reassessing the WASL

Make it shorter, make it smarter, make it actually useful to teachers. Small changes, if legislators go along:

With a five-year testing contract set to expire this fall, state lawmakers are discussing adjustments that would address many criticisms of the WASL, which is given each year to students in third through eighth grades and grade 10.

Educators have long complained, for example, that the WASL eats up too many days of instruction, and teachers can't use it to figure out what help students need.

In her budget, Gov. Christine Gregoire included money to create short classroom tests that teachers can use to determine whether students are on track to pass the WASL, and another set to diagnose why they fail. She supports reducing the length of the WASL for students in third through eighth grades (but not grade 10), which would mean less testing time, quicker results — and cost savings.

She also proposes translating the math and science sections into six languages, so that many immigrant students can show what they know even if their English skills aren't strong.

In all, Gregoire is asking for about $38 million for the WASL program in the 2008-09 school year. That includes about $4.3 million in enhancements, and takes into account an estimated $12.5 million in savings from shortening the exam.

No proposed changes for 10th grade in Gregoire's / OSPI's plan. For those who think the WASL's too costly, and was never meant to track individual student progress, this news won't change a thing. But at least it's an admission that, from a teacher's and parent's perspective, the WASL as it stands isn't reaching the standard implied by the second letter of its acronym.

Meanwhile, trouble still brews in the 12th grade...

can't take the sting away--or can you?

Update 11/17
4204, if the results hold up, passes.

Wow.

I mean, wow.

We might even avoid a machine recount.

I had hopes, but no expectations, for a turnaround. I called the initial result "apparent," in slim hopes that tallies would change as more votes came in.

And they did.




Co-blogger Ryan, who had been cautiously upbeat about HJR 4204's (Simple Majorities for Levies) chances, is pretty upset at its apparent failure:

[And] before anyone tries to tell me I don't get it, don't even start. I own my own home. My wife is self-employed, and we get absolutely reamed every April. I've got a special needs daughter who's eating up a lot of my discretionary income.

But I still believe that every vote should count 1-to-1. When your no vote is worth 50% more than my yes vote, that's giving you more power in a democracy than I have, and that's unfair. The people of Washington had a chance to fix that. Apparently, they prefer minority rules.

This can't be seen as anything other than a total repudiation of Washington students and teachers.

I'm a little less pessimistic. I blame...

• Rising property values, combined with the timing on the property tax assessments, which in the annually measured counties occur so close to the election you can smell tax revolt in the alder-smoked autumn breeze. (The initial rise and fall of the other tax-related initiatives and resolutions supports this thesis.)
• An ineffectual legislature that forces education proponents to rely on litigation and levies to raise cash in an inequitable system invented before I was born, and little changed since then, giving HJ 4204 opponents the ability to say, "Sure, I support education, but I want the legislature to get its rear in gear, even if troubled rural districts suffer in the meantime."
• Education pundits--myself?--for thinking that a successful media campaign translates into sufficient votes.
• The inequity itself. Voters who live in consistently supportive districts might not see the problem for what it is. Voters in troubled districts don't seem to mind.

Do all these add up to a "total repudiation?" I'm not sure.

Doesn't make it hurt less.

Update: The latest vote tally, statewide, claims there are about 490,000 ballots still out there. HJ 4204's "No" tally has slipped to a 30,000 vote lead, from about 60,000 earlier. Paper-thin hope?

Update: The results, as of 4:10 on November 11, are closer than ever--only about 2700 votes separate Approve and Reject. Maybe this one's gonna pull a Gregoire.

Education Funding Crisis

An Op-Ed piece in the Seattle Times has state representative Skip Priest claiming that it's time to solve the state's education-funding crisis. Priest is disappointed in the lack of strong direction shown by the Washington Learns group and finds the 30% dropout rate frightening. (Who doesn't?)

The district salary inequity issue is given just a blip in the piece. It is, however, one that many staff members find interesting in this state. Yes, there is a state salary schedule for both certificated and classified staff, but at the time it was created, some school districts paid more. (For the record, Everett has the best pay for certificated and Seattle---who lists their attorneys as classified staff---has the best rate of pay for classified staff members.) This inequity does make a difference, and not just in terms of which districts might be better able to attract teachers based on their salary scale. Every time there is a pay raise determined by the legislature, the districts with higher salaries get more money that those that strictly follow the scale.

Another blip in the article is the failure of the legislature to address the school transportation issue. Districts are currently funded according to "as the crow flies" measurements and a pre-determined number of stops. The problem with this is that if you're a district that has coastline, hills, or very rural areas, then you don't have many straight roads available...and housing is not evenly placed. Many districts spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars more---money that then cannot be used in classrooms---in order to make up the difference from the state allowance.

And SPED? A mere mention in the article, but there are enough problems here to fill several. I'm not even going to get started.

I'm not sure how we sort out one of these crises from the others---which is the most critical? Which one will have the greatest impact if we attempt to fix it first? How do we do triage with our educational funding in this state?

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.

Looking for the 411?

The Washington State School Director's Association has a nice service: E-clippings. It's updated Monday through Friday and has a compilation of education related articles published all over the state (and beyond our borders). It's a great snapshot to have each day to get the pulse of education in the state. Add it to your bookmarks.