Spokane7
42°
November 25, 2009 in Opinion
Guest Opinion: Be realistic about standards
My job as state superintendent of public instruction is to be the voice of our state’s 1 million students. In every policy decision I make, I think of our students and what’s best for them.
First, I want to make one thing clear: I strongly believe in high standards. As the former chair of the state House Education Committee, I led the way in passing House Bill 1209, the 1993 Education Reform Act that called for state graduation requirements. We are one of just 24 states that have high school exit exams, which places us far ahead of more than half the nation.
But, I also strongly believe in being fair to our students.
I recently proposed changes to the math and science graduation requirements that call for students in the class of 2013 to pass all four state exams: reading, writing, math and science.
My plan basically calls for a continuation of our current math requirement through the class of 2014 (instituting the new requirement with the class of 2015) and a delay in science until the class of 2017. While a large segment of legislators, stakeholders and educators agrees with my plan, many don’t. And I understand why.
We are all frustrated with our achievement in math and science and with a further delay of the graduation requirements. But this class of 2013 timeline is one I inherited, and one I believe is not realistic.
Our new math and science learning standards won’t be tested until spring 2011 (math) and spring 2012 (science). That’s when the class of 2013, the first to be required to pass all four state exams, is in their 10th- and 11th-grade years, respectively. Courts have consistently ruled that students must have ample opportunity to learn the skills and knowledge that are being assessed. I’m no lawyer, but assessing new standards when the class of 2013 is already two or three years into high school doesn’t seem like ample time.
We have a unique opportunity in math and science to set the graduation bar at a rigorous yet realistic level.
I will propose that the 2010 Legislature continue our current math requirement through the class of 2014, and that we have two tiers – “basic” and “proficient” – at which students in the class of 2015 can meet the graduation requirement. Many states, including highly regarded Massachusetts, employ similar requirements. Students who achieve proficient complete the requirement, but those who pass at the basic level will have to earn a fourth math credit, which is one more than the state requires. I encourage you to ask any educator what’s harder: to pass the state math exam or to earn a fourth-math credit. That’s not lowering standards.
In science, I will ask that the graduation requirement be delayed until the class of 2017, which is today’s seventh-graders. That will give them time to learn the new standards, and hopefully give our educators time to encourage more science instruction.
We teach reading, writing and math in our classrooms every day. But what about science? I recently spoke with a sixth-grade teacher who said her district allows one hour of science instruction every two weeks because science isn’t tested at the state level in sixth grade. One hour every two weeks. Science needs to be taught in elementary and middle schools with the same instruction time as the other core subjects if we expect our high school students to pass a graduation exam.
It takes a leader to stand up and do the right thing when others might not agree. I have great faith in our students. We consistently finish near the top on national tests, such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the SAT and the ACT.
My proposal is about fairness, plain and simple. We need to continue to have high standards and hold students accountable to ensure that they have the basic skills to move forward on whatever path they choose. I believe my proposal is the right thing to do for students, and I encourage you to read more about it on our Web site, www.k12.wa.us.
Randy Dorn is the superintendent of public instruction for Washington state.
A hypocrite by necessity 
EWU Text-to-Win Contest 
WSU Text-to-Win Contest 
Enter to win tickets to see Adam Carolla at the Knitting Factory 
DanDempsey on November 26 at 9:00 a.m.
The following is NOT encouraging:
Dorn said: “We consistently finish near the top on national tests, such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the SAT and the ACT.”
This is the same misleading use of statistics that Terry Bergeson put forth while refusing to substantially change anything.
WA’s ACT participation is so low it is meaningless. Why mention that: The top extremely small percentage of WA students can out score states that test over 50% of their student population?
WA’s has a below average graduation rate. As for SAT participation again WA tests a low percentage of students. It is pretty easy to beat Maine which tests 100% of graduating seniors, by omitting the testing of the bottom half of our graduates. WA has among the lowest participation of the states that use SAT as their choice .. almost all states with lower SAT participation rates are ACT states.
If Mr. Dorn was making a case for substantial change, it would have been nice to see:
1. A mention of the extremely high math remediation rates at Community Colleges, where many students are placed in classes to learn arithmetic (these are high school graduates) and an effective plan to change this.
2. Acknowledgment that the state will be testing all the new math standards at each grade level .. not the diluted selection of standards that his math experts have under way. {Same experts that were employed by Bergeson still run the show}.
3. A mention about School Districts that use ineffective instructional math materials like district 81, which produce those high college math remediation rates. Holt is the OSPI recommendation for high school. But #81 does not use materials recommended by OSPI at any grade level, preferring pathetic materials based on alignment with a failed philosophy over results.
I agree with Mr. Dorn’s stance on Graduation testing with a two tiered approach but remain skeptical about a lot of other OSPI math actions. What major elements about math are actually being fixed aside from public perception? Likely not much if Standards testing at each grade level remains diluted as currently planned.
rjwriter on November 26 at 10:23 a.m.
Dorn is simply beating the legislature to the punch.
The legislature will pull the plug anyway when 60-70% of minority students are in the position to be denied a high school diploma because they can’t pass the math test. Let’s see… the WASL was deemed by many to be at about the 7th grade level and less than 50% of our students passed it.
No worries…. after that performance the legislature has now implied the problem can be fixed by having all students take Algebra II….. another adult created crisis waiting to happen.
Dorn’s argument is reasonable considering that many of the states’ school districts insist on using fuzzy math curricula that has increased the achievement gap almost everywhere and required remediation as high as 80% for students going directly from high school to community college.
I love to see journalists screaming about lowering the bar…. what percentage of those math-phobes do you think could have passed the WASL?
If we required the governor and the legislature to pass the WASL math test before they could comment on high school graduation exams the silence would be deafening…..
Remember that neither Dorn nor Bergeson could correctly answer any of the WASL questions they were given during the last campaign. The same people are leading the design of the new test…. ..
It might be prudent to take a look see at the new exam before we subject our students to more hypocrisy.
DanDempsey on November 26 at 10:36 a.m.
Taking up Mr. Dorn on looking at the website, you can find the gutting of the k-8 math standards here through weak testing of grades 3 through 8.
Note how the use of “bolding” ….of the portions of standards to be tested discards skills like
rapid recall of math multiplication facts and things like borrowing and carrying. These will NOT be tested.
Despite new math standards, OSPI math experts are peddling backward on testing those standards as written.
See for yourself at:
http://www.k12.wa.us/Mathematics/TestItemSpec.aspx
DanDempsey on November 26 at 10:45 a.m.
Mr. Dorn said:
“My job as state superintendent of public instruction is to be the voice of our state’s 1 million students. In every policy decision I make, I think of our students and what’s best for them.”
So is the “bolding” of portions of the math standards to be tested and the omission of all that is NOT bolded from testing “best for our state’s 1 million students”?
I think not.
It looks like the team Bergeson holdovers are trying to cover for a decade of incompetence. Delay the math graduation requirement I can live with, tiered testing I applaud, but dilution of testing of the standards at grade 3 through 8 is inexcusable.
DanDempsey on November 26 at 10:48 a.m.
Mr. Dorn said:
“First, I want to make one thing clear: I strongly believe in high standards.”
But does Mr. Dorn believe in testing those high standards or just testing diluted standards? For currently OSPI is on track for diluted testing at grades 3 through 8.
laurierogers on November 26 at 11:05 a.m.
“We are one of just 24 states that have high school exit exams, which places us far ahead of more than half the nation.”
“We consistently finish near the top on national tests, such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the SAT and the ACT.”
What a crock.
To test as “proficient” on the 2009 math NAEP, 4th-grade students needed to score just 249 out of 500. 57% of Washington students couldn’t do it. Washington’s average score was 242. 8th-grade students needed to score just 299 out of 500. 61% of Washington students couldn’t do it. Washington’s average score was 289.
SAT and ACT scores tell similar tales of administrators parsing and plucking at statistics until they can say something that is technically truthful, but deceitful in their intent.
Meanwhile, around 80% of incoming freshmen at SFCC require remediation in math, many of them in basic arithmetic. Just 66% of Spokane students graduate from high school. Just 42.3% of Spokane’s 10th-grade students passed the WASL last spring, a test that is reportedly based on 7th-grade math content and that requires just 54% to pass.
Our students are leaving elementary school not knowing how to do long division, multiplication or conversions, and this is designed that way on purpose. Our students are leaving middle school completely unprepared for high school math. They’re leaving high school unprepared for college. The thing that needs to be done in math, and the thing that administrators consistently refuse to allow their teachers to do, is to TEACH, to just get up there and teach the material. Instead, administrators are married to crappy reform curricula and sloppy, inefficient, ineffective teaching methodologies that waste huge amounts of time while not getting the job done.
I’m not surprised that Dorn is pulling back on holding the schools accountable for their pigheadedness. I’m not surprised that administrators in Spokane have gone on record saying they don’t know how to fix the math problem. None of them will do the one thing that needs to be done. And yet, they are still there, still earning salaries, jeopardizing the futures of thousands of children every year. Why do we tolerate it?
Dorn must address this stubborn unwillingness to properly teach the students. Until these people are removed from their cushy seats and replaced with people who understand that teachers should teach, math content and correct answers are critical, practice is necessary, students can’t possibly apply something they don’t know how to do, and that students develop self-esteem when they feel confident about their abilities – nothing in Washington State relative to math will change for the better. We’ll all be having these same conversations in 2012 and 2015 and 2020 and forever.