Blogging Bayport Alameda

December 20, 2007

Great tests, less filler! Now with 20% more math!

Filed under: Alameda, School — Lauren Do @ 7:00 am

For Alameda parents, there is a new Google Group for those interested in sharing information about Alameda Schools and school related issues.   Alameda School Connection has a pretty good list of participating parents right now, you have to join to view and participate.   There is a very interesting conversation about, what else, charter schools on one of the threads.

One of the arguments that I find fascinating about the creation of the Charter Schools is to offer parents a level of choice in what schools their child attends.   It’s a fair argument, but on the other hand it seems like there are parents using the “choice” reasoning as a veil for “I don’t want to send my kid to a West End school if it’s not a charter.”   So here is my confusion, particularly for Elementary school aged kids and even more precisely for Kindergarten aged children. 

What is it about the proposed charter school that makes sending your kid to it so compelling?

I think it’s a fair question to ask.   It’s not as though they have a proven track record of serving K-5th grade kids.  And I think we all know as parents that young children learn differently than 6-12 kids.   I assume that those actively supporting and considering sending their K-5 children to the ACLC charter school have done the requisite tours and meetings and talked with staff about the curriculm and the different programs available to their children.    I assume that parents considering sending their children to private schools have done the same.  

But have the parents toured other Alameda schools to see what programs they individually offer yet prior to making the leap to, “If not School X, then it’s private/charter/insert schooling of ‘choice’ here”?   One parent on the Alameda School Connection phrased it best:

…I think the position I hear articulated by many parents which pretty much is  ”Edison or bust,” doesn’t make much sense either.  Have you been in a  classroom at Edison? At Otis? At Haight?  Do you know Haight’s math  scores are on par with Edison’s?  Do you know Bay Farm’s are better?   And they have trees at Bay Farm! And multiple playgrounds! Do you know  that Otis has about the sweetest community feel you’ll find anywhere?   That said, remember that the k-5 schools in Alameda all have the same curriculum, teachers are required to have the same training and, in any case, the best predictor of YOUR child’s scores/level of  achievement are your educational level and income level.  I also think  it’s disingenuous to say that you care most about neighborhood  schools–but are also interested in charter schools or private schools.  You want control, you want to go to the school you perceive  to be the best, I understand this–but don’t say it’s about location  when it’s really about perception of value…

Recently there was a meeting at Ruby Bridges where prospective parents were given an opportunity to learn about Ruby Bridges and after that less than two hour meeting, I walked away more confident than ever that Ruby Bridges would be able to offer my child a great education.   And the only staff person we met was the principal. 

Here’s something perhaps the school district should consider, how about an all-district Kindergarten informational meeting, it would work sort of like those college information nights some of us went to to pick up pamphlets about prospective colleges we could consider.   Everything needs to be marketed and sold these days, why not Kindergarten too?   This meeting could also include in addition to all the AUSD public schools all the private and charter schools as well, and throw in some homeschooling support organizations as well.   That way, people know what their options are and can make a decision with ALL the information at their fingertips.    It would work like any trade show where each organization would get a booth to set up informational materials, this would be an opportunity to meet key staff at the schools, a few Kindergarten teachers.   This would also be an opportunity to sign up for classroom tours.   I know it sounds like a lot of energy and effort: meeting teachers, taking tours, talking to parents of kids whose kids currently attend, but wouldn’t you do the same, if not more, if you were shelling out the dough to send your kid to private school?  Or would you rather take a “faith walk” with ACLC for your Kindergartner because of some uninformed perception of particular Alameda schools?

Just one note about the Kindergarten trade show, no booth babes, please, this isn’t E3.

48 Comments »

  1. Good question…Why is a charter compelling?

    I like the idea of sending my middle schooler to ACLC or the new charter NCLC because 40 years ago, when I was in elementary school I attended a school run along the same lines as ACLC…open classroom, self-directed study (remember the SRA reading material?), multi-age classes. I really thrived there.

    That wasn’t my only school experience, as a kid my family moved every year or two. So, I got to try out lots of schools in many states. But, that one was my best experience.

    I don’t know for sure that this is the right style for my soon-to-be 6th grader. But, I do want her to have the chance to experience it. If it doesn’t work, we’ll try something else.

    That’s what’s cool about choices, you try something, you try something else.

    Comment by another bob — December 21, 2007 @ 2:37 pm

  2. OK, if ACLC is so great and they don’t want to have the “lottery” end up only the privileged (by that I mean the parents who choose to particapate heavily in their childs education not just ones that live in big houses) then here is an idea. I think we all know that poor Washingtion school is the school you would never want your kid at these days. So here let ACLC have Washingtion…site and all. YES all meaning they have to keep every kid that is there and that would leave them with room for an additional 70 seats(give or take a few from the count I have from a couple of weeks ago) to draw from the lottery. No help from the district, no AUSD teachers helping their teachers; just them and the kids, IEPs, special services and all…oh some of those kids don’t fit their educational style you say…well welcome to the real world. Publicly funded schools have to take everyone AND KEEP THEM. Private schools get to accept and keep only those they like. Private schools are expensive you say, you want a private education but you can’t afford it you say. Once again that real world hit you smack in the face.

    If we all just joined in our system and truly gave of ourselves emotionally and financially all we could. If parents who spend $10-25K per year donated that money to our local schools and the families that couldn’t volunteered in the classroom and mentored students who didn’t have support at home. If I am going to make my own reality that is the one I will choose.

    By the way “another bob” you might want to take a look at Chipman for your soon-to-be 6th grader. That is where my soon-to-be 6th grader is going to go. My son at EHS went there after we pulled him from Wood. He has a 4.17 grade point average and all the credit for those grades went to the school in which he attends.

    Comment by Barbara M — December 21, 2007 @ 10:02 pm

  3. Facts and figures
    http://www.epi.org/books/charter_school/charterschoolfacts.pdf

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — December 22, 2007 @ 8:12 am

  4. Alameda NayTiff thats for the great link.

    Comment by Barbara M — December 22, 2007 @ 9:24 am

  5. Re. # 2

    Thanks just the same Barbara M, but I’d just as soon not spend my $10-25 K on your kids to make you feel emotionally joined in our system. All four of my kids attended “that poor Washington”, went on to EHS and are doing just fine. But, by your definition, they were “privileged” because we participated in their education.

    The only point I got from your idea of giving Washington to ACLC is that publicly funded schools shouldn’t have to take everybody AND KEEP THEM. And that’s a good point.

    Comment by Jack Richard — December 22, 2007 @ 12:20 pm

  6. #2 “I think we all know that poor Washingtion school is the school you would never want your kid at these days.”

    And the poor children at this school are danmed because their parents couldn’t get it together to get them into another school. Let the devil take the hindmost.

    From E pluribus unum to E unum pluribus.

    http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=548683&fr=

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — December 22, 2007 @ 7:14 pm

  7. Re. # 6

    I’m sure there’s a salient point you’re making through the video and motto as they pertain to post # 2, ANT, but it escapes my brain right now. Could you explain how the poor damned children and their scattered parents relate to Washington?

    Comment by Jack Richard — December 22, 2007 @ 7:55 pm

  8. Washington has by far the lowest test scores of any Alameda elementary school. Why would any parent allow their children to go to that school? Wouldn’t it be better to send all of the children from Washington to Edison where they would all do better?

    Those parents that can, will get their children out of Washington. Those children whose parents are of limited means, limited language and limited bureaucratic skills will populate a school that Barbara M characterizes as:
    “poor Washingtion school is the school you would never want your kid at these days.”

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — December 22, 2007 @ 9:04 pm

  9. Post #8 assumes test scores are a result of the school rather than the student, or effects of student’s family or student’s environment outside of school.

    While the affects of education are expected to be reflected in all aspects of the student’s life, the responsibility of the school district begins and ends at school district property lines. Am I correct in this assumption?

    In our society, how can anybody expect to “level the field” for all students once the student is off the school property? Such equalization would require a more perfect form of a communist state than the world has yet seen.

    Are Edison students scoring better because of the school building or better teachers, or, on average, are Edison parents better able to assist their kid’s education with their time, encouragement or example, outside of school?

    If the parents, via the PTA or other means, are better able to assist what happens in the school at Edison than Washington; should AUSD focus more funds to Washington than to Edison? (On a per student basis.) Using the formulas that the State of CA has put together for funding education by district as an example, the answer is yes - AUSD should focus more funding to under-achieving schools. The State has chosen to re-distribute local tax dollars to ‘balance’ education; that is the biggest reason why all school districts do not receive the same amount of funding per student statewide.

    The sad reality is that such a program does more to reduce test scores overall - it achieves the ‘lowest common denominator” Unfortunately, that is the course the State chose with the current funding model. CA once had one of the highest state achievement rankings, but now languishes at the bottom 10% of all the USA. Perhaps it is important to re-fund the better achievers so that the example of the “super-achievers” can stimulate peer achievements. Too bad this sounds so much like the ‘trickle-down’ of President Reagan’s “voodoo economics” of the 80’s. As I recall, the 70’s and 80’s were the ‘golden age’ for education in California.

    Comment by U-do voodoo? — December 22, 2007 @ 11:24 pm

  10. I think the point of #6 is that in a small town – low density homogenous environment like Exeter NH, http://town.exeter.nh.us/ , where Sea Coast Charter School is located, (Sea Coast Charter is the school featured in the video link of post #6), great things are still possible. This small town (under 15,000) is also home of the renowned private secondary school, Phillips Exeter Academy, http://www.exeter.edu/about_us/about_us.aspx. PEA, which serves over 1,000 students, is perhaps a positive peer community influence. (A plug for the voodoo of post #9)
    How can such historic areas which were first settled in the 1600’s offer such quality education options, and have homes built less than 10 years ago at prices below $130k? Small single family homes (under 1000 sf), built to stave off New Hampshire winters can still be affordable. High density = affordability? I don’t think so.
    http://www.realtor.com/realestate/kingston-nh-03848-1091846003/

    Comment by David Kirwin — December 23, 2007 @ 9:50 am

  11. If that was the point of ANT’s #6, why didn’t he use New Hampshire’s Motto, “Live Free or Die”?

    Comment by Jack Richard — December 23, 2007 @ 9:56 am

  12. Wto know that I guess you will have to wait for ANT to respond.

    Comment by David Kirwin — December 23, 2007 @ 10:07 am

  13. An interesting fact to throw into this is the fact that 2 of the 3 teachers that will head NCLC’s K-5 program currently teach at Washington.

    Comment by Barbara M — December 23, 2007 @ 10:28 am

  14. For those interested in reading the literature regarding school readiness and implications for school districts, you can start here:

    http://mikemcmahon.info/schoolreadiness.htm

    Then there is a link to the 100+ pdf for the entire document.

    Comment by Mike McMahon — December 23, 2007 @ 12:38 pm

  15. DK,#10

    It seems you can take almost any material and reach but one conclusion about single family homes, blah, blah, blah.

    I watched the video on Exeter and have been thinking a lot about it. It’s apples an oranges.

    As of the census of 2000, in Exeter there were 14,058 people, 5,898 households, and 3,715 families residing in the town. The population density was 715.9 people per square mile (276.4/km²). There were 6,107 housing units at an average density of 311.0/sq mi (120.1/km²). The RACIAL MAKEUP of the town was 97.18% WHITE, 0.42% African American, 0.17% Native American, 0.94% Asian, 0.29% from other races, and 1.00% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 0.87% of the population. Population density 715.9 per sq mile ( to our 6,700).

    THAT’S WHY A HOUSE COSTS $130K.

    Sounds like your kind of place. Perhaps you want to consider living there. Cash out of your California equity and buy a farm. Have a Charlie Brown Christmas, the works!

    Also the median income per household $49, 500, with 2.9% of families below poverty. It’s home to the famous prestigious Exeter Academy boarding school.

    One similarity to Alameda: The people on the video lauding the charter looked and spoke quite like the group of parents who spoke in favor of the charter school at the B.O.E. meeting.

    Except for the obvious emphasis on playing musical instruments, the stuff in the video about math concepts like manipulatives, and many other aspects of the curriculum sound like Paden’s magnet developmental program which drew kids to cross enroll from districts as far as Edison in the 1990s. Between budget cuts and teaching to the test, those programs at Paden have mostly been cut. In the same period of decline, AUSD subsidised ACLC to the tune of about $60 per pupil for ten years.

    But heck, what are a few more cuts going to hurt, especially if we can at least give a great experimental education to a small hand full children of upwardly mobile activist parents? They have earned the right by being so bright haven’t they? And by being more involved in their children’s education than the average stiff, the parents have earned it too.

    Comment by Mark I — December 23, 2007 @ 3:59 pm

  16. Mark,
    While I agree that population numbers and low density (and more importantly - the <1000 sqft small home size) helps make for affordable housing; I don’t believe racial make-up of population affects home price.

    Certainly comparing AUSD to that new Hampshire school district is apples & oranges, and it is true that whatever Sea Coast Charter is offering has probably been tried here. So why has the CA education ranking plummeted on state by state comparisons? I don’t think AUSD is representative of the state-wide decline in performance. Maybe those numbers, those stats are irrelevant, I really don’t know.

    There will be more tax dollars spent on AUSD kids next year than ever before. While I am not familiar with the ACLC / NCLC debate, re-apportioning funds to meet different needs might not be considered a “cut”, and $60 per student is not that big an investment, especially if it will draw from the overcrowded schools and help balance elementary school populations. For reference, what is the amount spent per year per student in AUSD budget? Isn’t it 6 or 8k? Probably more at the lower grade levels due to the lower # of students: teacher ratio.

    While charter schools provide additional options that may help the variety of students we have,(when I was young all us different ‘pegs’ were forced thru the same hole), I also wonder how much is just ‘new fad’ or old teaching methods being re-packaged, or a rush to change, instead of the patience or skill to fix.

    I don’t know a lot about current public education, but I try to stay involved with the teaching and schools of my two elementary school boys without being a ‘helicopter parent’. I think their school is successful because so many parents care. In that light I agree with most of post #9.

    I think Alameda public schools are wonderful. The school district was one of the big reasons we moved here to raise a family. I work for Berkeley Unified who I think spends more $ / student, but I am glad to have my kids in AUSD. I think it is because of the lower housing density of Alameda. I think, generally speaking, BUSD kids are more unruly, less disciplined, and there is more negative peer pressure.

    Comment by David Kirwin — December 23, 2007 @ 6:14 pm

  17. My kid goes to Washington. Here are my two cents, in the form of the letter I sent to the school board in favor of the charter’s approval.
    Also, I wanted to say that if by some miracle the NCLC model were to be used at Washington, I’d gladly stay there.

    *****************************
    Dear Board of Education,

    I am writing to you to encourage you to approve the charter application
    for NEA Community Learning Center on January 8th.

    I have enormous respect for the talented, skilled, hard working teachers
    in Alameda Unified School District. The way I see it, No Child Left
    Behind policies have robbed them of the opportunity to teach the subject
    matter in a way that inspires my daughter (a third grader). She excels
    in every subject and her standardized test scores are in the 96th
    percentile, but as each school year comes and goes, I see her become
    increasingly disenchanted with her classroom experience, her
    assignments, and her homework. Worst of all, she is becoming indifferent
    to the inherent joys of learning.

    No school can serve the needs of every child. This is the case in both
    the traditional classroom and for the proposed NCLC. For my daughter,
    however, NCLC offers a learning model without which I would have no
    choice but to send her to a traditional classroom and continue to watch
    her detach from the wonders of learning.

    Please approve NCLC’s charter application.

    ********************************

    I forgot to mention in the aforementioned letter that my daughter goes to Washington. I’d also like to point out that the low test scores at Washington are largely due to circumstances out of the school’s control, and that those test scores hasven’t affected my daughter’s success (test-score wise), so I’m not eager for her to go to the proposed charter for that reason.

    Comment by isd — January 7, 2008 @ 5:58 pm

  18. Dear ISD,

    “She excels
    in every subject and her standardized test scores are in the 96th
    percentile, but as each school year comes and goes, I see her become
    increasingly disenchanted with her classroom experience, her
    assignments, and her homework. Worst of all, she is becoming indifferent
    to the inherent joys of learning.”

    Congratulations on your daughter being so successful. Why do you think that NCLC would improve on her already successful education? What would you expect from your daughter above her already high achievement level if she attended NCLC? What of those children who are not as successful as your daughter? What do you see for them?
    How do they escape NCLB?

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — January 7, 2008 @ 6:55 pm

  19. I have children who also do consistently well on tests etc. I have never had a teacher tell me no when I asked for additional challenges to keep them stimulated. Additionally, as your daughter becomes an adult she will have to encounter and work with co-workers etc with all different abilities and diverse experiences. She won’t have the life experience of understanding those with very different family dynamics, ethnic-diversity, and those who’s first language is not English.

    Most people who want to attend a mainly Caucasian school with mostly two-parent perfect households and pretend the rest of the world doesn’t exist open up their checkbooks and write a check made payable to “Head Royce”.

    As you candidly pointed out, her test scores are high and she is doing well. Not only is your daughter doing well but imagine what great inspiration and support you offer her classmates and teacher by excelling at such a challenged school. You are VERY correct in the your point of teachers being able to change circumstances beyond their control. Please continue to be an integral part of the solution instead of creating more problems for the other youngsters of Washington. I guarantee that when it comes down to it the leaders of NCLC are not at all interested in taking on all the challenges that Washington School would bring if they had to keep all the kids currently enrolled. They only want kids like your daughter so that their test scores look like hers.

    Comment by Barbara M — January 7, 2008 @ 8:13 pm

  20. Hello Alameda Nay Tiff. Thank you for the questions, I’ll do my best to answer them.
    I’ve visited ACLC and asked many questions. The small teacher to student ratio, project-based curriculum and her direct involvement in day to day decisions at school will (I hope) re-spark her interest in learning.
    You stated that her education is “already successful”, but I don’t feel the measure of success is test scores. I mentioned her test scores because I wanted to eliminate any assumptions that we are leaving Washington for any other reason than her declining interest in learning. Test scores, race, funding, achievement gap; they’re all hot issues in Alameda education, and rightfully so. But those have no bearing on our decision to send our daughter to Washington or NCLC.
    I don’t expect anything above her high achievement level. In fact if her test scores are lower but she’s more excited about her classroom experience, I’d feel much better about her schooling. Critical thinking, clear expression of ideas, and a curiosity about the world is at the heart of lifelong learning, which is what I want for her; to be a global citizen with a passion for knowledge and the power to put it to good use, whatever that may be.
    To answer Barbara M.’s questions: Unfortunately, I have been told “no” numerous times when I’ve asked for additional challenges to keep my child stimulated. I’ve spoken to the teachers privately about their reasons for denying my requests. One teacher was perfectly honest and said that extra stimulating, interesting challenges for higher-achieving students would put too much of a dent in her instructional time which she’s trying to dedicate equally among the students and help them do well on standardized tests (due to NCLB). I wasn’t happy about that answer, but from my observations she was doing her best to serve the needs of all of her students. The students’ skill levels were so varied that she was too maxed out on time and energy to dedicate any extra time to one particular student. She also said she had very little time or need for parent volunteers in the classroom, because she didn’t have time for classroom projects.
    Another teacher told my daughter that she couldn’t read her choice of books in the classroom because the book was “too thick”. I thought it must have been a misunderstanding, but my daughter kept insisting it was true, and finally one day, she came home in tears about it. I spoke to the teacher, who said she felt the book was too high-level for her. I read the book, tested my daughter on the book’s vocabulary, content, and her comprehension of the plot. I used the same test the teacher uses to measure appropriate reading. The book is appropriate for her according to this test, but it is two or three grade levels above 3rd. I went in and spoke to the teacher again about it, but she insisted that the book was “too heavy” and that she would continue to require my daughter to read books at grade level. The teacher had no solid rationale for this reading policy, and finally, we came to an agreement that she could read her choice of books for ½ of the reading time and the teacher’s choice for the other ½. I spoke to some other parents of students in her class and they had the same experience, particularly with the issue of the books being “too thick” or “too heavy”. I considered moving her to another class, but when I spoke to parents of third graders in the other classrooms, I found that they are facing the same challenges.
    I wish the NCLC model would be used in the Washington campus in some fashion, because I desperately want an experience for her, that includes day to day contact with those who have “very different family dynamics, ethnic-diversity, and those who’s first language is not English”. She’s getting that at Washington now, and if she leaves Washington for NCLC, I think she’ll still have that experience, but the diversity of her peers won’t be as rich. This is true, but it is a sacrifice I’d be willing to make.
    As far as those who are less successful test-wise than my daughter , I see no value in a decision to sacrifice her love of learning so that other students who aren’t doing as well can (possibly) be more successful in the classroom in the face of NCLB’s ridiculous expectations of teachers. I can only hope that NCLB plans change with the next administration in Washington D.C., but I’ll believe NCLB is gone when I see it.
    Having said all that, if NCLC is turned down (and it looks by my Tivo that it’s going to be), if she continues at Washington, I plan to stay and continue to bust my tail making Washington a better place to learn for all kids.
    I appreciate the opportunity to speak openly here and know that the atmosphere will remain respectful. Thanks. I’m interested in more thoughts or feedback.

    Comment by isd — January 8, 2008 @ 11:25 pm

  21. Well stated, isd. Obviously, you’ve placed way too much faith in the bureaucracy. With all the requirements that have been laid on teachers, the most one can hope for is a high level of mediocrity. The good news is it sounds like your daughter will do well wherever she schools.

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 9, 2008 @ 9:22 am

  22. Most people who want to attend a mainly Caucasian school with mostly two-parent perfect households and pretend the rest of the world doesn’t exist open up their checkbooks and write a check made payable to “Head Royce”.

    I’m not sure what you mean by this exactly. Can you clarify?

    Comment by isd — January 9, 2008 @ 1:48 pm

  23. isd,

    I am headed out of town for work for a few days and I can’t take the time to comment on this and you other very endearing comment on getting help for your child. I seriously want to talk to you in much more when I return. I am not ignoring you…

    Comment by Barbara M — January 9, 2008 @ 2:20 pm

  24. I’m not sure what you mean by “endearing” now, either, but I’m eager to hear your explanation. I’ll be here…

    Comment by isd — January 9, 2008 @ 5:05 pm

  25. #20

    “Another teacher told my daughter that she couldn’t read her choice of books in the classroom because the book was “too thick”. I thought it must have been a misunderstanding, but my daughter kept insisting it was true, and finally one day, she came home in tears about it. I spoke to the teacher, who said she felt the book was too high-level for her. I read the book, tested my daughter on the book’s vocabulary, content, and her comprehension of the plot. I used the same test the teacher uses to measure appropriate reading. The book is appropriate for her according to this test, but it is two or three grade levels above 3rd. I went in and spoke to the teacher again about it, but she insisted that the book was “too heavy” and that she would continue to require my daughter to read books at grade level. The teacher had no solid rationale for this reading policy, and finally, we came to an agreement that she could read her choice of books for ½ of the reading time and the teacher’s choice for the other ½. I spoke to some other parents of students in her class and they had the same experience, particularly with the issue of the books being “too thick” or “too heavy”. I considered moving her to another class, but when I spoke to parents of third graders in the other classrooms, I found that they are facing the same challenges.”

    What exactly is the problem here? Why can’t your daughter read the books that she wants to outside of class? Life can be boring at times. Learning to tolerate boredom is an important life lesson. When I was young my grandmother told me that if I was bored, I should “Patsh zich in tuchis und schrei hooray”
    Always good advice.
    http://www.pass.to/glossary/gloz3.htm

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — January 9, 2008 @ 7:33 pm

  26. # 24
    Re. the # 22 response: You’ll notice that the common denominator from AUSD proponents is that anybody that doesn’t buy into their schick is a racist and an elitist with blinders on.

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 9, 2008 @ 7:50 pm

  27. 25:

    Tishe schmendrick

    Comment by dave — January 9, 2008 @ 7:53 pm

  28. Gai kakhen afenyam

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — January 9, 2008 @ 8:58 pm

  29. “What of those children who are not as successful as your daughter? What do you see for them?
    How do they escape NCLB?”

    “Life can be boring at times. Learning to tolerate boredom is an important life lesson”.

    Words escape me.

    Comment by isd — January 9, 2008 @ 9:56 pm

  30. No boredom allowed in our house.

    Comment by Jack B. — January 9, 2008 @ 11:30 pm

  31. Alameda NayTiff, I can not for the life of me understand how people like yourself (in hordes) still buy into the false perception of fairness and the legitimacy of standardized tests and or test scores in relation to the value of a particular school. You need to educate yourself. http://www.calcare.org/index.html http://www.calcare.org/links/index.html Test scores mean squat about how and what is taught in a school and are a waste of time and resources that serve only to pit school against school, district against district with the only winners being politicians who use such nonsense to “prove” they are doing something about education and the publishers of text books and the tests who reap major tax dollars via such folly. My child attends Washington by choice not default. We are involved parents who value learning on all levels and have both had experience as teachers. If test scores mean that much to you you should be aware that Washington test scores are presently the highest in the district when compared to schools throughout the state with similar demographics.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 10, 2008 @ 3:27 am

  32. #31

    Actually, I tend to agree. NCLB needs to be changed or repealed. Still, would you rather have your child do well on the tests or poorly? NCLB is probably a different discussion, but right now it is a fact of life that public schools need to live with. Regardless, there is only so much that teachers can do. They need to balance the needs of 20 plus students and manage the classroom. Some parents have expectations that are beyond what can be delivered. Education also needs to take place outside of the classroom. In the meantime, if your child is doing well on standardized tests, be grateful. It could be a lot worse.

    Comment by Alameda NayTiff — January 10, 2008 @ 6:48 am

  33. We do not participate in the sham of the tests. We, opt our child out and are confident via communication with his teacher and progress reports/grades that he is a thriving learner who enjoys seeking knowledge.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 10, 2008 @ 7:22 am

  34. On another thread dave challenged the veracity of the letter by Brian Rodriguez, which I feel was one of the most compelling and authoritative critical accounts of ACLC.

    I am willing to take isd’s account of her daughter’s teacher trying to dumb down the class as fact, but at the same time it doesn’t jive with any experience we have had with AUSD teachers with a cumulative 19 student years experience as parents in the district (eleven in elementary). At Paden in the 1990s to early 2000s it was quite the opposite.

    I’m big on anecdotal accounts to flesh out the theoretical into some kind of reality, but I can only put so much credence into one anonymous story like this, in terms of endemic mediocrity in our system.

    Comment by Mark I — January 10, 2008 @ 8:40 am

  35. My child had the same teacher as isd’s child and though I felt on a whole this teacher did an outstanding job I was puzzled by similar experiences in which my son was also chided/discouraged to read books outside his “grade level”. I did not press the issue (looking back perhaps I should have) though I told my son he could read what he pleased outside of class.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 10, 2008 @ 12:55 pm

  36. Mark I.; I believe that in the ’90’s and early 2000’s you had a better experience with AUSD than I am. In fact I think Alameda has great schools now, and that NCLB is ruining that, and that it is only going to get worse.

    Maybe I’m wrong? I have nothing to compare my experience to. Would you be willing to go back and ask some of your children’s former teachers how they feel NCLB has changed their teaching experience and how it is affecting their students compared to then? I am curious what they’d have to say (either way). Maybe I’ll find out something new.

    Comment by isd — January 10, 2008 @ 1:36 pm

  37. Re: Barbara M’s comments in post #19; I’m going to retract my request for clarification and explanation. I read the posts over more carefully and I think I got it through my head that the checkbook-opening comment was directed at me personally, and that Jack Richard is right on target. Methinks any more on that post will put me in the state of mind upon which I’ll want to take Alameda Nay Tiff’s grandma’s advice.

    *smack*

    “Yahoo!”

    Comment by isd — January 10, 2008 @ 1:41 pm

  38. 35/36 Thanks, even one more comparison helps focus the lens better. My own education seems like the dark ages by comparison, but looking back there were some very dedicated people working in almost 19th century conditions and even then I don’t recall a teacher discouraging precocious behavior. In 1960’s I remember kids being sent up a grade for reading or math, similar to the attention Lauren has written about

    Trying to respect our children’s privacy I will say that at the elementary level, one of ours had a teacher who came from teaching younger kids at another site who seemed a bit overwhelmed. The child in question, perhaps being like his father, was quick to judge and had short patience with the teacher to either engage him or to get lost, which he/she was not going to do. There was a personality clash and to some degree our son probably detracted from the progress of the class as a whole through a certain period of adjustment. Other kids progress may have suffered, which is too bad. But it wasn’t a classic case of our “plebe” being a drag on the other “bright children”.

    I can’t remember whether class size reduction had reached that grade at that time, but I think not. To me class size is going to be a huge core issue in the lower grades for some time to come. I can see a teacher freaking out and trying to control kids so they can keep a handle on the situation, which is not so good.

    The wonderful teacher both our boys had at Paden told us at some point after our kids had passed through, that they had to terminate the mixed age format because it was too difficult for teachers to teach to the test in that setting.

    isd, I would go back and ask more questions if I had the time. I wanted to do art docenting at that school even though our kids were gone, but when it didn’t happen the first year my connection with that community slipped and I have other fish to fry.

    Comment by Mark I — January 10, 2008 @ 4:32 pm

  39. Re: original question - “What is it about the proposed charter school that makes sending your kid to it so compelling?”

    As outlined below, their (NCLC’s) model in my opinion, is a better one than that of traditional schools. Oh yeah, and I’m a racist elitist, Mercedes driving, mansion living, sod who doesn’t want his kids in West end schools. NOT!!!

    The vision for education in the K-5 portion of NCLC is based on an ideal 21
    st Century education. The world has never been more connected, and the need
    for well-educated, compassionate, critically thinking people has never been
    greater. As more and more schools are forcing children into the proverbial
    box—many with scripted lessons, one-size-fits all assessments, constant
    standardized testing, de-emphasis of the importance of visual and performing
    arts, etc.—NCLC envisions creating an elementary educational environment
    where children of all backgrounds can discover their potential through
    guided learning that offers choice, bestows trust, values the arts, and
    provides the freedom to explore. Furthermore, the NCLC elementary component
    will emphasize mastery over time of the language arts, mathematics, and
    sciences. The NCLC elementary program will give facilitators the
    responsibility, flexibility, and power to teach children according to their
    needs, not according to bureaucratic mandate. After all, we cannot have
    classrooms and curriculum that silence children and their facilitators,
    control and regulate their thinking and learning, rate them and label them,
    and then expect them to take part in what is supposed to be a democratic,
    pluralistic, and participatory nation.

    *NCLC will be based on:*

    - The needs of the individual learner.
    - An agreed understanding of the key needs of learners living and
    working in the 21st century.
    - Responsive teaching—that is, teaching that responds to the learning
    styles of the children rather than a “one size fits all” mentality.
    - Collaborative effort involving learners, their families,
    facilitators, and the community.

    *NCLC will create classroom communities that:*

    - Are led by outstanding teachers who empower children to know they
    are smart and capable of high achievement.
    - Teach a balanced curriculum that is not only concerned with what is
    taught, but how it is taught.
    - Integrate project-based learning to teach children to learn and
    apply lifelong learning skills that matter.
    - Make children’s experiences in school purposeful and meaningful.
    - Give children freedom of choice and a voice, encouraging ownership
    in their own learning.
    - Trust children to see the world critically.
    - Live and teach democracy, nurture freedom, dignity, thoughtfulness,
    and community.
    - Foster a natural love and respect for learning and knowledge.
    - Encourage and allow free exploration, creation, and sharing of ideas
    and knowledge.
    - Use innovative and scientifically based methods of instruction.
    - Broaden literacy to include not only conventional reading and
    writing, but also digital, visual, and critical literacy, creating learners
    with multi-literacies.
    - Have high expectations for every child, including English Language
    Learners, struggling learners, learners with special needs, and gifted
    learners, and give those children the tools necessary to meet the high
    expectations.

    *NCLC will develop and utilize instruction in a lab/studio/workshop setting
    that: *

    - Forms communities of practice—groups that stay together, defining
    their goals, refining their tools, and constructing social practices that
    promote knowing through participation.
    - Teaches the three “R’s” (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic) in a
    meaningful context.
    - Demonstrates reading, writing, and thinking so learners will have
    explicit models to follow.
    - Allows learners the independence to choose reading material at their
    level and to engage in self-selected writing.
    - Gradually releases the responsibility to learn to the learner.
    - Employees the reading/writing connection to improve comprehension.
    - Encourages learners to write for real audiences and purposes.
    - Allows learners to read and write across all content subject areas.
    - Fosters learners’ natural curiosity and desire to explore the world
    in which they live.
    - Applies science as a tool for learners to understand their world.
    - Recognizes that a good foundation in mathematics starting in
    Kindergarten is critical to learners’ success in future math and science
    classes.
    - Emphasizes that learners develop mastery of mathematics over time.
    - Helps learners connect mathematics with the real world.
    - Demonstrates that mathematics is the language of science.
    - Utilizes science to teach mathematical principles.
    - Involves learners in meaningful hands-on science and engineering
    projects.
    - Emphasizes contextually based problem-solving skills.

    *NCLC will redefine assessment to include the use of:*

    - Observational context—evaluation of the individual’s processes and
    evaluation of the final products.
    - Process data—anecdotal records, oral presentations, whole-class
    evaluations, and responses through the performing arts.
    - Final product—published writings, student created tests, reading
    logs, writing samples, literature response logs, writing journals, and
    self-evaluations.
    - Traditional measurement tools—teacher made tests and standardized
    achievement tests for state accountability.

    Note: Assessment involves talking with children, listening to them read,
    reading their writings, observing them work, and observing their work over
    time. The traditional measures are important, but most of the data that
    informs instruction comes from the observational context, especially process
    data. Furthermore, assessment tools cannot be regarded as high quality if
    they cause a learner to give up. High-quality assessment encourages further
    learning; low quality assessment hinders learning. Assessment is central to
    the teaching and learning process; it grows out of and informs instruction –
    recognizing the individual strengths and needs of all learners.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 10, 2008 @ 5:46 pm

  40. How do you measure the success of such a program if the only way that ACLC is measuring their success is through the traditional testing method? How do you measure if ACLC is meeting their goals if they point to their success through their API scores and rating through US News and World Reports — which is how “traditional” education systems are rated. How are high expectations valued in each child if some students, excuse me, “learners” are told, “maybe this isn’t the right fit for you?” Is ACLC saying that their assessment tools are low quality as a significant percentage of their population “opt out” or rather “gives up” every year?

    I’m not saying that all of that doesn’t sound wonderful, but two questions pop to mind (1) are those things truly missing from the majority of our children’s education and (2) are all those elements a reality at ACLC?

    Comment by Lauren Do — January 10, 2008 @ 6:12 pm

  41. 39. (pardon my proliferation of postings today.) One of the very last speakers at the BOE meeting was an Alameda High school student speaking against the charters who ended his remarks by quoting the old saying “the road to hell is paved with good intention”. Right on.

    Why not have these goals for the whole district? To that end, we should not make that harder by serving a numerical minority at the expense of a much larger number.

    Some will say that we need to take extra special care to nurture an environment like ACLC so that it can stand as a beacon and an incubator. If I thought in the end game that taking that risk would really yield a benefit for the greatest number, like ACLC’s success would become as infectious as AIDS, only in a good way, then I might support the charter. Instead it is a fiscal cancer.

    Here I must refer back to the Alameda High student. Now class, what is the road to hell paved with? That’s right….

    Comment by Mark I — January 10, 2008 @ 6:26 pm

  42. #41 This is just stupid. If parents and educators want to create a charter school in the State of California they have the legal right to. I’m no John Henry and better people than I have tried to address the iniquities and shortcomings of traditional schools and the public education system FOR YEARS! Sometimes you have to know when and where to pick your battles. Furthermore if that rambling, in cohesive orator from Alameda High with his thinly veiled racist speech about “certain people” “like blacks” wanting “special programs” is any indication of the quality of education at Alameda perhaps that school is lacking in mandatory diversity and ethnic studies courses. Finally, as some one who has experienced death first hand because of the Aids epidemic I find it in the utmost of poor taste to use such an allegory.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 10, 2008 @ 8:05 pm

  43. # 41 Tell me Mark I, how is AIDS a good infection, in any way? You’re paving the road you’re traveling on.

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 10, 2008 @ 8:55 pm

  44. Re: “Most people who want to attend a mainly Caucasian school with mostly two-parent perfect households and pretend the rest of the world doesn’t exist open up their checkbooks and write a check made payable to “Head Royce”.”

    As a Washington parent I have always seen the diversity of our school as an asset to the education of my child. Head Royce? Why venture so far. I have neighbors who have stated plain as day that their kids go to St. Joes “because there are too many minorities at Washington”

    I’m tiered of this act as if everything in this district is equal, and “we are all in this together” jingoism. Dealing with the prejudices and inequities of this district has jaded me to such talk.

    When your child has to hear so called educated adults deride his place of learning, when you have to deal with a disengaged school population with the highest percentage of non-neighborhood and non-residents in the district, when you have to challenge the scam of standardized test scores because you know your faculty and children are outstanding and dedicated despite it, when you as PTA’s agree to collectively fundraise district wide and equitably disperse such funds, when you all stop the charade perhaps then your rhetoric will ring true.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 11, 2008 @ 12:02 am

  45. 42. apologies for offending with the AIDs reference. I haven’t lost anybody close, but do have friends with HIV.

    Generically I don’t apologize for gallows humor and made the epidemic analogy because I don’t understand how success at ACLC is supposed to magically ameliorate the situation, osmosis? I stand by the cancer comment and have lost family to that.

    #44 I get that there are issues at Washington which others of us may not appreciate as well as people with children there. But I’ve walked the walk that goes with the talk. We need prop 13 reform and we need to continue to pursue legal remedies for equal state funding. The two AUSD staff who have spear headed an effort on the latter are both charter opponents. Their efforts may be not be producing quick results but it’s hardly hollow rhetoric.

    Comment by Mark I — January 11, 2008 @ 10:41 am

  46. #44 Okay, I’ll hurry up and wait while two (2?) yes two AUSD staff and their do nothing cheerleaders (”Gimme’ a M.I.N.E.! What’s that spell? We’re all in this together….Yeah team!” ;) successfully rectify an entrenched 19th century model of education burdened by the realities of the modern world. Perhaps my three year old could be of some help as she should be graduating with a masters at that point. Where do we get in line? ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. However, you are on the mark as far as prop 13 reform and equal state funding being serious impediments to ever achieving better public schools in California.

    Comment by poguemahone — January 11, 2008 @ 11:18 am

  47. #46
    To your cheer leader line: “Gimme’ a M.I.N.E.! What’s that spell? We’re all in this together….Yeah team!”

    It confuses me because I see the charter people as the “M.I.N.E.” sector and the rest of us as the “we’re all in this together people”. So what do you mean and where are you on this again?

    When two hard working teachers (not the AUSD administrative “staff”), put in extra volunteer hours to investigate getting pro bono legal services for a class action suit against the state, or try to verify if that is a pragmatic option, I would either be grateful or keep quiet and not bitch about the wheels of justice turning slowly, unless I was prepared to do them one better. Actions do speak louder than words. They are taking action, covering the bases, including the least explored options because the situation is desperate.

    I have not been able to keep abreast of efforts one Prop 13 reform, but they see almost as obscure as legal action. To me it is important to keep pressure on ALL fronts ALL the time.

    I am emotionally exhausted by this entire three week roller coaster and I am not looking forward to the next charter application. I want to try to draw back and get some distance and some rest, because I’m in it for the long run.

    It’s more important to me that we hear each others concerns clearly and try to do what we can to pull together, than it is to cave in to emotion and abuse our freedom of expression by using hard language to grind a personal axe. That latter comes easy to this blogger.

    The up side of all this the dialogue has ramped up. Now, if we can not tear each other part when the $4 million in state cuts hit the fan.

    have a good weekend.

    Comment by Mark I — January 11, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

  48. #47 Granted, there are dedicated people trying to make the system work albeit from different angles and with different presumptions and ideas. In regards to the cheerleader reference I was sarcastically attempting to point out that there seems to be a large portion of people here in Alameda who, (to use your prior example,) talk the talk but do not walk the walk and that they only become involved when there is some perception on their part of having to give up any portion of what they feel they and theirs are “entitled” to. I think what I’m saying is it feels and sounds disingenuous to hear, “We’re in this together!” when prior you have consistently been excluded from the table, left out in the cold, “‘Cause I got mine. Not worried ‘bout yours.” has been the m.o. more often than not. I also think we all need to realize that often there are more than one solution in addressing a problem(s).

    Comment by poguemahone — January 11, 2008 @ 5:58 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.