Follow Us on Twitter

Taking on the DSTP Embargo...

Delaware Folklore, DOE, DSTPs, and thensome...

Roadblocks...

Some years ago, when the railroad crossing on Rt 7 just past Christina's Eden Center, was under construction, a misguided driver decided to forego caution and went headlights first into a crater where there had once been a solid surface. 

Playing Chicken...

Now, the natives know that the purpose of those craters is to shelter the cervesas from the sun.  No one likes skunked beer! One summer some years back, "beer drops" (as they are affectionately referred to) sprung up all over Newark.  Neighborhood kids would hang out at Old Oak terminus in Newark, watching the Lazy Daisy Construction company take breaks in an umbrella-covered subterrainean refuge.  The kids made a game of it.  The ultimate prize:  The blue cooler.  No one ever won.  The construction workers who could drag out a mile-long repaving project for three months easy were like stealth secret agents if you ever got too close to the treasure.

The Department of Education...

Last Thursday, DSTP results were released to the school districts ... with an embargo that is being used to prevent locally-elected school board members from viewing the data including district, school, and/or state generated reports. The Embargo, itself, is an annual rite in DOE.  They want the data sanctified by the State Board of Education.  I can understand that, but there are other devices in play here, not the least of which is Race to the Top.  No Sir, this is not a normal year.  We have RTTT to contend with and its DeDOE-imposed deadlines that come due before the embargo is scheduled to be lifted on July 15th.  Most school boards will want to sign off on these plans, but based on the nature of the embargo, they will be denied by the Department of Education the ability to make data-driven decisions, the same decision-making process stipulated by the state's RTTT application and the districts' MOUs with the state.

Talk about roadblocks and playing chicken.  If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd think that there was something in that aggregated data that DOE doesn't want seen. By whom?  School boards?  By USDOE?  Should I surmise that this is another strong arm tactic by DOE to usurp local control from the publically elected boards?  Let's face it -- We - local members - don't serve at the pleasure of the Governor, we're not appointed;  we are elected to represent the public.  We take an oath to support public education and uphold the laws regarding it.  We're not paid.  Most do this job because they genuinely care about the direction of education.  I'm starting to understand why the Delaware Code stipulates that school board members cannot be paid.  And I can sum it up in two words:  competing interests.

The problem, as I see it, is that local boards are at the end of a long line.  The memo from DOE did not come to me, an elected official.  It was addressed to District Test Monitors and cc'd to everyone under the education sun, except board members.  I have in my possession an email directive from Delaware's Secretary of Education, Lillian Lowery, directing my board's employee - our superintendent - to notify "constituents/board members" that the data cannot be shared until the embargo is lifted.  Now I know that I am walking a fine line, and I am aware that my next statement will sound flat-out pompus, but the last time I checked, superintendents were employed by their boards, and not the Secretary of Education.  And perhaps I am erroneous, but I believe that it is the obligation of our Secretary of Education to provide the DSTP data first to the boards and only then to the superintendents.

There's a hierarchy at play here and DOE is distorting its role and the chain of command.  My opinion, of course. Now, if DOE wants Christina or any other district as its own, and wants the liability of employing its superintendent, then I suggest they need to invoke the revised code as far as dissolution of boards and receivership of districts.  And until they take that action, DOE is obligated to share DSTP data with boards immediately because their actions on this matter are preventing board members from upholding the oath and doing their jobs. 

Look, I just want to do my unpaid job well.  You have a tool I need?  You claim that you're collaborative?  Come on, come over, collaborate with me!  My lights are on.  Can you say the same?

------------------------------------------------
As for beer dops?  Did we ever find out what treasures lay in the bottom of those craters?  I'd tell you, but that information is EMBARGOED until further notice.


Category: 7 comments

7 comments:

Nancy Willing said...

hmmmmmmmmm, this news needs to get to the legislature and the news papers much less the public.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

I didn't know that and I think most other parents didn't know either. I agree with Nancy, get the word out.

Nancy Willing said...

I just called down to Dover to try and see what they could tell me that justifies this action in their minds. A public relations person is supposed to call me back.

Some one should give the WNJ a call too.

Elizabeth Scheinberg said...

Nancy,

Glad you contacted DOE. I've emailed Dr. Lowery and repeatedly asked her to lift the embargo with regards to the boards, and she falls back to the excuse of the embargo being "tradition" to ensure accuracy. Now, if this was a traditional year, maybe, I could grant that. But, there is simply too much on the line with SIG grants and RTTT to make mistakes due to being data deficient. Hell, our "robust" data system is cited all over the RTTT application as one of the state's strengths. Some strength...

Hope you get somewhere with DOE -- I didn't...

Nancy Willing said...

DDOE evidently doesn't feel obligated to return phone inquiries - no response so far.

Elizabeth, can you explain to me what exactly you will be deciding as a Board in June RE: RTTT deadline that is effected by the lack of knowledge of test score data? Is this to do with SIG funding for schools that are underperforming and must have a plan (one of the 4 models) in place under NCLB to be improved?

Elizabeth Scheinberg said...

Nancy,
Here's why I want the data: The designation of Partnership Zone schools according to the RTTT Application is contingent upon the 09-10 DSTP scores. DOE has had "the list" of schools for months based upon past years progress; however, they diliberately have not announced schools b/c they said they were waiting on this piece of data. Now, here's where my concern comes in -- DSTP data is trending data. While the test itself is not useful in regards to providing immediate interventions to students, it does tell us whether progress is being made in our schools and across our district. Christina is well-known for playing musical principals. Every June we engage that process, sometimes due to the instructional need of a school, or b/c a principal resigns or retires. As this year has progressed, most folks from DOE down made the assumption that our failing schools would continue to fail and have been building plans around that assumption. But, Chrisitna has some extenuating circumstances that have not been considered 1) Two of our SIG Grant schools have had principals in place less than two years. It takes roughly 4 years for true instructional and cultural change to occur in a school. That means a principal needs about four years to show substantial gains. 2) Several of Christina's city schools could be considered "restarts" already b/c they were completely reconfigured due to neighborhood schools a couple years ago. However, it appears that before my time and RTTT, at least one of those schools was not classified as restart b/c they would lose their Title I funding. 3) We have some schools whose principals have been in place less than two years already. I'd prefer to avoid de-stabilizing a school by moving its relatively new principal, especially if trending data shows progress is in the works. However, due to teh Embargo, I can't confirm trending. 4)Furthermore, let's be careful that we are not moving a principal into an at-risk school b/c we assumed their previous school would gain on this year's DSTP without first seeing whether or not it did.

Basically, I want the data to confirm the assumptions. And June is the month that usually happens. Schools need their instructional leaders (principals) in place before summer starts. Principals work in the spring and then during the summer preparing the school for a successful fall opening.

It's about being data-informed and not assumptive. Shouldn't DOE support their local boards in that process?

Elizabeth

Post a Comment

Word Verification May Be Case Sensitive