"Getting Schools Ready for the World"

I like the questions this article is asking.

So the good news is that we don't need to develop students' learning dispositions in schools. We just need to maintain and strengthen the dispositions they already have. 

The bad news, however, is that new research suggests that traditional schooling may actually discourage these dispositions. For example, in one experiment described by Gopnick (2016), 4-year-olds were much less likely to find their own solutions to making a complicated toy work when the experimenter "taught" them ("I'm going to show you how my toy works") than when the experimenter allowed them to observe her trial-and-error efforts and think about the problem ("Hmmm … I wonder how this toy works?"). As Gopnik writes,

Studies show that explicit instruction, the sort of teaching that goes with school and "parenting," can be limiting. When children think they are being taught, they are much more likely to simply reproduce what the adult does, instead of creating something new.

If we're honest with ourselves, we know that current school structures that force kids to learn the same thing on the same day in the same place with other kids their same age with the same teacher going through the same curriculum to be assessed in the same way are not built on any sound theory of learning. It flies in the face of common sense to think that this approach will produce the powerful learners we're discussing here. If we're truly committed to developing every student's ability to learn how to learn, we're going to have to rethink our practice.

Worcester's enrollment is up!

h/t to Scott O'Connell for the story today. Good graph, too.
Now, you all remember how this works, right?

And that (depending on how subgroups shake out) is good news for FY18! @worcesterpublic https://t.co/zLLNOmdSTO

— Tracy Novick (@TracyNovick) December 21, 2016

From the article, it looks as though that's still shaking out.
As MassBudget wrote last month, while the economically disadvantaged count is improving in accuracy, there are still fixes need. Worcester, of course, actually did better on the economically disadvantaged allocation (there were districts that did considerably worse through the count) last year. What those numbers look like this time round is a very good question (and one that's being watched like a hawk by the Gateway Cities in particular).

I was reminded today that the ELL count is also something that's being watched (see slide 33 from last year for the mention). Assuming that was about the new guidance on ELL students, I don't see the issue, but I've asked for more.

Assuming there isn't a huge hit on either of those, it should be mildly good news in FY18.
...which reminds me that I haven't checked the inflation rate lately...

a few blogging notes for year end

• I'm reworking the "helpful links" sidebar (see ---->>> if you're on a full screen); I've dropped some of the Worcester-links, and I'm adding some DESE ones. Let me know if there are ones you'd find helpful. I'll link to the new state Joint Committee on Education when we know who is appointed.
• I'm still not thrilled with the new color scheme...I am finding the wider blog posts easier to read, though, which is what I made the changes for. 
• I don't always tweet when there are new posts, but I just about always link to them on my blogging Facebook page, so you can follow that if that's helpful. Likewise, the summary reports for MASC always show up under "Novick Reports" on the MASC page. 

December Board of Ed in sum

The Board of Education met in Malden on December 20.
Note that the Board of Ed not only is now being livestreamed during the meeting, but the meetings are beginning to be archived online.
In his opening remarks, Commissioner Chester noted the substantial number of proposed changes to regulations and standards that are currently out for public comment. I've posted all of those here.
Public comment included an early childhood perspective on ESSA, concerns about a proposed dropping of the instructional technology license, and grave concerns from MTA president Barbara Madeloni regarding the MCAS proposals. Madeloni asked the Board to "step back" from the increase of testing, saying "we've found ourselves in the smallest place of what teaching and learning can look like."

There was an update on the receivership of the Holyoke Public Schools, with a particular focus on the Morgan School, which went into state receivership a year ahead of the district. There was a particular emphasis on data updates and secondary pathways by student.

The Board then took public comment on the Mattahunt in Boston, followed by their own discussion of the school and future for its students. Several of the Board members clearly were concerned about what happens to the students being moved (with member Craven mentioning that they likewise had requested updates of what happened with the students of Dorchester Collegiate when it closed, which they have not received). There was also some concern about the community not having the same understanding of how the school was doing as the state did. The Commissioner, commenting that he had heard nothing in the last month to change his views about the school or decisions made, said it was time to move on.

There was a presentation on and a discussion regarding the PISA results which came out earlier this month. While there was some discussion of the stellar results of Massachusetts students, the Commissioner mentioned what he referred to as "very provocative" points on schools in China, Singpore, and Vietnam, which in some cases outperform Massachusetts in math, commenting that they have large class sizes of 40 or 45 students, but a low adult/child ratio, and teachers don't spend as much of their time teaching students.

There was a presentation on the state's plans for ESSA, particularly in light of the public sessions (one pager on that here) that took place in November and December. Additional indicators the public comment sessions indicated as important include school climate, access to the arts, and access to a well-rounded curriculum (one pager has them all AND acknowledges potential problems with them, as well). At this point, DESE plans to present again to the Board on this next month, with the plan before them in March, possibly to be submitted in the earliest window of April 3. All also acknowledge that no one at this point is clear of the plans of the incoming administration at the federal level.

There was an initial discussion about proposed changes to educator licensure. The changes, to my eyes, largely seemed about making it a more straightforward process.

There was an update on MCAS, specifically on the high school competency determination. The biggest change here is the proposed addition of a history assessment, which, as Secretary Peyser noted, is already in regulation and would thus require no change, just an implementation. Deputy Commissioner Wulfson commented that the state is "looking at all of our options: not tying ourselves to a pencil and paper or a computer based options" and was clearly open to inclusion of classwork, projects, and other assessment methods for this assessment.

There was a fairly lengthy presentation and discussion (of which I only have a hard copy) of early college high school ahead of next month's joint meeting with the Board of Higher Ed. Essentially, a substantial amount of groundwork has gone into possibly expanding such programming in Massachusetts.

While they had the recalculation of low income to economically disadvantaged on the agenda, there was no discussion of it.

As mentioned above, the January meeting is a joint meeting with the Board of Higher Ed, to be held at Bridgewater State.

DESE wants YOUR opinion!

No, that wasn't sarcastic at all!

There are a significant number of things out for public comment right now, and, thinking some of you would like nothing better than to use your time over the holiday break than to express your views, I'm collecting them all here in one list:

• Public comment on the ELA and math standards is due by February 17. A summary of proposed changes to the ELA standards are posted here. A summary of the proposed changes to the mathematics standards are posted here. The full changes are available for download of math and of ELA.

• Public input on the proposed new MCAS achievement levels and descriptors is due January 27. You can do that via this survey. 

• Public comment on the proposed changes to educator evaluation are due January 27. They are available for download here. Comments should be emailed to edevalcomments@doe.mass.edu. 

• Public comment on proposed changes to recovery high school regulations are due January 17. Those can be downloaded here. Comments should be emailed to achievement@doe.mass.edu.

• The standards for history and social studies are just beginning to be reconsidered. You can give input on this by taking this survey. 

December Board of Ed: MCAS

memo is here
Chester: discussion on where are we going on high school assessment
provide students, families, educators with more accurate assessment of if they're prepared as they move up the grades
a number of questions being tackled
leaving it at grade 10; when can we certify 'readiness' for college
adding history and social science to competency determinations

posting from my notes earlier:

1. Provide clear and accurate signals to students about whether they are on track for the expectations of colleges, employers, and civic engagement.
2. Keep the high school competency determination for English language arts and mathematics at grade 10 for the near future
3. Add history and social science to the competency determination.
4. Eliminate the high school chemistry and technology/engineering tests (as most choose bio or physics).
5. Add an introductory physics re-testing opportunity in February (in addition to the retest of bio already offered).
6. Convene a stakeholder workgroup to identify and recommend options for a grade 11/grade 12 assessment program to gauge students' readiness for success after high school.

Wulfson: preliminary discussion; on agenda in January

looking at a potentially new history test and 11th and 12th grade options

"Looking at all of our options: not tying ourselves to a pencil and paper or a computer based options"

competency options, existing options, classroom options

"want to continue our discussion with the field about getting students and families the information they need without wanting to be intrusive" in the classroom

back and forth here about science options

Doherty: do you still have to take US History?

Yes

law doesn't say you have to pass it

Sagan: revisiting standards?

Yes, that's K-12

Peyser: think regulations currently include history/social science

Wulfson: Board has voted to delay

Sagan: why haven't we done it? Money? (to general agreement)

Chester: for me one of the concerns were...bad time to increase requirements if you can't also increase supports for those students

which would seem to imply that increasing this requirement would mean increased support 
Peyser: I would be concerned about setting an expectation that if anything untoward happens on funding, that we'd drop the test
wondering about an alternative option for proposed dropped science tests, like AP tests
McKenna; only probably is you probably aren't going to be able to pass an AP chemistry test in 10th grade
but other options to consider

December Board of Ed: Educator Licensure

memo is here
Chester: update of an ongoing discussion
"getting close to bringing you recommendations to update" regulations
all updates "fit within existing statutory authority"
"revise where revisions are warranted"
"again no action being asked of the Board at this time"
Heather Peske
Brian Devine
Liz Losee
who get high points for putting their names on their PowerPoint
anticipate bringing changes to Board in January