Core Confusion A Field Case Study

Peggy L. Downs and Susan M. Goers

Introduction

The following Field Case Study was prepared by Susan Goers for EDDC 602, Concordia University to be employed as part of an overall CSIP assignment. Peggy L. Downs contributed to the defining content. Data collection through direct observation and interview, synthesis, and analysis were conducted by Susan Goers. In collaboration the two colleagues will present the findings to the Board of Directors for Good Foundations Academy.

Core Confusion

Good Foundations Academy (GFA) is a public charter school servicing over 400 students in grades K – 6. The school opened in 2010 in the suburban community of Riverdale, just outside Ogden, Utah. With a charter that focuses on academic excellence and charter education, GFA student have consistently performed in the top quartile on state tests, achieving 94% overall proficiency in English Language Arts for the last two years.

Challenge

Recent changes in the education landscape have caused a general confusion for the school community. The school uses the Core Knowledge Sequence as the foundation for its instructional program. The curriculum was developed more than 20 years ago and is used in over 5,000 schools across the United States and abroad (Hirsch, 2014). In Utah the state standards are called the “Utah Core Standards”. The dual use of the word “core” introduced a significant amount of confusion. In the same year that GFA was established, the state of Utah adopted the “Common Core Standards”, which were incorporated into the “Utah Core Standards”. There are now three consecutive phrases employing the word “core” and herein lies the problem. “Core Knowledge Curriculum”, “Common Core Standards”, and “Utah Core Standards” are three different entities. Beyond the confusion of the definition of core, there is an extra layer of confusion surrounding the terminology of “standards” and “curriculum”. 

Context

Standards are not a Curriculum

Standards define what a student should know and be able to exemplify at the end of a course of study or grade level. Standards do not dictate how a student will achieve the knowledge and skills described by the grade level, nor do they dictate how the teacher will conduct the lesson to teach the material. For example, The Utah Core Standards for Mathematics, Grade 4 includes the following standard:

“Use place value understanding and properties of operations to perform multi-digit arithmetic” (Utah Core Standards, 2014).

The district, school, or individual teacher is left to decide which properties of operations and what type of multi-digit arithmetic the standard is referencing. Curriculum is the tool that answers these questions for the teacher. Curriculum is primarily composed of four basic parts: goals, methods, materials, and assessments. The goals provide the step-by-step process needed to achieve mastery of the larger standard. The methods are the instructional strategies the teacher uses to deliver information and teach skills. The materials are the books, online resources, and other tools the student interacts with during the lesson. Finally, the assessments measure progress toward goals and mastery of the standards. Standards are the skeleton, while curriculum is the meat on the bones.

Core Knowledge Curriculum

The Core Knowledge Sequence provides schools with the content and skills to be taught at each grade level (Hirsch, 2014). For example, Core Knowledge outlines the expectations for Grade 4 mathematics as follows:

“recognize place value up to hundred millions, multiply by two-digit and three-digit numbers, and multiply three factors in any given order” (Hirsch, 2006).

Using these goals, a teacher can create lessons and activities that help a student make progress toward the standards. In addition to specifically defining the goals, the Core Knowledge Foundation provides extensive training for teachers in effective, research-based instructional methods, materials, and assessments (Hirsch 2014). Core Knowledge is a complete curriculum that can be used to help students achieve mastery of the standards.

Confusion and Data Collected

Good Foundations Academy is innovating ways to clarify the message sent to the community. Publications from the various entities involved do not help the cause. The following quotations illustrate the problem:

Core Knowledge

“The Core Knowledge Sequence provides a clear outline of the content to be learned grade by grade so that knowledge, language, and skills build cumulatively from year to year” (Core Knowledge, 2014).

Common Core State Standards

“The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them”(Common Core, 2014).

Utah Core

“The standards outline essential knowledge, concepts, and skills to be mastered at each grade level or within a critical content area. The standards provide a foundation for ensuring learning with the classroom” (Utah Core, 2014).

It is clear to see that there is confusion with the terminology.

In order to determine the weight of the problem within the first level of professionals, several informal interviews took place as well as a written poll of information based on the three phrases (Core Knowledge, Common Core, and Utah Core) by a sampling of 10 current faculty members. Informal interviews with parents were also conducted. 

Of the ten teachers polled, all of them were very clear and concise as to their definitions of Core Knowledge, understanding that it is a sequential curriculum that builds from year to year. Twenty percent of them were unsure about whether they could teach “other” material besides what was in the curriculum text. Most felt they had a fair amount of work to accomplish by simply teaching the material in the guides. On the other hand, when defining Common Core the understandings and interpretations of the teachers were varied. All stated that it was a national mandate to be adopted by the states. This very statement is an oxymoron. Forty percent answered that Common Core was a set of skills that every student across the country should have mastered at a given grade. Fifty percent of the teachers indicated that Common Core was Utah Core. Evidenced in this particular question is a vast array of confusion. Similarly, when asked to define Utah Core, teachers had varied answers in which fifty percent defined it as Common Core, and thirty percent as a mix between Common Core and State Standards. One teacher simply defined Utah Core as “??”.  In discussion afterwards teachers expressed that they simply didn’t want to address all of the confusion and had virtually no opinion on what was going on outside of the school. This is a common desire, to hide from the issue, but when the school community is being affected it becomes a responsibility to be propelled into action. We cannot hide our heads in the sand.

Of the 10 parents interviewed informally, none of them were able to distinguish between the Common Core and Utah Core. Forty percent of them assumed that the Common Core was Core Knowledge, and only when asked specifically the differences between standards and curriculum were they able to partially answer. 

Strategy/Possible Plan

The strategies that have been discussed and could be developed so far include the following:

1. Educate the faculty, staff, and Board of Directors on the terminology and how to explain it properly.

2. Provide scripted answers for office staff to answer questions over the phone.

3. Clarification on the website. Currently there are documents for parents to read, maybe we need to look to a diagram, Venn, or other that would help them internalize the differences.

4. Communication to parents and community by way of three fold brochure with bullet points. Make it available in the office and add to the current enrollment packet.

Outcome and Further Questions

The goal is to educate the community and to be able to provide answers that are politically neutral during this time of confusion. We are not looking to define where teachers should stand on the Common Core Standards. We simply desire our teachers, Board of Directors, and shareholders to be knowledgeable of the terminology being used in the profession, and how to interpret what will affect their students and our school. Furthermore we will want to determine how to sustain a culture rich in knowledge of educational practices throughout the country, the state, and our own district. Do we need trainings dedicated to the national and state scene each year? Do we need to set time aside for grappling with what we are hearing at our state levels? Do we want our teachers to be active in support of charter school legislation? What shape does that take in the big picture nationally? These are all questions that will require further pondering as we move forward. 

The final outcome will be measured and pieces determined effective as we implement them into the current school model.

References

Common core state standards initiative. (2010). Retrieved February 1, 2014, from http://www.corestandards.org 

Core knowledge foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved February 1, 2014, from Core Knowledge Foundation website: http://www.coreknowledge.org 

   Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (Ed.). (2006). What your fourth grader needs to know. New York, NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell. 

Utah core standards. (2014, January). Retrieved February 1, 2014, from http://www.schools.utah.gov/ core/ 

GFA Students Shine in Math Contest

GFA Students Shine in Math Contest

On November 14, 45 sixth grade students from Good Foundations Academy led by Susan Goers and Joseph Keddington competed in Noetic Learning Math Contest.

Noetic Learning Math Contest is an elementary math problem solving contest held twice a year. 18,334 young students representing 944 teams across the country participated in this fall contest. 

The overall winner was:

            Emmett Grames

The following student won the National Honor Roll title (http://www.noetic-learning.com/mathcontest/results/2013Fall/grade6.jsp). This title is awarded to the top 10% of participating students in the country.

            Emmett Grames

The following students received National Honorable Mention (http://www.noetic-learning.com/mathcontest/results/2013Fall/grade6_mention.htm).

            Noah Robert, Kylee Tidwell, Tyler Carlson, Isaiah Marshall, Hyrum Merkley, Jessica Day, Ryan Ross, Timothy Jarman, Satchel Sproul, Cody Baker, Caitlyn Lyle, Kaylee Cross, Jaxon Hansen.

The purpose of participating in the contest is to stimulate our students’ interest in math and to inspire them to excel in math.

The contest results show that our students can rise to the occasion and can meet the challenge. It also demonstrates our students’ great math skills and talents.

It is COOL to be good at math!

More detailed information about the Noetic Learning Math Contest can be found at: http://www.noetic-learning.com/mathcontest

Paths to Teacher Leadership

My resume states that my objective is:  Effective leadership in charter schools through collaboration and shared vision.  I believe this can be accomplished through an alignment of three areas of interest:  teacher development, leadership development, and effective policies and practices.  I believe that charter schools are entrepreneurial in nature and that they can benefit from culling the best ideas from both the education world and the small business world.  I believe that charter schools are most effective when they are based on an educationally sound mission statement with a clear vision that is shared by all in the community.  With that mission and vision as the foundation, the school can focus its attention of developing teachers, leaders and policies to further the goals of the school. 
 
I would like to consider the question of career paths to leadership, with effective policies to support this process.  Based on an informal survey of the teachers in my school, most teachers have no plans for their career beyond the classroom.  They have achieved the goal of having their own classroom and tend to focus their attention within the walls of that room.  They may have tunnel vision, seeing problems and opportunities from the perspective of the classroom but not the wider picture of the school or community.  Teachers at charter schools are not generally connected to teacher unions and may not have experience in district schools.   Typically, no one is asking them what they would like to do next, what training and education they wish to pursue, or what skills they wish to develop.  Many are willing to take on leadership roles when asked, but they may not seek these opportunities on their own.  An article in a recent Educational Leadership edition states that most teachers are interested in shared leadership but they have no wish to become principals.  The article states that 51% have a formal leadership role at their school (i.e. department chair or mentor) and 51% are interested in teaching part-time and combining teaching with another responsibility in their school, but only 16% are interested in becoming a principal (Educational Leadership, October 2013, p. 8). 
 
Teachers choose to work in charter schools because they want to be part of something they believe in.  They may love the curriculum, the small class size, the mission statement, or the sense of community.  They shrug off the sacrifices, including lower salary, longer hours, and higher workloads.  They establish strong partnerships with peers and dedicate themselves to the success of each student.  And yet, we allow them to burn out, leave the school or the profession, and lose the passion that brought them to the school.  At Good Foundations Academy, we have only 53% of the teachers we hired when we opened the school four years ago. 
 
I hope to have the opportunity to investigate current practices among charter schools which have developed career paths and leadership opportunities for teachers, research comparable leadership development in the small business world, and consider what policies and practices will lead to an effective, flexible, and meaningful process for developing teacher leaders in charter schools.  

GFA Townhall Meeting

TOWNHALL MEETING

GFA Parents and Extended Community Members

6:30 p.m.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Good Foundations Academy

5150 W 1050 S

Riverdale

Good Foundations Academy is a public charter school currently serving 468 students in grades K-6.  Established in 2010, the school has developed a program of academic excellence and strong character education.  GFA is proud to employ some of the best teachers in Utah!  The school is home to two charter school Teachers of the Year:  Sue Goers (2011) and Aimee Hall (2013).  With effective implementation of Core Knowledge and Singapore Math and integrated character education, the school is creating a rigorous instructional program where students are provided with the skills and knowledge needed for success in college and careers.  GFA was rated as a Top 5 school on the 2013 Charter School Baseline Data Report, and received a “B” on the 2013 School Grading Report.

The school is considering plans to add grades 7 and 8 to our program.  We are in the final stages of approval from the state Board of Education to increase our enrollment and add these grades.

Seeking Community Input

The GFA Board of Directors seeks input from the community to inform plans and priorities.  School leadership will present several options being considered for the school’s future.  We value the community’s questions and support.

GFA Parents – your vote counts!  This decision will affect every student and family at GFA.  If you do not attend, we will take that as a negative vote for expanding our program.  If you want to be part of GFA’s growth and believe your family will support a middle school program at GFA, your attendance is MANDATORY.  If you cannot attend, please call or email the school to let us know of your support.

Interested community members are also invited to learn more and to share insights and ideas with us.  We want to hear your questions and understand your needs and concerns.  Please join us for a Townhall Meeting at GFA on Tuesday, November 19, 6:30 p.m.

What Does the School Grade Mean?

Utah recently released School Grades for every public school in the state.  The School Grade Report is based on data for the 2012-13 school year.  Each elementary and middle school was graded on assessment results in proficiency and growth, while high school grades also included graduation rates.  How meaningful is this grade?  How was it determined?  What does it tell us about schools in Utah?  How did Good Foundations Academy score?

The School Grade is a single grade, based on the test scores for all students in the school that participated in state-wide testing.  Each student who achieved a predetermined score at “proficient” or above counted for a point.  These scores account for half of the total points possible (up to 300).  The other half of the possible points come from the “SGP” or student growth percentile.  Schools are awarded credit for each student who meets their growth target (up to 150 points), and they are given credit again for students who were below proficient and now have reached their growth targets (another 150) – that means the below proficient students are counted twice.  

Good Foundations Academy received a “B” grade, with 471 points out of 600.  42% of the schools in Utah earned a B, while only 10% received an A.  GFA is in good company.  Many well-established and successful charter schools also show B grades, including John Hancock Academy, an outstanding Core Knowledge school. 

Why did GFA receive a B instead of an A?  Students at our school are demonstrating proficiency.  94% passed Language Arts, 82% passed in Math, and 73% passed the Science test.  The problem seems to be that our growth data was not high enough to merit an A, and yet this question needs further analysis.  When one looks at the Spring 2013 CRT scores in more detail, a problem with the system becomes apparent.  Student proficiency scores are divided into four achievement categories:  substantial, sufficient, partial, and minimal.  In Language Arts and Math, GFA students were more likely than Utah students to score in the “substantial” or highest proficiency category.  On the Language Arts test, 71% of GFA students received the highest possible score while 56% of Utah students did the same.  In Math, 57% of our students scored “substantial” while 52% of Utah students earned this score.  This difference indicates that our students are performing at a very high level of proficiency.  If these students did not meet the established goals for growth, they were already performing well above their grade level expectations.  A student may have dropped slightly in scores compared to his peers, but this is not an indication that the school has failed to teach him.  And yet, a student who was ranked in the 97^th percentile the year prior and is now in the 95^th percentile will not receive a point for the school in the growth calculation. 

Another area that affects the School Grade at Good Foundations Academy is the way the report counts growth for “below proficient” students twice.  At GFA, the number of students who scored below proficient is tiny!  In some grade levels, they count for only 2% or 3% of the total number who tested.  In fact, at all the grade levels that tested in Science, GFA did not have enough students below proficient (minimum of 10) to count their score.  Therefore, the score for “all students” is the same as the score for “below proficient”. 

Does GFA have room to improve?  Absolutely.  While Language Arts stayed high, our Math and Science scores dropped this year.  In 2012, our Math score was 86%, compared to 82% this year.  Our analysis indicates that our program remains strong and effective.  As we grow, we have an influx of new students in the upper grades and it takes some time to bring them up to the level of achievement in math that our established students can demonstrate.  We remain committed to working with these students to master this important subject.

Our scores in science have been inconsistent.  We scored 66% in 2011, 86% in 2012, and 75% in 2013.  Science is a content-specific subject.  While language arts and math are general subjects with the same topics repeated year after year, science is handled differently.  The Utah Core Standards require certain topics to be taught at each grade level.  At GFA we follow the Core Knowledge Sequence, which lists similar topics but not always at the same grade.  Second grade learns about the water cycle but it is tested in fourth grade because that is where Utah Common Core places it.  So, our teachers in fourth grade review the subject in addition to the Core Knowledge topics they teach at that level.  It is a difficult compromise but we are working through the details to meet both standards.  GFA has committed resources and training to improve our instructional program in science.  We believe Core Knowledge provides an effective curriculum in science and we remain committed to faithful implementation.  We are confident that as these students mature in our program, science scores will improve.

Good Foundations Academy supports the state’s efforts to provide transparency and accountability to the public school system.  We will use this data in addition to our curriculum-based assessments and NWEA tests to continue improving our instructional program.  We believe the School Grade Report is a step in the right direction, but it does need further development.  We encourage the leaders of our state to continue reviewing the data to ensure schools like GFA are not penalized for providing a rigorous academic program.

What is "Academic Excellence"?

What is “Academic Excellence”?

At Good Foundations Academy, our mission is to “provide excellence and fairness in education through a common educational foundation.”   We often use the term “academic excellence” when we describe our school program, but what does that mean?

• Does it mean we are obsessed with test scores?  
• Do we define “excellence” by grades? 
• Do we confine learning to the classroom only? 
• Do we cover material in a prescribed curriculum, memorizing facts and names that mean little to the students?  

At GFA, we take the “long view” of education.  We are educating our students with the goal that each one will be ready and able to succeed at the high school and college of his or her choice.  Our curriculum, based on the Core Knowledge Sequence, is like a rich and generous banquet.  Each child is invited to partake.  Each child is exposed to the concepts, ideas, and skills that we teach.  We work hard to ensure that each child will walk away nourished and satisfied, trying something new, enjoying a few old favorites,  and sharing a valuable experience with friends.

At Good Foundations Academy, we define success through multiple measures, including growth, effort, character, and mastery.  Yes, students who earn high grades are celebrated on the Honor Roll.  We also celebrate a classroom which meets its target for growth on NWEA tests.  We honor a student who works hard and contributes to her community with U Rock! cards and Stepping Stone Awards.  We offer science fairs, geography bees, and forensics so that students can strive for excellence in a variety of disciplines and activities.

To answer the questions above:

• No we are not obsessed with test scores.  We use assessment data to improve our program, identify areas of strengths and weaknesses, and to seek ways to support our students.
• No, grades are not the only, or even best measure of excellence.  We recognize that academic excellence can be demonstrated in many forms, and that each child has unique talents and interests.  Grades are an important measure of achievement and our teachers work together to make sure classroom grades are valid, consistent and meaningful.
• No, learning is not confined to the classroom.  We understand that learning takes place wherever the opportunity presents itself.  We actively seek to help students make connections between what they learn in at school and their life outside the classroom.  Field trips, projects, guest speakers, and special events such as the Renaissance Festival, Roman Marketplace, and annual Science Fair are just a few important examples.  
• Although the Core Knowledge Sequence defines the baseline content and skills that are taught at each grade level, our teachers enrich, expand, and connect lessons to make learning at GFA a participatory sport.  We also believe that in order for our students to be able to learn critical thinking skills, they need to have something to think ABOUT.  Therefore, we teach basic facts, map skills, and names and dates to support our students’ growing ability to think critically and creatively.  Our students learn domain-specific vocabulary that will enrich discussions, build understanding, and foster written and verbal communication skills at all levels.

At GFA, academic excellence means that we value education, making it a priority in our lives, and doing our best every day.  We teach our students to achieve mastery in content and skills and to demonstrate achievement through a variety of expressions.  We guide our students to growth in character through a deep connection to great ideas, lessons in heroes and history,  and service to our community.