Monthly Archives: October 2017

NMLA Meeting 10/11

Ian Esquibel and Bella from the New Mexico Learning Alliance facilitated the meeting.

A Recounting: (please email corrections/addenda to oneofthejeffs@yahoo.com):

There were individual anecdotes around the room of positive and negative experiences with the current assessment, and Janelle and Bella spoke about their experience as students, which lead to their activism, bill writing and research, and a youth summit they have organized at Washington Middle School in April.

Susan said that the latest Federal law, the Every Student Succeeds Act, was intended to move toward more holistic assessment. The implementation of the ESSA in New Mexico does not change the state’s policy of assessment as it stands. Susan said grassroots solutions were the best. The notion that it is better to “ask forgiveness rather than permission” in implementing systems of more meaningful assessment is a faster solution to the problems we are faced with in the current system. (The problems we are faced with include being ranked at or next to or at the bottom in education nationally, steadily for the last three or four years, and being a state which is losing experienced teachers, and is not attractive for new teachers.)

It was brought up that the state needs to build the infrastructure to support more meaningful assessment. Susan said there are grants available and some state have accessed them. Massachusetts has a collaborative for education. New Hampshire has initiated PACE as a model for assessment. Colorado has created an “innovation zone”.  The language of “Alternative Assessment” carries for some, an implication of substandard. Ellen talked about using the language and work around “Authentic Assessment” which was prevalent in the 1980’s, and spoke about the fact that a more holistic assessment is more representative of an individual’s learning and abilities.

I asked Susan if she thought open-source education resources would help to bypass the entrenchment of current assessment methods by the monetization of assessments, (efforts such as Learnzillion, and our own OpenSourceEd.org).  Susan affirmed that “OER” is a part of the solution.

Barbara Peterson, board member from APS and former teacher, spoke about the need to foster teachers as professionals, and include “teacher voice” in the formation of future policy.

Jack Jekowski, from the Coalition for Excellence in Science and Math Education spoke about the fact that the author of New Mexico’s evaluation system was recently published in a work about the inaccuracies of his own, and other systems like it, cited in their newsletter, here.

Senator Padilla was recognized for his sponsorship of Senate Joint Memorial 1, which has the potential to transform education in New Mexico under the flexibility of the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The memorial asks New Mexico to create a pilot program that will design new ways of assessing our students, besides just standardized tests.  Article

He spoke about the role poverty plays in education, his own experience with poverty as a child, and how important efforts like this continue.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Improving Education in New Mexico

October 11, 2017

I met today at the National Hispanic Cultural Center to represent the Golden Apple Academy, with people from the Legislative Education Study Committee, Senator Padilla, Ellen Bernstein, Susan Patrick of iNacol, the Coalition for Excellence in Education, PTEC, the LANL Foundation, board members from APS, teachers, parents, and students in a meeting initiated the New Mexico Center for School Leadership, and sponsored by the New Mexico Learning Alliance.  The regular gathering of stakeholders in New Mexico education is necessary for the continuity of conversation of our values as a state, and what we want to bring to our children for the future of New Mexico.  The status of education in New Mexico demonstrates the need to broaden the conversation beyond the NM Public Education Department, and it was a sign of hope to have such representation from many organizations and individuals at the meeting today.  A discussion summary is here.   (Jump to the most pressing action)

Take Aways and Next Steps

  • There needs to be a repository for the continuation and advancement of this conversation, and public access for action. This post is an attempt to do that.
  • New Mexico will need to create the infrastructure to support a more complete system of assessment.  There will need to be criteria, auditors, and educators who are trained in the assessment of student products according to that criteria.
      • This is a recovery for teachers to be trained as professionals with judgement and agency, rather than the trend to move teachers into compliant, undertrained, assembly-line workers.
      • With regard to teachers as professionals, meetings such as these should be counted as professional development for interested teachers, so that teachers are encouraged to participate in these and any conversations about education, and the community is informed about education from a teacher’s perspective.  Until that becomes standard practice, meetings such as these should be planned to accommodate teachers who cannot attend.  The teacher’s professional judgment, as mentioned here at  leadership-pdc.org, needs to be fostered and counted.

The most pressing action, no matter a person’s affiliation, is to create a more publicly accountable Public Education Department, with protections against the gridlock that lead us to this rendition.  The current example of why we need to change that structure is the potential adoption of substandard curriculum in compliance with the New Mexico “version” of science standards, discussed here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Accountability and Standards, Education, education solutions, New Mexico Schools Graded, Politics in education, science in education

An Adopted Problem For New Mexico

New Mexico is on the verge of dumbing down education by adopting the Next Generation Science Standards with two adjustments for our state:

1) they are not supported by science,
2) they are not standard.

Here is the bigger problem:  I learned today in a consortium of legislators, educators, and researchers, that after taking public comment on the proposed adoption, whatever the outcome of that comment, the Public Education Department of Governor Martinez, most likely will adopt those faulty standards anyway.   They will say a “significant number” of public comment was in support of the adoption, (they won’t provide statistics, or they will play with semantics) and they’ll say districts have discretion, but the outcome will be that New Mexico will officially adopt the rule, bypassing all democratic processes.

After we restore policy for the people of New Mexico, we will need to dismantle the Secretary of Education post.  This example should be enough for people from all affiliations to realize the importance of elevating education out of the election cycle. The fact that the next administration can sweep away everything done in this administration, by passing “rules”, should convince everyone to change the mechanism to a more publicly accountable system. The volatility of policy should not undermine “the best of our knowledge”, which is what science education, and any education, is supposed to be.

To read the specifics of the proposed “rule” here is the LANL foundation position paper:

https://www.lanlfoundation.org/news/science-standards-letter-to-ped

Word is, because of this “loophole”, we can expect many rules to be proclaimed over the next year.

Please still participate, to the best of our abilities we must.   Interested parties may provide comment on the proposed repeal and replacement of this state rule at the public hearing or may submit written comments, or both, to Jamie Gonzales, Policy Division, New Mexico Public Education Department, Room 101, 300 Don Gaspar Avenue, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501, or by electronic mail at rule.feedback@state.nm.us, or fax to (505) 827-6681.  All written comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. (MDT) on the date of the public hearing.  The PED encourages the early submission of written comments.  The public comment period is from September 12, 2017 to October 16, 2017 at 5 p.m. (MDT)

 

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized