The Paper Saga Continues

Obviously Pleasantdale's administrators have nothing better to do with their time than to track down the who, what, why, when, where and how of a generous donation of brightly colored, multi-sized construction paper.

Two parents were kind enough to help carry the 84 reams of paper up to the teacher's workroom and now they are being blamed for 'forcing an employee' to let them in to the open building. Seriously?

Apparently, no good deed goes unpunished.

Rather than saying THANK YOU, the parents and donors are being railed by Dr. Fredisdorf and Principal Meg Pokorny for bringing an "unprecedented" contraband donation into the school under the guise of it being a safety precaution. What, is someone allergic to paper? Maybe they are afraid someone will get a paper cut? It obviously wasn't laced with poison for cripes sake...it was a DONATION!!

The best part is that Meg Pokorny is trying to say that paper is not stored in the teacher's workroom. If that's true, then why was there a stack of brown and black construction paper there? Why are there stacks of copy paper in there? Of course it is not stored in the teacher's workroom where teachers and students are able to access it - because she keeps it under lock and key! Teachers and students must utilize a "new distribution system" if they want any construction paper. Why do teachers have to ask for paper? Shouldn't it be readily available?

The bottom line is that they don't want this donation because it will circumvent the rigorous education process of strictly learning what is going to be tested and they don't test creativity! They don't want kids being creative. They don't want anyone's help or donations. They just want complete control of everything.
Again, who is being hurt in all of this? Oh yeah, it's those little guys at the bottom of the totem pole.
We thought we'd share an email from Meg in regard to the generous donation of paper.This email was sent out after not one, but two requests for acknowledgement that the paper was received. Notice, still no THANK YOU!

Dear Kim,

We are frequently blessed with gifts and donations from parents and in every instance that I recall, the parent either came into the office to deliver the gift or contacted me in advance to ensure that it wouldn’t cause disruption to our routine or to instruction. The paper you refer to was delivered to the teacher’s workroom after school hours, without notification to Joni, myself, or anyone in the office, although we were there at the basketball game. Two Board member requested that our custodian provide access to an area of the building closed off to non employees after 3:30. The note that accompanied the paper was discovered the next day and was addressed to “Teachers”. Unfortunately, deliveries of items under circumstances like this don’t always appear to have been made in goodfaith (sic).

I feel bad that time, effort and expense was incurred because you or someone else were given bad information. Your email mentions that you heard there was a need for construction paper at Middle School. Actually, there never was such a need. If you had contacted me in advance this could have been avoided. The fact is that we no longer keep our workroom stocked with a large selection of paper in all colors and sizes. I changed the system for how construction paper would be provided this year in order to cut down on waste and improve supply to teachers who needed it. In fact, a large shipment was delivered to school on November 17th and distributed to the teachers who had requested . If you’d like to know more about our system for supplyingteachers, (sic) just let me know. The paper found in the workroom was added to our supply reserves and will be delivered to teachers as they request it.

There are a good number of parents who, like you, are dedicated to helping me make our Middle School the best it can be. Those parents call or email me whenever they or their children experience or notice something that they think I should be aware of. If they have suggestions, I can’t always follow them, but I know that they really want to help us improve. Whenever I hear from then, I am sincere in my thanks for their help. Going forward, I hope you’ll do the same.

Meg P.

Instead of focusing on how to deliver high quality instruction schools have become preoccupied with how to produce increases in test scores. Pedro Noguera

Pleasantdale Administrators Show Their True Colors

Once upon a time there was a school district named Pleasantdale with a mission statement that read "Ensure that each student is a passionate learner empowered with the academic and social skills to responsibly choose and excel in life pursuits."

Of course the Pleasantdale administration and school board don't really follow that statement, they just like to talk about it, and point to it, and proclaim that they "don't do anything unless it is supported by the mission."

Recently, several students contacted us about the lack of construction paper at the middle school. Apparently creativity is not supported by the mission. 

Through several weeks of investigating, we learned that construction paper hadn't been ordered for the middle school students in quite a while and the only colors that were left at the middle school were a few sheets of brown and black. 

We also learned that a certain principal said the students should not be using construction paper because it took away from learning reading and math. 

Is it wrong to be passionate about the arts? What happened to empowering kids who enjoy being creative? Are their life pursuits any less important? Does the mission statement not apply to them? 

After hearing about the sad state of affairs for students that are passionate about being an artistic or creative learner, some people decided to help out. 

Thanks to the Barker, Camba and Gilman families as well as some anonymous donors, the middle school teacher's workroom was recently stocked with 64 reams of construction paper in various sizes and colors along with a note that read:

Dear Pleasantdale Middle School Teachers,

Thank you so much for a great start to the school year!  We appreciate your devotion to our children.  Please accept this donation of construction paper, as we heard there is a need for it at school.  We hope that this, in a small way, can help ensure that each student is a passionate learner and can excel in their life pursuits!

Thank you for all you do!

Sincerely,

The Barker Family, The Camba Family,

The Gilman Family

Now you would think that the principal would say something like, "Wow! How nice of them to think of our teachers and students!" or "That was thoughtful!" or even a simple, "Thanks so much!"

But no. 

Rather than acknowledging these parents, the building administrators removed the note and the paper. Yup, it's gone. They took it away.

The saddest thing is that this doesn't hurt the teachers and this doesn't hurt the generous donors. It hurts the kids.

What's also sad is that in the last election you heard several board members proclaiming to "Stay True to the Mission!" What mission were they talking about? Or maybe we should ask, who's mission?

Pleasantdale's administration is certainly not staying true to the mission of empowering students that are passionate and enjoy being creative and artistic. They are only staying true to the mission of mean spirited administrators, and they all should be ashamed of themselves.

Biased Survey Alert!

We're sure by now, every elementary school parent has received the "Elementary Parent Survey on Report Cards" in their report card folders.

We only have one question. What kind of clown put this survey together? Talk about a biased survey!

Two years ago, we did a blog post on how easy it was to find information on the Internet. A wealth of information can be gathered from Google alone, pertaining to just about anything. Tonight we conducted a search on Google using the search terms "Developing a survey" and wouldn't you know it, a whole bunch of information came up on this topic. We learned many things. It's too bad the person that developed the parent survey on report cards didn't research the topic before putting this survey together.

'The purpose of a survey is to get accurate information, not to sell or further market to your stakeholders. Despite the apparent marketing advantage this might have, this will not only bias the data you're getting (ruining the ultimate purpose of the survey), but it'll cause a certain percentage of the respondents to become cynical ('do they really care about the information I'm giving them, or is it just an excuse to sell me on this program?') and not complete the survey.'

It has been proven time and again that the way a question is asked can have an influence upon the answer. Aside from question number one, every question in the parent survey on report cards is biased.

Questions not asked in a neutral manner will lead the respondent toward a particular answer. The way a question is phrased may reflect the developer's underlying opinion.

Take for example, the question "I am satisfied that the new report card is easy to understand." The developer is leading you to believe not only that the report card is easy to understand, but also that you are satisfied with it.

Some questions can be downright confusing. Take for example question number seven. "I am satisfied with the written comments provided by teachers." Seriously, which teacher? Almost every student in the school has at least five different teachers. In grades two through four, some students have as many as seven teachers. So how can question number seven be answered? What if you are satisfied with some teachers but not with others?

Some questions, such as number three, are double barreled. In other words, there are two questions wrapped into one. A double barreled question will severely impact the results of the data being gathered.

Many parents prefer anonymity so they are free to speak their minds. Returning the survey to their child's teacher will undoubtedly curtail honest responses. What parent will freely speak their mind on this survey and then turn it in to a teacher without thinking that the teacher will be biased against their child? The intent of parents may not be to criticize the teacher, but truthfulness on a survey may be taken the wrong way. How many times have you thought to yourself, "I don't want to say anything because I am afraid they will take it out on my child"? Enough said.

What makes things even worse is that in the very near future, you are going to get the results from this survey and they will be anything but accurate. For instance, you probably won't know how many people were given the survey, how many separate families filled out the survey, the percentage of returns, etc. Families that that have more than one child can fill out several surveys based on the number of children they have thus skewing the results. For instance, if the district receives back four surveys, no one knows if they are from one family with four children (one survey for each child) or four separate families. Some people won't take the time to fill out individual surveys for each child. Are they supposed to? The directions are unclear because there are none!

The bottom line in all of this survey mumbo jumbo is that no matter what, the data that actually needs to be collected will undoubtedly be biased and inaccurate. Once again there will be fist pumping and shouts of joy declaring that everyone is either satisfied or very satisfied when in reality they couldn't be farther from the truth.

To conclude, we'd like to answer the wonderfully worded question number 9.

"Anything else we should know?"

Yes! With 13 million dollars in the bank, our administration needs to spend a little bit of money putting together a decent survey that will provide accurate data with which to build upon.

THE COMPLETE LIST OF PROBLEMS WITH HIGH-STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS

THE COMPLETE LIST OF PROBLEMS WITH HIGH-STAKES STANDARDIZED TESTS
Washington Post "The Answer Sheet" Column -- November 1, 2011
Guest Blog By Marion Brady

In 1949, I was a self-employed trucker, buying and hauling timber for 
shoring up the roofs of coal mines in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

A very long United Mine Workers strike put me out of the trucking 
business. Not having exhausted all the GI Bill benefits due me from a 
stint in the U.S. Navy, I went back to college, jumped through the 
necessary certification hoops, and started teaching in 1952 at the high 
school level.

A few days ago, I went to a reunion of the surviving members of a class 
that picked up their diplomas 50 years ago, in 1961. They were a smart 
bunch of kids. The work of a couple of them would be familiar to 
millions of Americans.

Not surprisingly, a few became teachers. Without exception, those who 
talked to me at the reunion had no regrets. But also without exception, 
none of them would now encourage anyone to enter the field. Reason 
Number One: Standardized, machine-scored, high-stakes tests.

If that comes as a surprise, credit corporate America's successful 
promotion of the idea that test scores say something important. 
Opposition to the present orgy of testing is now wrongly interpreted as 
unwillingness to be held accountable.

For those who buy that fiction, a list of some of the real reasons for 
educator opposition may be helpful.

Teachers (at least the ones the public should hope their taxes are 
supporting) oppose the tests because they focus so narrowly on reading 
and math that the young are learning to hate reading, math, and school; 
because they measure only "low level" thinking processes; because they 
put the wrong people --- test manufacturers --- in charge of American 
education; because they allow pass-fail rates to be manipulated by 
officials for political purposes; because test items simplify and 
trivialize learning.

Teachers oppose the tests because they provide minimal to no useful 
feedback; are keyed to a deeply flawed curriculum adopted in 1893; lead 
to neglect of physical conditioning, music, art, and other, non-verbal 
ways of learning; unfairly advantage those who can afford test prep; 
hide problems created by margin-of-error computations in scoring; 
penalize test-takers who think in non-standard ways.

Teachers oppose the tests because they radically limit their ability to 
adapt to learner differences; encourage use of threats, bribes, and 
other extrinsic motivators; wrongly assume that what the young will need 
to know in the future is already known; emphasize minimum achievement to 
the neglect of maximum performance; create unreasonable pressures to cheat.

Teachers oppose the tests because they reduce teacher creativity and the 
appeal of teaching as a profession; are culturally biased; have no 
"success in life" predictive power; lead to the neglect of the best and 
worst students as resources are channeled to lift marginal kids above 
pass-fail "cut lines;" are open to massive scoring errors with 
life-changing consequences.

Teachers oppose the tests because they're at odds with deep-seated 
American values about individual differences and worth; undermine a 
fundamental democratic principle that those closest to and therefore 
most knowledgeable about problems are best positioned to deal with them; 
dump major public money into corporate coffers instead of classrooms.

I, a retired teacher beyond the reach of today's "reformers," oppose the 
tests for those reasons, and for the psychological damage they do to 
kids not yet able to cope. But my particular, personal beef is that the 
tests (and the Common Core State Standards on which they're based) are 
blocking policymaker consideration of what I believe to be the most 
promising educational innovation in the last century --- the use of 
general systems theory as it developed during World War II as a tool for 
reshaping and radically simplifying the "core curriculum."

If you think that even a couple of those 25 reasons why educators oppose 
standardized tests are valid, consider getting behind what ought to be 
an option for every child's parent or guardian --- the right to say, 
without being pressured or penalized by state or local authority, "Do 
not subject my child to any test that doesn't provide useful, same-day 
or next-day information about performance."