Corbett, Washington?

Over the past ten years, Corbett School District has achieved the dramatic improvement that has eluded the State of Oregon. The State of Oregon, for its part, has kept quiet as Corbett has been recognized by various national agencies and media. Far from embracing Corbett's achievement as its own, the Oregon Department of Education has kept Corbett at arms length. Why? I'm not certain that they want it known that improving student achievement has nothing to do with State Standards, DDDM, PLC's, RTI, AVID, CIP, CDIP, NCLB, Scientific, Scientifically-Based, Evidence-Based, or VooDoo Based Evidence, or any of the highly profitable rituals that are the mainstay of the current educational practice. They don't want to celebrate the achievements of a district that openly expresses concern that TSPC is on the wrong track, that their definitions of Highly Qualified Teachers and quality professional development are wrong-headed. They don't like that we don't embrace the recommendations of the Chalkboard Project, the PTA, OSBA, the FBI... or that we believe the OEA to be a significant barrier to school improvement. And they certainly don't want it known that a district with Corbett's record of achievement has embraced a Charter School.

During a recent private meeting with the President of The College Board, he wondered aloud regarding Oregon's lack of acknowledgment of Corbett School District's astounding performance in the Advanced Placement program. I fumbled for an answer. What I landed on was this: in order for Corbett to produce improvements that were unlike those posted by any other Oregon district during the same decade, we had to approach education in ways that were fundamentally different from the Oregon orthodoxy that produced almost nothing. And when I say different, I mean 'in opposition' to. And when I say 'in opposition to', I mean that we believe that Oregon's approach to school improvement has been, on every level, disastrous. And it has been disastrously expensive. It is no secret that our practices, in direct opposition to every prescription from the State and Federal department, have produced unparalleled results. So it makes some sense that they ignore us.

The occasion of the above meeting was the College Board's Western Regional Forum in San Diego. We were invited to speak and to meet the President of the Board. The College Board published a special announcement in recognition of those schools in the Western Region that were recognized by Newsweek Magazine as being among the top 100 high schools in the nation. It was an elite list, and Corbett was on it. Right there in black and white. Well, almost. The College Board, those same folks who wondered why Oregon ignored us, listed us as Corbett, Washington.

Corbett, Washington. That would explain a lot. And it would let Oregon off the hook.

Oregon Gives Up Hope

The Oregon Department of Education has broken a fundamental rule: when deploying smoke and mirrors, don't skimp on the smoke. Mirrors present the clear danger of catching a glimpse of oneself, and that can be a jolting experience.

In this case, the image is not a pleasant one.

ODE is scrambling about like a gaggle of characters in a Buster Keaton movie, pushing, pulling, and hoping against hope to so situate a mobile goal post in the path of an errant kick that they can throw both arms toward the heavens and shout "Field Goal!!!" And their exuberance is, so far as I can judge, real. They are, it appears, authentically mistaken.

The State of Oregon has made no significant progress on student achievement in a decade. They have provided no evidence that they know how. Yet they insist that they can and that their lead is one that we ought all to follow. (And all the while, they are only jumping on every national fad, hoping that whoever started it knows what they are doing). And now this.

They are evidently so desperate to produce the illusion of improvement that they have decided to take what are currently the 10th grade assessments and magically transform them (though with no transformation) to the 11th grade assessments. Will this help students better prepare for life after high school? No. Will passing rates improve? Possibly. Why? More students who would have failed the 10th grade assessments will have dropped out prior to taking the same assessments in 11th grade. Sound cynical? I'm not sure. They don't show much evidence of thinking that far ahead.

And 'riddle me this': with the current ODE leadership having been in place for the better part of a decade, how did the discovery that the 10th grade assessments were misplaced by an entire calendar year somehow escape their attention until now? Shouldn't this intellectual sluggishness disqualify those responsible from further involvement? (or at least result in a good long time-out?)

And riddle me further: if the problem with the 10th grade assessments is that students don't see the requisite curriculum until 11th grade, how is it that over half of the 10th graders in the state will pass the assessments this year? Are over 50% of our students somehow accelerated by a year? Are two-thirds of our 10th graders accelerated in reading? That's how many Oregon students will pass the reading assessment this year. (In Corbett, it will be 90%. It boggles the mind what that implies...our curriculum is clearly misaligned!)

On one level, all of this is fine with me. After all, they got elected. But they don't stop at exercising horrific judgment in high places. They talk. They fill the press and the public discourse with silly notions that get in the way of real conversations about education. They flood entire statewide conferences with failed strategies that are obstacles to student achievement. They have the bully pulpit yet lack the imagination to reach all the way to the 'y'. They repeat every empty cliche that comes down from the national organizations without regard to the fact that their pet programs never produce results. They make judgments about the work of those who actually do the work, and they make them publicly.

So what's wrong with moving the goal post...again? Why not, after all, make the assessments easier? To do so undermines the work of those who insist that real achievement is possible. It puts the lie to those who claim that our children are not being served as well as they could be and that it's the fault of the adults. They give quarter to those who have sat in their desks for years and insisted that Oregon's students just aren't up to the goal of high achievement.

They have taken sides against hope.

More smoke. Really. You don't want to see this.

"...On a Jet Plane..."

Destination San Diego, where Dr. Trani and I will be the guests of The College Board at their annual Western Regional Forum on Saturday and Sunday. We'll be giving a talk about overcoming barriers to Advanced Placement courses for all children.

This month The College Board released its State by State analysis of Advanced Placement participation and performance. Corbett was one of two districts in Oregon in which 30% or more of seniors attempted at least one Advanced Placement exam. The key word is attempted. In 196 Oregon school districts, fewer than 30% even attempted such a thing.

Corbett was also one of only two districts wherein 30% or more of graduating seniors passed at least one A.P. exam prior to graduation. The state average is about 13%, so 30% is pretty good. But in Corbett's Class of 2009, 40% of graduating seniors passed three or more exams!

What about that 13% number? If that's how many Oregon students passed one more more exams, what did Corbett's top 13% do? They attempted an average of 10 exams each, and passed 85% of them with a score of 3 or higher! They earned a score of 4 or 5 on 60% of their exams. One was a State AP Scholar (one of two in Oregon) and one was a National Scholar (one of 53 in Oregon). That's what Corbett's top 13% did. How many passed one or more exams? 60%.

If that's the senior class, it was probably just a flash in the pan. What about the junior class, the Class of 2010? What did its top 13% produce? The top nine of 65 juniors passed an average of 5 exams each. They passed 67% of their exams (a little higher than the national average passing rate). They posted 4's or 5's on 38% of their exams. So Corbett's juniors performed far beyond the Oregon norm for seniors.

Could just be another fluke...law of small numbers and all of that. Let's see what the 10th graders did! (We'll find a flaw here. Just wait!) The top 13% of the Corbett 10th grade (Class of 2011) last year attempted 2.6 exams each and passed 48% of them. They passed an average of 1.25 each. And every one of them had at least one score of 4 or 5. In the 10th grade! So with regard to AP productivity, Corbett's 10th grade significantly outdistanced Oregon's Seniors.

So we're going to San Diego to talk about it. Should be fun.

Academic Decathlon Results

Barlow High School earned 1st place at the State Of Oregon Academic Decathlon Finals. They did commendable work and earned the win. Of special note is that the team exists in large part due to the effort of a remarkable student who wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. It's a great story. A high school senior demanding that pure academic achievement be given a place at the table.

Corbett School and Corbett Charter School earned 2nd and 3rd places, respectively. Corbett Charter School placed 2nd in the Super Quiz, with Corbett School placing 3rd. There were a number of great individual efforts, but we simply lacked the needed depth to pull out the win.

Corbett School won the right to represent Oregon in the online Small Schools national competition. We will do our best.

Overall, we would have to call this a building year. We took two freshmen to the event (almost unheard of) and the Charter team had no veterans. Barlow had two students who competed last year and seven of their nine members were seniors. They were well poised for a win. And they were well prepared.

I have to add that spending time with the 17 competitors from Corbett School and Corbett Charter School was a wonderful experience. These are among the nicest, brightest young people anywhere. I am deeply grateful to know them, and everyone with whom they came in contact was favorably impressed.

I predict that we will (both) do better next year. Stay tuned. For a year.

Valentine Thought

We are off to the State Academic Decathlon competition. Some of the kids have worked very hard. I hope that they earn a trip to nationals...it's a sight to behold. I can't believe I'm nervous. I'm going to miss Lara today. Even more than usual.

Budgetary advice for the day:

Better a great teacher drawing in the dirt with a sharp stick than a mediocrity massaging a Smart Board.

Wish us luck!

P is for Several Words, All Starting with 'P'

P is for Paternalism. It is the bedrock of the traditional public school system in Oregon and elsewhere. Paternalism in education includes the well-intended requirement that parents must send their children to a particular (usually 'neighborhood') school based on their place of residence. Paternalistic school districts believe that the children residing within their boundaries are 'their' children and that they have a fundamental right to whatever funding 'their' children generate from the state or federal governments. They believe that offering parents choice regarding attendance is harmful to 'their' students. The only escape from traditional Paternalism is private school or home school. (There are districts that allow students to attend outside their boundaries, but only with the explicit approval of the district and within certain explicit or implicit 'caps' in place.) Corbett School District has had a clear policy of approving all requests to transfer out for the past decade. I don't know of another district that keeps its doors open to that degree. Corbett made that principled decision, by the way, when it was losing 4% of its student population to transfers out, and twice as many students were leaving as were transferring in.

P is for Patronizing. When districts insist that they know best where a student 'fits', local schools are left to deal with those parents who are unhappy with their powerlessness to choose what's best for their children. Concerned parents rightly believe that if they are given no choice regarding attendance then they should have a say in how the school works. They should get to shape curriculum, operating hours, discipline policies, the choice of math programs, the budget, the contents of the library, the hiring and retention of principals. They hold that no individual decision made by any member of the staff should be beyond parental review. Principals and teachers who want to stay in good standing with their Districts know to keep their parents happy. I once had a superintendent for whom the highest complement that a principal could receive was the news that "I haven't received a single call." What should be educational decisions are now politically motivated. And because some parents are much more demanding than others, parents do not get an equal say in school matters. So now parents are forced to attend particular schools in which key decisions are made by other parents rather than by the professional staff. Giving parents a voice always caries the danger of giving some parents more voice than others.

P is for Professionalism. Schools need to 'go pro'. Plans need to be made and executed by trained professionals. Seasoned educators need to be empowered and responsible to make the decisions that matter. Teachers need to make decisions without fear of reprisal. They need to make demands of students without interference. They need to exercise their judgments based solely on what is best for students without regard for the opinions of non-teachers. They need to be liberated from Politics. (Politics is NOT one of our P's).

We are well on our way to 'going pro'. Many of our parents have discovered that their responsibility is to choose the very best school for their children and not to supervise the teachers or the revise the school philosophy after-the-fact. Some of the first parents who made the breakthrough to 'going pro' made the decision to leave. We honor their decision. When they discovered that teachers were going to be in charge of their classrooms, that students were going to be required to behave themselves, that completing assignments is the job of the student and not the teacher or the parent, they made the decision to find a better 'fit'. They did the right thing and we will remember them as people of conviction.

I have said to my staff that I believe that 90% of our students and 80% of our parents have made the transition to the new reality of the charter philosophy. The students are in the building and in the classroom every day, so they have an advantage. They know that their education is their work. They know that their teachers care about them and that they can count on being held to a high standard of effort, of conduct, of scholarship. They know that being kind and respectful greatly increases their standing in the school community. They know that whining is futile. 90%. That's pretty good.

There are those who haven't turned the corner with us. There are those students who still imagine that to remain intellectually inert will eventually result in someone else rescuing them, though I can't imagine how that would look in practice. A small fraction still believe that the accumulation of zero effort, day after day, will eventually amount to something more than zero. We are working with them. Most will come around.

There are still parents who believe that a nasty email will somehow compensate for a student's missing work or that the appropriate response to a student's misbehavior is to accuse the teacher of 'picking on' the student! These are good, time-tested strategies in the Patronizing School, but they are conspicuously out of place in a Professional School.

There are those who, based on past experience, believe that gossip is a school improvement strategy. I must have heard the phrase a hundred times during my career: "I'm not the only one who thinks this way. I've been talking to other parents..." The occasion for the last time I heard this? A student was reprimanded for being rude in the hall. So the expectation is that an administrator will be swayed by the fact that more than one parent doesn't think children should be required to behave in school? Well, in a Patronizing School, discontent (even in the form of gossip) is a potent weapon. But we strive not to be that school. And I predict that parents who are at home in that environment will continue to feel out-of-sorts regarding their experience here.

I think that achieving 80% consensus among parents in our first year of operation is an astounding achievement. The vast majority understand and appreciate where they are. Their students are going to graduate with an astounding array of options laid out before them. They will be ready to stand on their own and will be prepared, through years of practice, to take responsibility for themselves and to help those around them. They will be magnificent...and all the more so to the degree that we hold ourselves accountable to the vision of Professionalism and refuse to settle for less.

What is a Charter School?

Charter Schools are the hope of education turned right-side up. In what respect?

Several come to mind.

With Regard to Foundations:

Upside Down education begins with the obvious need to educate the children of a geographic area. More specifically, in the British Colonies, the public school system was born out of concern that too many young men were lying about town unprepared (and possibly unwilling) to contribute to the well-being of the community. Parents were accused of failing in their responsibilities, and the community felt the need to respond.

Right-side Up education begins with a sense of HOW children ought to be educated and by whom. The school is designed, top to bottom, to support a particular vision. Parents are invited to have their children educated in accordance with this vision. Parents are not asked to take on the roles of designer, principal, curriculum director or classroom teacher. Those jobs are filled by professionals.

With Regard to Parental Rights:

Upside Down education corrals families into neighborhood schools based solely on residency and without regard to individual family preferences. The results are too familiar to warrant description. Parents have a right to provide input. They have a right to ask for change. They have a right to lobby within the system, to advocate for their kids. But they don't have the right to change schools unless they successfully petition the district for permission to transfer or abandon public education altogether in favor of private or home schooling.

Right-side Up education puts ultimate authority, in the form of choice, in the hands of parents. Parents can support the school or shun it. Because Charter Schools are schools of choice, staff members are under no obligation to please each parent or to respond to pressure from groups of parents. Because parents have the right to walk away, they are never trapped in a charter school, but neither do they have leverage to make demands. Educational decisions are made by professionals, and parents retain their right to choose the best option for their children. The tension built in to mandatory attendance boundaries is broken in favor of a voluntary association.

At its best, that's what a charter school does. It resolves the fundamental tension inherent in the traditional school system. It offers a revolution in the partnership between parents and schools.