So, about three months ago, certain other bloggers in District 192 suggested that the primary election results meant that Farmington school district voters wanted change.
Will they think the same thing now?
The general election results are in and Julie McKnight, current chairwoman of the District 192 School Board, was re-elected and received the most votes - 200 more votes than Mr. Burke, and almost 800 more votes than Julie Singewald who came in third.
So what do those results mean? We won't suggest they mean residents think everything is great with District 192. We know that there are those who think there are plenty of problems, and we know that there are improvements that still need to be made.
The results do mean that plenty of people think the school district is headed in the right direction. We didn't have another incumbent to re-elect to really test how much faith people have in the current board's direction, but having the only incumbent finish comfortably in first is a strong sign. One other School Board member was elected to City Council, which again might suggest people see that Terry Donnelly has helped move the schools in the right direction and they hope he can do the same for the city.
Mr. Burke has gotten on the board. His name recognition certainly helped. After all, he's the most famous person in Farmington. We hope he will take his new post seriously and learns to treat others with respect. Whatever the case, we will certainly continue watching.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Don't look over there; look over here
Here is a classic tactic by a classic politician. We'll call it "guilt by extension." You tell people that everything is terrible, but you point to just one thing to make your point.
In this case, Burke and his buds cannot stop saying the words "11th grade math scores". There's the proof that Farmington schools are terrible, right? That would be true if it wasn't for one thing ... all of the other test scores.
Juniors who took the MCA math test last year, as a group, did not do well. There's no doubt. Among other things, that is some reflection on the education they received last year and the years leading up to last year. It was bad, and it should be corrected.
But what Burke doesn't bother to mention is whether anything has been done to correct it, or if anything is being done to improve math scores among Farmington students. He doesn't want you to look "over there" at the rest of the students. He wants you to focus on just one number, and ignore the possibility - the reality, actually - that the district has put in place good processes to help teachers teach better, which helps students learn better ... and the results are already showing.
Case in point, math MCA scores in grades 3-7 improved in 2008 compared to 2007. And the overall percentage of Farmington students who scored "proficient" on the math MCA was higher than the state average this year, which it wasn't in 2007. Remember that 2007-08 was the first full year for the new math curriculum, and the first year following the push to provide math-specific teacher training related to the new curriculum.
Then we move on to the reading scores. Well, Farmington students outperformed the state average in grades 3-8. 10th grade fell below state average by just over one percent, but still saw a 10 point increase from 2007. Grade 6 and 7 reading scores improved by double digits.
Lastly, look at ACT scores in Farmington schools. The average Farmington score has gone up by more than a point in the last five years ... and that's even with the number of students taking the test going up dramatically. More students, doing better to get ready for college. That doesn't sound like a failing school system to us.
In other words, the schools are improving. They are getting results ... it's just that Burke doesn't want you to notice.
In this case, Burke and his buds cannot stop saying the words "11th grade math scores". There's the proof that Farmington schools are terrible, right? That would be true if it wasn't for one thing ... all of the other test scores.
Juniors who took the MCA math test last year, as a group, did not do well. There's no doubt. Among other things, that is some reflection on the education they received last year and the years leading up to last year. It was bad, and it should be corrected.
But what Burke doesn't bother to mention is whether anything has been done to correct it, or if anything is being done to improve math scores among Farmington students. He doesn't want you to look "over there" at the rest of the students. He wants you to focus on just one number, and ignore the possibility - the reality, actually - that the district has put in place good processes to help teachers teach better, which helps students learn better ... and the results are already showing.
Case in point, math MCA scores in grades 3-7 improved in 2008 compared to 2007. And the overall percentage of Farmington students who scored "proficient" on the math MCA was higher than the state average this year, which it wasn't in 2007. Remember that 2007-08 was the first full year for the new math curriculum, and the first year following the push to provide math-specific teacher training related to the new curriculum.
Then we move on to the reading scores. Well, Farmington students outperformed the state average in grades 3-8. 10th grade fell below state average by just over one percent, but still saw a 10 point increase from 2007. Grade 6 and 7 reading scores improved by double digits.
Lastly, look at ACT scores in Farmington schools. The average Farmington score has gone up by more than a point in the last five years ... and that's even with the number of students taking the test going up dramatically. More students, doing better to get ready for college. That doesn't sound like a failing school system to us.
In other words, the schools are improving. They are getting results ... it's just that Burke doesn't want you to notice.
If I were the moderator ...
I watched the debate between the school board candidates. The previous posts have touched on process. I was thinking to myself that if I were the moderator of that debate, I would have asked Tim Burke to explain what he meant by "too much process" and watched him trip over his toungue trying to explain it. Maybe he could take the time to spell it out and help us try to envision what his version, goal, plan - whatever you want to call it - looks like, this model that he has devised that has "less process" or "no process" or "half of a process". I don't really know what to call it, and I don't think he does either, because I'm not sure that his plan exists. He has said time and again that he doesn't know anything about curriculum, so maybe he should have asked to "pass" on that question rather than show his ignorance on curriculum issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)