Our attorney has received an “amicus brief” from the Washington School Director's Association supporting the District's position. An amicus can apply to have a brief considered by the court, but cannot argue.
We will file a response to the brief. As our attorney, Keith Scully says: Their argument that this case sets a precedent for increased judicial control of local decisions is … wrong. Judge Spector's decision simply says that a school board has to have information supporting its discretionary decision.
A link to the Director's brief is listed to the left, under the heading “Legal Documents....” When we are ready to file our response, I'll post a link to it.
Regarding finances: The meter is on again; as the bills come in, I'll revise the fundraising tally and appeal for more financial help.
Thanks for your interest and thanks to those who have expressed support for this project.
Marty
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
Last brief filed prior to scheduling hearing
The School District's rebuttal of our brief was filed on Wednesday, July 21; you will find a link to it on the left. The hearing has not yet been scheduled. I will post the hearing date, as well as the location and the judges' names, as soon as I have this information. Unlike previous district briefs, this one actually addresses some of the issues brought forward in our case and noted in Judge Spector's decision. As before, I believe we have a very solid basis for our claims; now is not a time to discuss specific arguments, as they will be made in the hearing.
That's the news for now!
Marty
That's the news for now!
Marty
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Slight correction: We'd gotten the dates wrong – the Seattle School District's rebuttal brief is not due until July 21. When we receive it, I will post it. The hearing date and names of the three judge appeals panel will be announced sometime after July 21.
Money matters: I've just paid the first attorney's bill for responding to the School District's appeal of Judge Spector's decision -- $1,860. So, money is flowing out again. Any help you can offer is deeply appreciated. For information on helping with costs, see the links to the left.
Marty
Money matters: I've just paid the first attorney's bill for responding to the School District's appeal of Judge Spector's decision -- $1,860. So, money is flowing out again. Any help you can offer is deeply appreciated. For information on helping with costs, see the links to the left.
Marty
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Our response brief is in
On Monday, June 21st, we filed our “Brief of Respondent” in the School District appeal of Judge Spector's decision. (Sorry to be late in posting it to this blog; our attorney left town after sending me hard copy, but neglected to email an electronic version of the document we filed.) A link to the brief can be found in the left-hand column, below, under “Legal Documents in Textbook Appeal.”
There's no new information, either in the District's brief or our response. You might notice that, rather than acknowledge the catalog of unrelated miscellany in the Seattle Public School District's brief, our attorney, Keith Scully, chose to essentially restate our original case, upon which Judge Spector ruled favorably. He did emphasize certain statements which pertained to claims in the District's brief.
I think Keith has, once again, done a masterful job.
The District will file it's rebuttal by July 6th. Sometime after that, the court will announce a hearing date and the names of the three judges who will preside.
Thanks for your interest in our case. My fingers are crossed!
Marty
There's no new information, either in the District's brief or our response. You might notice that, rather than acknowledge the catalog of unrelated miscellany in the Seattle Public School District's brief, our attorney, Keith Scully, chose to essentially restate our original case, upon which Judge Spector ruled favorably. He did emphasize certain statements which pertained to claims in the District's brief.
I think Keith has, once again, done a masterful job.
The District will file it's rebuttal by July 6th. Sometime after that, the court will announce a hearing date and the names of the three judges who will preside.
Thanks for your interest in our case. My fingers are crossed!
Marty
Monday, May 24, 2010
School district files appeal brief.
The District's Appeal Brief is in -- A link to the appeal is shown on the lower left.
The Seattle School District's first brief in its appeal of Judge Spector's decision was filed on Friday. To me, it is not surprising that its arguments are weak. I don't think we could ever have scored this unprecedented victory had our case not been extremely well founded. Nonetheless, one can't predict what the appeals panel will rule.
Basically, the brief restates the district's original contention that, because the specified process was followed, any decision made by the board, (I might add -- regardless of how it flouted overwhelming evidence) must stand. Also, the brief misstates and misinterprets many aspects of our case. One of the most egregious examples is the contention that the court overstepped its authority by making a decision on curriculum. Not so – the court simply remanded the board's decision back to the board on the basis of the lack of evidence to support the decision.
We have 30 days to file our response brief (by June 21), and SPS has 15 days after (by July 6) to file its rebuttal. Our attorney tells me that a hearing will be scheduled after all briefs have been filed.
Update on the Issaquah adoption:
After considerable soul searching, the group of parents who fought the adoption of Discovering in Issaquah (east of Lake Washington), elected not to file an appeal of that school board decision. Sadly, their decision was based on the reality that in this relatively small district is dominated by a formidable array of administrators and staff members who, it was feared, would make school uncomfortable for the children of parents filing an appeal. It is so ironic that parents wanting badly to file on behalf of their own children as well as others felt they had to give up for the sake of their children. I might have done the same thing when my children were young; it's crazy making. Seattle's size and diversity provided us a different context.
The Seattle School District's first brief in its appeal of Judge Spector's decision was filed on Friday. To me, it is not surprising that its arguments are weak. I don't think we could ever have scored this unprecedented victory had our case not been extremely well founded. Nonetheless, one can't predict what the appeals panel will rule.
Basically, the brief restates the district's original contention that, because the specified process was followed, any decision made by the board, (I might add -- regardless of how it flouted overwhelming evidence) must stand. Also, the brief misstates and misinterprets many aspects of our case. One of the most egregious examples is the contention that the court overstepped its authority by making a decision on curriculum. Not so – the court simply remanded the board's decision back to the board on the basis of the lack of evidence to support the decision.
We have 30 days to file our response brief (by June 21), and SPS has 15 days after (by July 6) to file its rebuttal. Our attorney tells me that a hearing will be scheduled after all briefs have been filed.
Update on the Issaquah adoption:
After considerable soul searching, the group of parents who fought the adoption of Discovering in Issaquah (east of Lake Washington), elected not to file an appeal of that school board decision. Sadly, their decision was based on the reality that in this relatively small district is dominated by a formidable array of administrators and staff members who, it was feared, would make school uncomfortable for the children of parents filing an appeal. It is so ironic that parents wanting badly to file on behalf of their own children as well as others felt they had to give up for the sake of their children. I might have done the same thing when my children were young; it's crazy making. Seattle's size and diversity provided us a different context.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
News and thanks
3/21/10 Update
Thanks to all the people who have written, expressing your support and dedication to this effort, and also to those who have so generously made financial donations. We are many, many people nationwide standing in solidarity in our commitment to make effective math education accessible to all students.
I apologize to those who have looked for news recently on this blog: I've been following other math ed news, but little has been happening directly regarding our lawsuit, so I haven't sat down to give updates.
In the last 6 weeks, there has been an outpouring of support for our lawsuit and its outcome, as well a surge of determination to deflect the tide of inquiry-based math instruction that has flooded so many of our schools. I've been very moved by letters from parents who have struggled (heroically, and often poignantly, it seems to me) to support their children in developing strong math skills despite curricula that they found confusing, unintelligible, and deeply discouraging. I strongly believe that, whether the Seattle School District's appeal of Judge Spector's decision succeeds or fails, the continuing legal action will only heighten public awareness of the tragic and devastating results of the nationwide inquiry-based math experiment. The public NEEDS TO KNOW about this debacle. I think/hope that our lawsuit and its aftermath are helping this to happen.
SPS appeal:
We are waiting for the Seattle School District's detailed petition to be filed against Judge Spector's ruling that SPS's adoption of Discovering Math was arbitrary and capricious. For my part, I have not yet done my homework (blush!) of reviewing video of the verbal announcement of the appeal, made at the March 3rd Seattle School Board meeting. My understanding is that the appeal is primarily based on the issue of precedent.
State Supreme court action, Writ of Mandamus:
Dan Dempsey, an advocate who has unearthed some of the most compelling evidence regarding the failure of inquiry-based programs, is pursuing another legal action which may help our cause. Dan is working with attorney Scott Stafne and several individuals (including me) who have been involved in legal actions against SPS to challenge, in Washington State Supreme Court, the Seattle School District's repeated failure to consider evidence presented by the public. For further info, go to Dan's Mathunderground blog (a link is listed under the “Links” heading, below left).
Other News:
The Bellevue School District (east of Lake Washington) high school adoption committee has voted 18 to 8 for Holt Mathematics! This is an incredible victory for sane math advocates, as well as for all Bellevue students and their parents. Many individuals put forth enormous amounts of time and effort in bringing forth this success; they say that our lawsuit was very helpful in setting the stage for the final vote. Hopefully, the completion of the process, including the school board vote, will confirm that the committee's choice for explicit math curriculum will be implemented.
Spokane: Another victory for coherent high school math curriculum has been won in Spokane, where Laurie Rogers has worked for many months to make sure that all the pertinent information was available and that the adoption committee was allowed to carry out a legitimate decision making process. See Laurie's blog (listed below, left) for her riveting description of this hard fought campaign.
Issaquah: Another neighboring school District, Issaquah, east of Bellevue, has seen its adoption committee recommend Discovering, despite compelling evidence of the deficiencies of inquiry-based programs. Mark Van Horne has spearheaded an extraordinary effort to gather data and public support to urge the ISD School Board to reject the committee's decision. The vote will be held on March 24th. I will post a link to his blog ASAP.
Also, for you who might like to see us, I will post a link school board testimony given by Dan Dempsey and myself after the board voted to approve Discovering last May.
Thanks to all the people who have written, expressing your support and dedication to this effort, and also to those who have so generously made financial donations. We are many, many people nationwide standing in solidarity in our commitment to make effective math education accessible to all students.
I apologize to those who have looked for news recently on this blog: I've been following other math ed news, but little has been happening directly regarding our lawsuit, so I haven't sat down to give updates.
In the last 6 weeks, there has been an outpouring of support for our lawsuit and its outcome, as well a surge of determination to deflect the tide of inquiry-based math instruction that has flooded so many of our schools. I've been very moved by letters from parents who have struggled (heroically, and often poignantly, it seems to me) to support their children in developing strong math skills despite curricula that they found confusing, unintelligible, and deeply discouraging. I strongly believe that, whether the Seattle School District's appeal of Judge Spector's decision succeeds or fails, the continuing legal action will only heighten public awareness of the tragic and devastating results of the nationwide inquiry-based math experiment. The public NEEDS TO KNOW about this debacle. I think/hope that our lawsuit and its aftermath are helping this to happen.
SPS appeal:
We are waiting for the Seattle School District's detailed petition to be filed against Judge Spector's ruling that SPS's adoption of Discovering Math was arbitrary and capricious. For my part, I have not yet done my homework (blush!) of reviewing video of the verbal announcement of the appeal, made at the March 3rd Seattle School Board meeting. My understanding is that the appeal is primarily based on the issue of precedent.
State Supreme court action, Writ of Mandamus:
Dan Dempsey, an advocate who has unearthed some of the most compelling evidence regarding the failure of inquiry-based programs, is pursuing another legal action which may help our cause. Dan is working with attorney Scott Stafne and several individuals (including me) who have been involved in legal actions against SPS to challenge, in Washington State Supreme Court, the Seattle School District's repeated failure to consider evidence presented by the public. For further info, go to Dan's Mathunderground blog (a link is listed under the “Links” heading, below left).
Other News:
The Bellevue School District (east of Lake Washington) high school adoption committee has voted 18 to 8 for Holt Mathematics! This is an incredible victory for sane math advocates, as well as for all Bellevue students and their parents. Many individuals put forth enormous amounts of time and effort in bringing forth this success; they say that our lawsuit was very helpful in setting the stage for the final vote. Hopefully, the completion of the process, including the school board vote, will confirm that the committee's choice for explicit math curriculum will be implemented.
Spokane: Another victory for coherent high school math curriculum has been won in Spokane, where Laurie Rogers has worked for many months to make sure that all the pertinent information was available and that the adoption committee was allowed to carry out a legitimate decision making process. See Laurie's blog (listed below, left) for her riveting description of this hard fought campaign.
Issaquah: Another neighboring school District, Issaquah, east of Bellevue, has seen its adoption committee recommend Discovering, despite compelling evidence of the deficiencies of inquiry-based programs. Mark Van Horne has spearheaded an extraordinary effort to gather data and public support to urge the ISD School Board to reject the committee's decision. The vote will be held on March 24th. I will post a link to his blog ASAP.
Also, for you who might like to see us, I will post a link school board testimony given by Dan Dempsey and myself after the board voted to approve Discovering last May.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Seattle Schools is Appealing Textbook Decision
Today we received notice of the Seattle School District's decision to appeal the Decision of Judge Spector which required the SPS board to reconsider its high school math text adoption vote.
I am deeply disappointed that SPS will funnel more resources into this appeal, which, I suspect, will be more costly than following the judge's instruction to reconsider.
Our attorney tells me: “.... I’ll put in a notice of appearance, and then we wait for the District to complete the record by having the documents and transcripts transmitted to the Court of Appeals. They write the first brief, due 45 days after the record is complete.
You are still entitled to urge the District to withdraw the notice of appeal ....”
After the first brief, we will file a reply, the district will file a rebuttal, and there will ultimately be a hearing before three Appellate Court judges.
I am deeply disappointed that SPS will funnel more resources into this appeal, which, I suspect, will be more costly than following the judge's instruction to reconsider.
Our attorney tells me: “.... I’ll put in a notice of appearance, and then we wait for the District to complete the record by having the documents and transcripts transmitted to the Court of Appeals. They write the first brief, due 45 days after the record is complete.
You are still entitled to urge the District to withdraw the notice of appeal ....”
After the first brief, we will file a reply, the district will file a rebuttal, and there will ultimately be a hearing before three Appellate Court judges.
Monday, February 15, 2010
An exchange with the director of the State Board of Education
Here is an open letter which I sent last night to Edie Harding, Executive Director of the State Board of Education. Under the letter I have paraphrased her reply; below that is my response to her.
I am responding to your comment today in the Seattle Times:
' “It's long been established that in our state, the local board is always the prime decision-maker on curriculum.” ....the Seattle decision was "a surprise, and if I were the Seattle School Board, I would — well, I might take issue with the judge," she added.'
Having been one of the plaintiffs in the recent textbook appeal in Seattle, I'm well aware that School Boards make curriculum decisions. However, Ms. Harding, what recourse do you suggest to parents when School Boards abdicate their decision making power – refusing to consider voluminous, compelling, evidence from parents and community members, and instead give school administrators carte blanch to turn math education in directions that are unacceptable to informed parents and community members?
After careful consideration, Judge Spector ruled that “there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering series.” In this situation, the School Board had allowed school administrators to hijack our children's math education.
We parents and community members have a compact with schools – we trust the schools to educate our children to prepare them for entry into the economic and cultural life of society. When schools violate our compact with decisions such as this textbook vote, ignoring an outpouring of relevant evidence against the administration's chosen text, please tell me, what else can we do but file a lawsuit?
Martha McLaren
Ms. Harding graciously responded to my email within the day. She suggests that parents may hold school board members accountable by voting for or against them at election time.
Here is my response (I've corrected some awkward language from my original here):
Thank you for getting back to me. Unfortunately, in our experience here in
Seattle, holding board members accountable by voting them out of office
has been completely ineffective -- board members move on and never
actually give any accounting for the damage they might have wrought.
Martha
I am responding to your comment today in the Seattle Times:
' “It's long been established that in our state, the local board is always the prime decision-maker on curriculum.” ....the Seattle decision was "a surprise, and if I were the Seattle School Board, I would — well, I might take issue with the judge," she added.'
Having been one of the plaintiffs in the recent textbook appeal in Seattle, I'm well aware that School Boards make curriculum decisions. However, Ms. Harding, what recourse do you suggest to parents when School Boards abdicate their decision making power – refusing to consider voluminous, compelling, evidence from parents and community members, and instead give school administrators carte blanch to turn math education in directions that are unacceptable to informed parents and community members?
After careful consideration, Judge Spector ruled that “there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering series.” In this situation, the School Board had allowed school administrators to hijack our children's math education.
We parents and community members have a compact with schools – we trust the schools to educate our children to prepare them for entry into the economic and cultural life of society. When schools violate our compact with decisions such as this textbook vote, ignoring an outpouring of relevant evidence against the administration's chosen text, please tell me, what else can we do but file a lawsuit?
Martha McLaren
Ms. Harding graciously responded to my email within the day. She suggests that parents may hold school board members accountable by voting for or against them at election time.
Here is my response (I've corrected some awkward language from my original here):
Thank you for getting back to me. Unfortunately, in our experience here in
Seattle, holding board members accountable by voting them out of office
has been completely ineffective -- board members move on and never
actually give any accounting for the damage they might have wrought.
Martha
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Link to hearing transcript now available
Those interested in reading the 35-odd page transcript of the January 26 hearing in Judge Spector's courtroom can find a link to it in the "Legal documents in textbook appeal" section of this blog. We will post a synopsis as soon as possible.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Contact the SPS board and administrators, asks Where's the Math
King County Superior Court REJECTS Seattle's High School Math Adoption
Where's the Math - News Brief and Action Alert
February 7, 2010. For Immediate Release
On February 4th, King County Superior Court Judge Julie Spector ruled that last year's Seattle School board decision to adopt the Discovering high school textbook series was arbitrary and capricious. Judge Spector's ruling was heard and hailed across the country by private citizens and math education advocacy groups.
This unprecedented finding shows school boards and district administration that they need to consider evidence when making decisions. The voice of the community has been upheld by law, but the Seattle School district indicated they plan to appeal, demonstrating the typical arrogant, wasteful practices which necessitated the lawsuit in the first place.
Concerned individuals in Seattle and across the country need to speak up now, and let Seattle administration know that it's time to move forward and refocus on the students, rather than defend a past mistake.
The ruling states:
"The court finds, based upon a review of the entire administrative record, that there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering Series."
"The Board's selection of the Discovery Series was arbitrary [and] capricious."
This ruling does not mean that the courts are dictating textbooks. The legal definition of "arbitrary and capricious" implies an ".absence of a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made. There should be a clear error of judgment; an action not based upon consideration of relevant factors" (http://definitions.uslegal.com).
Seattle School District states in a memo to staff:
"This is a very surprising ruling and Seattle Public Schools is now evaluating the decision and our next steps. In addition to any action the School Board may take, the district expects to appeal this decision."
"We want students, teachers and families to be assured that the judge did not order the district to stop using these materials; she simply found that the school board had insufficient information and sent the decision back for further evaluation. This means that we will continue to use the instructional materials."
Already, district administration is downplaying the court's decision. The memo to staff implies this is no big deal, that the district will appeal, and that once the school board gets a little bit more information, everything will be fine.
Make it stop. Now is the time. Share your stories and concerns with Seattle district leaders. After more than a decade of promoting reform math textbooks and increasing the achievement gap, Judge Spector has provided an opportunity to reset the helm to the correct course. Please write and encourage the Board and Superintendent to:
-Not appeal this decision. Save the money for new textbooks that aren't "mathematically unsound"
-As ordered by Judge Spector, review the process and re-vote on the high school instructional materials adoption, considering all the relevant evidence.
-Model good citizenship and take prompt action on this matter
An appeal is expensive, and further erodes the district's credibility and public trust. The judge ordered the Board to take another hard look, which is far cheaper, easier, and more politically sound than having lawyers argue over an appeal.
For more information, see:
Full text of ruling: http://www.seattlepi.com/dayart/PDF/mathtextruling_20100204.pdf
YOUR financial support is needed. To donate: http://seattlemathgroup.blogspot.com/
Video news brief: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/83587497.html?tab=video
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2010995832_edit08mathbooks.html
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/415049_math04.html
Your letters make a difference. The legal record that formed the original basis for this case included critical comments and evidence from the public. Contact information for district staff and school board directors is provided below.
Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Superintendent maria.goodloe-johnson@seattleschools.org
Susan Enfield, Chief Academic Officer saenfield@seattleschools.org
Anna Maria de la Fuente, Math Program Manager ahdelafuente@seattleschools.org
Cathy Thompson, Director of Curriculum and Instruction. cthompson@seattleschools.org
Seattle School Board Directors
District I - Peter Maier peter.maier@seattleschools.org
District II - Sherry Carr sherry.carr@seattleschools.org
District III - Harium Martin-Morris harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
District IV - Michael DeBell michael.debell@seattleschools.org
District V - Kay Smith-Blum kay.smith-blum@seattleschools.org
District VI - Steve Sundquist steve.sundquist@seattleschools.org
District VII - Betty Patu betty.patu@seattleschools.org
Where's the Math - News Brief and Action Alert
February 7, 2010. For Immediate Release
On February 4th, King County Superior Court Judge Julie Spector ruled that last year's Seattle School board decision to adopt the Discovering high school textbook series was arbitrary and capricious. Judge Spector's ruling was heard and hailed across the country by private citizens and math education advocacy groups.
This unprecedented finding shows school boards and district administration that they need to consider evidence when making decisions. The voice of the community has been upheld by law, but the Seattle School district indicated they plan to appeal, demonstrating the typical arrogant, wasteful practices which necessitated the lawsuit in the first place.
Concerned individuals in Seattle and across the country need to speak up now, and let Seattle administration know that it's time to move forward and refocus on the students, rather than defend a past mistake.
The ruling states:
"The court finds, based upon a review of the entire administrative record, that there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering Series."
"The Board's selection of the Discovery Series was arbitrary [and] capricious."
This ruling does not mean that the courts are dictating textbooks. The legal definition of "arbitrary and capricious" implies an ".absence of a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made. There should be a clear error of judgment; an action not based upon consideration of relevant factors" (http://definitions.uslegal.com).
Seattle School District states in a memo to staff:
"This is a very surprising ruling and Seattle Public Schools is now evaluating the decision and our next steps. In addition to any action the School Board may take, the district expects to appeal this decision."
"We want students, teachers and families to be assured that the judge did not order the district to stop using these materials; she simply found that the school board had insufficient information and sent the decision back for further evaluation. This means that we will continue to use the instructional materials."
Already, district administration is downplaying the court's decision. The memo to staff implies this is no big deal, that the district will appeal, and that once the school board gets a little bit more information, everything will be fine.
Make it stop. Now is the time. Share your stories and concerns with Seattle district leaders. After more than a decade of promoting reform math textbooks and increasing the achievement gap, Judge Spector has provided an opportunity to reset the helm to the correct course. Please write and encourage the Board and Superintendent to:
-Not appeal this decision. Save the money for new textbooks that aren't "mathematically unsound"
-As ordered by Judge Spector, review the process and re-vote on the high school instructional materials adoption, considering all the relevant evidence.
-Model good citizenship and take prompt action on this matter
An appeal is expensive, and further erodes the district's credibility and public trust. The judge ordered the Board to take another hard look, which is far cheaper, easier, and more politically sound than having lawyers argue over an appeal.
For more information, see:
Full text of ruling: http://www.seattlepi.com/dayart/PDF/mathtextruling_20100204.pdf
YOUR financial support is needed. To donate: http://seattlemathgroup.blogspot.com/
Video news brief: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/83587497.html?tab=video
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2010995832_edit08mathbooks.html
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/415049_math04.html
Your letters make a difference. The legal record that formed the original basis for this case included critical comments and evidence from the public. Contact information for district staff and school board directors is provided below.
Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Superintendent maria.goodloe-johnson@seattleschools.org
Susan Enfield, Chief Academic Officer saenfield@seattleschools.org
Anna Maria de la Fuente, Math Program Manager ahdelafuente@seattleschools.org
Cathy Thompson, Director of Curriculum and Instruction. cthompson@seattleschools.org
Seattle School Board Directors
District I - Peter Maier peter.maier@seattleschools.org
District II - Sherry Carr sherry.carr@seattleschools.org
District III - Harium Martin-Morris harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
District IV - Michael DeBell michael.debell@seattleschools.org
District V - Kay Smith-Blum kay.smith-blum@seattleschools.org
District VI - Steve Sundquist steve.sundquist@seattleschools.org
District VII - Betty Patu betty.patu@seattleschools.org
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Laurie Rogers on the Lawsuit Victory
Friday, February 5, 2010
Decision favors plaintiffs in court challenge of Seattle math text adoption
Statement from Laurie Rogers:
Last year, Seattle Public Schools adopted the Discovering math series despite valiant opposition from parents and math professionals, despite poor assessments of the Discovering series' rigor and quality of presentation, and despite the fact that OSPI did NOT ultimately recommend the Discovering math series.
In response, three people filed a lawsuit, saying that Seattle didn't have sufficient supporting evidence for its adoption, and also that the Discovering series was associated with an INCREASE in achievement gaps.
Recently, a judge agreed with the plaintiffs and - while stopping short of telling Seattle administrators to cease and desist in their adoption - told them to revisit it. The district can continue to use the Discovering series, and Seattle administrators have stated their clear intention to do so.
Nevertheless, the court decision is momentous. It sets a precedent for districts across the country. When board members can't justify their adoption decisions, the people now have legal recourse.
What sheer arrogance and hubris Seattle administrators must have to persist in pursuing reform/discovery math instruction -- despite the statistics, despite the resistance, despite the remediation rates, dropout rates, achievement gaps, lack of skills, opposition from math professionals, concerns from parents, and low pass rates on standardized tests. Even with a court decision that basically says the school board's adoption of the Discovering series was rooted in ignorance ... Seattle administrators STILL persist.
Please express appreciation to Martha McLaren and her fellow plaintiffs for their courage and dedication. If you would like to assist Martha in her substantial court costs, please let me know and I can pass on your message.
Meanwhile, a toast to you, Martha. Other advocates will follow in your footsteps
Decision favors plaintiffs in court challenge of Seattle math text adoption
Statement from Laurie Rogers:
Last year, Seattle Public Schools adopted the Discovering math series despite valiant opposition from parents and math professionals, despite poor assessments of the Discovering series' rigor and quality of presentation, and despite the fact that OSPI did NOT ultimately recommend the Discovering math series.
In response, three people filed a lawsuit, saying that Seattle didn't have sufficient supporting evidence for its adoption, and also that the Discovering series was associated with an INCREASE in achievement gaps.
Recently, a judge agreed with the plaintiffs and - while stopping short of telling Seattle administrators to cease and desist in their adoption - told them to revisit it. The district can continue to use the Discovering series, and Seattle administrators have stated their clear intention to do so.
Nevertheless, the court decision is momentous. It sets a precedent for districts across the country. When board members can't justify their adoption decisions, the people now have legal recourse.
What sheer arrogance and hubris Seattle administrators must have to persist in pursuing reform/discovery math instruction -- despite the statistics, despite the resistance, despite the remediation rates, dropout rates, achievement gaps, lack of skills, opposition from math professionals, concerns from parents, and low pass rates on standardized tests. Even with a court decision that basically says the school board's adoption of the Discovering series was rooted in ignorance ... Seattle administrators STILL persist.
Please express appreciation to Martha McLaren and her fellow plaintiffs for their courage and dedication. If you would like to assist Martha in her substantial court costs, please let me know and I can pass on your message.
Meanwhile, a toast to you, Martha. Other advocates will follow in your footsteps
Friday, February 5, 2010
Looking at the decision
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Decision Favors Plaintiffs in Court Challenge of Seattle High School Math Text Adoption
Seattle, Washington – February 4, 2010 – Judge Julie Spector today announced her finding of “arbitrary and capricious” in the Seattle School Board's May 6 vote to adopt the Discovering Math series of high school texts despite insufficient evidence of the series' effectiveness.
Judge Spector's decision states, “The court finds, based upon a review of the entire administrative record, that there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering series.”
Plaintiffs DaZanne Porter, an African American and mother of a 9th-grade student in Seattle Public Schools, Martha McLaren, retired Seattle math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fifth grader, and Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington, had filed their appeal of the Board's controversial decision on June 5th, 2009. The hearing was held on Tuesday, January 26th, 2010.
Declared plaintiff Martha McLaren, “This is a sweet victory for the parents and students of Seattle Public Schools. It announces to Seattle that in this instance, the School District's practice of ignoring evidence, in favor of preconceived decisions, is arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law. The judge's finding may, hopefully, be a step towards improving high school math education through replacing confusing textbooks with coherent ones. However, students at all levels, not just in high school, badly need clear, understandable materials. In addition, it is essential that teachers, especially elementary teachers, understand fundamental math much more deeply than is now the norm. There is much work to be done to bring improvement; this decision is an encouraging development.
We are hopeful that the District will move forward responsibly, putting the students first, and will decline to appeal Judge Spector's decision. If the Board revisits its vote, as ordered by the court, and this time refuses to adopt Discovering, it seems possible that the textbook rated 2nd by the adoption committee, a series by Prentice Hall publishers which is well-regarded by critics of reform texts, might instead be recommended by Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson. The Seattle Public Schools could then begin undoing the long-term decline in math education that has been extended by this disastrous mistake.”
According to the plaintiffs' initial brief, Seattle Public Schools began eliminating "traditional" math texts in the 1990s, moving toward an approach called "reform," "discovery learning," or "constructivism," among other names. Reform texts rely heavily on written language, presenting complicated, “real-life” problems. Memorization and skills practice is de-emphasized, and calculator work is encouraged from kindergarten on. Students generally work in small groups to devise their own approaches and solutions. With traditional "explicit" texts, however, students are given the opportunity to master key topics through examples, practice and extensive teacher feedback.
The initial brief had stated that the district committee chosen to review mathematics textbooks was biased toward reform, and that the textbook criteria were similarly biased, so that the resulting recommendation would be a reform textbook. The plaintiffs also asserted that the board voted to adopt the Discovering textbook series in contradiction of information presented from community members prior to the vote.
Citizens testifying to the board prior to the May 6 vote emphasized that the Discovering textbook series had been rated “unsound” in a review conducted by the Washington State Board of Education, and that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction had passed over the Discovering program, instead recommending Holt Mathematics, a balanced textbook series featuring increased explicit instruction.
In Seattle, the movement toward reform texts has culminated in the adoption of the Everyday Math K-5 texts in 2007, Connected Mathematics Project (CMP2) texts for grades 6 – 8 in 2006, and the Discovering texts for high school in 2009 .
Attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann, LLP, represented the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Even before the decision was announced, the plaintiffs voiced their unanimous admiration for his presentation of the appeal; his handling of the case was clearly crucial to the success of the project.
##
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Decision Favors Plaintiffs in Court Challenge of Seattle High School Math Text Adoption
Seattle, Washington – February 4, 2010 – Judge Julie Spector today announced her finding of “arbitrary and capricious” in the Seattle School Board's May 6 vote to adopt the Discovering Math series of high school texts despite insufficient evidence of the series' effectiveness.
Judge Spector's decision states, “The court finds, based upon a review of the entire administrative record, that there is insufficient evidence for any reasonable Board member to approve the selection of the Discovering series.”
Plaintiffs DaZanne Porter, an African American and mother of a 9th-grade student in Seattle Public Schools, Martha McLaren, retired Seattle math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fifth grader, and Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington, had filed their appeal of the Board's controversial decision on June 5th, 2009. The hearing was held on Tuesday, January 26th, 2010.
Declared plaintiff Martha McLaren, “This is a sweet victory for the parents and students of Seattle Public Schools. It announces to Seattle that in this instance, the School District's practice of ignoring evidence, in favor of preconceived decisions, is arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law. The judge's finding may, hopefully, be a step towards improving high school math education through replacing confusing textbooks with coherent ones. However, students at all levels, not just in high school, badly need clear, understandable materials. In addition, it is essential that teachers, especially elementary teachers, understand fundamental math much more deeply than is now the norm. There is much work to be done to bring improvement; this decision is an encouraging development.
We are hopeful that the District will move forward responsibly, putting the students first, and will decline to appeal Judge Spector's decision. If the Board revisits its vote, as ordered by the court, and this time refuses to adopt Discovering, it seems possible that the textbook rated 2nd by the adoption committee, a series by Prentice Hall publishers which is well-regarded by critics of reform texts, might instead be recommended by Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson. The Seattle Public Schools could then begin undoing the long-term decline in math education that has been extended by this disastrous mistake.”
According to the plaintiffs' initial brief, Seattle Public Schools began eliminating "traditional" math texts in the 1990s, moving toward an approach called "reform," "discovery learning," or "constructivism," among other names. Reform texts rely heavily on written language, presenting complicated, “real-life” problems. Memorization and skills practice is de-emphasized, and calculator work is encouraged from kindergarten on. Students generally work in small groups to devise their own approaches and solutions. With traditional "explicit" texts, however, students are given the opportunity to master key topics through examples, practice and extensive teacher feedback.
The initial brief had stated that the district committee chosen to review mathematics textbooks was biased toward reform, and that the textbook criteria were similarly biased, so that the resulting recommendation would be a reform textbook. The plaintiffs also asserted that the board voted to adopt the Discovering textbook series in contradiction of information presented from community members prior to the vote.
Citizens testifying to the board prior to the May 6 vote emphasized that the Discovering textbook series had been rated “unsound” in a review conducted by the Washington State Board of Education, and that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction had passed over the Discovering program, instead recommending Holt Mathematics, a balanced textbook series featuring increased explicit instruction.
In Seattle, the movement toward reform texts has culminated in the adoption of the Everyday Math K-5 texts in 2007, Connected Mathematics Project (CMP2) texts for grades 6 – 8 in 2006, and the Discovering texts for high school in 2009 .
Attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann, LLP, represented the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Even before the decision was announced, the plaintiffs voiced their unanimous admiration for his presentation of the appeal; his handling of the case was clearly crucial to the success of the project.
##
Thursday, February 4, 2010
A DECISION IN OUR FAVOR!
I just received this email from our attorney:
Court’s decision, reversing the School District on grounds that the decision was arbitrary and capricious. .......
Congratulations!
Keith Scully
Attorney at Law
Gendler & Mann, LLP
To see a pdf. of the decision, click on the link for Legal Documents, DECISION 2/4/10
Court’s decision, reversing the School District on grounds that the decision was arbitrary and capricious. .......
Congratulations!
Keith Scully
Attorney at Law
Gendler & Mann, LLP
To see a pdf. of the decision, click on the link for Legal Documents, DECISION 2/4/10
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Have things really changed that much? A letter to a friend.
You ask whether things have changed -- since math wasn't being taught well 40+ years ago either. You're absolutely right on that, but I believe it's only gotten worse over the years, as more and more math phobic people have gone into the field of education. These people never understood math well, so their teaching had to be based on rote following of procedures, etc. Then came "new math", which was an effort to reinvent math and make it more accessible. That bombed, and the efforts to reinvent continued.
What happened is that eventually those bright, math-phobic folks took over the education establishment. They reinvented math to be gentler, kinder, and more fun. Some of the hallmarks are: Small group problem solving, with students figuring our their own solutions to challenging problems. Visiting many topics for only a few weeks each year and moving on, regardless of whether any real mastery was attained. The thinking was/is that students will revisit the topics again in successive years, and will painlessly absorb the concepts. As appealing as these ideas are, it turns out that they don't work reliably, as evidenced by ensuing decline in achievement scores, skyrocketing tutoring businesses, as well as skyrocketing rates of remedial math in our colleges. This also turns out to be an extremely inefficient way to teach math; in order to have enough time to do all these hands-on projects in groups, the explanation of the underlying structure of math and practice with standard algorithms have all been abandoned.
It's been a grand experiment that has failed; the "discovery" books are confusing and inefficient. Now, the vast majority of students feel irritated and demoralized about math. Middle class whites can often afford tutoring, so they do better than minorities, but all are affected. It's been going on long enough so that we have statistics now to demonstrate that these "reform" books are making things worse than ever before. So, yes, things have changed. We're not even trying to teach math, we're teaching "pretend math" and lo and behold, very few are developing math skills. What most students have learned is that they don't know how to do real math; instead of gaining skills and knowledge, they've internalized the belief that they can't learn it.
Where did we go wrong? We never tackled the problem of teachers, particularly elementary teachers, who do not have a "profound understanding of fundamental mathematics." It turns out that teaching elementary math is really, really hard. Yet, teachers in China with way less education do it much better than we, primarily because they are carefully mentored by, and paired with, experts; this happens over years and years.
The reform approaches have added some very valuable elements to math education -- for example, use of physical objects ("manipulatives") in early grades to help students make the connection between concrete things and symbols. They've also introduced scads of wonderful problems. But the traditional books had a lot of very good math context that needed to be explicitly presented, and not left for students to "discover" on their own -- what discoveries are made in modern classrooms would need to be organized and carefully studied in order to be understood, and there's no time left for that. Besides, that would be seen as "boring" and "not kid-friendly."
So, IMHO, we need to get solid texts back in our classrooms and set about the very, very challenging task of helping teachers to learn real, hard core math. For example, such skills as adding and dividing fractions are mysterious to huge numbers of elementary teachers, yet these skills are really helpful in daily life, and essential to mastering algebra, which is nowadays the "gateway into the American economy."
So, that's as much of it as I can cram into a few paragraphs. Thanks for asking about this issue about which I'm so passionate.
Marty
P.S. The phrase “profound understanding of fundamental mathematics” comes from LiPing Ma's very enlightening book, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. Robert Moses is the first person I know of who referred to Algebra as the “gateway into the American economy.” He wrote a book called, Radical Equations: Civil Rights From Mississippi to the Algebra Project. I found it completely riveting. Moses recalls his experiences in the civil rights movement and finds parallels with his championing math education for inner city students in Boston from the 80's to the present.
What happened is that eventually those bright, math-phobic folks took over the education establishment. They reinvented math to be gentler, kinder, and more fun. Some of the hallmarks are: Small group problem solving, with students figuring our their own solutions to challenging problems. Visiting many topics for only a few weeks each year and moving on, regardless of whether any real mastery was attained. The thinking was/is that students will revisit the topics again in successive years, and will painlessly absorb the concepts. As appealing as these ideas are, it turns out that they don't work reliably, as evidenced by ensuing decline in achievement scores, skyrocketing tutoring businesses, as well as skyrocketing rates of remedial math in our colleges. This also turns out to be an extremely inefficient way to teach math; in order to have enough time to do all these hands-on projects in groups, the explanation of the underlying structure of math and practice with standard algorithms have all been abandoned.
It's been a grand experiment that has failed; the "discovery" books are confusing and inefficient. Now, the vast majority of students feel irritated and demoralized about math. Middle class whites can often afford tutoring, so they do better than minorities, but all are affected. It's been going on long enough so that we have statistics now to demonstrate that these "reform" books are making things worse than ever before. So, yes, things have changed. We're not even trying to teach math, we're teaching "pretend math" and lo and behold, very few are developing math skills. What most students have learned is that they don't know how to do real math; instead of gaining skills and knowledge, they've internalized the belief that they can't learn it.
Where did we go wrong? We never tackled the problem of teachers, particularly elementary teachers, who do not have a "profound understanding of fundamental mathematics." It turns out that teaching elementary math is really, really hard. Yet, teachers in China with way less education do it much better than we, primarily because they are carefully mentored by, and paired with, experts; this happens over years and years.
The reform approaches have added some very valuable elements to math education -- for example, use of physical objects ("manipulatives") in early grades to help students make the connection between concrete things and symbols. They've also introduced scads of wonderful problems. But the traditional books had a lot of very good math context that needed to be explicitly presented, and not left for students to "discover" on their own -- what discoveries are made in modern classrooms would need to be organized and carefully studied in order to be understood, and there's no time left for that. Besides, that would be seen as "boring" and "not kid-friendly."
So, IMHO, we need to get solid texts back in our classrooms and set about the very, very challenging task of helping teachers to learn real, hard core math. For example, such skills as adding and dividing fractions are mysterious to huge numbers of elementary teachers, yet these skills are really helpful in daily life, and essential to mastering algebra, which is nowadays the "gateway into the American economy."
So, that's as much of it as I can cram into a few paragraphs. Thanks for asking about this issue about which I'm so passionate.
Marty
P.S. The phrase “profound understanding of fundamental mathematics” comes from LiPing Ma's very enlightening book, Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. Robert Moses is the first person I know of who referred to Algebra as the “gateway into the American economy.” He wrote a book called, Radical Equations: Civil Rights From Mississippi to the Algebra Project. I found it completely riveting. Moses recalls his experiences in the civil rights movement and finds parallels with his championing math education for inner city students in Boston from the 80's to the present.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Response to Danny Westneat 1/27 column in Seattle Times
I am one of the three plaintiffs in the math textbook appeal. I am also the white grandmother of an SPS fifth grader, and a retired SPS math teacher.
Mr. Westneat grants that the textbooks we are opposing may be “lousy,” but he faults us for citing their disproportionate effect on ethnic, racial, and other minorities. He states that we can't prove this claim. I disagree, and West Seattle Dan has posted voluminous statistics in response to the column. They support our claim that inquiry-based texts, which have now accrued a sizable track record, are generally associated with declining achievement among most students and with a widening achievement gap between middle class whites and minorities.
We've brought race and ethnicity (as well as economic status) into this appeal because there is ample evidence that it is a factor. True, this is not the 80's, and true, in my 10 years of experience teaching in Seattle Schools, I found no evidence that people of color are less capable than whites of being outstanding learners. However, in my 30+ years as a parent and grandparent of SPS students and my years as a teacher, I've developed deep, broad, awareness of the ways that centuries of societally mandated racism play out in our classrooms, even in this era of Barack Obama's presidency.
Students of color, students from economically struggling families, students with learning difficulties, as well as everyone else, are guaranteed equal access to education by the laws of our country and state. There is a panoply of factors, put into place long ago and slow to fade, which converge to make it generally challenging for minorities to access the resources essential for safety, security, and basic needs. These factors also have made it inevitable that the confusing Discovering texts and the learning environment they create are going to hurt minorities more than whites. The texts are deleterious; more so to vulnerable groups of people than others. I believe their adoption violates many students' right to equal education.
Mr. Westneat grants that the textbooks we are opposing may be “lousy,” but he faults us for citing their disproportionate effect on ethnic, racial, and other minorities. He states that we can't prove this claim. I disagree, and West Seattle Dan has posted voluminous statistics in response to the column. They support our claim that inquiry-based texts, which have now accrued a sizable track record, are generally associated with declining achievement among most students and with a widening achievement gap between middle class whites and minorities.
We've brought race and ethnicity (as well as economic status) into this appeal because there is ample evidence that it is a factor. True, this is not the 80's, and true, in my 10 years of experience teaching in Seattle Schools, I found no evidence that people of color are less capable than whites of being outstanding learners. However, in my 30+ years as a parent and grandparent of SPS students and my years as a teacher, I've developed deep, broad, awareness of the ways that centuries of societally mandated racism play out in our classrooms, even in this era of Barack Obama's presidency.
Students of color, students from economically struggling families, students with learning difficulties, as well as everyone else, are guaranteed equal access to education by the laws of our country and state. There is a panoply of factors, put into place long ago and slow to fade, which converge to make it generally challenging for minorities to access the resources essential for safety, security, and basic needs. These factors also have made it inevitable that the confusing Discovering texts and the learning environment they create are going to hurt minorities more than whites. The texts are deleterious; more so to vulnerable groups of people than others. I believe their adoption violates many students' right to equal education.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Our day in court
Today Cliff Mass and I, (DaZanne Porter had to be at a training in Yakima) accompanied by Dan Dempsey and Jim W, had our hearing in Judge Julie Spector's King County Superior Courtroom; the event was everything we hoped for, and more. Judge Spector asked excellent questions and said that she hopes to announce a decision by Friday, February 12th.
The hearing started on time at 8:30 AM with several members of the Press Corps present, including KIRO TV, KPLU radio, Danny Westneat of the Seattle Times, and at least 3 others. I know the number because, at the end, Cliff, our attorney, Keith Scully, and I were interviewed; there were five microphones and three cameras pointed towards us at one point.
The hearing was brief; we were done by 9:15. Keith began by presenting our case very clearly and eloquently. Our two main lines of reasoning are, 1) that the vote to adopt Discovering was arbitrary and capricious because of the board's failure to take notice of a plethora of testimony, data, and other information which raised red flags about the efficacy of the Discovering series, and 2) the vote violated the equal education rights of the minority groups who have been shown, through WASL scores, to be disadvantaged by inquiry based instruction.
Realistically, both of these arguments are difficult to prove: “arbitrary and capricious” is historically a very, very difficult proof, and while Keith's civil rights argument was quite compelling, there is no legal precedent for applying the law to this situation.
The School District's attorney, Shannon McMinimee, did her best, saying that the board followed correct procedure, the content of the books is not relevant to the appeal, the books do not represent inquiry-based learning but a “balanced” approach, textbooks are merely tools, etc., etc. She even denigrated the WASL – a new angle in this case. In rebuttal, Keith was terrific, we all agreed. He quoted the introduction of the three texts, which made it crystal clear that these books are about “exploration.” I'm blanking on other details of his rebuttal, but it was crisp and effective. Keith was extremely effective, IMHO. Hopefully, Dan, James, and Cliff can recall more details of the rebuttal.
After the hearing, there was a brief discussion of whether the judge might keep the sample Holt texts, which I had borrowed from Jock McKinlay, a Bellevue parent who is using them to buttress his stand against the adoption of Discovering in that district. The press group waited patiently outside while Jock and I figured it out on the phone; he graciously agreed to leave the books with Judge Spector through the weekend.
Outside, in the hall, Cliff, Keith and I were interviewed by several reporters and each of us had the chance to speak at length. Cliff was his usual charismatic, compelling and erudite self; Keith and I both did fine as well, I think. We were featured on KIRO TV news at noon; the segment presented our side in a good light.
Whether we prevail or not, I feel like we've hit a home run by pulling media attention towards the math education catastrophe that is occurring in Seattle Public Schools. Dan Dempsey was busy telling people the facts about the new SPS initiative for turning Cleveland High School into a science, technology, engineering and math focused program. If nothing else comes of this, hopefully the district will not succeed in squandering money on this fruitless public relations gimmick.
Thanks to Chris Jackins for introducing us to Keith Scully, thanks to Dan Dempsey for providing the data needed to make a case, thanks to Rick and Linh-Co Burke, Dick Padrick, Ted N, Paul D, Jim W, and all the members of wheresthemath.com and community members who have helped to support this effort.
The hearing started on time at 8:30 AM with several members of the Press Corps present, including KIRO TV, KPLU radio, Danny Westneat of the Seattle Times, and at least 3 others. I know the number because, at the end, Cliff, our attorney, Keith Scully, and I were interviewed; there were five microphones and three cameras pointed towards us at one point.
The hearing was brief; we were done by 9:15. Keith began by presenting our case very clearly and eloquently. Our two main lines of reasoning are, 1) that the vote to adopt Discovering was arbitrary and capricious because of the board's failure to take notice of a plethora of testimony, data, and other information which raised red flags about the efficacy of the Discovering series, and 2) the vote violated the equal education rights of the minority groups who have been shown, through WASL scores, to be disadvantaged by inquiry based instruction.
Realistically, both of these arguments are difficult to prove: “arbitrary and capricious” is historically a very, very difficult proof, and while Keith's civil rights argument was quite compelling, there is no legal precedent for applying the law to this situation.
The School District's attorney, Shannon McMinimee, did her best, saying that the board followed correct procedure, the content of the books is not relevant to the appeal, the books do not represent inquiry-based learning but a “balanced” approach, textbooks are merely tools, etc., etc. She even denigrated the WASL – a new angle in this case. In rebuttal, Keith was terrific, we all agreed. He quoted the introduction of the three texts, which made it crystal clear that these books are about “exploration.” I'm blanking on other details of his rebuttal, but it was crisp and effective. Keith was extremely effective, IMHO. Hopefully, Dan, James, and Cliff can recall more details of the rebuttal.
After the hearing, there was a brief discussion of whether the judge might keep the sample Holt texts, which I had borrowed from Jock McKinlay, a Bellevue parent who is using them to buttress his stand against the adoption of Discovering in that district. The press group waited patiently outside while Jock and I figured it out on the phone; he graciously agreed to leave the books with Judge Spector through the weekend.
Outside, in the hall, Cliff, Keith and I were interviewed by several reporters and each of us had the chance to speak at length. Cliff was his usual charismatic, compelling and erudite self; Keith and I both did fine as well, I think. We were featured on KIRO TV news at noon; the segment presented our side in a good light.
Whether we prevail or not, I feel like we've hit a home run by pulling media attention towards the math education catastrophe that is occurring in Seattle Public Schools. Dan Dempsey was busy telling people the facts about the new SPS initiative for turning Cleveland High School into a science, technology, engineering and math focused program. If nothing else comes of this, hopefully the district will not succeed in squandering money on this fruitless public relations gimmick.
Thanks to Chris Jackins for introducing us to Keith Scully, thanks to Dan Dempsey for providing the data needed to make a case, thanks to Rick and Linh-Co Burke, Dick Padrick, Ted N, Paul D, Jim W, and all the members of wheresthemath.com and community members who have helped to support this effort.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Hearing rescheduled
The hearing on the Appeal of the Seattle High School math text adoption has been rescheduled. It will be held on Tuesday, January 26th, 8:30 AM, in the courtroom of Judge Julie Spector, King County Courthouse, 615 Third Avenue, Room W 842. For further information, contact:
Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
January 5, 2010 Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Hearing Impending in High School Math Text Adoption Appeal.
Seattle, Washington – January 7, 2010 – A hearing is set for Monday, Jan. 11, at 8:30 AM, in the King County Superior Courtroom of Judge Julie Spector, on the appeal of a Seattle School Board vote last May to adopt the Discovering Mathematics high school textbook series. The appellants contend that the school district acted arbitrarily and capriciously by voting 4 to 3 to adopt a type of textbook associated with a widening achievement gap between minority students and white students, and between low-income and other students.
The three plaintiffs are the mother of an African American 9th grader, a retired math teacher whose grandchild is a 5th grader, and a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington. They filed the appeal based on their claim that, well before the May 6th vote, there was an ample accumulation of evidence that the “reform” math curricula favored by the district had helped to drive down WASL achievement scores, especially for English language learners and other minorities. Aiming to reverse the decision to adopt the texts, which they label confusing, wasteful of students' time, and lacking in clear explanations and practice problems, the plaintiffs filed their appeal on June 5th , shortly after the Board vote.
Martha McLaren, grandmother of a 5th grade student, declared, “Few people understand what a catastrophe is unfolding in our schools due to this misguided approach to teaching mathematics. It's tragic for individual students who grow up believing they are incompetent, and it's ultimately an immeasurable blow to society.”
"I can't afford the tutoring that wealthier parents can afford in order for their children to learn the math skills they don't learn in Seattle Public Schools," stated Ms. DaZanne Porter, mother of a Cleveland High School freshman.
Summarizing the situation which has evoked a rising protest to Seattle Schools' math curriculum, UW atmospheric sciences professor and co-plaintiff Cliff Mass describes giving a simple basic math skills exam to his first year students in the fall. They scored a class average of 58%. In the January 2 Cliff Mass Weather Blog, he writes, “If many of our state's best students are mathematically illiterate, as shown by this exam, can you imagine what is happening to the others--those going to community college or no college at all? ... Quite simply, we are failing our children and crippling their ability to participate in an increasingly mathematical world.”
Attorney Keith Scully, of Gendler and Mann, LLP, is representing the plaintiffs. He estimates the hearing will last about one hour, and expects a decision from Judge Spector by the end of the month. The hearing will be held in the King County Courthouse, at 516 Third Avenue, E-609, in Seattle.
Donations for legal expenses in this appeal are accepted with gratitude. They may be made directly to the “Seattle Math Group” account at Washington Federal Savings Bank.
##
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Hearing Impending in High School Math Text Adoption Appeal.
Seattle, Washington – January 7, 2010 – A hearing is set for Monday, Jan. 11, at 8:30 AM, in the King County Superior Courtroom of Judge Julie Spector, on the appeal of a Seattle School Board vote last May to adopt the Discovering Mathematics high school textbook series. The appellants contend that the school district acted arbitrarily and capriciously by voting 4 to 3 to adopt a type of textbook associated with a widening achievement gap between minority students and white students, and between low-income and other students.
The three plaintiffs are the mother of an African American 9th grader, a retired math teacher whose grandchild is a 5th grader, and a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington. They filed the appeal based on their claim that, well before the May 6th vote, there was an ample accumulation of evidence that the “reform” math curricula favored by the district had helped to drive down WASL achievement scores, especially for English language learners and other minorities. Aiming to reverse the decision to adopt the texts, which they label confusing, wasteful of students' time, and lacking in clear explanations and practice problems, the plaintiffs filed their appeal on June 5th , shortly after the Board vote.
Martha McLaren, grandmother of a 5th grade student, declared, “Few people understand what a catastrophe is unfolding in our schools due to this misguided approach to teaching mathematics. It's tragic for individual students who grow up believing they are incompetent, and it's ultimately an immeasurable blow to society.”
"I can't afford the tutoring that wealthier parents can afford in order for their children to learn the math skills they don't learn in Seattle Public Schools," stated Ms. DaZanne Porter, mother of a Cleveland High School freshman.
Summarizing the situation which has evoked a rising protest to Seattle Schools' math curriculum, UW atmospheric sciences professor and co-plaintiff Cliff Mass describes giving a simple basic math skills exam to his first year students in the fall. They scored a class average of 58%. In the January 2 Cliff Mass Weather Blog, he writes, “If many of our state's best students are mathematically illiterate, as shown by this exam, can you imagine what is happening to the others--those going to community college or no college at all? ... Quite simply, we are failing our children and crippling their ability to participate in an increasingly mathematical world.”
Attorney Keith Scully, of Gendler and Mann, LLP, is representing the plaintiffs. He estimates the hearing will last about one hour, and expects a decision from Judge Spector by the end of the month. The hearing will be held in the King County Courthouse, at 516 Third Avenue, E-609, in Seattle.
Donations for legal expenses in this appeal are accepted with gratitude. They may be made directly to the “Seattle Math Group” account at Washington Federal Savings Bank.
##
December 3 Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Brief Filed in Court Challenge of Seattle High School Math Text Adoption
Seattle, Washington – Dec. 3, 2009 – A brief was filed Monday, Nov. 23, in King County Superior Court appealing a May 6, 2009 Seattle School Board vote to adopt the Discovering Mathematics high school textbook series. The brief contends that the school district acted arbitrarily and capriciously in voting 4 to 3 to adopt a type of textbook associated with a widening achievement gap between minority students and white students, and between low-income students and other students.
Seeking to prevent the school district from adopting this series are plaintiffs DaZanne Porter, an African American and mother of a 9th-grade student in Seattle Public Schools; Martha McLaren, retired Seattle math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fourth grader; and Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington.
According to the brief filed Monday, Seattle Public Schools began eliminating "traditional" math texts in the 1990s, moving toward an approach called "reform," "discovery learning," or "constructivism," among other names. Reform texts rely heavily on written language, presenting complicated, “real-life” problems. Memorization and skills practice is de-emphasized, and calculator work is encouraged from kindergarten on. Students generally work in small groups to devise their own approaches and solutions. With traditional "explicit" texts, however, students are given the opportunity to master key topics through examples, practice and extensive teacher feedback.
The brief claims the district committee chosen to review mathematics textbooks was biased toward reform, and that the textbook criteria were similarly biased, so that the resulting recommendation would be a reform textbook. The brief also states that the board voted to adopt the Discovering textbook series in contradiction of information presented prior to the vote.
The plaintiffs contend that the district superintendent and school board had access to data and research, including WASL scores, indicating that math skills of minority students have continually declined for all grades since reform textbooks were introduced. The plaintiffs also claim the school board was informed that the Discovering series was not a good candidate program to reverse this negative trend.
Citizens testifying to the board prior to the May 6 vote emphasized that the Discovering textbook series had been rated “unsound” in a review conducted by the Washington State Board of Education, and that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction had passed over the Discovering program, instead recommending Holt Mathematics, a balanced textbook series featuring increased explicit instruction.
In Seattle, the movement toward reform texts has culminated in the adoption of the Everyday Math K-5 texts, Connected Mathematics Project (CMP2) texts for grades 6 - 8, and now the Discovering texts for high school. At Cleveland High School, which has 95% ethnic minority and 70% free and reduced lunch students, a similar “Discovery/Inquiry” text was piloted from September 2006 to June 2009. In those three years, the WASL pass rates for Cleveland's Black 10th graders averaged around 10%, while the district average for Black 10th graders was about 22%; scores for limited English students declined dramatically, from 15.4% to 0% of students passing the exam.
The appeal of the School Board's May 6, 2009 vote was filed June 5 by attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann, LLP. A hearing on the appeal is set for Jan. 11, 2010, in the court of Judge Julie Spector.
##
Contact: Martha McLaren
mmcl@pugetridge.net
206 762 2350
Brief Filed in Court Challenge of Seattle High School Math Text Adoption
Seattle, Washington – Dec. 3, 2009 – A brief was filed Monday, Nov. 23, in King County Superior Court appealing a May 6, 2009 Seattle School Board vote to adopt the Discovering Mathematics high school textbook series. The brief contends that the school district acted arbitrarily and capriciously in voting 4 to 3 to adopt a type of textbook associated with a widening achievement gap between minority students and white students, and between low-income students and other students.
Seeking to prevent the school district from adopting this series are plaintiffs DaZanne Porter, an African American and mother of a 9th-grade student in Seattle Public Schools; Martha McLaren, retired Seattle math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fourth grader; and Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington.
According to the brief filed Monday, Seattle Public Schools began eliminating "traditional" math texts in the 1990s, moving toward an approach called "reform," "discovery learning," or "constructivism," among other names. Reform texts rely heavily on written language, presenting complicated, “real-life” problems. Memorization and skills practice is de-emphasized, and calculator work is encouraged from kindergarten on. Students generally work in small groups to devise their own approaches and solutions. With traditional "explicit" texts, however, students are given the opportunity to master key topics through examples, practice and extensive teacher feedback.
The brief claims the district committee chosen to review mathematics textbooks was biased toward reform, and that the textbook criteria were similarly biased, so that the resulting recommendation would be a reform textbook. The brief also states that the board voted to adopt the Discovering textbook series in contradiction of information presented prior to the vote.
The plaintiffs contend that the district superintendent and school board had access to data and research, including WASL scores, indicating that math skills of minority students have continually declined for all grades since reform textbooks were introduced. The plaintiffs also claim the school board was informed that the Discovering series was not a good candidate program to reverse this negative trend.
Citizens testifying to the board prior to the May 6 vote emphasized that the Discovering textbook series had been rated “unsound” in a review conducted by the Washington State Board of Education, and that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction had passed over the Discovering program, instead recommending Holt Mathematics, a balanced textbook series featuring increased explicit instruction.
In Seattle, the movement toward reform texts has culminated in the adoption of the Everyday Math K-5 texts, Connected Mathematics Project (CMP2) texts for grades 6 - 8, and now the Discovering texts for high school. At Cleveland High School, which has 95% ethnic minority and 70% free and reduced lunch students, a similar “Discovery/Inquiry” text was piloted from September 2006 to June 2009. In those three years, the WASL pass rates for Cleveland's Black 10th graders averaged around 10%, while the district average for Black 10th graders was about 22%; scores for limited English students declined dramatically, from 15.4% to 0% of students passing the exam.
The appeal of the School Board's May 6, 2009 vote was filed June 5 by attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann, LLP. A hearing on the appeal is set for Jan. 11, 2010, in the court of Judge Julie Spector.
##
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
June 8, 2009 Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Contact: Martha McLaren
206. 762 2350
mmcl@pugetridge.net
Court Challenge of Seattle Math Text Adoption
A trio of plaintiffs has challenged Seattle Public Schools' recent adoption of the Discovering series
Seattle, Washington -- June 8, 2009 -- An appeal of the Seattle School Board's controversial May 6th decision to adopt the Discovering series of high school math texts was filed in King County Superior Court on Friday, June 5, 2009. Plaintiffs are DaZanne Porter, an African American and mother of an 8th grade student in Seattle Public Schools, Martha McLaren, retired Seattle math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fourth grader, and Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington. Their appeal of the School Board's 4 to 3 decision was filed by attorney Keith Scully of Gendler and Mann, LLP. The Declaration cites recent WASL data showing a continually widening achievement gap in mathematics among ethnic minority and free-lunch students in 4th, 7th, and 10th grades. The plaintiffs state that this widening achievement gap corresponds with the expanded use of "inquiry based" texts books in Seattle public schools. According to their declaration, the SPS staff knew that the Discovering series had been deemed "unsound" in a study commissioned by the State Board of Education.
Ms. Porter, parent of an African American eighth grader and a teacher who is a reading coach at a Seattle elementary school, states that her son has already experienced unnecessary confusion and frustration caused by "inquiry based" curricula in Seattle elementary and middle schools. She wants the District to adopt a "balanced" text such as that recommended by the State Board of Education, by the Holt Publishing Company, which she says will give her son a much better chance to learn math skills needed for college and career. "I can't afford the tutoring that wealthier parents can afford in order for their children to learn the math skills they don't learn in Seattle Public Schools," stated Ms. Porter. "I've looked at these math textbooks, and they are not parent friendly, which means I will not be able to help my son, which will put him further behind."
Ms. McLaren, retired Seattle Math teacher and grandparent of a Seattle Public Schools fourth grader, states that as a math teacher and math substitute for 8 years, she witnessed students floundering with "inquiry based" math curricula throughout the district. She has spoken with numerous teachers who confirm her observation that the "inquiry-based" textbooks", used by students working in small groups, have resulted in confusion, discontent, and lost time for math education. She reports that the Seattle School District has denied the relationship between the widening achievement gap and the use of inquiry-based curricula. The achievement gap began to expand after the introduction of inquiry based materials at all grade levels in the late 90s, and continued to grow with the adoption of inquiry based middle school texts (CMP2) in 2006 and elementary texts (Everyday Math) in 2007. The elementary textbooks which district administrators predicted would reduce the achievement gap are instead linked to increases in the gaps for Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, Low Income and Limited English students.
Professor Mass teaches atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington. He has had to
The Seattle Public School District has 20 days from June 5 to deliver the record of information available to it in making its adoption decision.
##
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)