LAUSD board wants superintendent candidates with teaching experience | 89.3 KPCC

LAUSD board wants superintendent candidates with teaching experience | 89.3 KPCC:

LAUSD board wants superintendent candidates with teaching experience

The Los Angeles Unified school board on Tuesday took another step in its march towardhiring the next district superintendent by detailing the kinds of candidates it wants to interview.

"These characteristics are meant, as I read them, our aspirations and where we reach to and our goals and where we’d like our district to move for all children," board member Steve Zimmer said as the board began a 70 minute debate about the list of characteristics the superintendent search firm gave the board earlier this month.

The nineteen traits approved by the board include what you’d expect in a superintendent candidate: a deep understanding of teaching and learning, an ability to be a strong partner with the school board, and the skills to plan long-term for the school district’s needs.

But the board members also agreed they want specific kinds of backgrounds and approaches. They said candidates should have experience as teachers and principals in an urban school — and they should see public education as a tool for social justice, one that can address the struggles of students of color.

The list reflects some of the same traits sought by members of the public in meetings held this month. 

Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates, the firm hired by the district to help in the superintendent search, will now take the board’s list and call qualified candidates to ask if they’re interested in heading the country’s second largest school district.

The board plans to interview candidates next month and make a selection by Jan. 1.LAUSD board wants superintendent candidates with teaching experience | 89.3 KPCC:

Gates Foundation Puts New Focus on Transforming Teacher Prep - Education Week

Gates Foundation Puts New Focus on Transforming Teacher Prep - Education Week:

Gates Foundation Puts New Focus on Transforming Teacher Prep

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will invest some $34 million in cooperative initiatives designed to improve teacher-preparation programs’ overall effectiveness.

The Seattle-based philanthropy announced the three-year grants Nov. 18. Gates awarded the funds to five consortia through a competitive process—a change from its former strategy of one-off grants to individual teaching programs.

The winners will use the funding to create “transformation centers” based on four driving principles: developing strong partnerships with school districts; giving teacher-candidates opportunities to refine a specific set of teaching skills; using data for improvement and accountability; and ensuring that faculty and mentors are effective at guiding novices into the profession.

The grantees include:

• TeacherSquared, a center that currently consists mainly of nontraditional preparation programs, including the campuses of the Relay Graduate School of Education; Urban Teachers, which operates programs in the District of Columbia and Baltimore; Boston-based Match Teacher Residency; and the teaching programs offered by the Yes Prep and Aspire charter-management organizations;


• Texas Tech University, which will head the University-School Partnerships for the Renewal of Educator Preparation National Center, or U.S. PREP, a consortium of six universities located in Southern states;


• The Massachusetts Department of Education, which will lead the Elevate Preparation, Impact Children (EPIC) center, an effort that will involve all 71 providers in that state; and


• The National Center for Teacher Residencies, which will expand its network of providers using a residency model of preparation that couples a full year of student teaching with slimmed-down coursework.

The fifth grant, to TeachingWorks at the University of Michigan, differs from the others. The group will serve as a clearinghouse for the other grantees to share best practices, provide technical support to each center, and supply teacher performance assessments.

Each grantee save EPIC won about $7 million; EPIC received about $4 million. The philanthropy received about 40 applications representing some 500 programs in all.

The Gates Foundation has also contracted with the a nonprofit called Teacher Prep Inspection U.S., to visit each program annually and provide feedback on progress. The group is headed by longtime teacher-preparation analyst Edward Crowe. (The nonprofit that publishes Education Week receives support from the Gates Foundation for the coverage of college- and career-ready standards.)

Changing Practices

Gates officials said that their renewed focus on teacher preparation builds on the foundation's philanthropy in two other areas: teacher evaluation and academic standards.

“The timing is great because of having great consistent, high standards in the country and more meaningful, actionable teacher-feedback systems and some clear definitions about what excellence in teaching looks like,” said Vicki Phillips, the Gates Foundation’s director of college-ready programs. “Districts and prep programs can work in ways that are just much more powerful, stronger, and more targeted than three years ago, when we might have been doing more shooting in the dark.”

Some of the centers plan to expand and deepen work already under way. That’s the goal for the National Center for Teacher Residencies, which will expand from 17 to 37 providers, five of which will be demonstration sites that best embody the four principles around which the new grants are oriented.

Others, such as U.S. PREP, will work to scale up practices that have been successful elsewhere. Each of the participating universities in that center will begin by piloting a yearlong model for student teaching and a common tool for assessing teacher-candidate skills—initiatives first introduced at Arizona State University.

Of the grants, potentially the most wide-reaching is Massachusetts’. That state was selected partly because of the work it’s done to strengthen and make more transparent its quality-control process for teacher-preparation programs. (An Education Weekinvestigation earlier this year found deficiencies in most states’ review systems.)

Now, under the Gates grant, Massachusetts will aim to make its first-year teachers as Gates Foundation Puts New Focus on Transforming Teacher Prep - Education Week:

Yes, the teacher shortage is bad, but California voters don’t want fast tracked teachers either - The Hechinger Report

Yes, the teacher shortage is bad, but California voters don’t want fast tracked teachers either - The Hechinger Report:
Yes, the teacher shortage is bad, but California voters don’t want fast tracked teachers either
California teachers need more student teaching experience prior to teaching, poll says

Schools are desperate for teachers in California, but attempts to fast track teachers into classrooms haven’t won over voters there, results of a new poll suggest.

More than half of voters polled said they oppose policies that allow new teachers to begin teaching before they have completed training, even if those teachers would fill shortage positions, according to a poll released this week by EdSource and the California-based Learning Policy Institute.

The number of alternative teacher training programs nationwide has increased since 2000. Many allow teachers to enter the classroom after completing a brief training or while still working toward a credential. Traditional programs also offer paths to teaching that allow new teachers to become the “teacher of record” before their own schooling or credentialing is complete.

Voters responded to several questions about how California should improve the teaching profession.

In California, such programs have been particularly popular as the state deals with a worrying teacher shortage. Fewer teachers are enrolling in teacher preparation programs and entering classrooms, especially in critical subjects like math and special education.  The number of teacher credentials issued in California declined by 26 percent between the 2009-10 school year and 2013-14, and between 2009 and 2013, enrollment in teacher preparation programs dropped by 55 percent. More than 85 percent of voters in the poll said that the shortage of teachers in the state is a serious problem.

Related: Alternative routes to teaching become more popular despite lack of evidence

Harold Levine, dean of the University of California, Davis School of Education said in a call with reporters about the poll that he gets calls from desperate school districts “begging us to help them find people who may not be credentialed” to work in empty classrooms. “In some cases, in many hard-to-staff schools and particularly in northern parts of the state and in rural areas, it’s quite daunting for them [to find teachers],” he said.

The poll surveyed 1,002 registered English and Spanish-speaking California voters. They overwhelmingly said that teacher quality is essential for new teachers. Nearly 95 percent of those polled said a high level of training is critical for new teachers, and 88 percent of residents who were polled said teachers should have a full year of practice teaching under an expert mentor teacher prior to teaching Yes, the teacher shortage is bad, but California voters don’t want fast tracked teachers either - The Hechinger Report:

Poll: California voters say state must take action to address teacher shortage | EdSource

Poll: California voters say state must take action to address teacher shortage | EdSource:

Poll: California voters say state must take action to address teacher shortage

California registered voters regard the emerging shortage of K-12 teachers as a very serious problem and think that the state should be taking decisive action to rectify the situation, according to a poll commissioned by EdSource and the Learning Policy Institute.

The survey was conducted by the Field Poll, in part with support from the Walter and Elise Haas Fund, following recent reports indicating that the number of new teaching credentials issued in California has declined steadily for more than a decade, along with even more precipitous reductions in teacher preparation program enrollments.

The poll found that statewide, 64 percent of voters describe the shrinking supply of teachers as “very serious,” and a similar proportion (65 percent) thinks it’s “extremely important” for the state to do more to encourage young people and others to enroll in teacher preparation programs.

“At a time when California is implementing new standards, it’s important that all students have access to teachers who are well-prepared in those subject areas,” said Linda Darling-Hammond, president and CEO of the Learning Policy Institute.   She is also chair of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.  “A teacher shortage will set back the state’s education agenda.”

Darling-Hammond noted that the shortage is not being experienced uniformly across the state.  Shortages are especially acute in math and science and special education, as well as in certain districts and regions of the state.

The survey of 1,002 registered voters statewide – including both English and Spanish speakers – found there is broad-based voter support (85 percent) for having the state forgive a portion of teachers’ college loans or offering more scholarships to prospective teachers as a way to bring greater numbers into the teaching profession.

By contrast, more than half (52 percent) oppose policies that would allow schools to hire individuals who have not yet completed their training or who have not earned a teaching credential as a means for dealing with teacher shortages.Poll: California voters say state must take action to address teacher shortage | EdSource:

Teachers, parents say changes to standardized test so far won't deter the boycott movement | WRVO Public Media

Teachers, parents say changes to standardized test so far won't deter the boycott movement | WRVO Public Media:

Teachers, parents say changes to standardized test so far won't deter the boycott movement

Listen

Listening...

4:08

The state’s education commissioner said parents who are thinking of opting their children out of standardized tests again this school year should stick with the exams because they will be different than last year’s tests. But, the state’s teacher’s union and a parents group says the changes don’t go far enough.

Education Commissioner Mary Ellen Elia is hoping to contain a movement that led 20 percent of students to boycott the third-eighth grade standardized tests last spring.

The commissioner, who began her job in July after the April tests were administered, said they will be different in the spring of 2016.

Elia said teachers will have more input to review the test items and how they match up with the new Common Core standards. And, Elia said due to complaints she’s heard from teachers, students and parents across the state, there will be other changes as well -- including shorter tests.

“So, we’re shortening the tests at every grade level,” said Elia, mentioning a new policy that she previously  announced.

She said children who don’t finish the tests in the allotted time might be allowed a few more minutes.

“Are we really measuring whether or not they have comprehension or whether they can read quickly?” Elia asked.

The New York State Education Department is ditching the current testing company Pearson in favor of a company, Questar, that allows teachers to have more say in the tests. But, the new company will not be in charge of the exams until the spring of 2017. A modified version of the controversial Pearson tests will be administered to students. While the commissioner is not telling parents what to do, she said she hopes the effort by education officials to make the changes will influence their actions.

“Parents should consider that if they make a decision,” Elia said. “We hope that will influence them and that the teacher involvement, particularly, will be positive.”

Elia also recommends delaying the effects of the tests on students’ permanent records for six more months through the 2018-19 school year. She said she thinks Teachers, parents say changes to standardized test so far won't deter the boycott movement | WRVO Public Media:

To Mark Zuckerberg from a former classmate: Why I’m ‘alarmed’ by your new school reform effort - The Washington Post

To Mark Zuckerberg from a former classmate: Why I’m ‘alarmed’ by your new school reform effort - The Washington Post:

To Mark Zuckerberg from a former classmate: Why I’m ‘alarmed’ by your new school reform effort

Emily Talmage is an elementary school teacher in Lewiston, Maine, who happened to be a classmate of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg when they both attended Phillips Exeter Academy as teenagers.  In the education world, Zuckerberg is known for his $100 million gift to Newark Schools, money that was largely wasted, as told in a recent book by Dale Russakoff,  a former Washington Post reporter, titled “The Prize: Who’s in Charge of America’s Schools?”  Here’s an open letter to Zuckerberg from Talmage about one of his latest education reform efforts. Talmage has seven years of teaching experience in New York City and Maine, as well as a masters degree in urban education from Mercy College and a masters degree in developmental psychology from Teachers College, Columbia University.

[Why Mark Zuckerberg’s $100 million gift to Newark schools was announced on Oprah’s show]

Here’s the letter, which originally appeared on EmilyTalmage.com:

Dear Mark,

You probably don’t remember me, but we were students together at Phillips Exeter Academy 15 years ago. I was a lower (sophomore) when you were a senior, so our paths didn’t overlap much, but I do believe we had one class together — Latin with Mr. Morante.

I’m writing for two reasons: first, a quick thank you for Facebook. I’ve always enjoyed it as a social tool, but recently I have discovered how powerful it can be as networking tool to gather people around a common cause. Lately, I’ve connected with parents, teachers, administrators, bloggers, and other activists around the country who are all working passionately toward one goal: getting our local schools back from the powerful corporate and political interests that now strangle them. We share notes and research, triumphs and setbacks, inspiration and outrage, and lately it seems — incrementally at least — that we may be getting somewhere.

A bit about me: after Exeter and college (Amherst ’07), I followed the two-year teaching-temp route through the New York City 

To Mark Zuckerberg from a former classmate: Why I’m ‘alarmed’ by your new school reform effort - The Washington Post:

Making the Case for a Good-Enough Diploma - Pacific Standard

Making the Case for a Good-Enough Diploma - Pacific Standard:

Making the Case for a Good-Enough Diploma

Common Core and big business have combined to make the lot of the upwardly mobile high school dropout even more dire.

Jennifer Neustedt is a caregiver—her job includes changing bedding, helping patients with eating, and monitoring their medicines—in an elder-housing facility in Bellingham, Washington. The 32-year-old, married with four children, works 40 hours a week for about $11 an hour.

Jose Rosado is a full-time metal fabricator in Cleveland, Ohio, putting together drop boxes that FedEx uses for package pick-ups. Twenty-seven, married and with a three-year-old son, he makes about $15 an hour. His wife doesn’t work—she’s been ill for a few years—and health-care costs have added to the family expenses.

Both are high school dropouts. Neustedt left school when she became pregnant at age 15, while Rosado dropped out in ninth grade because “I was into all sorts of things, and school wasn’t one of them.” Both need a high school diploma, or its equivalent, to move into the educational programs that will help them climb up the economic ladder.

If Neustedt were to put in two years of community college in a nursing program, she could triple her pay and move up in the booming health-care industry. Rosado wants to go to a vocational-tech training school to get certified in welding, which would open up his job options and perhaps triple his pay. It might even jumpstart his dream of owning an auto mechanic business.

Neustedt and Rosado both take tutoring classes to prepare for the GED, a high-school equivalency test. GED stands for General Educational Development (or, in less charitable quarters, the Good-Enough Diploma), and the test measures basic math, reading, writing, and history. Both Neustedt and Rosado put in 15 to 20 hours a week studying for the test, and they have been at it for more than a year.

These two are, by all estimations, reasonably intelligent adults, in stable family relationships, who work full-time and are working hard to get ahead—the kind of people the bootstrap puller-upper political crowd extols as examples of American hard work and determination. And yet neither Neustedt nor Rosado has passed the four-part GED. In fact, neither has passed even one of the parts.

They’re not alone. Fewer people passed the GED in 2014 than had in any other year since 1968, when the United States had 100 million fewer citizens. Why can’t they earn a good-enough diploma?

COMMON CORE’S SHADOW

(Illustration: Pacific Standard)

A retooled GED rolled out in January 2014, and the new test is harder than the old one. A lot harder. That’s intentional: The people behind the test insist that a harder test is good for worker productivity and gives the GED more value—arguments that echo those made for the Common Core State Standards Initiative and its mission to improve American classroom education through consistent curricula and ample standardized testing.

Common Core, in fact, is a big reason the current GED is so much harder. States—and keep in mind that states decide when and how to adopt Common Core, not the federal government—required the new test to adhere to Common Core standards. Rather than assessing skills learned by rote, including basic math, reading, and writing skills, Common Core means to emphasize analytical learning—“how” and “why” and not just “what.” And the new GED reflects that intention.

The content change in the new test—more math, algebra-level and above (the old test was one-fourth advanced math; the new test is one-half ), essays graded on analysis and not grammar, tough chemistry equations—is the biggest factor in the historic drop-off, according to those who tutor prospective test-takers.

And while those who oversaw this test change insist that the numbers will go up as tutors and test-takers get to know the new GED, right now the new test is failing a large number of people who need a second chance to get ahead. This remains a significant population to draw from: According to the Department of Education, while dropout rates among all demographic groups have been falling for years, some seven percent of current 16- to 24-year-olds are high school dropouts.

The GED has always measured basic academic proficiency, but it also served as a proxy for the test-taker’s determination to study and ultimately move up economically. The new test has lessened the importance of that resolve, and seems to be discouraging people from even trying.

The focus of the new test also questions a tacit, if real, goal for many taking the GED: It’s a tool for moving up a few rungs on the vocational ladder, not a launching pad for those who want to jump onto the university escalator.

University of Chicago researchers found that, in the past few decades, the GED has consistently accounted for about 12 percent of the high school diplomas awarded in the U.S. But fewer than five percent of those passing the GED go on to earn a bachelor’s degree, compared to 27 percent of regular high school graduates. About 40 percent of GED test-passers, according to a 2011 study conducted for the GED Testing Service, do attend some post-secondary education classes—college, vocational school, or certification programs—but only about half spend more than Making the Case for a Good-Enough Diploma - Pacific Standard:

Overtime scandal in Newark schools–union demands ouster of personnel chief | Bob Braun's Ledger

Overtime scandal in Newark schools–union demands ouster of personnel chief | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Overtime scandal in Newark schools–union demands ouster of personnel chief

Rodriguez–both the school board and the teachers’ union want her out.

The Newark Teachers Union and its president, John Abeigon, have filed a legal action asking the state’s education commissioner to fire the so-called “chief talent officer” of the state-operated Newark district, Vanessa Rodriguez, contending she lacks the proper qualifications and licensing for the position.

—

The petition was filed just hours before the Newark school board–which had once tried to fire Rodriguez–forced the personnel chief to read a document that publicly revealed problems involving the overpayment of overtime to city school administrators. Rodriguez’s boss, state-appointed superintendent Christopher Cerf, had tried to play down the document that admitted some school employees had received tens of thousands of dollars in unearned overtime.

—

The revelations come just as Cerf has cut back on funds used by schools to provide books, materials, supplies, and support services. The school year began with the state-operated schools more than $60 million in the hole, but Cerf contends he has reduced the shortfall to less than $13 million.

—-

Abeigon, in revealing the administrative petition filed with state Education Commissioner David Hespe, called Rodriguez a “quack” who had visited “misery and damage” on Newark children, parents, and school employees.

—-

The union and its president also asked Hespe to set aside “all personnel decisions she had made, tenure charges she certified, and layoffs of employees that she approved.”

Rodriguez had been one of the highest-paid administrators in the district, making $185,000 annually.

—

She was a close confidante of Cami Anderson, once a political  operative for former Mayor–now US Sen.–Cory Booker;  Anderson was named  state-operated superintendent  four years ago by Gov. Chris Christie. Christie fired her in June and replaced her with Christopher Cerf, a former state education commissioner and Overtime scandal in Newark schools–union demands ouster of personnel chief | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Massachusetts Dumps MCAS for PARCC-stuffed “MCAS 2.0” | deutsch29

Massachusetts Dumps MCAS for PARCC-stuffed “MCAS 2.0” | deutsch29:

Massachusetts Dumps MCAS for PARCC-stuffed “MCAS 2.0”

On November 12, 2015, the PARCC consortium announced that it will now offer several “testing options,” which amounts to little more than PARCC now becoming a test item vendor by degrees.

Weeks before, on October 19, 2015, Massachusetts Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester proposed that DESE create a hybrid of the state’s current assessment, the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) and PARCC.

He called it “MCAS 2.0.”

It should come as no surprise that on November 17, 2015, Massachusett’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) voted 8-3 fr what amounted to a set-up: either a revised MCAS (i.e., now PARCC-stuffed MCAS 2.0) or full-blown PARCC.

So, the DESE choice was actually Sort of Hidden PARCC or Obvious PARCC.

And in typical, corporate-reform “urgency,” MCAS 2.0 is supposed to be constructed, Massachusetts Dumps MCAS for PARCC-stuffed “MCAS 2.0” | deutsch29:

ESEA Reauthorization Moving Forward: House Appoints Conference Committee Members | deutsch29

ESEA Reauthorization Moving Forward: House Appoints Conference Committee Members | deutsch29:

ESEA Reauthorization Moving Forward: House Appoints Conference Committee Members

House, Senate, and, likely, White House negotiations regarding the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) have been happening behind the scenes since roughly late September. It seems that a single bill has been negotiated out of the House version, the Student Success Act (SSA) and the Senate version, the Every Child Achieves Act (ECAA), both of which were passed in July 2015.

Word is that the negotiated version looks more like ECAA than SSA. One of the major differences between the two bills involves the issue of opting out of federally mandated standardized testing. SSA declared the right of parents to opt out; ECAA leaves it up to states to decide upon opt out rules.

In July 2015, I wrote about opt out language in both SSA and ECAA. However, I will not comment further on the now-negotiated, SSA-ECAA version until I am able to see the text. Moreover, that negotiated version will next go before a House and Senate conference committee, where it could be further modified before heading to both houses for a vote. (In this July 2015 post, I offer more discussion regarding the issue of the conference committee process.)

And that conference committee is moving forward. According to this November 17, 2015, House Education and the Workforce press release, House Speaker Ryan has made the committee appointments:

House Moves Toward K-12 Education Conference Committee
Speaker Ryan appoints House Republican conferees

WASHINGTON, D.C. | November 17, 2015 – House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-MN) issued the following statement today after the House of Representatives approved a motion to go to conference on reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Actand Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) appointed House Republican conferees:Today, the House took an important step forward in our effort to improve K-12 

ESEA Reauthorization Moving Forward: House Appoints Conference Committee Members | deutsch29:

Attention: Aurora Public School Families; Atención: Familias de alumnos de las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora - UNITED OPT OUT

Attention: Aurora Public School Families; Atención: Familias de alumnos de las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform:

Attention: Aurora Public School Families; Atención: Familias de alumnos de las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora

Aurora Public Schools in Aurora, Colorado, recently posted their Opt Out guidance notice on their website, as required by state law. Each school is required to send home a letter to parents to inform them of their parental right to refuse state assessments. Each school is also required to inform parents of all testing that is occurring, while specifying which assessments are for the state and which are for the district.

The Aurora District doc can be read in its entirety here: Aurora Public Schools Assessment Information .  It is incredibly difficult to find it if searching on the website – it is listed under District Policies here: http://aurorak12.org/about-aps/district-policies/section-i/ and the title is IKA -Grading/Assessment Systems.

Key points for parents from the document include:

Parent/Guardian Request for Exemption
A parent/guardian who wishes to exempt his or her child from a particular state assessment or assessments shall make this request in accordance with this policy’s accompanying regulation. In accordance with state law, the district shall not impose a negative consequence upon a student
whose parent/guardian has requested an exemption from a state assessment or assessments. This policy’s exemption process shall apply only to state assessments and shall not apply to district or classroom assessments.

Please know that parents also have the right to refuse additional assessments which are being used to rob Aurora’s children of important instructional time.

The state tests: PARCC (also called CMAS) English, Math and CMAS  Social Studies, Science end of year tests must be refused. These tests are all developmentally inappropriate and create a fear-based environment in our schools – for teachers and students. School is meant to be a safe place for children to learn and take risks as learners.

However, in addition,  we recommend refusing the following assessments:  PALS, Acuity, and TS Gold. Each of these assessments rob Aurora’s teachers of valuable instructional time and none of the assessments are used to inform authentic instruction. These assessments are used to teach to the test and skill/drill children – all of which decreases opportunities for meaningful learning experiences for Aurora’s children. Finally, these assessments gather immense amounts of data on children – data that ultimately will be used to profit the corporations who create the tests. Each of these assessments take teachers away from their teaching.  And last of all,imagine what our schools would be like if all this money were used to hire nurses, librarians, counselors, purchase more resources, create smaller class size, hire more teachers, and create community centers within each school to provide additional supports for Aurora’s families?

The Aurora document also states:

Additional Assessment Information for Parents/Guardians
In accordance with state law and this policy’s accompanying regulation, the district shall distribute an assessment calendar and related information to parents/guardians on an annual basis to inform them about the state and district assessments that the district plans to administer during the school
year.

If you have not received the calendar please call your school and request it immediately. 

Regarding procedures for refusing assessments they state:

Parent/Guardian Request for Exemption
In accordance with the accompanying policy, the parent/guardian of a student enrolled in the district may request that his or her child be exempt in participating in one or more state assessments. It is strongly encouraged that parents/guardians have a consultation with their school prior to requesting exemption.
1. The request for exemption must be submitted in writing to the school principal.
2. The parent/guardian will not be required to state the reason for asking for the exemption,
3. The request for exemption may apply to all or specific state assessments administered to the
student during the school year.
4. A request for exemption will be valid for one school year. Requests for exemption from state
assessments in subsequent school years require a new written request.
5. Parents/guardians are encouraged to submit their requests for exemption at the earliest
possible date each school year so that the district may plan accordingly

We do not recommend having a consultation. It is our experience that consultations are used as a tactic to persuade parents to allow children to take unnecessary tests. If no one took these tests, we could begin to rebuild and improve our schools by directing our time and our tax dollars to our children’s learning needs rather than the corporations’ pockets. It is up to the parents to demand more for their children. Our children and our public schools are not for profit. If we can answer questions or assist in any way, including translation of opt out letters, please email us at unitedoptoutnational@gmail.com . 

Sincerely,

UOO TeamAttention: Aurora Public School Families; Atención: Familias de alumnos de las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform:

Spanish Translation:

Las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora en Aurora, Colorado publicó recientemente una notificación de como Rechazar Pruebas en su página web, como se requiere por la ley estatal. Cada escuela tiene la obligación de enviar a casa una carta a los padres para informarles de su derecho a rechazar las evaluaciones estatales. Cada escuela también tiene la obligación de informarlos de todas las pruebas que se dan, mientras que especificar cuáles evaluaciones son del Estado y cuáles son para el distrito.

El documento del Distrito de Aurora se puede leer en su totalidad aquí: Aurora Public Schools Assessment Information. Es increíblemente difícil encontrar si uno busca en la página web -aparece en Las Políticas del Distrito aquí: http://aurorak12.org/about-aps/district-policies/section-i/ y el título es IKA -Grading / Evaluación Sistemas.

Puntos claves para los padres del documento incluyen:

Solicitud del padre/tutor de la Exención

Un padre/tutor que desea exceptuar a su hijo de una(s) evaluación(es) deberá hacer esta solicitud, de acuerdo con la regulación de acompañamiento de esta política. De acuerdo con la ley estatal, el distrito no impondrá ninguna consecuencia negativa sobre un estudiante cuyo padre/tutor ha solicitado una exención de una(s) evaluación(es) estatal(es). El proceso de exención de esta política se aplicará únicamente a las evaluaciones estatales y no se aplicará a las evaluaciones del distrito ni del salón de clase.

Favor de saber que los padres también tienen el derecho de rechazar las evaluaciones adicionales que se están utilizando para robar a los estudiantes de Aurora el tiempo importante de instrucción.

Los exámenes estatales: PARCC (también llamados CMAS) Inglés, Matemáticas y pruebas del fin del año Estudios Sociales y Ciencias de CMAS deben ser rechazados. Estas pruebas son inapropiadas para el desarrollo del niño y crean un entorno basado en el miedo en nuestras escuelas – para los maestros y los estudiantes. Se intenta que la escuela sea un lugar seguro para los niños endonde aprenden y toman riesgos como estudiantes.

Sin embargo, recomendemos el rechazo de las siguientes evaluaciones: PALS, Acuity, y TS Gold. Cada una de estas evaluaciones roban de los maestros de Aurora el tiempo valioso para enseñar, y ninguna de las evaluaciones se utilizan para informar la instrucción auténtica. Se resulta el enseñar a la prueba y para la habilidad/perforación – todo lo cual disminuye las oportunidades de las experiencias significativas de aprendizaje para los niños de Aurora. Por último, estas evaluaciones se reúnen enormes cantidades de datos sobre los niños – los datos que se utilizarán para beneficiar a las corporaciones que crean las pruebas. Cada una de estas evaluaciones les quita a los maestros de la enseñanza. Y por último, imagínense lo que nuestras escuelas serían si todo este dinero se utilizara para contratar a enfermeras, bibliotecarios, consejeros, para reducir el número de estudiantes en cada clase, para contratar más maestros, adquirir más recursos, y crear centros comunitarios dentro de cada escuela para proporcionar apoyos adicionales para las familias de Aurora?

El documento Aurora también dice:

Información adicional de la Evaluación para los Padres/Tutores:

De acuerdo con la ley estatal y la regulación de acompañamiento de esta política, el distrito distribuirá un calendario de evaluación e información relacionada a los padres/tutores anualmente para informarles acerca de las evaluaciones estatales y del distrito que el distrito planea administrar durante año escolar.

Si usted no ha recibido el calendario por favor llame a su escuela y solicitarlo inmediatamente.

Con respeto a los procedimientos del rechazo de las evaluaciones se dice:

Solicitud del padre/tutor de la Exención

De acuerdo con la política de acompañamiento, el padre/tutor de un estudiante matriculado en el distrito puede solicitar que su hijo sea exentado de participar en una o más evaluaciones estatales. Se recomienda que los padres/tutores consulten con su escuela antes de solicitar la exención.

1. La solicitud de exención deberá ser presentada por escrito al director de la escuela.
2. No se requiere que el padre/tutor indique el motivo para solicitar la exención,
3. La solicitud de exención puede aplicarse a todas o determinadas evaluaciones estatales administradas al estudiante durante el año escolar.
4. Un solicitud de exención tendrá una validez de un año escolar. Las solicitudes de exención de las evaluaciones del estado en los años escolares siguientes requieren una nueva solicitud por escrito.
5. Se recomienda que los padres/tutores presenten los solicitudes de exención en la fecha más temprana posible de cada año escolar para que el distrito pueda planificar en consecuencia

No recomendamos tener una consulta. Es nuestra experiencia que las consultas se utilizan como una táctica para convencer a los padres a que los niños tomen pruebas innecesarias. Si nadie tomara estas pruebas, podríamos comenzar a reconstruir y mejorar nuestras escuelas dirigiendo nuestro tiempo y nuestros impuestos a las necesidades de aprendizaje de nuestros hijos en lugar de los bolsillos de las corporaciones. Corresponde a los padres a exigir más para sus hijos. Nuestros hijos y nuestras escuelas públicas no son para los fines de lucro. Si podemos responder a las preguntas o ayudar de cualquier manera, incluida la traducción de sus cartas del rechazo de los exámenes, por favor envíenos un email a unitedoptoutnational@gmail.com.

Sinceramente,

UOO Equipo

Esto no es un documento legal. Para los propósitos informativos solamente.Attention: Aurora Public School Families; Atención: Familias de alumnos de las Escuelas Públicas de Aurora - UNITED OPT OUT: The Movement to End Corporate Education Reform: