Maine Education Commissioner Stephen Bowen merits praise for inclusively and thoroughly developing the state’s application for flexibility from certain elements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
The waiver application includes input from an online survey, four education department working groups and many public forums. The document submitted Sept. 6 to the U.S. Department of Education represents a constructive collaboration of Maine Department of Education staff, school board members, administrators, teachers, parents and legislators.
It’s rare to achieve such strong consensus among groups that often find themselves on opposite sides of the negotiating table or the political divide. That consensus grew from the shared acknowledgment that federal standards established as part of the No Child Left Behind Act are unworkable and force school districts to engage in resource-sapping “busy work” in efforts to meet unattainable standards.
The next focus for a collaborative approach to constructive change within Maine’s education community should be educator evaluations. The Legislature earlier this year passed LD 1858, which requires local school districts to implement performance evaluations for teachers and principals.
The Maine Education Association, the union that represents public school teachers, opposed the legislation. However, in addressing the issue as part of the flexibility package, the union’s president, Lois Kilby-Chesley, acknowledged that professional reviews are coming and offered her vision for how the performance appraisal process should work: “You will see educators and principals working together to raise standards of each individual school.”
LD 1858 calls for local school districts to formulate their own evaluation methods in compliance with Maine law and subject to approval by the Department of Education. That’s where cooperation similar to that seen in crafting the flexibility waiver will be critical.
The flexibility application envisions a system that assigns responsibility for ensuring student progress to local administrators with support and — only as needed — intervention from the Maine Department of Education.
A similar approach should apply to educator performance evaluations. Just as No Child Left Behind’s “one-size-fits-all” list of suggested remedies fails to help leaders of local school districts correct problems inherent to their districts, a similarly rigid performance measurement system would tilt the focus from improving public education to labor-management struggles.
Paul Stearns, president of the Maine School Superintendents Association, argues persuasively that teachers of subjects such as art and special education must be measured differently than those who teach English and math. Teachers who contribute to learning environments that promote sustained, measurable progress ought not be penalized because their students’ test scores don’t provide a clear comparison, which is one of the bases for the waiver request.
The Maine Educator Effectiveness Council, a group of educators, school board members, business people and consultants impaneled by the Maine Department of Education in May, must report its recommendations for educator evaluation criteria to Bowen by Nov. 1.
In addition to evaluating information from outside sources such as the school system in Montgomery County, Md., which has used an educator evaluation program since 1997, the council should model the cooperative, outreach-based process used to craft the flexibility waiver.
An educator evaluation process that establishes broad state standards but ensures local authority over school district employees, supplemented by professional development support from the state, would align with the framework laid out in the waiver application and represent real progress toward best practices in public education.
Stephen Bowen is a lackey for ALEC and supports the privatization (and profitization) of education.
Does anyone else find it ironic that Bowen and LePage would wish to dismantle the very system they purport to lead?
At this point, Bowen merits zero praise, zero trust, zero respect, and has zero credibility:
http://www.pressherald.com/news/virtual-schools-in-maine_2012-09-02.html
Yes, the Bush-Bowen-Lepage connection was well detailed in the Press Herald piece and is reminiscent of the Abramhoff-Norquist-Reed shenanigans. But I do think the collaborative work outlined here is deserving of praise. However, I am more disturbed by the idea that Maine cannot achieve high standards. There was a lot I found counter-productive about No Child Left Behind but it was not the standards. When you tell a child s/he cannot possibly achieve something s/he does not. When you tell a state you cannot achieve high educational standards it will not. On that point I hope the waiver is refused. Keep the standards high and celebrate your progress towards them.
Kayak, you are dead on. When you don’t set a goal, all you get is what you wind up settling for. Those of you who hunt know how effective a 12 gauge buskshot shell spray pattern is at 150 yards. Example made, I hope ! Setting the standard’s high, and providing the kid’s and parent’s with an actual physical example that they can see and understand, is the best thing that we as a State could do for our kid’s and our State. What BDN doesn’t include in this article is just what is the business community going to contribute, be it business education that it see’s as needed or foreseeable, providing actual educational materials that build toward those goal’s and standard’s (that they will have a part in determining by the way !) or even making available some of their people who actually work in area’s that the subject’s taught have actual application (and encourage the kid’s in exploring as a career) to teach and explain and relate what is being taught to what is seen and used on a daily basis. One would also think that this a prime example of just how the various SCORE and SBA office’s could contribute. Not on a daily basis but when the class hit’s that ‘wall’ of academic and needs the practical, hand’s-on lesson’s taught and appeciated.
And the business community isin’t he only one that needs to step up. Local and State Government, SCORE and the SBA not withstanding, can help as well by contributing their people, on a temporary basis, in teaching and demonstrating the practical aspects and applications of subject’s that they use. State DOT surveyor’s especially can demonstrate the requirement’s for actual math, geography and being used on a daily basis, not a as a sit-on-your-butt-brain deadener. Those kid’s who show skills and a desire to work in science need to be shown, and demonstrated to, that science is a wide area that is far more used here in Maine than is generally given credit for. Environmental science (Both the Conservation folk’s but also the logging industry), agricultural science’s (Hello Univ. of Maine ! ) medical and biological science’s (Anyone from Jackson Lab’s listening in ?), materials science’s (Hello Cianbro and BIW !!) and marine science’s (Anyone from the local State Marine Resource’s Office out there ?) all are area’s that our kid’s can benefit from if they are just exposed to the material’s actual working and business application’s. Those kid’s who show skill’s in math can be shown that math has option’s covering both theory but also the various engineering field’s to accounting and finance. Math can also be shown to applicable in the Maine manufacturing business’s in the now frequently heard cry for more Computer-aided manufacturing community (Anyone out there from BIW and P&W in Berwick ?)
What needs to be done is for the DOE to get off it’s collective keester and climb off their lofty perch and get involved, and get the various community’s skills and ability’s involved and used, by building the educational system that benefit’s the kid’s we have, both now and those to come, and the various community’s in Maine. The practical 1st step’s have been taken in other state’s, namely Virginia, so the model has been set. Question is are we, as a State, gonna’ be smart enough to use what’s out there or are we gonna spend more time (that we don’t have) and money (that we REALLY don’t have) re-inventing the wheel ? DOE has submitted it’s NCLB Waiver. Fine, since Maine has now jumped off the diving board, has anyone bothered to see if the pool is filled or is gonna be ‘crunch’ time when we hit bottom ?
This is a step in the right direction. However, I don’t necessarily trust Bowen to constructively improve education in Maine, at least not on his own. All parties concerned must work together on this and avoid political input, from either within or from outside of Maine.
Did you read the article? This was one of the most collaborative exercises anywhere in recent history. Bowen got input from school board members, administrators, teachers, parents and legislators. This is a model for how things should be done. What more do you want?
Bowen got the input only because he needed it to justify his NCLB Waiver. What was missing was the community at large’s point’s of view, specifically the business community’s since they are gonna be the one’s that are providing the job’s, both now and in the future, for the kid’s. If Bowen really wants to make this a comprehensive plan than it’s time that this portion of the community makes their point’s of view known. To date, that anyone’s seen here, Bowen’s been missing that.
I agree that the business community’s input is needed, but I think more in the area of curriculum development than for NCLB. We are long past due for a serious discussion of what it takes to prepare kids to be good, productive citizens (that was the defined “purpose” of education when I was in the field many years ago).
The Department of Education’s press release said there was collaboration, but I’m not aware of how much there truly was. Did the BDN investigate this claim?
Nancy, if you read BDN I’m surprised you ask this question. Bowen’s travels around the state, working with all interested parties to make this happen, have been well documented in this newspaper.
SB52, as has been shown, don’t mistake effort for actual work performed and goal’s met. Smoke and mirror’s vs. fact. Which one actually get’s thing’s done and can be measured ?