It was only a year ago that the board members listened to a breathless Director of Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction Sarah Stevens as she spoke on (and on and on) about the wonders of the $100,000 a year consulting firm Core Collaborative.
The principals wanted it. The teachers wanted it. The students wanted it.
All God's children wanted Core Collaborative.
The only problem is none of it was true.
Sure, Stevens produced some administrators and teachers who talked about how Core Collaborative had improved their classrooms, lifted the students' spirits and completely eliminated unsightly acne, but those were carefully selected proponents.
Teachers at all levels told the Turner Report, Core Collaborative, like many of the outside consulting firms that were formed to cash in after the passage of No Child Left Behind, took basic ideas that were already being employed in the classrooms of veteran teachers, added a few educational buzzwords and then the district started pulling dozens of teachers out of classes for training several days during the year.
When newly elected board members Jeff Koch and Jennifer Martucci, holdover Debbie Fort and Jasper County Commission appointee Gary Nodler voted not to renew the district's contract with Core Collaborative, Sarah Stevens stamped her foot and left the board room in a huff.
(Former Superintendent C. J.) Huff wasn't too happy about it either.
Stevens was later removed from her position and resigned from the district...and moved seamlessly to a job with Core Collaborative.
Though Core Collaborative is gone, there is always another patent medicine consulting firm ready to step into the breach.
The first inkling that history was repeating itself came when Interim Superintendent Norm Ridder said, "We're going to have Sarah come up here and discuss with you where we're at. We have a very excited staff who want it immediately. Sarah can explain what is going on." Ridder was referring to the female administrator who was going to present information on the consulting firm, L. B. Williams, which has been working with district officials and teachers spreading the joys of "Cognitive Coaching."
Only it wasn't Sarah Stevens who stepped up to the board table.
The administrator who gave the rapturous sales pitch for Cognitive Coaching was Assistant Director of Special Services Sandra Cantwell (pictured with Executive Director of Student Services Mark Barlass)Ridder later apologized to Cantwell for calling her by the wrong name.
At that point, however, Cantwell simply began praising the district's latest initiative.
Instead of telling teachers what to do, Cantwell said, with Cognitive Coaching "you take them to a deeper level of thinking."
It not only takes teachers to a deeper level of thinking, she added, but "you coach the teachers on their thinking."
In the old days, Cantwell said, principals "went in and observed (teachers) and we wrote down everything that we saw.. We told them what they did well and what they need to improve on, which is really a judgmental statement. Cognitive Coaching takes the focus off of those judgmental statements."
With Cognitive Coaching, principals won't have to worry about doing any of that.
And it also focuses on the student, Cantwell said, making the teacher think about "what would success look like for this little guy in your school, rather than I think you need to do this, this, and this?'
"It's powerful," she said. "I even tried it on my husband." She did not mention if she was teaching him how to think.
Cognitive Coaching helps teachers become "reflective practitioners," Cantwell said, sprinkling some educational jargon in for the seasoning.
"You're not telling them what to do; you're teaching them how to think."
No one questioned that Orwellian concept.
The biggest difference between Core Collaborative and Cognitive Coaching- Ridder is the one pushing the latest miracle cure. But don't worry, he said. "It's basically going to those who want it."
Judging from Ridder's endorsement of Cognitive Coaching, everyone wants it. When he made his rounds at the schools, "People were saying, 'I want this!' "
See what I mean.
The cost for Cognitive Coaching is $69,000, which would bring in trainers to handle three cohorts, with 40 teachers in each cohort.
The best thing about the program, Executive Director of Student Services Mark Barlass said, is that the money comes from federal Title 2A funds.
"It's no cost to the district, except for the substitutes."
Perhaps it's no cost to the district, but every taxpayer in the district (and elsewhere in the United States) will pay for it.
And substitute teachers make $80 per day, meaning that each day just one training day for the three cohorts costs $9,600.
Each cohort will have eight days, which adds up to $76,800 for substitute teachers, or a total of $145,800 for the training.
Board member Debbie Fort, who has always been critical of pulling teachers out of the classroom, questioned the need for that. "That's taking 120 teachers out of the classroom. Can't we do summer training?" She also suggested training on district professional development days or on weekends.
Without addressing the professional development days or weekends, Ridder said, "The real issue is they have to be with kids to practice," indicating that if the teachers were trained in the summer, it would be completely forgotten by the beginning of school. "That's why it's during the year."
Fort persisted, continuing to note the time that teachers would be away from students.
"This is responding to the demand from teachers," Ridder said. "Teachers want this. For us to slow down, it's kind of smacking them in the face and saying, 'Hey, you're not that important. I'm concerned about that a little bit.' "
"How do you know teachers want this?" Musser asked.
"Oh, my!" Ridder exclaimed. "Just walk in the building and ask them,"
Board member Lori Musser questioned why the training could not be done locally at the Southwest Center in Webb City, where 67 R-8 teachers and administrators trained last year. Fort noted that the district pays a fee to belong to the Southwest Center.
"Southwest Center was having people in, but they weren't having people in," Ridder said.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Ridder also noted that if it would help the board, "We can bring teachers here to testify." Hmm, that sounds familiar.
Fort indicated she wanted evidence that the teachers actually want the training and evidence that the training that has already taken place has been effective.
"Do we have 120 teachers who are interested in this training?" Fort asked.
No one seemed to know.
The board postponed approval until the August 9 meeting.
(The discussion on Cognitive Coaching begins at the two hour and 10 minute mark of the accompanying video.)
It was only a year ago that the board members listened to a breathless Director of Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction Sarah Stevens as she spoke on (and on and on) about the wonders of the $100,000 a year consulting firm Core Collaborative.
The principals wanted it. The teachers wanted it. The students wanted it.
All God's children wanted Core Collaborative.
The only problem is none of it was true.
Sure, Stevens produced some administrators and teachers who talked about how Core Collaborative had improved their classrooms, lifted the students' spirits and completely eliminated unsightly acne, but those were carefully selected proponents.
Teachers at all levels told the Turner Report, Core Collaborative, like many of the outside consulting firms that were formed to cash in after the passage of No Child Left Behind, took basic ideas that were already being employed in the classrooms of veteran teachers, added a few educational buzzwords and then the district started pulling dozens of teachers out of classes for training several days during the year.
When newly elected board members Jeff Koch and Jennifer Martucci, holdover Debbie Fort and Jasper County Commission appointee Gary Nodler voted not to renew the district's contract with Core Collaborative, Sarah Stevens stamped her foot and left the board room in a huff.
(Former Superintendent C. J.) Huff wasn't too happy about it either.
Stevens was later removed from her position and resigned from the district...and moved seamlessly to a job with Core Collaborative.
Though Core Collaborative is gone, there is always another patent medicine consulting firm ready to step into the breach.
The first inkling that history was repeating itself came when Interim Superintendent Norm Ridder said, "We're going to have Sarah come up here and discuss with you where we're at. We have a very excited staff who want it immediately. Sarah can explain what is going on." Ridder was referring to the female administrator who was going to present information on the consulting firm, L. B. Williams, which has been working with district officials and teachers spreading the joys of "Cognitive Coaching."
Only it wasn't Sarah Stevens who stepped up to the board table.
The administrator who gave the rapturous sales pitch for Cognitive Coaching was Assistant Director of Special Services Sandra Cantwell (pictured with Executive Director of Student Services Mark Barlass)Ridder later apologized to Cantwell for calling her by the wrong name.
At that point, however, Cantwell simply began praising the district's latest initiative.
Instead of telling teachers what to do, Cantwell said, with Cognitive Coaching "you take them to a deeper level of thinking."
It not only takes teachers to a deeper level of thinking, she added, but "you coach the teachers on their thinking."
In the old days, Cantwell said, principals "went in and observed (teachers) and we wrote down everything that we saw.. We told them what they did well and what they need to improve on, which is really a judgmental statement. Cognitive Coaching takes the focus off of those judgmental statements."
With Cognitive Coaching, principals won't have to worry about doing any of that.
And it also focuses on the student, Cantwell said, making the teacher think about "what would success look like for this little guy in your school, rather than I think you need to do this, this, and this?'
"It's powerful," she said. "I even tried it on my husband." She did not mention if she was teaching him how to think.
Cognitive Coaching helps teachers become "reflective practitioners," Cantwell said, sprinkling some educational jargon in for the seasoning.
"You're not telling them what to do; you're teaching them how to think."
No one questioned that Orwellian concept.
The biggest difference between Core Collaborative and Cognitive Coaching- Ridder is the one pushing the latest miracle cure. But don't worry, he said. "It's basically going to those who want it."
Judging from Ridder's endorsement of Cognitive Coaching, everyone wants it. When he made his rounds at the schools, "People were saying, 'I want this!' "
See what I mean.
The cost for Cognitive Coaching is $69,000, which would bring in trainers to handle three cohorts, with 40 teachers in each cohort.
The best thing about the program, Executive Director of Student Services Mark Barlass said, is that the money comes from federal Title 2A funds.
"It's no cost to the district, except for the substitutes."
Perhaps it's no cost to the district, but every taxpayer in the district (and elsewhere in the United States) will pay for it.
And substitute teachers make $80 per day, meaning that each day just one training day for the three cohorts costs $9,600.
Each cohort will have eight days, which adds up to $76,800 for substitute teachers, or a total of $145,800 for the training.
Board member Debbie Fort, who has always been critical of pulling teachers out of the classroom, questioned the need for that. "That's taking 120 teachers out of the classroom. Can't we do summer training?" She also suggested training on district professional development days or on weekends.
Without addressing the professional development days or weekends, Ridder said, "The real issue is they have to be with kids to practice," indicating that if the teachers were trained in the summer, it would be completely forgotten by the beginning of school. "That's why it's during the year."
Fort persisted, continuing to note the time that teachers would be away from students.
"This is responding to the demand from teachers," Ridder said. "Teachers want this. For us to slow down, it's kind of smacking them in the face and saying, 'Hey, you're not that important. I'm concerned about that a little bit.' "
"How do you know teachers want this?" Musser asked.
"Oh, my!" Ridder exclaimed. "Just walk in the building and ask them,"
Board member Lori Musser questioned why the training could not be done locally at the Southwest Center in Webb City, where 67 R-8 teachers and administrators trained last year. Fort noted that the district pays a fee to belong to the Southwest Center.
"Southwest Center was having people in, but they weren't having people in," Ridder said.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Ridder also noted that if it would help the board, "We can bring teachers here to testify." Hmm, that sounds familiar.
Fort indicated she wanted evidence that the teachers actually want the training and evidence that the training that has already taken place has been effective.
"Do we have 120 teachers who are interested in this training?" Fort asked.
No one seemed to know.
The board postponed approval until the August 9 meeting.
(The discussion on Cognitive Coaching begins at the two hour and 10 minute mark of the accompanying video.)
15 comments:
Same song, second verse. Groundhog Day. It never changes.
Sandra Cantwell can't talk without her little anecdotes. Ask her for some measurable data or evidence and all you get is a bobble head stare. Is this the person Ridder relies on for information? She's as bad as Sarah ever was. No wonder he confused them.
Deb Fort is right. We need the teachers in the classroom, not off for 8 days going to another needless coaching seminar. NO More of that. Been there, done that.,It didn't work then, it won't work now. Can't get enough subs. Kids need their teachers in the classroom, not off for days at a time. It creates a bad environment when so many teachers are gone at a time. We've had enough of that. Mark Barlass doesn't call the shots for PD. That's not his place. Good that the board is putting a stop to all that!
Maybe Ridder thinks it's a good idea, but he does NOT make decisions for the board. Stick to your guns, BOE, and say NO MORE needless programs crammed down our throats!!!
Thanks for the info, Randy. BOE keep asking those questions and hold the admin responsible to answer; better yet, ask the teachers yourselves. Teachers I know do NOT want to be out of the classroom for PD because it's disruptive. Thanks for doing the sub-cost math, too; the economics make the whole prospect even more absurd.
Hmmm..hire a new Supt, tell us he's the Savior, but don't listen to his recommendations. Even a blind man can see through this board. Debbie Fort thinks she is the Supt and calls the shots, because obviously she knows much more than the others. Good luck getting someone who wants to take Ridders job.
Thanks Dr. Fort and other board members for asking the questions that should and must be asked. The district CANNOT AFFORD to sink any more money into these initiatives at this time. Joplin is still talking as if there is a bottomless pit of money. There is NOT! Let these things go for now and keep teachers in the classroom. And the idea that those who are at the top salary levels keep harping on - If you don't give us the highest wage possible, we'll go somewhere else and you'll be sorry. - has become disgusting to me. That argument sure doesn't work for the majority of the working public who must work harder and harder for less and less. We just got rid of a superintendent who was one of the highest paid in the state and he still very nearly destroyed our school system. The $180,000 (plus God knows how much in benefits) is more than fair and the public must demand results for that salary just as we demand performance from our teaching staff. The BOE needs to concentrate on supporting and paying the most important members of the district - our teachers. And, no, I do not work for the school district. I'm just a taxpayer. So BOE and Dr. Ridder, come clean to the public, get your financial house in order, concentrate on quality teaching and stop the ridiculous idea of adding more and more unproven programs.
When was the last year Debra Fort was actually a classroom teacher?
Cantwell is another Huff promotion. Wasn't qualified then, not qualified now.
Nice to see that no-neck Barlass act interested in something.
Time to move on, big boy.
Sarah, Sandra--pretty much the same thing.
You tell'em ciege!
She's been teaching teachers at MSSU.
The idiocy of this post is amazing to me! Every school district, Joplin included, is given DESIGNATED federal dollars that can ONLY be used for professional development. If you don't spend it, you have to give it back. Not one penny comes out of general revenues or takes away from other programs, salaries, etc. this is motivated 100% by agenda, not at ALL about money. It's unbelievably stupid, as this is an INCREDIBLE TRAINING OPPORTUNITY for our teachers and staff to improve relationships and communications - the two issues that our researchers identified as the biggest problems impeding education in Joplin. So sit back and throw your ignorant stones, but it's truly ridiculous!
Dear 2;10.
You are horribly arrogant and condescending. It has already been stated that the funds come from Title Two, but heaven forbid we should send some TAX dollars back instead of wasting them. Those dollars don't fall out of the sky, either. As far as the hours of PD we must have, I don't think that is news, also, but we were told that PD would be teacher-driven, not administration driven. So many programs and initiatives have come through that it is ridiculous, all touted as outstanding by administrators but none having much impact on learning outcomes or teacher retention. If you could drop the condescension for just a few moments, you would do yourself a favor if you would research the history of R8. Before Huff came, we were an outstanding and highly performing district. It has been a downward spiral ever since. When we were emerging and experiencing success, we had none of these programs and initiatives. We had good curriculum, quality materials, and teacher-driven PLCs and teacher-created assessments. Teachers learned about what needed to be assessed, what improvements needed to be made in instruction, and how to identify struggling students. It cost little but there were measurable gains. Perhaps we should try those things again, even though it might make a few more jobs seem unnecessary. I don't need an outside source to learn how to communicate or how to improve relationships. Those are fundamental skills that good educators should already possess.
Think twice before you throw around names and labels. Those who call others "stupid" or their opinions "idiocy" are not good administrators or coaches, and I would surmise not good teachers, either. You don't know it all, but your tone comes off as though you believe you do. You also come off as sounding like you have a personal stake in this issue, which makes you somewhat easier to identify. You need to go join the others of your ilk that are no longer with R8. Your abusive attitude is no longer acceptable in this district.
Post a Comment