Forum Replies Created
-
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Can you summarize the assessment methods from which districts will be able to choose? The goal would be to evaluate a district’s Pre-K program against the state’s defined “Gold STANDARD Pre-K” in order to secure continued district funding, correct?
If this is an ongoing PROGRAM, where will state funding, that “districts will have much freedom with” come from? Why would we consider putting this new regulation in the state budget? Doesn’t this contradict a return to local control? Why not leave PreK in the hands of parents, communities and churches?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Oh yes, I forgot…forgive me, thinking too much about students again. There ARE Pearson quotas to meet.
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
That’s a great point Richard. Why couldn’t the bonuses be tied to dual credit accrued also? If students are taking dual credit they are college/career ready and teachers have contributed to that.
Another point that was raised on a different thread was that AP courses are being redone to align with national standards and there seems to be increased regulation that students complete the entire curriculum instead of just doing well on the test. Will teachers that want bonuses tied to AP exams be required to teach common core?
Might CLEP/DSST/NYU Language/ other Credit by Exam (CBE) which can be taken anytime, and are not tied to national standards curriculum, be linked to teacher bonuses also? I read that some students didn’t take APs because some STAAR test dates conflicted with AP test dates. Other CBE could be scheduled around the required STAAR. Of course, if a student passed a CBE in a certain subject I am not sure why they would need the STAAR EOC in that subject?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
We once left “the great task of elevating these little ones” to parents, churches and communities. Is our state government truly better equipped to define a “Gold Standard PreK” for elevating these fearfully and wonderfully made, individual little image bearers? How about we start using technology to put options in the hands of adults to whom these little ones matter most, instead of creating more systems to profile and fit them into a predefined mold?
I don’t think my oldest son was reading at grade level in the third grade. All three of my boys read later than my girls and I never labeled one of them with a standardized test. By the time my oldest was a junior in high school he had written a published casebook and won a national debate competition. He took upper level college accounting classes his Sr year in high school and graduated with 70 hours toward a bachelor’s in accounting which he completed debt free at 19yo. By the grace of God, he loves to read, learn and work and relates well to diverse people.
If the Tutt Case is any indication, I was at huge risk of having this kid removed from my home, tested and placed with total strangers, because he wouldn’t have tested at grade level (like many of his 8 & 9yo public schooled peers). Rouge judges are seemingly given that authority with the focus on “Gold Standards.”
Defining and enforcing a “Gold Standard PreK” is yet another hit to parental rights: the right to steward our money and their time more wisely.
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
“looking to the government to take the place of good parenting is a dismal alternative.” I strongly agree and taking larger and larger sums of money for the definition and accountability from parents who do a better job, is flat out wrong, not something I would have expected from AG Abbott. We once left remedial parenting to churches and communities. Now it is a state job?
Isn’t the ACA the Fed’s defined “Gold Standard Health Care?” Is it just a matter of time before the state takes money to define and hold accountable for “Gold Standard In Utero” and helps educate folks on ways to “eliminate the achievement gap between African & Hispanic Americans and Whites & Asians” (Michael Williams #1 Goal for TX Ed)?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Yes, and I believe better indicators of college and career readiness are those tests that benefit students graduating high school “college and career ready” (ACT, SAT, AP, IB, CLEP, Skilled Trade Certification…) not the TSI test. The TSI test is to place students in classes to learn material they should have learned in high school. We are failing if students aren’t ready for either College Algebra or a skilled trade coming out of high school. Why would we reward districts for funneling students into a remedial system? Shall I start quoting statistics on how many of those remedial students go on to graduate and how much student loan debt they accrue (or grant money we pay in taxes) for Non – Credit classes? We are speaking of bonuses, right? If our goal is to enslave the next generation to the government then the TSI test should absolutely be used to reward teacher bonuses.
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
I don’t think the TSI test should be used for teacher bonus allocation. That test seems created for putting students in non – Credit remedial classes (more and more of them). If the goal is to have college bound and skilled trade students ready by high school graduation why would students need the TSI test to prove teachers worthy of a bonus? That test benefits community college budgets and further contributes to over a TRILLION dollars in student loan debt and over half in default:
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
We elect local school boards. The state certifies teachers. Why can’t we let districts dole out money given by the state for teacher bonuses? Maybe locally elected board members would be more inclined to listen to parents and value teachers parents value if Phase 2 parent choice went to course and teacher level, instead of school level. Technology and transparency makes that very doable.
Teachers like to teach courses they are good at teaching and in which they feel valued. If there is a demand, why not pay the superstar algebra I I teacher to teach that course (as much as possible) district wide? Maybe the district in which that scenario works chooses to use teacher bonus money to provide a vehicle for that teacher to travel? The money should be spent to retain good teachers. Parents know best who they are. Local Admin should know best how to retain them.
And, YES, use test scores from tests useful to students (ACT/SAT/AP/IB/CLEP/Skilled Trade Certification…) not tests created for the purpose of rewarding teachers which force pressure filled benchmark testing and waste student time and tax payer money.
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Doesn’t offering money for a state defined “Gold Standard PreK,” with much freedom in how districts use the money, set younger children (toddlers/babies/in utero) up for benchmark testing like the pressure filled, early elementary benchmarks so many parents hate now?
Re: Comments last week made in the other thread that the “Testing is not out of control.” How about doing a poll of parents (the customer?) on that? No doubt many politicians believe they are Pearson’s customer and EVERYTHING, especially tax payer’s money and our children’s time, is very much under control (theirs).
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Money spent on defining and assessing a state “Gold Standard Pre K” comes out of the family budgets of parents. It will further solidify one thing we are teaching our children very well: “We can not self govern. We must depend on the state to tell us what and how to learn and to make sure we do it…according to the state’s standard.”
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
It is the state’s responsibility to educate or “provide an efficient system of public free schools” to assist parents in this God given responsibility?
If parents should be able to keep money in their pocket to choose how to feed their child and care for their own child’s healthcare should the state take a parent’s money to define a “Gold Standard Pre K” and assessment for 2, 3 and 4 year old children? And, if so, why stop at 2 yr olds? Can’t we intervene in attaining “Gold Standards” as defined by some wealthy politicians trying to take over Austin if we intervene in vitro with procedures to make sure we have no low testers?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
Won’t it further limit options by filtering more education dollars through the state to define and assess it’s “Gold Standard” for our “Pre K Class,” our 2, 3, and 4 year old children whose parents were once free to spend more money caring for their young the way they saw fit?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
How does the proposed plan provide parents more options?
Julie Jumes, 11 years ago
The program’s eligibility requirements involve, in large part, the state defined testing of children 9yo or younger? These children will be earning or not earning state money for their district based on test scores, correct? A teacher’s pay and position is based on this funding isn’t it?
Simplified terms:
The state takes money from tax payers, districts who agree to attempt to implement the state’s defined “Gold Standard Pre K” get money from the state to spend with much local level freedom as long as kids can prove up to the state’s accountability tests? Would the tools used to assess these kids happen to be adaptive assessments? Might adaptive assessments be harmful to young children and the future of Texas if they were defined by the wrong people in Austin? Might our state avoid these harms by staying out of the Pre K assessment business, leaving that to parents?
