Two of the contract awards listed in the recent blog post are for a Teaching American History Grant which MCPS received from the federal Department of Education. As the administration has plans to zero out this line item in FY12, it is getting increased scrutiny from the government. The 'Center for History and New Media' refers to the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media, at George Mason University.
Here are the dollar amounts for the two contracts:
Teaching American History Grant Project Coordinator Awardee
Education Consulting Services, Inc. $ 60,000
Teaching American History Grant Project EvaluatorAwardee
Curriculum & Evaluation Associates, LLC $ 33,000
And here is the 2010 award that MCPS received: $999,918, for 225 teachers. For information on all the Maryland awardees go here. For information on the entire program, go here.
As for me, in reading the abstract (below), if I were on the BOE I would certainly have a few questions to see how the almost $1M federal tax dollars are being spent; such as, what are the metrics for the success of this program?
Grantee Name: Montgomery County Public Schools
Project Name: Unveiling History: Exploring America’s Past
Project Director: Maria L. Tarasuk
Funding for Years 1-3: $999,918
Number of Teachers Served Overall: 225
Number of School Districts Served: 1
Grade Levels: 4, 5, 8, and 9
Partners: George Mason University, Maryland Historical Society
Topics: Colonization; Revolution and the Founding of the New Nation; Civil War and Reconstruction; Industrialization and Urbanization; Modern America; World Wars I and II; Contemporary America
Methods: Summer institutes, seminars, workshops, classroom observations
This district — the largest in Maryland — includes more than 1,000 American history teachers, many of whom have little or no background in their subject matter or in specific strategies for teaching history and historical thinking skills. Each year, the project activities will feature a 1-week summer institute for separate cohorts of 20 elementary teachers. A 2-week summer institute, beginning in Year 2, will serve annual cohorts of 30 secondary school teachers. In addition, all teachers in the district can participate in six annual events during the school year: four content-based visits to historic sites in the Washington, D.C., area, and two skill and application workshops that integrate technology and reflective practice. Teachers who have participated in 1 year of the project will be allowed to return for a second year. Returning teachers will attend more advanced workshops on historical thinking skills and share what they have learned through presentations at their schools, meetings or state or national conferences. The project strategies will focus on historical thinking skills (such as close reading, assessing reliability and sourcing) and include practice with online resources and primary sources, biographies, autobiographies and other historical narratives. Returning teachers who demonstrate refined skills will be filmed in their classrooms, and the videos will be used in discussions regarding best practices. The Center for History and New Media will develop an open-source, open-access Web site to share project materials, including primary source activities, the classroom videos of teachers, podcasts of site visits and workshops, and workshop materials, such as bibliographies, teaching strategies and recommended Web sites.
I participated in it several years ago. I'm sure it's changed some- but we had a pre-test/ post-test administered by some sort of evaluator (maybe the 33 grand earmark mentioned above?).
ReplyDeleteMr. McCabe, thanks for the information. From reading the fed requirements, it looks like an evaluator is required. Was the program helpful to you? I would hate to see this program removed from federal FY12 funding as is being proposed by the administration. My concern is twofold: 1. I would like to see some metrics as to how this improves teaching quality over the years, given the grant is almost $1M; and 2. the BOE deciding to place these financial items on the consent agenda. The public wants an open discussion about how our tax dollars are being spent.
ReplyDeleteExcellent question "metrics for success".
ReplyDeleteThe US Department of Education has atandards for "evidence" for an initiative. Hopefully, the new "data driven" superintendant will structure initiatives to collect evidence that meets the standard and our elected officials - at all levels- will insist than new initiatives meet the standard of evidence before rolling them out throughout the county.
If the $1 million dollars spent does not even meet the "evidence standards with reservations", there is no reasonable evidence to spend one cent more on this approach. This is another example of wasting precious education dollars on corporate welfare. The contractors and teachers they hired were paid. Perhaps some teachers learned something but MCPS learned nothing reliable and contributed nothing to "what works" literature and the funding institution learned nothing.
"Meets Evidence Standards – Studies assigned this rating are generally well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that do not have problems with randomization or attrition, or regression discontinuity designs that do not have problems with attrition. “Meets Evidence Standards” is the highest rating for a study reviewed by the WWC.
Meets Evidence Standards with Reservations – Generally, studies assigned this rating are strong quasi-experimental studies that have comparison groups with demonstrated equivalence and meet other WWC Evidence Standards. Studies assigned this rating may also include randomized trials with problems in randomization or attrition, as well as regression discontinuity designs with attrition problems.
"
sheldon fishman
parent of 4 mcps grads
source: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/help/glossary
Sheldon and Mr. McCabe,
ReplyDeleteThis (below) is the text from the TAH grant directions. Did MCPS follow this? I am not sure. Mr. McCabe, as you were in the program, do you know how the results were reported to the Dept. of Ed? Was there a control group? (Here is the link to the below text: http://www.seiservices.com/tah/about/GPRAindicators.asp)
"As part of the APR or 524B, Teaching American History (TAH) grantees are required to report on both (1) project-specific measures and (2) Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures. The current TAH GPRA indicators are:
(1) Students in experimental and quasi-experimental studies of educational effectiveness of Teaching American History projects will demonstrate higher achievement on course content measures and/or statewide U.S. history assessments than students in control and comparison groups.
(2) Teachers will demonstrate an increased understanding of American history through the use of nationally validated tests of American history that can be directly linked to their participation in the Teaching American History program.
All grantees must respond to these two GPRA indicators providing, to the extent possible, all the information they have on student performance and teacher content knowledge gains. For an example of the ED524B for TAH, download the 2006 Grant Performance Report/ED524B Project Status Chart.
For more information on the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 see http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/mgmt-gpra/gprptm.htm
And here is some advice from the website about choosing an outside evaluator:
"If you have requested proposals from a number of evaluators then this will be a chance for you to review each evaluator’s plan, writing style, and budget to determine who fits best with your organization’s style and needs. The proposal chosen will ultimately serve as the basis for the evaluation contract."
Did the BOE do this? How will we know if this is on the consent agenda? There is to be no public discussion of these financial decisions.
Paula- I *believe* there was some type of control group if my memory serves. But as a participant I'm not sure how everything was evaluated and reported- I can only tell you there was something in place- and that I was asked to participate.
ReplyDeleteAs for the program's value- that is such a hard question to answer. I would liken it to a college level history class- with lectures and the like- with an emphasis on how to implement primary document analysis in the classroom. It certainly made me think about what I was doing in the classroom- and how I could encourage students to think more critically.
Now- is it worth the money?
That as they say- is above my pay grade. But I certainly appreciate your desire to answer these important questions.
Mike
I can say with certainty that this study did not have a random sample.
ReplyDelete