How many consultants were hired to decide on the #2 choice the teachers made?
Why did Rivera originally state that Norwalk was a district that had different programs happening in different buildings and that was not good. Now he is offering a choice for schools to pick Journeys or Core Knowledge? It sounds like pandering to Mike Lyons to me. Is that what is best for the students?
It is rumored that Rowayton is not going to choose Journeys. They will choose Core Knowledge. What kind of application will they have to provide for the superintendent? Why are they choosing Core Knowledge when the first choice is Journeys?
In my opinion, Manny Rivera went with the number two choice recommendation of the ELA administrator because it was a solid choice. He wants his $50,000 bonus though, so he also offered the Apple choice (Lyon's choice) so that the Board would be happy with him. Guess who will get his $50,000 bonus making him the top paid superintendent in CT? I see the connection for the Core Knowledge offered, do you?
Wow, conspiracy everywhere. If you are both so smart, why don't you look at the results? Why don't you look at cities that have made curriculum decisions several years before us and the results they have had?
7:29AM, please tell us what cities have had such dramatic testing results? I have been reading about large drops in testing scores in NY and other cities. There seems to be a huge response from teachers, parents and legislators to rethink what is happening in the schools.
It's just a resource, not curriculum. There seems to be such confusion about is. What matters is that Norwalk chooses a vendor that will put books into the hands of students. Those without Title I money are woefully under supplied. What we need is real PD for teachers and administrators, helping us make the move to CCSS, and teach literacy the best way for our students.
Common Core is so different from what we've been teaching to, and testing, that our scores WILL drop dramatically at first, to think otherwise is foolish.
What matters is that limited resources are spent on the BEST our money can buy. I am not at all opposed to Journeys. I am opposed to the choice one or two of our schools might be making. I am questioning why such a choice was allowed. Why a choice at all? Is this political? So that the Board isn't wrong in their selection? That is what I am suggesting. Meantime, what is really best for the students? Journeys! With no question about it.
Title 1 money is hugely misunderstood. In most cases, Title 1 money is to be spent only on the lowest achieving students. It is not a resource for a reading program. The purchase of books for all students would be illegal use of funding. People keep throwing Title 1 money around as if that money solves a school's monetary problems. Could we all remember why Title 1 funds were provided by the federal government to begin with? It's only for the lowest achievers.
Wrong, it's not only for the 'lowest achieving kids'. It is for targeted, at risk students. They need more reading, more practice, and specialized materials not provided by the district,
So, using your words, these 'targeted, at risk students' are the recipients of all Title 1 funds, meaning all materials and tutoring services are only for them? Is this how the school system spends this money? Or is it the way they are supposed to spend the money? Which is the case?
How many consultants were hired to decide on the #2 choice the teachers made?
ReplyDeleteWhy did Rivera originally state that Norwalk was a district that had different programs happening in different buildings and that was not good. Now he is offering a choice for schools to pick Journeys or Core Knowledge? It sounds like pandering to Mike Lyons to me. Is that what is best for the students?
It is rumored that Rowayton is not going to choose Journeys. They will choose Core Knowledge. What kind of application will they have to provide for the superintendent? Why are they choosing Core Knowledge when the first choice is Journeys?
In my opinion, Manny Rivera went with the number two choice recommendation of the ELA administrator because it was a solid choice. He wants his $50,000 bonus though, so he also offered the Apple choice (Lyon's choice) so that the Board would be happy with him. Guess who will get his $50,000 bonus making him the top paid superintendent in CT? I see the connection for the Core Knowledge offered, do you?
ReplyDeleteWow, conspiracy everywhere. If you are both so smart, why don't you look at the results? Why don't you look at cities that have made curriculum decisions several years before us and the results they have had?
ReplyDelete7:29AM, please tell us what cities have had such dramatic testing results? I have been reading about large drops in testing scores in NY and other cities. There seems to be a huge response from teachers, parents and legislators to rethink what is happening in the schools.
ReplyDeleteIt's just a resource, not curriculum. There seems to be such confusion about is. What matters is that Norwalk chooses a vendor that will put books into the hands of students. Those without Title I money are woefully under supplied. What we need is real PD for teachers and administrators, helping us make the move to CCSS, and teach literacy the best way for our students.
ReplyDeleteCommon Core is so different from what we've been teaching to, and testing, that our scores WILL drop dramatically at first, to think otherwise is foolish.
What matters is that limited resources are spent on the BEST our money can buy. I am not at all opposed to Journeys. I am opposed to the choice one or two of our schools might be making. I am questioning why such a choice was allowed. Why a choice at all? Is this political? So that the Board isn't wrong in their selection? That is what I am suggesting. Meantime, what is really best for the students? Journeys! With no question about it.
ReplyDeleteTitle 1 money is hugely misunderstood. In most cases, Title 1 money is to be spent only on the lowest achieving students. It is not a resource for a reading program. The purchase of books for all students would be illegal use of funding. People keep throwing Title 1 money around as if that money solves a school's monetary problems. Could we all remember why Title 1 funds were provided by the federal government to begin with? It's only for the lowest achievers.
ReplyDeleteWrong, it's not only for the 'lowest achieving kids'. It is for targeted, at risk students. They need more reading, more practice, and specialized materials not provided by the district,
ReplyDeleteSo, using your words, these 'targeted, at risk students' are the recipients of all Title 1 funds, meaning all materials and tutoring services are only for them? Is this how the school system spends this money? Or is it the way they are supposed to spend the money? Which is the case?
ReplyDelete