Chief
Academic Officer Maria Navarro said that although return of investment
can be complicated for so-called focus teachers, the strategy is
generating the right kind of discussion regarding Montgomery County
Public Schools.
“I think if anything else the ROI process pushes people’s conversations at a deeper level than before, so I think at a minimum it is guiding people’s questions based on data or … guiding next steps based on data, and so we always to kind of continue that sort of data-driven decision making in our schools,” Navarro said.
Navarro presented academic data on students in schools that received focus teachers for select math and English courses two years ago.
Navarro and Kimberly Statham, deputy superintendent of teaching, learning and programs, said some of the secondary schools that were selected to receive new focus teachers in English and in mathematics showed improvement.
With regard to return on investment, board member Rebecca Smondrowski said it is important to consider focus teachers in this case as well as other elements that may have led to improvement in student academic performance.
“I just think the information is important in how we evaluate what we’re doing and how we evaluate what other outside forces may be contributing to our kids,” Smondrowski said...
http://www.thesentinel.com/mont/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2333:board-of-education-examines-specialty-teaching-needs&Itemid=766
“I think if anything else the ROI process pushes people’s conversations at a deeper level than before, so I think at a minimum it is guiding people’s questions based on data or … guiding next steps based on data, and so we always to kind of continue that sort of data-driven decision making in our schools,” Navarro said.
Navarro presented academic data on students in schools that received focus teachers for select math and English courses two years ago.
Navarro and Kimberly Statham, deputy superintendent of teaching, learning and programs, said some of the secondary schools that were selected to receive new focus teachers in English and in mathematics showed improvement.
With regard to return on investment, board member Rebecca Smondrowski said it is important to consider focus teachers in this case as well as other elements that may have led to improvement in student academic performance.
“I just think the information is important in how we evaluate what we’re doing and how we evaluate what other outside forces may be contributing to our kids,” Smondrowski said...
http://www.thesentinel.com/mont/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2333:board-of-education-examines-specialty-teaching-needs&Itemid=766
If by “focus teachers” the BOE means instructors, who spend one-on-one time with students to teach reading and math, especially K thru 5, this could be a good idea with excellent ROI. Our child received “advanced” on the reading and writing MSA in the 4th grade. What the test results (nor teaching or special education staff) never mentioned was the results were with our child’s IEP accommodations; “read-to” and “scribe.” This meant that, when read to our child scored high on understanding, etc. When someone else did the writing, our child scored high for responses to the material. However the mechanics of actual reading and writing were nonexistent. By the beginning of the 5th grade our child was completely illiterate. When we asked the lead special educator at our child’s school (MCPS), we were told that our child “… was very smart, but incapable of ever learning to read or write.” We did not believe this. We enrolled our child at Huntington Learning Center and within 16 months, our child went from illiterate to reading/writing on or above grade level as confirmed by MCPS MAP-R testing (that’s six grade levels in 16 months). With a lot of tumult and struggle, our child’s IEP removed the “read-to” and “scribe” accommodations. Our child, now in the 11th grade, is an avid reader, has a 3.5 WGPA in mostly honors courses and is college bound. Six years ago, when that special educator told us that our child was “… incapable of ever learning to read or write,” what they really meant was that MCPS was UNWILLING or UNABLE to teach our child (and many children) to read and write. It’s no wonder that many MCPS students graduate as functional illiterates and three out of four students fail their final math exams. My only concern with this “initiative” is that MCPS will screw this up as well. A pilot program, closely monitored by MCPS and an outside auditor, should be conducted with publicly available results, before moving forward.
ReplyDelete