[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=39796.06

Kora: Mandatory summer school for those who fail ISTEP

Craig Davison
For The News-Dispatch

Michigan City - A proposal from board member Beryle Burgwald that would retain all Michigan City Area Schools third grade students who don't pass the language arts will wait as board members work out possible amendments.

Dr. Vidya Kora suggested all district students who fail a portion of the ISTEP tests must take mandatory summer school. If a student does not have 90 percent attendance at summer school, he or she will be retained in the same grade.

Burgwald said substitute amendments "gut the original language" and that Kora's is a broad approach to the problem he is trying to solve: reading comprehension.

"It's more of a shotgun approach," he said, adding that sometimes with this type of approach, "you miss the target."

Burgwald also said that just showing up provides another loophole for students to be promoted and that they should have to successfully complete the summer session.

The resolution was tabled. A workshop meeting is expected to be called in the coming days before the next board meeting for discussion. Board President James Kintzele said Kora and Burgwald should work together for an agreement to present to the board.

Other board members took the chance to speak on the resolution as well; Kathryn Lee said it's important, although there are parts she is uncomfortable with.

Dr. Jeffrey Jones said he has spoken against the resolution in the past, but is supportive of the amendment that requires parents to be involved in getting their kids the remediation they need.

"Ultimately, it's up to the family," he said. "This is what's going to be required."

[MCityRes]

As a teacher, I am concerned about the retention/summer school debate. A major sticking point for me is that the criteria they are using to send students to summer school will be Spring ISTEP scores. It is hoped in the future that scores will be available to schools, students and parents before summer break. However, this is not a guarantee, especially in the years that new cut scores must be developed. Being this is the first year for spring testing, 2009 Spring scores are not yet available. How can MCAS know in the future that the state will have scores done in time to properly notify schools and families of a student's need for summer school?

Dr. Vidya Kora suggested all district students who fail a portion of the ISTEP tests must take mandatory summer school. If a student does not have 90 percent attendance at summer school, he or she will be retained in the same grade.
In the past, if a middle school student did not pass both parts of the fall ISTEP, they were placed in summer school the following summer as well as an extended learning class for a minimum of one semester. 8th grade students were "required" to attend summer school as well as taking a basic skills class in either Language Arts, Math or both in 9th grade (dependent on their needs.) MCAS has since done away with the mandatory summer school for older students since attendance was quite a problem. It now looks as though the idea is back...and so it goes in MCAS.

The difference between the two proposals is Mr. Burgwald's focuses on 3rd grade whereas Dr. Kora's is more broad. My concern with both ideas is that research has shown retention is not as effective for students above 3rd grade. Research has also shown that retaining a student one or more times can actually increase their chances for dropping out. Sometimes academics factor into those decisions, but sometimes it's also social awkwardness. Who wants to be the 17-year-old freshmen? Or how about a middle-schooler who is old enough to drive? Do these board members have a suggestion on what to do with the students who continually fail year after year (sometimes just by a point or two)? Would retention always be in their best interest? I shudder to imagine a 16-year-old 8th grader going to school in the same building as an 11-year-old 6th grader. Here is a very interesting publication (albeit 10 years old) about the effectiveness of retention: http://www.advocatesforchildren.org/pubs/retention.html

I am not knocking retention by any means. It is an effective strategy for SOME children, mostly in the younger grades. But I think an overall blanket policy for all students in all grades might not be the best policy for OUR students. We still need more support services at the younger levels. It still makes me sad that the Title I program is not what it used to be. The old program format was an effective intervention with my students.

I apologize for venting. It's just that sometimes in our community I do not feel comfortable expressing my opinion publicly due to my occupation. I just feel it is extremely dangerous to base a child's entire future on one single test. (This is why as teachers we are taught to assess students in a variety of ways!)


Article on the failure of Chicago's test-based grade retention program: http://www.fairtest.org/chicago-research-c...ven-improvement

[Southsider2k12]

Thanks for the perspective and welcome to the site!

I'd be curious whether you think it is worse for students to be passed along to higher levels without having the skills associated with the prior grades, or for them to be at an awkward age in a lower grade level?

From my point of view it sounds like so many kids come into our system without the skills even needs to start kindergarten that they are almost behind from day one. These kids almost never get caught up with their peers. Are we hurting them more holding them back, or by putting them deeper in over their heads?

Personally I do not like the fact that the system puts so much worry into pass/fail and into suspension rates. I really wish we would make sure our students are ready, but ready for more than just the ISTEP.

[Ang]

Welcome to the site MCityRes, and thank you for your input. However, I have to share my story and my opinion of social promotion.

My son was an A student all through elementary school. He was bright and enjoyed school. All that changed in 6th grade. Personally, I don't think he was mature enough to handle the change from elementary to middle school. Eitherway, he started flunking assignments. I worked with his teachers, and being an MCAS employee myself, I had a better than average relationship with his teachers. Nothing worked. I wanted him held back in 6th grade, but they refused due to social promotion. He was advanced to 7th grade and was even less ready for that than he was the 6th grade. The bottom line was he ended up dropping out of school after the 10th grade. He was never able to catch up and grasp the concept of middle and high school. I truly believe had he been held back in 6th grade - like I wanted him to be - he would have been more successful later on.

[Southsider2k12]

After some nasty debate, this did pass 4-3.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=40812.62

Board: It's summer school for failing students
3rd-graders who don’t excel then are retained

Craig Davison
For The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Any Michigan City Area Schools third-grader who doesn't pass the language-arts portion of ISTEP must pass mandatory summer school for grade-level reading comprehension.

If not, the student heads back to third grade that fall.

The School Board on Tuesday night amended its retention policy to reflect that.

"This is an intervention," said board member Beryle Burgwald, who introduced the amendment and said the district needs to increase reading comprehension or it is setting up students to fail in later grades.

"Summer school is an intervention."

The measure passed by a single vote after board members discussed various options that could be addressed, including tabling the amendment once again as the administration created a rubric that would identify at-risk kids at the beginning of the school year, use ISTEP and other assessments, affect all grades and create criteria for successful completion of summer school.

The tabling motion was made by board member Dr. Vidya Kora, who introduced the rubric measure. The motion failed, as board members Burgwald, Donald Dulaney, Jim Kintzele and William Greene voted against it. Board members Jeff Jones and Kathryn Lee joined Kora.

The board members voted in the same groupings for Burgwald's amendment. There is nothing in the amendment that doesn't preclude nor direct the administration to do any of these tasks in Kora's measure.

Jones argued this is a multi-faceted problem, and the threat of retention would make no difference to the parents who aren't involved in their children's scholastic success.

"This is much too complex to legislate success," he said.

Burgwald said he introduced the measure for a specific reason: reading comprehension. He said if the board tried to address every solution with the amendment, then nothing would be accomplished but discussion.

Assistant Superintendent Carla Iacona said at a Monday workshop if the policy were in place this past school year, 207 children would face mandatory summer school or retention. About 490 third-graders passed the language arts portion of ISTEP.

Iacona said Tuesday that ISTEP looks at more than reading comprehension, and that a child reading at grade level could still fail the test. Jones said this resolution forces kids into summer school on one criteria, then dictates passing summer school on a different criteria.

"We are measuring two different things," he said.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...&TM=35807.4

ISTEP test shouldn't be make or break
I agree that students should not be held back if they don't pass the ISTEP test in third grade. If I remember correctly, I had a lot of kids in school with me that just had problems test taking. I know other parents now who have children who just freeze up when testing. All their papers that they bring home are A's and B's but when it comes to tests they just bomb!

Now if a child is passing the class and just fails ISTEP, I don't think that is just cause to hold them back. Some kids need more time than others to think out answers. Some kids are just not good at test taking. Some kids rush through tests and don't take time to think out answers because of nervousness of taking the test itself.

There has to be some other kind of resolution to the problem rather than holding kids back, especially if it depends on only one test. What is this, college? That is the only place I have EVER heard of someone taking ONE test and failing everything based on that one score.

People, this needs to be thought over a little better than this.

Jen Ginther

Michigan City

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=55468.42

Flunking third graders simplistic attempt
Our school board's conclusion in the matter of flunking or requiring third grade children to attend summer school if they do not pass a test is just amazing. I have a few questions and observations that make me scratch my head even further.

1. Is there an example of this simplistic solution working anywhere in the United States? The amount of time in the classroom will increase by a certain number of hours for the kids (if they attend regularly). If simply adding more classroom time equals better results, then aren't there a million better ways to do it? Year-long school? Longer days? Smaller class sizes? More teachers? Charter schools?

2. Is the real intent to motivate through punishment? Parents being faced with an ultimatum may make the test an even bigger deal than it already is. Why not say it? Intervention? By whom? The board?

3. Is there one good reason for a parent to believe that a one-day test is a better barometer of passing a grade as opposed to the year-long relationship and advice of the teacher and the principal?

4. Where does the school board fit into the equation if the child doesn't pass the next time? Do we honestly think those extra summer classes are the quality hours needed to pass the test? Motivational?

5. This is a Michigan City problem. We seem to be unique. Other proven solutions are not sought out and we seem to have a perfectly formed circular firing squad that's been shooting like this for how long?

Have we given the elected school board the power to dictate summer school as a punishment, a requirement and tool of intervention, regardless of the input of teachers and principals and aides - and parents? Results ... just results ... pass the test or else. Education is not the same as being in the work force, and in many respects I hope it never tries to be.

Maybe some introspection on the entire educational structure is in order.

Michael Mack

Michigan City

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...ArticleID=25176

The Issue:

Students who don't pass third grade ISTEP will have to attend summer school.

Our Opinion:

Student performance needs to be assessed and addressed daily. Flunking students is no measure of success.
Flunking students
ISTEP test not right measure

Editorial

When it comes to performance evaluations in the business world, the old adage says employees should never be surprised to learn of their shortcomings at an annual review. That's because good managers frequently review employees' performance and provide feedback so improvement can take place when needed.

Similarly, neither students nor teachers should find any surprises when annual ISTEP results are compiled. You would expect teachers to know each student's progress practically day by day. The school system shouldn't wait until this standardized test is given, and the results are made available, which unfortunately come so much later that they don't offer much help in assessing progress.

So it was good to see the school board of Michigan City Area Schools reject the idea of holding back third grade students who didn't pass the ISTEP test, as had been proposed. Instead, those who fail ISTEP will be required to attend summer school and pass. Only then would they be retained for another year at that grade level.

Making sure children achieve some benchmarks of learning before they advance makes sense and has a certain gut appeal, especially if you are of the opinion that our schools are graduating students who can't read.

But "flunking" kids isn't success. Making sure that they actually learn day by day, week by week, is success.

That is an enormous challenge in the Michigan City Area Schools. Each time a student fails ISTEP or any test, not only the student fails, but the school system, the parents, and the community fall short as well.

If that's what is happening, MCAS needs to further re-examine its testing, teaching and curriculum. Doing the same thing and expecting different results makes no sense.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=2546.382

Retaining students doesn't work
As I read the article "Board: It's summer school for failing students" [Wednesday], I found myself wondering if any research went into the decision. The Journal of School Psychology published two research articles about a meta-analysis study of 44 students proving that retention does not work. (The articles can be found in Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 3, 1997, and Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 243, 1999.)

Nonetheless, I wonder what Mr. [School board member Beryle] Burgwald meant when he said, "This is an intervention." Is he referring to the RTI Model? RTI stand for Response To Intervention. The RTI model is a relatively new model all schools must follow. The RTI model basically has three tiers of "interventions." Imagine tier 1 as the base of a pyramid, while tier 2 is above that and tier 3 is the tip of the pyramid. Schools must develop interventions that build from Tier 1 to Tier 3.

A tier 1 intervention might require a student to spend time during the school day memorizing unknown math facts, while Tier 3 might suggest a student be recommended for special needs classes. I wonder where "retention" falls on the MCAS RTI model?

Please don't get me wrong. I am not questioning that interventions are not needed for students who struggle. In fact, the research proves that interventions are sound academic practices. I am simply providing some research that proves retaining a student doesn't work.

Brian Strauss

Michigan City

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=52201.85

Adminstration trivializes ISTEP
Many of the points raised by your editorial Sunday ["Flunking students"] and by others on this page in opposition to the retention policy recently passed by the school board can be answered, I believe, by referring to the finding of the report from the Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education on the operation of our own school system.

The new retention policy uses ISTEP (more particularly the language arts portion, which includes reading comprehension) as its measure because ISTEP, as the CDDRE report points out to Superintendent Harding, "is the measure with which your entire district is being held accountable by the state of Indiana."

The administration tells us, however, that no one really "fails" ISTEP; rather, there are just some student who "don't make the cut." For the administration to trivialize ISTEP scores in such a way might explain why 51 percent of our students can't read with comprehension by the time they reach 10th grade.

We now know that according to figures supplied by the administration itself, 43 percent of our third graders going on to the fourth grade did not pass the language arts part of ISTEP. That is unacceptable! We also know from that that whatever it is the administration has been trying to do to address this serious problem - provided the administration thinks such a problem exists at all - hasn't worked.

For example, in interviewing MCAS principals, CDDRE found only one out of 13 thought the literacy coaches instituted by this administration were "doing well." CDDERE concluded that the language arts program currently in place in our school district "are extremely disjointed," being "of no benefit" - especially to students, and, CDDRE adds, "this is reflected in the district's ISTEP scores and your current status with the state." To continue along these lines, says the study, will mean that "students will continue to suffer."

The editorial's attempt to explain the approach of the retention policy is garbled and not altogether correct. Perhaps the editorial board also has some trouble with reading comprehension. Under the latest retention policy, failing ISTEP's language arts would not automatically bring on retention; a student who, through a summer school reading remediation program was able to read with comprehension at grade level, would still be promoted. Summer school is considered an effective form of intervention relative to reading and writing.

I find it interesting that when a year or so ago I introduced a similar retention proposal, minus the summer school feature, The News-Dispatch editorially endorse that proposal. Now that summer school was added, an editorial comes out against the plan. In the words of that great social commentator, Alf, "Go figure."

Finally the CDDRE report cited above was sent to Superintendent Harding late in May but has been suppressed by the administration since then, probably with good reason, at least from the administration's standpoint, given the report's conclusion. I gave a copy of this report to the editor of The News-Dispatch and I await editorial comment on it.

As someone who teaches college, I am one of those who, as your editorial puts it, "are of the opinion that our schools are graduating students who can't read."

Beryle Burgwald

School Board Member

Michigan City

Editor's note: The editorial, of course, should have said that under the policy adopted those who fail to pass after summer school would be retained. The editorial stands for itself, but the position it took is that "Student performance needs to be assessed and addressed daily. Flunking students is no measure of success."

[Ang]

Wow.

Looks like a little bit of a pi$$ing contest has begun.

I support this decision and Mr. Burgwald. I appreciate the fact that he has taken the time to explain exactly what this is all about so that people can actually understand it. The editor's note is a little snippy IMO, kinda like taking an opportunity the have the last word.

In regard to Brian Strauss' letter, the only comment I have to make on that is that promoting children who are academically behind does not always work either.

Finally, I don't really think MCAS would be in this predicament at all if the Title 1 funds were used appropriately.

[Southsider2k12]

My letter to the editor which was in the paper today

I have watched the policy debate about retaining third graders in the MCAS with a lot of interest. The thing I haven't seen discussed here is the big picture.

This a much bigger problem than just 43% of third graders not passing ISTEPs. From day one a large number of our students start out behind in school. A leader in the local BabyTalk program once told me that one in five children in Michigan City gets to Kindergarten and does not know how a book works. To be clear, I am not saying doesn't know how to read a book, I mean that they do not know things like which way is up, that a book reads from left to right, and which is the front side of a book. Teachers are asked to take these kids, plus all of the other kids, and turn them into kids that can pass the state regulated tests. The Early Learning Center is a great step forward for the kids who are at risk of being behind from day one, but at the same time, it cannot be funded illegally, as it is now. We have all heard the often quoted 43% of students who don't pass the ISTEP at the third grade level. If the MCAS policy of social promotion was working, these numbers shouldn't get worse as the kids get older, but by the time they get to 9th grade 46% of our students are failing the English ISTEP, and this is an improvement from a 49% failure rate a year prior. Just for reference sake the state average in 9th grade is 33% failing. I don't think most people realize that the total number of students we have at the 9th grade level is over double the population at the 12th grade level. This is because so many of our students cannot earn credits at the high school level. Essentially that portion of the population who can't pass tests, also can't pass enough classes to become 10th graders. They are unable to advance without social promotion, which ends by state law after 8th grade.

One of the points of the debate over this policy was the feelings of the children who get held back under this new policy. Are hurt feelings really more important than the 30% of students who do not graduate from the MCAS? To me more feelings are hurt over a life time of a person who is unable to support themselves, let alone a family, because they did not do well enough in school to graduate high school.

We need to worry more about saving kids early on in their education, even if it means having them repeat a year of school. All you have to do is look at our graduation rates, ISTEP scores, and our population of students who cannot get out of the 9th grade to know that what we have been doing is not working. Failing students at the 9th grade level is too late. It has to start earlier. It is much easier to save a third grader who is not able to read, versus a high school freshman who cannot read.

[Ang]

I saw that in today's paper. Good job SS'der and I don't think they did any "editing for content"

[RedDevilMC]

My letter to the editor which was in the paper today

Also, remember the 3rd graders from the past 2 years are those that lost out on Title 1 funding. I had a discussion with a principal who had a great track record on ISTEP testing until those funds were pulled. With her funding she focused on reading and language. So she has a gap now in scores. Her 5th graders were exceptional last year but now she has a gap due to the movement of Title 1 dollars. Another issue: All children are not attending early learing. This is an option, so we still have a big % not ready for kindergarten.

The hell with ISTEP and 3rd grade flunking. There should be testing in kindergarten or have a K2. At this age kids don't even realize they are behind or playing catch up. I am working on some data in our elementary school system for one of my classes. I hope to be able to share in the up coming months.