Thursday, January 8, 2015

Dear Staff, an update of what our legislators have in mind.

The new year is upon us and our elected officials have begun discussion and action regarding how they can help prepare students of Wisconsin to compete at a world class level. This is an intention I, and all educators, should be supporting, in my opinion. Sounds great.

They are very concerned about accountability it seems. While I have never worked in a “failing school” during my career, they must be more prevalent state-wide than I am aware. Otherwise, why would this be the first priority order of business which the leadership takes up? They have expressed that they want to assure that any discussion of accountability incorporates accountability standards. Sounds great.

One surprising recommendation is to disregard the performance standards (as presented upon the School Report Card) agreed upon by the Accountability Design Team and replace them with letter grades. Relabeling schools that “meet expectations” as “C” letter schools could attach a negative connotation to schools which in fact are meeting performance expectations. Perhaps that is just an oversight which they will revisit.

A newly formed Academic Review Board is proposed to make decisions relative to identifying schools in Wisconsin which are deemed failing schools. There will be thirteen members on this team. As it stands, currently eight of these members will consist of representatives from voucher schools or charter schools or appointed by the leadership party, which is on record as strongly favoring both charter and voucher schools. Most likely another oversight.

The tests used to assist in the determination of success status will not be uniform. Apparently, all Public Schools will use the same test, however, non-public schools will get to choose from a menu of assessments for accountability purposes. It has been a while since I have had a test and measurement class, but I recall that if you are going to make comparisons between treatments it is imperative to have consistency relative to how scholars are assessed. Another oversight?

The definition of accountability, as reflected in early discussions, does not revolve around providing schools with the training, resources, and means for interventions relative to students who are not succeeding. Instead, public schools which receive failing grades from the Academic Review Board will be transitioned into for-profit Charter Schools. This decision will be made independent of the regard of local school boards. Private schools would be allowed to continue running, but would receive a funding penalty. Not the even playing field I was expecting to see.

Of course, nothing being discussed at this time is surprising and it is hoped that the recommendations will be impacted by the obvious. I am unsure how this accountability bill as outlined will lead to improving education in Wisconsin. Unless the assumption is that public schools are failing our communities and need to be replaced by private entities. It does not provide a means of fairly comparing public and non-public school performance. It does appear to be an avenue for “for-profit” schools to gain access to public funds. I am unaware of the history of success of such entities which would lend support to such an intent.

In truth, I have no concerns relative to the performance of our scholars on any form of assessment. We are a strong academic performing school district which will continue to demonstrate success in the future. We have highly educated, professional, and competent educators and support staff who have made a commitment to serving all students enrolled in our system. Like most public educators, I do not fear competition or comparisons when the playing field and means of comparison are uniform. I honestly believe we have an outstanding product which our pubic considers exceptional. I do have a concern regarding decisions impacting our public schools that have much more to do with political statements than that of providing a quality educational product. I do have concerns regarding “punishing” educators and schools for patterns of failure when such bias, inconsistency, and hidden intentions are apparent at the onset.

I am sure there will be much discussion to come!

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Dear Staff, an update of what our legislators have in mind.

The new year is upon us and our elected officials have begun discussion and action regarding how they can help prepare students of Wisconsin to compete at a world class level. This is an intention I, and all educators, should be supporting, in my opinion. Sounds great.

They are very concerned about accountability it seems. While I have never worked in a “failing school” during my career, they must be more prevalent state-wide than I am aware. Otherwise, why would this be the first priority order of business which the leadership takes up? They have expressed that they want to assure that any discussion of accountability incorporates accountability standards. Sounds great.

One surprising recommendation is to disregard the performance standards (as presented upon the School Report Card) agreed upon by the Accountability Design Team and replace them with letter grades. Relabeling schools that “meet expectations” as “C” letter schools could attach a negative connotation to schools which in fact are meeting performance expectations. Perhaps that is just an oversight which they will revisit.

A newly formed Academic Review Board is proposed to make decisions relative to identifying schools in Wisconsin which are deemed failing schools. There will be thirteen members on this team. As it stands, currently eight of these members will consist of representatives from voucher schools or charter schools or appointed by the leadership party, which is on record as strongly favoring both charter and voucher schools. Most likely another oversight.

The tests used to assist in the determination of success status will not be uniform. Apparently, all Public Schools will use the same test, however, non-public schools will get to choose from a menu of assessments for accountability purposes. It has been a while since I have had a test and measurement class, but I recall that if you are going to make comparisons between treatments it is imperative to have consistency relative to how scholars are assessed. Another oversight?

The definition of accountability, as reflected in early discussions, does not revolve around providing schools with the training, resources, and means for interventions relative to students who are not succeeding. Instead, public schools which receive failing grades from the Academic Review Board will be transitioned into for-profit Charter Schools. This decision will be made independent of the regard of local school boards. Private schools would be allowed to continue running, but would receive a funding penalty. Not the even playing field I was expecting to see.

Of course, nothing being discussed at this time is surprising and it is hoped that the recommendations will be impacted by the obvious. I am unsure how this accountability bill as outlined will lead to improving education in Wisconsin. Unless the assumption is that public schools are failing our communities and need to be replaced by private entities. It does not provide a means of fairly comparing public and non-public school performance. It does appear to be an avenue for “for-profit” schools to gain access to public funds. I am unaware of the history of success of such entities which would lend support to such an intent.

In truth, I have no concerns relative to the performance of our scholars on any form of assessment. We are a strong academic performing school district which will continue to demonstrate success in the future. We have highly educated, professional, and competent educators and support staff who have made a commitment to serving all students enrolled in our system. Like most public educators, I do not fear competition or comparisons when the playing field and means of comparison are uniform. I honestly believe we have an outstanding product which our pubic considers exceptional. I do have a concern regarding decisions impacting our public schools that have much more to do with political statements than that of providing a quality educational product. I do have concerns regarding “punishing” educators and schools for patterns of failure when such bias, inconsistency, and hidden intentions are apparent at the onset.

I am sure there will be much discussion to come!

Hello, FdL Democrats.

You may have read the various articles about Wisconsin Republicans' latest attempts to stifle the will of voters.

Despite laws to prohibit and deter voters from going to the ballot box--voter ID, limited early voting, limited registration opportunities, etc.--Wisconsin voter still spoke loudly in 2009 and resoundingly reelected Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to an additional ten year term.
At 81, Shirley is still twice as smart and works twice as hard as most of us, yet extremist legislators are forwarding a bill that creates a mandatory retirement age for judges to force her from the bench. If they can't manipulate the electorate, they will simply spit on the electorate.

Please share this, the link below, and other articles with all of those who are committed to an independent judiciary and respect for the will of the voters in Wisconsin. And, of course, email or write your legislators now.

Thanks, peg

For almost 40 years, Wisconsin's judges have been working without a mandatory retirement age. But all of a sudden, some state GOP leaders have decided that this is a major problem.

As the Wisconsin Supreme Court prepares to take up multiple cases involving the “John Doe” criminal investigation of potentially illegal campaign coordination between Governor Scott Walker and the "independent" issue ad groups that have bankrolled the Republican party, Rep. Dean Knudson (R-Hudson) has decided that the time has finally come to put senior judges out to pasture, saying that he plans to introduce a bill in early January. "75 is the age that I would set, however, there are 132 legislators here. There may be some that would prefer to set that at 77. I wouldn't be surprised if there's discussion about 78 or 80," Knudson told Madison's WKOW TV.

...



Today, (Abrahamson) is 81 and as sharp as a tack. In recent years, as right-wing justices have taken the majority, she has authored a series of important dissents. On Wisconsin's voter ID law, Abrahamson wrote that: “Today the court follows not James Madison — for whom Wisconsin’s capital city is named — but rather Jim Crow, the name typically used to refer to repressive laws used to restrict rights, including the right to vote of African-Americans."

On a challenge to the passage of Walker's Act 10, which overturned Wisconsin's 50 year tradition of good faith bargaining with public sector workers, she chided the majority for giving in to political pressure, writing that: "Trust and confidence in the integrity of the judicial branch as an institution is critical at all times but especially when a case has high public visibility, is mired in partisan politics, and is emotionally charged . . . There is no liberty if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."

Hello, FdL Democrats.

You may have read the various articles about Wisconsin Republicans' latest attempts to stifle the will of voters.

Despite laws to prohibit and deter voters from going to the ballot box--voter ID, limited early voting, limited registration opportunities, etc.--Wisconsin voter still spoke loudly in 2009 and resoundingly reelected Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to an additional ten year term.
At 81, Shirley is still twice as smart and works twice as hard as most of us, yet extremist legislators are forwarding a bill that creates a mandatory retirement age for judges to force her from the bench. If they can't manipulate the electorate, they will simply spit on the electorate.

Please share this, the link below, and other articles with all of those who are committed to an independent judiciary and respect for the will of the voters in Wisconsin. And, of course, email or write your legislators now.

Thanks, peg

For almost 40 years, Wisconsin's judges have been working without a mandatory retirement age. But all of a sudden, some state GOP leaders have decided that this is a major problem.

As the Wisconsin Supreme Court prepares to take up multiple cases involving the “John Doe” criminal investigation of potentially illegal campaign coordination between Governor Scott Walker and the "independent" issue ad groups that have bankrolled the Republican party, Rep. Dean Knudson (R-Hudson) has decided that the time has finally come to put senior judges out to pasture, saying that he plans to introduce a bill in early January. "75 is the age that I would set, however, there are 132 legislators here. There may be some that would prefer to set that at 77. I wouldn't be surprised if there's discussion about 78 or 80," Knudson told Madison's WKOW TV.

...



Today, (Abrahamson) is 81 and as sharp as a tack. In recent years, as right-wing justices have taken the majority, she has authored a series of important dissents. On Wisconsin's voter ID law, Abrahamson wrote that: “Today the court follows not James Madison — for whom Wisconsin’s capital city is named — but rather Jim Crow, the name typically used to refer to repressive laws used to restrict rights, including the right to vote of African-Americans."

On a challenge to the passage of Walker's Act 10, which overturned Wisconsin's 50 year tradition of good faith bargaining with public sector workers, she chided the majority for giving in to political pressure, writing that: "Trust and confidence in the integrity of the judicial branch as an institution is critical at all times but especially when a case has high public visibility, is mired in partisan politics, and is emotionally charged . . . There is no liberty if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."

As he prepares for an all-but-certain presidential campaign in 2016, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is saying even though he didn’t graduate college he’s got a kind of master’s degree — just not the traditional kind you and I might expect.

“I’m like the majority of people in America,” Walker told Hugh Hewitt. “I’m someone who went to college, had the opportunity in my senior year to go and take a job full-time, which was not the only reason I went to college, but one of the biggest reasons was to get a job.”

Then he got married and started a family. “Like a lot of folks in America, you know, your family and your job take the time away from you finishing it up,” Walker continued. “I’ve got a master’s degree in taking on the big government special interests, and I think that is worth more than anything else that anybody can point to.”

Scott Walker is correct in saying that he’s like the majority of people in America in that he does not possess a college degree, and many Americans may find Scott Walker more relatable because of his lack of a college degree. What’s more, while a college degree is not a requirement to be wildly successful in our country, without seeing any polling I’d expect a majority of Americans expect their president to have a college degree. After all, more than showing an aptitude for learning, a college degree demonstrates an individual has an ability to follow through to the completion of a goal.

That awkward moment when when Republicans say #NotAllCops and then blame ALL ONE BILLION MUSLIMS for Charlie Hebdo.

It costs about $12,000 to educate a k-12 student in Wisconsin. However, if that student has special needs that average cost per student (and the key word here is average) jumps to around $27,000 a year. (And bear with me for using rounded and averaged numbers.)

Special needs is a broad category. One student may have a reading disorder which may require only an hour a day with a reading specialist. Another student may be severely disabled and require a full-time aide, assigned to that student for the entire day. In some cases this may be portal-to-portal assistance requiring that aide to be on the bus with their charge to and from school. That aide may also undergo student-specific training to administer medications or deal with medical emergencies.

...

So the legislature is toying with the idea of providing vouchers at a still-to-be-determined amount, an amount higher than the current $6,700 voucher, to serve special needs students without the requirement to serve all takers.

It is easy to see what will happen. The private schools can turn this into a cash cow, cherry-picking the students with the reading disorder and leaving those with profound needs to the public schools.

As if right on cue, Republican insider and apologist Christian Schneider writes an op-ed explaining that if women do not let any man that wants to kiss them, kiss them, it will be the end of romance. Apparently in Republican insider view, if only the women would do what the Republican alpha male wants, then we would not be having these problems. Instead of taking a pull quote from Schneider's column, and because Mr. Schneider has a habit of deleting his ridiculous columns as if nothing ever happened, here it is in its scary entirety:

Furthermore, the unexpected passionate kiss has been a landmark of American romanticism from time immemorial. Are we to reimagine Tramp as a sex offender because he didn't spit out his spaghetti to ask permission before meeting Lady's kiss? Seems like "Gone with the Wind" wouldn't have been quite as romantic if Rhett Butler's famous pre-kiss speech had been, "Stop it. You hear me Scarlett, stop it. No more of that talk. With your permission, I am now going to put my tongue in your mouth."

Maybe it's easy to dismiss the "kissing permission" stance as merely extreme feminist ravings. But they are not alone. Last year, universities often cited a statistic that showed one in five women on campus had been sexually assaulted. But, among other problems, that number was inflated by women who had been subjected to "unwanted kissing." Further, the "permission to smooch" stance is a natural progression of the "affirmative consent" movement among states that are passing laws mandating a woman say "yes" out loud before any sexual contact takes place.

More concerning, though, is the fact that it appears that laws are now mandating things that used to be learned simply through personal interaction. We now have a generation that foster romantic relationships by staring at computer screens, without learning to pick up nonverbal cues. And when we start to not be able to read people and situations, lawyers get involved — litigation now fills in the cracks where personal experience once governed.