In order for Worcester to apply for Race to the Top funds, the superintendent, the chair of the School Committee, and the president of the teacher's union all have to sign this memorandum. In doing so, they are agreeing that Worcester will do several things.
While the item on the agenda is a superintendent's report (recommended action: "accept and file"), whether or not the School Committee actually votes tonight on the MOU is anyone's guess.
Here's what's in the MOU:
- Worcester agrees to "improve teacher and principal effectivenes based on performance." At base, this means some sort of (unspecified) assessment system, which pays "significant attention to student growth." Also, our professional development programs have to be based on this model.
- Worcester agrees to ensure effective teachers and leaders in the schools. The state is working on some sort of "pipeline" for this; Worcester largely is agreeing to use it.
- Worcester agrees to turn-around lowest achieving schools....let's come back to that one, shall we?
- Worcester agrees to use data to improve instruction. This talks about getting data (they don't specify; one assumes MCAS) to teachers in a timely fashion, and letting the state have data from the district to study (not sure about legal ramifications there).
- Worcester agrees that, if the MOU is signed, the state can "take appropriate enforcement action" if they feel Worcester isn't meeting goals, timelines, budgets or targets. This means that they can demand that Worcester pay money back out of local funds or can deny Worcester further funds. Unilaterally.
- replace 50% of staff. That means, in plain English, fire at least half the teachers.
- restart model. That means close the school, fire all the teachers and the principal, and make everyone reapply under new leadership, which could also mean turning the school into a charter.
- close the school. Period.
- "transform" the school, though districts can only use this option for more than half their schools if they have more than 9 schools underperforming. This means fire the principal and then have "other interventions."
These policies have caused great disruption in Chicago: neighborhood schools have closed, teachers who knew their kids have been fired, parents have been in an uproar. (And remember, they don't elect their school committee in Chicago, so they don't have much recourse, either)
in summer 2009, CPS "turned around" Fenger, firing all personnel incuding teachers with long-time relationships with students. Most who really knew the students and their families are gone, creating more instability and internal displacement... parents are very concerned becaue these same policies are now part of the national plan for education.
The state says that it's requiring these models of "level 4 or 5" schools, 'though just how they're measuring that isn't clear. We can safely assume, however, between the subgroups, the level of poverty, the level of ELL students...we're covered here in Worcester. This is going to be required of us if we sign.
If any part of this bothers you AT ALL, get in touch with school committee members, current or future, TODAY. It's on tonight's agenda, but they may hold the vote until January 7.
With a decision of this magnitude, we need to consider fully just what we are signed up for.
This isn't free money.
1 comment:
what is your concern about the plan
Post a Comment