Monday, January 21, 2013

Those "math professionals" can't do math UPDATED 6x

The TERC Petition currently shows there is a minimum of 272 concerned parents interested in the Mt. Lebanon School District math program. I say minimum because a few signatures show two parents signing together. There are also anonymous signers which may have multiple signatures. So what do the "math professionals" do? They schedule a math presentation for the Jefferson Middle School Library.

Even though I have not been to any school board meetings in their new location, I went to Jefferson Elementary and Junior High (now called Jefferson Middle School) and know that the JMS Library is much smaller than the High School Library. I think I figured out the problem. The "math professionals" can't do math.

From the District home page,
Curriculum Presentation at School Board Meeting
Starting this month, there will be presentations at the Regular School Board meetings on curriculum and programs. This month, an overview of the K-12 mathematics curriculum will be presented.

Starting this month, there will be presentations at the Regular School Board meetings on curriculum and programs." Coincidentally," there will be an overview of the math curriculum tonight. The "math professionals" are so confident that they are providing the best education possible to each and every student, there couldn't possibly be more than the six parents who initially met with the School District attending this presentation. Since 650 parents showed up for the elementary school Math Night, wouldn't that be an indication that the venue needs to change? 272+ concerned parents signed the petition. Lebomathfacts.org is urging parents to attend so that they can to evaluate the information for themselves. Please visit their website. It is excellent.

If the room is too small to handle the number of attendents, keep in mind that parents have the right to move the meeting to another location or to reschedule the presentation.

Update January 22, 2013 12:45 PM  Presentation by Mt. Lebanon Parents for a Balanced Math Curriculum representatives
Copy of MTLSD presentation is not available.

Update January 22, 2013 3:49 PM Mt. Lebanon School District K-12 Mathematics Program has just been added to the District website.

Update January 23, 2013 2:00 PM Mt. Lebanon teachers defend math program by Nick Lewandowski, writer for The Almanac (saved in Google Docs)

Update January 23, 2013 8:54 PM Video of K-12 Mathematics Program Presentation

Update January 23, 2013 11:02 PM Some parents say elementary math system used by Mt. Lebanon neglects basic skills by Matt Santoni, staff writer, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Update January 24, 2013 8:32 AM Facet of elementary math cirriculum fractions some Mt. Lebanon parents by Harry Funk, freelance writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (saved in Google Docs)

123 comments:

Anonymous said...

Another clear and convincing example of a serious disconnect in the functioning of the administration of the school district.

If not that, then it is an example of intentional intent to show disrespect, and to frustrate and stonewall the concerned parents and public.

Anonymous said...

Ironically, next week is National School Choice Week - 27 January through 2 February. Maybe some of our MLSD "math professionals" could do with a little competition to keep their skills sharp!

Anonymous said...

I believe that parking is an issue at the high school therefore the meeting at Jefferson. I bet that very few show up, nowhere near the number of people who signed the petition.

Lebo Citizens said...

4:44 PM, the meetings were moved to JMS last year due to the renovation. The meetings are held in the tiny JMS library. Why couldn't it be held in the Jefferson auditorium?
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Excellent point Elaine ! How about that 4:44 PM ?

Anonymous said...

How many concerned parents are reluctant to appear because they fear union retaliation against their kids?

Lebo Citizens said...

Posti is absent. Too many parents and not enough seats. People are standing.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

If the board wanted parental input they would have scheduled the meeting at a larger location and would not be presenting the math program tonight - instead they would be listening to parents.

The first rebuff came with the math nights and this board meeting is the second rebuff. The Board doesn't want to hear complaints from anyone. What else can we expect from someone who drums his fingers and says we are the math experts.

Lebo Citizens said...

A parent just tweeted from the meeting that she is totally lost on how the problem is being solved.
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

Parents are standing in the back- no seats for them :(
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

Parents are still standing at the meeting. Talk is about change orders. 50+ parents are there for the math.
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

To see the presentation that some parents are presenting tonight,go to:Curriculum Issues Mt. Lebanon K-5 Math
Cappucci asked the men to wrap up the presentation and five+ parents volunteered their five minutes each.
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

Cappucci just said that she does not foresee any changes being made.
I can't wait for the podcast. This is really something.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Cappucci does not foresee any changes being made.

That seems hauntingly familiar. Didn't she say something like "I have no intention of revisiting building C"* to another set of interested constituents?

*Elaine Cappucci in response to CAC presentation and critique on the high school renovation.

Lebo Citizens said...

I spoke with some folks who attended the meeting. There were people standing for three hours. That is ridiculous! Also, some of the "math professionals" left after the presentation and did not stay for comments.

Bottom line is that the School District has dug in their heels and they aren't going to budge. Thanks goes to the person on Twitter who tweeted almost to the bitter end, until her battery died.

I think we have a standoff. This is sinful.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

And the disgusting behavior continues. This must be the new civil atmosphere mtL magazine was advocating on their Facebook page...before they took down all the comments. This community is now officially a joke.

Anonymous said...

I think this thread illustrates how this thing is nothing more than an ego trip. First you make a statement and then contribute more than half of the so called comments. Inclusive? Public spirited? I think you should run for something again so that people who have never heard of this thing could show the world what they really think of you, again.

Anonymous said...

7:25

Really? An ego trip on Elaine's part?

A standing room only crowd of parents at a school board meeting and somehow you just accuse Elaine of being on an ego trip?

No doubt you are a result of a Mt. Lebanon education based on your incredibly inaccurate conclusion! The funny thing is, it probably took you ten times as long to come to that inaccurate conclusion if the Math curriculum is any indication of how things are done throughout the district.

Anonymous said...

See what happens when you put an elementary PTA mom and a teacher's kid in charge of a school board.
Turf won't make up for TERC in an election year.

If Posti had appointed a curriculum committee the math program would have been evaluated in 2012 and the math professionals - who leave because they aren't paid to listen to parents at meetings - could have made these changes themselves. Now they are defensive, lazy and overpaid.

Lebo Citizens said...

7:25 AM, I approved your comment even though I don't agree with it, something that MTL won't do on Facebook or on their future blog.
"Lucy" was kind enough to Tweet updates from the meeting, so I was passing them on to everyone who cared to read them.
Quite frankly, I don't care what people think of me. I don't do this to make friends.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Is 7:25 am a megalomaniac or what? Now THEY know what the 'world' thinks of Elaine. Incredible!
But, I guess when your world exist only within the borders of Lebo you tend to think of yourself only.
The district advertised last nights TERC meeting as a "presentation" not a discussion, not an open forum, not a debate... a presentation. And essentially that is what the parents got as many of the "math professionals" left before the comments portion and Cappucci's dictate that nothing will be changing.
So parents heed 9:25z, sit down, shut up and open up your pocketbooks, this isn't your school district and you have no say in how your kids will be educated.
Nor is there a political party you can turn to affect change. Rs are backing Ds and Ds are backing Rs.

Anonymous said...

This is interesting. I was also at that meeting last night, and did not witness 50+ parents there for the math. I saw the "regulars", a group of Principals, a group of teachers who were presenting and other teachers supporting them. Also a handful of parents there to represent lebofacts, and a few others there to find out a little bit more about both sides of the math, to figure out what they support. The most bothersome thing I saw was some of the parents (who spoke later) against the math program completely disregarding, not paying attention to, and a blatant disrespect for the math presentation put on by the school district. They were not interested in what was being presented, or even giving the courtesy/respect of listening, in what the board was asking the teachers who presented. This was evidenced by the phone texting, facebooking and tweeting. In fact one of the speakers sounded as though she was not present for the meeting. Mr. Woods did a nice job with the presentation and the teachers there were very interested in his point and even looked as though they were taking notes. And as a side note all those people who were on their phones put them down and listened intently when he spoke. Another woman, Elaine, did a great job showing another point of view. It is hard to take the people who are interested in changing the math program seriously when they seem to only listen/hear/ have respect for their “group” only.

Anonymous said...

Why debate the compelling evidence when you can complain about the logistics of the meeting?

Anonymous said...

9:42 this is interesting.
"Mr. Woods did a nice job with the presentation and the teachers there were very interested in his point and even looked as though they were taking notes."

The teachers were taking notes. What, are they just learning about the ins and outs of TERC too?

Why would they need to take notes from Mr. Wood's presentation? They're teaching the math, shouldn't they already know what it is all about?

Anonymous said...

8:42 AM-Maybe it seemed that the parents were not interested in the presentation becuase we have heard it already. The parents have spoken to the teachers and principals. We have spoken to the school board and the administration, and we see what comes home from school. Parents see nothing but Investigations papers coming home from school. At least last year we had math facts quizzes coming home, but not this year! In addition, we are not permitted to see the text book so that we know what our children will be working on next.

The papers that come home are either homework (which is maybe 3-5word problems) and papers that have already been done in class. When I was in 3rd grade, I had at least 10 multiplication problems to do each night. This is insanity!

Anonymous said...

Reminds me of those board meetings where the compelling evidence indicated the high school project was going to cost less than $95 million!

9:42 must be one of those wingnuts!

Anonymous said...

8:58 compelling evidence?!

How about MTLSD dropping to #3 in the Business Times list? Compelling enough for you.

If you're a business professional moving his family to the Pittsburgh area and looking for the best school district wouldn't this list influence where you look?

So much for your "compelling evidence" bad PR move. Shoot the messenger, disrupt the discussion, do anything you can to move away from talking about TERC.

Anonymous said...

What specific part of Mr. Wood's presentation did you not agree with 9:04?

Anonymous said...

I feel very strong in trying to wade through this math program and see what is best to support. I am one of the many parents who is still doing research and went to the meeting as part of that research. As a person looking in this was what I saw, and I know i was not the only one who was kind of "turned off" 9:09---you could be right, but then its probably not the first time they heard Mr. woods presentation either. As a side note... I'm not sure why you don't see the book, my kids bring theirs home and I try to do the work in it as time permits so I can help them.

To 9:04
I can't say for sure what they were writing, however my guess is that it was not on the ins and outs of TERC. But it looked as though the teachers are actually interested in his points, interested in giving our students the best education and if there are gaps where does he see them. Also so they can answer the questions they are asking.

Anonymous said...

I would not consider 4 parents standing as standing room only. Also, Posti was present via calling in to the meeting and responded to roll calls and asked a question during the math presentation. I say this not because I am some crazy School Board supporter but because I feel that the full truth is not being told here. There are some misleading statements.

Not all parents who were there were anti-Investigations. There was also a group of us there in support of Investigations, including several teachers.

Which "math professionals" left early? I am asking because I did not see who left. I do know that the elementary presenters, Mrs. Malock and Mrs. Robbins stayed until the end.

Anonymous said...

I do not consider it "compelling" 9:26, since Lebo also moved UP from #6 to #5 in the state.

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/news/2012/04/06/slideshow-western-pas-top-50-school.html#1358866688998&cm-11458262124_1358866686

Lebo Citizens said...

Here we go with the misleading crap again. I uploaded the podcasts from last night's meeting.
1 21 13 School Board Meeting Part 1
Listen to the roll call vote and hear Elaine Cappucci say that she thought Mrs. Posti was going to call in, but evidently didn't. Posti asked a question later on in the meeting, but she did miss the roll call.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

9:35 can you not read or comprehend what you read?
Point out where I said anything, ANYTHING about having a problem with Mr. Wood's presentation?

Let's try this again. I asked why there was a need for the teachers to take notes on his presentation. As the "math professionals" using TERC shouldn't they already be well versed in the subject?

9:38 writes they don't know what the teachers were writing, so why bring it up?
You see the parents/audience are accused of tweeting, texting and disinterest, but lo and behold, the teachers are focused, taking notes and interested only in providing the children with the best education possible.
Yep, sure the parents are just a bunch of rabble rousing trouble makers.
Yeah I buy into that!

Anonymous said...

So now we are debating when Mrs. Posti joined the bridge line, instead of the content of the presentation?

Anonymous said...

Of course you wouldn't 10:01 because it doesn't fit in your view of the world.

I'm betting you're one of those people that lobbied for the HS project because the school district was the number one reason people would move here.

So of course MTLSd falling in the local rankings isn't compelling to you. It isn't convenient to your position.

But, thinking about this. A business professional moving his family from state ranked #2 Unionville-Chaddsdord (a very affluent area) is going to look not at #3 MTL first. #1 ranked USC with it's lower taxes will probably attach him first.

Keep mixing up that Kool-aide though, you do it so well. LOL

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the teachers were making out their grocery list 10:19.

Thanks for confirming that you didn't attend the meeting.

Anonymous said...

Yes, there is a lot of misleading information here. Posti may have missed the initial attendance roll call but she was clearly present during the math presentation and the rest of the entire meeting and answered to all proceeding roll calls.

Also, I am really getting the sense that much of the anti-Investigations movement is coming from Jefferson, and I can understand that. It does seem that there may be serious problems there. It is a shame that there is not more consistency across schools, and this seems to be a major area of concern and need for correction. I would hope this could be done without losing the essence of the math curriculum which fosters essential critical thinking while incorporating traditional math "algorithms."

My children are at Washington. At Math Night, our principal clearly articulated the math curriculum and emphasized that Investigations is only one piece of the math puzzle. My second grader brings home math facts worksheets from class and for homework, and they regularly have timed tests. Another example is our fourth graders who must practice their multiplication tables using flashcards. Parents must sign off that they were done, and if they are not, the child must stay in at lunch recess and do them then. From what I gather the sentiment at Washington is much less hostile to Investigations, and I think this is a product of implementation by our principal and teachers. There does seem to be a balanced approach at our school. While there are detractors at each schools(there will never be complete agreement over any topic), there does not seem to be a huge problem with the math curriculum at Washington, Foster or Howe. I am not familiar with Hoover. Jefferson clearly is having problems, and Lincoln seems to be a mixed bag.



Anonymous said...

Thank you 10:49, did the teachers learn that white bread is healthier than whole wheat or what?

Did I miss that part of Mr. Wood's presentation that the teachers were so focused on?

Anonymous said...

How come the board meeting isn't being televised on Ch19 at it's usual 10 am showing?

Lebo Citizens said...

10:59 AM, I caught the TV schedule on Channel 19. Now it says that School Board DISCUSSION meetings are televised at 8, 10, etc. Last night was not a Discussion meeting, but a Business meeting. There goes our transparent board again!
Elaine

Anonymous said...

One other thought for any parent, and especially Jefferson parents, Mrs. Davis, our principal at Washington, encourages parents to visit and observe your child's class. By policy, you are allowed to observe the classroom at any time. If you have not utilized this policy, I encourage you to do so, especially during math.

Anonymous said...

Thank you 10:56. That is the same impression I am getting as well.

Anonymous said...

That was my impression also. Weren't the parents asking for a math program that incorporated traditional thinking?
So why the defensive posturing by a blogger here?

Elaine, hate to bring this up here and perhaps it can be another post. If it was a business meeting and there was supposed to be a revenue generation report anything on that $45,000 investment?

Again perhaps another post so as not to interfere with the math discussion.

Anonymous said...

There is no math discussion here 11:45. Not one person has even referenced a single item in Mr. Wood's presentation.

Why discuss facts when you can just complain? Then again, I guess it is hard to refute Mr. Woods when they didn't bother to attend the meeting.

Anonymous said...

Hmm I guess that means that neither presentation (MTLSD or Woods) warrents conversation. Just a small amount of parents with a problem...mainly at Jefferson.

Lebo Citizens said...

I updated the initial post with a link to the parents' presentation made last night.
I could not provide a link to the MTLSD presentation because they are leaving no tracks. The math presentation was not mentioned in their agenda and the meeting has not been televised. No presentation link on their website either.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Just a thought...Dr. Steinhauer could update his Blog with a posting of The Math Curriculum Presentation made during last evening's School Board Meeting. Again just a thought...

Anonymous said...

It might be even more useful to parents if the elementary schools all utilized the same website format.

While Washington and Lincoln both reference the elementary math curriculum, it appears that the other elementary schools just link to the SD curriculum page.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Woods's presentation was professionally and civilly presented.

His second, third and fourth points:
-"Our focus is not to remove Investigations but to include the teaching of traditional US algorithms at appropriate grade level."
-"We are asking for a balance between traditional and Investigations math."
-"We fully support our teachers, school board and school administration."

After speaking with Mr. Woods following the presentation and given the above taken directly from his presentation, I am convinced that he is not seeking to get rid of Investigations but rather to have a balance, a theme which came up over and over.

It appears that some schools are achieving this balance better than others. Why is that? This is a question that needs to be asked.


Anonymous said...

10:56AM-In second grade my child also came home with Math Facts worksheets. Your 4th grader should already know their multiplication tables and should be doing long multiplication. The multiplication tables should already be mastered by the end of 3rd grade. Is that where the students begin to fall behind?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Woods made an excellent presentation, am I capable of critiquing it, no way.
My comment about teachers taking notes was prompted by Ms. Cappucci's claim after Wood's presentation that there probably wouldn't be any changes in the program.
Why should teachers take notes if they won't be able to revew them, see if Woods made good comments. Cappucci pretty much said his presentation didn't matter.
Lebowitz said we should by all means challenge our educators. Cappucci seems to be taking a different and completely opposite position that our what she say 16 math experts are pretty much above reproach.

Furthermore, as for this blog being composed of malicious, wingnuts that only want to bash the district. Do you think we would've gotten the examination of the elevator sump pump change orders if it wasn't question on Elaine's blog?

Dale and Dan asked some interesting questions and Mr. Marciniack's (sp?) responses were a little weak. Like if the intent is toget the elevator up and running promptly and unless the elevator itself works on steam, why is the power for the pumps coming from 500' away. Again off topi and another subject for discussion.

Anonymous said...

doesnt one of Posti's kids go to Jefferson middle?

Anonymous said...

Lebowitz says we should challenge our educators. Steinhauer seems to be of a similar frame of mind.
Cappucci defends the status quo.

What are we to think?

Anonymous said...

Cappucci seems to be taking a different and completely opposite position that our what she say 16 math experts are pretty much above reproach.

WHAT??????????

Anonymous said...

"Cappucci just said that she does not foresee any changes being made.
I can't wait for the podcast. This is really something.
Elaine
January 21, 2013 at 9:56 PM"

If you listen to her response to Mr. Wood's presentation she does basically day what Elaine reported above.
Granted she did not come out directly and say the math professionals were above reproach, but coupled with all her evidence offered in her retort and the conclusion of not foreseeing any changes, isn't beyond reproach a fair conclusion?

I mean seriously, if she watch teachers taking notes, listened to Mr.Wood's presentation how could she possibly not foresee the possibility of some changes?

Dr. Steinhauer if I heard him correctly at least left the door open for revisions or additions to the math curriculum.

Lebo Citizens said...

Now is the time to be thinking about running for school board, Parents.
We have four seats opening up. Remely, Birks, Posti, and Ostergaard. Remely hasn't committed yet if he is going to run for two offices. Ostergaard is out. Posti and Birks are going to run again.
Parents, I think you could have an impact on your kids' education if you run. Think about it.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

I hope someone asks Remely in public of his opinion of the parents presentation points on the math issues v. the Districts stonewalling.
Education is a hot issue in State politics also, so lets have your opinions Mr. Remely, out in the open for all to see and hear.

Lebo Citizens said...

Well, what do ya know, the District just added the math presentation to their website. I have the link posted in the second update to this thread. I found it under the agenda, for those who were wondering.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Lame !! They call themselves math professionals ?

Lebo Citizens said...

I caught most of the school board meeting on TV tonight. Mr. Cooper had a tough night last night. He accused a resident of rolling her eyes. I guess Mary Birks has exclusive rights to eye rolling. Also, when David Huston came up to speak, Cooper said, "Oh God." Nice.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

What happened to all the assessment Mr. Cooper talked about when he came on the board? EYE ROLL

Anonymous said...

Remember the math facilitators we hired to teach the teachers the new math program? If teachers are taking notes on the parents presentation we need a restaffing.

Anonymous said...

Interesting you bring that up 9:22...
http://triblive.com/mobile/2014219-81/curriculum-teachers-district-schools-leaders-class-coaches-full-advanced-association

"Mt. Lebanon officials budgeted $55,157 for a new elementary math facilitator. The district has a director of student support services and nine subject-area supervisors who oversee curriculum."

"At North Hills, curriculum leaders are teachers who get extra time free from class. Bethel Park and Upper St. Clair use part-time curriculum leaders.

North Hills has 16 leaders, making stipends of either $2,866 or $3,866. At Upper St. Clair, they make $5,000, $8,000 or $11,000, which is as much as five times what department heads make ."

Lebo Citizens said...

I updated this post with today's Almanac article, written by Nick Lewandowski.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

Interesting that there have been 64 comments on this post but not once has anyone mentioned any issues with Mr. Wood's presentation.

Apparently there is really no issue after all.

Anonymous said...

Probably why Dave Franklin still has more signatures for turf.

Lebo Citizens said...

Just a heads up. MTLSD had posted this announcement on their website:

Curriculum Presentation at School Board Meeting
Starting this month, there will be presentations at the Regular School Board meetings on curriculum and programs. This month, an overview of the K-12 mathematics curriculum will be presented.

Guess what next month's presentation is about? Sports programs! John Grogan will be presenting. Maybe he will bring up turf with no mention of the YSA or a Joint Maintenance Agreement.

I don't think the SB members get it. Has the math curriculum issue been settled? What about science? The only reason they are bringing in Grogan is to discuss the rifle range. Maybe someone will mention the tennis courts.
Elaine

Richard Gideon said...

Having allowed a couple of days to digest its contents, here are my "take aways" from the MLSB meeting of 21 January 2013:

1. The tone of the meeting was set in the first two minutes and four seconds when Mrs. Cappucci, extolling the virtues of change and citing as an example the service of the retiring Mr. Brad May as audio/visual supervisor, segued into the elementary math courses. "Critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving have taken over from rote memorization," she said. And that is where she made her first of many mistakes. Critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving have ALWAYS been a part of a well taught math course. Rote memorization was but a tool used to place into a child's head facts that could be recalled quickly and applied to a problem. Mrs. Cappucci, I feel bad for you if your teachers did not teach you how to think about a math problem when you were in elementary school; but mine did - and in the mid-1950's!

2. We hear later from teachers that our new math program is teaching kids how to think independently, and work together in order to come with original ways of solving a problem. I'm glad to hear it. Question: What were our math departments doing for the first 96 years? Am I to understand that prior to TERC our kids could not conceptualize a problem and arrive at a solution by independent means? If that's the case how did some of our young people become engineers and scientists? Heaven help you if your cross a bridge designed by an engineer who attended the Mt. Lebanon School District in his or her tender years, prior to the introduction of Investigations!

3. After the District's math facilitators and teachers finished their presentations board members nearly fell over themselves in congratulating all in attendance on a great "discussion." Discussion? Discussion of what! The actual discussion, if you could even remotely call it that, only came during the public comment period when Mr. Jeff Woods had a chance to bring out the well documented problems associated with TERC Investigations. And to do this several parents yielded their time so that he had a chance to be heard.

4. I was glad to hear a couple of Board members concede to a "balanced approach" to math instruction, and that, as one Board member quipped, "Mr. Woods would likely not let the District forget it!" But why didn't the District's "math professionals" seriously address the gist of the argument adduced by Mt. Lebanon Parents For A Balanced Math Curriculum parents' group; that being that the studies showing the success of Investigations are seriously flawed, and that well over half of the school districts that adopted TERC and cited in the 2007 survey by Nan Simpson, Ph.D. had dropped the program by 2009. And then we have this from Wilfried Schmid; Professor of Mathematics, Harvard University: “The TERC authors are also opposed to the teaching of the traditional algorithms of arithmetic, such as long addition, subtraction with borrowing, and the usual pencil-and- paper methods of multiplication and division. Not only do they refuse to teach the algorithms, they make clear their preference not to have the students learn them outside of the classroom, either.” It is my understanding that much, if not all, of this information was made available to the District in earlier meetings. If so, the District cannot claim that they had never seen it before.

5. Even with all the evidence showing Investigations to be seriously flawed, the Mt. Lebanon Parents For A Balanced Math Curriculum group was NOT CALLING FOR ITS REMOVAL. They were calling for it to be supplemented with American algorithms. Personally, I would have called for TERC's elimination in favor of Singapore Math. But Mr. Woods took a moderate course. Still, the reaction of the Board was mixed.

...continued below...

Richard Gideon said...

6. But the keynote figure in all of this was our Board president, Elaine Cappucci. I don't know Mrs. Cappucci personally, and I certainly am not casting aspersions upon her. I'm sure Mrs. Cappucci is a fine lady and passionately believes she is right. But it was evident during the meeting that Mrs. Cappucci's mind was made up in advance, and that no amount of data, argument, or debate (if it had been allowed) was going to change it.

Like the "new math" of the 1960's and 1970's, I suspect that TERC will die a quiet death as school districts come to terms with it. In the meantime, unless schools using this system are willing to supplement with other, more salubrious methods that lend themselves to foundations for more advanced skills, they will be faced with the ironic but sad situation of kids, who are having "fun" with math now, being left in the dust of other children who did not have the "pleasure" of "full-TERC" math as the foundation of their math curricula. In fairness, it was stated that our Lebo schools are indeed supplementing, but the evidence adduced by parents suggests otherwise - we shall see.

Finally, if you are a parent or the parents of a child or of children in the Mt. Lebanon School District, and you are unhappy about the current state of affairs in the math programs, let me suggest to you that your first responsibility is to your kids; not to the kids' schools, or their teachers, or to the District; or to the Board. If you want your children to learn American algorithms, and the schools refuse to teach them, then you owe it to your children to provide a tutor; or perhaps put them in a private school, if you can afford it; or perhaps move out of Mt. Lebanon. Don't permit yourselves the delusion of loyalty to a ZIP code. Your family comes first, not the school system. And I say these things as a former "math professional," having taught applied mathematics, along with other subjects, for 23 years in a post-secondary school.

Anonymous said...

9:22 The math facilitators were hired, but with the restructuring they all went on to teaching positions. We don't have math facilitators anymore.

Anonymous said...

I have to say I am very fortunate that my kids had already learned their basics before Investigations came into the school. However, I think there are benefits to the program. If I remember correctly there are approximately 6 different methods, including traditional. That is what I liked about the program. If one way didn't click for your child, there would be another to follow that might work. Now, while you wait for that method to be taught, it can be EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING. I questioned what in the hell they were teaching many times and felt useless because I couldn’t help. I would show my kids how to solve the problem the normal way, and they would tell me they weren't allowed because they had to learn this particular method. I wrote many notes on their homework telling the teacher that I "called a stop to doing the homework" because my child was close to tears.

With that said, I don't think there is any substitute for knowing your math facts. Kids still need to be able to calculate things in their head. i.e. 8+7 = 15, 8X7 = 56. I think my kids were successful with Investigations because they already had that foundation. I spoke with a friend who is part of Lebemathfacts and she said her kids don't have the basics and therefore are really struggling. She said that kids are coming out of 5th grade not knowing how to do long division. That would be of great concern to me. I personally think more time needs to be spent on the basics then Investigations gives time for. It treats the basics as just another method, completely ignoring the need for memorization, which in my opinion is key. They still need to do timed tests and flash cards.

For my family, one of my kids does math the old fashion way, the other uses one of the Investigations methods and can calculate very large numbers in his head, he has even taught me how to do it. It is pretty cool. He has tried to teach his brother, but it just doesn’t click for him. That's ok, he can use pencil and paper.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Gideon, you are absolutely correct. My child was having a horrible time with Math in 3rd grade. (this is prior to TERC) I sent him to Kumon for the summer, it was all timed test, doing the same problems over and over until he had them memorized. He was back on track in 4th grade and is an good math student now. Sometimes we have to take matters into our own hands.

Lebo Citizens said...

Another update. This time, it is the link to the video of the MTLSD presentation that had the School Board drooling.
Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

Since so many school districts are following this thread, I wanted to include the links to the school board meeting podcasts and agendas. There are two parts to the January 21, 2013 School Board meeting.

http://lebocitizens.com/Lebo_Citizens/Podcasts/Podcasts.html

Elaine

Lebo Citizens said...

I added a link from the Trib. See update.
Elaine

Richard Gideon said...

In my rather lengthy post of 23 January 2013 I did not bring up a point that I feel brings into focus a solution to the problem parents are having with the Mt. Lebanon School District: School Choice. I did not bring it up during my critique of the meeting out of respect for the parents who are fighting with the District over TERC. You see, most of the feedback I have received from the Mt. Lebanon Parents For A Balanced Math Curriculum group, while expressing frustration with the District, was supportive of it and the concept of public education as it is currently constituted. And that is where I break ranks with these good people.

School choice does not mean that one would have only Charter Schools as alternatives; it means that parents would have a menu of choices that would include private, Charter, and other public schools. Instead of funding school districts, funds would be attached to the child. Why is it OK to send your kid to the college of your choice in Pennsylvania (we'll stick to Pennsylvania for this example), where state grants and loans follow him or her, but it is not OK to send your Mt. Lebanon elementary school kiddo to Upper St. Clair? The counter argument often adduced is that choice will hurt the local district. But if the local district is doing a good job it has nothing to fear - it will receive a plethora of kids and dollars! If it is not doing a good job then the added competition will force it to reevaluate its programs and make necessary changes.

Another argument I have heard is that some parents don't want their tax dollars going to private schools; especially for-profit schools. Well! Did anyone go to a private college on a student loan subsidized by tax dollars, and with state grants? Do we have any University of Phoenix graduates in the audience? I have three daughters who graduated from Geneva College - a private school. And as for the "for-profit" argument; as one who taught in a "for-profit" school for 22 of my 23 years' teaching career I find this argument strange. For-profit schools have every incentive to do a good job; that is how they attract and keep students! And let me point out that EVERYBODY has a profit motive! Who amongst you does not want to take in more money than you spend? Do you actually believe that a Mt. Lebanon teacher is altruistic to the point that he or she would teach for expenses only - or for free? Does not the MLEA negotiate for high wages and benefits, including a generous retirement benefit? This concept that public employment is somehow "pure and free from the stigma of profit" is ridiculous to the extreme. It does not guarantee quality, and a Google search for "public school corruption" will return enough hits to keep you reading for quite some time. "Profit" did not always have such a stigma attached to it: "The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit."... Samuel Gompers, the first and longest-serving president of the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

My point is that school choice would put the emphasis on the child and the child's education; not the child's school district. Isn't that what we all want?

Lebo Citizens said...

Make sure you read the comments in the PG (6th update). One teacher from KY said it is the worst math curriculum she ever taught. Another one said to teach K-1 the whys. For the older kids, there is no why. It just IS.
Elaine

Anonymous said...

A question that I haven't heard anyone ask.
If the kids are doing their own investigation, pretty much coming up with their own solutions to solve math problems then why do we need to keep class sizes small?
Bump them up to 28-30 kids per class and dump a teacher or two off the payroll.

Anonymous said...

If a 1st grade teach from Kentucky said it, it must be true.

Anonymous said...

LOL

Elaine, for the idiot blogger who suggested there were only a handful of parents there, this from the Trib:

"The nearly 75 parents who attended the meeting at the Jefferson Middle School Library..."

I'd say that would fill the place up!

Anonymous said...

12:17
So that's your intellectual CONTRIBUTION to the conversation, eh?!

Nobody can possibly be smart or have an informed opinion if they don't live in the bubble, right?

Wake the hell up! If you have something that supports Investigations or is evidence that traditional math instruction doesn't work, by all means, we'd love to read it.

Your insult towards a teacher you've never met and your holier than thou attitude regarding Kentucky leaves me cold.

Anonymous said...

Test scores are all that matters these days 12:54

Anonymous said...

1:24
Test scores are all over the map. Look at student outcomes posted on the district website at each of the schools...you will see that more than half the schools have DROPPED scores in PSSAs. That's right. They DROPPED.

Why do you think the admin and teachers are racing to supplement the existing curriculum. It's because they have figured out it is deficient.

Anonymous said...

75 parents, a number of which were parents and teachers there in support of the program.

Anonymous said...

Yep 1:24 test scores are all that matter... got it. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Who, 2:32? The woman with the MBA who says she's never had to use algorithms in her finance career or the math teacher who admitted during the presentation that she was never good at math?

Lebo Citizens said...

3:16 PM, to be fair, 2 is a number.
Elaine

Tom Moertel said...

It's important that all of us understand that test scores are important, and important for a reason: Simply put, they are the most effective, most reliable means of measuring what students know. That's why teachers grade homework, quizzes, and tests; why colleges rely upon SATs and entrance exams; and why businesses test potential employees before making hiring decisions.

Test scores, of course, don't tell the whole story, but they tell more of the whole story than any other means, and probably more than all other means combined.

Therefore, if you care about what students actually know (instead of what other people believe students know), you had better start understanding that test scores are worth taking seriously.

Yes, teaching to the test is a real problem, but a much worse problem would be to measure the things we care about and then not take those measurements seriously.

Anonymous said...

OK Tom, 1:24 declares it's the test scores that count. Probably because they believe the scores support the math program.
2:04 states half the schools PSSA scores have dropped.
Can you do one of your evaluations for us?

Anonymous said...

Tom, test scores do matter. But really. Is a high-stakes test like the PSSA really the best way to evaluate ANYTHING? The whole school year revolves around this test. It is not a timed test and therefore, does not show mastery or fluency of math equations. And what does a correct answer on the PSSA mean? Your child with absolute certainty knew the answer? Eliminated 2 of the 4 answers and guessed correctly? Had absolutely no clue what the answer was but got the question right?

Why not use unit math quizzes and regular old math tests to assess if this math curriculum works? And as someone commented on the on-line PG article - you have to remove the scores of the kids who have been taught traditional math at home or had tutors teach them algorithms. Those kids will skew the data re: the success of Investigations. And by the way - I'd be less concerned about his PSSA scores in 3rd grade and more concerned about how the child does in math when he gets to high school and beyond.

Tom Moertel said...

Yes, I could evaluate our test scores (and in fact I have). The problem is that looking at those scores is not a reliable way of judging whether the school district’s increased emphasis on Investigations is hurting or helping. That’s a causal question, and you can’t answer causal questions by looking at observational evidence, and that’s what our test scores are. (Now, if we also had the “counter-factual” test scores that we would have had, had the school district not switched to Investigations, we could compare the did-switch and didn’t-switch scores to measure the effect of switching. But we don’t have those scores.)

That’s why I wrote in earlier comments that, if you want to know the effect of switching to Investigations, you must look to intervention trials. Those trials use random assignment to create balanced did-switch and didn’t-switch scores for comparison. And there were a few of those trials, and I did summarize them, as well: see comment one and comment two.

To summarize them again, however: Investigations doesn’t seem to have much effect, good or bad, compared to more traditional curricula. There are likely to be better options.

Tom Moertel said...

Standardized tests like the PSSA are vital.

Without them, the public would have no means of reliably comparing the output of different school districts, nor would most school districts have any means of reliably comparing their own performance from one year to the next. (Few school districts have the in-house statistical chops to calibrate their own internal tests to allow for reliable year-to-year comparisons.) Without standardised tests, then, the public would lose the ability to hold accountable an essential branch of government, and most school districts would lose the ability to know whether they were moving forward or backward.

Anonymous said...

With all due respect....I have to wonder how MtLSD managed to do so well prior to the PSSA exams? Thank God we now have them. They've had such a wonderful effect on my kids' education.

Anonymous said...

Tom and everyone else,

It has now been five years since the introduction and implementation of the TERC curriculum. Those who started in 2008 in 1st grade would now be in 6th grade. Would it not make sense to follow those scores at one of the early adopter schools (of which I know Washington is one) to see how PSSA scores have changed for the same class of students at each interval.

That sounds like what Tom is looking for. I believe there were two other early adopter schools besides Washington but I am not sure.

Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 take the PSSAs according to the PDE website.

To follow from the first year you might look at the following:

3rd grade scores in 2007-08
4th grade scores in 2008-09
5th grade scores in 2009-2010
6th grade scores in 2010-2011
7th grade scores in 2011-2012

Alternatively you might follow the 1st graders who started in 2007-2008 because they have ONLY learned TERC math from day 1 by looking at:

3rd grade scores in 2009-2010
4th grade scores in 2010-2011
5th grade scores in 2011-2012
6th grade scores in 2012-2013

I think if you look at both data sets it would be interesting. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to do it tonight.



Anonymous said...

9:50. Just want you to know that some of what you say is incorrect. The curriculum may have been approved in 2007 but there was not an immediate roll out and full implementation. Materials had to be purchased. Teachers had to leave their classrooms to receive training in how to teach Investigations. I believe the plan was always full implementation (100% Investigations) by this year or next year. So the 1st graders in 2007-2008 were not full Investigations.

Lebo Citizens said...

I understand that full implementation is set to roll out for 2013-2014.
Elaine

Tom Moertel said...

I should point out that I have already analyzed Mt. Lebanon's standardized test outcomes vs. exposure to Investigations, accounting for the number of years each tested class had been exposed to the curriculum at the time of testing. (The school district kindly provided me with some roll-out data on Investigations when I requested it.)

I'm probably not going to publish what I've done, however, for fear it would be misinterpreted. Almost nobody understands the difference between causation and association. And that includes a lot of people who think they do. And, tragically, that also includes a lot of decision-makers at our school district.

Publishing my findings, then, would probably make a lot of people angry and/or defensive and probably not help the school district make better decisions.

While I can appreciate that people would like me to look into this issue further, I'm not sure I can do so and actually help.

Thanks for understanding.

Anonymous said...

Tom, do you mean correlation vs causation?
Not a big deal, but for readers that might want to understand your point they'll have better luck finding an explanation using that term.

Anonymous said...

So then WHEN exactly do test scores matter?

The point is that you can take a look at its impact on these students. Are we supposed to wait five years AFTER implementation or a full 10 years before we can analyze test scores?

That seems like an awful lot of students who might get the shaft if this doesn't work out.

Anyone figure out why more than half the districts who have rolled out investigations have gone back on their decision?

Richard Gideon said...

When the "new math" was trotted out in the elementary schools in the late 1960's and early 1970's test scores showed that it was a success. Then high school math teachers started reporting problems, as the first wave of kids hit their classes. Four years later college math professors started writing papers about how American students had fallen behind their foreign counterparts. So how could an initial series of tests that seemed to confirm the efficacy of "new math" be so far off the mark? Because the tests were designed to "prove" the success of "new math," not its efficacy in solving problems. And prove it they did.

Tests are indeed a good way of measuring a person's abilities and understanding, but let's not forget that the test designer has a great deal of influence on the outcomes. If a child is given a math problem he or she has never seen before and is asked to solve it and explain how the answer was obtained - and indeed does both - you may credit the child with both a correct answer and a correct methodology. But if you limit the child to using only one problem solving method on the grounds that any other is not considered valid for the purposes of the test then you skew the data big time.

Neither TERC Investigations nor standard American Algorithms "teach understanding" of what numbers are or how they behave with respect to one another. That job is performed by the teacher. And if the teacher is good at it then the method used to do the actual work becomes a "Ford vs. Chevy" debate, and telling a kid that only "Chevrolets" will be tolerated does not do them any service.

Lebo Citizens said...

Our kids shouldn't be treated like lab rats. There is conclusive evidence that TERC isn't all it is cracked up to be. The school board and the Doctors are running clinical trials on our children with a "drug" that should be recalled and has been recalled over and over. I don't think parents are too comfortable with that, Mrs. Cappucci. You're the scientist, Elaine. You're testing the correctness of other observations. My question, who is funding the study? Pearson?
Elaine

Tom Moertel said...

So then WHEN exactly do test scores matter?

They matter whenever you’re interested in questions like “Where are we?” Which is to say all the time.

But they won’t allow you to answer questions like “How did we get here?” and “Had we not done X, where would we be instead?” and “If we do Y, will it help us get to Z?” At least, test scores won’t allow you to answer questions like those unless you already know the causal structure of the thing you’re asking questions about. And usually, you don’t.

For example, in the present case of Parents vs. Investigations, the debate between the parents and the school district is about that very causal structure. The school district believes that test scores have remained encouraging and, therefore, that switching to Investigations hasn’t been harmful. The parents believe, however, that the switch has created learning gaps that the test scores don’t reflect, because the parents have stepped in with supplementary home tutoring. So the school district (implicitly) believes in model (1), and the parents (implicitly) believe in model (2):

(1) Test Scores ← Investigations

(2) Test Scores ← Investigations + Home Tutoring

Both models, if true, would produce test scores like we’re seeing, but each would lead us to opposite conclusions about the effect of switching to Investigations. And that’s why the test scores can’t tell us whether the switch was helpful or harmful.

(By the way, I wrote “implicitly” above because the human mind is an amazing causal-inference machine. We make causal inferences all the time, without effort and without noticing that we’re doing it. The problem is, our causal-inference engines are highly tuned for our past lives as hunters and gathers and not so much for our modern lives as decision-makers. Our causal brains are still wonderful in many ways, helping us navigate busy streets and noisy playgrounds, but they get us into trouble when trying to figure out what test scores mean. Still, we try to “make sense” of the scores. And our brains dutifully (and invisibly!) provide an underlying causal model – one that agrees with our pre-existing beliefs and not necessarily reality.)

John David Kendrick said...

There are a couple of things happening on this thread...

One is a discussion of the problems with the SD's math program....

The second is an attempt to hijack Elaine's website the way that Blog Lebo got hijacked a few years ago.

The third is the machine's attempt to position Mr. Moertel, who happens to be a Supt's Key Communicator, as a statistical expert. Tom's future presentations will be an interesting read.

The machine clearly has a strategy. Unfortunately, helping the kids, which is what Elaine is trying to do, is not a part of it.

Stay tuned, the Balkanization of Mt Lebanon continues...

Anonymous said...

But Tom, in analyzing any type of data we have to make some assumptions.

For instance, one might assume that the majority of parents either didn't care to, or didn't have the money to, put their kids in Kumon to supplement math.

Therefore, if we assume that a great majority of students did not receive additional math tutoring, then test scores alone (looking at the right grades and years of course) would allow us to draw conclusions on the TERC math program based on those assumptions.

If the assumptions change, then so must the conclusion.

Tom Moertel said...

John (K),

I suspect that one of the school district’s greatest fears is that I would be seen as credible expert on educational matters. The vast majority of my research and writing has undermined the school district’s claims (e.g., on the high school project, on plagiarism, on the SD’s assessment-appeal policy, and even on the present Investigations thing, which I’ve summarized in this very thread as “There are likely to be better options,” which is not exactly a ringing endorsement). In light of all this, I’m not sure what makes you believe I’m under the control of “the machine.” It’s not a very bright machine that picks up a hammer and then whacks itself with it.

In any case, I’m not losing sleep. For I have long ago made peace with the fact that when it comes to matters like these, your beliefs and reality are no longer on speaking terms.

Sincerely,
Tom
(Writing to you from my Cave of Evil, deep within the mountain lair of the Superintendent and his Sooper Seekret Kommunicator Kult. Note to self: Expense lunch to the “Balkanization of Mt. Lebanon” project.)

Tom Moertel said...

Dear anonymous voice of January 25, 2013 at 11:15 AM:

Re: Your claim that “If we assume that a great majority of students did not receive additional math tutoring, then test scores alone (looking at the right grades and years of course) would allow us to draw conclusions on the TERC math program based on those assumptions.”

No. It's important that you get this: No.

Even under your assumption, the relationship between Investigations use and test scores is associational. If you attempt to draw causal conclusions from this relationship, you may as well just make up whatever conclusions you like. In effect, that's what you're doing without realizing it.

All readers: If you want to understand, for real, the difference between causal and associational concepts, there is probably no easier way than to read the first two sections of the following survey paper on modern causation theory:

Causal inference in statistics: An overview, Judea Pearl, 2009.

This stuff is not ivory-tower theory. It has profound practical consequences.

In particular, if you’re a policy-maker and don’t understand – genuinely understand – the essence of the first three sections of that paper, there’s a very good chance that you are making poorly informed and possibly harmful policy decisions. I’m sorry that there’s no easier way to get it right than to actually get it right. But policy decisions are causal interventions. If you’re not doing what is necessary to get them right, you’re probably getting them wrong.

Anonymous said...

"Balkanization" is that when like Mt. Lebanon breaks up into itty-biity little nation states like Croatia did?

Or am I mixing metaphors?



Anonymous said...

Tom,

There is zero chance whatsoever that our math professionals are using the data as you suggest.

After some period of time you must acknowledge that test scores on the PSSAs will be a result of the TERC math curriculum and not that mixed TERC/Normal math of the last few years.

If we can't agree on that, then I truly am stumped.

John David Kendrick said...

Tom,

What formal education do you have in statistics? What are your credentials?

Tom Moertel said...

John, I expect my claims to stand or fall on their own merits. I do not expect anyone to accept them under the faulty argument that "Tom has credentials, therefore his claims are true."

It's exactly that kind of lazy thinking that has allowed so many "experts" to lead our elected representatives into foolishness. I'd expect you of all people to get this.

It's time, therefore, that the public stopped trusting in credentials and other trinkets of authority and instead starting putting the claims of "experts" to the test.

John David Kendrick said...

WOW!

Lebo Citizens said...

I, for one, am tired of the experts telling parents what is best for their children. I believe that parents know their child better than anyone else, don't you think? It is time that the board stop relying on the "professionals" and start doing their own research. Open your eyes, School Board, and stop being rock heads. Yes, Allen's and Steinhauer's jobs are on the line. When are you going to wake up?
Elaine

Tom Moertel said...

Dear anonymous voice of January 25, 2013 at 1:06 PM:

What you’re missing is that our test scores are not influenced by curriculum changes alone. They are also influenced by student changes, class changes, teacher changes, school changes, parenting changes, community changes, testing changes, and so on. (Even in a parallel universe where curriculum changes had absolutely no effect on test scores, do you believe that test scores would be flat?) Therefore, unless you have some reliable means of prising the curriculum-caused effects away from the others, you cannot look at test scores, even long after Investigations has completely shadowed the previous curriculum, and conclude that the curriculum change is what caused the test scores to change.

Does this explanation un-stump you?

P.S. One reliable means of prising the effects of interest away from the rest is to use randomized controlled trials.

Richard Gideon said...

"It's time, therefore, that the public stopped trusting in credentials and other trinkets of authority and instead starting putting the claims of "experts" to the test."

Mr. Moertel:
Truer words were never spoken! It matters not to me whether a fact is presented by a Ph.D. or a plumber - as long as I can verify it as fact.

Having said that, and by way of an example, I'm fully aware that a teacher with a degree in mathematics is assumed to know something about mathematics, and as a teacher is also assumed to know how to teach it to a child in an efficacious manner. This does not, however, negate any outside challenges to what the math teacher is teaching. When the District announces to the world that "we are the math professionals" my response is "I certainly hope so!" But when our school board couples that with an implied "sit down and shut up" they fall prey to post hoc ergo proptor hoc and cum hoc ergo propter hoc without giving it a thought.

Anonymous said...

I'm glad you brought that up Mr. Gideon, "we are the math professionals."
I agree with everything you and Tom are writing, but I do have a problem with the above statement.
No they aren't the math professionals. The people that actually apply math, the scientist, the accountants, the doctors and researchers, the architects, that peoplr that actually use math to create, to imagine, to build ARE the math professionals!
Mr. Steinhauer and his staff are instead the professional teachers of math.
So while we can't debate how to measure how good they are at their profession, unless they are applying their talents to extracurricular pursuits in math beyond the classroom they are no more "math professionals" than say the local banker.
I mean really, do we call the English teacher a professional writer? The music teacher a professional musician? The art teacher a professional artists? How about the sports coaches are they professional athletes?
Of course there are exceptions but just because on teaches say Hemingway, that doesn't necessarily make them another Hemingway.

Tom Moertel said...

Richard, I have to agree. For me, the great tragedy of Monday night’s school board meeting was that the school board, in effect, told the public that it was not interested in holding accountable the branch of government it was elected to oversee.

Instead, when there was a question about whether that branch of government had problems, the school board turned to the staff within that branch of government and asked them what they believed. Since the staff believed there were no problems, the school board considered the question closed and told the public it was time to move on, time to “let the teachers teach.”

This is what the school board did instead of determining for itself, using reliable methods, whether those problems were real.

In reality, the problems either exist or do not. But if they do, the school board won’t know unless they look for them and use methods that are sufficient to detect them. And asking the staff what they believe is not sufficient. That method will fail when the problems are hidden in the staff’s blind spots, which is the most likely explanation for previously undetected problems. (It will also fail when the staff is interested in hiding mistakes.)

The blind-spots failing is a big one because most of the problems that still exist at our school district are able to exist only because they have evaded the watchful eyes of our administration and teachers, whom I believe are good people trying to do a good job and for the most part succeeding. So if you want to determine, for real, whether there are any lingering problems in our school district, you have to use a detection method that looks into the staff’s blind spots. And, again, asking the staff is not one of those methods.

If you’re reading this and happen to be a school director, here’s my question to you: What have you done, personally, to ensure that if these problems were real, you would be able to detect them?

Lebo Citizens said...

I need some help from the parents of 6th graders. An email was sent to parents at either Jefferson or Mellon or both, concerning an online remediation math website. I would like to share it here. I will post it without your personal information. Please email me at egillen476@aol.com
Elaine

Anonymous said...

I apologize for my hamfisted typing, but how arrogant is it to sit in front of a room full of people and declare "we are the math professionals?"
People that use math day in and day out in their occupations and get paid for their ability to apply their math skills to manage money, run businesses and create things.

Anonymous said...

Excellent point and closing question, Tom!

Unfortunately, we've seen this before.
The district, succumbed to constituent pressure on the high project and formed the CAC to review the high school plans. The CAC was comprised of "professionals" in the building trades though the board set very strict limits on what they were actually suppose to do.
Go back to the CAC's final report and pay close attention in particular to Cappucci's response to their professional opinions and findings.
It's like Deja Vu.

Anonymous said...

After reading the issues and comments in regards to the math program, I can only conclude that the school district, and the school board are snobs. It also reflects the patrician attitude of many professionals in Pittsburgh. "The know it all, that knows nothing."

Anonymous said...

6:26, The CAC had a timeline that did not permit them to report to the board until the schematic drawings were 95% complete. At that point changes could not be made even though the CAC had a better design than Celli. The CAC members were ignored from the beginning and the Board's behavior was insulting to some of the finest professionals in our community. However, folks like our Board don't care about anyone but themselves and they are too lazy to do the proper homework to get things right unless it involves sports. Math be damned!

Anonymous said...

Typical school district bureaucracy, 10:22.
They define the goalline, then go thru all sorts of gyrations, PR schemes and personal attacks to defend their vision. The $95 million high school dream is a perfect example and when the dream blows up in their face, they absolve themselves of any responsibility.
Read the board comments in the paper when the first bids came. They were shocked, stunned that the bids weren't anywhere near their expectations.
Any heads roll? Anyone get evaluated down for not
meeting job expections? Not on your life!
The same will happen with the math ciurriculum.
In ten years when the test scores remain flat and the district budget goes over $100,000,000 per year, and the cost per student exceeds $20,000 per year today's parental concerns will have been forgotten.
And a New Math program will be cast before the swine.

Anonymous said...

What happened to all the assessments Bill Cooper talked about when he joined the school board?

Hey Bill !! How many test scores do you need to look at when your math remediation rate at the college level is 23% ? I would expect that of the Pittsburgh Schools but never Mount Lebanon.