Education by Worksheet?

What does a steady diet of worksheet learning activities do to children's natural desire to learn?

The Creativity Crisis in American Public Schools....

There is a concerted effort on the part of U.S. public schools to emphasize preparation for high stakes testing in reading and mathematics. Teachers, administrators and even schools can get the axe if their test scores are not high enough after a few years or so. So what does that mean? More standardized curriculum, rote memorization and nationalized testing. Children are left out of the decision making processes central to the educational activities they engage in. This is where creativity takes a hit. Because without autonomy, creative learning experiences are snuffed out. Should policy makers be concerned about this? Apparently not.

Senseless....

"This doesn't make sense to me. Why are we lowering standards to become a teacher when obviously Tony Bennett didn't think that teachers were qualified?" Sarah Verpooten,  Lake Central High School.

What is the reasoning behind REPA 2? Good question. We heard over and over and over from the current IDOE Administration that we had a problem with instruction and a problem with teachers. So it boggles the mind that Tony Bennett and his cohorts would create conditions for less educated and less experienced teacher and administrator candidates to educate Hoosier school children who lack comprehensive training and education.

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has a great summary  of Tony Bennett's final education initiative for the citizens of Indiana.

REPA 2 Means New Teacher Candidates Can Be Less Prepared....

REPA 2 licensing changes have been passed by the Indiana State Board of Education under Supt. Tony Bennett.

Ultimately, this change means fine art teacher candidates can now be licensed by passing a test. It doesn't matter that the teacher candidate lacks extensive knowledge of cognitive psychology, curriculum design, learning environment design, child development, instructional methods or extensive practicum and studio experience.

No teacher licensing test prep can adequately prepare a candidate for the real classroom with real children like professional schools of education. 

Would you send your child to a medical professional who was not fully trained or educated in their field?

This is an attempt to degrade the teaching profession.

The passage of REPA 2 is a sad chapter in Indiana education history.

What happens when non-educators reform public education....

From Dov Rosenberg

"Education Reform, beginning with the No Child Left Behind 
Act and continuing with Race to the Top, has produced no US score 
gains on international tests in science, math, or reading. There has 
been no shrinking of the "test score gap" by race or class, no 
reduction in child poverty, no narrowing of income inequality, 
and no diminution in the prison population. However, it has 
resulted in huge profits for Pearson and other testing firms;
 the reduction of teacher morale to its lowest level in history; 
expansion of "Teach-For-A-While" elite programs where teaching 
is viewed as a career stepping stone, and the proliferation of
education consultants and charter school leaders making 6-figure 
salaries. Look at what's going on in your city & your 
community since high-stakes testing has been imposed (2001).
 Have students in poor and under-served communities been 
empowered? Are they enjoying school more? Are their families 
being energized by the new choices they now have? Or, have 
precious portions of the school day, that should be devoted to the 
arts, music, sports, physical education, been sacrificed as schools 
are deluged with tests? Have special needs & English Language 
Learners been marginalized because they might lower a class or 
school's test profile? There is a story to be told here, school by school,
 city by city, state by state. Your TV, radio, and newspapers haven't 
told it yet. It's up to you to tell it. Be heard." - Inspired by Mark Naison

Community Control of Schools Jeopardized in Michigan?

I just learned about the Michigan state legislature's attempt to take control over all of their public schools. What does that mean for public education when school boards are ignored and marginalized? Are we witnessing an attempt at total authoritarian control of public schools? What ramifications does this have for public schools in America? From my perspective, I agree with the concerned public school advocates of Michigan,  this is bad policy and will not provide an excellent education to all children. It will, however, take away community control and funnel citizen's tax dollars to for-profit corporations. 

When control of public education is taken away from local communities, fine arts learning opportunities are bound to be further diminished by authoritarians seeking to cut education costs. We have seen this funding rationale time and time again.

Correction: REPA II Response Deadline Moved UP!

Please send your REPA II response to State Board of Education officials by November 27th!
I have just received information the meeting has been moved up, so we will plan accordingly!
Thanks so much to all of you who care deeply about keeping highly qualified educators in Indiana classrooms!

REPA II: Your Response Needed! The Deprofessionalization of Special Area Teachers by the Indiana Department of Education

It's back. Here is a summary of REPA II's rule changes that would affect fine arts and special education teachers licensing criteria:

"What does it mean for students, parents and taxpayers to have teacher candidates without a comprehensive professional education background, working with students in fine arts or special education classes across Indiana Public Schools?

What kind of learning experiences are children likely to encounter with adults who have little or no training in education methods, pedagogy or child development who have been selected to teach visual arts, music or special education students?

Do parents and taxpayers expect special education, fine arts and music education teacher candidates to have extensive training as professional educators in the areas they have been intrusted to engage Hoosier school children in?" 

Here (log in to Google) are some talking points.

Why the rush to REPA II?

Contact the Indiana State Board of Education before Dec. 5th and voice your concerns.

Please share with your parent groups! 

RttT and Divergent Thinking in US K-12 Education

The President, has created a conundrum for himself by doubling down on standardized learning experience and high stakes testing while at the same time, professing his desire to improve the development of creativity through STEM learning....high stakes testing and deep autonomous learning experiences that would facilitate the development of divergent thinking capacities is not compatible. 

Teachers must train learners to take tests in order to avoid losing their jobs.

What we will see from current federal policy makers is a continuing shift toward non consensual educational experience in our schools based on data driven approaches to learning. 

"Researchers have consistently found that an approach based on extrinsic rewards and consequences actually reduces children’s intrinsic motivation to learn (Amrein & Berliner, 2003; Good & Brophy, 1995; Kohn, 1993). Sheldon and Biddle (1998) boldly claimed that attaching high stakes to tests “obstructs students’ path to becoming lifelong, self-directed learners and alienates students from their own learning experiences in school” (p. 170). .Because of high-stakes testing and the pressure that surrounds it, children are no longer engaged in enriching experiences for the pure joy of learning-experiences whereby they make decisions, explore options, make hypotheses, or problem solve. Extrinsic motivation, in the form of rewards and consequences, has replaced learning for the sheer pleasure of learning and the internal satisfaction that comes from a job well done. Children are now under increased pressure to perform on demand, memorize mundane facts and figures, and sit for long periods of time while listening to the teacher and/or filling in circles on a worksheet."

Unless their is a change, the US Dept. of Education will continue to embrace Pavlovian approaches to educational experience more likely to be found in authoritarian societies while our economic rivals will move to emulate the best of US educational learning experiences of the past that nurtured and supported the development of vast numbers of innovative thinkers and entrepreneurialism never before seen in human history.

Fine Arts education in U.S. schools have never before become so important in the learning experiences of American children.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/1120085/on_standardized_testing_an_acei_position_paper/

Glenda Ritz to be Our New Superintendent of Public Education

Glenda Ritz has been holding a 3% lead all night.

Ritz more than holding Her own!

Ritz - Bennett election results courtesy of the Indy Star .

Bennett-Ritz Debate and Gubernatorial, State Superintendent Candidate Statements on Music and Art Education

Here is the link to the radio broadcast of the only Bennett - Glitz political debate that was held for Indiana voters by Northeast Indiana Public Radio .

------------------------------------------------------

From the Alliance for Indiana Music Education:

A questionnaire pertaining to Music Education in Indiana was submitted to the candidates for Governor and Superintendent of Public Instruction. The responses from Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Gregg, Republican State Superintendent of Public Instruction incumbent Tony Bennett, and Democratic candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction Glenda Ritz are provided after each question. Gubernatorial Libertarian candidate Rupert Boneham and Republican candidate Mike Pence did not submit responses.

Do you believe music education should be a part of the core curriculum for grades K-12 in Indiana schools? Gregg: When we talk about education we hear a lot about math, science and reading, and for good reason-these skills are the building blocks for education. But learning is more than just these basic building blocks. Our kids need a rich education-one that includes music, along with art and physical education. A well-rounded curriculum will keep our kids interested and engaged in the classroom. I am also the proud parent of a former high school band member that is now in a percussion ensemble at Vincennes University. Boneham & Pence: No response. Bennett: I believe music education is an integral part of students' overall academic experience. Music education helps enhance and support student learning in mathematics, English/Language Arts, Science-all subjects. The ways local schools and educators decide to incorporate music into the curriculum should be a reflection of student needs and local community values. As school leaders and school board members create school budgets, class schedules and calendars, music education is an integral part of the discussion. Ritz: Yes, I believe music education should be a part of the core curriculum for grades K-12 in Indiana schools.  Schools should not have to cut music programs from their curriculum due to funding or "academic" requirements.  Music offers students an opportunity to discover their talents and to learn through unique expression.

Should all Indiana students have the opportunity to be taught music by a certified music educator? Gregg: Having a dedicated teacher can make all the difference in the world in a student's life. All of our kids should have access to qualified teachers, no matter the school and no matter the subject. Boneham & Pence: No response. Bennett: We know that teachers have a tremendous impact on the long-term academic and career success of their students. Our commitment must be to ensure all students have access to a great teacher. To do so we must provide local school leaders the flexibility they need to make decisions based on student needs.                                         Ritz: Yes, Indiana students should have the opportunity to be taught music by a certified music educator.  I oppose the proposed REPA II rules on licensing that would mean teachers could just "take a test" from Pearson to become a licensed music teacher. Boneham & Pence: No response.

If an attempt is made to eliminate or severely reduce funding for music education in the next session of the general assembly, would you intervene with legislative leaders? Gregg: Yes. We believe that music and art education is vital to a well-rounded education. Studies have shown that students with a background in music and art consistently perform better in other subjects. We have heard a lot of talk about surpluses, but the truth is that we don't know how much money we have until an independent audit is completed, and if there is a surplus it has been obtained through slashing education funding. Balancing the budget on the backs of our children is simply unacceptable, and when I am governor that will not happen. Bennett: School funding decisions are not made in this way at the state level. The Indiana General Assembly is responsible for developing a biennial state budget, which includes school funding; however, local school districts determine how that money is spent on programs and curricula to support student learning. With that said, I strongly encourage each parent and guardian to advocate at the local level for continued funding for programs important to their students. Ritz: Yes, I would work with the General Assembly to stop any attempt to reduce funding for music education. Boneham & Pence: No response.

What do you foresee as the greatest challenges facing music education in Indiana? Gregg: As a former band parent, I understand that two greatest challenges facing music education in Indiana are standardized testing and funding. The more emphasis there is on standardized testing, the less focus there is on music education. Additionally, it hurts funding for music and other arts because school funding is tied to standardized testing, not having a well-rounded curriculum. Our education system, including music education, is at a critical junction. We must ensure our kids have access to good teachers and a quality education, from pre-kindergarten through college or technical school. I have an early childhood education plan to fully fund all-day kindergarten and to begin a pre-K pilot program. Indiana is one of only 8 states that does not fund pre-K education, and that is unacceptable. We need to get our kids ready to learn from day one. We also need to make sure that when discussions of education reform take place, we give teachers a seat at the table. Under my administration the days of denigrating and scapegoating teachers will end. Bennett: The most important challenge before us is how to ensure students receive the type of education that will prepare them for success after high school. We know that 31% of Indiana high school graduates attending public colleges are in Indiana need of remediation. Additionally, nearly two-thirds of all new jobs require at least some level of postsecondary education. We must continue to prepare our students for the future, and by making sure they receive quality, challenging instruction in all subjects, which ultimately offers students more opportunities to succeed. Ritz: The greatest challenges facing music education in Indiana under Tony Bennett include loss of funding, REPA II licensing proposal, and academic high-stakes testing. Boneham & Pence: No response.

What place does music education have in your education reform goals? Bennett: Driving student success is my number one goal. Due to the value music education brings students; I believe it is vital we strengthen these co-curricular activities at the local level. Communities, parents and students need to exercise their right to a well-rounded education and demand quality curriculum, activities and educators in all subject areas, including music education. Ritz: Music and the arts are vital to developing the whole child and nurturing students' talents.  All Indiana children K-12 deserve a well-rounded curriculum which must include music.  Boneham, Gregg & Pence: No response.

A tale of two approaches for learning:

Neuro scientist Beau Lotto's approach to learning weaves art, science,  autonomy, joy and play into educational experience.

 
Compare Lotto's approach (1)  to the approach predicated upon how many multiple choice questions a child can answer on a standardized test advocated by the world's most influential (2) education reformer:

Now my question to Mr. Gates is this: Under the high stakes testing schemes promoted by you and your foundation, when do teachers have significant time to facilitate project based learning experiences that weave creativity, joy, science, art, mathematics, engineering, technology and play if they are forced to push non consensual rote learning experience in order to prepare their students to pass state-mandated standardized high stakes tests?

 1. http://blog.ted.com/2012/06/26/science-is-play-beau-lotto-and-amy-otoole-at-tedglobal-2012/
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lcZbRY_bYs&feature=player_embedded#!

Vote Smart!

Looking for information on candidate's positions that are important to you?

here is an excellent resource!

http://votesmart.org/

Self Expression and the Common Core....

I was shocked to learn that Common Core Academic Standards architect David Coleman, a literary scholar and McGraw-Hill edu-entreprenuer with no background in child development or classroom teaching experience, doesn't think much of honoring children's opportunities for expressing time sensitive ideas and feelings. 

In a 2011 presentation to N.Y. Dept. of Education officials, he made the statement, “People don’t give a ‘sheet’ what you (students) feel or what you think (http://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/resources/bringing-the-common-core-to-life.html),” describing his rationale for the de-emphasis of personal expression in the development of language skills in the new National education standards.

This statement provides insight into the corporate educational establishment’s view of children, teaching and learning.

After 28 years in the classroom, from my perspective, I understand that in order to promote the healthy mental development and physical well being of children, learning should be a joyful adventure and the acquisition of knowledge should be vivid and engaging. Due to biological and environmental factors, EVERY child has a unique structure of mind. 

Is it fair to children that the Common Core reduces even further student learning opportunities through imaginative engagement?

Coleman’s inference that a stream of depersonalized text oriented seat work is the remedy to solve America’s education crisis is problematic. Results of the High School Survey of Student Engagement reveal 67 % of survey participants are disengaged from exactly these kinds of learning experiences similarly prescribed by Coleman. 

Children thrive in learning situations where their imaginative realms are engaged and their ideas are honored.  

Opportunities for children to attend art class just became more important....

Society Loses When Politicians Cut Teachers, Police and Fireman

Increasing class sizes and eliminating arts education in our schools, cutting back on police and fireman in our communities can only mean one thing. John Walsh elaborates.

The Race to Homogenize the Human Mind....

I came across this unfinished painting recently and thought it was interesting.....

Dwindling Creativity Development Opportunities In Our Schools....

Data driven education rules in today's U.S. classrooms. Children spend much of their time in school participating in information processing activities or paper and pencil selected response work sheets designed as preparation for high stakes testing events. The fine arts, have never before become so important to the schooling experiences of children. When I read articles like this, I become very, very concerned.

Arts Education Inequities in the Windy City? The Chicago Public Education Story from Chicago Teachers

To say that teachers voices have been suppressed by the corporate news media in this age of corporate driven education reform is an understatement. 

I have yet to hear teacher's concerns expressed appropriately in main stream media news broadcasts. This video by the CTU, eloquently shines a light on children's inequities for learning opportunities in the fine arts,  lack of resources and support from administrators and policymakers who govern Chicago Public Schools!

The High Costs of Standardized Testing in Indiana....

State treasure: Indiana tax payers are out of $46,229,751.00 in education funding diverted last year from public schools and paid to out-of-state standardized test publishing companies.

Time: six weeks of test prep substituted for new learning across the curricula? Get the details here at Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education.

Top that off with the physiological toll high stakes test stress has on America's children and one has to ask this question: Is the runaway train that is high stakes testing good for the educational and psycho-emotional development of students in U.S. Public Schools?

If you would like to express your concerns with the Indiana Education Select Commission, you can contact them here:
Rep. Robert Behning, Co-Chairperson h91@IN.gov
Rep. Rhonda Rhoads--h70@in.gov,
Rep. Timothy Brown, h70@in.gov
Rep. Edward Clere h72@in.gov
Rep. David Frizzell h93@in.gov
Rep. Kathleen Heuer h83@in.gov
Rep. Cindy Noe h87@in.gov
Rep. Jeffrey Thompson h28@in.gov
Rep. Greg Porter h96@in.gov
Rep. David Cheatham h69@in.gov
Rep. Clyde Kersey h43@in.gov
Rep. Vernon Smith h14@in.gov
Rep. Shelli Vandenburgh h19@in.gov
Sen. Dennis Kruse, Co-Chair Senator.Kruse@iga.in.gov
Sen. Carlin Yoder Senator.Yoder@iga.in.gov
Sen. James Banks Senator.Banks@iga.in.gov
Sen. James Buck Senator.Buck@iga.in.gov
Sen. Luke Kenley Senator.Kenley@iga.in.gov
Sen. Jean Leising Senator.Leising@iga.in.gov
Sen. Scott Schneider Senator.Schneider@iga.in.gov
Sen. Earline Rogers S3@iga.in.gov
Sen. Frank Mrvan s1@iga.in.gov
Sen. Timothy Skinner s38@iga.in.gov

Creativity, Innovation and didactic learning....

A young boy creates a machine to experiment with force and gravity in his art class.

 Recently, I participated in WFYI's Teacher Voices, Conversations About Education Forum at the Marion County Public Library. The focus of the discussion was to center on improving high school graduation rates. I made several discussion points during the event. My first comment centered on an examination of the student comments from the High School Survey of Student Engagement. Over 350,000 graduating high school seniors have taken the survey since 2006. Nearly 70 % claim they have been cognitively disengaged with their learning experiences in school. Why? A closer look at the survey data and student comments will shed light on this issue. Students love hands on learning, project based learning, collaborative learning, fine arts learning and learning experiences that are personalized. What turns students off? Didactic, rote based learning.

If the goals of improving student engagement, critical thinking and innovation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics is a national goal, then project based, hands on learning must be central to any kinds of reform effort. But it isn't.

Data driven, didactic educational experience is the only way educators can efficiently prepare students for high stakes testing.  High stakes testing is the driver of learning experience. What does that mean? Pencil and paper seat learning is the rule and multi-sensory hands on project based learning is the exception.

I have written about Bill Gates childhood learning experiences before and how his foundation's education initiatives are not conducive to promoting innovation and creativity. Back in 2001, I read a biography of Gates: Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the making of the Microsoft Empire. According to the descriptions of Gates formative years provided by authors James Wallace and Jim Erickson, Gates learned computer programming through constructivist and self directed learning experiences supported and nurtured by the teachers, administration and community at the elite private Lakeside School in Seattle.

So I ask myself why? Why would Mr. Gates advocate for a standardized curriculum and high stakes testing  for other people's children?  He knows fully well, that was not the approach to learning that he participated in when his teachers engaged him in constructivist learning activities during this critical period in his life. The learning experiences that provided him with opportunities to develop his computer programming skills are diametrically opposed to the authoritarian, narrow, didactic, rote based, depersonalized learning experiences he now advocates for other peoples children.

By leveraging billions of education reform dollars through the Gates Foundation into education policy initiatives and insisting on mandated standardized testing across the K-12 public school curricula in order to evaluate teacher performance, policy makers have ensured that educators will continue to use data driven, didactic test prep in order to prepare students for high stake testing.

Until policy makers change the way teachers are evaluated without the heavy reliance upon high stakes standardized tests, educators will continue to teach to the test and creativity in our schools will continue to be pushed aside.

Passive Learning vs. Dynamic Learning

My good friend and former classmate Ken Rohrer is the creator and webmaster of the Incredible Art Department. Ken published an essay I wrote about the importance of children's fine arts programs. Here is an excerpt:  

"Within schools, the art room is that unique place where children are allowed to experiment, imagine, create and express personal ideas using a myriad of forms, materials, artist’s techniques and technologies. Much of visual arts education learning requires students to execute the steps to represent and convey ideas in two, three, and four dimensions. This requires individuals to develop the ability to focus their attention on a vast array of quality control details. The assembly of these qualities within an art work requires a synchronization of consciousness with one’s imagination and the sensory, emotive and cognitive realms."

You can read the entire article here:

Connecting STEM Learning and Arts Assessment

Children experiment with gravity, geometry, friction, and design with a marble run they have constructed.

One of the major reform initiatives currently supported by the U.S. D.O.E. and Indiana Dept. of Education (http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-education-secretary-arne-duncan-issues-statement-release-presidents-council-a) is improvements in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) education.   That is a commendable goal.

However, there is one problem. Under the current standardized high stakes accountability framework and linear curriculum structures with which teachers and students are forced to operate, providing space, time and opportunity for children to develop personal, meaningful relationships with STEM content will be difficult at best.

A major research study recently released by Indiana University and University of Louisville, reveal Indiana students with improving ISTEP scores perform no better on ACT exams (http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/22841.html ). What does that say about the current trends to standardize educational experience?  If policymakers want positive outcomes in STEM education, then they better provide teachers with a framework to make learning experience personal for their students. Heterogeneous groups of learners in classrooms around the U.S. and in Indiana are the rule and not the exception. Yet, teachers are expected to provide a common, standardized learning experience for each of their charges.  Policymakers would be wise to provide teachers with flexibility in the use of alternative assessments making it possible for deep integration of STEM across the curriculum. Portfolios come to mind.  Indiana used to be a national leader in electronic portfolio development. That program was abandoned after selected high stakes testing was mandated at the beginning of the millennium.

With electronic portfolios the fusion of STEM with the visual arts and other subject areas will provide deep transformational learning experiences for children. Authentic STEM learning experiences documented in electronic versions of Leonardo da Vinci’s visionary notebooks comes to mind. The possibilities and dynamic range of learning experiences custom fit to motivate and engage individual learners with unique talents, interests, passions and structures of mind are endless.

Using standardized testing and experience as a way to drive STEM learning activities means knowledge and content is fixed and static. Learners in these situations are typically passive recipients of knowledge and are left outside the decision-making processes central to the learning activities they engage in ( http://www.indiana.edu/~ceep/hssse/ ).

If the U.S. DOE and the Indiana DOE want to engage learners with STEM content and improve STEM learning outcomes then they would do well to provide teachers with opportunities to facilitate learning experiences that allow children to learn STEM subjects the same way scientists explore scientific phenomenon in various laboratory settings or the way visual artists investigate their ideas, materials and content in the studio setting. A STEM classroom experience emphasizing didactic learning experience and text based rote memorization of a bunch of facts and formulas is a recipe for disengagement.

REPA 2 Webinar Link

Get the absolute low down on REPA 2 here:

http://connect.iu.edu/p6hy89qf12s/

IDOE's Next Reform Measure? Dumbing Down Education

In the final analysis, this is what REPA 2 will do to the educational experience of Indiana school children. The IDOE will not get quality educational experiences in the classroom with teacher candidates who have no formal education or training in the education sciences and can merely be placed in a classroom by passing a single standardized teacher licensing test of which I received an invitation to help create. 

 I will not participate in any Indiana Department of Education sponsored professional development activity with Pearson or any other IDOE vendor that will create conditions in Indiana Schools for the de-professionalization of teachers and administrators. It takes much, much more than passing a test to become an educator. The development and implementation of REPA 2 ultimately marginalizes opportunities for children to engage in personally meaningful learning opportunities with bonafide expertly trained and educated teachers of professional schools of education who have extensive knowledge in curriculum development, education methodology, cognitive psychology, child development, education history, classroom management and practicum experience.

There is no scientific evidence concluding that non professionally trained teacher candidates outperform teachers who have extensive knowledge and education from professional university education programs.   "Although some have suggested that perhaps bright college graduates like those who join TFA may not require professional preparation for teaching, we found no instance where un-certified Teach for America teachers performed as well as standard certified teachers of comparable experience levels teaching in similar settings." 

 Want to comment on REPA 2 rule change proposals? Do it here:

Time to begin writing Indiana State School Board Members:

Tony Bennett
tbennett@doe.in.gov

Tony Walker
tony@walkerlawgroup.biz

Jo Blacketor
joblacketor1@gmail.com

Cari Whicker
cwhicker@hccsc.k12.in.us

Sarah O’Brien
smobrien@avon-schools.org

Neil Pickett
neilcpickett@gmail.com

Michael Pettibone
mpettibone@accs.k12.in.us

Daniel Elsener
delsener@marian.edu

Vicki Snyder
vicki.snyder@signature.edu

James Edwards
jdedwards@pcsi.net

David Shane
dshane@ldiltd.com

Doing, making and authentic learning: Where standardized education needs reform.

Want to improve education? Increase opportunities for authentic learning: 
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2012/06/maker_faire_and_science_education_american_kids_should_be_building_rockets_and_robots_not_taking_standardized_tests_.html

All children, in order to obtain a well rounded education, deserve to experience a rich curriculum under the guidance and leadership of expert teachers!

Matt Farmer discusses the importance of providing ALL children with a well rounded educational experience. Austerity measures that limit children's educational experience is bad for their intellectual and psycho-emotional development. All children are entitled to rich curricular experiences facilitated by expert professionally trained teachers.

I recieved an email yesterday inviting me to participate in a teacher licensing test development activity for visual art teacher candidates without professional educator training or knowledge.  I will not participate in any Indiana Department of Education sponsored professional development activity with Pearson or any other IDOE vendor that will create conditions in Indiana Schools for the de-professionalization of teachers and administrators. It takes much, much more than passing a test to become an educator. The development and implementation of REPA 2 ultimately marginalizes opportunities for children to engage in personally meaningful learning opportunities with bonafide expertly trained and educated teachers of professional schools of education who have extensive knowledge in curriculum development, education methodology, cognitive psychology, child development, education history, classroom management and practicum experience.

 Want to comment on REPA 2 rule change proposals? Do it here:

Arts Cuts in Pennsylvania Public Schools

Arts cuts in Pennsylvania are coming due to reckless legislation and empty promises. 

How often has this happened in Indiana?

REPA 2 Affects Other Professional Educator Licensing Rules Too

Please feel free to weave these talking points in your comments to legislators on the Indiana Select Commission on Education. These lawmakers are poised to influence the IDOE's ill-conceived change proposals to the Indiana teacher and administrator licensing process. cg

PUBLIC COMMENTS TALKING POINTS ON SPECIAL ED:

For Parents:  The below statements are issues of concern for many parents of children with disabilities.  Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.

Parents 1:
Passing a test is not enough to ensure that my child’s Special Education teacher is ready to address my child’s learning needs.  I expect my child’s teacher to understand my child’s disability, and know how to teach him/her.  (Insert something about your child…My son Steven has difficulty reading and needs his teacher to know instructional strategies related to his disability…)

Parent 2:
As a parent, I see myself as an active partner in my child’s education.  It is important for me to be able to discuss my concerns and contribute to the planning for my child’s future.  I want my daughter’s special education teacher to be able to participate and interact with me in these discussions, working with me to develop an IEP.   This is a problem already, even with teachers who are fully prepared and I can only imagine how much more difficult this would be with a teacher who received their license only by taking a test. (Insert a personal experience here)

Parent 3:
My child has a civil right to a free, appropriate, public education according to federal law.  Reducing the skill level of my child’s special educator raises concern about the State of Indiana ensuring my child’s civil right.

For Teachers:  The below statements are issues of concern for special education teachers in the state of Indiana.  Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.

Teachers 1:
As a teacher, passing a test does not demonstrate that I have the skills needed to apply them in the classroom.  (Insert a personal experience here… “ I may know about various “textbook” strategies to teach a child who is struggling with reading, but actually using those strategies in the presence of a real student requires more than my knowledge

Teachers 2:
The job of a special educator is multifaceted and includes many tasks beyond instruction.  Working with families and other professionals to ensure a quality education for students with disabilities, requires interpersonal and organizational skills that can only be develop through direct application acquired during field experiences and student teaching opportunities.  These experiences provide critical reflection through the teacher education process.  (Insert a personal experience where you benefitted from or needed some guidance in this area, e.g. working with a mentor or cooperating teacher.)

Teacher 3:
The REPA II proposal violates the intention of federal legislation, IDEIA and Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which requires well trained “highly qualified” teachers to provide free appropriate public education to student with disabilities.  REPA II undermines this intent by watering down a teacher’s qualification thereby diminishing the skill level of a special educator.

Teacher 4:
Given the complexity of my job as a special educator, I am concerned about my administrator’s ability to adequately evaluate my effectiveness.  I am opposed to the idea that my administrator can determine my ability to maintain my licensure.  Administrators can decide if I can remain on an emergency license indefinitely or lose it.  Or as a teacher on a Professional License, my administrator’s evaluation can determine if I keep my “Professional” status or change to a “Probationary” status.  (Insert an example – How does my administrator’s previous experience as a (insert here: elementary teacher, PE teachers, coach, etc) inform him/her about special education?)

From Regina Weir 

For more info on special ed rules changes go here:

Senate Members of Indiana Select Commission on Education need to hear from you about degredation of teacher licensing rule changes in REPA 2

Dennis Kruse, Co-Chairperson: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s014

Carlin Yoder: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s012

James Banks: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s017

James Buck: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s021

Luke Kenley: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s020

Jean Leising: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s042

Scott Schneider: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s042

Earline Rogers: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s003

Frank Mrvan: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s001

Tim Skinner: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=s038

REPA 2 Points of concern:
Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and passage of the content assessment.  Adjunct teachers would not be required to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy assessment required for new teacher licenses.

-          Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.

-          Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.

-          Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations.  This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.

-          Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.

-          Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.

-          Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.

In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education.  Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana.  Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen.  If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching.  Review the proposed rules at  http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf. 

 

Indiana Select Committee on Education contact links:

Indiana State Reps on the Select Commission on Education that need to hear from you regarding REPA 2 Points of concern:

Robert Behning: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h091

Rhonda Rhoads: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h070

Timothy Brown: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h003

Edward Clere: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h072

Dave Frizzell: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h093

Kathleen Heuer: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h083

Cindy Noe: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h087

Jeffrey Thompson: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h028

Greg Porter: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h096

David Cheatham: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h069

Clyde Kersey: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h043

Vernon Smith: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h014

Shelli Vandenburgh: http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-lsa-2-5.pl?data=h019

REPA 2 Points of concern:
Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and passage of the content assessment.  Adjunct teachers would not be required to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy assessment required for new teacher licenses.

-          Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.

-          Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.

-          Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations.  This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.

-          Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.

-          Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.

-          Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.

In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education.  Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana.  Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen.  If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching.  Review the proposed rules at  http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf. 

 

REPA 2 Public Comment Link on Special Education and Special Area Teacher Licensing Changes is Open:

Here is the link to make comments on the entire REPA 2 Rule licensing proposal or to individual rule changes:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9VYXCQ3

After reading through this document and obtaining info from other educators I am providing analysis of the proposed rule changes in a later post.

It is important you give the IDOE feedback before the June 21 deadline. The comment section will be closed on that date and further public comments will not be considered.

Indiana Department of Education will attempt to change special education and fine arts teacher licensing rules: Stay Tuned....

Public commenting on REPA 2 teacher licensing rule changes are slated to open today on May 24, however, that is subject to change.
I will post the link to the IDOE public comment page as soon as it is made available.

In the mean time, some points to ponder: What does it mean for students, parents and taxpayers to have teacher candidates without a comprehensive professional education background, working with students in fine arts or special education classes across Indiana Public Schools?

What kind of learning experiences are children likely to encounter with adults who have little or no training in education methods, pedagogy or child development who have been selected to teach visual arts, music or special education students?

Do parents and taxpayers expect special education, fine arts and music education teacher candidates to have extensive training as professional educators in the areas they have been intrusted to engage Hoosier school children in?

At the end of the public comment period, 21 days from it's inception, there will be ONE hearing. This will be your chance to personally speak and provide more insight into your concerns about these proposed rule changes.

Stay tuned!
campak14@yahoo.com


 

Public Comment Date changed....

The May 21st public comment date for REPA 2 has been extended to another date, sometime in June. As soon as the new date is made available, I will post it on this blog. Thanks so much! Clyde

REPA 2: Points of Concern

Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and passage of the content assessment.  Adjunct teachers would not be required to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy assessment required for new teacher licenses.

-          Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.

-          Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.

-          Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations.  This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.

-          Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.

-          Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.

-          Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.

In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education.  Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana.  Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen.  If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching.  Review the proposed rules at  http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf.  More details about the public comment Website and the public hearing will be forthcoming.