About Common Core

It might not be totally rotten to the ‘Core’!

If you are involved in education these days, one of the terms that has become a regular part of your vocabulary is Common Core, which is shorthand for Common Core State Standards (CCSS).  While there are parts of Common Core that I have several concerns and reservations about, I would not consider myself entirely against Common Core; I would not consider myself a fan of Common Core either.  So it makes it interesting that lately I have been in the position of defending Common Core.  I have been defending Common Core from those who misunderstand what it is, where it came from, and who is behind its adoption.

Florida’s State Board of Education for the Department of Education adopted the CCSS in 2010.  Since then approximately 45 states have now adopted CCSS or parts of it.  The purpose behind Common Core is that students in any state  should be measured by  similar, rigorous standards  resulting in students going on to be  successful in post-secondary schooling or a career.

One of the first myths about Common Core is that it is a curriculum; it is not.  Common Core are standards, just as the current Florida Next Generation Sunshine State Standards (NGSSS) and before that the Sunshine State Standards where were  all standards. Each state and local school board has autonomy in adopting and/or developing their own curriculum, teaching practices, and supportive resources that are aligned to those standards.

Another myth is that Common Core is a mandate, not so different from “ObamaCore;” a federal program that is being forced by the federal government; again, is not the case.  The Nation Review, in an April 3, 2013, article entitled, The Truth about Common Core explained, “They (CCSS) simply delineate what children should know at each grade level and describe the skills that they must acquire to stay on course toward college or career readiness.”  The conservative Fordham Institute’s Michael J. Petrilli wrote in The RNC on the CCSSI, OMG! “The Common Core standards are worth supporting because they’re educationally solid. They are rigorous, they are traditional—one might even say they are ‘conservative.’ They expect students to know their math facts, to read the nation’s founding documents, and to evaluate evidence and come to independent judgments.”

It is for the reasons above that I support Common Core.  Common Core infuses the daily technology tools that are a critical and necessary part of being successful in college and the work place. It was the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers who worked together to develop CCSS in 2007.

I greatly encourage you to look at the CCSS for yourself by visiting the FL DOE Common Core standards search page at: www.cpalms.org/Standards/FLStandardSearch.aspx There you will find all the adopted CCSS for K-12 such as this one for 6^th grade ELA (Reading/Writing):

• [LACC.6.W.1.3] “Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, relevant descriptive details, and well-structured event sequences.”
• [LACC.6.W.2.6] “Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others; demonstrate sufficient command of keyboarding skills to type a minimum of three pages in a single sitting.”

The concerns that I have with Common Core start with Florida’s CCSS implementation timeline. It says that by 2013-2014 Kindergarten through 2^nd grade will be fully implemented in CCSS and that by 2014-2015 Kindergarten through 12^th grade will be fully implemented in CCSS.  In the above example of two 6^th grade ELA standards you can see that the use of individual student technology will be necessary for teaching the Common Core standards. With a 2015 deadline– which I might add also includes standardized testing of the CCSS– our schools and more importantly, our teachers and students, will not have the time to transition to these standards and will not have all the necessary tools in place.

The CCSS in Florida will not be measured by the FCAT but rather by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC).  The PARCC will be taken entirely on computers from 3^rd grade through 12^th. Education Weekly reports in Common-Core Tests to Take Up to 10 Hours published on March 12, 2013, that the PAARCC test requires  nearly 8 hours for 3^rd grade students to take and more time for the other grade levels: “The amount of time students will have to complete both the performance-based and end-of-year components in math and English/language arts: Grade 3^rd: 8 hours, Grades 4^th-5^th: 9 hours, 20 minutes, Grades 6^th-8^th: 9 hours, 25 minutes, Grades 9^th-10^th: 9 hours, 45 minutes, and Grades 11^th-12^th: 9 hours, 55 minutes”.  Keep in mind this is in addition to the multitude of standardized test students are also required to take such as Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), American College Testing (ACT), Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), Florida’s Postsecondary Education Readiness Test (PERT), and Florida End-of-Courses (EOC).  Many of these tests are being updated to include CCSS assessments as well.

In order to accomplish this major shift in standards and assist teachers in developing their curriculum to meet CCSS standards, a tremendous amount of time, funding and resources are required. At the same time, teachers must also continue teaching to the current NGSSS as their students are still being assessed on these and teacher evaluations are still affected by students’ FCAT test scores.  Citrus through a multitude of professional developments and initiatives has been doing a phenomenal job preparing for Common Core; the iPad/one-to-one students devices that are being introduced into classrooms is just one example of how that is being accomplished. However, there is just not enough time let alone funding resources to properly implement CCSS.  The expectation is that by 2015 our students will be formally assessed on CCSS and their future academic success defined by the CCSS assessments; in turn, teachers’ evaluations and incomes will be determined by those students’ CCSS assessments.

My hope and efforts are to help the state legislators provide a statutory balance before 2015 by providing flexibility for school districts in order to not remove “common sense” when implementing Common Core.

Comments Off on About Common Core
Filed under: News & Updates

Recent School Board Meeting Clarifications

There have been several misunderstandings as to what took place at the workshop and board meeting and as well as misunderstandings regarding who suggested what and what will happen next. If you missed any portion of the meeting or if you have not had a chance to see the meeting for yourself you can view the meeting by visiting http://new.livestream.com/citrusschools/events/2117691

At the workshop the board discussed the school staffing plans and how they relate to the overall general budget.  At the school board meeting the board formally approved the Staffing Plans for the 2013-2014 school year which included retaining the Media Specialist, continuing Renaissance with reduced staff ($250,000 savings), and reducing 11 high school teacher positions for a modified block schedule ($531,000 savings), along with some additional smaller savings.  During the workshop the district staff presented the school board with suggested savings that had been developed by the District Budget Committee last year.  It is important to note that the CCEA had two of its leaders­­– the CCEA President and CCEA’s lead bargaining negotiator– on the District Budget Committee.  Last year the District Budget Committee was assembled to look into budget reduction recommendations.  This committee was made up of a cross section of representatives from all the various Citrus County School Departments as well as a representative from each of the Citrus County Schools and leadership from the CCEA.  The committee used a survey to rank the impact of various programs or cuts at our schools.  All of the items mentioned during the May 23^rd school board workshop came from this District Budget Committee.  (Click here to see the 2012-2013 presentation, suggestions and surveys.)  I want to also clarify that the suggestion of the 1% pay reduction for all employees (which included all administrators and board members) or the reduction of one workday for all employees (which included all administrators and board members) were suggestions made by the District Budget Committee and not the school board.  The board discussed several cost-cutting options that would directly affect students and schools.  After reviewing those suggestions the board agreed to send to the District Budget Committee suggested items that would require going through the bargaining process. The next bargaining meeting is on May 30^th.  This ONLY means that the board began a conversation with the Citrus County Educational Association (CCEA) regarding bargaining required items suggested by the District Budget Committee.

Nearly none of the Budget Committee’s suggested cuts were approved by the board for the 2012-2013 budget; in fact,  the school board had subsequently rejected most of  these suggestions two additional times, one as recently as the January 29^th School Board Workshop meeting.  The board’s goal has been to maintain as many of our schools’ programs and curriculum as possible so over the last several budget years the board has used the Reserved Fund Balance (savings) to maintain these programs.  What the School Board recognized and what the board has stated is that we could no longer continue to use the reserved funds because we had limited reserved funds now remaining. Over the last several years we have used approximately $9 million in reserved funds to maintain programs and staff in our school district which has brought our Reserve Funds now down to the minimum required amount of 3.5% or $3.5 million.  After making the most recent cuts to the high school staff and the Renaissance Center we felt we had to address all of the non-bargaining suggested cuts from the District Budget Committee and now were left with having a conversation about the bargaining- required suggestions.  It is for that reason that at the May 23^rd workshop the board sent the Budget Committee’s suggestions to the bargaining table.

Please understand that just because the board has sent the Budget Committee’s suggestions to the bargaining table does not mean the board agrees with all of those suggestions. However, one of suggested items that I feel is an example of an item to discuss is reducing the number of non-extra duty supplements.  (Supplements are additional pay for both extra and non-extra duties.)

Following the 2013 Legislative session Citrus County Schools learned that due to mandated instructional salary increases, increases in the Florida Retirement System rates, and casualty insurance costs increases, that, even with the added new educational funding by the 2013 Legislator, Citrus School District would still be facing approximately a $2 million shortfall.  After receiving news of the shortfall, the Executive Administrative Team met with principals as soon as possible to inform them of these new unforeseen budget challenges and to ask for their insight and assistance in making cuts.  The principals were asked to perform the terrible task of looking at what position they might be willing to surrender such as one less P.E. teacher, TOSAs, or media specialists.  They were asked about closing Renaissance, along with additional suggested cuts by the District Budget Committee.  At the May 14^th and May 23^rd School Board meeting the school board heard from many staff and teachers– many from the CCEA –asking the school board to not cut the Media positions or close the Renaissance building to make “Mini Renaissances”.  With more and more items being rejected this leaves the school board with fewer and fewer options to consider.

These are some of the toughest challenges we face as board members and it is why we have spent a great deal of time and research to get information from all levels in our schools before making decisions.

As a husband of a 22 year veteran teacher of the Citrus County School system I personally understand the challenges both economic and personal our staff face.  I deeply value each of our amazing staff and the work you have done to help make our students, schools and district a success.

If any of you have specific questions, please feel free to contact me.

Comments Off on Recent School Board Meeting Clarifications
Filed under: News & Updates

Planning for Next School Year

These days, when as School Board Members we are not at Award Ceremonies, Retirement Parties, graduations, or end of the year events– school administrators, district staff, the executive team and the school board have been deep in budget and staff planning for next school year.

Many of you are aware of the recommendations we have been looking at and I am grateful to those of you that have been involved in contacting me, individually and collectively, with your feedback, concerns, suggestions, and insight.

One of the recent recommendations we have been looking at, is to change the Media Specialist Position from an Instructional Media Specialist to a Support Media Aide Paraprofessional at the Elementary and Middle Schools Media Centers.

I felt it important to take a moment to explain what has brought us to the point of needing to consider these and other recommendations to reduce costs.

This recent recommendation was made on the tail of the recent adjournment of the 2013 Legislative Session and the passing of the State Budget. On those last days, in the very last hours, several last minute funding reductions to education were passed and to make matters worse, new cost increases were added. For Citrus County Schools, one of those new cost increases was a new Florida Retirement System Employer obligation rate, which is an additional $1.3 million annual increase. That was just one of several budget items impacting costs that the District just learned of a week ago.

In January 2013 we anticipated approximately $4 million less in funding for the 2013-2014 General Fund budget. These latest additional costs will likely increase that projection to over $6 million less in funding to the General Fund budget. The Legislature passed $4 million in new educational funding to come to Citrus County Schools; of that $4 million, nearly 90% is required to go to specific items, such as instructional salary increases, school security, and casualty insurance costs. This means that the anticipated $4 million in new educational funding will fall short by approximately $2 million. In January 2013 it was the board’s hope to make up the $4 million in lost funding by making approximately $2 million in cuts, but had hoped with the then legislative session beginning that new funding might have reduced how much we would need to cut. At the same time we have needed to be careful to not continue to use the Reserve Funds to balance our budget as we are currently below the required amount of 3.5% or approximately $4.2million. Keep in mind over the last several years, in order to maintain the current level of school programs and services in our district, we had previously used up approximately $9 million in reserved funds.

While there have been numerous conversations over the past two years, at board meetings and workshops, regarding the possibility of cutting positions like the media specialist positions, Physical Education, curriculum/testing coordinator teachers, and others. These recommendations were not something the board had hoped to have to address during the current budget cycle.

In the ongoing preparations for the ever growing cost of education, with declining resources, last year a District Budget Committee was assembled to look into budget reduction recommendations. This committee was made up of a cross section of representatives from all of the various Citrus County School Departments as well as a representative from each of the Citrus County Schools. The committee used a survey to rank the impact of various programs at our schools. Changing the media specialist position from instructional to support was a part of the survey as well. (click here to see the 2012-2013 presentation and survey) Few of the suggested Budget Committee cuts were approved by the School Board for the 2012-2013 General Fund Budget. The Board’s goal has been to maintain as many of our schools’ programs and curriculum as possible. As a result the Board felt, in order to do that, it had to use the Reserved Fund Balance (savings) to maintain these programs. What we recognized, and stated then, was that we could no longer continue to use the reserved funds because we had limited reserved funds remaining that we could use.

In January 2013 the District anticipated that there would be $4 million less in funding to the General Fund. Consequently the 2013-2014 budget preparations began by first presenting the Board with the options that the Budget Committee had given us months earlier. Those options included changing the Media Specialist positions from Instructional to Support, Physical Education, curriculum/testing coordinator teachers, and others. At that time the Board again did not feel that they wanted to make the recommendation to approve those cuts that would take place in those direct student areas. The School Board then asked the District to look for alternative cuts. The School Board asked the District to look for cuts that would produce the largest reductions in costs while, at the same time, affecting the fewest number of students.

During this conversation with the Executive Staff regarding cutting costs that would affect the fewest amount of students, I brought up my concern about the increasing operating costs of operating The Renaissance Center, our school in the Lecanto complex that serves as an alternative to student expulsion. This is a valuable program to our school district with outstanding dedicated teachers and staff who are committed to turning around at risk students, and giving them an opportunity to turn their life around and be successful. My concern is that Renaissance accommodates approximately 90 students at a cost of $1.6 million annually or about $18,000 +/- per student, compared with approximately $5,500 per student at a traditional school. At our most recent Board Workshop meeting, on April 23rd, a presentation was given regarding the operation, costs and cost reducing options for The Renaissance Center. One option was to reduce costs, of about $250,000, by reducing staff at Renaissance but largely maintain the school as is, another options is to move the program to the high schools and create “mini Renaissance” at a savings of about $905,000. At that meeting there were administrative representatives from the middle and high school levels in attendance. I asked the administrative representatives if they were prepared to lose programs or other instructional staff at the school level like media specialist in order to keep The Renaissance Center. The principal said, while they would not like to have to make that choice, if they had to choose between losing either Media Specialist or the Renaissance School, then they would lean towards keeping Renaissance. They explained that by speaking about how disruptive students do not make for a positive learning environment for the regular classroom students.

Last week, after the District received the news about the now $6 million shortfall, the Executive Administrative Team met with Citrus County School Principals as soon as possible to inform them of these new, unforeseen budget challenges and to ask for their insight and assistance in how to go about making these cuts. High school Principal’s had previously agreed to a teaching staff that included reducing staff by several instructional positions at each school while maintaining the block schedule. The elementary and middle school principals were asked to perform the terrible task of recommending how they would reduce costs by reducing an Instructional positions at each of their schools.  Their options were one less P.E. teacher, no Curriculum/Testing Coordinator Teacher, or Media Specialist. The principals’ consensus was that, given all of the complexities, cutting the Media Specialist, was the lesser of these terrible choices.

Unfortunately, Citrus Schools is not alone in making these very difficult choices. School districts, all over the state of Florida and throughout the nation, have to reevaluate the structure and programs at their schools. Last week Pasco County Schools also cut all media specialist positions. (see: http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/pasco-school-board-cuts-literacy-coaches-and-media-specialists/2119608)

These are some of the toughest challenges we face as board members and it is why we have spent a great deal of time and research to get information from all levels in our schools before we make these decisions.  As one principal put it at our May 14^th board meeting, “at this point any cuts you make will have an effect on our students, so we have to recommend the ones that will have the least negative effect.”

I personally value each of our staff whether instructional, non-instructional, support, administrative, and all the other departments. We have dedicated people who are not just staff members but are often a parent or a grandparent to many of our students. These people work so hard to help make our students successful every day.

If any of you have specific questions as we continue to make these decisions, please feel free to contact me.

Comments Off on Planning for Next School Year
Filed under: News & Updates