As I began this story I discovered that it would be too long for one posting. Hence, Part 1. This part discusses CSCOPE. Part 2 will directly address the bullying.
The easiest way to stop bullying in a school is to shine light on it. When kids or parents report bullying, we can deal with it and stop it. As long as bullying goes unreported it continues. It goes unreported because the victim is fearful of the consequences of reporting. We must create a place for kids to report harassment of any kind. Students must know that it will stop, if reported, and there are those who will protect them. This is no big discovery. What is new is the bullying educators are receiving at the hands of Legislators and right wing interest groups. Can we report this without consequence? Do we have a safe place to do so? Will the bullying stop? I do not think so. Therefore, I’m going to report a recent incident of bullying even if I get beat up. Time to shine a little light.
My assumptions, my deeply held beliefs, are important to this accusation of bullying. I believe an educated person can look at issues from more than one side. I believe we have an obligation to teach our students critical thinking and the ability to look at old assumptions in a new light. I believe that in America the most important freedom is the freedom to think, to question the government, and to express one’s thoughts without fear of retribution. I believe that encouraging students to look at issues from both sides is not indoctrination, it is education. I believe that anyone who opposes that in fact supports indoctrination. I believe that anyone who opposes the beliefs outlined above is neither about education nor freedom.
CSCOPE. OK, we are a CSCOPE district. For those of you who do not know, CSCOPE is a digital, web-based curriculum management program with a scope and sequence for every core subject K-12 that is aligned with the state outline of required curriculum. It purports to map each course in a way that ensures students are best prepared for the state high stakes standardized test. It includes sample lessons and sample unit tests. But the core of CSCOPE is that it maps instruction aligned with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or TEKS, and links those requirements vertically and horizontally. CSCOPE is written by educators, teachers, and service center personnel. It is used by over 800 of the 1,000 some odd, (some not), districts in Texas.
Our decision to adopt CSCOPE was not a top-down decision. We had a cadre of Lead Teachers who were charged with developing our own scope and sequence, our own benchmark tests. When implemented we showed great improvement. Then we plateaued. We gathered our Lead Teachers and asked what do we need to do. They said it was now too much, too complicated to keep up with the state standards and expectations. They suggested we look at purchasing a curriculum management system rather than trying to do it ourselves. We set up days for various vendors of such management systems to come and share their wares with our Lead Teachers. After all the presentations and descriptions, the Lead Teachers selected CSCOPE as the most comprehensive aligned system on the market. We then took that to the District Team, and they agreed. We became a CSCOPE district because our lead teachers and our district-wide collaborative decision making group chose to do so. Unlike other districts where CSCOPE may have been selected centrally, our teachers chose it after looking at the alternatives. We had very little opposition to the implementation of CSCOPE.
However, I had a lot of concerns about CSCOPE. I feared the elementary math was not aligned properly. I feared that the system was so big we could not influence it. I feared that it was an approach to “idiot proof” instruction. I was worried the social studies took too much of a traditional approach. I expressed all those fears to all the appropriate folks in CSCOPE. I was not happy with all the answers, but we moved forward anyway. We decided we would use CSCOPE for 3 years then re-assess. It is re-assessment year. We agreed as a group to declare the scope and sequence non-negotiable, but make the lessons optional. We wanted to use the unit tests, but we allowed teachers to modify them. All went fairly smoothly except for the teachers who had a tough time abandoning the sequence and lessons they had used for years, and for the teachers who were teaching the textbook. Regardless, we had a smooth implementation.
CSCOPE has glitches. It is not perfect. Some content areas are non-existent or out of date. Some of the lessons are really poor. Regardless, it is considerably better than what we tried to produce ourselves. It is a tool to improve instructional planning. That is why it was chosen.
So, what is the big deal? Evidently, in many districts a superintendent or central office staff decided to implement CSCOPE without teacher input. The administrators decided what components would be non-negotiable without teacher input. In those systems there has been a lot of teacher push back and resistance, understandably from my point of view. It pitted administrators against teachers and teachers sought a variety of forums to complain about CSCOPE. There are websites and blogs and forums where teachers in the mandatory districts constantly decry the weaknesses of CSCOPE. Our teachers talk openly about their concerns and we pass them on to the CSCOPE managers. Bottom line, where CSCOPE was mandatory it is resisted. Where CSCOPE was a teacher made decision, not so much.
Regardless, we chose it. We will evaluate it. We have attempted to modify when needed and provide options when needed.
But, CSCOPE just changed dramatically this past week due to right-wing complaints and political bullying. I totally resist and resent that. Hence, Part 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment