SCOTUS protects political speech

Today the Court refused to hear an appeal of a case that would be the first to test the latest free speech ruling. The background:

A seventh-grader from Vermont was suspended for wearing a shirt that bore images of cocaine and a martini glass — but also had messages calling President Bush a lying drunk driver who abused cocaine and marijuana, and the "chicken-hawk-in-chief" who was engaged in a "world domination tour."

After his suspension, Zachary Guiles returned to school with duct tape covering the offending images.

Williamstown Middle School Principal Kathleen Morris-Kortz said the images violated the school dress code, which prohibits clothing that promotes the use of drugs or alcohol.

An appeals court said the school had no right to censor any part of the shirt.

Alito's political speech exception was the controlling ruling. "Bong hits 4 Jesus" is unacceptable, but "Bad Bush Hits Bong" is apparently okay.

Perhaps we pessimists have reason to be a little less pessimistic. (Outright optimism is a stretch.)

Yakima teacher could lose license for copying WASL sections

Using the OSPI's freely available study guides to help students prep for the WASL: fine and dandy.

Photocopying last year's test to help students prep for the WASL: big trouble.

Students at Highland Junior High, in Cowiche northwest of Yakima, told a teacher that they recognized some of the questions on the science portion of this year's WASL as examples in a study guide given to them earlier this year by teacher Darryl Hartung.

Highland School District officials investigated and discovered that Hartung photocopied portions of the 2006 science WASL and modeled his study guide after those questions, which state laws forbids....

The tests have been sent for scoring, but they'll be flagged and will go unreported to the students and the district.

Hartung, a 17-year teacher with the district, was placed on administrative leave in April and has since been reassigned to teach sixth grade at Tieton Intermediate School....

If [OSPI] finds that Hartung acted in flagrant disregard of professional standards, he could be charged with a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500 and have his teaching license revoked.

It will depend on whether the state wants to make an example of Hartung, who really has no excuse, since the test instructions specifically forbid copying (or even discussing) any portion.

However, I'd say that by having his name all over the media, he's probably paid penance enough.

Why I Don’t Screw With the District Office

Alternate Title: Payroll Blues, Part II

From the June 20th Education Week:

Thousands of Los Angeles teachers have not been paid properly for months because of errors in a corporate-style payroll system that was introduced in January as part of a sweeping, $95 million computer modernization.

The Los Angeles Unified School District acknowledges that the payroll system’s rollout was rushed and tainted by numerous programming glitches and insufficient training of school-based pay officials.

Yet the district teachers’ union has not been satisfied with such explanations. It sued the district this spring, even before a massive failure of the system on June 5—a day the district now calls “Black Tuesday”—when roughly 28,000 employees were overpaid and 4,500 received less than they were due.

The biggest mistake my district ever made with my paycheck was about 5 years ago when they forgot to charge me union dues for 10 months and I didn’t notice. Ended up having an extra $100 a month taken out for 6 months to make up the difference. Was not amused, and that’s when I became messianic about double-checking my own pay stub and telling others to do the same.

The view from the teachers union is here; coverage from the LA Times here.

Big Deal or No Big Deal, Union Dues Lawsuit Edition

The Supreme Court did what everyone thought they would last week and ruled against the WEA in the lawsuit regarding the use of union dues for political purposes.

To our conservative friends, big big deal. SVC Alumnus has been all over it from the very beginning, and his site has a nice overview of comments from op-ed columns around the country.

To the EFF, perhaps the biggest deal they’ve ever had, but clearly not nearly as meaningful since the passage of HB2079. The teachers vs. union blog is still going strong, and there’s some excellent commentary on the EFF homepage.

To Education Week, not a big deal. Not front page news, not front section news. In fact, not until page 29 do you find the article about the decision, and this is the second paragraph:

But the court’s unanimous ruling on June 14 will likely do little harm in the long run to the Washington Education Association or other public-employee unions, legal experts said.

To the WEA, no big deal at all. They’ve barely acknowledged it on their website, most of the rank-and-file couldn’t care less, and the fines might seems steep, but they can be taken care of. There isn’t much here that I can see that would effect change on the WEA, and I’ll leave that to the reader to decide whether that’s a good thing or not.

And it’s also left to you to decide: deal, or no big deal?

Seattle school payroll to join 20th century

It took this...

Last fall, district officials discovered a Nova Alternative High School teacher allegedly adding overtime to her signed time sheets — something she had been doing since 1992, according to the district. Of the $179,000 the district believes she stole, $120,000 was in the past five years.

...to make this happen...

This fall, the district will launch a new computer system that links its payroll and financial systems, and it is hiring an internal auditor, reorganizing its human resources and payroll departments and training managers to better monitor their budgets.

...despite this.

The state auditor recommended in 2001 that the district cut off employees' access to their signed time sheets, records show. The state made the same recommendation in 2002. And in 2003, 2004 and 2005, audits continued to warn that the district's shoddy payroll system put funds at risk. Auditors pointed out smaller losses: $1,800 in 2003-04, $12,000 in 2004-05.

To be fair:

Despite the findings, Spencer said the district is in good financial shape. She pointed to an audit of the district's financial statements over the same time period. For the second year in a row, that report found no problems. Standard & Poor's and Moody's both recently raised the district's bond ratings — another sign of the district's financial stability, Spencer said.

Still, you have to be amazed that, in 2007, the district is just now linking its payroll and financial systems via computer. And I thought my district was slacking.

Update: Ryan points out how modernization has foundered in the LA Unified School District.

No bong hits, part II

As a self-proclaimed defender of student free expression rights, I'm certainly disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision to rule against Joseph Frederick in the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.

That said, I'm not exactly crestfallen, either.

The ruling is pretty narrow and seems to be focused almost exclusively on speech that promotes drug use. Justice Alito summed it up this way in his concurring opinion:

"Public schools may ban speech advocating illegal drug use," Alito wrote in his concurrence. "But I regard such regulation as standing at the far reaches of what the First Amendment permits. I join the opinion of the Court with the understanding that [it] does not endorse any further extension."

I still think the court was a little silly in thinking that any reasonable person -- yes, even teenagers -- would think that "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" means "Hey you! Go smoke pot!", but I can at least somewhat understand where it was coming from. Doesn't mean I agree with the decision, but I take comfort in knowing that the court took the time to acknowledge that this was a case about drug advocacy and not political or religious speech.

The key will be this: How broadly will administrators try to apply the decision? Although Hazelwood, at its core, is pretty vague, administrators have consistently misapplied even the most specific portions of the majority opinion and used the ruling as sweeping justification for squelching student speech.

The most troubling part for me is that the court has further extended what qualifies as "school sponsored." This was an event that took place outside of school hours and off school grounds. How will administrators and districts try and use this ruling to extend their power off campus? Will this extend to the electronic realm?

Time will only tell.

Who Says the Union Can’t Host a Healthy Debate?

Last month WE Magazine, the official newspaper of the WEA, published a letter from Dwayne Brecto of Grandview chiding the association for their support of the National Board Certification. This month there are 4 responses, 1 in agreement and 3 arguing the other side. I’ll give credit where credit is due—the WEA could have very easily turfed Brecto’s letter and kept to the party line, but they didn’t, and that’s a pleasent level of openness.

I’m very publicly on record as being anti-NBPTS, because I’ve never heard a completely convincing argument for the merits of the Certification, and it seems odd for the association to be pushing so hard and using our dues monies to promote a program that benefits so few teachers in Washington. One comment from the magazine sticks out to me:

Between the sate grant opportunities and professional growth grants provided by my district, I paid nothing but sweat, tears and time away from my family to gain my national board certificate.

The NBPTS says that the process takes between 200 and 400 hours; the cost involved is better than $2000. You might get the money piece covered, but some of us don’t want to have to spend that much more time away from our families working on the job.

That, then, is the inequity of the National Board—if you have young children, if you have family commitments, if you’re already committed to your school on the most visceral level, then you’re not going to have the time without taking away from other areas. I’d rather the WEA take the money that they’re spending on National Board certification and push it into something more worthwhile, like finding some sort of real direction for Take the Lead.

I hope that the conversation continues.

UW Grad Gets Award from AERA

Tyrone Howard, a 1998 grad of the UW’s graduate school of education, was awarded AERA’s Early Career Award. This comes along at the same time the College of Education was ranked 8th nationally by US News and World Report.

Good on them!

Soldiering on in the Battle of the Sexes

The Clark County Columbian recently published an article which reaffirms what we already know: boys and girls have differently wired brains. What is unclear, however, is how we as an educational system should respond to this. Most school districts show a "gender gap" in their test scores. If there is a physiological reason for this, there isn't much a classroom teacher can do to make a difference.

I was chatting with some teachers recently about student behavior in the hallways. There were several comments about touching, slapping, horseplay---and I had to ask if this was primarily observable in boys. This is one of the main ways in which young men communicate and as schools, we do our darndest to stop them. I'm not saying that any behaviors which might be dangerous to others should be tolerated, but at some point we have to honor their needs. I worry that schools have overcompensated in recent decades to be far too "girl friendly" for learning. How do we make the playing field a level one?

sorry, Jesus: no bong hits for you

Joseph Frederick has lost his free speech case.

Joseph Frederick unfurled his homemade sign on a winter morning in 2002, as the Olympic torch made its way through Juneau, Alaska, en route to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Frederick said the banner was a nonsensical message that he first saw on a snowboard. He intended the banner to proclaim his right to say anything at all.

His principal, Deborah Morse, said the phrase was a pro-drug message that had no place at a school-sanctioned event. Frederick denied that he was advocating for drug use.

"The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic," Roberts said. "But Principal Morse thought the banner would be interpreted by those viewing it as promoting illegal drug use, and that interpretation is plainly a reasonable one."

I've already written elsewhere:

While academics might posit that meaning is a function of the text, or of the author's intent, or of a transaction between author and reader mediated via text, when it comes to this case, school administrators are essentially reader response theorists. What matters isn't what Frederick wrote, so much as what effect it would have on its readers, no matter how nonsensical the message.

Chief Justice John "Stanley Fish" Roberts, writing for the Court, essentially adopted that hermeneutic.

Update: The opinion is here [pdf].

Update II: This is how the Court's thinking has evolved over time: from "materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school" (the Tinker standard) to "inconsistent with the school's educational mission" (the ham-fisted administrator standard).

Update III: Law prof Eugene Volokh tries to understand Alito's ruling, which he sees as controlling the case.

OSPI Summer Institute Report

I really, really like the Summer Institutes that OSPI puts on every year. This past week I went to my 5th one, and once again they really hit it out of the ballpark. Some random thoughts from the 4 day event:

• I’ve criticized her pretty relentlessly on my home blog, but there’s an undeniable personal magnetism to Terry Bergeson. When she talks about the state of education in Washington and shares where she wants to take us, it’s compelling. When she talks about the successes going on around the state (she was big, big, big on Othello this year), you’re right there with her. When she talks about our failures, like in math and science, it feels honest. She’s a consummate politician, and it’s easy to see why she’s had the success she’s had.
  
  
• So I’m attending a math workshop on Wednesday and who should come in and sit down next to me but none other than....Terry Bergeson. You can really feel the passion that she has for mathematics, and the workshop that we went to (by the dynamic James Burnett of Origo Math) was a dandy. I beat her at a game of Cat and Mice, which sadly locks my district out of receiving any I-Grants for the next decade. Mea Culpa!
  
  
• The sessions that I went to on RTI and data analysis were top-notch. Tonya Middling of OSPI struggled a bit when her powerpoint wouldn’t work, but still gave a nice overview of what RTI means, and Steve Hirsch of WSU really made me think about how we can measure the effectiveness of the interventions we do. Steve, especially, is doing some exciting work correlating WASL pass rate with oral reading fluency rate.
  
  
• Went to a session on why people should go after the National Board Certification, and I wasn’t impressed. There’s some great dialogue about the issue in this month’s WE Magazine, which I’ll get into in another post.

Bottom line—Summer Institute is professional development done right. I give OSPI a lot of credit for putting it on every year; I hope I can get more of my building to go next year.

standardizing the curriculum in the Bellevue district

In Bellevue, teaching is becoming a committee affair.

Since he arrived in Bellevue 11 years ago, [Bellevue Superintendent Mike] Riley slowly has shifted control away from individual teachers to committees, mostly made up of teachers. Those committees determine what all eighth-grade English teachers or all high-school biology teachers will teach and why. Teachers then write lessons for all their colleagues to use, or they adapt them from district textbooks. Adjustments are made as problems arise.

Teachers can take detours of a day or two to re-teach if they need to, but not much more, without committee approval.

Riley calls Bellevue's efforts "coordinated" or "coherent" curriculum. Critics deride it as "scripted."

The article, in true journalistic fashion, outlines the pros and cons and gives voice to teachers who both hate and love the new curriculum. The core disagreement is how much flexibility the new process allows--critics say it makes robots out of teachers, while proponents praise the amount of guesswork it takes out of the system.

In a way, it reminds me of curricular change my colleagues and I enacted at Capital High School over the past year. Crucial differences, though, made our process not only acceptable to all the teachers involved, but invigorating.

First, although we standardized some elements of instruction, we also purposefully respected teacher autonomy. We set up a book list and outlined lesson plans for specific activities like literature circles, but left it up to individuals to implement the curriculum in the way that worked best for them. We met frequently to discuss what was working and what wasn't, but at no time did we all follow the same daily plan.

Second, not only did we respect teacher autonomy, but we respected student autonomy, too, including three sessions of literature circles where students, with input from parents and teachers, chose their own books and read them together with small groups.

Third, and most important, our impetus to change came from the bottom up. We saw that certain students weren't being reached by a one-book-fits-all structure, and so we worked for months to revamp our curriculum. No principal, superintendent, or government flack breathed down our necks. Instead, we worked as professionals, and the result was impressive: student engagement, teacher confidence, and even district recognition.

Standardization, to a degree, has its benefits. The trick is finding the right degree--and teachers have to lead the way.




(Oh, and to Mike Riley, who thinks this country needs a national curriculum: what, are you crazy?)

the state of special ed in the state

According to the federal government, we need "intervention." But there's a reason:

But Douglas Gill, Washington's special ed director, said the grade was due to missing data, not poor performance.

The state has since turned in the missing information, but federal officials refused to issue a new evaluation, Gill said. Nevertheless, Gill said the report won't bring any sanctions for the state.

Only nine states are up to federal standard, according to the feds.

Ask any special ed teacher whether the unwieldy federal system "needs intervention." Bring a chair and a bottle of water. It's going to be a long chat.

Requa case raises interesting questions

This piece of news is almost a month old at this point, but I've been kicking it around in my head for quite a while now.

It centers around Gregory Requa, a student suspended for 40 days by the Kent School District for his involvement in the making of YouTube video that mocks one of his teachers. The suspension subsequently was upheld by a federal judge.

It's an interesting case as teachers, administrators and our courts grapple with the impact of online speech in the classroom; the pending decision on the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case will provide even more clarity about just how far off campus school officials can go to regulate student speech.

Requa's lawyers tried to make the claim that his suspension infringed on his First Amendment right to free speech, but the Kent School District said his suspension was only for the disruption caused in class in the making of the video: “The video depicted the conduct that was punished,” according to a district spokesperson.

Which leaves me with two questions.

1. Are they seriously trying to lead us to believe that the Kent School District always gives 40-day suspensions whenever a student makes a hand motion towards his nose (indicating his teacher smells bad), rabbit ears behind his teacher's head, and pelvic thrusting motions at her when she's not looking?
2. Do the really mean to imply that they would not have suspended Requa had the video only been footage of her cluttered class and shots of her backside, neither of which ostensibly disrupted the class?

Those of you that end up reading the blog with regularity will find that I am a ridiculously ardent defender of student free speech rights -- after all it's how Jim and I came to know each other in the first place -- and decisions such as this one scare me. The judge explained herself this way:

“The court has no difficulty in concluding that one student filming another student standing behind a teacher making ‘rabbit ears’ and pelvic thrusts in her direction, or a student filming the buttocks of a teacher as she bends over in the classroom, constitutes a material and substantial disruption to the work and discipline of the school.”

While noting that “the ability of students to critique the performance and competence of their teachers is a legitimate and important right,” Pechman said that a classroom devoid of inappropriate behavior is in the public interest.

Regarding the video, Pechman said, “The First Amendment does not extend its coverage to disruptive, in-class activity of this nature.”

While I don't disagree that having respectful and orderly classrooms is important, and I certainly wouldn't want to be the topic of a similar video, I wonder what kind of a precedent this sets for legitimate criticisms.

What if it simply had been footage of a teacher teaching poorly, interspersed with legitimate complaints about the classroom? Would the district acknowledge that with a suspension? Would Pechman strike down that suspension as unconstitutional?

Better yet, what if it had been an flier about what a terrible teacher a particular teacher is, then distributed it off school grounds. Would the district have forgiven such speech?

I seriously question whether they're punishing the speech or the medium.

oh, s---: student swears at concert, claims to imitate teacher

Why you might want to reconsider lacing your lectures with profanities, because, you know, it gets attention: it really gets attention.

After singing solo in a school concert in Longview, a 13-year-old girl said she wanted to thank her choir teacher by imitating her.

Savannah Larson then let loose with a string of expletives and obscenities that stunned the audience of about 700 students, teachers and family members in the gym at Monticello Middle School.

The choir teacher can take solace in the fact that at least Larson was listening.

Update: The Times has more details. Larson had just finished singing "Where or When" by Rodgers and Hart. Those kids and their "popular music."

Update 6/18: Larson explains herself here. I thought kids these days were supposed to be all tech-savvy, recording their evidence on iPods and such.

how we pass the WASL

In response to a previous post, drpezz asks,

How does your school prepare your students for the WASL? Do you have an overall philosophy, tendency, or set of ideals guiding your teaching?

What about you personally?

I don't presume to speak for all the teachers at my school. However, I do know what's worked for me, and what's worked for my fellow teachers in CHS's English department. I'd imagine others have similar strategies. I'll focus on writing, because it's been at the forefront of my teaching over the past few months.

1. Philosophically and practically, success on the WASL is not the overall goal.
I believe that good writing is good writing, WASL be damned. If students aim for perfection through a process of constant revision and reflection, they'll become better writers than the baseline the WASL demands.

When I create or assess a writing assignment, I rarely think, "This'll be great prep for the WASL." I'm usually more concerned about the differing interests and abilities of the students in front of me. I want their writing to be authentic and thoughtful, and so I repeat this mantra: "Everything written is a work in progress." Every major assignment goes through three or four drafts, and gets feedback from peers and from me. We focus on narrative development one day, punctuation another, depending on what arises.

2. Even though I don't teach to the test, I teach how the test works.
At least once during the 9th grade and 10th grade years, students read WASL samples and score them according to the WASL rubric. They then debate their scoring in small groups, and lastly in a whole class discussion. They're harsh, even harsher than the WASL demands. (This is good, and it just might prove Point #1.)

3. Departmentally, we focus on WASL scoring at least once annually.
CHS English teachers score OSPI-provided practice essays using the WASL rubric, argue vociferously about the scoring, and then swap class sets and grade each others' students. It gives us a fresh perspective on our own writing instruction, and gives our students a less biased professional judgment of their abilities, without the stress.

4. Across departments, teachers share information.
For a couple years our school has focused on writing across the curriculum, with a measure of success. ("We're ready for math across the curriculum," a calculus teacher noted. I completely agree.) English teachers talked to various departments about assessing writing in any subject area. The administration provided funding for an afterschool writing lab, and, more important, reduced class sizes and a curriculum overhaul in the 9th grade year. (We'll see how that turns out in '08, but we're optimistic.) We presented our progress to the school, as did other departments that have undergone massive changes, in collaboration times set aside by our administration.

Hope that's what you were looking for, drpezz. Next question?

Thinking About the Little People

I'm not so sure the voice of the small district has been adequately represented during the reform efforts of recent years. I suppose that most might claim that their needs for things like textbooks and special programs are proportional to larger districts, but I'm not so sure that claim holds true for all of the work needed. They don't always have the capacity to support curriculum alignment work, afford instructional coaches, offer a diversity of classes for students, better benefits for teaching staff, and more.

The state of Washington is looking at trying to help in two areas: one is salary equity across the state and the other is instructional materials. One of the recommendations from Washington Learns was to identify no more than three curricula for both math and science for the elementary, middle, and high school levels. This poses a problem for all districts because of the potential need to purchase curriculum. Money is a premium for all, certainly, but small districts may not have the student numbers to attract some of the better deals from publishers. In an effort to help, state officials are working with publishers to freeze prices for six years. While this might not be as good as supplying more funding to districts, it is a step in the right direction.

we're passing the WASL--well, mostly

Good news:

More than three-quarters of the 10th-graders who took the Washington Assessment of Student Learning earlier this spring passed the reading and writing sections of the test, the two still required for graduation....

Of the more than 73,000 sophomores tested statewide, 85 percent passed reading — about the same as last year's 10th-graders — and 88.4 percent passed writing, higher than last year's students.

Better news:

Taking into account only test-takers still scheduled to graduate in 2008, nearly 96 percent passed reading and writing.

Worst news:

Little more than 53 percent of sophomores passed math, however — slight decline from the 54 percent who passed math last year.

change in scenery

Our very own Science Goddess has moved. Update your links accordingly. Update 6/9: It's moved again. The current link is the right link.

Parenting the WASL

The Tacoma News Tribune has posted a story about how many parents are exercising their right to view their child's WASL booklet(s). As one might expect, there are very few who choose to do so. My guess is that OSPI and districts everywhere are breathing a sigh of relief.

We have had only a couple of parents in this district take this option. We try to supply them with anchor papers or other comparable evidence so as they look at the work done by their own child, they have a better understanding of the score. So far, I don't believe that anyone has chosen to challenge the grade.

I think the most interesting portion of the article was this:

Becky Venable, a mother of three from Cheney, Spokane County, became curious about the WASL when her middle child was in fourth grade and was literally ill from the stress of having to take the test. When he was in seventh grade, he failed all three parts – math, reading and writing.

So Venable asked to see his seventh-grade test results. “My husband was so horribly upset I thought he was going to literally kill the guy who was showing us the test,” Venable recalled.

She said they could clearly see where their child got frustrated, because in the reading section there was one question he didn’t answer at all. “But he got points for writing a little essay on how much he hated the WASL,” she added.

When they tried to appeal his results, they discovered high school tests are the only ones eligible for a scoring review because they are the only ones that count toward graduation.

Venable and her husband decided their two younger children would opt out in the future.

Based on current rules, however, Washington students will not qualify for alternative assessments unless they attempt the 10th-grade WASL at least once.

Venable said they might send their now-10th-grade son to private school for his senior year to avoid the WASL graduation requirement.

“I just felt like the state was experimenting with my children – and they’re not doing that any more,” she said.

Experimenting sounds a bit extreme...and in the meantime, I'm not sure that it sends an appropriate lesson to these children that if you're nervous about something, mommy and daddy will find some way for you not to have to do that. Is it not more important to know that your child has a set of basic skills which prepare him/her for (early) life beyond high school? Would you not want to help your son or daughter learn some strategies for successfully managing stress? What will happen to these kiddos when they have a hard day on the job---will mom and dad swoop in and save them?

school board candidate hits the blog

In Washington we could use more school board candidates like Seattle's Lisa Steubing, who's taking advantage of the new/old media to share her thoughts, unfiltered-like, on the P-I's blog. A sample:

I believe in defining what professional teachers should accomplish--then giving them the academic freedom, the support and the tools to achieve those goals.

It is terrible that the WASL has such weight because it is tied to NCLB. Teachers have practically been reduced to technicians in preparing their students. The more we script and restrict instruction the less time we have for creative, in-depth and higher-order learning.

As part of a local union effort, I'll be interviewing Olympia's upcoming candidates, and will be sure to publish their thoughts on my other blog.

Update: Incumbent Darlene Flynn joins the fun. Commentators complain about a lack of communication; maybe blogging begins the healing process?

increased stipend equals increased National Board enrollment

As I've noted elsewhere, $5,000 certainly sweetens the prospect of enduring an extra 200-400 hours of work in the National Board certification program. Turns out there are a lot of other Washington teachers (blog title!) like me:

Teachers pay $2,500 to go through the certification process, a yearlong evaluation that measures their teaching skills against national standards.

In Washington, $1,250 scholarships are available. By the May 15 scholarship deadline, more than 1,200 teachers had applied — up from 500 who apply in a typical year, state officials said.

Last Saturday I attended the orientation for PLU's Professional Development program, which helps teachers work through the process, and am starting to assemble documentation of my work as a professional in a learning community.

They'd better count blogging.

Get in Line, Bud

People just aren't being made like they used to. It seems like many school districts across the state are closing elementary schools. Port Angeles just celebrated the 100-year anniversary of a school (which is closing at the end of the year). Port Townsend is looking to shutter the doors of one of its two elementary schools. Seattle has looked at closing some of its sites. Now, Mercer Island is concerned about dropping enrollment.

Mercer Island is not the only district hoping to attract students from outside its attendance area in order to boost numbers (and therefore financial support from the state). Will it be long before districts are working to poach from others? Will incentives be offered and test scores be touted? There are only so many little ones to go around and educational dollars are always at a premium.

interview buzzwords in Washington

A colleague from my days in Evergreen's M.I.T. program is moving back to Washington, and, of course, is looking for the edge in the job hunt. I haven't sat on an interview committee for a little while, and might not be hip to all the latest, so I'll put the question to the bright minds of this here blog. What's hot and not in educational buzzwords these days?

My school's been batting around "differentiated instruction" and "rigor" over the past year, but that's about all I can drum up. (I wonder if my distinct ignorance of pedagogical trends is helping or hurting my teaching.)