They explain why in their press release, which I will quote in full:
December 10, 2007
Contact:
Shalimar Backman
206-276-9300
s.backman@comcast.net
OSPI Pays $770K to Keep Math Status Quo
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Dr. Terry Bergeson hired the Dana Center of Austin, Texas to oversee the revision of Washington State math standards at a cost to taxpayers of $770K, plus undetermined expenses. The Dana Center proposal was nearly six times as expensive as a competing bid from a highly qualified firm. A careful examination of the first draft of the resulting revised WA math standards, released December 4, reveals that OSPI has poorly used public funds, producing a new framework that will do little to raise Washington State's math to world-class standards.
The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) was directed by lawmakers to improve math standards as per House Bill 1906, passed in the 2007 legislative session. The State Board of Education (SBE) hired a consultant and formed a Math Advisory Panel to review existing standards and make recommendations for improvements. The consultant, Strategic Teaching of Millersville, MD, issued a final report on August 30, 2007. Current WA standards were compared to those of states and nations considered to have the best, including California, Indiana, Massachusetts, Singapore and Finland, and were found to be lacking in content, rigor, focus and clarity. The Strategic Teaching report specifically recommended that Washington State model its standards after those exemplary states and nations, as well as the NCTM Focal Points. The Math Advisory Panel endorsed the report, and SBE adopted it on September 19, 2007.
House Bill 1906 specifies that the SBE recommendations must be followed by OSPI in revising WA standards. OSPI formed a standards revision team stacked with supporters of reform math, including some with little math background. The result of the combined efforts of the standards team and the Dana Center is a draft far below the world-class levels recommended by the SBE and required by HB1906. Vague language and a lack of commitment to mathematical rigor indicate a consistent effort to preserve the methodologies of reform math. For example, the recommendation to strengthen computational fluency has been ignored. Strategy seeking and verbal explanation remain dominant methods of problem solving, rather than using and mastering standard algorithms.
Bill Hook, a research scientist who led a five year study comparing curricula in California said, "The SBE Report clearly sets out a number of exemplary math standards for the use of the standards re-write team. But it would appear that the Dana Center has created their own versions of the individual math standards in order to promote the use of their favorite textbooks, such as Everyday Math, TERC, etc. A simple cut and paste of existing exemplary standards would have produced a far better result, and would have followed the SBE report recommendations."
According to Dr. Chris Carlson, member of the LWSD Board and State Math Advisory Panel, "One of the keys to defusing the math wars is to make our standards pedagogically neutral. That is . . . standards pertain to the content that students should master at each grade level, not how the content should be taught. The first draft of the revised K-5 standards has a long way to go in meeting this goal."
OSPI requested bids from companies to help draft the new standards. One of the unsuccessful bidders was StandardsWork, an organization that helped rewrite the California and Indiana standards, considered exemplary by the SBE report. The StandardsWork bid to rewrite WA math standards was $130,000. However, Bergeson selected the Dana Center, whose bid of $770,000 was nearly six times that of StandardsWork. Additionally, OSPI is paying an undisclosed amount for additional expenses.
The Dana Center has supported the adoption of reform math curricula in other states, including TERC/Investigations, Connected Math, and Everyday Math. Dr. Uri Treisman, Director of the Dana Center and leader of the WA revision team, served on the advisory board for Connected Math. Dr. Susan Hull, another Dana Center leader of the WA revision team, was on the advisory board for Connected Math 2. Treisman was also influential in the adoption of Everyday Math in Texas and New York City.
OSPI has been entrusted with solving a problem they created through the imposition of reform math standards and curricula on Washington State. For years they have ignored protests of parents and teachers, as well as declining math performance of students. Now Terry Bergeson and colleagues at OSPI are undermining the intent of HB 1906. By selecting the Dana Center, a like-minded contractor, OSPI appears determined to further a reform math agenda at an exorbitant cost to taxpayers. But the bigger cost will be paid by our children, whose math education will remain inferior to their peers in other states and nations. The public has until the end of December to voice their concerns to their state representatives and the State Board of Education. The draft of standards revisions and related information can be accessed at OSPI’s Project Website.
Here's their web site, for more information.
Posted by Jim Miller at December 13, 2007 02:10 PM | Email ThisTell that to Sen. Ted Stevens.
Posted by: Cato on December 13, 2007 04:58 PMIn order to pay teachers more, we have to pay administrators and the union school bureaucracy less. And in order to do that, we need to eliminate the public school system in favor of a private system or tax credits that allow for the efficiency and product orientation of business. When schools are run like a business, they will hire good teachers and foster competition amongst teachers. Overhead will be minimized. Lazy union bred teachers will be dropped for the hard working and brighter teachers who are willing to do what it takes to get the high salaries. In the private sector, we can fire people for incompetence. Amen. There are a lot of teachers and union bosses, politicians and education bureaucrats that need firing, ASAP. And yes, let's start with Terry Bergeson.
We all try to buy the best products we can afford in our private lives. We don't settle for spoiled milk, or electronics that don't work. Yet we continue to watch Progressive School Administrators destroy our educational system, while simultaneously increasing costs. That's an amazing failure. Take back your schools.
Get government and unions out of education!
Holy Cow -- You plainly understand the problem. It plainly frustrates you. The answer is staring you straight in the face. List your objections to Michele's proposed course of action, and I'll bet you can overcome all of them.
"... and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
Posted by: TB on December 13, 2007 08:14 PM2. I am not aware that quality education is a partisan issue. Parents are leaving public schools, but not all children will be able to go to private school or be homeschooled. There is still a need for quality public schools.
3. According to the WA Consitution, education is the paramount duty of the state. I believe many corporate leaders who have to compete internationally have been sounding the alarm that math and science education in the US sucks.
4. In my opinion, all the principle players know that the union dominated system we have in place now will never be able to deliver a quality education to most students. So, to prevent a lawsuit, they dumb down the standards and those that are able, get out of the system. This has led to the poor, children, of color, and immigrant children in places like DC and Philly being trapped in public school systems that increasingly cost more per pupil and deliver less in terms of basic education. This will increasingly happen here as well.
5. We need school competition.
Posted by: WVH on December 13, 2007 09:38 PMWhere's the Math, indeed!
Posted by: D-Web on December 13, 2007 11:13 PM"Principal Tells Teachers To Dumb-Down Standards
City Hall Angered; Central Park East High Students Miffed
Andrew Kirtzman HARLEM (CBS) ― Have teachers at an East Harlem school been ordered to lower their standards because many students there are poor?
That's the impression some got from their principal's memo.
And now City Hall has stepped in.
The weather was gloomy Thursday outside Central Park East High School, but the talk was about a controversial memo from the school's principal.
"I don't think he thinks we're dumb," 12th grader Crystal Scarlett said. "He just thinks we can do much better than we're doing."
But not everyone agreed.
Last month, Principal Bennett Lieberman sent off a stern memo to teachers.
"If you are not passing more than 65 percent of your students in a class, then you are not designing your expectations to meet their abilities, and you are setting your students up for failure, which, in turn, limits your success as a professional."
Was he ordering teachers to dumb down their classes?
The memo continued:
"Most of our students come from the lowest third percentile in academic achievement, have difficult home lives, and struggle with life in general. They DO NOT have a similar upbringing nor a similar school experience to our experiences growing up."
Some students took offense.
"That's not the way to pass," 12th grader Richard Palacios said. "That's not the way to get your education, so you're basically cheating yourself."
CBS 2 HD made several requests to speak with the principal and he refused. But he is standing by his comments.
Lieberman told a newspaper Thursday he "confidently stands by" his words.
But late Thursday, the Department of Education weighed in. It sent him a letter demanding he clarify his views and state that he is not ordering his teachers to lower their standards.
No word back yet from the principal.
Teachers at the school stand to receive $3,000 bonuses if their school improves.
http://wcbstv.com/local/central.park.east.2.610529.html
Posted by: WVH on December 13, 2007 11:44 PMI would answer your question as follows: go to the state auditor website and look up performance audit. It explains there what they are looking at currently and how the decision was made to look at those areas.
Then send in a comment or request that they look at this specific area.
The slight implication in your statement that "where is the state auditor!" is unfounded, IMHO. Quite frankly, they are busting their asses so the legislature doesn't tinker with the legislative language of I-900. Since it has been 2 years since passage of I-900, the legislature is allowed to go in and change things. I'd say get the full story on the performance audit authority, what they are doing, and cut them some slack if I were you.
Posted by: Michael H on December 14, 2007 12:19 AM"reformed": changed so as to make 1+1=3
A few years ago I was assiting my daughter with her math homework. In working one of the problems, nowhere in the book she had was an example of it. Nowhere! I saw this type of problem several times that year in her math book.
And now, with TB's choice, it's going to be more of the same for our children!
Of course, "reformed" math makes this expenditure looks like $10.
Posted by: John F on December 14, 2007 08:13 AMLet's try logic:
- Parents complain to the Govt. that their kids are not learning.
- Govt. wants school accountability to make sure kids are learning.
- Accountability is measured through standardized testing.
- Standardized testing is administered by the govt, if your school fails the test, the Govt, takes over.
- Schools don't want the Govt. to take over so they make sure kids do well on the test.
- All other learning is put aside so teachers can focus on teaching how to pass the test.
- Children pass the test and Govt. is happy because there is now accountability.
- Parents complain to the Govt. that their kids are not learning.
Gotta love the "No Child Left Behind" law which brings accountability to schools through chaos. Everyone is so worried about passing the standardized test the kids are left behind. =)
We've had traditional teaching methods for years, and has worked wonders for millions of Americans, yet we MUST have change for the sake of change (sarcasm).
I have yet to hear any teacher or parent say anything good about the WASL. So why is it still around?
Go on the PDC website and look at who's giving Terry Bergeson her money, especially the $1400 donors. You'll find Weyerhaeuser execs, Boeing execs, Mircosoft execs, etc. The guy who writes the editorials for the Business Roundtable has done a couple of columns on the WASL and how any move away from it is by extension a weakening of the standards.
The trick is, I think that the WASL has outgrown Bergeson. No legislator can possibly vote to outright scrap the WASL--the next election will be about how they don't value education and accountability. No real fix to the WASL is possible, because it's so tied to the EALRs.
The only real path to systemic change here will be to swap out the WASL for a better assessment, like the MAP or SAT-9. I don't see that happening this session, but maybe the next.
Posted by: Ryan on December 14, 2007 12:13 PMFor instance, if high schoolers could choose from the WASL, ACT, SAT or other college or technical college entrance tests then I bet you would see a variety of different math classes offered. As It is now, high school students must prepare for both the WASL and SAT (what a waste). I know of several students that wanted to go into fields such as criminal justice which requires business math, but the high schools no longer offer business math because it is not on the WASL.
When you only use one test (WASL), you get only the type of curriculum that matches to the test.
Posted by: Holy Cow on December 14, 2007 01:27 PMHave you seen the performance audit of the ESDs? Talk about watered down and indecipherable. Eliminating ESDs is about the most cost effective thing this state could do with K-12 Ed right now; the ESDs do basically nothing, and are accountable to no one... all with a guaranteed supply of never ending public funds.
I'd say John425 at comment #1 is right on target.
Posted by: 4trogan on December 14, 2007 05:33 PMOur kids can get the very best education in math from any number of places like Sylvan Learning Center and Kumon which have sprung up across this state (and nation) at a rate of 340%.
So, we pay taxes once for the schools, then again for tutoring that teachers will not do.
Posted by: Ann on December 14, 2007 09:57 PMI discussed it with my husband last night, and we have decided to boycott the WASL. The WASL is Bergeson's baby and she is the one responsible for the curriculum mess. If she wont take our curriculum concerns seriously then why should we participate in her test? I think it is clear that curricula and WASL go hand in hand.
At our school, there is this lady that we all call the 'WASL lady'. She opts her kids out and is always trying to get others to opt out of WASL as well. She is a little crazed, but her kids are very bright and she is a very hands on parent. There is a little resentment towards her because the kids that opt out give the school a zero score. I don't know if it is true or not, but she said our district (Edmonds) had 1000 opt outs last year. I do know that Snohomish county is recognized for having the largest number of WASL refusals.
Posted by: Holy Cow on December 15, 2007 10:35 AMmany excuses--"parents don't understand the new methods;" "no child left...;" "parents have no time for kids;"--everything except taking responsibility and fixing the problem; wonder where THEIR kids/relatives go to school?!
ever see Terry's office send out a parent survey on the schools? ha--the results would scare the pants off of them! or they would blame some right-wing conspiracy; anything but a mirror glance;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on December 16, 2007 10:37 PM