Texas Section 39.023, Education Code Subsection a-3 states the following:
(a-3) The agency may not adopt or develop a criterion-referenced assessment instrument under this section based on common core state standards as defined by Section 28.002(b-1). This subsection does not prohibit the use of college advanced placement tests or international baccalaureate examinations as those terms are defined by Section 28.051.
By "the agency", the law refers to the Texas Education Agency (TEA), one of the state-level entities that governs and regulates education in Texas. It appears that the TEA is breaking that very law on a daily basis.
The law seems to leave some gray area in regards to materials designed for Common Core. If the tools in question are not directly linked to the school's curriculum or used for any grading, assessment, or standards, the tool may be interpreted as optional. However, as soon as any teacher mandates any of these tools be used by their students, they cross that line.
So-called "educators" continue to thumb their noses at the Texas law, with the national "Leaning Forward" conference in Dallas this upcoming weekend. Common Core appears in numerous topics for the conference and seminar sessions. For example:
D04 -- ONLINE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODULES FOR IMPLEMENTING COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS
As states, districts, and schools transition to the new Common Core State Standards, teachers will need to know how well their teaching aligns to the new standards. Hear about the Surveys of Enacted Curriculum online system that has been providing analysis of instruction and standards for years. Explore a process and specific steps for school and district teams. Understand the application of data for professional development and the use of data for tracking and evaluating instructional change over time.
There is little doubt that Texas "educators" will be in attendance of these discussions and presentations on Common Core, despite it being illegal to use in Texas.
One of several such "optional materials" is an online interactive site called Think Through Math. It was designed specifically for Common Core. If parents allow, teachers may offer the program for students to use for additional practice. However, the site cannot be used as any official part of any curriculum in Texas, nor may it be used in any assessment, to include "extra credit" or other incentives program.
Another tool appears to be less in that gray area realm. ISIP's Istation is a reading tool being used by Texas schools. The program uses Common Core teaching materials. It then employs automated assessment standards. Those standards were designed around Common Core standards. They have also, supposedly, adopted additional standards based upon various state requirements.
The Texas State Board of Education and the TEA have contracted ISIP to provide Istation to all Texas public and open-enrollment charter schools. The SBoE and TEA have also purchased home edition licenses for all students in the state. They support ISIP's Common Core based assessment and evaluation program to the extent they want Texas students to use it at home.
This creates a conundrum. It's a perplexing state of affairs. The ISIP documentation lauds how its design assesses various metrics involved in Common Core, doing so automatically, grading students so teachers don't have to. Common Core and any tool that assesses kids for grades based upon its standards is against Texas law. Yet, here is a program that does just that and Texas is paying for it with taxpayer money.
The "Texas Success Story" for Istation makes the case for the automated standards. Yet, when you navigate on the link concerning those standards, as related to Texas's success, you will find these "indicators". Notice the specific inclusion of the illegal Common Core:
Istation's Indicators of Progress (ISIP™):
- is a research- and standards-based formative assessment
- is computer-adaptive technology that selects successive questions dynamically, based on responses to previous questions, effectively tailoring the assessment to each student's level of ability
- assesses all domains of reading for each grade, including phonemic awareness, letter knowledge, alphabetic decoding, comprehension, vocabulary, spelling, and text fluency
- identifies the needs of all students from each reading domain, from struggling to advanced learners
- generates instant reports that group students by need of additional targeted instruction in specific skills
- can be delivered via the Internet or Web
- is correlated to common core and state-specific standards
- is highly rated by the NCRTI as an RTI screening and continuous progress monitoring tool
Schools in Texas do, in fact, use the assessment tools to grade students. In Judson ISD, for example, it is the primary assessment tool used to determine a student's report card grades and advancement to the next grade-school level.
One more time, for clarity, the SBoE and TEA are using Texas tax money to buy a Common Core assessment tool for use in Texas schools despite the fact that any Common Core based assessment tool is against Texas law.
Numerous inquiries were extended to state education personnel at the school, district, local school board, TEA, and SBoE levels. None have replied with any explanation or commentary. Perhaps state laws do not apply to SBoE, TEA, and public school ISDs. Perhaps they just ignore the laws. In any case, all of the above owe Texas parents a detailed, straight forward, honest explanation devoid of bureaucratic double-speak.
Very interesting post, as I am from TX. I applaud TX for not getting on the Common Core Train. Although, Common Core seems to be great in concept, because with so many families relocating from state to state, I see the need for some kind of standardization. But the reality is that each child is not a cookie-cutter copy of all other children. True learning varies from child to child, from subject to subject, and is often successfully learned in their own time frame, Leaning can't be forced into such a cookie-cutter, non-flexible pattern, when you take into consideration the individuality of each child. Forced learning is not enjoyable for the child and the material is easily forgotten. Again, I think getting all the states on the same page is a great idea, but there still has to be flexibility. We don't need any more programs that dumb-down the kids and have all their studies geared to pass standardized tests. Real learning comes when a child is authentically interested in a topic and engaged, which is garnered by creativity and flexibility in teaching. More money should be directed at having lower student to teacher ratios, so that the individual child can get a more individualize education and their educational needs met. JMHO.
ReplyDeleteJW -- I oppose a national standard for several reasons. The greatest one is that point of individuality you make. That goes to the heart of liberty. The US Constitution forbids the federal government from regulating anything not explicitly stated in Art. 1 Sect. 8. (The 10th Amendment states the ban). Education was intentionally left off of that list. If you read The Federalist, the reasons why are obvious. Even education being regulated at a state level is questionable, as it still infringes upon municipal, local, and individual freedoms.
DeleteBeyond that, common core not only does this "cookie cutter" approach, but ignores basic human cognizant development. Grades 2-5 are in the "concrete" realm of development and should remain in the applicable levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. But Common Core expects elementary students to perform meta-cognitive tasks before establishing a foundational factual and defining data base.
It is like expecting a 5th grader to solve an integral with infinite variables and no constants, and no understanding of basic multiplication or addition.