was the worst I have seen in the district

lately. Parents were told one thing, and another was done. For instance, at the

middle school parents were told the Spanish pilot would last all year and then

suddenly it ended after the first trimester. This program should have been

communicated to every grade level in the school because sooner or later, it will

affect those families as well.

Why haven't parents been given any research studies or a list of schools that are

currently using the program so we can evaluate it ourselves? What does LT think

of this kind of learning?

Why does our school ask for parental input and then do nothing with it? It is like

talking to a wall. Everything is pre-determined and you make parents go through

the motions as if they might actually have some say and it never happens that

way. It is a done deal long before any meeting or discussion took place. You just

want the parents to think they have a say or a chance to give input.

The best meeting on this program was the private parent meeting. It was a

chance to learn without all the empty promises and misinformation. It was a

chance to discuss, understand and compare notes. It was an opportunity to freely

express our feelings without being noted.

Also, far too much time is being spent on writing assessments and outcomes. The

teachers could not be more stressed out over this program and that stress trickles

down to the kids.

Finally, the program has potential, but not until all the glitches are fixed, it is

communicated openly and honestly and everyone from teachers to parents to kids

have a thorough understanding of what it is all about. Nov 30, 2010 4:56 PM

Everyone's Voice - What have you got to say?

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Nice Job!!

Monday, December 13, 2010

Come One and All!

Refreshing ROAR!

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Thursday, December 2, 2010

It's That Simple...

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

More Ouch!

Support this blog

We Are Always Watching

Search This Blog

Disclaimer

Just For Kids!!

Educational Websites

Sites of Interest

Teacher & Administrator Salary Database - Find out what our staff is earning

School Board Meetings

Need to reach us?

Blog Archive